simonharpham-1 Reviews

I Am Legend (2007)

Yet another terrible adaptation of a great book.

[3/10 · 15 January 2008]

What is it with Hollywood? Why can't you read a great book and think "This would make a great movie exactly as it is - there's no need to change a thing"? With that in mind I wonder if Francis Lawrence ever bothered to read the book "I am legend", and (assuming he did) if he understood the meaning of the words 'I am legend' at the end, because if his film reveals his understanding of this great work of science fiction - and its final few lines - then God help him when he tries to understand something a little more complex, such as the operation of his kettle. He must spend hours in the kitchen waiting for the water to boil, only it never will because he hasn't plugged the thing into the wall.

The one saving grace of this film (and I never thought I would say this) is Will Smith's acting, which - as a portrayal of a man completely and utterly alone and going gradually insane - is actually believable.

Pretty much everything else about this film made me want to weep with frustration and beat the director to within an inch of his life with a paperback copy of the book this film claims to represent.

Beowulf (2007)

Deeply poor.

[1/10 · 15 January 2008]

The CGI in this film is good, but CGI still has a way to go if it's to replace real-life. In fact I found the CGI characterisation a little off-putting because some of the characters were clearly supposed to be based on the actors who supplied the voices but I spent the entire film wondering who they were. In this respect I found the choice of Ray Winston for the lead role of Beowulf particularly incongruous because no matter how much CGI is applied to the process of making a film as soon as I hear that voice what I actually see on the screen isn't a muscle-bound (anti-)hero but a fat cockney: Even if Ray Winston were to have a full body transplant (which is effectively what this film gives him) I'd still see a fat cockney on the screen and I'd spend the entire time wondering where he was hiding (or trying to guess who Unferth is, only to find - to my disappointment - that it's a particularly crap attempt to render John Malkovich's face).

I'd say more-or-less the same the 3D element of the film which, though a nice bonus, I found most effective in the film's quieter moments such as the shot along the pebble-beach with the longboat in the distance. All that flying through the air around and about Grendel failed to impress - if anything it just left me feeling dizzy and a little sick.

So what of the adaptation? Well it's terrible, of course, because Hollywood touched it and Hollywood just can't bear to leave any story untouched by its own mutable standards. To put it bluntly: As an adaptation of Beowulf this film is clown shoes. I'd have enjoyed it more, and it would have had more artistic integrity, if Beowulf had a painted face, stick-on nose and a fright wig: At least it would have been an honest statement of intent.

The nearest thing this film has to integrity (bearing in mind that Mel Gibson recently felt free enough to release a film entirely in Aramaic) is Grendel muttering some of his lines in Anglo Saxon, which would be alright were it not for the fact that no-one else in the film speaks in Anglo Saxon, so the effect of this device it to make it appear as if Grendel is speaking his own monster-language, not the same language as everyone else in the epic.

In summary then: This film is a terrible adaptation, with graphics that will look dated by next year, and some awful scriptwriting. Well done lads, you've penned another hit! Hollywood Ending: OTOH if you like Hollywood action movies with a D&D twist (like Eragon & LotR) then this film is for you. You'll spend your £5, you'll laugh, gurn and cry your way through the film and come out the other end of the movie sausage-machine feeling replete.

And more fool you.

The Grudge (2004)

It's difficult to be frightened if a film just confuses you.

[5/10 · 12 November 2007]

It's difficult to be frightened if a film just confuses you. Maybe it lost something in translation, but a series of disconnected and apparently unexplained episodes between different characters that don't seem to have much to do with one another didn't have the hairs standing up on the back of my neck. Sure, sure, it has the scary stop-frame animation girl from The Ring, but random pools of water, small children with white-painted faces, and a hairpiece that drags itself across the floor just doesn't it for me.

In the end I gave up & read the synopsis (above). I guess it sort-of explains the film, although it just seems like a bit of a lame excuse for filming several short stories without bothering to tie them together properly.

Ju-On: The Grudge 2 (2003)

Same as the first, but worse.

[5/10 · 12 November 2007]

I found this even more confusing (and even less frightening) than the first Grudge film, with which it shares many features: The same lack of coherent plot (again I had to refer to the synopsis (above) to find out what the film's actually about), the same white-faced children, the same girl from The Ring (nice effect the first time I saw it, getting a bit passé now), same pools of water (ooh, scary, scary water), same silly hairpiece dragging itself across the floor (couldn't the characters just squash the thing with a heavy book or something?). Not scary in the slightest: would probably have been better billed as a light comedy, or a soporific.