Review: Tangled

Another I missed in theaters (curse this isolated place!!) and just finally got to see: Tangled.

 

Plot:  A Disney-fied version of the Rapunzel story.  That's the short summary :)  Yes, the one all the buzz is about.  And rightly so.

Everyone keeps talking about this as a 'return' to the older style of Disney movies, and I can see what they mean.  The sidekick characters, the little running jokes, the music (yay for Alan Menken!), being more story and less adventure movie (though there is adventure too).  It's still got a modern touch (more little jokes than say, Snow White) but it's not Treasure Planet.  And for sidekick characters, I liked the chameleon - his little hands were adorable!  

I liked the voices in this one.  Mandy Moore has the pipes for the musical numbers, without sounding too 'pop-y,' if you know what I mean.  And even when she speaks, she sounds like a bubbly young personality, but not irritatingly so.  I loved her bipolar reaction sequence to escaping the tower - too funny!  The lead male is suitably fun and quippy, no Snow White's Prince here. (Favorite line:  "You broke my smolder!").  But the one I really liked was Donna Murphy, the villainess's voice, Mother Gothel.  I reeeeeally liked her song, "Mama Knows Best."  She's won two Tonys, and the experience certainly shows!  And as a side note, how many different Disney movies are there where the villain has the best song??  Just think about it! 

Visually, it's beautifully rich and detailed.  Like Sleeping Beauty, with the feel of old paintings or illuminated letters.  It's CGI, not old style animation, but they didn't let the computer overwhelm the picture, if you know what I mean.  Does that make sense?  Something about the texture, I think...

Overall:  5 of 5.  Beautiful animation, cute characters, good music. Kept me watching and I laughed out loud several times.  One I definitely want on my shelf.  And on repeated viewings, it might even rival Beauty and the Beast as my favorite Disney movie.  Yes, I liked it that much!

And just because I liked the character posters for this one :)

Review: Red Riding Hood (the book this time)

Yes, it's a book too.  And it came to our library here just in time for me to read it before going to see the movie!  Again, Red Riding Hood.

Plot:  Just like the movie, a reinterpretation of Red Riding Hood, only with werewolves and a love triangle.

Don't miss out on the extra chapter online.  If you're planning on watching the movie too, the movie does include the extra chapter, but the book does not.

Looking at comments on Amazon, a lot of people were furious about the ending of the book.  The book does end at a cliffhanger.  The extra chapter includes a resolution, matching what was filmed in the movie.  I thought that was annoying, having to read the end of the story online after reading the book, but I didn't hate it like some commentators did.  But then, I got this from the library and didn't pay for it, so that might help.  To be totally honest, though, I liked the open ending of the book better than the resolution provided in the extra chapter.  For all the mystery and build-up of the story, which was very well-done actually, the resolution in the extra chapter felt very simplistic and a little rushed, a bit of a letdown, really.  Almost too neat for the way the story had been developed.  It seems like both a marketing ploy, so that people still want to come and watch the movie without the surprise having been ruined, and at the same time a bone tossed to the tween demographic who wouldn't be able to handle an open ending.

The book itself is not a hard read.  It is a simple Young Adult (YA) book, after all.  I cranked through it in about 5-6 hours.  Came home from work, curled up with it under a comfy blanket, and finished up that evening.  Granted, it was one of those days where I wanted to escape into a good book, but it still wouldn't take a reader all too long to finish this one.  Nice fluffy read, and we all need those from time to time.  Anne has Trashy Romance Novels, I have YA fantasy.  :)

Overall: 3 of 5.  Not a classic, even for young adult fiction, but it was a fun little read.  Not one for the shelf, though.  I enjoyed it much more than the movie, so this is a repeated message: read the book, don't watch the movie.

Review: Red Riding Hood (the movie)

Part of a movie-filled weekend a few weeks ago - our little theater had a weekend full of movies I wanted to see for once!  I spent a lot of time at the theater that weekend.  :)  I kicked it off with Red Riding Hood.

Plot:  The premise is a darker twist on the traditional Red Riding Hood story.  Teen-aged Valerie lives in a medieval town plagued by a werewolf (the Wolf).  She is caught in a love triangle, while the Wolf  meanwhile starts attacking people in the village again after decades of relatively peaceful coexistence.  A werewolf hunter, Father Solomon, arrives in the town and starts looking for the Wolf amongst the townsfolk.  Valerie is quickly recognized as special in the eyes of the Wolf.  She faces suspicion and accusations from her friends and family, while trying to find who the Wolf really is.  And yes, she wears a red cloak and has a grandmother who lives in the woods.

I did not like the girl who played Valerie.  She looked much as I had pictured her when I read the book, but had absolutely no emoting ability.  She has those big wide eyes, but most of the time just had a stare, mouth slightly agape.  I've seen bits of her work in other pieces, so I know Amanda Seyfried can do much better, but there was just nothing to her Valerie.  A few flashes of emotion, but nothing to make the character warm or believable.  And especially when compared to the book; there,Valerie is a clever, independent sort of person, wanting more than her little town presents her (think Belle in Disney's Beauty and the Beast) and honestly torn between her feelings for the two men interested in her.  Instead, she seems rather vacant here.

I didn't like the guy who played Peter either.  (I did like the use of Peter as a name in a story dealing with a wolf though).  His way-too-modern hairstyle bothered me, for starters.  Where does he get that much hair gel in a tiny village deep in the forested mountains anyway?  And the fact that he's supposed to be the dashing, handsome, passionate love that she's turning down her betrothed to run away with... Just look at the pictures at the bottom there.  Who would you choose?  I guess it's like every version of A Tale of Two Cities that I've ever seen - the devoted-yet-still-rejected guy always seems to be the more handsome one.  Honestly, Robert Pattison in the Twilight movies produces much the same reaction from me - "Really?? He's the handsome one sweeping her off her feet?"

Thinking of those two characters, there seemed to be little chemistry between the leads.  The love triangle was there more because everyone talked about it, rather than actually feeling it.  I guess it goes with the whole superficial feel of the movie.  There were definitely scenes which could have been much more moving - several deaths, the love triangle, etc - which never really stirred a beat.

The writing felt anachronistic.  Not that the characters were using slang, but the speech patterns of the characters especially felt decidedly modern.  Not "I am going marry your daughter" but "I'm gonna marry your daughter," less enunciated, more modern-teenager sounding.  I didn't like it.  Sometimes it was the writing itself, sometimes the delivery, but it felt jarring in several conversations.

The movie felt very rushed.  Even without having read the book, the beginning of the movie felt ridiculously hurried and choppy.  The pace settled down a little once Father Solomon arrived in the town, but  it still felt like things were empty and glossed over.  And after having read the book as well, I know they were leaving tons out that helped with the explanations and eliminated that rushed feeling.  And at the same time, wasting time with her far-away thoughts (the repeated image of Valerie and Peter walking on a snowy mountaintop with her in an impractical 20-foot long cloak was ridiculous) - scenes not really necessary, when they didn't spend time with scenes which would have helped the story more.  I'm all for eye-candy in a movie, but a good treatment of the story helps too.

Some thoughts on camera work - were they trying to avoid a higher MPAA rating by shooting all stabbings looking up the sword at the attacker?  It was already PG-13, so would showing the sword stabbings have been that much worse?  As it is, you don't actually see anything.  Not that I'm a violent little ghoul who wants to see stabbings, but it was very odd camera work and I didn't like it.

And a continuity error... Suzette's scars were not visible in her last scene in the movie, even though a point was made about how she would be disfigured by the injury.  Just something I noticed.

Now for some things I did like...

I did like the idea, the story itself.  I really like re-imagined fairy tales and classic stories.  The princess who's ordinary, or not set on being married off to the prince who slays the dragon.  Several of my favorite books are along these lines (The Enchanted Forest Chronicles by Patricia C. Wrede, The Ordinary Princess by M. M. Kaye, Bridget Jone's Diary by Helen Fielding...)  This was the first time I'd seen Red Riding Hood tackled in this light, and I did like the story.

I like Gary Oldman.  He played Father Solomon as a man driven to protect in what he feels is the right way, but becomes mislead by his mission.  He wasn't quite as evil as I felt he became in the book, but Oldman made it work.  And I liked Julie Christie too.  Both of these actors have enough experience to make the characters believable, even with weak writing.  A few acting bright spots in an otherwise unremarkable casting effort.

Overall: 2.5 of 5.  Not bad, but not good.  Not even so-bad-it's-good.  Felt more like a rushed made-for-TV adaptation of a book - average acting overall, and kinda a rushed, choppy feel to the flow of the story.  Read the book instead.

 

HERE BE SPOILERS

I did and didn't like the ending. The actual book is left open-ended, though if you want closure, it is available online (more on that in another post though).  Here, they did go for the closure route, following the plot of the bonus chapter.  That was OK (I actually preferred the openness of the book) but I did like the last scenes, noting the aftermath of Father Solomon's visit, and how everyone's life continued after the Wolf came and left.  I guess to say I like the aftermath scene, but not the resolution of the Wolf mystery?

Review: Easy A

I missed this one when it came to the theater on post, so was very excited about it reaching our little library.  Up this week:  Easy A.

Plot:  After a little white lie about losing her virginity gets out, a clean cut high school girl sees her life paralleling Hester Prynne's in The Scarlet Letter, which she is currently studying in school - until she decides to use the rumor mill to advance her social and financial standing (summary courtesy of IMDB).

The acting was good.  Thomas Haden Church and Lisa Kudrow are both solid in roles as faculty in Olive's school, both funny and sad as their stories developed.  Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci were hysterical as Olive's parents - not too involved, or too stupid-and-insensitive as teen movie parents tend to be.  They are intelligent, quirky, and honestly concerned about their kids - you know, real people.  The adult characters in general were pretty well rounded for a movie of this sort.

The standout, though, was Emma Stone as Olive.  Because her narrative drives a lot of the movie, it was important to have a strong female lead, and Stone handles it well.  She also has a very expressive face, making her range of emotions pretty genuine, and entertaining to watch.  I loved watching her play with her singing birthday card; just seemed a very real thing to do.  I'm looking forward to seeing what else she chooses to act in in the future.

The writing was great.  An actual vocabulary was used (somewhat rare in a teen-based comedy, in my opinion).  Yes, there was some swearing in there too (it is PG-13, after all), but there was some intelligence as well.

Yes, it's probably technically a romantic comedy, as the couple does get together at the end, but that wasn't the focus so much as just Olive's adventures and misadventures. So, a mildly romantic comedy, instead of a Romantic Comedy, if that makes sense?  Which is good, as the male lead (don't want to say hero, as his role wasn't that big) was pretty generic.  Really just there to give some closure at the end of the movie, I think.  Still, a relatively minor character being pretty generic and dull isn't as big a downside to a movie when the lead is so entertaining.

Overall:  4 of 5.  Very clever comedy, with an interesting heroine.  And Emma Stone seems a good up-and-comer to watch.  Can definitely see this one on the shelf.

Review: Sweeney Todd

Back-to-back!  Another Tim Burton/Johnny Depp/Helena Bonham Carter piece:  Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

Plot:  Benjamin Barker was a barber in London who was falsely accused of a crime by a corrupt judge.  He has returned from his imprisonment to find his wife dead and his daughter adopted by the same judge.  He now goes by the name of Sweeney Todd, and returns to his previous trade, taking up residence over the pie shop on Mrs. Lovett.  Todd, aided by Mrs. Lovett, begins a murderous quest for vengeance, while Mrs. Lovett's pie business booms as a side effect...

Dark humor, definitely!!  It's a dark story - love, revenge, murder, cannibalistic meat pies - but it's treated with a lighter touch, so that the funny points come through and the macabre doesn't overwhelm.  I guess you could say, it's gory at a few points, but tastefully done.  It's not a suspense movie, designed to subtly frighten you, and it's not a horror movie bloodbath.  The blood is present, and necessary, but not the focus in most scenes - I guess that's the best way to describe it.

I like musicals, even dark ones.  And Sondheim does do great music and lyrics, even if they aren't always the cheeriest stories out there (West Side Story, anyone?).  But hey, I love Les Mis, and a lot of Andrew Lloyd Weber pieces too, so a musical doesn't need to be cheery for me.  Interesting side note - Sondheim and Weber share a birthday!  Anyways, I've been humming several of the songs this past week, since watching the film, so that's always a good sign.  Being a movie musical, it doesn't have the full catalog of songs ("The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" by the chorus is gone, for example, since they don't need the backstory sung when Burton can film it) and a few of the pieces have shorter arrangements, but still good.  Already knowing the story (we have a cast recording at home of the 1979 Broadway version with Angela Lansbury), "Not While I'm Around" was one of my favorites - not necessarily humm-able, but throat-catching.  I definitely enjoyed the character of Toby.

And just because Depp and Bonham Carter always work with Burton wasn't a guarantee that they'd have parts in this one - they both had quotes about having to audition for Sondheim before getting a role and how nerve-wracking it was!  They both do well with the songs, even in accent.  Not Tony award winning or operatic ranges, but still well done.  Side note - the accents are kept through the songs.  It makes the songs more genuine, not quite so surreal as musicals can be, but it does make the lyrics hard to follow sometimes.  Let's face it, Cockney isn't the most enunciated accent!

They may not have spectacular vocal ranges, but they portray the characters very well.  Sweeney Todd is a man falling apart, driven by his revenge.  And Depp plays this beautifully.  Like I said last week, he does crazy well.  Here, it's more a depressed, disintegrating sort of madness, not the manic sort that the Hatter was.  And Bonham Carter makes a lovely sort of strong fragileness, with a madness of her own.  The two of them really do carry the show!

Thinking of cast - uncredited cameo by Anthony Head (Buffy's Giles) as a citizen in the street talking to Todd.  Don't blink or you'll miss it :)

Oh, and stupid notes from the IMDB boards... several commented on Danny Elfman's absence from the Burton usuals on this piece.  Duh - it's a musical, the score is already written, and anything that needed adjusting to fit the movie can be done by Sondheim himself!  Silly question...

Overall: 4.5 of 5.  Dark, darkly funny, and several memorable numbers.  The actors did a great job bringing it to life.  Not an 'upper' of a movie though - be forewarned.  Revenge, madness, murder are more on the menu than cheery songs and happy endings.

 

Huzzah!

Renfair time!

Or to be totally accurate, The Original Renaissance Pleasure Faire!  And it's old enough that I believe it could be considered an Original (it celebrates it's 50th anniversary next year!).

We went a few weeks ago with two good friends from post here, plus their kids, so we had a good bunch of us heading out for good food and good fun.  Good clean fun, in fact - as advertised!  A perfect day weather-wise too.  Warm enough that even in the shade it was comfortable.  Couldn't have asked for a better day!

 

Those pictures are advertising for one of the groups they had performing at the Faire, the Washer Women.  I actually took the pictures, though, for all my caving friends.  Just seemed appropriate somehow ;)

Zach and the girls learned to dance right as we entered.  Zach got roped in as they needed another guy to even out pairs  :)  They were all so cute!  Zach was a great sport about it.

A parade passes through the Faire on regular intervals.  Musicians, soldiers, sailors, banner carriers, lords and ladies, and of course, the Queen (below on her chair).  It's a pretty impressive parade, actually.  The 'townsfolk' of the Faire line the way and call out to the parade too.  "God save the Queen,"  "Long live the queen," and similar calls.  Lots of noise and simple music and festive people in costume. 

 

On the subject of costumes, it must be recognized as one of the highlights of the Faire, of course.  You can see it in the parade, and a good number of costumes too, as the parade is pretty long, but you also see costumes on all the vendors, performers, and folk just wandering the Faire.  Not just historical costumes, either.  Fairy tale costumes, and just humorous ones too.  It's a fun excused to get dressed up a little!  For our group, one of my friends made garlands for all the girls that came with us.  When the littlest one didn't want to wear hers, I got to wear the extra :)  The wings of the left there were from a wing shop (no kidding).  I think this was the owner, or at least one of the workers.  Her wings were much more involved than the ones in the shop!  There are at least 3 pairs of wings on that 'set' that she's wearing - very ornate, and just gorgeous in the sunshine!  The pair on the right were just wandering the Faire.  He leaked water from his wooden tanks and tums at regular intervals, and she stood with her boat shoes in the puddles.  "No, not enough."  Really detailed costumes, too, for such silly ones!  Another lady we saw at about the same time at the couple was in a dress all of wood.  Like Dutch wooden shoes, except it was her whole outfit!

 

One of the funniest moments of the day was Zach during one of the groups performing.  The Merry Wives of Windsor were one of the groups performing.  The Wives are the serving wenches and the Windsor their tavern.  The show centers on limericks and drinking songs.  The Wives had two different shows they perform, depending on how ... ribald... the songs were.  We wandered into the Adult version. Yes, it warrants the capital letter!  One of the songs they did involved people from the audience.  Each man pulled up from the audience was the subject of a verse of the song - the Baker with the nice buns, etc.  Zach was one of the 'volunteers.'  Giving them credit, the Wife pulling the guys from the audience did ask first if she could "borrow" him :)  And you can ask me what character Zach was, but to be honest, after the first line of his verse, I was laughing so hard, I don't even remember what it was about!

Another highlight was the FOOD! Festival food, above and beyond!  The girls were gushing about Cake on a Stick (official name: Sin on a Stick).  Zach tried it - chocolate-covered cheesecake on a stick.  He enjoyed it, but said it was the richest cake he'd had in a while!  One of those desserts to split, I think :)  I'm not a big cheesecake person, so I indulged at the crepe stand - strawberries and chocolate (Nutella).  Yum!!

And the biggest fun of the day for me: Gnome-hunting!  I even earned my rank as Gnome Finder Extraordinaire (and yes, I have the certificate to prove it!).  At the kids area, you could pick up a map of the fair with lots of little X's marked.  In the area of the X's, gnomes were hidden in stalls.  The vendors provided their own gnomes, and the kids had to find where in the stall the gnomes were.  Once they found the gnome in the stand, they'd point it out to the vendor, who'd stamp the back of the map.  There were 26 gnomes to find throughout the whole fair.  The two below are just examples from one of the shops - in each stall they were different figurines, so it did make it more challenging and more fun!

PS - if you're in the SoCal area, the Faire is still running through the end of May, so head over to Irwindale and have some fun!