tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-927067590706304792.post8435430251624091678..comments2023-09-29T15:10:27.852-07:00Comments on Terry's Movie Reviews: The LOVELY BONESTerry Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06690649007588400600noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-927067590706304792.post-65242653484196895082010-01-21T01:05:50.346-08:002010-01-21T01:05:50.346-08:00Books are better than movies. That's something...Books are better than movies. That's something everyone agrees upon. You spend days, sometimes weeks with a book. You get to 'hear' what characters are thinking, you get a much more in depth look into their make-up & a much mopre detailed description of whythey do what they do (With a few exceptions where the author cleverly decides to leave it up to the reader) You spend 90 minutes to 2 hours with a movie & all those little details either have to be dismissed or crammed into a few lines of dialogue. Sub-plots are erased... Does anyone remember that Richard Dreyfuss' Hooper in 'Jaws' was supposed to have an affair with Chief Brodie's wife?<br />Or that Hooper was also eaten by the shark in the book? Did eliminating those elements lessen the entertainment value of the film? It did at first for me, buit I got over it when I realized the core of the story were the 3 men on the boat. So a good adaption cuts away the crust & leaves the meat of the sandwich intact. <br />The question now becomes, why adapt a book that (as dbm puts it) 'near impossible'? <br />My problem with the film was the glorification of death - here's a story where a horrific fate befalls an innocent 14 year old girl & the director turns her afterlife into a teenager's dream world... What was the point of doing that? Why take a gritty plot & make it user friendly?<br />To me, Jackson wussed out big time. <br />As to the comment that Tucci should have been left out of the trailer, I couldn't disagree more, because THAT is the reason my interest was peaked. Knowing Tucci's Mr. Harvey was the killer did not detract from his performance or the creepiness of his character for me. & I did not like the lame ending when Mr. Harvey meets his end. I shook my head & thought, "No, no, no, that's not how a monster is supposed to go out!"Terry Rnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-927067590706304792.post-90550102268999268342010-01-21T00:15:22.518-08:002010-01-21T00:15:22.518-08:00I thought the film was fine. I did not read the bo...I thought the film was fine. I did not read the book though.movie luvanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-927067590706304792.post-42098836218293283912010-01-18T16:44:47.866-08:002010-01-18T16:44:47.866-08:00I own the book and there is just something about b...I own the book and there is just something about books being adapted to movies, where almost 90%of the time, the film does not match up to the book and this is one of those. John Hillcoat did a pretty good job with with The Road, but The Lovely Bones is near impossible to make. The reason being, the book is series and series of " implied " moments, where your imagination is supposed to create scenes for yourself. How do you put on screen what someone is thinking to themself ?<br />It's a difficult book to adapt and I gave Jackson an B for effort.<br />I don't think it was bad like anonymous thinks. Might have been even worse in the hands of a lesser talented director and storyteller than Jackson.<br />I do think Saoirse Ronan ( pronounced Shur-shee ) has a great career ahead of her. She's a natural. I hear that her plans are to attend college and resume acting afterwards, so maybe she'll be the next Jodie Foster in that regard, where she gets to grow up in college and make a comeback.<br />I also think the marketing behind the movie blew it by showing Tucci in the trailer. That totally gives it away. It may have been more tense to people that weren't aware of the book had they left him out of the trailer.<br />I give it a pass, only for being that the book is incredibley hard to put to screen. It's like making Stephen King's It. I loved that book, and I always felt there was no way they could make a faithful version of it because there are way too many behind the scenes and implied things going on. And once Hollywood decided to make it into a TV movie it was a jumbled, laughable mess and wasn't faithfull to the book ( like most King books to movies )<br />Jackson got it more right than not.dbmnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-927067590706304792.post-792087875212287222010-01-17T22:16:11.827-08:002010-01-17T22:16:11.827-08:00Rachel Weisz's role was cut dramatically from ...Rachel Weisz's role was cut dramatically from the film, so if you're going to blame someone, blame Peter Jackson for editing her part out. In fact blame Jackson for the whole film being as bad as it was.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com