The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo - Fincher (2011)

Plot
Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig), a reporter for the news paper Millenium, is sentenced to pay fines, as one of his articles includes false accusations against a CEO. Mikael soon gets a call from Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer), formely the CEO of Vangerkoncernen. Mikael decides too meet with Henrik, but what he doesn't know is that Henrik Vanger's right hand Frode (Steven Berkoff) has been checking up on Michael, with the help of hacker Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara).

Henrik Vanger wants Blomkvist to help find his niece's killer, who mocks him by sending a picture of a flower every year. A gift his niece used to give him on his birthday. Mikael borrows a small house close to Henrik Vangers mansion, and starts to dig into the family's history.

Meanwhile, Lisbeth Salander tries to get trough, after her intendant gets a stroke Lisbeth's life is turned for the worse. After being sexually abused by her new intendant Nils Bjurman, she decides to get a revenge on him that he will never ever forget. At the same time, Blomkvist is starting to get somewhere in the case of Harriet Vanger's killer.

Opinion
This is a remake of a Swedish film that is really good. A film that is about two people working together before they even know they are. This is not the case in the American film. Lisbeth and Mikael are working in different places the whole time, and when the meet, for some reason they seem to be lovers since forever. Lisbeth has for some reason turned into a trusting, weak girl.

The un-swedishness of the stiff boring surroundings makes the film a poor choice if you like the original one. It seems like the director is using a lot of American, Swedish stereotypes. They look and behave like Americans think swedes does, and what they don't know, they make it american. This is not working, and everything from, dialogue to surroundings seems stiff and unnatural. It also annoys that they mix Swedish and English all the time. Keep it consistent, that would have been a bit better. I also find it weird that the American actors were speaking english poorly, and swedish poorly. Skarsgård were the only one actually speaking both languages the best.

There is no chemistry between the two actors either, and there is no conviction in their acting. It feels like they are just going trough the motions.

On top of that, there is a lot of things that you in the Swedish version can guess yourself too. Build you own story trough what happens in the plot, but in this case you can't build your own story. Everything, every little detail is shown, or told in the plot.

There are two things I can find that is good with the movie, and that is  1) the intro. It is computer animated and looks really good and 2) Stellan Skarsgård as Martin Vanger.

I will not recommend anyone to see if if you like the Swedish version. I will not recommend it anyway as the film is really awful.

Rooney dödade Lisbeth

Jag skrev för ett tag sedan ett inlägg om hur mina förväntningar på The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, och speciellt hur Rooney Mara verkade vara som Lisbeth Salander.
Igår kväll såg jag filmen.
Rooney Mara dödade Lisbeth Salander.
Hon rev ner precis allting som Noomi Rapace byggt upp med Lisbeth.
Nu får vi börja om igen.

Lisbeth Salander är en trasig kvinna, men hon är inte en kvinna med ett öppet sår. Hon blöder inte längre. Hon vill bara ha sin hämnd. Hon vill ha hämnd för andra.
Lisbeth klarar sig själv, och hon är inte dummare än hon behöver att vara. Salander vet vad hon vill ha, hon tar det och hon blir inte fäst vid saker.
Rooney Mara är öppen, frågar om hon får saker och blir förtjust i Mikael Blomkvist. Men hon frågar först om hon kan få det. Hon berättar allt om sig själv, och Lisbeth gör inte sådant. Lisbeth tar reda på det hon behöver, och bestämmer därefter om det är värt hennes tid eller inte. Oftast är det inte det. Hon lägger inte ner känslor där det inte behövs, och hon behöver ingen fasad.
Lisbeth litar inte på Blomkvist, hon litar inte på någon, och definitivt inte oss.
Inte utan att ha kollat upp oss, och visste hon våra innersta hemligheter skulle hon nog inte lita på oss så länge hon levde.

Mara har ingen glöd i sin blick som Noomi har. Lisbeth lever för vissa få saker, inget som Mara tar till sig alls.
Där Noomi som Lisbeth slår tillbaka, tar Mara emot och gör ingenting. Hon rör sig bara i ett rörelsemönster, utan övertygelse, utan tankar och utan list.

Jag kan verkligen inte hitta något bra med Maras version av Lisbeth och min förväntning att Lisbeth skulle vara en rockstjärne-wannabe blev infriad. Lisbeth har inte en fasad, Lisbeth är äkta. Mara är inte äkta. Hon har bara på sig kläderna för att revolta emot samhället. Som en tonåring, och hon beter sig som en tonåring. Hon får Lisbeth att verka som någon som ska vara omyndigförklarad.

Mara tar emot samhället med våld, Rapace tar emot samhället med list och rättvisa.

Tetro (Coppola, 2009)

Plot
Bennie (Alden Ehrenrich), a young boy, soon turning 18 shows up at his brother's apartment in Buenos Aires. His brother, Tetro (Vincent Gallo), ran away when Bennie were a young child. Tetro refuses to admit he has a family, but Bennie wants to know why Tetro ran away.

Tetro is now living with a woman named Miranda (Maribel Verdú), whom he met when he just came to Argentina, and is still a failed writer when Bennie finds him. Bennie and Miranda help each other to find out why Tetro ran off, and it turns out to be Bennie's family history that has been hidden for everyone, not Tetro's.

Opinion
Coppola has not always managed to succeed with his films, but in this one he does. It is a film noir, without the police detective, but with the intrigues.
The dialogue is well-written, and there are no giant holes in the plot. The black and white setting of the film makes shadows, lightning and sound important, and in this case the whole setting off the film fits perfectly in every aspect.

I would say that the actors fit their roles perfectly, and also, the characters personalities are also put together with great care. Tetro, the crusty one who refuses to talk to his brother, Miranda, the always happy and bubbly girlfriend and Bennie, the young innocent boy who can not say no.

This time Coppola managed to succeed. A film I would recommend to anyone if you can get hold of it!

Top-21!

Here is (I guess) my top 21 favourite films that I think everyone should watch some day!

• Carrie (De Palma, 1976)
• La vita è Bella ((Life is Beautiful) Benigni, 1997)
• M (Lang, 1931)
• Tim Burton's Nightmare Before Christmas (Selick, 1993)
• Iron Man (Favreau, 2008)
• The Others (Amenábar, 2001)
• Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari ((The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) Wiene, 1920)
• Chocolat (Hallström, 2000)
• Nightmare on Elm Street (Craven, 1984)
• El laberinto del fauno ((Pan's Labyrinth)Del Toro, 2006)
• El orfanato ((The Orphanage/Barnhemmet) Bayona, 2007) 
• The Full Monty (Cattaneo, 1997)
• E.T.: The Extra-Terrstrial (Spielberg, 1982)
• What's eating Gilbert Grape  (Hallström 1993)
• Stand By Me (Reiner, 1986)
• American History X (Kaye, 1998)
• Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauen (Nosferatu, a symphony of Horror) Murnau, 1922)
• Bringing up Baby (Hawks, 1938)
• Gladiator (Scott, 2000)
• Friday Night Lights (Berg, 2004)
• Cry-Baby (Waters, 1990)

Challengers: Edward Scissorhands, Corpse Bride, The Crow, Watchmen, Howl's Moving Castle, Spirited Away, Children of The Corn, Halloween, The Lion King, Fight Club, Night of The Living Dead, Green Street Hooligans, Sin City, Henry- A Serial Killer, Finding Neverland, Donnie Darko, Batman - The Dark Knight, London To Brighton, Candy, Bravo Two Zero, Top Gun, Queen of The Damned, Underworld, Snarveien, Trolljegeren, House on Haunted Hill, Hellraiser, Alice In Wonderland, 28 Days Later, Blair Witch Project

Varför blir du rädd?

Skräckfilmer är idag en betydligt mer accepterad genre än vad den var för bara några årtionden sedan.
Vad är det då som gör att människan tycker om att se på saker som skrämmer dem?
Det är inte den frågan som jag tänker svara på nu, utan det jag ska försöka att skriva om, är det faktum att det inte alltid är det monstruösa som skrämmr en, utan det kan vara det helt vardagliga.

Om vi ser på några av de skräckfilmer som tar sig som mest läskiga i min ögon så ligger där Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween, Coraline och The Others. Något som tre av dem har gemensamt är att de alla utspelar sig i miljöer som man kan känna igen. (Nightmare on Elm Street anser jag är läskig av den orsaken att Kreuger ger sig på en där man ingenting kan göra något det. I drömmarna. Man kan inte be om hjälp, och man kan inte hjälpa sig själv. Gör det Kreuger till genial, eller bara en fegis?)

Om vi tar första exemplet som jag skulle vilja titta närmare på så är det Halloween. I originalfilmen så ser vi ett helt vanlig (om än bråkig) amerikansk familj, där yngste pojken har tendenser mot det makabra. Man skulle kunna kalla Mike Meyers för en psykopat, men det som gör det är att han egentligen inte är ett monster i stil med Dracula eller zombies, utan han är en helt vanlig människa, och filmen utspelar sig i helt vanliga miljöer som man kan känna igen sig i. Det behövs inget odött monsturöst för att skapa monster helt enkelt, ondska finns runtomkring oss.

Coraline jobbar på samma sätt. Boken, tänkt som en barnsaga, handlar om Coraline, vars föräldrar jobbar för mycket, och ofta har annat att göra än att leka med Coraline, som istället börjar att utforska för sig själv. Hon lyckas att hitta portalen till en annan värld. En värld som ser ut precis som den hon kommer från, men lite gladare, lite färgrannare, och med bättre föräldrar. Kruxet är, föräldrarna har knappar till ögonen. Mamman, som i alla andra aspekter är den perfekta mamman (hon lagar god mat till Coraline, och de båda vill leka med henne, och låter henne göra vad hon vill), visar sig vara inget annat än ondskefull, och tar barnens liv ifrån dem. Genom att invagga Coraline i en idyll värld, så försöker hon att få Coralina att ge sitt liv till henne. Vilket barn skulle inte vilja ha ett sådant liv som Coralines andra mamma ger henne?

Vi har här två exempel där det idylliska får besök av ett monster.
Det är i sådana här filmer som det är svårare att skilja på fiktion och verklighet. När börjar det påhittade, och när är världen precis som den är utanför filmen?

Just fallet med Halloween tycker jag är det mest talande för sådana här fall av skräckfilm. Mike Meyers är sprungen ur människa, vare sig utan att ha dött tidigare, eller att ha druckit någon konstig häxbrygd för att få några som helst krafter.

Personligen är jag fortfarande rädd för att någon kväll vakna och se att ljuset från fönstret störs av något, och att det står en livslevande Mike Meyers utanför.

There is only one Lisbeth Salander!

Rooney Mara is the actress who are portraying Lisbeth Salander in the Hollywood remakes of the Swedish film-trilogy based on Stieg Larsson's books.

It is, as usual that Hollywood can not leave perfectly good films alone but has to come along and ruin them it hurts when you see one of your favorite fictional characters becoming someone you do not recognize.

Noomi Rapace will alway be the Lisbeth Salander loved by those who like the movies.

Haven't we seen Hollywood ruin enough movies for us now?

I wonder why there even is a remake market for foreign films. As I see it, they do the remake, and people forget the original, or don't even know there is a original film. Is this because Hollywood is so scared that they will loose their status within the film-industry? Or are Americans to lazy to read the subtitles?

I doubt that any country ever will have as enormous film-industry as there are in Hollywood, even if they stopped doing remakes on foreign films.

While Noomi Rapace looks like a bad ass, as Lisbeth is, Mara looks like a wannabe-rock star.

Lisbeth Salander is not just dark clothes and lots of make-up, Lisbeth is a broken person, and that's the most important part, I doubt anyone could do that as good as Noomi does.

Also, this is bothering in the question: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2011/10/hm-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo.html. Why do one need a clothes collection to look like Lisbeth Salander? (I guess the american version of her). 

After watching the trailer one wonder, have they actually changed anything, or is it exactly the same, and in that case, wouldn't it have been cheaper to subtitle the original film? Is it really such a bother for American people to watch something from another culture than their own? Is it so hard to understand the context of objects and people, as we always have to do as most of the films shown worldwide are recorded in an american context, even though the settings might be from somewhere else?

No, there is only one, Lisbeth Salander.

(I will most probably come back to this subject when the remakes have hit Sweden around Christmas)

Personal trivia:

I have known for a while that the film was going to be made, and I hated the idea, always wondering what idiot director that's going to ruin my love for films this time. Today (27th October 2011) I checked, and realized that the director of this film is the director of many films I dislike, and he is using Brad Pitt in many of them. This can not become more horrible...

Also, I dislike Daniel Craig, he ruined James Bond for me...

*Edit 30/10 -2011*
http://www.aftonbladet.se/webbtv/noje/film/article13666143.ab
One of the trailers for the film.
The dialog are awful! I mean really, really awful!
Thank you Hollywood, for ruining a perfectly good film! It's appreciated.

Bright Star

Bright Star is directed by Jane Campion and released in 2009.

Plot

Bright Star is a film about the love-story of poet John Keats and Fanny Brawne and it is based on the book with the same name.

John Keats, a poet of the 19th Century, living with his friend Charles Brown in the outskirts of London. Trough Brown and the Dilkes family, Keats gets in touch with the Brawnes, and their daughter Fanny. Keats being a mediocre poet, does not dare to get to close to Fanny, even though he is drawn to her, because he can not offer her wealth or a steady life. At the same time as he tries to understand his feelings for Fanny and write, he is also taking care for his sick brother. 

Brown tries all he can to keep Fanny and John from each other, but he does not succeed. He tries to kick him out, and send him away, but in the end, Fanny and John becomes lover. After a trip to London, though, John becomes sick (most probably from the same illness his brother had), and some of his friends decides that a trip to Italy is the best way to make sure he gets well. Meanwhile, the maid in the Brawne house, becomes with child, and Brown accepts to pay for the child, and this makes it impossible for him to accompany Keats to Italy, instead, he will be the one who reads the letter from Italy to Fanny and her mother, which tells them of the death of the poet. 

Opinion

The film was a lot better than I thought it would be. I do not like the actors that much, but they are bearable. I have not seen anything made by Campion before (no, I have not seen The Piano before either), but she seems as looking at what other films she had done, to like this poetic kinds of film.

I was a bit suspicious, Keats being alongside Byron and Poe, one of my favourite 19th Century poets, on whether I would like the film or not.

I did like the use of poems trough the film, as I guess, to show emotions the no one could put words to, in hint things. Fanny using literature and poetry in a way to come close to the one she loves, even though there is obstacles in the way, she wanting to know everything about the interests of her love, even though her own interests lies elsewhere. 

If you want to look at a  sad romance film, this is the film to watch, so don't assume it is a film on the life of John Keats, then you will be annoyed on how they only care for the love story and his love poems. 

Tim Burton's Art for exhibition in Los Angeles

http://www.lacma.org/art/exhibition/tim-burton

The Los Angeles County Museum of Art are going to show bits and pieces of the director Tim Burton's (Beetlejuice, Nightmare Before Christmas, Batman) art from his whole career.

According to the article, there will be more than 700 pieces of art up for display, bot illustrations, photos, paintings, animations and other things Burton have made during his long career in the show-business.

Tim Burton himself will open the exhibitions at 10AM on Saturdays and Sundays as soon as they open (Oct 1st).

Dracula (1992) Spoiler alerts!

Plot
Jonathan Harker (Keanu Reeves) travels to Transylvania to help Count Dracula (Gary Oldman) to buy property in London. Dracula finds the photo of Harker's wife-to-be Mina (Winona Ryder), and becomes obsessed with her. Mina is, when Harker is away, visiting her friend Lucy (Sadie Frost), whom becomes very sick. Arthur Holmwood (Cary Elwes) orders for the Doctor, Jack Seward (Richard E. Grant), but he has no idea what could have happened to Lucy, and in turn sends for his friend Abraham Van Helsing (Anthony Hopkins) who says it is because of Nosferatu. Mina gets romantically involved with the vampire, without knowing who he is.

Mina goes to Romania, marries Jonathan, and keeps quiet about her adventures with the vampire, but after Van Helsing tells them they have to kill him, she agrees and follows, and her secret is out.

Opinion
This film is one of the worst Dracula films. They claim to keep to the book, but it is very few parts of the film that do. The effects are really poor made, and the ideas are poor in all.
Reeves makes a really bad impression, there is no love to be this role in his acting, and the love story between Dracula and Mina is just stupid. The Count becomes a vampire in the same category as Edward Cullen, Bill Compton and other "humanvampires" of today, and not the monster he is in the book.
The worst acting, among many really poor ones, is anyhow Lucy. She does noting else but swirls around in bed, and then explodes. That was not very nice.

I would not recommend to see this film if you want the magic of Dracula, nor if you want a nice vampire story. The only reason one should watch this is to see how poor it is.

Trolljegeren (Trollhunter)

Plot

A grupp studenter från Volda i Norge, gör som projekt ett repotage om björnjakt, där björnar skjuts utanför säsong, av någon som inte alls är björnjägare.

De tre vännerna följer efter mannen genom Norge, och han varnar dem för att göra det. När de hittar honom i skogen, kommer det fram att det finns bra mycket farligare saker i skogen än björnar.

Åsikt

En fiktiv dokumentär i samma anda som Blair Witch Project, Rec, och Paranormal Activity (även om man kan se att de flesta likheterna finns till Rec, där de också har ett filmteam). Dock är den här filmen betydligt roligare, och man får faktiskt se vad det läskiga är. Det får man inte riktigt i de andra filmerna.

Troll känns väldigt norskt, och det här konceptet passar mycket bra. Det finns både humor, och samhällskritik i filmen. Den är välgjord, och de troll som finns med är riktiga bestar, även om endel av dem liknar John Bauers troll. Det kändes också väldigt skönt att filmen inte dominerades av saker som Griegs I bergakungens sal även om man kände igen termen (det norska ordet för bergakung är dobregubbe, som var just namnet på ett av trollen).

Norge har på sistone gjort några riktigt bra filmer (där ibland Snarveien, Död Snö, Fritt Vilt) och den här blir lätt en del av samlingen!

Det finns lite få saker som man kan sitta och irritera sig på i storyn, men man har lätt överseende för dem för att allt annat är riktigt bra.

Rekommenderas definitivt!

Super 8

Plot
Joseph Lamb (Joel Courtney) looses his mother in a accident at the steel factory, at the moment he and his friends are recording a film about zombies. After convincing Alice Dainard (Elle Fanning) to play the wife of the private detective they decide to shoot the scene, at night, at a railroad track. They witness the train crash, and the military take over the small Ohio Town.
The deputy Jackson Lamb (Kyle Chandler), tries to uncover the truth, not knowing his son are in the middle of it. The truth turns out to be something no one would ever have guessed.

Opinion
One can straight away see this is a work of Steven Spielberg (most famous for among other E.T, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, and the TV-series Taken (where he also worked with the sister of Elle Fanning, Dakota)). Spielberg loves to show us young heroes (found in E.T and Taken), and things no one knows existed. The monster in this film had, when looked close upon, a great touch of E.T in him, and also, the films takes place in a time, when people (mostly adults) are afraid of the outside, the cold war is at it's peek, and everyone is scared.
J.J Abrams, (the producer of Lost, Alias and Cloverfield) on the other hand seem to like technical things. Some of the props in this film had a close resemblance to things we can see in Alias, but the "oh, we can't really see the monster until the end of the film"- is somewhat close to how he made Cloverfield.

I guess I could say you should go see the film. There are some lose treads (as we know J.J Abrams, had the same idea with Lost), unseen monsters that might ruin the experience. Joe is very similar to the character of Elliot in E.T, and the second Fanning sister, are rather similar to her older sister, as she was portraying Allie (yeah, not much of a name change, as Alice were called Allie throughout the film) in Taken.

What's good with the film is the first half, where the monster is unknown. We just know something is lurking, but we have no real idea what it is, except dangerous. Also, the fact that they do not work with stereotype teenagers (or youngsters on the brink of becoming teenagers), as are done in many films (another films working that well too is Mysterious Skin). That was nice to see. There were all kind of outsiders, but there were no real "cool gang".

If you like E.T, Lost and Alias (preferably in a combination) go see the film, otherwise, don't. Or at least don't spend money on seeing it in the movies.

Pirates of the Caribbean - On Stranger Tides

Plot

Jack (Johnny Depp), Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), Blackbeard (Ian McShane) and the Spaniards are all out for the same thing. The fountain of youth.

The films starts with Jack trying to save Gibbs (Kevin McNally), but ends up at the royal kings dinner table, where he finds Barbossa, one leg less, but just as dirty and evil. He runs of in his usual manner, and to find the man who claims to be him. "Jack" (the imposter) turns out to be Angelica (Penélope Cruz), an old acquaintance of Jack's and the daughter of Blackbeard.  She tricks him, and he has to gang up with Blackbeard, and Gibbs manages to get onto Barbossa's ship. 

Jack decides to try and make mutiny, and that is not one thing Blackbeard approves of, and he makes Jack show him the way to the fountain, or he will kill him. Blackbeard needs to find the fountain, because a prophecy has foretold he will be killed by a one-legged man, Jack on the other hands, is as always looking for something precious to him.

Opinion

Penélope Cruz as a substitute for Kiera Knigtley is not okay. The film is for me a disappointment, but it is still a more "serious" Captain Jack Sparrow we see. But without the trio (Depp, Bloom, Knightley) that actually makes the Pirates movies, it feels a bit... poor. There is something lacking, especially as it seems like they are giving other people traits from the other two (Angelica gets some of Elizabeth's traits, and random missionary man Philip gets some of Will's traits, and it does not seem right).

I feel it being a bit too much magic in this film, even though it has been a lot in the others, this just became a bit over the top. But there were a few really fun situations, and a nice touch using Keith Richard in one of the roles. And I did really like the mermaids, so far from the cute ones in Disney's cartoons and fairy tales, these were proper evil mermaids. Those I liked!

The story is okay, I couldn't find enormous holes and odd ends or parts without any explanation, even if one thinks that, it is still Captain Jack Sparrow we speak about, even though his plans and ideas are not even close to what they are in the other three films, and I feel it hard to understand if this is before or after the other films. 

I'm not sure if I should recommend it or not. I would at least not pay full-price for the film, or I would wait for the DVD to become cheaper before I see it (if I hadn't already), but if you're a Johnny Depp/Jack Sparrow/PotC-fan, well, I guess it's okay, but the first film is still the best of the four. 

Spoiler alert!

(If you do not want to know what happened, then stop reading, right here! And yeah, I put them down here as I don't want to ruin the film for anyone!) 

A big disappointment was the Spaniards! They only wanted to find the fountain to destroy it, as it is not a religious place, how lame is that? I mean, come on! That is just... I don't even have words for it! 

Remakes

I was going to open up a discussion topic now.

What do you people think about the remakes that Hollywood are doing now?
Are there really no ideas what so ever on new films.

I have seen two trends that are really strong in Hollywood the last few years.

1. Remakes on really good old films/foreign film, making them really poor!
2. Making films of comic-books and mangas (an one or two books).

This discussion subject will be remakes (I will make on on the making of films of comics later).

So what do you think about the remakes? Do they need to make remakes?
What films has had a better remake than the original film, are there any?

Well, it's all up to you to start discussing!

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Plot

Charlie Bucket (Freddie Highmore), a poor boy living in Scotland whit his family. In the town, Willy Wonka's (Johnny Depp) (the worlds most amazing chocolate-maker) closed down factory exists, but one day, people start to see smoke from the factory again. It is announced that there will be five golden tickets in the candy-bars sent out to the stores.

The first was found by a German child named Augustus Gloop (Philip Wiegratz), the second by Veruca Salt (Julia Winter) from England, the third by Violet Beauregarde (AnnaSophia Robb) from Atlanta, USA, and when the fourth ticket was found by Mike Teavee (Jordan Fry), from Denver, USA, Charlie becomes rather disappointed as his chances of getting the tickets are very small.

One day, Charlie finds a ten pound bill, and buys a chocolate-bar, in it, he finds the last golden ticket, and are invited for a day at the factory, and at the end, someone will win an amazing price!

Opinion

Johnny Depp in one of his craziest roles, but the film is cute, and I think it really is a family-film, and even  younger children can see it.As I remember from reading the book, it does not follow it exactly, but rather well, but I think Willy Wonka is not as eccentric in the book, and he has no problems with his parents, which I think is a nice add from Hollywood (for once!). Even though, of course, the idea of the film is that, do not be greedy, and you will get what you want, it works, but as it is adapted from a children's story, getting the morale completely out of the story is hard. 

I personally would have liked if Helena Bonham Carter had a larger role, as she is an amazing actress, but she is okay as a mother. I also see it rather fun that Christoper Lee is Willy's angry father!

I would really recommend the film to anyone. It suits everyone,  and Johnny Depp makes Willy Wonka more interesting than what he is in the book, and he has an opportunity to really go crazy (a lot better than when he was the Mad-Hatter in Alice in Wonderland). This was the second film Freddie Highmore and Johnny Depp works together, and in this one, Freddie has grown a lot.

Priest

Plot

Once there were a war, between man and vampires. Man though they had win, but they were wrong. 

When the "Priest" finds out his brother (whom are portrayed by Stephen Moyer, most known as Bill Compton in True Blood), and the woman and child the priest had left for his brother to take care of, had been attacked by vampires, he leaves the city, and breaks the vows he once made to the church.

Opinion

A really good movie!

You feel like they have taken The Matrix(a lot of the fighting haveMatrix-feeling), added some vampires (evil ones), and then put in a few wannabe-Batmanbikes, and some Star Wars feeling, and voilá, you have a filme based on a Korean manhwa.

The fighting is of course unrealistic, but it is well-executed, and the vampires are really cool, as they are not sparkling, or not human at all, as the humans and the vampires are two different races. There are ONE human vampire, and he is the first of his kind.

One thing that I felt was really good with the film was the fact that they did not linger to much in things "unnecessary" for the plot. 

I would really recommend the film to everyone who loves nasty-ass vampires, and it has a nice touch of religion vs. vampires, that I have not seen in films.  Of course, there are some cliches, but one can live with them because the rest of the movie makes up for it.

I think this movie actually worked better in 3D than other films I have seen, and the animation at the beginning of the film was one of the best I have seen in cinema (only the one in the seventh Harry Potter film has been close to as good!).

Hello and welcome!

Hello!

Well, after a few weeks of thinking, I decided that I was going to start this blog! This, and one blog specialized on book reviews. Mostly because I like to help people to know a lot about films and books, and I would love to let people know what kinds of books and films I think are good, and give help and tips.

I will review both old and new films, as I see it, it is never to late to discover a film!

As a difference from my other "main" blog, this will only contain reviews of films and filmrelated subjects, and my other blog http://libraryofthedreams.blogspot.com/ will only contain book reviews and bookrelated subjects!

I hope you will enjoy this just as much as I do!

Sanna

Vampires Suck!

Plot

Becca Crane moves to her dad in Sporks, Washington from Nevada. There she meets Jennifer and Rick her two "friends" but also Edward Sullen and Jacob White. Edward and his family are vampires. Edward and Bella dates, but Edward leaves her and she gets devastated and tries to kill herself. She is now torn between Jacob, whom also has a dark secret, and Edward, but in the end she choose Edward. 

Opinion

As I dislike Twilight, I love this film. It has a lot of fun jokes on behalf of Twilight, and how people claim Bella and Edward and the rest of the characters are behaving in the book and film.

If you like Twilight, you will probably don't like it that much.

To be able to understand it completely though, you must have either watched or read the books/films, even though you might enjoy some of the things anyway.

I'd say, slapstick and spoofs are the words that describe it, so if you do not like that, then do not watch.

Vampire Knight

Plot

Yuki, the shy girl who becomes in some ways entangled with some of the "night students" at her school.

It's hard to know whether it is in a all romantic way, but it sure has the tones of a romantic story. But that's not hard to guess as the manga is a Shojo manga, which means it's written for girls at the age of 12,13,14-ish.

We will find out, Yuki's first memory, is being attacked by a vampire, and her job at the school (which is run by her father) is to make sure the day classes does not discover the secrets of the night students, this she does together with her childhood friend Zero, whom also becomes a vampire and Yuki battles to make him keep sane and not become what they classify as Level E vampires (the savage ones).

What makes the story even more tangled up, is the fact that Zero's family, was killed by vampires.

What we also get to know during the story is that Kaien Cross, is not really Yuki's father, and that Yuki has her own heritage that she carries, deep within her self.

Recommend?

Oh, yes. Even if it's silly, romatic yucky and ucky, I do recommend the anime. But, it's not for those who do not like really romantic stuff.

It's rather like many other Shojo manga, and it's rather similar to many vampire stories looks like, but it is a nice break from all those new vampire stories that looks the same like Twilight and True Blood/Sookie Stackhouse novels.

Queen of The Damned (the film)

Queen of the Damned

Plot

Based on the book by Anne Rice, we see Lestat, having been dorment for many years, waking up in a new, modern era. He decides the best way to lure the vampires from their hiding, exposing them, to make the vampires the leading race, is to become the singer of a rock band, and in the lyrics reveal all the secrets of the vampires. Not all vampires are to keen on it though, but one girl at an agency that looks for vampire's becomes very excited, as Lestat is the one vampire she has been looking for.

Opinion

I still haven't read the book, so I don't know whether it follows the book or not. But the film in it self is a master piece. It's rather predictable though as soon as Jesse comes into the picture, you know what will happen with the love story. On the other hand, I did not believe that Lestat would come as far as he did with his exposing strategy, and he did execute it very well, and in ways I would never guess. As in Interview with a Vampire, Lestat shows us some hidden talent, that he does not want to share, he knows lots of stuff, be he do not want to tell... Exactly the same from IwaV, where he never tells Louis the whole story, and that might be the reason they fall out all the time.

It becomes a bit boring though with all the long, I mean really long, flashbacks, if they were shorter, it would be more interesting to watch, as, yeah we get it music had some significance in Lestats life, but instead of doing one very long flashback, I think it would have been better with a few shorter ones.

But at a whole, this really is one of my favourite films, and no matter, I will always prefer Stuart Townsend as Lestat rather than Tom Cruise.

Picture found at:

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnFsyBTIENfubTlz1CqcrYN48zsLSNIcC0Ey2Whjq1nytq2IiiO7L-bmjDhdMcsrBSViazNwt6vVBjHuOX3GxQ29nRGvPaIH23q4VOEB1Uid-beEXPFH7UXyi4pwxsZmb4yvjZDnhEf7Y/s1600/QUEEN+of+the+DAMNED+01.jpg

Das Cabinett des Dr Caligari

.I will not make a review as on the other films on this as I think this way of reviewing this is the better way

Well, the film looks like an early expressionism painting. I could never have realized that so much was hidden in it. I will try and compare the films with the Romantic movement.

First of all, I would never have guessed how alike it is to the Romanticism books and literature written in the early 1800's such as Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Bram Stoker's Dracula. If we compare Cesare with the monster in Frankenstein, you can find similarities in how he has his master, and how he is alienated from the rest of the world, but the difference is in how Cesare does not break free from his master the way the creature does in Frankenstein.

Furthermore, you can see how the landscape is similar as the Germans are building the Third Reich and how the economy is poor. It becomes a question about class in the end.

There is also many elements of fantasy and horror (as we can find many similarities between German expressionism film and modern horror films) similar to the ones in the books written in the beginning of the 1800's. This unreal worlds are in the expressionism film most clear in the backgrounds and the acting. We see worlds that do not look like our own, there are few shadows that makes the world "real" and the acting is often grotesque.

As many of the expressionism films are similar to the literature written during the Romantic movement, there is no surprise that the first vampire film based on Bram Stoker's Dracula also originated from this time in the shape of Warnau's Nosferatu.

If one like the 1800' romantic Gothic book, you will love this film.