Coraline Out on DVD/Blu-Ray

Hurray! Coraline was released today on DVD and Blu-ray in exactly the way I'd hoped: with both the 2D and the 3D versions, accompanied by 4 pairs of 3D glasses. When I saw the movie in the theater months ago, I was blown away by its visual artistry. It had such an amazing look and atmosphere.
The stop-motion film was beautiful, sinister, compelling, heartwarming, humorous, and haunting. This is admittedly an odd amalgam, but it really worked. I saw the movie in 2D, and it was gorgeous, but I remained very curious about the 3D version. I hoped the DVD would include both versions, and it does!
When I can manage to find a bit of free time, I'd also like to reread Neil Gaiman's novel for a fresh comparison. The film did a wonderful job of bringing his work to vibrant, animated life, but there were also deviations (e.g., the character of Wybie, who I actually rather liked). So much to do, see, and read... and, as always, so little time!

Kimonos and Robots

In the past several weeks, I finally got around to watching a couple of DVDs that I’d been meaning to for quite some time. The first was Kenneth Branagh’s adaptation of As You Like It. Given that this is one of my favorite Shakespearean comedies, I was really excited about the film version. And Branagh has done such wonders with film adaptations of Shakespeare plays, the best being (in my humble opinion) Much Ado About Nothing. Branagh set his interpretation of As You Like It in nineteenth century Japan, which I found very intriguing. And it certainly was visually stunning. The costumes, in particular, were gorgeous—a fusion of Victorian and Japanese garb. Bryce Dallas Howard was a vibrant Rosalind, and Romola Garai nearly outshone her as Celia. (I didn't even recognize her as the same actress who portrayed the 18-year-old Briony Tallis in Atonement!) For all its good points, however, the film never grabbed me the way I expected it to. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something seemed lacking. I came away with the vague feeling that perhaps As You Like It simply works better as a play. When I read it a few years ago, I remember loving the language and thinking, "Wow, I think this may have just become my favorite Shakespearean comedy." Then, I saw Sir Peter Hall's RSC production at the Ahmanson Theatre. With a 1930s, depression-era backdrop, it was both nuanced and memorable. Branagh's version is beautiful to look at, and all the actors were extremely competent. But, the spark that truly brings a film to life and creates a deep connection between the audience and the characters on screen remained elusive.

One last note: Brian Blessed had the difficult task of portraying both Duke Senior and his power-hungry brother Duke Frederick. Blessed was excellent in both roles, but images from his stint as Old Deuteronomy in Cats kept leaping unbidden to my mind! Okay, so this picture here isn't of Brian Blessed, but my searches came up empty. This was the best I could do, but I think it gives a good idea of why the image interfered with my ability to focus on and truly enjoy Blessed's efforts in the film!

If you haven't yet guessed, the second DVD I watched was Wall-E. Yes, I know, I work at Disney. How could I have waited till now to watch this film? What can I say? 2008 was an insanely busy year! Anyway, Pixar did its usual amazing job with this film. I appreciated its lofty goals and its artistic achievement. How it gave essentially non-speaking robots such personality and soul really was brilliant. And, of course, its environmental message certainly is timely and relevant. But, just like Branagh's film, Wall-E left me not entirely satisfied. The obese humans' return to a still-toxic Earth seemed unrealistic, and I didn't understand why some live acting was injected into an otherwise all-CGI film. Because I couldn't see the purpose for doing this, it actually distracted me during the movie. Also, the messages, while extremely important, seemed a bit overhanded. Overall, I liked the film, respected what it set out to do, and marveled at what it accomplished artistically and technically. But, I didn't love the film. Perhaps I can best convey my feelings with a comparison to its Pixar predecessor: Wall-E is a more important film than Ratatouille, but I liked Ratatouille more.

Return to the World of Harry Potter

Last Spring, KPGirl told me she was rereading the first 6 books in the Harry Potter series in anticipation of the release of book 7. I thought that was a fabulous idea, so I decided to do the same before reading the finale. I am, however, a bit of a dawdler, and there were too many things going on and too many other books I was reading, so I conceded that I probably wouldn't make it to book 7 until summer of 2008. But, I didn't mind. I wasn't in a hurry to find out what happened; I just needed to turn a deaf ear and blind eye to whatever spoilers were floating out there.
The first two books were quick reads that I finished in late summer. I enjoyed them, but not as much as the first time, when J.K. Rowling's magical world was brand new to me. Then, a bit of a lull happened, which was perhaps a bit odd since book 3 had always been my favorite. Two months ago, however, I got into a Harry Potter fix: I watched Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix on DVD and reread books 3 and 4 in a fairly short span of time. Now, I'm in a bit of a lull again. This time, it's not surprising at all considering book 5 is my least favorite. (In a rare occurrence, I actually found I liked the movie better than the book!) I am 558 pages into it and still have 300+ pages to go.

Despite the slow-going of book 5, I have enjoyed revisiting the Harry Potter books. Knowing subsequent events and connections made me notice many details and set-ups that I missed the first time. Since I'm rereading all these books in paperback format, I also found that a sequential error in the original hardback of book 4 had been fixed! (Harry's parents now emerge from Voldemort's wand in the correct order.) As an editor, I find this interesting and amusing. See? Things do get fixed in reprints!

Since I am in the midst of book 5, I must include the following images for my Factorie friends who are not Harry Potter readers. These are the talented Mary GrandPré's illustrations of the detested Professor Umbridge (aka Umbrage). She is described as resembling a large, pale toad. Is this not apt?

When An Old English Epic Goes Hollywood

At first glance, Robert Zemeckis's Beowulf does not seem like my kind of film. At second glance, well, it's still not my kind of film, but there are definitely elements that both intrigue and appall me. The "performance capture" technology and the look of the film appeal to me on an aesthetic level. And, since I am not always a purist when it comes to the literary canon, it does interest me to see modern interpretations of the classics. When done well, it can be intellectually and emotionally stimulating. Now, I must say that I remember very little of Beowulf from my college reading: hero kills monster Grendel, saves kingdom, fights dragon, receives mortal wound, dies. Since it made so little impression on me, I am not one of those people who can exclaim with righteous indignation, "What have you done to England's national epic?!" Nevertheless, just from seeing the commercials, visiting the website, and doing some surfing, I found several things troubling about this film.

I realize that when one watches a film, there is a silent compact to suspend disbelief. Given that this is a fantasy epic, that would go double. I also realize that the majority of Hollywood films must meet a required dosage of violence and sex. But, really, stiletto heels on Grendel's mom?
Played by Angelina Jolie, Ma Grendel is re-imagined as a beautiful siren appareled in liquid gold. I guess she needed to top Beowulf's leather loincloth. I also cannot get past that we are supposed to easily accept the sultry seductress as the mother of the deformed lump of flesh that is Grendel. It seems a bit ridiculous.




--begets?!-->






The funniest article I came across about Hollywood's latest plastic (make that CGI) surgery on a literary classic was titled "Angelina Jolie, Boobs, Star in Beowulf." It actually made me think of the medicine woman from The Simpsons Movie.
In the immortal words of Homer Simpson, "Thank you Boob Lady" for providing fodder for my blog.

Simply Enchanted

On Thursday, I went to see Disney's Enchanted, a very charming twist on the traditional princess fairy tale. The film interweaves the animated world of Andalasia with the gritty world of New York City. Somehow, it manages to offer an homage to all the classic Disney fairy tales and at the same time parody those films. The parody, of course, is affectionate in nature, but it is still effective. Amy Adams played the ingenuous Giselle to perfection. When she first arrives in New York, she exhibits all the mannerisms of her animated self until, subtly and slowly, she becomes more and more "real" as a result of her interactions with Robert (Patrick Demspey) and his adorable daughter Morgan (Rachel Covey). Throughout it all, however, Giselle never loses her winning innocence and optimism. The male leads were also very well cast. I mean, which girl wouldn't want McDreamy and Cyclops vying for her affections? Seriously, though, Patrick Dempsey provided a nice foil to all the fairy tale shenanigans, but I thought James Marsden was hilarious as the dashing but slightly ridiculous Prince Edward. He's a great singer, too, but I already knew this from his performance in Hairspray . In addition, Susan Sarandon made a menacing Queen Narissa, garbed in the traditional dark purple of Disney villains, though surprisingly complemented with a pair of daunting go-go boots! Robert's almost-fiancée Nancy and the henchman Nathaniel were strong supporting characters. I thought both of them looked familiar, and it turns out that Nancy is played by Tony-award-winning Idina Menzel, who starred in Wicked (too bad they didn't write her a song to sing!), and Nathaniel is played by Timothy Spall, who appeared in the Harry Potter movies as Peter Pettigrew, a.k.a. Wormtail. However, I think my favorite part of the film was Pip the chipmunk. In the animated world, he is a wise-cracking creature with a New York accent. When he becomes a real chipmunk in New York, he loses the ability to talk and must resort to pantomimes to communicate with the clueless Edward. The charades scene between the two is sidesplittingly funny. All in all, this was a delightful modern-day fairy tale. Bravo Disney!

Mmmm.... Ratatouille...

Since the Ratatouille DVD was released today, I will take this opportunity to extol this little gem of a film. Only Pixar can take an animal so traditionally reviled and make it not only cute and sympathetic, but get away with placing said critter in a restaurant kitchen!
The movie has heart, humor, and the usual Pixar standard of amazing visuals. The scenes of Paris are breathtakingly gorgeous; they made me ache for a return to the magical City of Light. And the food, which rivaled the culinary masterpieces one might see on the Food Network, actually made me hungry. (Never mind that the dishes were being prepared by a rat.) As for the characters, they are rendered with such detail that I swear you can see every hair on Remy's furry little body.
This feel-good movie brimming with artistry and laugh-out-loud moments will have you cheering for its unlikely but lovable hero. I think I'm going to go to amazon and order it right now...