Rogue One Spoilers...

It seems that there is some interest regarding how I felt about Rogue One.  I have done very little movie reviewing as of late, and this is going to be relatively short and surely not comprehensive.  There are spoilers.  So, seriously, if you don't want to read any spoilers, close this tab right now.  I do not want to be responsible for anyone's ruined movie going experience...

SPOILERS COMING...  This is your last chance to turn back...

*I'll start with this, because it won't spoil the movie, just in case you're still accidentally reading.  Our biggest issue, as a family, was the voluminous number of inappropriate previews.  We almost always go to MJR, but this was an AMC.  We are incredibly careful about what our kids see, and the previews (22 full minutes of them) were worse than any movie they have ever seen.  Super frustrating.

*Apparently there was a ton of re-filming for this movie.  They did not even use the "I rebel" scene from the trailers, and I was incredibly disappointed about that.  I mean, I bought an "I rebel" t-shirt.  Seth says it is now obsolete...

*The story line was basically good, but it was a true war story.  They did a masterful job of connecting it to episode IV, but it had a much darker feel than most of Star Wars.  Along those lines, I did think it was an incredible testament to the cost of war, and that's something we don't always see in entertainment media.  So, I appreciated that.  

*Everybody dies.  Star Wars fans should have been prepared for this, but somehow I didn't consider that this would be necessary for the plot to be consistent with episode IV.  It threw me a little bit.  The story, itself, was not developed enough to create deep emotional attachment to the characters (you just can't do that in a couple of hours), but it was a little shocking by the end, when I realized no one was going to survive.  It took me awhile to process.

*It's definitely not a movie for small children.  Historically, I am conservative in my assessment of appropriate age levels, but I would not have been comfortable viewing this film with anyone younger than Caleb (age 12, and he was with us).  Even then, you have to know your kids.  My oldest two would not have been ready for this movie at twelve.

*Final scene with Princess Leia?  Well, yeah... awesome!

Alright, that's all for now...  May the Force be with you...

L.

The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies, A Review...

I have been a huge fan of the Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings series'.  I have to admit that I am not a die-hard lifer, and I have actually never read the LOTR trilogy (although I have read The Hobbit).  This is not within my usual MO, as I am generally first a reader and then a movie watcher (if at all), but it's just the way it goes.

Late last night, I sat down with much anticipation, mixed with a great deal of caution, to watch the "defining moment," as it had been advertised, and I found it, perhaps, less than defining.  I was disappointed that two of the lines/scenes from the trailer that were particularly compelling were apparently cut from the film.  I am left to assume that they will be a part of an extended version release, but why do that?  Shouldn't the trailer showcase the best of what is to come?  I feel like I watched a trailer for a different movie!

Within a few minutes of the opening scene, I found myself saying, "This should have been Rated R".  Not that that makes much of a difference.  Even if that was the case, a lot of parents would have marched their six year olds in to see it, and I suppose that is their prerogative, as parents.  However, I feel that it is worth reporting that I found "Battle of the Five Armies" to be ratcheted up a notch from the other five films in regard to violence.  There were several close up, sustained camera views of the faces of people as they died, and I guess I always find it a little disturbing to watch the light of life snuffed out of someone's eyes.  I wouldn't say that they crossed the line to "gore," but this was, almost in its entirety, a war film.  This is the part of the review where I have to caution you: know your children.  And, if you have any doubt as to whether this intensity is appropriate for them, please go see the movie first, on your own.  The worst case scenario is that you watch it, think I'm crazy, and feel as if you've spent a few dollars too many when you go back with the kids.  But I will tell you this.  My thirteen year old daughter, who is within the age range for which this film was found "appropriate," would not have made it to the title screen.

In regard to language issues, I am left shaking my head.  I cannot fathom why, in over 20 hours of squeaky clean material, they felt the need to throw in one profanity in the middle of this movie.  Of interest is the fact that the reviewer at plugged in has it wrong, as well.  In the plugged in review, it is stated that, "Dáin calls the orcs "b--tards".  Somehow, I thought that maybe, just maybe, there would be something contextual about this statement that would make it make sense.  This is not the case.  Dáin actually uses this profanity to refer to the elves, simply out of spite.

Content issues aside, there is a lot to like about this story (always is).  Specifically, the idea that people who should be fighting for the same things make a real mess of things when they turn on one another and Bard's dedication to protect his children and his people, at any cost.  And, ya know, you have to appreciate Legolas, his story of unrequited love, and his amazing skills in battle.

Over all, I would say that the film adaptation of The Hobbit served as less of a prequel and more of a back story than was originally intended in the literary works.  This particular film didn't offer any stand alone value (which is to be expected), and, realistically, I think it might have been a better move to make only two movies (the first 15 minutes or so of this one felt like it was intended to be the end of "The Desolation of Smaug").  But there's no going back now.  Not for us...  Not for this franchise... and definitely not for Bilbo Baggins...

L.

Mockingjay Part 1, A Review...

So... last night I settled into a seat in a crowded, but not full, theater, with a lot of pretty funny perfect strangers around me, who did some whistling... and yelling... and gasping.... and watched the premier of Mockingjay, Part 1.  It was a little bit of a different experience for me than the first two films, because I did not have time to re-read the trilogy before I went to see this movie.  This morning, I am trying to determine if that had something to do with the fact that I found Mockingjay, Part 1 to be the best of the three adaptations, so far, hands down.  But I don't really think that was it.

Spoilers to follow...

First, let me say, that content-wise, they got this one right.  I was terribly disappointed when the first two big screen installments took a series that had a grand total of one swear word spread over 1,155 pages and peppered the films with profanities and the misuse of God's name.  I'm not going to get into all of that, again, because if you really want to know what I thought about it, you have probably already read my previous reviews or you can look them up now.  It was mildly surprising, and definitely a welcome change, that they finally decided to cut it out with this movie.  Can we thank new screenwriters for this?  I hope so.  Knowing that they filmed Mockingjay, Part 1 and Mockingjay, Part 2 together, I am hopeful that I'll be able to have the same kind of experience next fall.

They have, again, avoided the addition of any overt sexual stuff in this movie.  I found it interesting how they chose to present Finnick's story of what is essentially human trafficking  during Peeta's rescue.  Not that that's any different from how this happens in the book.  It's not.  But while reading the book, we were not privy to the information about how Peeta was rescued, so it feels as if Finnick's story takes a bit of a back seat to everything else that is going on, simultaneously, on the screen. 

 

Clearly there are some violent scenes.  I don't think anyone would expect anything different, and, in fact, there would be no way to show the horror of civil war without these.  So, some reviewers might give a cautionary warning about the violence, but I am not going to do so, except to remind you that this is not a film for children.  I can't say what age I would recommend for this type of depiction of war.  It's not for my kids (as a reminder, my oldest is 14).

 

But...  I can recommend this movie, without hesitation, to adults.  Well... almost without hesitation.  I did not feel that I could recommend the first two movies, so to recommend this one is, essentially, to recommend that you begin in the middle of the story, without a guarantee that the end will be worth watching...

And now, the storyline.  I felt like this film was far more detail oriented than the others.  The little things matter to me.  For example, they found the right cat to play Buttercup.  I'm not sure, exactly, what to do with the plot hole that is caused by switching cats, but the one I saw yesterday was definitely the right one.  How many of my readers are laughing at me right now?  Never mind.  Don't answer that!

I think they also got most of the one-liners in there that I would have considered essential.  Another re-read, and I may have to recant that statement, but I'm pretty sure I was going to be OK with the movie as long as Finnick said, "I takes ten times as long to put yourself back together as it does to fall apart," which he did.

I thought they handled The Hanging Tree amazingly well, although I think non-readers of the series might be a little confused about where this song came from.  I loved the lake.  I wish they'd bothered to use it in the first two films.  And... the pearl.  Again, confusion for non-readers.  Does Peeta even give Katniss the pearl in the second movie?  Because I almost think that's something I found conspicuously missing, and now, here it is.  Little things like this made me feel like, throughout this movie, they were sort of trying to fix the things that were botched in the first two.  I would definitely welcome some commentary on that.

Effie...  here you are in district 13!  I really liked what they did with Effie, although I am still a bit disappointed that Katniss' prep team has been all but missing, throughout.  I understand that you can only develop so many characters, and they have had a lot of characters to develop, and I am just about ready to give up the prep team for this reason, but I am concerned about the missing scene where Katniss finds them chained and mistreated in what is, essentially, a dungeon in District 13.  District 13 was a little too happy, and President Coin was entirely too likeable in this film.  I'm trying to figure out where they're going with that.  Is it for the shock value later?  I'm not sure.

I think they cast the new characters for this movie very well.  Pollux was always a favorite of mine in the books, and he was exactly how I imagined him.  Boggs was fantastic.  It did just occur to me, though, that Katniss doesn't step on his nose in the movie.  I think she should have, but as long as she vomits all over him, next time, we'll call it good.

I have seen some reviews that describe this movie as slow moving, a two hour long preview, etc.  In my opinion, the whole franchise would have been better off if they had split every book into two parts or made every movie four hours long (it's not unheard of... consider Lord of the Rings).  The slow moving, detail oriented story is what we all spent hours upon hours reading, isn't it?  Most of what frustrated me in the first two movies, they have corrected here.  Still...  there is no fixing the disconnects, because of what was missing in the other films.  Anybody want to start begging for re-makes of The Hunger Games and Catching Fire?

One last thought.  Haymitch.  Does anybody think they might be intentionally leaving out all of the details of his life, at this point, because there really is a prequel in the works?  To this point, I have seen nothing about this, and as far as I know, I'm the only one asking, but come on...  The story would be amazing...  You would think that with the revenue that would be all but guaranteed this would be floating out there somewhere...

And, that's it.  Go have some lamb stew for lunch, or something.

L.   

Catching Fire, A Review...

Well, this one is complicated in all kinds of ways.  To be completely honest, I'm not sure I can even begin to make an unbiased review, but I'm going to try...

To begin with, the plugged in review echoed a lot of my own sentiments on this one.  If you are looking for a list of moral issues with the film, this is a pretty good place to start.  There is not much I can add to the discussion regarding black and white, this is here and that isn't, content:

plugged in review

But herein lies the problem.  This story has long since taken on a life of its own, for me.  And yet, I have been accused of over thinking things a time or two...

In terms of strictly entertainment value, I would have to say, "skip this film".  In fact, it was pretty disturbing to me as the clock struck midnight... and 1:00... and 2:00... and as I continued to process things past 3:00... and 4:00... to think of the reactions I observed in the theater around me. 

Profanity is always unnecessary.  Always.  It is even more unnecessary when there is one misuse of the word, "Hell" in the entire literary trilogy.  Nothing else.  I cannot quite wrap my mind around why the screenwriters felt that it was a good idea to sprinkle the profane here and there, throughout the film.  I struggled with the same thing in regard to The Hunger Games.  And my mind is blown as to why God's name is ever uttered in this dystopian society where there is no knowledge of God, at all.  None.  Even if I was someone who didn't care much about these things, it would be a disconnect for me.  But apparently most everyone else in the world doesn't share this sentiment, because, I kid you not, many people laughed out loud at most of the uses of profanity.  Connecting with the story, I found this phenomenon to be quite disturbing, as the profanities were slipped in at some of the most serious times - during Peeta's gift to the families of the dead tributes of district 11, Haymitch uses "s***", and everyone laughs.  When we should be learning of the terrible mistreatment of victors, by the Capitol, and our hearts should be softening toward Johanna, there's a "d***", and everyone laughs.  At the end of the film, when Katniss, in angst, should be running her fingernails down Haymitch's face and deeply mourning the (at least temporary) loss of Peeta, she instead is calling Haymitch a "son of a b****", and everybody laughs.  How is this stuff funny?  Even if I thought that profanity was funny (which I don't), I don't see how I could have found these situations humorous in any way.  But, then again, when the story isn't fully developed, maybe people don't really get it.

I am almost positive the teenage girls sitting behind me didn't even know there was a story.  They just squealed every time Peeta and Gale made appearances.  That got old real fast.

The violence in Catching Fire struck me as less intense and disturbing than that of The Hunger Games.  In and of itself, this should be a red flag.  I understand that the intent was to keep the gore minimal enough to avoid an R rating, but I think we have to remember that this story is supposed to be horrible.  No one should walk away feeling like they have just experienced an enjoyable movie.  The point is that this is horrific.  When the credits roll, you don't want anyone sitting there thinking, "Wow!  I sure wish this could happen to me!"  At its heart, this is a story about oppression, war, and revolution.  It's not supposed to incite  warm fuzzies.  That said, I'm not a real lover of violence, but I would have been OK with more graphic material in order to stay true to the terror of the story.  There were a few moments during The Hunger Games when I had to look away.  There are moments during The Lord of the Ring trilogy when I have to look away.  Nothing in this film made me feel that way, and my primary concern about that is that it is a scary thing to become desensitized and lulled to sleep in regard to the repulsive nature of the games.

And then, rounding out the "big three" in regard to moral content, is the issue of sexuality.  I was pretty worried about what they were going to do with Finnick's sugar cube scene and Johanna's tree costume.  Overall, I felt that these were handled tastefully, and although I'm not prepared to give an all clear for 13 year old boys to engage in this material (mine sure won't), I think it was less intense than I expected.  That may not be saying much.  We do see Johanna's bare back (from the waist up), hence my caution to parents of young boys.  Other than that, I thought the costuming was actually quite beautiful. 

And now, the actual content (and why I will never be satisfied with how this story plays out on the big screen unless they decide to release extended versions of the movies that are each 8 hours long)...

SPOILERS!  SPOILERS!  SPOILERS!

DO NOT READ BEYOND THIS POINT IF YOU DON'T WANT CONTENT!

I am just going to admit it, I liked the movie.  I did not love the movie, but I liked it.  I thought that the screenplay hit on most of the major points that I found to be essential to the story, and it was relatively true to the book.  I didn't think there was enough detail, but that's probably to be expected.  Books are almost always better than the film version.

Here's what disappointed me most.  I am going to try to be chronological.

The conversation between Katniss, Haymitch, and Peeta in district 11 is too sterile.  I read quite a few pieces about the need to make Peeta a stronger character in this film, and in my opinion, that was the place to do it.  He should be livid about the personal games that Katniss and Haymitch play with one another, behind his back.

Plutarch doesn't flash his Mockingjay watch and tell Katniss, "It starts at midnight?"  Really?

I didn't feel that nearly enough time was given to the months leading up to the quarter quell and the relationships between the characters.  I would have liked to have seen the whole scene from the book, between Gale and Katniss, at the little stone cottage deep in the woods.  I thought the scene where Katniss is out hunting and finds the fence electrified, causing her to jump from a tree back into the district, resulting in her injury, was essential.  Peeta's "always", while not left out, entirely, feels out of context.  As I write about this, it is becoming apparent that, for me, it's the small things that make up the whole.

Along the same lines, regarding character development, I felt that the other victors were seriously neglected.  At the very least, I felt that more attention needed to be paid to the reaping.  This is what makes them human.  Although I know she was little more than an extra, even in the book, I think it would have elicited pretty strong emotions, for example, to show Celia's reaping, with her children clinging to her as she is dragged off to the games.  I think the exchange between Seeder and Katniss, regarding the safety of Rue and Thresh's families would have added to the story.  Why not make it clear that Chaff is Haymitch's best friend?  These types of things would only have taken a few more seconds of screen time.

I thought the casting for Finnick was awful.  If somebody disagrees with me on this, please feel free to say so, but it just didn't work for me.  The scene where he's reviving Peeta was pretty sad, and then when Peeta is revived, Katniss is like, "Do you want to stand up?"  And then Peeta, who was essentially dead, is just healthy again?

And everything is too easy in the arena, not all that unlike last time.  The effects of the poisonous fog are too short lived.  These people are supposed to walk around with their skin falling off.  If you wanted comic relief, the joke that Katniss and Finnick play on Peeta would have done it.  Haymitch sends a note explaining the spile.  Finnick doesn't have to carry Peeta, and subsequently, Katniss doesn't have to carry Mags. 

 The parachutes of bread are conspicuously absent.

At this point, I have pretty much written off any hope for back-story on either the Mockingjay pin or Haymitch's games.  I'm going to hold to the opinion that this is a shame.

Still, there were definitely some exceptional moments.  As much as I didn't care for Finnck too much, there is something very convincing about his reaction as he is watching Katniss panic over Peeta's brush with death.  I also thought the scene with the spinning cornucopia was intense and that the connection between Johanna and Katniss, there, was an excellent addition to the story.  Effie's transformation is remarkable, and I love how we begin to see the shift in her worldview, creating the thought that anyone, even the most narcissistic, materialistic, unyielding person can learn to love and choose to change.  I also thought the theme of self sacrifice for the sake of others ran pretty deep in this film, paralleling the book.  And that's probably the number one attribute that makes this story worth telling... and re-telling...   

And so I find myself ready to sign off on this one, knowing that as soon as I hit "post", I will think of a dozen more details I wish I had included.  And next year, I'll do it all over again, and I really, truly hope that splitting Mockingjay into two movies is going to help with the development of the teachable moments and lasting truths that can be taken away from this narrative.

L.

Catching Fire, Pre-review...

I'm trying, pretty desperately, to be concise.

For anyone who hasn't read my previous posts regarding The Hunger Games franchise, you might want to follow the links below to find out how this entertainment "purist" got mixed up in this whole thing, to begin with (spoiler alert):

Hunger Games, Pre-Review 

Hunger Games Review

 

But here's the thing.  At this point, I know that I am getting ready to subject myself to 2 hours and 26 minutes outside of my ordinary, entertainment based standards.  And the number one reason for this is that I have committed to following this theatrical story to its end and to offering what I hope to be a well rounded review of what's good, what's bad, and what's teachable.  

From things that I have picked up here and there, I am already a little more than concerned about how well this movie will follow the heart of the story.  I am also pretty sure that Catching Fire is going to push the moral standard even more than its predecessor, and I'm not too happy about that.  We'll see...

From a purely storyline point of view, here's what I'm looking for tonight:

Is the relationship between Katniss and Peeta more fully developed in this installment?  I am concerned about some things I have read about the "manning up" of Peeta, and I am having a difficult time determining how Katniss will come to trust the other victors if they're not bending over backwards to protect him. 

I'm still holding out for some explanation of the Mockingjay Pin and its origins.  At the very least, I would like to see a scene from Haymitch's games where Maysilee is wearing the pin as her district token... or something.  I don't think we're going to get a flashback, though, because I have yet to see anyone cast as a young Haymitch...  Again, I lament the thought that no room has been left for a prequel...     

I think that what they do with District 11 on the victory tour is essential to the story.  

Beyond that, I think I'll wait to pick it all apart until I've actually seen it. 

What I will say is this.  Having watched all three trailers, I am going to admit that I was riveted.  I'm not sure how many times I replayed them, but it borders on embarrassing.  Let's hope those scenes aren't the only things worth watching.

L.