|
Author
|
Comment
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/24/05 6:30 pm)
|
Brothers Grimm
I was lucky enough to attend a preview of Terry Gilliam's The
Brothers Grimm tonight, and thought I'd post my thoughts. They
can be read in their entirety here,
but I'm going to cut and paste the non-spoilery parts.
I've been looking forward to this flick for a while; not only is a new Terry Gilliam movie long overdue, but I had high hopes for what he might do with the Grimm material.
I kept confidence even after various production difficulties shut down filming for a while and I still like the premise. The Brothers Grimm are 19th-century ghostbusters, travelling around the German countryside elimating various folkloric bogeymen, and are sent down to a town whose little girls are disappearing in various fairytale-like ways (though I think that if you dress your daughter in a red, hooded cloak, give her a basket, and send her into the woods, you are just asking for trouble) to face a terrifying enemy...
Yeah. Except, the movie? It is not so good.
I'm going to start by listing the things I liked about it, so that I don't forget to give credit where credit is due. By and large, the actors did fine jobs with the material they were given, and if the material they were given was lousy, they're not to blame. Heath Ledger, Matt Damon, Monica Bellucci, Lena Headey--they all did as well as could be expected. The child actors were particularly good. Visually, the movie is indebted to The Wizard of Oz and Company of Wolves, two of my favorite movies, so I see nothing wrong with that. The first twenty minutes are pretty exciting.
But there are many things wrong with this movie, and first among them is the sound. I did not have any kind of headache when I walked into the cinema, but the movie was simply an aural assault. It wasn't just that the volume in the cinema was turned up too loudly, either. The soundtrack itself was painful. The music was bombastic, intrusive, and overblown, and the diegetic sounds were turned up to 11. Nothing was spoken if it could be shouted; nobody laughed if they could instead shriek loudly with joy; no door was opened without being slammed against a wall. Every noise was amped up--horses galloping, men falling, arrows being fired. Not three minutes passed without one character howling another's name or, even worse, my nemesis, the dreaded "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!"
And as to the cinematography...I became motion-sick during the first half-hour. According to IMDb, the Weinsteins fired the original cinematographer, which is a pity, because I suspect she might have, oh, held the camera still for perhaps 30 seconds at a time. There was such incessent, unnecessary busy-ness and superfluous movement, so many jump-cuts and swooping, curving pans--it was like watching a music video (and this is coming from someone who enjoyed Moulin Rouge immensely). After a while I started wondering if the film had originally been meant to be watched with 3-D glasses--that's how many times something would "unexpectedly" fly into the face of one of the protagonists.
And then there's Peter Stormare, who should be publicly flogged for his performance. His character is fairly useless to begin with, and to this he adds an absolutely incoherent Italian accent, a ridiculously cartoonish affect, and an unbearable amount of mugging He was so very wretched that he managed to overshadow Jonathan Pryce's third-rate version of his own role in The Adventures of the Baron Munchausen.
The movie is deeply indebted to Terry Pratchett's Witches Abroad, though it does not approach the latter's quality, and there are numerous unexplained elements that would have benefitted from a greater elaboration of the story, but apparently it would not do to waste time on such trivialities when Stormare's deathless mugging could be showcased.
All in all, a disappointing movie. And I don't think it's the one Gilliam set out to make. It doesn't feel like his style; he didn't write it, and the writer he did get is a hack--he wrote Reindeer Games for pete's sake! Here's hoping Gilliam does something better next time.
Edited by: Veronica Schanoes at: 8/24/05 6:33 pm
|
DerekJ
Unregistered User
(8/24/05 6:42 pm)
|
Re: Brothers Grimm
(So, an entire "Grimm" review, and not one comparative reference to "Van Helsing" or "The Frighteners"?--
Well, by accident or design, you're more creative than most.)
|
Erica Carlson
Registered User
(8/25/05 9:38 am)
|
Re: Brothers Grimm
Thanks for that, Veronica. I find it curious that a mostly negative review somehow makes me want to go see the movie. But it is helpful to know ahead of time about the soundtrack, and also to get an idea of what to expect (not too much).
I'm also very curious about the indebtedness to Witches Abroad, but might wait to ask question or comment until I've seen the film for myself.
Best,
Erica
Edited by: Erica Carlson at: 8/25/05 9:39 am
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/25/05 10:35 am)
|
Brothers Grimm
Heh. I'm curious about that myself! But I'd still have gone to see it no matter how many bad reviews I'd read, if it were me, so I understand. There were a few other things I liked that I couldn't put in because they would have spoiled plot points, and in all honesty, I still think the underlying idea is neat. Just the execution...
Edited by: Veronica Schanoes at: 8/25/05 10:37 am
|
Jess
Unregistered User
(8/26/05 11:46 pm)
|
Grimm
I'll be anxious to read other's opinions as well. I do not like the kind of sound or picture style you have discussed, so I am likely to beg off unless someone just raves and raves about it. Thanks for the head's up!
Jess
|
DerekJ
Unregistered User
(8/27/05 12:23 am)
|
Re: Brothers Grimm
Quote:
There were a few other things I liked that I couldn't put in because they would have spoiled plot points, and in all honesty, I still think the underlying idea is neat.
And although the issue's hardly worth fighting over in this form (yeesh!), for the sake of keeping a thread alive, still say that one viewer's "neat" is another's "cheat":
There's just no dopier copout in the world than the "What if the author lived his own stories?" formula, that seems attract screenwriters who'd rather just toss easy references around, because they were too lazy to dig into a little quirky biographical meat of the subject--
"Shakespeare in Love" may have been the most cute/tolerable (out of four or five that spring to mind)--
But pointing out that "Romeo & Juliet" was just a working-stiff updating of Pyramus & Thisby for that week's groundling audience shows a more creative writer than some paid screenwriter's concoction of "See, there was this girl he met..."
(And "dark fairy tales" may be more of an easy lure for screenwriters than "Language historians cashing in on German nationalism", but it's still darn lazy.)
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/27/05 5:30 am)
|
Brothers Grimm
Tastes differ; I liked it, not so much for the Brothers Grimm aspect of it, but because I like the general idea of ghostbusters specializing in folklore.
|
beautifulstars
Unregistered User
(8/27/05 6:16 am)
|
brothers grimm
I saw the movie last night, and have to admit that my favorite part of the experience was sitting in front of a young girl who, when a character appeared on the screen in a red cape being chased by a wolf yelled "Is that suppose to be Red Riding Hood or something?" and later, when things had calmed down, whispered to her companion "Did you know this is based on a true story?"
I went into this movie expecting very little, and was somewhat annoyed by the first ten minutes or so most particularly for the reasons already mentioned -- very sketchy camera work and booming sound -- but I have to admit that the second half of the movie drew me in. I found that the overwhelming and disjointed referencing to fairytales -- or the possible inspiration for Grimms' fairytales -- eventually got much too irritating. And I definitely agree that treatment of the Queen (who I would like to have seen more of) and her obsession with youth was cliche. Also, there were too many characters introduced to muddy the main plot, which, along with the constant references, was disconcerting.
However, I have to admit that I enjoyed Stormaire, purely because of his intense overacting. Although, the accents altogether were wretched.
I'd reccomend the film simply because it is a bit of fun, and at times the visuals are beautiful.
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/27/05 6:42 am)
|
Re: Brothers Grimm
Quote:
"Did you know this is based on a true story?"
Best. Line. Ever. I wish I'd had a kid like that in my audience. She would definitely have been my favorite part too!
|
Rosemary Lake
Registered User
(8/27/05 12:16 pm)
|
Witches Abroad
[[ The movie is deeply indebted to Terry Pratchett's Witches Abroad, though it does not approach the latter's quality, and there are numerous unexplained elements that would have benefitted from a greater elaboration of the story ]]
I loved WITCHES ABROAD, so I'd like to hear more about this. Is there a causation thing like in SILVERLOCK or some of Wrede's Enchanted Forest books?
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/27/05 5:37 pm)
|
Re: Witches Abroad
I elaborate a bit on that idea in the spoiler-y version of the review I linked to in the first post--I don't want to post it here, though, because it does reveal too much about the plot and I don't want to ruin it for anybody else.
I love Witches Abroad as well!
|
cmoore0013
Unregistered User
(8/27/05 10:42 pm)
|
An o.k movie
I went to see this around 4 today. I went with some friends and there was actually a crowd. I was very dissapointed by the film considering what it had going for it. I mean it had an amazing plot, great actors, and one of the most creative directors of all time.
Let me start by saying that I have waited a long time to see a faithful version of any Grimm fairy tale that is brought to life in a live action version. This film had it's moments.
The nods to Rapunzel, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Red Riding Hood, and Hansel and Gretel are hard to miss. There are soem that are interesting, but I know I have never heard of. An example is a child is swallowed by a horse in one of the films darker moments and a girl has her face stolen by a weird blob that lives in a well. What was that stuff? It was very weird.
The actual Brothers Grimm themselves are played so well by Damon and Ledger. They are thankfully the highlight of the film and I'm so glad that thye were. Also wonderful is Lena Headly as Angelika. There is always this mystery in her eyes. I really loved it. The real great one here is sadly underused and that is Monica Bellucci as the evil queen. She brings an amazing seductiveness to the role of the queen. One that has never been fully explored in any version of the Snow White tale. I actually believe that she IS the fairest one of all. Her character is just so underused though. I would not have cared if maybe they put a little more Snow White in the mix and in one of those flashback scenes had her in there. Anything for more of the queen. Monica really surprised me.
The script had it's problem. The writer himself has had some ups and downs. He wrote the remake of The Ring and the recent Skeleton Key. Both of those were great. I personally didn't mind Reindeer Games like most people. However, he did write The Ring Two and Scream 3, which are two of the worst movies I have EVER seen. The script has it's ups and downs as well.
The movie is actually not that bad, but the French people in the film are so annoying that it is not even funny. Half the time, you have no idea what they are saying and you just can't wait until something in those woods is going to tear them apart.
Overall, it's not a bad movie. It's fun. Don't go in expecting a life changing movie. If you want a good time at the movie, you will not be dissapointed.
|
evil little pixie
Registered User
(8/28/05 10:57 pm)
|
how scary is it?
Apologies because this isn't exactly what this thread started about, but I wanted to ask the people who've seen the movie how scary it was. I don't do well with scary movies and I mostly avoid them. The only two I've tried to see in the theater were "The Ring" and "The Manchurian Candidate." I had to leave both within the first 15-30 minutes; in fact "The Manchurian Candidate" very nearly put me in hysterics. On the other hand, I wasn't bothered by "Underworld" or the creepier scenes in the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter movies. So do you think someone like me would be ok seeing "The Brothers Grimm" in a dark theater, or would I do better to watch it on DVD with the shades up to let in the sunlight? Thanks!
|
Veronica Schanoes
Registered User
(8/29/05 1:02 am)
|
Re: how scary is it?
You'll be fine. It's not at all scary.
|
darklingthrush
Registered User
(8/29/05 11:47 am)
|
Re: how scary is it?
I have to agree as far as scary elements go if you are ok with Lord of the Rings you will be fine with this. One addendum if kitty violence bothers you..there is one scene you should look away from.
I didn't notice the camera angles or the noise level. The confusion of characters and plot at the beginning did throw me off. I enjoyed the end and the visuals. And Heath Ledger as Jakob Grimm is wonderfully neurotic and charming (supposing that was his aim.)
|
DerekJ
Unregistered User
(8/29/05 4:08 pm)
|
Re: how scary is it?
Quote:
And Heath Ledger as Jakob Grimm is wonderfully neurotic and charming (supposing that was his aim).
And which threw off fans of the 1962 George Pal movie, who remember
Jacob as being the type-A workaholic and Wilhelm as being
the unorganized/imaginative one... :b
|
poole3
Registered User
(9/10/05 6:49 pm)
|
Re: how scary is it?
I saw the movie and thought it was gruesome. For me in a sense it spoiled fairy tales for me, and don't even feel like reading them to my children.
For the person who asked about the part where a horse swallows the girl whole, their is a similiar story but it's a wolf swallowing the children and the mother rescues them by cutting up the wolf. The mother than fills the wolfs stomach with rocks. I'm not sure of the name of the tale but someone talked about it in my classroom.
Back to the movie: It was choppy which I thought was weird, at first I was thinking something was wrong with the film at the theatre, but now that someone else says it also happened to them, I guess that's how it was meant to be?!
just my 2 cents!
|
cmoore0013
Unregistered User
(9/11/05 1:08 am)
|
Gruesome?
I didn't find it gruesome at all. Actually, I think that was one of it's problems. It didn't go far enough. It was rated PG-13, but could have easily been PG. It was not scary in the least bit. So would say that it would scare children, but that wouldn't have scared me as a kid. I would have found it creative and funny.
Since it was a PG-13, I was expecting it to go much further in the violent details, such as Cinderella's stepsisters cutting up their feet, etc. I know that wasn't even in the film, but stuff like that should have been.
Maybe it's just me, I heard a couple of disgusted groans when the witch started to drink the goblet of blood at the end. Maybe I'm just sick. I just didn't think it was very much like a fairy tale. More like a mainstream Hollywood version of a fairy tale, which never works for me. If I want to see a good film version of a fairy tale I have too look in European countries, although Faerie Tale Theatre and the Cannon Movie Tales were good.
|
Helen J Pilinovsky
Registered User
(9/11/05 8:13 pm)
|
Re: Gruesome?
Eh, I didn't find it particularly gruesome, but in any case I believe the stones in the wolf's belly tale is a variant of Little Red Riding Hood.
Edit: the above is actually Veronica's, signed in from my machine. *My* opinions on the movie will follow once I regain something resembling aplomb.
Edited by: Helen J Pilinovsky at: 9/11/05 9:49 pm
|
kristiw
Unregistered User
(9/12/05 12:25 am)
|
bellyaching
I didn't associate it with the horse who swallowed the little girl, but the story of the wolf whose stomach was filled with stones is from The Seven Kids. The mother goat warns her children not to open the door to anyone but her. They know her by her white feet and soft voice, so the wolf powders himself with flour and swallows a lump of chalk. They let him in, he eats them up, all but for the littlest one hiding in the clock. It's the mother goat who saves the day by cutting him open and sewing him back up again. It was one of my favorites when I was a kid, but insofar as the movie is concerned, I think the horse who rode away with children stuck fast to his back, and could stretch to accommodate an entire town, would have been more appropriate. I think it originates in the British Isles, but then the film wasn't overly concerned with sticking to actual Grimm stories.
|
Mimsy
Borogrove
Registered User
(9/12/05 5:33 pm)
|
Some delight in magic beans
(This message was left blank)
Edited by: Mimsy Borogrove at: 9/12/05 9:20 pm
|
