Wow! This one's really good, by far the best of the three Harry Potter movies. Criticising a film based on a book is always difficult. After all, there are two ways to look at it: you can compare it with the book, or you can look at it forgetting about the book and rate is as a film as such (which, of course, is almost impossible if you have read the book). This one turns out very good either way. Whereas in The Chamber of Secrets it looked like possibly all the wrong choices had been made concerning what to include and - most of all - what to exclude from the film, here this very difficult task is done perfectly. The film would become a couple of hours longer if the director should choose to include everything (we're not even talking about the next two parts...), so you have to make choices. And yes, this means that a lot about the classes, the yearly competition, the frictions between our main characters, Hagrid's creatures, the trips to Hogsmeade etc is left out, the director concentrates on the plot. And this he does in an excellent way. Although it is a rather complicated story, it is brought to you as clear as, well, anything. Even the time travel part, which is done perfectly. OK, one remark: the whole story about Potter sr and his friends could or should have gotten a little more attention and explication. There are a couple of points where the film deviates from the book, but always in a supportive and OK manner. Two more compliments. Harry Potter in the books starts to become a more and more annoying teenager, not to say an insufferable jerk (is it adult's eyes reading a children's book?); here there's nothing of that, he remains sympathetic all the way. Although I must say that this gets worse especially in the next books, and certainly in the Phoenix-one. Secondly, and more important. I hate - and I mean HATE - digital effects. That has got nothing - and I repeat myself: NOTHING - to do with making a film. Just a cheap trick, and that was a bad (and commercial) band in the seventies already... Of course it's unavoidable here, and I must say that it is done in a brilliant way. The effects really are perfect. Well, you can see it is fake (how could you not?), but it's not disturbing, even nice to see. So even as you look at it as just a film and forget about the book it's a pleasure to watch. Can't imagine that little children have any fun when watching it, though. But that is not my problem...
Reviews
3 Reviews
Breathless
(1960)
One of the - if not THE - best movies ever made
13 April 2004
Recently I saw this movie for the second time; the first time was over ten years ago. Vaguely I remembered that it made quite an impression, just like all the early Godard movies (which, in those days, were fortunately broadcast by the German tv). Well, to be short: this movie is absolutely stunning, fantastic, sublime, smashing, et cetera. This is film just like film should be: not a stupid story told in a boring matter - like most movies do - but downright art, excuse me, ART. There is a wonderful co-operation between director, photography, actors, and the scenery of France, Paris in particular. Jean-Paul Belmondo has never been a truly great actor; after playing in some early Godards he appeared mainly in quite bad Hollywood-style French thrillers. But somehow he seems to be the right man in the right place. Jean Seberg is not only unbelievably beautiful but also the absolute star of the movie (at least on the screen). She is just perfect in her role. And last but not least: the soundtrack by French jazz star Martial Solal is completely spot on. There is clear synergy between the restless photography, the restless music and of course the restless characters of the protagonists.
This movie cannot be missed. It belongs in a league with for example Bertolucci's Il Conformista, Bunuel's Belle de Jour, Godard's own Le Mépris (completely different by the way). More than that: it was an important step in creating an entirely new way of making and assessing films. In other words: one of the - if not THE - best and important movies ever made.
This movie cannot be missed. It belongs in a league with for example Bertolucci's Il Conformista, Bunuel's Belle de Jour, Godard's own Le Mépris (completely different by the way). More than that: it was an important step in creating an entirely new way of making and assessing films. In other words: one of the - if not THE - best and important movies ever made.
Lost in Translation
(2003)
Horrible
3 February 2004
Geez, what a horrible movie this is. An incredibly stupid, predictable, as thin as ice plot, very very outdated, silly and insulting jokes about Japanese, and an actress that probably suits better in Sesame street. Bill Murray, maybe two or three (non-insulting) funny jokes and a Sex Pistols (well, as a karaoke act) song made that I managed to endure it. Don't watch it, it's a waste of your time.
Tell Your Friends