redanhemma
Lifetime Total
1+
IMDb Member
10 years
Reviews
Hotel Transylvania (2012)
Decent film, but not hugely impressive
I had heard a lot about this one being good, so I decided to watch it but was rather underwhelmed. Most of all what kind of bothered me was the constant happy-cheery-jokey kind of stuff going on. I get that the target audience is young children, but I don't think that necessarily means you need to make everything so silly and cheesy. I've seen a lot of really great children's movies that were more serious (though still age-appropriate of course) and only had the occasional funny bit. Especially considering the monster theme, I did not expect this level of silly and cheesy.
And while on the topic of the monster theme, that's another thing that kind of bugged me. Maybe I'm just stuck up, I don't know, but it bothers me when creators take too much of a creative liberty with established classical characters or beings/creatures, or in some cases they just got things wrong (like the oh so typical case of calling the monster Frankenstein when that's in fact the name of the man who made him, that's a massive pet peeve of mine, and just generally making his character entirely wrong). I suppose I just prefer more old- fashioned monsters. And... Why is Quasimodo not human, and more importantly, why is he some sort of crazy fiery chef??? Speaking of which, Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame is a pretty good example of how a movie for children can still be pretty dark and serious without CONSTANT comic relief.
Overall the movie is not awful or anything, not at all, but much too goofy, over-the-top, predictable to a ridiculous extent, and not very "authentic" with its monsters. I'd say it has too much of a modern tone as well, if that makes any sense. This could have been so much better if the creators had the courage to be more unique.
And while on the topic of the monster theme, that's another thing that kind of bugged me. Maybe I'm just stuck up, I don't know, but it bothers me when creators take too much of a creative liberty with established classical characters or beings/creatures, or in some cases they just got things wrong (like the oh so typical case of calling the monster Frankenstein when that's in fact the name of the man who made him, that's a massive pet peeve of mine, and just generally making his character entirely wrong). I suppose I just prefer more old- fashioned monsters. And... Why is Quasimodo not human, and more importantly, why is he some sort of crazy fiery chef??? Speaking of which, Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame is a pretty good example of how a movie for children can still be pretty dark and serious without CONSTANT comic relief.
Overall the movie is not awful or anything, not at all, but much too goofy, over-the-top, predictable to a ridiculous extent, and not very "authentic" with its monsters. I'd say it has too much of a modern tone as well, if that makes any sense. This could have been so much better if the creators had the courage to be more unique.
Dorian Gray (2009)
Decent movie, HORRIBLE adaptation!
As a movie in and of itself this is not too bad, in fact I might even have really liked it if I hadn't read the book. However, as an adaptation, this was a disaster. Like many other reviewers I get the feeling that they didn't even read the book! So many things are just way off, it's awful...
They took way too many "creative liberties" and it certainly didn't add anything of value, it just made it look like a poor attempt of being unique (if you want to make an adaptation, you should follow the original, otherwise you should make your own story).
Henry suddenly had a daughter (???) who would serve as the romantic interest and I get the impression that she was meant to "save" Dorian from his lifestyle or something. The painting was practically alive, it could move and make noise and seemed to be physically decaying - the first sign of corruption, if memory serves, was a maggot or something eating its way through the canvas. Why? Hell, I don't know. Basil's death was unnecessarily violent and he was chopped up into pieces and dumped in a river, presumably so that he could be found later in the movie and cause drama. These are just some examples of the weird things that were changed, because screw the original, right?
Most of the characters were really off, and some plot points were changed for no apparent reason, it served no purpose whatsoever and they should have been kept the way they were. They also did a lousy job at subtlety, either they didn't know how to do it or they thought the audience would be too stupid to pick up on it.
Again, as a movie on its own it's kind of alright, but it's quite frankly a disgrace when compared to the original. I had really high hopes for it too, I think they really could have done a much better job if only they had bothered reading the book.
They took way too many "creative liberties" and it certainly didn't add anything of value, it just made it look like a poor attempt of being unique (if you want to make an adaptation, you should follow the original, otherwise you should make your own story).
Henry suddenly had a daughter (???) who would serve as the romantic interest and I get the impression that she was meant to "save" Dorian from his lifestyle or something. The painting was practically alive, it could move and make noise and seemed to be physically decaying - the first sign of corruption, if memory serves, was a maggot or something eating its way through the canvas. Why? Hell, I don't know. Basil's death was unnecessarily violent and he was chopped up into pieces and dumped in a river, presumably so that he could be found later in the movie and cause drama. These are just some examples of the weird things that were changed, because screw the original, right?
Most of the characters were really off, and some plot points were changed for no apparent reason, it served no purpose whatsoever and they should have been kept the way they were. They also did a lousy job at subtlety, either they didn't know how to do it or they thought the audience would be too stupid to pick up on it.
Again, as a movie on its own it's kind of alright, but it's quite frankly a disgrace when compared to the original. I had really high hopes for it too, I think they really could have done a much better job if only they had bothered reading the book.
Alleluia! The Devil's Carnival (2016)
Interesting!
I've been looking forward to this ever since I saw the first movie. It was definitely good, I thoroughly enjoyed the story (which was actually more of a prequel) and it was nicely done with sets, costumes, lighting, special effects, etc. I think it wasn't made quite as clear as it should have that most of the movie was a flashback, I got the impression that the flashback parts were just a parallel story line until near the end when it became obvious what the backstory was, although I won't go into more detail on that because it would be a spoiler. My main issue with this movie was that the music just didn't get to me. The first movie had some really catchy tunes ("Grief", "Beautiful Stranger", "Grace for Sale", etc.), as did Repo! by the same creators, but the songs in this one felt a little too... Staggered, for a lack of better words. They just didn't stand out. The only one that really appealed to me was "Hoof and Lap". Aside from that, this was interesting and I do hope they make a third one, because this really leaves you wanting more!
The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
Incredibly beautiful!
This was indeed a wonderful experience! First of all, the music is excellent, I have listened to it over and over on YouTube after finishing the movie. All of the visuals are beautiful as well - aesthetically, this movie is stunning!
Something I found interesting is that from the very beginning and throughout the entire movie, every other scene or so looks like an ending scene because of how beautiful and dramatic it is (as you would imagine a scene in the end of a movie) with the music, angles etc. This actually makes it a bit difficult to determine for how long the movie has been running, since the level of drama doesn't give a clue, but I personally like that a lot.
As for the story, it's an interesting concept and not as predictable as most movies I've watched - I was surprised several times when things did not go as I expected them to. While the aesthetic aspects are actually the best part of the movie, the plot is great too, assuming you like this type of movies of course. It is not your typical "love drama" or anything like that (I personally really dislike that) even if romance is a big part of it, and it's dark or at least semi-dark every once in a while which is greatly appreciated as well!
Overall this was a great experience which I would highly recommend. The reason I gave it a 9/10 is only based on personal preferences: I would've wanted it to be a little bit darker in certain ways, and maybe a slightly different ending. But again, it's only my personal preference, the movie is wonderful if you like opera, Victorian era visuals and a dramatic story with semi-dark elements.
Something I found interesting is that from the very beginning and throughout the entire movie, every other scene or so looks like an ending scene because of how beautiful and dramatic it is (as you would imagine a scene in the end of a movie) with the music, angles etc. This actually makes it a bit difficult to determine for how long the movie has been running, since the level of drama doesn't give a clue, but I personally like that a lot.
As for the story, it's an interesting concept and not as predictable as most movies I've watched - I was surprised several times when things did not go as I expected them to. While the aesthetic aspects are actually the best part of the movie, the plot is great too, assuming you like this type of movies of course. It is not your typical "love drama" or anything like that (I personally really dislike that) even if romance is a big part of it, and it's dark or at least semi-dark every once in a while which is greatly appreciated as well!
Overall this was a great experience which I would highly recommend. The reason I gave it a 9/10 is only based on personal preferences: I would've wanted it to be a little bit darker in certain ways, and maybe a slightly different ending. But again, it's only my personal preference, the movie is wonderful if you like opera, Victorian era visuals and a dramatic story with semi-dark elements.