Tangles (tania) wrote,


I know I said I was about to go, but I realised I'd forgotten to rant / rave about the two new trailers I saw online yesterday. And whilst I'm at it, I'll throw in another trailer I saw a while ago... But first...


A lot of people have now posted about the new Garfield trailer, so here's my two cents:

I saw the Garfield trailer yesterday and had many of the same thoughts as those I've been hearing around LJ. I'm SO sick of people doing stuff with CG just because they can. :P

If they were going to do it, they should have done it as a 2D film in the style of the comic strip. That's not bias speaking, it's just that that's how everyone is used to seeing Garfield. And those designs WORK. If it ain't broke...

As for any argument that people won't sit through watching such a simplistic style - HA HA! I LAUGH AT THEE!! Come on. Powerpuff Girls, Simpsons... hey, look, if some insane people will actually sit through Rugrats movies, Garfield will DEFINITELY work.

So yeah, minus points for the CG Garfield. But admittedly, I did laugh at the butt-swinging bit at the beginning of the trailer. :)

For those who've wondered, the female vet in the trailer (played by Jennifer Love Hewitt) is meant to be one and the same as "Liz the vet" from the comics - te one Jon is always trying to hook up with. *siiigh* My prediction for the movie - she and Jon will, actually, hook up. Laaaaaame...

I DO think that Bill Murray is a good choice for Garfield's voice tho (that's who it is, btw). I just don't think the trailer gave us a good chance to hear him in action much.

Well. If they've GOTTA do it in 3D, I suppose that's probably the closest they could get the design to look like the Garfield we know and love. I'm also concerned about plot - Gargield was always a real quick-fire gag strip, it doesn't lend itself to an ongoing story. I'll give this movie a chance, but with some reservations. :P

Now Calvin and Hobbes, THERE'S a good candidate for a movie. But Bill Watterson would never allow it in a MILLION years.


This hit the net yesterday and was immediately innundated with hits. Due to this, Sony chose to put it online in Streaming Media format.

Biiiiiig mistake. Sony, listen up: I would MUCH rather wait 15 minutes and watch a nice smooth quicktime video, than instantaneously get a horrible, jerky streaming-media... THING that keeps FRICKIN' WELL FREEZING UP!!

Now as many of you may well know, I'm a huge Spider-Man fan. I collect some of the comics. And Doctor Octopus is my all-time favourite supervillain. Actually, probably my favourite character outright, closely followed by Peter Parker himself.

So as you can imagine, I'm thrilled to the back teeth with the few glimpses we were allowed of Doc Ock in action in this trailer. Though I've yet to see it without all the jerkiness and abrupt pauses (THANK YOU, SONY :P ), it looks like a damn fine superhero flick.

I'm fairly picky about those. I like the first Spider-Man, and both X-Men flicks. I did NOT like the Hulk (slow, boring, cartoony and pointless) or Daredevil (needlessly violent and confused).

That first scene in the S2 trailer, where Ock throws a car through the window of a restaurant and Peter, in the course of saving MJ, comes close to getting his face ripped off by the rear tyre, is totally cool.

Spidey's webswinging looks like it's been done a LOT better in this film. I didn't have a prob with it in the first one (except that there was so little of it, due to budgetary concerns I believe) but it looks a lot more real and dynamic here.

Alfred Molina, it turns out, looks like a BRILLIANT choice for the good Doctor. He's got the grin down pat. ;) Looks like he ditched his natural English accent for an American one (makes sense if they're sticking to comics continuity; Otto Octavius grew up in Queens) but it's hard to say, he only had one line in the trailer.

I'm looking forward to seeing the nice, big, clear, non-jerky version of this trailer attached to Return of the King this boxing day. :)

Which reminds me! I picked up my ROTK tickets the other day!! :D 11am, I wanted an earlier session but neither Dad nor Robbie would drag themselves outta bed that early for a movie, darn 'em.

Anf finally...


With all due respect to Chris Columbus, his adaptions of the HP books "Philospher's Stone" (yes, we Aussies got the original English title) and "Chamber of Secrets" were disappointments. Known for his saccharine direction of previous films such as "Home Alone" and "Bicentennial Man", this director managed to completely suck the life out of the first two Harry Potter tales.

And we all know that the sparkling life J K Rowling invests her stories with is part of their great appeal.

What were were left with was two kids films which, in their own right, were good enough films, but were pale shadows of the original books.

Perhaps once I would have thought that maybe some books are just impossible to adapt while maintaining their magic, but good ol' Peter Jackson has blown that particular argument out of the water by crafting his Lord of the Rings trilogy so beautifully, I actually find watching the films PREFERABLE to reading the books. And that really IS a first for me.

So. "Prisoner of Azkaban. "PoA" is my all-time favourite of all the HP books because of its dark tone and the fascinating character interaction all through it - this is the book which introduces Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, and finally offers us some insight into the mysterious workings of Severus Snape's mind. I think I speak for many of HP's adult readers when I say we find the HP backstory - the tale of the _adult_ generation including the above characters - to be one of the most fascinating elements in the HP saga. And it's the darkness of these characters and these books that seperate them from normal children's literature. J K Rowling does not talk down. Her child AND adult characters have neuroses, make mistakes, act petty, and are all one hundred percent human (well, except Lupin, heh... bad choice of words. ;) )

Based on what I saw of the trailer, it looks like Chris Columbus's replacement, director Alfonso Cuaron, has decided to bring that darkness and reality back to these films in full force. It also looks as though he's not afraid to tweak and change elements of the story, which in film can be a good thing (as demonstrated by Peter Jackson). For instance, I didn't recognise the trailer scene that depicts Snape apparently standing in front of the kids, protecting them from something that approaches.

Slighty OT, but the selection of the creepy song "Something Wicked This Way Comes" for the trailer really tickled me. :)

Hopefully Cuaron will have drawn better performances from some of the child actors (I refer, in particular, to the kid who plays Ron). I've never had much of a problem with the performance of Daniel Radcliffe (Harry), who underplays remarkably well for a kid (though he's no match for the kid who played Elliot in E.T. or the wonderful Hayley Joel Osment - but child actors of that calibre are one in a million). I also admire the venemous performance of the kid playing Draco Malfoy, who looks creepier and creepier with each successive film (LOVING the new hairdo he's got in this trailer; THAT is how I always imagined Draco!).

Everything I see in the entire trailer just makes me feel better and better about this film. Let's hope it lives up to expectations or I'll be watching all the future ones alone! Robbie was SO disappointed in the second film that I've had to talk him into coming to see this one with me, and he says this is the last chance he's giving the HP film series. He's a big fan of the books too.

For those who haven't seen any of these trailers yet, I recommend all three for various reasons. Trailers. Gotta love 'em. I'm one of those "anticipation is half the fun" types. ;)

*wanders off happily with "Something Wicked..." going around in her head*
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded