50 Shades of Grey - Movie Review

Today is a cause for celebration - book lovers will be happy to know that Hollywood has finally come out with an actual movie adaptation of a book. Not word for word, but I have never seen a movie stick so closely to a book's plot in my life. Honestly, I went into this movie feeling very skeptical. Like so many other people, I had my own ideas about who should play the characters and how the movie should be filmed. In another way I was skeptical because, as I've said before, the book started out as Twilight fan fiction. I didn't think that a movie adaptation of a book that is - in a general sense - a knockoff of another book could possibly be any good. I am still not sure if I was right or not about this, so let's discuss it.

*Spoiler Alert*

In the beginning I could Not. Stop. Laughing. I mean the sexual innuendos were ridiculous and it was a little bit corny. I think I actually snorted a little once. I mean at one point, Anastasia forgets a pen and Christian hands her a pencil with his name on it and while they're talking she is playing with the eraser around her mouth and actually bites it at one point - I mean, come on! And after the interview when she runs out into the rain - symbolizing how um...wet...she is. I was cracking up. But then I realized that this was all true to the book the way they did it. Right off there is the subtle flirting and using inanimate objects to foreshadow what they are going to do later.

This might make you laugh, and I didn't realize until it happened, that somehow, subconsciously, I was not expecting so much nudity. I guess I am so used to movies discreetly switching frames to something else that I was surprised even though I knew there was going to be nudity. Now thinking back over the scenes, there was some pretty...revealing flashes of certain areas.


I really want to applaud Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson for bringing these characters to life. I know they are receiving a lot of criticism because everyone has a different opinion and let's face it, when it comes to this book, there is just no pleasing everyone. I think it was incredibly brave for these actors to take on this movie because in all truth, it was a gamble. For one, with all the discussion and controversy around who should play who, when the decision was made and there was all the backlash of fans who were outraged that their dream cast wasn't chosen - that had to be intimidating. Knowing that before they even had the chance to 'crack the whip' at the movie, they were already letting some people down. Not only that, but they knew from the beginning that they - especially Jamie - would become sex symbols. From now on people are going to look at them and see Christian and Anastasia - until they grab up some new roles and fast. The gamble there was that if people like the movie, they will most likely get a ton of new offers and if people don't, they might not. What I most respect is that Jamie and Dakota got to know their characters and became them. They took their roles seriously and ran with them. The mannerisms were near perfect and actually, I think Jamie actually portrayed Christian even more mysterious and suave than he was in the books. But it's more than that, in their eyes, you could see the thoughts and emotions of the characters coming through their expressions and I think that is absolutely incredible. 

Despite what I heard them say in some interviews, I think they created a really good on-screen chemistry. Jamie especially was just dripping with sexual appeal in every scene which was absolutely true to his character. Dakota was virginal and curious and a little awkward but also not a push over which was true to her character. I really think the acting was really very good.

The only complaint I have with this movie is that other than having read the book, there wasn't really enough time to really get to know and actually care that much about the characters. As a stand alone movie without the book, I wouldn't really understand why these two people were so after each other, particularly why Christian was so hot after Anastasia. But then again, it happened really fast in the book too so I don't know. The bottom line is that in my opinion, they played the characters very well and the movie was hot and steamy but also romantic in its own way.

Now for the rating

Main Characters: I think both characters evolved throughout the course of the film. Christian turned into more of a romantic and Anastasia lost her virginity. So there's that. I really liked Anastasia a lot though, she was kind of dorky but also stood strong and wasn't a push over and  - something I find rare for a female lead, unfortunately - she was in control of herself. She didn't let Christian's domineering attitude nor her own attraction for him guide her actions. I don't know if being attracted to Christian Grey is the same as 'liking' him as a person. Yeah he's hot, but I don't know if I were to like him if I were to meet him in person - he's so bossy. I give them both together a 4/5

Support characters: Friends and family? They barely got any screen time and honestly I have no idea how they contributed to the film at all. I'll give them 2/5 for showing up.

Classic Potential: Probably will end up in the same category as Basic Instinct and of course, Twilight, but I think this film will go down in history as something, so for that I will give 3/5.

Acting: Christian for sure gets 5/5 because even though I was sure I wouldn't like Jamie in this role, he proved me completely wrong. He became Christian Grey in my mind and not only that he became Christian Grey on screen. Not just in appearance but in mannerisms and his intense stares and expressions that said so much more than words. Anastasia I give 4/5 because although Dakota played Anastasia really well, there was just something a tiny bit off in her scenes with Jamie, something lacking. I can't put my finger on it but it's there and for that is why I docked 1 point.

Soundtrack: 5/5 hands down. Each and every song was perfect for the scene it was played in. I love the special version of Beyonce's Crazy in Love and Haunted. Some of the other songs are still stuck in my head and I will be getting this album for sure. 

Overall: 23/30 = 76%

So not a great grade, but I still really enjoyed the film personally. Comparing it to the book, it really stayed true to the spirit of the novel and I think that is really cool. I thought it was neat the way they brought to the screen through cinematography the way E. L. James described textures and touches in the book. I have great respect for the actors and the people who worked to bring a book to life. The book itself...

In my opinion, the book is what I call an 'entertainment read' that will never really be considered a great work of literature but is good enough to be a page turner and scandalous enough to make its mark in history. Something you can read in a single sitting and let's face it, it's hot. I myself blushed like crazy when I read it. The one thing I will say about E. L. James is that she is very...very.... descriptive. 

I wasn't surprised that it was such a success because...so was twilight. I mean really, the plot is almost the exact same. Girl meets guy, guy is powerful, mysterious, and has a dark secret. She's like 'I don't care, you're hot and interesting (and rich, but that totally means nothing to me...really...*shifty eyes*) and I want to fix you' and he's like 'you'll never understand, I'm a monster and even though I claim to care for you and I know what kind of person I am I don't have the self control to leave you alone' so somehow that translates to love. I mean, LITERALLY - just "please excuse my dear aunt sally" this equation:

(Twilight - vampires) - werewolves) + SEX = 50 Shades of Grey. 

The whole thing is really...unlikely though not as impossible as Twilight. Which I think is another reason why I think this franchise is so successful.

Anyway, that's my opinions on this particular matter. I hope my review has been helpful to you or at least entertaining. Have you seen 50 Shades? What did you think?

Let me know!
Oriona





Picture credits are linked through the pictures.

The Fountain - Movie Review

Directed by Darren Aronofsky

Release Date: November 22, 2006

Warner Brothers Pictures and Regency Enterprises

Starring: Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz

Film Synopsis:

Tommy is a medical researcher studying brain tumours and desperately trying to find a 'miracle cure' for his dying wife, Izzy. Their story is mirrored by the book Izzy has written about a conquistador from the 1500's searching for the mythical tree of life in order to save his queen and country.

Watch the trailer here.

Discussion:

*Major Spoiler Alert*

So the first time I saw this movie, I was very confused about what was actually happening. I could see that his wife was dying, but was kind of thrown by the flashes between him as a 15th century conquistador and a guy floating in space in a giant bubble with a tree. I really feel that you have to watch the entire movie to even begin to understand what is happening. However, to say this movie is about a guy whose wife is dying and he is trying to cure her is like saying the Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad is about some guys going up a river in a boat.


What the movies is really about is life, death, and love. Some people think this movie is them being reincarnated - I'm not entirely sure of that. It very well could be, and there are some signs pointing to that, but I think that the part that happens in the past is just the story Izzy wrote about a conquistador and his queen -  and that part of the movie is to symbolize and illustrate what is happening to them. It's how Izzy views her illness.

 I am not too clear about the guy in the future but I have a theory that when Tommy plants the tree at the end, he then goes and finds the actual tree of life - that his lab seems to have found - and he becomes immortal. Clinging to the love of his wife and one day takes her whole tree - which maybe he replanted as the tree of life, or took her body to the tree of life OR the tree just became symbolic of her; I'm still not sure. But anyway, he takes his tree/wife to Xibalba (the nebula surrounding the dying star) as a way of dying and being reborn. My other theory is that the guy in the bubble is just Tommy's way of finishing the story. What's more is the whole part with him and Izzy in modern times is the guy in the bubble's memories. That's really all that I find really confusing. It makes sense and then it doesn't. - wibbly wobbly.


Either way, this movie is really stunning visually and I loved all of the symbolism of him just...moving through time and space. It is a story that makes you just sit there and think about how inevitable death is. We are all constantly moving toward it and there is nothing really we can do. What is most important in our lives is the people we love and spending time with them. It's about the experiences in life that add up to who we are in the end. We cherish those memories because one day someone we love will die and all we really have when they are gone is their memory.

Maybe this movie is about reincarnation in a way because energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It simply...changes. The energy that was these two people who loved each other might change one day to be another two people who love each other. Or maybe, it will just be a tree.

Review:

Protagonist: It is kind of hard to pick which version of Hugh Jackman's character is really the one to review, but I decided on Tommy because the conquistador is like the story version of him and the bubble guy is the future version of him(?). I think throughout the movie I just kind of felt bad for Tommy. I mean, the guy's wife is dying and he has the answer for her cure so close to him...just at his finger tips and before he can get the chance to use it, she dies. He was also pretty relatable I thought, because how many people these days have had to watch someone they love slowly die right in front of them and they are powerless to stop it?  He did do a lot of changing in the movie, I think at first the version of him in the bubble with the tree didn't want to face his past but he eventually did and he ended up dying feeling 'whole.' But the conquistador I think took a turn for the worst - he seemed to be a bit greedy and destructive at the end drinking all that life sap. For all that I give the character of Tommy: 4/5.

Antagonist: Time and the disease are really the antagonists in this story. Although the inquisitor was a pretty menacing guy, he wasn't really important to the story. There is nothing that can beat death or fight passage of time - they drive the events of every story really. For that I give them 5/5.

Support Characters: I think of Izzy as a lead/support character. Although she was Tommy's wife and the conquistador's queen, she just had this heir of the mysterious oracle who was helping Tommy learn some divine truth. Which in the end I think he did, using the memories of things she said and her story. The other people in the movie did almost nothing except for Tommy's boss played by Ellen Burstyn - she was kind of like a motherly figure. Being that most of this movie was about Tommy's inner struggle with dealing with the death of his wife and the supporting characters didn't really contribute much, I give them 3/5.

Classic Potential: I am not entirely sure about this one, I think this movie was made a bit before it's time and I don't think a lot of people will get it, but maybe people in the future will see more from it so I'm gonna go half and half and give it a 2.5/5


Acting: Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz are amazing actors and I think they did a really good job, especially at the end when Tommy is sitting on the bed crying and giving himself a crude ring tattoo to replace his wedding band - was really heart wrenching and made me bawl my eyes out. I'm still sniffling a bit while writing this. I think it was cool how they both played multiple characters but those characters still mirrored each other. 4/5

Soundtrack: I just finished watching the movie less than two hours ago when writing this and I can't even remember the soundtrack really, so for that 2/5.

Special Effects: Really good. Like I said before this movie had stunning visuals and symbolism and it was all very beautiful and seamless to my eyes. I give it 5/5


Overall Rating: 25.5/35

References and Picture Credits:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0414993/

http://www.dardarkom.com/17922-watch-and-download-the-fountain-2006-online.html

https://magnoliaforever.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/ashleys-top-50-favourite-films-of-all-time/

http://cinema.theiapolis.com/movie-0F4A/the-fountain/gallery/hugh-jackman-in-the-fountain-2006-1086055.html

http://writewithhonour.blogspot.ca/2012/08/the-fountain-2006.html

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/still/00000729/the_fountain24.html

http://fyeahdarrenaronofsky.tumblr.com/post/4966522118/raphmike-hugh-jackman-the-fountain-2006

http://www.aceshowbiz.com/still/00000729/the_fountain15.html

Points System

Okay, so this is how I am going to be rating the books, movies, and music albums I will be reviewing from now on. Each category is rated out of 5 and then totaled at the end for an overall rating.

Books:

Protagonist/Main Character: rated on likability and how well a reader could relate to them. They are also judged on how much character development happens over the course of the book and if they are an active participant of events - or does he/she just sit around letting all the other characters carry her through and basically does nothing but everything 'surrounds' that character. (I'm looking at you, Bella)

Antagonist: Basically judged on how good of a villain they are and how much they drove the plot. Could the story have still happened without them?

Support Characters: Do they give something extra to the book? How do they help the main character and how to they help make the story?

Addictive-ness: How hard was it to put down?

Classic Potential?: Could this book and its author stand the test of time and take a place next to the greats such as Shakespeare, Jane Austin, J.R.R. Tolkien, Homer?







Movies:

Will be rated like books with these changes:
There will be no addictive-ness rating

The Classic Potential will be compared to movies like Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, Gone With the Wind, and other movies like that which could never really be remade or topped. Movies that will always be around and enjoyed for generations.

There will also be these categories:

Acting: Did the people playing the characters really make them come to life, or did you just see the actor?

Soundtrack: How well did the soundtrack capture the mood of the movie?

Special Effects (if applicable): Were they well done for the time period of the movies and were they believable?

*I can also foresee other categories coming up with different kinds of movies but I think these are good and can encompass most movies I will be reviewing.


Music Albums


Emotion: Does the album provoke any emotion from you?

BMR: Beat, Melody, and Rhythm - how are they? Does it suit the kind of music? Is it confusing?

Enjoyable? Could this on its own be entertainment? Would sitting in a room listening to this music be enough to entertain someone.

Creativity: How different is this from other music in the media? How did the artist take this genre and make it their own?

Message: Is the artist trying to say something with their music?


These are all I can think of that would cover just about anything, but if there is some other aspect that you would want me to talk about when I am reviewing something, let me know!

~Oriona

Picture Credits:

http://pixshark.com/open-book-magic.htm

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/classic-movies/images/582858/title/classic-movie-wallpaper-wallpaper

http://www.trickntrick.com/2014/03/easy-way-to-make-money-online-listening-to-music/

http://rockyourworld.co.za/inspired-through-experience/listen-to-the-words/

http://welltempered.wordpress.com/2014/02/08/classical-music-how-should-you-listen-try-these-four-ways-to-get-the-most-out-of-classical-music-then-tell-us-your-own/

Happy New Year!

Okay so I had every intention to do my blog the past couple of weekends but it has been very hectic here so this upcoming Sunday I will be going into the planned blog schedule. When I wrote the first one I was staying at my mom's and taking care of her after she had surgery, and then the following week I came home and then it was holiday shopping and parties. Then there was cleaning to get ready for my friend to come visit in the states and that has been what I have been up to lately. Anyway, I have so many ideas and posts I am working on for book reviews, and it has been a challenge trying to find movies and albums to compliment the chosen books. I also find it hard because a lot of books I have wanted to review have also been converted to film, so I don't quite know what to do about that situation.

Anyway, I just wanted to let you guys know that I am still here and looking forward to taking this literary/musical/cinematic journey with you guys :) keep your eyes open for my next book review this Sunday!

That's it for now,
Happy New Year!

Hunger Games - Movie Review

Details:

The Hunger Games

Based on the book by Suzanne Collins

Release Date: March 12, 2012

Lionsgate Films

Directed by Gary Ross

Movie Synopsis: 

Living in poverty stricken District 12, in the outskirts of the country of Panem, young Katniss Everdeen has a hard life. In this dystopian future, the people of Panem's districts live everyday on the edge of starvation, and every year they are forced to watch in horror as one boy and girl between the ages of 12 and 18 are taken from each of the 12 districts to fight to the death on a televised event called the Hunger Games.

Discussion:

So I was "hmming" and "hawwing" about which movie to review first because there is just so many that I want to talk about, but those will all come in good time. I wanted to pick something that would also fit in the same 'feel' as Sabriel. You know, strong female protagonist and also a bit dark so I thought this was fitting. Also if I am being 100% honest, I wanted to pick something a bit more popular so more people could relate to it.

I am happy to say that I read the Hunger Games book before the movie came out and I was fairly impressed by the way it turned out. It seems to be happening a lot these days where they take an awesome book series and decide it needs to become a movie series. For a lot of us book lovers, the picture to the side rings absolutely true when Hollywood takes a beloved book or series and tries to summarize it in a two hour feature film. For some, we wish they would take one book and make it as long as the Lord of the Rings extended edition. It also had better be perfectly cast and follow the plot to a T and not miss a single detail.

That all being said, I think that after realizing through the Twilight series what a huge profit they could make by taking a popular book series and making it into a movie franchise - they also realized that they need to keep the fans happy. To that purpose I think they are doing their best to stay true to the spirit of a book if not to the plot. I think that is what they managed to do with the Hunger Games.

The way the movie was filmed was definitely different and interesting and reminded me somewhat of an independent film at the beginning. It was very artistic and gritty. They did an awesome casting job as well, Jenifer Lawrence was definitely a great pick for the role of Katniss. I don't want to give too much away, although I don't think there are too many people who don't know how this movie goes anymore. I will say this though, I am really happy to see more media where the lead female protagonist is not just the arm candy for the male hero. I think it is important for girls to have such a strong role model. I also really admire Jenifer Lawrence for being a good role model off screen as well.

Review:

I really don't have many complaints about this movie that aren't because I read the book - and I am not going to get into a big book vs. movie discussion. The only thing I will talk about in that respect is the first 3 finger salute when Katniss volunteers. In the book, it read as a much more profound moment than I felt came across in the movie. I mean really, that was the first major turning point in the story. I don't know if people really realize but that three finger salute, first of all, is a symbol of admiration and respect for the people of that district. On top of that, doing that was the first sign of open protest towards the capitol and it was a huge deal for the people of District 12 to be brave enough to do that. I really think that for such a major aspect of the story - although subtle, they really didn't give it the proper explanation or profound feeling that I think they should have. That all being said, I think that for a first installment of a series, they did a really good job. Hollywood can never really know how a series is going to go over with the fans. I am really happy that they invested a bit of money into making sure that the special effects were good too, I mean I am glad that Katniss didn't end up running like this. But then again, she would just run normally being that she doesn't have powers, but I just wanted to include that. (hehe) Movies like Beautiful Creatures shows us that not every book series would be good as a movie but I am fairly confident that Hollywood found a winner with this series. (Totally not because the sequels are already out)

I give the Hunger Games 8 out of 10 stars (still working on the points system and I know I used 5 stars last time but I forgot that stars aren't limited to groups of 5 and I will probably go back and change these) - I recommend it to anyone.

Hope you enjoy it :)

Picture credits:

http://ifunny.co/fun/1yHKodsA1

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_hunger_games/