Peter Jackson's The Lovely Bones

[Morris Schæffer]

Didn't see a thread so here....

There's a picture (sort of):

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=24609

[Mara]

The book was complete crap. I can't seem to get excited about this at all.

[Benny Profane]

Remember when Lynn Ramsay was going to direct this? That might have been good.

[lovejuice]

The book was complete crap. I can't seem to get excited about this at all.
i'm really surprised. haven't read it, but it seems to be like a good sentimental novel, no?

[Raiders]

The book was complete crap. I can't seem to get excited about this at all.

The first half was pretty good I thought. The second half not so much.


Remember when Lynn Ramsay was going to direct this? That might have been good.

Nah, I think Jackson is more right for this project. Plus, if we get Heavenly Creatures Jackson, it could be wonderful. I would like to see him sidestep some of the latter half developments of the book, but they could play out better cinematically I think than they did on page.

[[ETM]]

I can't seem to think of a way for that story to pay off on screen, which is why I'm gonna trust Jackson on this one. He's been wanting to make it for ages, and I hope it's with good reason.

[Mara]

The first half was pretty good I thought. The second half not so much.

I agree that it got progressively worse. I was listening to it on CD while commuting, and I got so frustrated that I decided it was a bad thing to have on while driving.

[Ezee E]

The latter half of the book has some major flaws, but I think it's something that could work on film, if only a few adjustments are made.

While it still seems strange that this is a $100 million dollar movie, I feel pretty confident that Jackson will pull it off. Looking forward to this a lot actually.

[Dukefrukem]

This is in my top 5 anticipated movies this year.

[Spinal]

I thought it was Kimberley Peirce who was originally going to direct this. Or maybe it was both Ramsay and Peirce at some point.

[transmogrifier]

The latter half of the book has some major flaws, but I think it's something that could work on film, if only a few adjustments are made.

While it still seems strange that this is a $100 million dollar movie, I feel pretty confident that Jackson will pull it off. Looking forward to this a lot actually.

According to his interview in US Today, they did change a few things in the book, though he doesn't specify what, of course.

[megladon8]

I thought it was a great book.

Admittedly I was like 16 when I read it.

[Bosco B Thug]

Didn't see a thread so here....

There's a picture (sort of):

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=24609
Aw, I've been waiting for this, but disappointing tease, I wanted some face.

[Ezee E]

Aw, I've been waiting for this, but disappointing tease, I wanted some face.
What is your Av Bosco?

[Watashi]

I'm thinking about buying this and reading it before release. It sounds like a really cool premise.

[Ezee E]

http://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/lovely-bones.jpg

[Bosco B Thug]

What is your Av Bosco?
The Birfuckinerds, baby! Oh yeah!

Sorry. The Birds. One of it's many moments of startling, silent beauty.

EDIT: Above image. Secret, under-the-radar promo image? Much better!

[Ezee E]

The Birfuckinerds, baby! Oh yeah!

Sorry. The Birds. One of it's many moments of startling, silent beauty.
Weird. It's coming up as a stretched picture of a friend of mine with her puppy.

No. Seriously.

[Bosco B Thug]

Weird. It's coming up as a stretched picture of a friend of mine with her puppy.

No. Seriously.
Yeah... I don't know. That's definitely weird.

[[ETM]]

Weird. It's coming up as a stretched picture of a friend of mine with her puppy.

No. Seriously.

I have to confess: while reading your posts, I always have Tracy Jordan's voice in my head. It makes your posts unspeakably awesome, especially when they involve something weird.

[Ezee E]

;154347']I have to confess: while reading your posts, I always have Tracy Jordan's voice in my head. It makes your posts unspeakably awesome, especially when they involve something weird.
Awesome.

[Sycophant]

I have lately been thinking you look like Tracy Morgan now, E.

[Ezee E]

I have lately been thinking you look like Tracy Morgan now, E.
I am a stabbing robot.

Hope you get the refernce

[Sycophant]

Hope you get the refernce

I didn't. But within about three seconds, Google cleared everything up for me.

[MadMan]

Considering that this is Jackson going back to his pre-LOTRs, King Kong roots, I am actually anticipating this one. Even though I have yet to read the book.

[Dukefrukem]

trailer of the trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY1K6YQ2Cx8)

[ThePlashyBubbler]

I didn't think this was going to be so...special effectsy. Interesting.

[Ezee E]

I didn't think this was going to be so...special effectsy. Interesting.
He request $80 million or so on this. I found it crazy too.

[Qrazy]

The visuals look good. The story sounds stupid but who knows... except for people who have read it... they probably know.

[Raiders]

The visuals look good. The story sounds stupid but who knows... except for people who have read it... they probably know.

Actually it's a great concept and for the first half of the book it is executed pretty darn well. It gets progressively worse after that, but sometimes what sounds corny and lame on paper may work on screen. I still expect this to rock.

[Qrazy]

Actually it's a great concept and for the first half of the book it is executed pretty darn well. It gets progressively worse after that, but sometimes what sounds corny and lame on paper may work on screen. I still expect this to rock.

I'm a Jackson fan too so I expect/hope so as well.

[Mara]

trailer of the trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY1K6YQ2Cx8)

I'm trying to ignore the gratingly awful voice over (which sounds like it should be saying "A young girl in a new town discovers a strange and exciting new world" instead of "A young girl gets raped and cut into pieces.")

But the visuals are giving me a strong Heavenly Creatures vibe, which is a good thing.

[Ezee E]

Agreed with Raiders. I really did not like the end at all, but with Jackson behind it, I'm really looking forward to it.

[Acapelli]

http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/thelovelybones

[megladon8]

They gave way too much away in that trailer.

Funny how the ideas in this movie represent the polar opposite of those in the project I'm working on right now.

[Watashi]

Great looking trailer. Despite what people say about the book, I have trust in Jackson.

[Raiders]

They gave way too much away in that trailer.

Not really. The killer is given away in the book after like, 20 pages. It's about the people on Earth figuring it out and Susie trying to reach out to them from, well, Heaven.

[Bosco B Thug]

I have faith in Jackson, but man do I really not like CGI, and that includes CGI landscapes.

[Henry Gale]

Loved the trailer up until the last third, though I just kind of hated how the trailer went into generic thriller-mode instead of what the footage itself was. But I'm even just picturing the in-between world stuff set to Eno synths (assuming that's his approach to the score) and getting excited from that.

[Watashi]

I have faith in Jackson, but man do I really not like CGI, and that includes CGI landscapes.
Jackson and CGI go together like peanut butter and jelly.

[EyesWideOpen]

I never imagined while reading it that the grandma was as hot as Susan Sarandon.

[Bosco B Thug]

Jackson and CGI go together like peanut butter and jelly.
Yeah... but then I really don't have any sort of attachment to the LOTR films, or King Kong.

[Watashi]

I wish Andy Serkis was playing the killer.

[Ezee E]

Beautiful trailer.

[transmogrifier]

Excellent. Looking forward to it immensely.

[eternity]

Tucci's getting an Oscar nom.

[Wryan]

Looks great except that camera-attached-to-actor's-face thriller cam shot. I like the visuals a lot.

[Dukefrukem]

Wow I got chills. I can't wait to see this,

[Mara]

I still haven't gotten over how cuddleable Jackson's gotten recently.


Oh, and the trailer looks 15x better than the book. (But it all depends on thse second half / ending.) I'm kinda excited now.

[Wryan]

I still haven't gotten over how cuddleable Jackson's gotten recently.

Given his films and obvious sense of humor, he seems like such a cool hang-out guy.

But I miss the weight, frankly.

http://2aday.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/pjackson_l.jpg

[Mara]

He was always cute. But he looks better now-- healthier.

[chrisnu]

Original music by Brian Eno!

I was also more interested with the first half of the trailer, but that may be just because they shoehorned exposition into the trailer in order to "get it". I'll still see it opening night, of course.

[B-side]

I think it looks awful outside of the visually delicious afterlife scenes.

[transmogrifier]

I think it looks awful outside of the visually delicious afterlife scenes.

What exactly makes it look awful? Seems like hyperbole to me.

[Sven]

Seriously, save the hyperbole against Jackson films for me.

Personally, I thought all the heaven stuff looked like glorified Windows screensaver nonsense. However, Mark Wahlberg's hair is definitely the number one selling point.

[B-side]

What exactly makes it look awful? Seems like hyperbole to me.

I don't know, everything? The mawkish sentimentality, mostly. The storyline isn't exactly interesting either. The only thing that makes it even remotely unique is the fact that she's kinda watching over the events or whatever, and I doubt that'll be enough to elevate it. It looks like a mish-mash of cliches and excess.

[transmogrifier]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[B-side]

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Hey, I want it to be good like everyone else. That trailer was a disappointment for me.

[[ETM]]

What exactly makes it look awful? Seems like hyperbole to me.

I've never liked how that word, along with "horrible" is tossed around like nothing.

[Watashi]

Seriously, save the hyperbole against Jackson films for me.

Personally, I thought all the heaven stuff looked like glorified Windows screensaver nonsense. However, Mark Wahlberg's hair is definitely the number one selling point.
Heaven looks more like a level from Super Mario Galaxy.

Which is awesome.

[Amnesiac]

Heaven looks more like a level from Super Mario Galaxy.

Which is awesome.

Actually, it sort of reminded me of that part near the end of Majora's Mask, when Link travels to the Moon and you arrive at that strange, eerie, Elysian Fields-like location with the giant tree in the middle:

http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww46/Amnesiac7/_12494504346533.jpghttp://images.wikia.com/zelda/images/0/0b/Inside_the_moon.jpg

Anyone who has played the game will probably know what I'm talking about.

[Qrazy]

Actually, it sort of reminded me of that part near the end of Majora's Mask, when Link travels to the Moon and you arrive at that strange, eerie, Elysian Fields-like location with the giant tree in the middle:

Anyone who has played the game will probably know what I'm talking about.

Yeah it definitely reminded me of that as well but I also feel like I've seen the image other places although I can't really remember where.

[Sven]

Yeah it definitely reminded me of that as well but I also feel like I've seen the image other places although I can't really remember where.

Perhaps Sally Potter's Orlando?

[Winston*]

I don't need to see a trailer for this movie. It's Peter Jackson, I will see it opening weekend.

[Qrazy]

Perhaps Sally Potter's Orlando?

Nope, haven't seen it although I've been meaning to.

Although a bit different maybe I'm just remembering miscellaneous lone tree moments such as the one in What Dreams May Come, The Fountain, etc.

[Pop Trash]

I'm siding with Brightside/Sven. Trailer was pretty bad. I'm still seeing it of course but I hope it turns out better than the trailer, otherwise this will be the Benjamin Button of '09. A talented director makes an overrated Oscar baity movie with some nice visuals.

Also: why is this book so acclaimed exactly? I haven't read it but it must be the prose because it surely can't be the plot. I read a young adult novel called Remember Me by Christopher Pike when I was 10 that had a very similar plot (minus a rape since it was "young adult" and had to be semi-chaste) and that book didn't get much attention. Oh, and frickin' Ghost man.

[Boner M]

The visuals look like Dream Theatre cover art. I haven't read the book, but a youtube commenter said this:


Amazing! the book was the best thing i have EVER read. Better then Twilight! and i love twilight.

[KK2.0]

Trailer gave me bad memories of "What Dreams May Come" a film which i loathe for the over the top sentimentality and overall bad pacing and acting. However this one has something else to drive me besides the eye candy: Peter Jackson + Susan Sarandon + Stanley Tucci a combo that it's hard to resist.

I'll rewatch Heavenly Creatures to fight against WDMC's bad vibes.

EDIT: Trailer gave too much away, from now on i won't watch/read anything else about this movie until it's opening.

[Henry Gale]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5178FPEzfAL._SS500_.jpg

Very nice image for the tie-in reprint of the novel and audiobook that I'm assuming it will also be the domestic poster.

[Morris Schæffer]

Empire Magazine UK's review:


Plot
December 6th 1973, Pennsylvania. Vivacious teenager Susie Salmon (Ronan), fresh with the bloom of new love, is groomed, then murdered by her neighbour George Harvey (Tucci). As Susie’s parents (Wahlberg,Weisz) try to cope with their devastating loss and Harvey tries to cover his tracks, Susie keeps track on and influences their lives from a celestial purgatory.

Review
The Lovely Bones, Peter Jackson’s adaptation of Alice Sebold’s surprising best seller, is at least five films in one and therefore the perfect film for these credit crunch times. Over its 135 minute running time — it carries this load lightly — Jackson manages to squeeze in a touching teen romance, a gripping portrait of a serial killer, a family falling apart drama, an expressionistic after-life fantasy, a police procedural flick and, in one gripping set-piece, a fantastic retread of Rear Window. Jackson may not keep all these multiple plates spinning successfully, but this is bold, daring original filmmaking, with arguably more emotional and intellectual meat to chew on than either the Rings trilogy or Kong.

The Lovely Bones, both book and film, opens with a close-up image of a snowman trapped in a snow globe. The image reverberates around the entire movie. From Susie Salmon sitting on her heavenly gazebo narrating her own life following her brutal murder, to her father Jack (Wahlberg, good hair) building intricate model ships inside delicate bottles to her mother Abigail (Weisz) keeping Susie’s room in pristine untouched condition to her killer George Harvey (a terrific, meticulous, barely recognisable Tucci) carefully tending to his miniature doll house, these are characters looking to build ideal worlds but who eventually become ensnared by them, unable to move on, tethered by their pain. If this makes Lovely Bones sound like a draining downer, it shouldn’t: it is poignant, gripping, emotionally alive (but never sentimental) and gorgeous. All this from the man who brought you Meet The Feebles.

With its heady teen protagonist and themes of murder intertwined with the fantastical, on paper this felt like Jackson returning to the intimate, small-scale milieu of Heavenly Creatures (the fascination with the afterlife connecting with the real world also touches base with Jackson’s forgotten flick The Frighteners). Eschewing Sebold’s almost comic vision of the afterlife as a kitsch heavenly high school, Jackson’s vision of “the in-between”, a holding pen between Earth and Heaven, is a cornucopia of digitally enhanced vistas, flower iconography, quickly shifting landscapes and startling memorable images: a horrific bathroom vignette, a fleet of ships in bottles bobbing on a sea, a gazebo planted firmly in the middle of a midnight lake with the moon as a clock. Occasionally it strays deep into Rainbow Brite territory but perhaps that’s the point. Accompanied by Brian Eno’s lovely ambient noodlings, this is Jackson seeing and feeling purgatory through a 14 year-old’s subconscious, a 48 year-old man fluent in the language of ‘70s tween dreams.

But the best stuff doesn’t have a single pixel in it, meaning the afterlife segments eventually feel like stop-gaps. A heart-stopping piece of detective work by Susie’s sister Lindsay (Rose McIver who grows in stature throughout the film) is brilliant suspense cinema. The first half an hour is terrific stuff, sketching Susie’s life — all Partridge Family posters, Snoopy pendants and dreams of being a photographer — in the warm, faded tones of a ‘70s photograph. There is a lovely discussion between Susie and her boozy grandmother — Susan Sarandon in comic relief mode — about the thrill of first kisses and Susie’s subsequent crush on English hunk Ray is movingly etched, further enhancing the heartbreak of her life cut short. Saoirse Ronan may be the nemesis of spell check but she is emerging as a Jodie Foster for the noughties, making Susie spirited, smart, intense and adorable.

Sebold purists may carp that Jackson soft peddles the pivotal act of murder but, while he is not graphic, Jackson nails the emotional violence through both Harvey’s quiet insistence and telling images of creepy antique toys. Despite strong performances and moments from Wahlberg and Weisz, the movie doesn’t do full justice to the crumbling relationship of Susie’s parents — it occasionally feels glossed over, hinting at things but never paying them off. If that means there is a Director’s Cut on the way, then all the better. Spending more time in Susie Salmon’s sometimes harrowing, sometimes beautiful, always compelling world is something to rejoice in.
Verdict
Like The Lord Of The Rings, The Lovely Bones does a fantastic job with revered, complex source material. As terrific on terra firma as it is audacious in its astral plane, it is doubtful we’ll see a more imaginative, courageous film in 2010.

http://www.empireonline.com/images/stars/medium_4.gif

[KK2.0]

135 minutes! good, i was afraid Jackson wouldn't resist the temptation to do another 3+ hour movie.

didn't read much more than this, but i'm glad the review is positive.

[MadMan]

I still think that this looks fantastic, but then I'm a sizable fan of Jackson's work.

[Raiders]

Looks like with the possible exception of Ronan (and maybe some art/set designers) you can knock this one off the Oscar watch list.

I'm still rather looking forward to it. The apparent excesses appeal to me.

[Bosco B Thug]

Looks like with the possible exception of Ronan (and maybe some art/set designers) you can knock this one off the Oscar watch list.

I'm still rather looking forward to it. The apparent excesses appeal to me.
The reviews are disappointing - it seems Jackson, completely cognizantly, didn't want to return to the dark nature of Heavenly Creatures - but I feel exactly the same way.

And reviews usually really get to me, but I have a strange lack of upset feelings about TLB's critical ravaging. I've no doubt it's probably as blah as it's being made out to be, but I'm strangely ok with that. It's probably partly my having no attachment or familarity with the book.

[Mara]

Being less than faithful to the book isn't a bad thing. I really wasn't a fan.

[Ezee E]

Still looking forward to it.

Off-topic though, I saw the premiere photos, and Saoirse Ronan has the bluest eyes I've ever seen. They're almost scary.

[Winston*]

This movie pissed me off for numerous reasons. I haven't read the book but am told the movie is exactly like it, so the book pissed me off also.

[Mara]

This movie pissed me off for numerous reasons. I haven't read the book but am told the movie is exactly like it, so the book pissed me off also.

I heard they were very different, but I disliked the book.

Either way, do tell.

[Henry Gale]

Mild spoilers.

http://i836.photobucket.com/albums/zz284/henrygale42/lb1.png

The Lovely Bones is maybe the most frustrating film I've seen in a long time. I was completely taken by it for the first hour: introducing itself through Saoirse Ronan's character Susie, narrating as a confused spirit trying to make sense of the memories she holds from her short life (almost echoing the ending of a certain Sam Mendes film) as gorgeous visuals from both the story's In-Between world and its remarkable living, breathing portrait of Pennsylvania in the '70s beautifully fill in the world around it all. Ronan and Stanley Tucci are both incredible in their roles as the film hesistantly has the inevitable tragedy to approach while for the the supporting performances just sort of take a backseats to the importance of Susie's journey and Tucci's role in her transition to another world. I was watching it in complete awe only leaving a little itch in the back of my head to wonder why the overall impression of it hadn't been too kind.

Then as Susie settles into the In-Between, Jackson visually and viscerally tries to impress us by with too much too fast, trying to have the viewer digest so much so early that by the time the focus shifts back to Pennsylvania life, Susie almost seems to no longer be the narrative's main focus as she pops in every once in a while to explore a new facet of her fantasy land that now lacks the scope and wonder of whatever we may have been shown there just a half hour before. I'm glad Jackson made this instead of another big-budget adventure film, but I almost wish he had revelled in the possible scope of fantasy elements here instead of leaving it all to almost feel like he was simply trying to show some restraint with effects when tell that side of the story.

http://i836.photobucket.com/albums/zz284/henrygale42/lb3.png

Too much of it begins to meander too fast once the hour mark hits. I would argue that the turning point for it can be pointed to an almost comedically-played montage of Susan Surandon's grandmother character dropping in and making broad gestures to show she isn't quite suited for taking care of things around the house! The Hollies' "Long Cool Woman in a Black Dress" plays and... Uh-oh, fire on the stove! Washing machine's acting up! But don't worry, by the end we see her hair is down and she folds some towels, so I guess she turned out alright when the movie wasn't looking.

Surandon's character has no reason to be in here, Weisz is wasted as she's given less and less screentime as the film progresses while her motivations are never made completely believable. And... oh, of course you have Mark Wahlberg. In my mind, Wahlberg has never been a good actor, and here he completely deflates all effective emotion in any scene that he needs to really convince in his role as a father to Susie but also whenever he needs to convey his remaining role as a husband to Weisz and as a father to the children left affected by Susie's death.

http://i836.photobucket.com/albums/zz284/henrygale42/lb5.png

Eno's score is pretty damn good, but used in strange ways. An altered version of "Baby's on Fire" from his Here Come The Warm Jets is put to a scene where I was almost entirely baffled by the path the film had taken tonally. It's also strange that even though he would have been more than able to potentially help to build a more '70s feel with the score simply through utilizing sounds closer to what he's known for (certain synths and his endless skill in allowing simple soundscapes to convey incredible depth), the result is instead similar to most Hollywood scores, just arranged a little better.

Visually, The Lovely Bones has so much going on in every scene that I am comfortable in saying that it succeeds enough technically to deserve to be seen. I would now consider it an important film of the year because the atmosphere it creates feels so fresh despite the story its telling, and clearly a lot of care went into making so much of that work even when what you're seeing and feeling could feel a bit more justified.

http://i836.photobucket.com/albums/zz284/henrygale42/lb2.png

But what do I think about the film overall? I never read the novel so I can't say whether or not it's a successful adaptation. I only truly loved the first hour so I would be really hesistant to recommend it outright to anyone simply curious about it. And yet... I can definitely see it leaving a lasting enough impression on me over time. Although in my mind, that may be more due to the desire left for whatever potential it had so early on to be fufilled instead of the satisfactory way it was actually delivered. Overall, it's a bit of a mess, but it has some moments of absolute beauty.


*** / ****

[NickGlass]

I thought this was rather horrendous--an 135-minute trailer-of-a-film that chops its ostensibly genuine performances to pieces. I thought the subject of this film was meant to be grief, not a sloppy thriller with a garish palate. Jackson's choices are just...baffling.

[B-side]

Is Tucci as hilariously bad as I've heard?

[Winston*]

Is Tucci as hilariously bad as I've heard?

He gives a good performance as an X-files monster.

[Adam]

http://i560.photobucket.com/albums/ss47/adamstone20/Flukeman.jpg

[B-side]

He gives a good performance as an X-files monster.

I meant in the film. He's become a bit of a meme in the IYPC on Rotten Tomatoes.

[Sven]

I meant in the film. He's become a bit of a meme in the IYPC on Rotten Tomatoes.

What is IYPC?

[Boner M]

I meant in the film.
Winston's saying that Tucci plays his character as if he was an X-files monster.

[B-side]

What is IYPC?

Stands for Increase Your Post Count. Basically, it's a social thread.

[B-side]

Winston's saying that Tucci plays his character as if he was an X-files monster.

Ah, right. That's what I figured.:P

[NickGlass]

Is Tucci as hilariously bad as I've heard?

It's hardly his fault, but, yeah, it's a bizarrely poor portrait of a VILLAIN.

And I generally love Tucci.

[Dukefrukem]

D+? really Nick??

[KK2.0]

Sigh, anticipation dropped like a meteor, but i'll still watch it since i'm a PJ fanboy.

[balmakboor]

I really had this pegged as an Oscar sure thing early on. I'm still looking forward to it.

[number8]

I want to watch this just to see how terrible it is. The opinions I've heard range from "Not that good" to "What the fuck is this shit?"

[BuffaloWilder]

This was - just kind of okay.

[number8]

Wow, Ebert's review of this rules.


It's based on the best-seller by Alice Sebold that everybody seemed to be reading a couple of years ago. I hope it's not faithful to the book; if it is, millions of Americans are scary. The murder of a young person is a tragedy, the murderer is a monster, and making the victim a sweet, poetic narrator is creepy. This movie sells the philosophy that even evil things are God's will, and their victims are happier now. Isn't it nice to think so. I think it's best if they don't happen at all. But if they do, why pretend they don't hurt? Those girls are dead.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100113/REVIEWS/100119992

[BuffaloWilder]

Man, he can still whip smack you in the face when you aren't looking. Spot on, man.

[Spun Lepton]

Worse than King Kong? Aww, man! Peter! What happened!?

:sad:

[Winston*]

Worse than King Kong? Aww, man! Peter! What happened!?

:sad:

Definitely worse, and I don't like King Kong to begin with.

[Ezee E]

Heh. This is like a majorly flawed masterpiece.

For one, it doesn't know what to focus on, as it shifts immediately from one tone to another. One second it's about the family mourning, and it'll immediately go into the paradise that Susie Salmon is in. Just bizarre.

Two, it's great that Peter Jackson is behind this. The shifting of the two worlds, and the use of special effects is just simply too good for what the movie ends up being like. There are moments that I absolutely love in this, such as the reveal of all the murders and the very beginning of the movie.

Three, going back to the bizarreness of the movie. The Grandma played by Susan Sarandon might just be the worst thing in a movie this year. It's not particularly Susan's fault, but that of the screenplay, and direction. She really has no point in being there except for comedic relief that isn't funny at all. It is just weird to watch.

Peter Jackson's cameo in it is pretty funny to me. Seems extended, but probably something only people who truly know what he looks like would notice.

[Ivan Drago]

Heh. This is like a majorly flawed masterpiece.

For one, it doesn't know what to focus on, as it shifts immediately from one tone to another. One second it's about the family mourning, and it'll immediately go into the paradise that Susie Salmon is in. Just bizarre.

Two, it's great that Peter Jackson is behind this. The shifting of the two worlds, and the use of special effects is just simply too good for what the movie ends up being like. There are moments that I absolutely love in this, such as the reveal of all the murders and the very beginning of the movie.

Three, going back to the bizarreness of the movie. The Grandma played by Susan Sarandon might just be the worst thing in a movie this year. It's not particularly Susan's fault, but that of the screenplay, and direction. She really has no point in being there except for comedic relief that isn't funny at all. It is just weird to watch.

Peter Jackson's cameo in it is pretty funny to me. Seems extended, but probably something only people who truly know what he looks like would notice.

My thoughts to a T. And I thought "Haha NICE!" at his cameo.

[Grouchy]

This has to be the worst film by a major director I've ever seen. No, seriously. The number of things that are wrong with it are too many to mention, but I guess since I've made that statement, I should back it up.

First of all, Heaven (or whatever the midsection is called) looks like puke. It's one boring CGI landscape after another, and sometimes they happen so fast it's like an EPSON commercial. There's really no meat at all in the visuals. In fact, the only scene set in the other world that resonates in any way is the first one in the bathroom where the Salmon girl realizes she's dead. And, surprise, it's the most restrained one. Whenever Heaven doesn't look like an EPSON commercial, it looks like an Enya videoclip, specially in some weird romantic scene where the girl remembers her school crush - and, by the way, couldn't they find a normal-looking, handsome boy instead of a Bollywood star? It was therefore pretty funny when Enya started in the soundtrack.

Leaving the visuals aside, the script is so badly pieced together it's a wonder it ever got made. I think - I should clarify, I haven't read the novel - it suffers because it tries to be very faithful to the source material. Here and there I perceived random, odd character actions that might have worked in a long novel, because you have more space to create elaborate, quirky personalities that could behave this weird. The Rear Window-like climatic scene, for example, is so bad it becomes parody (the guy is hearing the pages in the diary being turned), which is a shame because Stanley Tucci really does his best with what he's given. In fact, you couldn't fault any of the actors for this mess - they're all very good and perfectly cast. It pains me to say it, but the way to make this movie better would have been to get another director, one who got the grasp of the story instead of just sweeping through the pages and using steadicam a bit too much. The character of the grandmother really has no reason to exist, even if she was in the book. Most inappropriate bit of comic relief ever.

Really, how does one go from making a classic film like Braindead to this crap? Hollywood.

[angrycinephile]

After this massive failure Peter Jackson should follow this up by making a another gory, funny horror film. Shoot it in New Zealand and for a tiny budget.

[Ezee E]

After this massive failure Peter Jackson should follow this up by making a another gory, funny horror film. Shoot it in New Zealand and for a tiny budget.
I think his next project is the sequel to Spielberg's Tintin.

[balmakboor]

This has to be the worst film by a major director I've ever seen. No, seriously. The number of things that are wrong with it are too many to mention, but I guess since I've made that statement, I should back it up...

Really, how does one go from making a classic film like Braindead to this crap? Hollywood.

I sense that we may be in total agreement. Braindead/Dead Alive remains his masterpiece.

I disagree with one -- and only one -- thing you said. I don't think all the actors are good or perfectly cast. I only liked the girl and the murderer.

[Grouchy]

I disagree with one -- and only one -- thing you said. I don't think all the actors are good or perfectly cast. I only liked the girl and the murderer.
Well, they're the two best. In fact, their one scene together was pretty solid.

But I don't think any of the others were wrong. Whalberg and Weisz sold their grief to me, at least.

[balmakboor]

Well, they're the two best. In fact, their one scene together was pretty solid.

But I don't think any of the others were wrong. Whalberg and Weisz sold their grief to me, at least.

I guess I never bought Ronan, Whalberg, and Weisz being a family. They felt like people brought together by a casting director instead of Whalberg and Weisz being drawn together by attraction and Ronan being the biological result.

[Ezee E]

I guess I never bought Ronan, Whalberg, and Weisz being a family. They felt like people brought together by a casting director instead of Whalberg and Weisz being drawn together by attraction and Ronan being the biological result.
Yeah, I'd say outside of Ronan, everyone (including Tucci) were pretty bad.

Susan Sarandon couldn't help it though. No one could've made her role good.

[Ivan Drago]

I sense that we may be in total agreement. Braindead/Dead Alive remains his masterpiece.

"I KICK ASS FOR THE LORD!" :lol:

But yeah, this movie sucked. Grouchy's thoughts pretty much sum it up.

[balmakboor]

Yeah, I'd say outside of Ronan, everyone (including Tucci) were pretty bad.

Susan Sarandon couldn't help it though. No one could've made her role good.

I don't know if it was on paper or Sarandon's doing, but if she added just one more tick to her character she'd resemble my dog in the Summer time.

[Ezee E]

I don't know if it was on paper or Sarandon's doing, but if she added just one more tick to her character she'd resemble my dog in the Summer time.
Literally everything about her character makes no sense, has no importance, and was completely awful. Might be the worst character I've seen in a movie.

In the book, it seemed to work.

That montage though. Just after the family is mourning too... Just bizarre.

[hey it's ethan]

I still like this movie a lot. The use of Brian Eno's "The Big Ship" was so dope.

[Morris Schæffer]

The Rear Window-like climatic scene, for example, is so bad it becomes parody (the guy is hearing the pages in the diary being turned), which is a shame because Stanley Tucci really does his best with what he's given.

I just saw this, and my thoughts haven't yet coalesced into something definitive, but I was under the impression he was hearing the floorboard creaking rather than pages being turned by Susie's sister.