Search
Tom Turner (388 KP) rated Ozma of Oz in Books
Apr 30, 2021
If you've seen the 1985 movie Return to Oz you will no doubt recognise elements of this book. While the Gump and Pumpkin Head were pulled from The Marvelous Land of Oz (the previous Oz book.) Pretty much the rest of the movie was taken from this book.
Ozma of Oz configure the perfectly peculiar style from the first two. As I suspected would be the case, also starts to tie loose ends together from the previous works so it definitely starts feeling like the series is one cohesive whole. Because so much of it was familiar from the movie it's hard for me to evaluate the book on its own merits. This is diffent from other adaptations because it wasn't a diet adaptation, so it's impossible to say "Movie did X better while book did Y better." and unlike WWoO the story isn't an institution.
Ultimately it was an enjoyable entry.
Ozma of Oz configure the perfectly peculiar style from the first two. As I suspected would be the case, also starts to tie loose ends together from the previous works so it definitely starts feeling like the series is one cohesive whole. Because so much of it was familiar from the movie it's hard for me to evaluate the book on its own merits. This is diffent from other adaptations because it wasn't a diet adaptation, so it's impossible to say "Movie did X better while book did Y better." and unlike WWoO the story isn't an institution.
Ultimately it was an enjoyable entry.
Toddler Flashcards HD: Baby Learning Games & Apps
Games and Education
App
250+ toddler flashcards with high-quality pictures, photos, sounds, written words and professional...
Under Milkwood
Book
Commissioned by the BBC, and described by Dylan Thomas as 'a play for voices', UNDER MILK WOOD takes...
Top 10 Biggest Beasts Ever (2015)
Movie
Before man ruled the world, Earth was a land of giants. Count down the biggest beasts of their kind...
David McK (3557 KP) rated Hornblower: The Even Chance (1998) in Movies
Aug 15, 2021 (Updated Aug 15, 2021)
First of the TV movie adaptations of CS Forester's famous nautical hero Horatio Hornblower, taking it's main inspiration and plot from the earliest (set, if not released) of those books when Hornblower had just joined the navy.
Ant, therein, I found, lies my biggest problem with the film: Ioan Gruffudd (back before Hollywood came calling - he was Mr Fantastic from the original Fantastic Four movies, remember) is simply too old for the part!
That's not to say that he doesn't give it his all, or even manage to fully inhabit the role: just that, in this one at least, I couldn't get over the fact that Midshipmen were only supposed to be in their very early teens (11, 12, thereabouts), and yet here we have an actor in his mid 20s (at the time of recording) playing a 17 year old - and even 17, to me, seems too old to be a Midshipman during the period portrayed.
Ant, therein, I found, lies my biggest problem with the film: Ioan Gruffudd (back before Hollywood came calling - he was Mr Fantastic from the original Fantastic Four movies, remember) is simply too old for the part!
That's not to say that he doesn't give it his all, or even manage to fully inhabit the role: just that, in this one at least, I couldn't get over the fact that Midshipmen were only supposed to be in their very early teens (11, 12, thereabouts), and yet here we have an actor in his mid 20s (at the time of recording) playing a 17 year old - and even 17, to me, seems too old to be a Midshipman during the period portrayed.
David McK (3557 KP) rated Sharpe's Honour in TV
Nov 14, 2021 (Updated Nov 14, 2021)
The fifth episode in the TV adaptations of the novels by Bernard Cornwell (which are well worth a read), based on the book of the same name.
I say 'based on' as, because while the main thrust of the storyline is the same, the TV movie of necessity abbreviates the novel somewhat: most noticeably (I felt) watering down quite substantially the role of El Matarife in the proceedings.
As this starts, Sharpe is still mourning the death of his wife Teresa, while Napoleon - in his first appearance in the series - is in retreat from Russia, and with Major Pierre Ducos hatching a plan to drive a wedge between the Spanish and British allies while also getting his revenge on Sharpe by provoking a duel between Sharpe and a Spanish nobleman who he (Ducos) later murders, with Sharpe then taking the rap for said murder (until he is later able to prove his innocence).
I say 'based on' as, because while the main thrust of the storyline is the same, the TV movie of necessity abbreviates the novel somewhat: most noticeably (I felt) watering down quite substantially the role of El Matarife in the proceedings.
As this starts, Sharpe is still mourning the death of his wife Teresa, while Napoleon - in his first appearance in the series - is in retreat from Russia, and with Major Pierre Ducos hatching a plan to drive a wedge between the Spanish and British allies while also getting his revenge on Sharpe by provoking a duel between Sharpe and a Spanish nobleman who he (Ducos) later murders, with Sharpe then taking the rap for said murder (until he is later able to prove his innocence).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
Murder on the Orient Express is a mystery drama directed by, and starring, Kenneth Branagh and is based on the 1934 Agatha Christie novel of the same name. The film brings in a spectacular cast alongside Branagh, including Penelope Cruz, Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Johnny Depp, Josh Gad, Michelle Pfeiffer and Daisy Ridley. Also part of the main cast, while not well known, but equally as talented, are Tom Bateman, Derek Jacobi, Leslie Odom Jr. and Lucy Boynton.
For those unfamiliar with the novel, or the 1974 and 2001 adaptations, Murder tells the story of, well… a murder. On a train. It’s really a lot more than that. Branagh portrays Hercule Poirot, a famed Belgian detective who is looking forward to some time off. But during his travels, a most unfortunate thing happens. Two things actually. Someone is murdered aboard the train he is traveling on, the Orient Express (naturally). And the murderer would’ve gotten away free and clear had storm not caused an avalanche, which thanks to a derailed engine, caused the train to become stuck and the body to be discovered. Poirot’s friend, Bouc (Bateman), runs the train and requested that Poirot solve the mystery before the police arrive in fear of someone innocent being accused, and to save himself from a heyday with his father. Can Poirot find out who is the killer between the star-studded cast?
I’ve read the novel. Seen both adaptations. This film blows those earlier adaptations out of the water. There is no contest here. Now clearly, nothing can beat the book. But Murder is about as great a film you can get in the murky land of Hollywood these days. As mentioned, Branagh directed and starred in the film, which he shot on 65 mm. The last time he did this was with Hamlet in 1996. It looked good then, and it looks even better now. With eye-popping visuals throughout the entirety of the film, and a masterful soundtrack that seamlessly blended with the tones and themes of each scene, the film is a modern masterpiece.
It wasn’t without its faults. (Most) every film has them. And there are a lot of people who are upset with Branagh’s portrayal of Poirot, particularly the representation of his eccentric facial hair. I am not one of those people. I believe it, along with other amazing moments, lent a bit of humor to the movie to break up what should otherwise be, and is, a serious whodunit mystery. Also, I felt they changed a few things in the adaptation that didn’t necessarily need to be changed.
I found it hard to sit and write about the film though. Given the nature of a great mystery, I can’t tell you too much about it without risk of giving out crucial details to the plot and outcome. So I will leave you with this, boys, girls, and everything in between and beyond… with a great and talented cast (bravo to Michelle Pfeiffer in particular) who nailed home their characters, to great visuals, and a great score, this movie is definitely one you want to catch.
For those unfamiliar with the novel, or the 1974 and 2001 adaptations, Murder tells the story of, well… a murder. On a train. It’s really a lot more than that. Branagh portrays Hercule Poirot, a famed Belgian detective who is looking forward to some time off. But during his travels, a most unfortunate thing happens. Two things actually. Someone is murdered aboard the train he is traveling on, the Orient Express (naturally). And the murderer would’ve gotten away free and clear had storm not caused an avalanche, which thanks to a derailed engine, caused the train to become stuck and the body to be discovered. Poirot’s friend, Bouc (Bateman), runs the train and requested that Poirot solve the mystery before the police arrive in fear of someone innocent being accused, and to save himself from a heyday with his father. Can Poirot find out who is the killer between the star-studded cast?
I’ve read the novel. Seen both adaptations. This film blows those earlier adaptations out of the water. There is no contest here. Now clearly, nothing can beat the book. But Murder is about as great a film you can get in the murky land of Hollywood these days. As mentioned, Branagh directed and starred in the film, which he shot on 65 mm. The last time he did this was with Hamlet in 1996. It looked good then, and it looks even better now. With eye-popping visuals throughout the entirety of the film, and a masterful soundtrack that seamlessly blended with the tones and themes of each scene, the film is a modern masterpiece.
It wasn’t without its faults. (Most) every film has them. And there are a lot of people who are upset with Branagh’s portrayal of Poirot, particularly the representation of his eccentric facial hair. I am not one of those people. I believe it, along with other amazing moments, lent a bit of humor to the movie to break up what should otherwise be, and is, a serious whodunit mystery. Also, I felt they changed a few things in the adaptation that didn’t necessarily need to be changed.
I found it hard to sit and write about the film though. Given the nature of a great mystery, I can’t tell you too much about it without risk of giving out crucial details to the plot and outcome. So I will leave you with this, boys, girls, and everything in between and beyond… with a great and talented cast (bravo to Michelle Pfeiffer in particular) who nailed home their characters, to great visuals, and a great score, this movie is definitely one you want to catch.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Death on the Nile (2022) in Movies
Feb 19, 2022
I don't like to go into a film with a negative impression... but... #NotMyPoirot #SlashTheStash.
Linnet Ridgeway goes to Poirot with fears for her safety, and that of her new husband, when an old mutual acquaintance shows up at each new location on their honeymoon.
An Agatha Christie novel always makes for a great plot, and this one has had several different adaptations over the years. Don't go into it expecting a faithful adaptation though, this one comes out a bit spicier. It also takes some liberties with Poirot's backstory, which does add some interesting context to things about him, but at the same time, it's not the source material.
As with Death Train, Death Boat has a star-studded cast. While I love most of them in other things, I found the whole dynamic to be a little all over the place. Tom Bateman and Ali Fazal were solid, Russell Brand was surprisingly good, but everyone else was either rather bland or too over the top. Then there's Kenneth... I'll give it to them, it feels wrong thinking that Poirot is sexy... but there's one moment where even I, a Ken denier, took a sharp intake of breath.
Death on the Nile comes in at 2 hours and 7 minutes, had they cut what felt like 10 minutes of Gal Gadot walking down the length of the ship, it could easily have come in under 2 hours.
I think that identifies the issue I have with these new adaptations. This one in particular has a very theatrical feel to it. A lot of the boat shots early on feel like you're watching it happen on a stage. I don't object to that style, I like watching theatre, but having it thrown in randomly threw me.
My other big gripe was the choice of shots. Death Boat really likes to not show you faces when people are talking. Watching these scenes was off-putting, it felt like they'd been re-edited and had a new audio track overlaid... badly. There's also a scene where the camera swoops backwards and forwards between the people who are talking, and after a while, I could feel the motion sickness building.
It isn't until films like this come out that you realise just how much of one is computer generated. I have to assume that the majority of this budget went on the cast, it certainly wasn't spent on the effects. The de-aging on Branagh in the opening was awful, and must have cost more than hiring a younger actor to do those scenes. The generated scenery wasn't any better, it was painfully obvious which weren't real.
Death on the Nile is, at the end of the day, another classic Christie story, and even with some butchering, there's still a great mystery to unfold. That being said, I would rather sit through one of the other adaptations again if they were all laid out in front of me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/02/death-on-nile-movie-review.html
Linnet Ridgeway goes to Poirot with fears for her safety, and that of her new husband, when an old mutual acquaintance shows up at each new location on their honeymoon.
An Agatha Christie novel always makes for a great plot, and this one has had several different adaptations over the years. Don't go into it expecting a faithful adaptation though, this one comes out a bit spicier. It also takes some liberties with Poirot's backstory, which does add some interesting context to things about him, but at the same time, it's not the source material.
As with Death Train, Death Boat has a star-studded cast. While I love most of them in other things, I found the whole dynamic to be a little all over the place. Tom Bateman and Ali Fazal were solid, Russell Brand was surprisingly good, but everyone else was either rather bland or too over the top. Then there's Kenneth... I'll give it to them, it feels wrong thinking that Poirot is sexy... but there's one moment where even I, a Ken denier, took a sharp intake of breath.
Death on the Nile comes in at 2 hours and 7 minutes, had they cut what felt like 10 minutes of Gal Gadot walking down the length of the ship, it could easily have come in under 2 hours.
I think that identifies the issue I have with these new adaptations. This one in particular has a very theatrical feel to it. A lot of the boat shots early on feel like you're watching it happen on a stage. I don't object to that style, I like watching theatre, but having it thrown in randomly threw me.
My other big gripe was the choice of shots. Death Boat really likes to not show you faces when people are talking. Watching these scenes was off-putting, it felt like they'd been re-edited and had a new audio track overlaid... badly. There's also a scene where the camera swoops backwards and forwards between the people who are talking, and after a while, I could feel the motion sickness building.
It isn't until films like this come out that you realise just how much of one is computer generated. I have to assume that the majority of this budget went on the cast, it certainly wasn't spent on the effects. The de-aging on Branagh in the opening was awful, and must have cost more than hiring a younger actor to do those scenes. The generated scenery wasn't any better, it was painfully obvious which weren't real.
Death on the Nile is, at the end of the day, another classic Christie story, and even with some butchering, there's still a great mystery to unfold. That being said, I would rather sit through one of the other adaptations again if they were all laid out in front of me.
Originally posted on: https://emmaatthemovies.blogspot.com/2022/02/death-on-nile-movie-review.html
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Stephen King's It in TV
Dec 11, 2017 (Updated Dec 11, 2017)
A good adaptation but now looks dated
As Stephen King adaptations go, this isn't half bad. It manages to stick fairly faithfully to the book and keeps at least most of the major characters and plot points mostly intact. Which considering the length of the book is fairly impressive.
Tim Curry steals the show as Pennywise although i wouldnt say hes particularly scary. He's the best thing about every scene he's in. Shame the same can't be said about the rest of the cast, whose acting ranges from just okay to downright awful. The child actors seem to be much better than their adult counterparts! There's also the fact that it now looks very dated being nearly 30 years old and it really shows it's age in the effects. And for some reason despite this being rated a 15, there's barely any gore or bloody injuries which is a shame as King's books are known for this.
In all honesty having watched this back recently, I think the new version might be better.
Tim Curry steals the show as Pennywise although i wouldnt say hes particularly scary. He's the best thing about every scene he's in. Shame the same can't be said about the rest of the cast, whose acting ranges from just okay to downright awful. The child actors seem to be much better than their adult counterparts! There's also the fact that it now looks very dated being nearly 30 years old and it really shows it's age in the effects. And for some reason despite this being rated a 15, there's barely any gore or bloody injuries which is a shame as King's books are known for this.
In all honesty having watched this back recently, I think the new version might be better.
tonidavis (353 KP) rated Before I Fall (2017) in Movies
Jul 8, 2017
Mystery fail due to film media
Sometimes book to film adaptations work sometimes there a disaster this fell in the in-between. Whilst the film followed the story premise it wasn't that captivating and I think the reasons because it it doesn't work as well in the film medium. In the book the first accident is heightened and where all left guessing the events but are that much more involved because we know what she shouts before the accident we wonder why she shouts it int he film they cant do that because you would see what responsible. I dont think it was the film makers fault just that the suspense that made the book just doesn't transfer over. I mean as a teenager chick flick its okay but the books is deep powerful and meaningful and enraptures you in this mystery of teenage life and leaves you wondering the meaning why she yell what she does. The film doesn't