TWILIGHT...REALLY

Now we've all heard of the best selling TWILIGHT series- author Stephanie Meyer's claim to fame or should I say fortune- and as expected an inevitable screen adaptation has finally made it's way. But for someone who hasn't read the novel and has only seen the film, I've got to ask...What's all the fuss about? Sure Twilight has an intriguing premise-looks to reinvent the vampire myth-vampires sparkle in the sun, have alabaster, milky skin, superhero strength and speed, can read minds and track scents like hunting dogs. Here our vamp Edward Cullen has swooning good looks and Bella the makings of a Jane Austin heroine-what would a romance be like between such a vampire whose earnest about not killing humans and a human whose more intrigued by the vampire way of life than the vampire himself? Well...not too convincing.

The moody atmosphere and the natural chemistry between the two leads gives tweens something to cheer about-but what could have been the big Hollywood romance of the year- comes off as a trashy Mills & Boon romance for teens on film-rushed and forced-Bella and Edward instantly fall in love (of course it's love at first sight for Bella at least and for Edward it's food at first sight-but that too will soon predictably change) Using silences, long extended pauses, the close up, blowing hair- an unnatural, melodramatic intensity is created. The moody atmosphere of the film is constantly disrupted by both these characters spouting some of the lamest, cheesiest, unintentionally funny dialogue I've heard. When Edward says to Bella " I'm the Lion and your the lamb" or when he takes her on his back in the classic Vikram and Betal piggy back-Edward has you cringing as he says "Hang on to me Spider Monkey"- and when that is followed up with some of the not so special, special effect with the two jumping and flying in the air supernatural nonsense- I was laughing at the stupidity of it all.

It's an extremely confused screenplay-indecisive about it's focus-should it play up the supernatural element or really focus on the romance.And apart from the generally poor characterizations, useless characters and underwritten villains- you just don't FEEL the love.

Neha

FEAST YOUR SENSES

LOOK AT THIS- THIS IS HISTORY IN THE MAKING

I remember the last time I felt like this was when THE DARK KNIGHT released and gosh-- I haven't even seen the film and I didn't even gush over TITANIC like half the world did a decade ago.

But there in lies the DANGER- with so much buzz around the film and expectations riding sky high- I am a tad skeptical that this one- with a plot that's hardly decipherable from the fast paced, sensory overload trailor. Let's hope that James Cameron lives up to the hype and even if not- gives us at the very least an exhilarating ride.

Not too far away now.

Neha

A christmas carol technology has nothing to do with Avatar

I was a little surprised when recently at dinner a friend was comparing the technology used in A Christmas Carol to that of Avatar- drawing on similarities between the two. But let it be said there is absolutely nothing similar about the two.

"You're basically animating what I think they call a virtual puppet in a database. A kind of avatar version of you" This is what Colin Ferth had to say about the technology used for A Christmas Carol releasing this weekend and it is similar to how Polar Express used it- but only this time your taking the classic Dicken's fable remade a zillion times over and giving it a new age, cutting edge tech makeover. To simply explain how this technology works- Robert Zemeckis' captures the motion of the real actors i.e. Jim Carey holding a torchlight say-covers it in computer generated graphics and then puts them against an animated backdrop. an added advantage is CGI takes care of Carrey's 7 different get up's.
But don't get confused bloggers when you hear the term avatar being thrown around loosely-this technology has nothing to do with James Cameron and his AVATAR and the pathbreaking technology he has developed for that one. Avatar uses STEREOSCOPIC CAMERAS- in lay man's terms- Cameron takes two cameras, straps them together-each one giving you a different perspective on a scene-eerily mimicking the way the human eye in 3 D form views the world.The difference is- movie geeks pay attention- Avatar version gives you depth- it's like watching images through a window-that real, that involving with a distinctive background and foreground to it. Unlike AVATAR, A CHRISTMAS CAROL is like a flat, moving, animated painting.

And that my dear friends is the difference.

Enjoy

Neha

AND NOW THE DISNEY/JIM CARREY VERSION

COMPARE AND CONTRAST- THE ORIGINAL WITH DISNEY'S LATEST OFFERING

'The Last Airbender' Stills - Photo Gallery on Yahoo! Movies

'The Last Airbender' Stills - Photo Gallery on Yahoo! Movies

was it elementary my dear mr ritchie?

Hi Rudra! thanks for your great feedback. if indeed the passion is missing or rather, slacking, trust me, neha and i will be sure it doesnt seem that way anymore!! watch this weeks episode, think you fill find a lot of 'heart' in it :) and keep writing we love listening to what you have to say.

The Last Airbender. Shyamalam. Dev Patel. Hmmmm. think i have to calm myself and respond to you on that one neha. and i will soon :)

meanwhile, i have always been a sucker for detective fiction and have grown up reading the nancy drews, famous fives etc (hey, now that would be quality family fare for hollywood to make a good movie out of, right?!) later progressing to agatha christie, (the wonderful hercule poirot) and of course, the absolutely one of a kind MR SHERLOCK HOLMES.

i remember living, breathing, devouring CONAN DOYLES 4 novels and short stories following holmes' and his sidekick watson on their dark trails and mysterious adventures with sheer absorption and glee. later, i have a vague memory of watching "the Hound of the Baskervilles", a rather dimly lit, violent version that felt insipid near the book (often the case of course as the book had come alive in my imagination alone)

but i did not fear or give up hope in hollywood, ack, how could i :) .. i admit i havent sought out other film versions, perhaps alo because none have been that fantastic? but i have at the same time, silently, always waited and wondered what a good sherlock homes movie would be like; that too made TODAY!!

TA-DAH! along comes a powerhouse of cinema news: GUY RITCHIE directs ROBERT DOWNEY JR. , JUDE LAW, RACHEL MCADAMS ...and MARK STRONG (remember him in Rock n Rolla n Body of Lies??) in a 2009 release of SHERLOCK HOLMES!!

I CANT WAIT!!

holmes is just such a fascinating character himself and the dynamic between watson and him is boiling with energy, fun, wit, and mystery all at once. here is a man who is supremely intelligent, has many eccentricities, and is able to solve what seems like the unsolvable every time with panache, that too! who can forget that tongue in cheek one liner as holmes brilliantly deduces something out of complex connections making it seem like the most simple and logical thing ever, and he looks at a stupefied watson and casually says, "elementary my dear watson", i can almost see DOWNEY JR's mischief in that one...

just saw the trailer and it looks GOOD- thrilled to see BOB DOWNEY JR here as the 'modern' holmes, the gruff english accent, that wicked smile.. (here is an actor i want to keep watching, more on his other film "the soloist" later), and the mood of this one feels contemporary, dark, edgey, sharp, fun, action packed, wryly comic and wonderful- London looks lovely and the tech credits seem super strong... so now its all about what exactly they do with the story. and therein lies my curiousity- it SEEMS there is something apocalyptic going on in this one. not giving away more than the trailer can...but leaves me hungry...

i hope mr ritchie and the strong cast do mr conan doyle proud :)

watch out... and keep your comments coming!

WILL NIGHT BE THE KNIGHT FOR HOLLYWOOD'S NEW FRANCHISE ?

I'm looking forward to M.N. Shyamalan's THE LAST AIRBENDER- and while it might have something to do with how DEV PATEL of SLUMDOG fame proves himself as an actor (let's face it SLUMDOG though good was a highly overrated film with performances including that of Patel's being just serviceable and not particularly brow raising)I'm more curious to see how Shyamalan who hasn't had a great run recently with films like The Village, Lady in the Water and the more recent Happening not holding a torch to his earlier masterpieces The Sixth Sense and my personal favorite The Unbreakable-resurrects himself. As a director he's moving in a different direction- THE LAST AIRBENDER that's based on a popular NICKELODEON animated series is the first of an intended trilogy and Shyamalan finally decides to jump onto the franchise film bandwagon. Instead of his usual preference for under crowded scripts and low budgets- he will be spearheading a big budget (more than twice the budget he's previously worked with)high action epic fantasy adventure that in his words has similarities with "The Lord of the Rings", "Harry Potter" and "The Matrix" franchises. Now that my fellow bloggers is interesting don't you think- "Do you think Shyamalan will bow down to franchise demands or do you think he with his own trademark flair for an eerie atmospheric piece of cinema create a new Hollywood franchise success story? Take a look at the first look on u-tube and speculate.

Cheers,

Neha