Part of me is bouncing in my seat, and the other part is completely terrified. Apparently Warner Bros have optioned the entire Dragonriders of Pern series (Anne McCaffrey) and has got as far as appointing a screenwriter for a first movie version of Dragonflight.
If they pull it off, it could be fantastic. The story is strong, there's lots of drama, great characters, and the dragons. We now have the technology to make the dragons convincing - look what they did with Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, and Avatar! But if they mess it up it could be truly awful.
But let's play with the idea for a bit. Casting call:
Lessa: Emily Blunt
Masterharper Robinton: Jeremy Irons
Sebell: Eddie Redmayne
Menolly: Amy Adams
F'lar: Christian Bale
F'nor: Freddie Highmore
R'gul: Chris Cooper
Lytol: Tommy Lee Jones
Fax: Robert Duvall
Manora: Phyllis Logan
Ramoth (voice): Meryl Streep
Mnementh (voice): John Hurt
Canth (voice): Matt Damon
So that's my picks for the major parts. I know that Sebell and Menolly don't appear in the main trilogy until Dragonquest but I suspect will be edged into the first movie.
Warner Bros, are you listening?
Showing posts with label Film critic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film critic. Show all posts
20 March 2015
21 April 2014
More fifth mark and other things
Today was a productive day, in and around regular rain showers. Daughter and I tidied up the detritus of her term at school around her desk and under her bed, and then dodged the rain to sort out the strip of garden behind the shed to plant some of the herb and pansy seeds. This means two sets of gardening in two weeks which is pretty much a record for me!
It went quite well because we'd headed off to Bunnings first and acquired a proper hoe and hand digging and clearing tools, along with some compost and a bag of bark. The compost went on the garden we cleared where the seeds were going, and the bark on another bit that hubby cleared around the front. I was stunned how fast the hoe sorted out the weeds - 10 minutes and most of them were gone, with another ten or so to sort out the ones with stubborn root systems using the hand tools. It felt pretty good too!
Now the interesting bit will be whether the seeds grow or not.
Last night we took daughter to The Lego Movie, which was a heap of fun, with masses of references that kept hubby and I cracking up laughing. The story was surprisingly strong, well scripted, and very clever. Probably my favourite bit was when the main characters were on a pirate ship attempting to build a space ship but didn't have a hyperdrive (this is Lego, remember - you can build anything!) and the Lego version of the Millennium Falcon arrived (complete with Lego C-3PO, Lego Han Solo and other characters from Star Wars) and Lego Batman jumped ship and stole their hyperdrive... only in Lego, seriously. There was also strategic placement of "human relics" including a piece of old sticking plaster, a scalpel blade, and glue.... And a number of annoyingly catchy songs. All in all, a good night out and one we will definitely look to get on DVD. 5 stars from me.
And the rest of the Easter Triduum, I hear you say? Good Friday liturgy was quiet, reflective, and well done. Holy Saturday felt empty and cold, and Easter Day was good - although I missed singing the Alleluias and the Gloria again (they did 476 so we didn't even use the Gloria at all!).
Tonight was spent salivating over the gorgeous A4 Pacific-class steam locomotives in the fascinating BBC documentary Locomotion: Dan Snow's history of railways, which we've been enjoying on ChoiceTV recently. The beautiful Mallard and her sisters still have the power to make me drool. They look so sleek and so wonderfully fast. I seem to remember it was one of the few really famous classes of steam loco that we didn't have a model of when I was a girl, but it was the one we all wanted!
It went quite well because we'd headed off to Bunnings first and acquired a proper hoe and hand digging and clearing tools, along with some compost and a bag of bark. The compost went on the garden we cleared where the seeds were going, and the bark on another bit that hubby cleared around the front. I was stunned how fast the hoe sorted out the weeds - 10 minutes and most of them were gone, with another ten or so to sort out the ones with stubborn root systems using the hand tools. It felt pretty good too!
Now the interesting bit will be whether the seeds grow or not.
Last night we took daughter to The Lego Movie, which was a heap of fun, with masses of references that kept hubby and I cracking up laughing. The story was surprisingly strong, well scripted, and very clever. Probably my favourite bit was when the main characters were on a pirate ship attempting to build a space ship but didn't have a hyperdrive (this is Lego, remember - you can build anything!) and the Lego version of the Millennium Falcon arrived (complete with Lego C-3PO, Lego Han Solo and other characters from Star Wars) and Lego Batman jumped ship and stole their hyperdrive... only in Lego, seriously. There was also strategic placement of "human relics" including a piece of old sticking plaster, a scalpel blade, and glue.... And a number of annoyingly catchy songs. All in all, a good night out and one we will definitely look to get on DVD. 5 stars from me.
And the rest of the Easter Triduum, I hear you say? Good Friday liturgy was quiet, reflective, and well done. Holy Saturday felt empty and cold, and Easter Day was good - although I missed singing the Alleluias and the Gloria again (they did 476 so we didn't even use the Gloria at all!).
Tonight was spent salivating over the gorgeous A4 Pacific-class steam locomotives in the fascinating BBC documentary Locomotion: Dan Snow's history of railways, which we've been enjoying on ChoiceTV recently. The beautiful Mallard and her sisters still have the power to make me drool. They look so sleek and so wonderfully fast. I seem to remember it was one of the few really famous classes of steam loco that we didn't have a model of when I was a girl, but it was the one we all wanted!
16 July 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt 2
Well, the last gasp for Harry? The last movie anyway. We went to see it in 3D last night, and I must admit that I was both excited and a bit nervous. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is absolutely my favourite of the book series (see my somewhat passionate review of the book from 2007 here) and the last half of the book (the bit that was covered in this movie) is my favourite part of the book.
So, what did we think? I liked it. Despite the reviewer of the Sydney Morning Herald this morning saying that we shouldn't see it in 3D, I actually liked it that way. I didn't find the 3D intrusive at all, and enjoyed some of the effects such as the fiend fyre in the Room of Requirement "coming to get me", not to mention what happened to Voldemort when Harry finally sorted him out. Some key plot points in the book were missed in the interest of making the story flow better (most notably Dumbledore's backstory, particularly his links with Grindelwald and the story of what happened to his sister Ariana) but somehow I didn't mind too much. It did leave the Dumbledore of the movies rather more of a teflon character, and a lot less complex and interesting, than the Dumbledore of the books - not to mention his relationship with Harry being far more straightforward because Harry was never given a reason not to trust him.
They also skipped a lot of Harry's obsession/hunt/quest for the Deathly Hallows - they included it but it was much less of an element than in the book. The focus was on Harry and Voldemort, the final showdown, and the Battle for Hogwarts. And the battle scenes were epic.
It was almost exactly as I had imagined it, but seeing Hogwarts getting completely trashed by acromantula, giants, Death Eaters, and anything and everything else nasty was still pretty shocking - piles of rubble everywhere reminded me uncomfortably of Christchurch. I thought they used the special effects departments quite well during the battle scenes, and there were some nice changes of pace with the trio down at the dock with Snape (location changed from the Shrieking Shack, but it worked well), Ron and Hermione in the Chamber of Secrets (this was only referred to in the book and they made a great fist of it in the movie - also nice to have an on-screen kiss between these two!), and Harry in the Forbidden Forest.
I loved the way they did the Forbidden Forest scene - much my favourite part of the book. Seeing Harry talking to his dead parents, Sirius, and Remus Lupin, after using the Resurrection Stone was really poignant, especially thinking that it was the first time that Harry had seen his parents since he was a year old.
I also think that the legendary Alan Rickman did a truly wonderful job as Professor Snape: this was his finest hour in that role, and he carried it off with his usual aplomb. I found the scene with Harry down by the docks well-balanced and beautifully acted by both Dan Radcliffe and Rickman (quite incredible seeing Harry there trying to save the teacher he hated most of all, with Snape's blood all over his hands), and the scenes in the Pensieve with the adult Snape were really well done. I also liked the addition of Snape arriving at Godric's Hollow just following the death of James and Lily a good one - it worked well in terms of conveying the depth of Snape's love for Lily and how much he felt her loss.
They also handled the Malfoys' shifting alliances well, and it was the first time that I actually felt that Narcissa Malfoy (Draco's mum) was a proper character rather than just a cipher. Some nice cameos from Maggie Smith (Minerva McGonagall) and John Hurt (Ollivander) too. Matthew Lewis did a great job as Neville Longbottom, and was finally given a chance to come out of his shell a bit. I loved the bit when he was facing off the Death Eaters and blew the bridge, but did think that the hanging off the end of the bridge and got back on was a really dreary seen-it-a-million-times-before cliche coming out to play, but I loved the speech they gave him in front of Voldemort. Nice touch, given Neville's family history with You Know Who!
Where I think it was weaker was around some of the emotions - the death of Fred Weasley was downplayed, and I almost felt that Ron wasn't that worried about it later on when he was talking to Harry - the emotional connection there seemed to be quite weak. Hagrid only popped up in the Forbidden Forest with no explanation of how he got there and didn't seem to be at all bothered that he was carrying "dead" Harry back to the castle. I also thought they stretched out the confrontation between Harry and Voldemort a bit much. I know they were trying to make it a really epic event but having them fall off the castle wall and live - seriously? Voldemort can fly, but Harry can't! He should have been smashed all over the courtyard! Come on, already... Jo never suspended the laws of physics in the books!
I also got frustrated at how many times the snake popped up: in the book, Nagini was wrapped in a magic shield, and then she was hunting with the Death Eaters before Neville killed her, before Harry and Voldemort started their fireworks. They made it part of the battle. The problem was that the explosion of the snake with all the souls of people she'd killed coming out (hey, I thought she was just a snake, a reptile, nothing more?) was so dramatic and visual that the final death of Voldemort was anticlimatical.
However, these are fairly minor criticisms. I think that, of all the Potter movies, this one was the best. And best by a long long way. I really want to see it back to back with Part 1. They will dovetail beautifully - they were planned as one movie and filmed together (Peter Jackson has a lot to answer for there!) and it shows. The story arc is consistent, the acting is great, and the storytelling is the best it's ever been for a Potter movie. The books are still better, but for the first time this actually works as a movie rather than as a pale, weaker echo of the book. Took them long enough!
4 stars.
Caution: Massive spoiler alert!
So, what did we think? I liked it. Despite the reviewer of the Sydney Morning Herald this morning saying that we shouldn't see it in 3D, I actually liked it that way. I didn't find the 3D intrusive at all, and enjoyed some of the effects such as the fiend fyre in the Room of Requirement "coming to get me", not to mention what happened to Voldemort when Harry finally sorted him out. Some key plot points in the book were missed in the interest of making the story flow better (most notably Dumbledore's backstory, particularly his links with Grindelwald and the story of what happened to his sister Ariana) but somehow I didn't mind too much. It did leave the Dumbledore of the movies rather more of a teflon character, and a lot less complex and interesting, than the Dumbledore of the books - not to mention his relationship with Harry being far more straightforward because Harry was never given a reason not to trust him.
They also skipped a lot of Harry's obsession/hunt/quest for the Deathly Hallows - they included it but it was much less of an element than in the book. The focus was on Harry and Voldemort, the final showdown, and the Battle for Hogwarts. And the battle scenes were epic.
It was almost exactly as I had imagined it, but seeing Hogwarts getting completely trashed by acromantula, giants, Death Eaters, and anything and everything else nasty was still pretty shocking - piles of rubble everywhere reminded me uncomfortably of Christchurch. I thought they used the special effects departments quite well during the battle scenes, and there were some nice changes of pace with the trio down at the dock with Snape (location changed from the Shrieking Shack, but it worked well), Ron and Hermione in the Chamber of Secrets (this was only referred to in the book and they made a great fist of it in the movie - also nice to have an on-screen kiss between these two!), and Harry in the Forbidden Forest.
I loved the way they did the Forbidden Forest scene - much my favourite part of the book. Seeing Harry talking to his dead parents, Sirius, and Remus Lupin, after using the Resurrection Stone was really poignant, especially thinking that it was the first time that Harry had seen his parents since he was a year old.
I also think that the legendary Alan Rickman did a truly wonderful job as Professor Snape: this was his finest hour in that role, and he carried it off with his usual aplomb. I found the scene with Harry down by the docks well-balanced and beautifully acted by both Dan Radcliffe and Rickman (quite incredible seeing Harry there trying to save the teacher he hated most of all, with Snape's blood all over his hands), and the scenes in the Pensieve with the adult Snape were really well done. I also liked the addition of Snape arriving at Godric's Hollow just following the death of James and Lily a good one - it worked well in terms of conveying the depth of Snape's love for Lily and how much he felt her loss.
They also handled the Malfoys' shifting alliances well, and it was the first time that I actually felt that Narcissa Malfoy (Draco's mum) was a proper character rather than just a cipher. Some nice cameos from Maggie Smith (Minerva McGonagall) and John Hurt (Ollivander) too. Matthew Lewis did a great job as Neville Longbottom, and was finally given a chance to come out of his shell a bit. I loved the bit when he was facing off the Death Eaters and blew the bridge, but did think that the hanging off the end of the bridge and got back on was a really dreary seen-it-a-million-times-before cliche coming out to play, but I loved the speech they gave him in front of Voldemort. Nice touch, given Neville's family history with You Know Who!
Where I think it was weaker was around some of the emotions - the death of Fred Weasley was downplayed, and I almost felt that Ron wasn't that worried about it later on when he was talking to Harry - the emotional connection there seemed to be quite weak. Hagrid only popped up in the Forbidden Forest with no explanation of how he got there and didn't seem to be at all bothered that he was carrying "dead" Harry back to the castle. I also thought they stretched out the confrontation between Harry and Voldemort a bit much. I know they were trying to make it a really epic event but having them fall off the castle wall and live - seriously? Voldemort can fly, but Harry can't! He should have been smashed all over the courtyard! Come on, already... Jo never suspended the laws of physics in the books!
I also got frustrated at how many times the snake popped up: in the book, Nagini was wrapped in a magic shield, and then she was hunting with the Death Eaters before Neville killed her, before Harry and Voldemort started their fireworks. They made it part of the battle. The problem was that the explosion of the snake with all the souls of people she'd killed coming out (hey, I thought she was just a snake, a reptile, nothing more?) was so dramatic and visual that the final death of Voldemort was anticlimatical.
However, these are fairly minor criticisms. I think that, of all the Potter movies, this one was the best. And best by a long long way. I really want to see it back to back with Part 1. They will dovetail beautifully - they were planned as one movie and filmed together (Peter Jackson has a lot to answer for there!) and it shows. The story arc is consistent, the acting is great, and the storytelling is the best it's ever been for a Potter movie. The books are still better, but for the first time this actually works as a movie rather than as a pale, weaker echo of the book. Took them long enough!
4 stars.
News and views
Things are happening in my world again. The last post was a bit of a random collection of not very much because not much was going on, but I have things to say now!
Small daughter has finished her first term of school (well, part of a term as she started part-way through) and has loved it. She's really happy at school and doing very well, and I must admit that it's really nice to have her reading me stories, as well as me reading stories to her! She had her first five-week evaluation a week ago and did extremely well overall - there are areas to work on (there always are!) but we were both very proud of her.
Work has also been interesting: I've been involved in developing some tools for a new service that we're launching (on quite a terrifying scale, with some of NZ's biggest companies!) and we had the first big meeting with all the prospective clients on Monday. It went extremely well and everyone was completely enthusiastic about it. It may mean some changes in my role with the company over time, which will be good.
I'm also really happy with work because they decided that my old "steam powered laptop" (as in takes ages to start up, goes with a hiss and a roar, and rapidly runs out of puff!) was a bit decrepit (I'd decided that long ago!) and upgraded me to a completely brand new one straight out of the box. Nice. I'm still figuring out what some of the functionality is for, and the change from WindowsXP OS to Windows 7 was a bit of a shock to the system! Fortunately I was using MS Office 2007 so Office 2010 is not such a jump. However, it's blindingly fast, it has wizzy toys, and it's got some great functionality in the programs that I know I'll find a use for so I'm super happy. Not to mention a battery life of longer than half an hour....
And I've seen Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt 2 and my Rugby World Cup tickets have arrived so I'm happy. I would have loved to go to an All Blacks match but wasn't prepared to fork out the several hundred dollars a ticket that it cost to go even to a pool game. At least these two could be reasonably well-matched - I followed Sphenodon's comments on the Six Nations before I made my pick of the minnows in the pool games and tried to get some that would be reasonably balanced.
Small daughter has finished her first term of school (well, part of a term as she started part-way through) and has loved it. She's really happy at school and doing very well, and I must admit that it's really nice to have her reading me stories, as well as me reading stories to her! She had her first five-week evaluation a week ago and did extremely well overall - there are areas to work on (there always are!) but we were both very proud of her.
Work has also been interesting: I've been involved in developing some tools for a new service that we're launching (on quite a terrifying scale, with some of NZ's biggest companies!) and we had the first big meeting with all the prospective clients on Monday. It went extremely well and everyone was completely enthusiastic about it. It may mean some changes in my role with the company over time, which will be good.
I'm also really happy with work because they decided that my old "steam powered laptop" (as in takes ages to start up, goes with a hiss and a roar, and rapidly runs out of puff!) was a bit decrepit (I'd decided that long ago!) and upgraded me to a completely brand new one straight out of the box. Nice. I'm still figuring out what some of the functionality is for, and the change from WindowsXP OS to Windows 7 was a bit of a shock to the system! Fortunately I was using MS Office 2007 so Office 2010 is not such a jump. However, it's blindingly fast, it has wizzy toys, and it's got some great functionality in the programs that I know I'll find a use for so I'm super happy. Not to mention a battery life of longer than half an hour....
And I've seen Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Pt 2 and my Rugby World Cup tickets have arrived so I'm happy. I would have loved to go to an All Blacks match but wasn't prepared to fork out the several hundred dollars a ticket that it cost to go even to a pool game. At least these two could be reasonably well-matched - I followed Sphenodon's comments on the Six Nations before I made my pick of the minnows in the pool games and tried to get some that would be reasonably balanced.
20 May 2011
A History of Christianity
There's been a bit of a blog silence from moi for the last couple of weeks. No particular reason: just nothing significant to write about! After Graduation last week, I plunged into a huge amount of training and work - I think it's been two days in the office in the last fortnight. I've also been training a new colleague, who's been following me around watching me deliver training and getting a feeling for our style of delivery, which I found mildly intimidating at first! However, it's been quite good so far and he's going to co-deliver with me next week, so that could be interesting (I've never co-delivered training so am not sure how it works!).
However, the prompt for blogging has come from my brother. He has sent me the absolutely fabulous A History of Christianity BBC series by Diarmaid MacCulloch, the Professor of History of the Church at St Cross College, Oxford. This sumptuous series is beautifully filmed on location in some of the most important sites throughout Christian history, including China, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Rome, Spain, Mexico, all over Europe ... in fact, I am completely and totally green with envy over where he went to! It is engagingly presented by Prof MacCulloch, who is one of the world's foremost experts on the history of Christianity, and he definitely knows how to tell a good story and keep people interested. I spent years studying church history when I did my BMin but I've learnt things from his series that I never knew, including about the "Church of the East" centred in Baghdad and their mission to China and Japan in the 8th century!
The series is based on his magisterial A History of Christianity: the first three thousand years, which was a bestseller (and not just to church history nuts!) in 2009 on release - the Archbishop of Canterbury has called it the "definitive work" in the field - which is something coming from a scholar like Rowan Williams! A good story well told... to the point that I have just ordered the book from Amazon. Can't wait - but think it might not be one for lugging to work for lunchtime reading as it's over 1200 pages....
Some personal highlights from the first four episodes of the programme: the rediscovery of a Christian church in China dating from the 8th century (now being used as a Buddhist monastery); his extremely clear and lucid discussion of the causes of the Great Schism in 1054 between Orthodox and Roman churches; the Church of the East; nearly a whole episode devoted to Orthodoxy, looking at it in Eastern Europe, Russia, and other places. I am waiting to hear his treatment of monasticism - I've seen four of the six episodes (the other two are on their way, I'm told!) and so far he hasn't dealt with monasticism at all and you can hardly trace the history of Christianity without looking at the influence of monks!
This is fascinating, beautiful, interesting history. Even if you're not into God, church, or anything else "religious" it's worth watching because he investigates the links between Christian history and the political landscape beautifully, and the locations are just stunning. Thank God for the BBC, is all I can say right now!
However, the prompt for blogging has come from my brother. He has sent me the absolutely fabulous A History of Christianity BBC series by Diarmaid MacCulloch, the Professor of History of the Church at St Cross College, Oxford. This sumptuous series is beautifully filmed on location in some of the most important sites throughout Christian history, including China, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Rome, Spain, Mexico, all over Europe ... in fact, I am completely and totally green with envy over where he went to! It is engagingly presented by Prof MacCulloch, who is one of the world's foremost experts on the history of Christianity, and he definitely knows how to tell a good story and keep people interested. I spent years studying church history when I did my BMin but I've learnt things from his series that I never knew, including about the "Church of the East" centred in Baghdad and their mission to China and Japan in the 8th century!
The series is based on his magisterial A History of Christianity: the first three thousand years, which was a bestseller (and not just to church history nuts!) in 2009 on release - the Archbishop of Canterbury has called it the "definitive work" in the field - which is something coming from a scholar like Rowan Williams! A good story well told... to the point that I have just ordered the book from Amazon. Can't wait - but think it might not be one for lugging to work for lunchtime reading as it's over 1200 pages....
Some personal highlights from the first four episodes of the programme: the rediscovery of a Christian church in China dating from the 8th century (now being used as a Buddhist monastery); his extremely clear and lucid discussion of the causes of the Great Schism in 1054 between Orthodox and Roman churches; the Church of the East; nearly a whole episode devoted to Orthodoxy, looking at it in Eastern Europe, Russia, and other places. I am waiting to hear his treatment of monasticism - I've seen four of the six episodes (the other two are on their way, I'm told!) and so far he hasn't dealt with monasticism at all and you can hardly trace the history of Christianity without looking at the influence of monks!
This is fascinating, beautiful, interesting history. Even if you're not into God, church, or anything else "religious" it's worth watching because he investigates the links between Christian history and the political landscape beautifully, and the locations are just stunning. Thank God for the BBC, is all I can say right now!
16 February 2011
Glad that's over
I'm home again after a ghastly trip to Hamilton. It wasn't a trip I was supposed to do: I got a call at about 3pm on Friday afternoon asking whether I could deliver training in Hamilton on Monday and Tuesday this week - which of course means that I have to travel on Sunday (something I try hard not to do, as it means I lose about half my weekend and most of my Sunday). I agreed because we were desperate - someone had pulled out and there was no-one else available.
Our training team arranged for the box of goodies to come down from Auckland and get left at the motel which was already booked, and I sorted flights and a rental - there was only one car left in Hamilton, a Toyota Camry (bigger than we usually use but I wasn't moaning!). However it turned out that only one night had been booked there instead of two - we got this sorted in the end.
I arrived on Sunday evening, found my motel, then went for a drive to find the Wintec campus in Avalon Drive where I was supposed to be delivering the course. What a nightmare! The signposting in the city is just awful and it was already dark which didn't help. Also, it is definitely unclear that the new north-south bypass is also Avalon Drive and there were signs pointing to Avalon Drive in another direction altogether, so all in all I spent about an hour cruising the streets looking for this wretched place. I got there eventually but was somewhat displeased.
Worse was to come. I found the venue itself on Monday morning and got set up in the room I had been told we were in. I was just about ready to start delivering when the organiser of the venue popped up and said she'd changed the room - I refused to budge until the following day. It was about 28degC that day and hugely muggy (thank God for airconditioning) - and I wasn't the only one who got lost on the way. Most of the trainees got lost too and were late. And I snagged my nice new work shirt (that I only got on Friday) on some sharp thing on the doorframe and it ripped. Just a little rip and fortunately nowhere naughty, but I was peeved because I liked the shirt.
Day 2 we moved into the new room - which had an antique airconditioning system with three settings: "loud", "off", and "deafening". I opted for "loud" as it was over 30degC and we desperately needed it, but it made it hard for me to hear their answers and sometimes for them to hear me. The room was also unsuitable for the number of people we had and all in all it was a bit of a mess. However the training went well, which was good.
The complete disaster started when I was leaving. I got to the airport with plenty of time to spare to be told that "we're not checking anyone in for your flight yet". I left my baggage with the attendants and tried the Koru Lounge, but found it even hotter and stuffier than the general airport areas, so gave up and went to the cafe. Hamilton Airport is a dump: it has a bookshop, one very overpriced cafe, and car rental cubbyholes, and that's it. You'd think for a so-called "international" airport it could do better - even Napier and Palmerston North airports are better.
I waited ... and waited ... and waited. No information. No announcements. Time was creeping on, and rumours were flying amongst waiting passengers that the plane had been turned back to Wellington. I asked the staff but they were singularly unhelpful. I waited some more. And then, ten minutes after the last Auckland flight left, they announced that our flight to Wellington was cancelled and we had to stay the night - had they told us even 20 minutes earlier I could have flown to Auckland and picked up a flight home. So they arranged accommodation for me at the Airport Inn, with vouchers for dinner and breakfast. The one bright spot was the lovely man at the Hertz cubbyhole who extended my rental on the car for another night quite happily (essential because Hamilton Airport is about 30mins from Hamilton city).
I checked in. I ate dinner (very nice). I went to see Black Swan (review to come). I came back to the motel - to find the driveway literally crawling with huge black insects about an inch in size, that look like some bastard offspring of a grasshopper and a weta. And there were hundreds of these things: and guess what? They were in my room too... the first time I have ever contacted reception of a motel and asked for flyspray to be delivered. I have no idea what they were, but they were huge, ugly, and in horrifying numbers.
Air NZ had refused to rebook me on a flight until after 10am (so much for preferential treatment as a Koru Club member!) and the flight was nearly 45 minutes late, so I wiped off the whole day - by the time I made it back to lovely Wellington it was almost lunchtime and I was hot, frustrated, and desperate to be home. So I came home and worked from home - and caught up on my laundry.
And I have to do it all again this weekend: but to (the hopefully slightly more civilised) Auckland. Another Sunday departure, another loss of half my weekend. I only hope it's not such a fiasco as this one.
Our training team arranged for the box of goodies to come down from Auckland and get left at the motel which was already booked, and I sorted flights and a rental - there was only one car left in Hamilton, a Toyota Camry (bigger than we usually use but I wasn't moaning!). However it turned out that only one night had been booked there instead of two - we got this sorted in the end.
I arrived on Sunday evening, found my motel, then went for a drive to find the Wintec campus in Avalon Drive where I was supposed to be delivering the course. What a nightmare! The signposting in the city is just awful and it was already dark which didn't help. Also, it is definitely unclear that the new north-south bypass is also Avalon Drive and there were signs pointing to Avalon Drive in another direction altogether, so all in all I spent about an hour cruising the streets looking for this wretched place. I got there eventually but was somewhat displeased.
Worse was to come. I found the venue itself on Monday morning and got set up in the room I had been told we were in. I was just about ready to start delivering when the organiser of the venue popped up and said she'd changed the room - I refused to budge until the following day. It was about 28degC that day and hugely muggy (thank God for airconditioning) - and I wasn't the only one who got lost on the way. Most of the trainees got lost too and were late. And I snagged my nice new work shirt (that I only got on Friday) on some sharp thing on the doorframe and it ripped. Just a little rip and fortunately nowhere naughty, but I was peeved because I liked the shirt.
Day 2 we moved into the new room - which had an antique airconditioning system with three settings: "loud", "off", and "deafening". I opted for "loud" as it was over 30degC and we desperately needed it, but it made it hard for me to hear their answers and sometimes for them to hear me. The room was also unsuitable for the number of people we had and all in all it was a bit of a mess. However the training went well, which was good.
The complete disaster started when I was leaving. I got to the airport with plenty of time to spare to be told that "we're not checking anyone in for your flight yet". I left my baggage with the attendants and tried the Koru Lounge, but found it even hotter and stuffier than the general airport areas, so gave up and went to the cafe. Hamilton Airport is a dump: it has a bookshop, one very overpriced cafe, and car rental cubbyholes, and that's it. You'd think for a so-called "international" airport it could do better - even Napier and Palmerston North airports are better.
I waited ... and waited ... and waited. No information. No announcements. Time was creeping on, and rumours were flying amongst waiting passengers that the plane had been turned back to Wellington. I asked the staff but they were singularly unhelpful. I waited some more. And then, ten minutes after the last Auckland flight left, they announced that our flight to Wellington was cancelled and we had to stay the night - had they told us even 20 minutes earlier I could have flown to Auckland and picked up a flight home. So they arranged accommodation for me at the Airport Inn, with vouchers for dinner and breakfast. The one bright spot was the lovely man at the Hertz cubbyhole who extended my rental on the car for another night quite happily (essential because Hamilton Airport is about 30mins from Hamilton city).
I checked in. I ate dinner (very nice). I went to see Black Swan (review to come). I came back to the motel - to find the driveway literally crawling with huge black insects about an inch in size, that look like some bastard offspring of a grasshopper and a weta. And there were hundreds of these things: and guess what? They were in my room too... the first time I have ever contacted reception of a motel and asked for flyspray to be delivered. I have no idea what they were, but they were huge, ugly, and in horrifying numbers.
Air NZ had refused to rebook me on a flight until after 10am (so much for preferential treatment as a Koru Club member!) and the flight was nearly 45 minutes late, so I wiped off the whole day - by the time I made it back to lovely Wellington it was almost lunchtime and I was hot, frustrated, and desperate to be home. So I came home and worked from home - and caught up on my laundry.
And I have to do it all again this weekend: but to (the hopefully slightly more civilised) Auckland. Another Sunday departure, another loss of half my weekend. I only hope it's not such a fiasco as this one.
12 February 2011
Royally speaking
We went to The King's Speech last night. I was looking forward to a night watching Colin Firth, but instead I was drawn into the world of Bertie, the prince who wasn't supposed to be King, the insecure stutterer, friendless and frightened, who found in a commoner a friend who believed in him.
It was a masterful performance by Colin Firth - you forgot he was even there and there certainly weren't any "Darcy-in-the-lake" moments - he was totally absorbed in the character and he made him live. I also thought Michael Gambon delivered a very assured performance as the old King George V. I have to admit I wasn't so keen on Helena Bonham Carter as Elizabeth -she was very good but not quite as good as some of the others. Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue, the elocutionist, was astonishing - light, gentle, funny, and encouraging.
It wasn't all dismal and sad though: the practice rendition of the first speech of the war had me rolling in the aisles - when the new King was practicing, he was swearing to help him relax, and he did a few words of the speech then a whole lot of "additions" - it was hysterically funny.
All in all, definitely recommended. The question isn't whether it will win an Oscar. The question is how many.
It was a masterful performance by Colin Firth - you forgot he was even there and there certainly weren't any "Darcy-in-the-lake" moments - he was totally absorbed in the character and he made him live. I also thought Michael Gambon delivered a very assured performance as the old King George V. I have to admit I wasn't so keen on Helena Bonham Carter as Elizabeth -she was very good but not quite as good as some of the others. Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue, the elocutionist, was astonishing - light, gentle, funny, and encouraging.
It wasn't all dismal and sad though: the practice rendition of the first speech of the war had me rolling in the aisles - when the new King was practicing, he was swearing to help him relax, and he did a few words of the speech then a whole lot of "additions" - it was hysterically funny.
All in all, definitely recommended. The question isn't whether it will win an Oscar. The question is how many.
23 August 2010
Holy Grail
I have always loved the legends of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, and particularly stories around the quest for the Holy Grail. I don't even remember how I first got introduced to the legends - probably Dad told me some of the stories when I was small. I do remember reading the gorgeous Once and Future King by T H White as quite a young girl, maybe 8 or 9, and then finding other retellings of the legends over the years, including Mallory's lyrical Le Morte d'Arthur as a university student - in fact, the chance to read this in the original was a huge factor in me choosing to major in Middle English literature! Victoria University used to offer an Honours-level paper in Arthurian Literature that I always wanted to take, but one paper does not Honours make...
I also loved some of the fantasy writers who were inspired by the Arthurian legends. Marion Zimmer Bradley’s tour de force The Mists of Avalon was a complex retelling from the perspective of Avalon’s women, with Morgaine (Morgan le Fay) as the heroine. Patricia Kenneally-Morrison’s Keltiad novels took the Arthurian legends into a future world “in a galaxy far, far away,” but at the same time captured something of the beauty of Mallory’s language in modern times. She gave us Arthur with a Celtic twist (or Keltic, in her language). Slightly more down to earth and definitely more grounded in history were the Jack Whyte retellings, with an Arthur that fitted thoroughly into Roman Britain. I never quite figured out where Stephen Lawhead’s Arthur fitted but I liked the stories! I also enjoyed a recent version called Glastonbury Tor by LeAnne Hardy, which picked up the element of the Grail as small and insignificant (much like the plain wooden cup in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade).
I was musing about the mythology of Arthur and the Holy Grail the other day after my small daughter asked me where the suburb of Avalon in our hometown got its name. She wanted to know if it was named after a ship or a person (as lots of the streets are), and so I told her a very abbreviated version of the main Arthurian story. This got me thinking about the archetypes of this story, and why it holds so much appeal to me. It is the quest element that I have always responded to: the seeking, the looking, and the purity of those who achieved the Cup; whether the Grail ever existed for real; and what would happen if it was ever found.
And then it struck me. The Holy Grail is supposed to be either the cup that Jesus used at the Last Supper, or the cup that caught his blood as he died. Words from our Anglican liturgy came to me in a blinding flash: “May we who eat this bread live his risen life; we who drink his cup give life to others; we whom the Spirit lights give life to the world.” In communion, what are we but little Holy Grails, holding the blood of Christ? The quest for the Grail is nothing more and nothing less than the inner quest of finding God poured out in us and carrying that for others. It doesn't matter if it never existed. It is a way of telling inner truths that inspire us. I hunger for good stories well told, and stories like this are hugely inspiring. I still cannot read the climax of the Grail quest in The Hedge of Mist (Patricia Kenneally-Morrison) without tears, and it teaches me something of what I need to be, the purity and love I need to seek.
I cannot believe that I’ve missed this all these years of reading Arthurian legends of love and betrayal, forgiveness and hope.
I also loved some of the fantasy writers who were inspired by the Arthurian legends. Marion Zimmer Bradley’s tour de force The Mists of Avalon was a complex retelling from the perspective of Avalon’s women, with Morgaine (Morgan le Fay) as the heroine. Patricia Kenneally-Morrison’s Keltiad novels took the Arthurian legends into a future world “in a galaxy far, far away,” but at the same time captured something of the beauty of Mallory’s language in modern times. She gave us Arthur with a Celtic twist (or Keltic, in her language). Slightly more down to earth and definitely more grounded in history were the Jack Whyte retellings, with an Arthur that fitted thoroughly into Roman Britain. I never quite figured out where Stephen Lawhead’s Arthur fitted but I liked the stories! I also enjoyed a recent version called Glastonbury Tor by LeAnne Hardy, which picked up the element of the Grail as small and insignificant (much like the plain wooden cup in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade).
I was musing about the mythology of Arthur and the Holy Grail the other day after my small daughter asked me where the suburb of Avalon in our hometown got its name. She wanted to know if it was named after a ship or a person (as lots of the streets are), and so I told her a very abbreviated version of the main Arthurian story. This got me thinking about the archetypes of this story, and why it holds so much appeal to me. It is the quest element that I have always responded to: the seeking, the looking, and the purity of those who achieved the Cup; whether the Grail ever existed for real; and what would happen if it was ever found.
And then it struck me. The Holy Grail is supposed to be either the cup that Jesus used at the Last Supper, or the cup that caught his blood as he died. Words from our Anglican liturgy came to me in a blinding flash: “May we who eat this bread live his risen life; we who drink his cup give life to others; we whom the Spirit lights give life to the world.” In communion, what are we but little Holy Grails, holding the blood of Christ? The quest for the Grail is nothing more and nothing less than the inner quest of finding God poured out in us and carrying that for others. It doesn't matter if it never existed. It is a way of telling inner truths that inspire us. I hunger for good stories well told, and stories like this are hugely inspiring. I still cannot read the climax of the Grail quest in The Hedge of Mist (Patricia Kenneally-Morrison) without tears, and it teaches me something of what I need to be, the purity and love I need to seek.
I cannot believe that I’ve missed this all these years of reading Arthurian legends of love and betrayal, forgiveness and hope.
28 July 2010
Quote of the day
One of my favourite movies is the stupendously funny and wonderfully scripted The Princess Bride. Some of my favourite quotes of all time come from there, including:
Apparently, the creators of PB weren't so far from the truth when they designed the ROUS, either. I spotted this story today: scientists have found the remains of a rat the size of a small dog in East Timor - okay, it's not as large as the six-foot ROUS, but a rat the size of a Jack Russell is still a respectable rodent. Ewww.... but I guess that I don't mind giant rodents as long as there's a Dread Pirate Roberts/Westley around to kill it for me!
- Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something.
- Mawaige. Mawaige is what bwings us togevver today.
- Death cannot stop true love. It can only delay it for a little while
- Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You kill' my father. Prepare to die.
Apparently, the creators of PB weren't so far from the truth when they designed the ROUS, either. I spotted this story today: scientists have found the remains of a rat the size of a small dog in East Timor - okay, it's not as large as the six-foot ROUS, but a rat the size of a Jack Russell is still a respectable rodent. Ewww.... but I guess that I don't mind giant rodents as long as there's a Dread Pirate Roberts/Westley around to kill it for me!
16 July 2010
Movies
Today I've actually watched two movies - pretty unusual for me!
We got Into Great Silence out of the library. It's a documentary/meditation on the monks of Le Grand Chatreuse - the motherhouse of the Carthusians. I read about them last year, but this took the monks from the page into real life. It is so much more than a movie. It's a meditation on life, on love, on dedication to God, and on silence.
There is no score - the only sound in the movie is the sound of the monks themselves. The clank of buckets. The sound of snow falling. The wind blowing in the trees. Water falling. Chant. Philip Groning tried for 16 years to get into the Charterhouse to film, and they finally let him in for 5 months. He had no film crew, and lived the life of the monks, attending all of their offices, praying and living in the silence of the cells. He filmed in a mix of digital and lovely, grainy Super8, and it was totally atmospheric.
The other one we saw was Toy Story 3 at the theatre tonight. And it was superb. I wasn't actually a huge fan of the original Toy Story movies, but this was really well done. Basic plot: the toys' owner is going to college and has grown out of the toys. They end up in a daycare (horror house) and spend the rest of the movie attempting to escape. The animation is absolutely superb and the story really hung together. There were also a lot of in-jokes for the adults in the audience about the various kinds of toys, including when Ken and Barbie first met, and the ability of Mr and Mrs Potato-Head to move their various bits independent of their potato bodies. It was also a really good story about dedication, friendship, courage, and what happens when toys go bad.... Highly recommended. Adults and children will both enjoy this one. Heaps better than Shrek Forever After!
We got Into Great Silence out of the library. It's a documentary/meditation on the monks of Le Grand Chatreuse - the motherhouse of the Carthusians. I read about them last year, but this took the monks from the page into real life. It is so much more than a movie. It's a meditation on life, on love, on dedication to God, and on silence.
There is no score - the only sound in the movie is the sound of the monks themselves. The clank of buckets. The sound of snow falling. The wind blowing in the trees. Water falling. Chant. Philip Groning tried for 16 years to get into the Charterhouse to film, and they finally let him in for 5 months. He had no film crew, and lived the life of the monks, attending all of their offices, praying and living in the silence of the cells. He filmed in a mix of digital and lovely, grainy Super8, and it was totally atmospheric.
The other one we saw was Toy Story 3 at the theatre tonight. And it was superb. I wasn't actually a huge fan of the original Toy Story movies, but this was really well done. Basic plot: the toys' owner is going to college and has grown out of the toys. They end up in a daycare (horror house) and spend the rest of the movie attempting to escape. The animation is absolutely superb and the story really hung together. There were also a lot of in-jokes for the adults in the audience about the various kinds of toys, including when Ken and Barbie first met, and the ability of Mr and Mrs Potato-Head to move their various bits independent of their potato bodies. It was also a really good story about dedication, friendship, courage, and what happens when toys go bad.... Highly recommended. Adults and children will both enjoy this one. Heaps better than Shrek Forever After!
13 January 2010
Avatar
We went to see Avatar in 3D this morning. I was completely blown away - not only by the 3D animation, but by the story too.
Firstly, the technology. I have seen 3D movies etc before, including at the Pompeii exhibition last week and in various incarnations over the years. The shorts at the beginning of the movie (for the wonderful-looking Tim Burton version of Alice in Wonderland and some other stuff) looked very flat, with layers at different levels. However, Avatar was different. It was rounded, with true depth. It drew you in and made the story seem more believable.
The story itself was not a new one. Earth people raping a pristine world for some kind of commodity that they want and destroying an entire way of life in the process, while one of their own is drawn into that way of life and eventually becomes one of the indigenous people. The twist in the tale was that the indigenous people fought back and eventually forced the "sky people" to leave.
What astonished me was the beauty of the world of Pandora that Weta Workshops created for James Cameron, including a glorious use of phosphorescence in the night-time appearance of the forest and a lovely selection of quite incredible creatures. The culture of the Na'vi people was well-thought out and felt believeable, including a flourishing panantheistic religion. The religious ceremonies that were shown were beautifully done and felt to me a lot like a combination of North American Indian and South Pacific - but it was definitely true to the story. And for the romantics, there's a love interest, for the adventure freaks there's plenty of that, and for the action heroes, well, there's a whole lot of that going on too.
My feeling? Go see it. My poor words are not enough to describe this film.
3 October 2009
Saturday
Interesting day today. Met with a very old friend (old as in known for a long time, not ancient!) for breakfast, hubby and small daughter went to a birthday party for one of small daughter's friends, I had a skype meeting with the co-founder of the community I want to join, dropped off daughter to grandparents for the night, went to the rugby (won tickets on Classic Hits again - yay!), and then to see Inglourious Basterds, the new Quentin Tarantino movie.
Short version of day: friend excellent, meeting really exciting, rugby good because we won and it was a good game, and movie predictably bloody but quite an interesting story especially as I know a fair bit about WWII. Acting was superb, especially the German actor playing Col. Landa, the SS guy, and Brad Pitt. Hubby and I had an interesting discussion about the just war and what we'd do in a similar situation. Found the final scene (burning down the movie theatre) amazing: especially as the projector kept playing and we saw the face of the Jewish heroine playing onto the smoke like some kind of demented Faust. Also reminded me of parts of the final Harry Potter book and "For the Greater Good".
Maybe more on this tomorrow - it's almost midnight and I'm a little tired - and we have a confirmation service tomorrow.
Short version of day: friend excellent, meeting really exciting, rugby good because we won and it was a good game, and movie predictably bloody but quite an interesting story especially as I know a fair bit about WWII. Acting was superb, especially the German actor playing Col. Landa, the SS guy, and Brad Pitt. Hubby and I had an interesting discussion about the just war and what we'd do in a similar situation. Found the final scene (burning down the movie theatre) amazing: especially as the projector kept playing and we saw the face of the Jewish heroine playing onto the smoke like some kind of demented Faust. Also reminded me of parts of the final Harry Potter book and "For the Greater Good".
Maybe more on this tomorrow - it's almost midnight and I'm a little tired - and we have a confirmation service tomorrow.
12 September 2009
Up the birthday
The last couple of days have been interesting. Yesterday was my birthday, the third day of the conference, and hubby's graduation. My birthday was sort of postponed until today!
The graduation was really good. It wasn't your typical university-style graduation ceremony, all black robes, fancy hoods and ritual coming out your eyeballs: this was Playcentre and it was colourful, funny, and lighthearted. What they are awarding is really parts of a diploma in early childhood and adult education - it's done in stages, with certificates awarded at the end of each stage. Hubby has just finished the fifth course (of six): only one of about thirty people nationwide that have got through that far this year. He's hoping to finish off his diploma next year - if the last of the six courses is finished being written in time!
So my birthday was postponed, which was fine with me. We went to see UP, the new movie from Disney Pixar, with small daughter, and then had dinner at Hogsbreath (mmmm, steak....).
I was very impressed with UP. It was unusually adult-focused, in that there was a very definite adult storyline as we followed the life, love, and loss of Carl Fredricksen: the "preamble" was about him as a young boy and man meeting the love of his life. Both he and his wife-to-be had a wanderlust: specifically, they wanted to go to South America. But life intervened: attempts to have a baby (which wasn't possible - shown very sensitively), living, fixing the house, growing old together, and finally the death of his wife. Then he was supposed to go into a rest home, aged 78, but instead made his house fly (using helium balloons!), intending to head to South America - ending up with a small stowaway in the form of a local Boy Scout - and then the adventure began as he tried to get to Paradise Falls with this small boy in tow, and discovering that life is about living and loving where you are.
What touched me about the movie was watching Carl coming to terms with the death of his wife Ellie, and the guilt and disappointment he felt he must have caused her in that he never got to take her to South America. She had written a "my adventure book" when she was a child, with plans to go to this place "Paradise Falls" and child-Ellie had left the second half of the adventure book blank for her to fill in her adventures when she got there. Carl felt she'd died with never having experienced her adventure, but partway through the movie, he found her book again - and discovered she'd filled the last part with photographs and stories of their long life together, signing it, "Dear Carl, thanks for all the adventures, love Ellie" - that bit made me tear up. It's a long time since a Disney movie has made me cry!
Small daughter enjoyed the funny parts and the adventure story, but hubby and I were both really moved by the adult themes and stories of this movie. Disney usually constructs its movies on two levels, but we almost felt this one was aimed more at the adults in the audience than the children. I really felt for some of the grandmas and grandads in the audience who were bringing their grandchildren - it would have been really hard for some of them, especially if they'd lost their loved ones.
I recommend this one, even if you're not that into Disney.
I found this story about how Pixar actually released the movie early for a private screening for one little girl who was dying of cancer - who saw the movie and then died later that night, with an "adventure book" like the one Ellie Fredricksen had - with her (a gift from Pixar).
The graduation was really good. It wasn't your typical university-style graduation ceremony, all black robes, fancy hoods and ritual coming out your eyeballs: this was Playcentre and it was colourful, funny, and lighthearted. What they are awarding is really parts of a diploma in early childhood and adult education - it's done in stages, with certificates awarded at the end of each stage. Hubby has just finished the fifth course (of six): only one of about thirty people nationwide that have got through that far this year. He's hoping to finish off his diploma next year - if the last of the six courses is finished being written in time!
So my birthday was postponed, which was fine with me. We went to see UP, the new movie from Disney Pixar, with small daughter, and then had dinner at Hogsbreath (mmmm, steak....).
I was very impressed with UP. It was unusually adult-focused, in that there was a very definite adult storyline as we followed the life, love, and loss of Carl Fredricksen: the "preamble" was about him as a young boy and man meeting the love of his life. Both he and his wife-to-be had a wanderlust: specifically, they wanted to go to South America. But life intervened: attempts to have a baby (which wasn't possible - shown very sensitively), living, fixing the house, growing old together, and finally the death of his wife. Then he was supposed to go into a rest home, aged 78, but instead made his house fly (using helium balloons!), intending to head to South America - ending up with a small stowaway in the form of a local Boy Scout - and then the adventure began as he tried to get to Paradise Falls with this small boy in tow, and discovering that life is about living and loving where you are.
What touched me about the movie was watching Carl coming to terms with the death of his wife Ellie, and the guilt and disappointment he felt he must have caused her in that he never got to take her to South America. She had written a "my adventure book" when she was a child, with plans to go to this place "Paradise Falls" and child-Ellie had left the second half of the adventure book blank for her to fill in her adventures when she got there. Carl felt she'd died with never having experienced her adventure, but partway through the movie, he found her book again - and discovered she'd filled the last part with photographs and stories of their long life together, signing it, "Dear Carl, thanks for all the adventures, love Ellie" - that bit made me tear up. It's a long time since a Disney movie has made me cry!
Small daughter enjoyed the funny parts and the adventure story, but hubby and I were both really moved by the adult themes and stories of this movie. Disney usually constructs its movies on two levels, but we almost felt this one was aimed more at the adults in the audience than the children. I really felt for some of the grandmas and grandads in the audience who were bringing their grandchildren - it would have been really hard for some of them, especially if they'd lost their loved ones.
I recommend this one, even if you're not that into Disney.
I found this story about how Pixar actually released the movie early for a private screening for one little girl who was dying of cancer - who saw the movie and then died later that night, with an "adventure book" like the one Ellie Fredricksen had - with her (a gift from Pixar).
12 July 2009
Family antics
This weekend has been a really nice one for our family. Yesterday we took our small daughter to see Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs - the first time we've taken her to a live movie since she's been old enough to watch. She really enjoyed it - so did we! I like Pixar movies and this was done well. It was much better than Ice Age 2 with a much more coherent storyline and better acting. Small daughter could follow the story well and laughed in all the right places - hubby and I laughed in a few more, as there were a number of jokes in there aimed at adults (as is traditional with children's movies - gotta have something in there for the poor long-suffering parents taking small children to the movies!). The animation was of a much higher order than previous Pixar movies - there was a whole department devoted to fur! - and it was quite realistic.
Today, we introduced her to some simple boardgames - draughts (with lots of help from me) and Snakes and Ladders, which she did okay on herself, although she was very keen on moving everyone's pieces and she didn't always put them back where they started.... It took me back a few years to when we used to play boardgames on rainy Sunday afternoons, starting with the easy ones and working up to Monopoly and Trivial Pursuits - not to mention Canasta, Five Hundred, Samba, and Cribbage!
Pachyderm
Today, we introduced her to some simple boardgames - draughts (with lots of help from me) and Snakes and Ladders, which she did okay on herself, although she was very keen on moving everyone's pieces and she didn't always put them back where they started.... It took me back a few years to when we used to play boardgames on rainy Sunday afternoons, starting with the easy ones and working up to Monopoly and Trivial Pursuits - not to mention Canasta, Five Hundred, Samba, and Cribbage!
Pachyderm
7 July 2009
Feeling Potterish again
Rove McManus had a hilarious interview with Dan Radcliffe (Harry Potter) and Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley) on the set of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows posted on YouTube. Some new footage from the Half-Blood Prince movie that's opening here in NZ next week (can't wait!) and some very funny discussions with Dan and Rupert about their various roles in HBP and DH, and some of the changes that have come over the years they have been filming together.
This dedicated HP fan has been re-reading all 7 books just to make sure I'm completely up-to-date again when HBP opens - I also caught most of Order of the Phoenix on SkyMovies last night while doing some work in the motel (another trip away...). Of course, we do have all of the movies and books at home but it was nice to have it in widescreen! However, seeing OOTP again reminded me why I definitely prefer the books to the movies. JK Rowling is a genius, and that level of cleverness doesn't always translate well into a movie medium. In fact, the only book adaptation that I've seen and really liked was Les Miserables and that one wasn't a movie! The original Victor Hugo book is long, tedious, overly complicated, and boring. The musical was much better!
Pachyderm
This dedicated HP fan has been re-reading all 7 books just to make sure I'm completely up-to-date again when HBP opens - I also caught most of Order of the Phoenix on SkyMovies last night while doing some work in the motel (another trip away...). Of course, we do have all of the movies and books at home but it was nice to have it in widescreen! However, seeing OOTP again reminded me why I definitely prefer the books to the movies. JK Rowling is a genius, and that level of cleverness doesn't always translate well into a movie medium. In fact, the only book adaptation that I've seen and really liked was Les Miserables and that one wasn't a movie! The original Victor Hugo book is long, tedious, overly complicated, and boring. The musical was much better!
Pachyderm
10 February 2009
Doubt
I managed to catch Doubt yesterday (Phillip Seymour Hoffmann and Meryl Streep) while in Palmerston North - I knew hubby didn't really want to see it and I had a whole evening to fill in up there.
Story in a nutshell: Catholic parochial school run by Sisters of Charity. Prioress Sister Aloysius (Streep) believes that the new parish priest (Hoffmann) is molesting the school's first black student (also an altar boy). Sister Aloysius asks the very innocent novice Sister James (Amy Adams) to watch Father Flynn in her classes. Sister Aloysius doesn't want Father Flynn at the school as she believes that he is too progressive and is fighting to have him removed. Sr James isn't sure whether Father Flynn is guilty and is drawn into the battle.
It's excellent. Acting was really superb, with lots of little undercurrents - progressive v. traditionalist, male v. female, nun v. priest, white v. black etc. It's an adaptation from a play and it really shows, with emphasis on just a few characters, a short time frame (about a month), very tight scripting (beautifully crafted words and images), but very complex characters. Streep is really brilliant as the repressed, passionate, frightened, strong, and quite terrifying Sister Aloysius; Amy Adams brings a gentleness and strength to her wide-eyed Sister James, and Hoffmann portrays the complex, confused, and caring Father Flynn. It reminds me a bit of Arthur Millar's All My Sons in terms of its complexity and questioning.
I've got a lot to think about, but what keeps coming back to me is what a former parish priest of mine said to me years ago when I was struggling with doubt in a huge "dark night" experience: "Doubt is not the opposite of faith. Unbelief is the opposite of faith."
Doubt to me is wrestling with God - a bit like Job - being prepared to ask the tough questions and live with them. I always want my answers to come easily and quickly, but sometimes God wants me to stay with the questions because its in those times I learn most. Sr Aloysius, Sr James, and Fr Flynn were all asking tough questions and finding the fellowship of doubt. I like Fr Flynn's image of doubt as being a little like grief - shut up behind a glass wall that you can see through but not reach through (can't remember the exact words). That is where we grow.
I highly recommend this one if you like your movies quite thought-provoking and a bit unresolved - at the end we still don't know whether Father Flynn did it or not!
Pachyderm tssf
Story in a nutshell: Catholic parochial school run by Sisters of Charity. Prioress Sister Aloysius (Streep) believes that the new parish priest (Hoffmann) is molesting the school's first black student (also an altar boy). Sister Aloysius asks the very innocent novice Sister James (Amy Adams) to watch Father Flynn in her classes. Sister Aloysius doesn't want Father Flynn at the school as she believes that he is too progressive and is fighting to have him removed. Sr James isn't sure whether Father Flynn is guilty and is drawn into the battle.
It's excellent. Acting was really superb, with lots of little undercurrents - progressive v. traditionalist, male v. female, nun v. priest, white v. black etc. It's an adaptation from a play and it really shows, with emphasis on just a few characters, a short time frame (about a month), very tight scripting (beautifully crafted words and images), but very complex characters. Streep is really brilliant as the repressed, passionate, frightened, strong, and quite terrifying Sister Aloysius; Amy Adams brings a gentleness and strength to her wide-eyed Sister James, and Hoffmann portrays the complex, confused, and caring Father Flynn. It reminds me a bit of Arthur Millar's All My Sons in terms of its complexity and questioning.
I've got a lot to think about, but what keeps coming back to me is what a former parish priest of mine said to me years ago when I was struggling with doubt in a huge "dark night" experience: "Doubt is not the opposite of faith. Unbelief is the opposite of faith."
Doubt to me is wrestling with God - a bit like Job - being prepared to ask the tough questions and live with them. I always want my answers to come easily and quickly, but sometimes God wants me to stay with the questions because its in those times I learn most. Sr Aloysius, Sr James, and Fr Flynn were all asking tough questions and finding the fellowship of doubt. I like Fr Flynn's image of doubt as being a little like grief - shut up behind a glass wall that you can see through but not reach through (can't remember the exact words). That is where we grow.
I highly recommend this one if you like your movies quite thought-provoking and a bit unresolved - at the end we still don't know whether Father Flynn did it or not!
Pachyderm tssf
10 January 2009
Moving
Not me moving - you'd have heard a lot more protests if that was the case (along the lines of "I hate packing!"). Movies. Two of them. Yes, the stay-at-homes have finally got out of the house - sort of.
First: Dark Knight, which we got out on video a couple of nights ago. I walked out of it. Not because it wasn't good - it was excellent - but it was twisted. Heath Ledger turned The Joker into a psychopath - no more campy "Mister Not-so-Nice Guy", this character was insane, and determined to breed more insanity. I am not a person for violence, and this was violence against the mind. Nasty. I love Christian Bale as an actor (I remember him as The Boy in Kenneth Brannagh's Henry V some years ago, when Christian was still small enough for his character to be carried dead across the field of Agincourt by Henry V) but I just couldn't watch it. The darkness that was internal to The Joker was spreading around the whole movie, expressed in the sets, the costumes etc. Very clever, but it was too twisted for me: did violence to my head!
Second, Quantum of Solace, tonight. "Not a person for violence" and she goes to see a James Bond film? Firstly, hubby loves Bond and I don't mind them, and I like the Blond Bond too. Secondly, somehow the violence in Bond doesn't seem as real as it was in Dark Knight. Slightly disappointed there were no gadgets and the Aston Martin only appeared for about 3 minutes of screen time. Story was very episodic, but did link with the previous Bond movie quite well. Interesting twist was that Bond wasn't saving the world this time: he was saving M (Judi Dench), and he was saving Bolivia from a man-made drought. The bad guy had "stolen the water", quite literally, by diverting it into sink holes underground in the desert. Not sure if this is possible, but it was an interesting twist for Bond - an ecological/humanitarian crisis not a madman with a laser satellite....
Daniel Craig portrayed a Bond eaten by grief over the death of his previous "Bond Girl" (Vespa) and not caring who died on the way as he tried to find out why she was killed. A touching moment that revealed the more human side of Bond when his friend Mathis was shot - the only time I've ever seen Bond stay and hold a dying person. I'd give it about 3 stars: okay, but wouldn't see it again.
Pachyderm
First: Dark Knight, which we got out on video a couple of nights ago. I walked out of it. Not because it wasn't good - it was excellent - but it was twisted. Heath Ledger turned The Joker into a psychopath - no more campy "Mister Not-so-Nice Guy", this character was insane, and determined to breed more insanity. I am not a person for violence, and this was violence against the mind. Nasty. I love Christian Bale as an actor (I remember him as The Boy in Kenneth Brannagh's Henry V some years ago, when Christian was still small enough for his character to be carried dead across the field of Agincourt by Henry V) but I just couldn't watch it. The darkness that was internal to The Joker was spreading around the whole movie, expressed in the sets, the costumes etc. Very clever, but it was too twisted for me: did violence to my head!
Second, Quantum of Solace, tonight. "Not a person for violence" and she goes to see a James Bond film? Firstly, hubby loves Bond and I don't mind them, and I like the Blond Bond too. Secondly, somehow the violence in Bond doesn't seem as real as it was in Dark Knight. Slightly disappointed there were no gadgets and the Aston Martin only appeared for about 3 minutes of screen time. Story was very episodic, but did link with the previous Bond movie quite well. Interesting twist was that Bond wasn't saving the world this time: he was saving M (Judi Dench), and he was saving Bolivia from a man-made drought. The bad guy had "stolen the water", quite literally, by diverting it into sink holes underground in the desert. Not sure if this is possible, but it was an interesting twist for Bond - an ecological/humanitarian crisis not a madman with a laser satellite....
Daniel Craig portrayed a Bond eaten by grief over the death of his previous "Bond Girl" (Vespa) and not caring who died on the way as he tried to find out why she was killed. A touching moment that revealed the more human side of Bond when his friend Mathis was shot - the only time I've ever seen Bond stay and hold a dying person. I'd give it about 3 stars: okay, but wouldn't see it again.
Pachyderm
22 June 2008
Chalk and cheese
We went to see The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian last night. I was looking forward to a relaxing evening minus the rugrat, with a reasonable movie. I was looking forward to seeing how they had turned one of the better Narnia books into a film. Most of all, I was looking forward to seeing Andrew Adamson's latest offering.
We were blown away. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (LWW) was well done, reasonably acted (although not fabulous), with a wonderful score and great effects. Prince Caspian left it for dead (it helped that Weta Workshops was involved with the armour and models and the like) - the acting was excellent, the script was fantastic, and the battle scenes really well done. The four actors playing the Pevensie children (William Moseley as Peter, Anna Popplewell as Susan, Skandar Keynes as Edmund, and Georgie Henley as a very convincing Lucy) have grown into real actors - I was particularly impressed with William's Peter and Georgie's Lucy. Ben Barnes as Caspian was a good choice - eye candy and good acting, although at times a little stilted, but that may have been the accent (sort of Spanish).
There were some interesting twists for those of us that know the book. There was a lot more character acting, in the sense that it wasn't a cheerful fantasy romp like LWW was sometimes - lots of dark overtones, inter-character issues (especially between Peter and Caspian, which were well done), and the Pevensie children all had much more complexity than the book offers. I was particularly interested in seeing Peter's struggles to adapt from being a High King in Narnia to being just a schoolboy in England, and then going back to Narnia to find someone else was leading it.... William Moseley did a fabulous job conveying this. Lucy was much more grown up - partly because Georgie Henley is older and could give more to the role. Skandar's Edmund was quieter and more grave than in the first movie, but he had some key scenes (especially in Aslan's Howe) that showed how much growth his character had undergone.
The battle scenes, instead of skirmishes and hit-and-run battles like in the book had a set-piece in front of Aslan's Howe, and an earlier one in an invasion of Miraz's castle (usurper-king) - the invasion of the castle isn't in the book but it was a glorious idea that didn't quite come off for Peter - but the plan was excellent (however, Peter failed to learn that people don't do as they're told....!).
All in all, excellent. In terms of the obvious comparison, I think LWW was not as good as Fellowship of the Ring, but that Caspian is better than The Two Towers, and at least as good as The Return of the King - in some ways it's better (no false endings!), although the ending isn't quite as satisfying as RotK. Both Narnia movies are a lot better than any of the Harry Potter movies - I've seen all the movies, but mostly because I'm a Potterhead. The books are better by far!
Personal rating for Caspian: 8/10. Go see it. You won't be disappointed.
Pachyderm
We were blown away. The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (LWW) was well done, reasonably acted (although not fabulous), with a wonderful score and great effects. Prince Caspian left it for dead (it helped that Weta Workshops was involved with the armour and models and the like) - the acting was excellent, the script was fantastic, and the battle scenes really well done. The four actors playing the Pevensie children (William Moseley as Peter, Anna Popplewell as Susan, Skandar Keynes as Edmund, and Georgie Henley as a very convincing Lucy) have grown into real actors - I was particularly impressed with William's Peter and Georgie's Lucy. Ben Barnes as Caspian was a good choice - eye candy and good acting, although at times a little stilted, but that may have been the accent (sort of Spanish).
There were some interesting twists for those of us that know the book. There was a lot more character acting, in the sense that it wasn't a cheerful fantasy romp like LWW was sometimes - lots of dark overtones, inter-character issues (especially between Peter and Caspian, which were well done), and the Pevensie children all had much more complexity than the book offers. I was particularly interested in seeing Peter's struggles to adapt from being a High King in Narnia to being just a schoolboy in England, and then going back to Narnia to find someone else was leading it.... William Moseley did a fabulous job conveying this. Lucy was much more grown up - partly because Georgie Henley is older and could give more to the role. Skandar's Edmund was quieter and more grave than in the first movie, but he had some key scenes (especially in Aslan's Howe) that showed how much growth his character had undergone.
The battle scenes, instead of skirmishes and hit-and-run battles like in the book had a set-piece in front of Aslan's Howe, and an earlier one in an invasion of Miraz's castle (usurper-king) - the invasion of the castle isn't in the book but it was a glorious idea that didn't quite come off for Peter - but the plan was excellent (however, Peter failed to learn that people don't do as they're told....!).
All in all, excellent. In terms of the obvious comparison, I think LWW was not as good as Fellowship of the Ring, but that Caspian is better than The Two Towers, and at least as good as The Return of the King - in some ways it's better (no false endings!), although the ending isn't quite as satisfying as RotK. Both Narnia movies are a lot better than any of the Harry Potter movies - I've seen all the movies, but mostly because I'm a Potterhead. The books are better by far!
Personal rating for Caspian: 8/10. Go see it. You won't be disappointed.
Pachyderm
5 January 2008
Veni, vidi, vomiti
We saw The Golden Compass as planned. Don't bother. Read the book.
End of review.
Pachyderm
End of review.
Pachyderm
31 December 2007
The Seeker: the Dark is Rising
We were planning to see The Golden Compass tonight, but when we found out that The Seeker: the Dark is Rising was playing we changed our minds! It's an adaption of Susan Cooper's book The Dark is Rising, the second of five linked novels (Over Sea, Under Stone; The Dark is Rising; Greenwitch; The Grey King; Silver on the Tree) in The Dark is Rising Sequence. The books all stand alone but are related and some characters turn up in several books.
The story in brief: Will Stanton discovers on his 11th birthday (in the book) and 14th birthday (in the movie) that he is the last of the Old Ones to be born - the Old Ones are a group of people that guard and guide the world towards the Light. They are opposed by the Lords of the Dark, the most powerful being the Rider. Will's task is to find six Signs of the Light made in different ages and hidden that will give the Old Ones the advantage when the Dark rises. It all sounds a bit bald that way, but the book makes it much more exciting.... There are Arthurian themes and elements woven throughout the Sequence, and echoes of earlier, pagan times that make the books very rich and layered.
We weren't expecting much: the movie trailer was pretty dire and we love this book, so we were prepared for something just merely average. However, we were pleasantly surprised! The movie captured both the atmosphere and the story really well, although there were some inevitable changes. I was slightly disappointed that the Arthurian elements were skipped (although as hubby pointed out, it would have made the story too complicated and too hard to tell in a visual medium), but the sense of history and the conflict between the Light and the Dark was really well shown. Chris Eccleston (Dr Who) played the Rider and did a really fine job - interesting to see him as a villain for a change! The importance of the Old Ones (particularly Merriman Lyon) was played down a bit, but they were emphasising Will's story and the search for the six Signs of the Light.
As book adaptions go, it was pretty well done. That said, I'm not sure I'd want to see it again - the book is fabulous and no movie was ever going to do it justice. However, I would be interested if they adapted Over Sea, Under Stone.
Pachyderm
The story in brief: Will Stanton discovers on his 11th birthday (in the book) and 14th birthday (in the movie) that he is the last of the Old Ones to be born - the Old Ones are a group of people that guard and guide the world towards the Light. They are opposed by the Lords of the Dark, the most powerful being the Rider. Will's task is to find six Signs of the Light made in different ages and hidden that will give the Old Ones the advantage when the Dark rises. It all sounds a bit bald that way, but the book makes it much more exciting.... There are Arthurian themes and elements woven throughout the Sequence, and echoes of earlier, pagan times that make the books very rich and layered.
We weren't expecting much: the movie trailer was pretty dire and we love this book, so we were prepared for something just merely average. However, we were pleasantly surprised! The movie captured both the atmosphere and the story really well, although there were some inevitable changes. I was slightly disappointed that the Arthurian elements were skipped (although as hubby pointed out, it would have made the story too complicated and too hard to tell in a visual medium), but the sense of history and the conflict between the Light and the Dark was really well shown. Chris Eccleston (Dr Who) played the Rider and did a really fine job - interesting to see him as a villain for a change! The importance of the Old Ones (particularly Merriman Lyon) was played down a bit, but they were emphasising Will's story and the search for the six Signs of the Light.
As book adaptions go, it was pretty well done. That said, I'm not sure I'd want to see it again - the book is fabulous and no movie was ever going to do it justice. However, I would be interested if they adapted Over Sea, Under Stone.
Pachyderm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)