Tag: reviews | Amy C. Shaw

Movie Review: Clueless

September 4, 2014 • 12 Comments

I would have never been interested in Clueless were it not for the fact that it is a light adaptation of Emma. I probably would not have cared for it much either were it not for that.

Clueless feels a bit like Mean Girls, only set in the 1990s instead of the 2000s, though it focuses on popular girl Cher (Emma), who decides to befriend new girl Tai (Harriet), who she sees as a project.

First I’ll get my complaints out of the way. I know that this movie is just depicting teenage life, not necessarily condoning all aspects of it, but I really had a problem with the drug usage in this movie. There’s not a ton of it, and I know for most people it will seem overly sensitive of me to feel this way, but this sort of thing is exactly why I don’t read many YA contemporaries. I didn’t hang out with those kinds of people, and I don’t have an interest in reading about them/watching them on screen. I expected there might be some sex talk and language, especially within a crowd of popular kids, but I was surprised by the drugs. It’s something I would expect more from, well, the kids like Travis (Robert Martin), but even that bothered me. Anyhow, at least he was turning around in the end.

Also, stereotypical popular girl characters just annoy me in general, which is a reason why I don’t really like Mean Girls that much. I can appreciate the satirical writing, but I don’t connect with the characters. The same applies here with Clueless.

One last thing, does it bother anyone else that Josh (Knightley) is Cher’s ex-stepbrother? I’ve never had a stepbrother before, but that seems really awkward to be kissing yours a few years after your parents divorce, even if you were only related legally for a little while…

Though admittedly, Paul Rudd’s portrayal did win me over.

What I did appreciate was the journey Cher went on. Though she does start off pretty much the way you would expect based on stereotypes and cliches, she does grow through the film. As she learns to appreciate people for who they are and learns to think beyond herself, she really becomes a better person and friend, and I appreciated that. Her character arc and Josh’s character were really the main highlights of the film. And drawing the Emma comparisons, with some of the differences between the original and the film turning up a little surprising…

Clueless is also quotable and has some fun moments in it, but I definitely don’t have the same endearment for it as Emma Approved or other Emma adaptations. It’s still worth at least a watch though if you’re a fan of the original story and interested in the idea.

If you’ve seen Clueless, what are your thoughts on it?

Book Review: Emma

August 27, 2014 • 12 Comments

I think Emma has possibly maybe taken over as my favorite Austen story. The 1996 film adaptation with Gwyneth Paltrow was my first exposure, and I enjoyed it, but then I saw the 2009 BBC mini-series version and I fell completely in love with it! Romola Garai and Jonny Lee Miller were truly perfection in it. And then with Emma Approved coming out this year, I decided my Austen read for the year needed to be Emma. And though as the longest of Austen’s works it did start to eventually wear on me and feel a little too long, overall it was still the most enjoyable experience I have had so far reading an Austen novel.

Emma is not the most likable character (though more likable than I think some people have made her out to be… mostly she’s just young and naive), and I don’t relate to her as well as Lizzie. I find all the interactions with her friends and family to be the most interesting out of any Austen story I’ve read, however, and there is just something so sweet about the Knightley and Emma romance. He has known her for her entire life and he knows her faults extremely well, and he’s not afraid to point them out to her. And yet, he loves her deeply. And for her the revelation that she loves him is, “Of course!” It makes sense.

I also love how many quirky characters are in the story, like Mr. Woodhouse, Miss Bates, and Harriet Smith. They are far from the air of perfection certain characters (the Eltons and Frank Churchill, namely) try to give off. Harriet is a nobody with very little in the way of social graces, but she is kind and loyal. Much can be the same as Miss Bates, though she is less charming and more chatty. Mr. Woodhouse is well-meaning and loves his daughter with great devotion, but is an extreme worrier and germaphobe who is basically afraid to live any life outside of his house. But we see just as many flaws in the characters that supposedly have it all together, including Emma. And I like that about the story.

If you enjoy the story from its various adaptations, I think you’ll enjoy the book. It might get a little tedious, and Austen’s writing is not the easiest to read in general, but I think it’s worth the journey.

Have you read Emma? What are your thoughts? Which Emma adaptation is your favorite?

Movie Review: Jane Eyre (2011)

August 20, 2014 • 15 Comments

*There will be spoilers. This story is over a 100 years old but still, just in case…

Let me fully explain upfront my knowledge of Jane Eyre before going into this film. I had seen part of an older adaptation (I could not tell you about who was in it or anything like that) many years ago, and I knew that Rochester was already married to a crazy lady, and I knew Jane went back to him in the end. (I forgot about him being blind until the end of this movie, then I remembered from before. Nothing else in between or from before the wedding rang a bell for me.) I also went into this movie knowing it was not some happy, sweet Jane Austen thing. I expected it to be a little depressing. It was a beautifully shot film and all the actors/actresses were great. But something left me wanting in the end.

For someone who had not read the book, this movie feels ridiculously underdeveloped. It feels like it takes approximately two weeks (I know it’s longer) for Jane and Rochester to fall in love with each other, and they have like zero chemistry beforehand. The second they kiss they look happy, but before then there’s nothing, not even tension. What does Rochester see in Jane? Someone different and who speaks her mind? That was all I could gather. But really I want to know what Jane sees in Rochester. Uh, a dude? I have no clue. Aside from looking like Michael Fassbender (though not the best version of him), I’d say he really had nothing going for him. Especially when you watch the deleted scenes (or read the book, I imagine) and learn about his previous mistresses. I mean, dude is just not faithful. And I found him a little creepy. So… no.

Oh, and up until Rivers basically said, “Stop being silly and marry me already, you’ll like me eventually,” I was completely shipping him and Jane even though I totally knew that was going to crash and burn.

st-john-rivers — But I’m such a nice guy…

In two hours, I felt I got a pretty good grasp on Jane, which is good. The backstory was sad but intriguing and the non-linear narrative I think mostly worked for the film. The parts with Rochester felt so brief and so not-at-all romantic though that the whole romance just feel extremely flat, even in the end when Rochester is redeemed (though I did finally feel a little bad for him at that point, because he did actually try to save everyone from the fire and ended up blind).

I was just never convinced that either of them really loved the other. At all. She was like, “Oh, a boy!” and he was like, “Hey, I can manipulate this chick.”

So I need to know from fans of the book (Charlene and Alisa, for starters), is their relationship way better in the book? Is it better developed? Do you actually root for them? Does Rochester seem like less of a jerk, or at least start to become slightly less of one and become more likable throughout?

I’m also curious how creepy the book is, based on deleted scenes that I think put a bad aftertaste in my mouth, and may have even affected my overall rating for it, though I know it shouldn’t. There are two or three scenes not included in the movie where Jane’s dead childhood friend shows up. And I’m not a fan of paranormal or ghosts, not because I think they’re scary, I just don’t care for it. I thought the movie felt haunting enough without adding that, which is why I suppose they didn’t, but is this a theme in the book? Because I’m not interested in ghost stories.

The craft of the film and the cast are spot-on, but the story felt underdeveloped and left much to be desired for me. For these reasons, this gets a 3-star rating from me.

If you’re a Jane Eyre fan, tell me what I missed from this movie!

Mini Movie Reviews: Divergent and Guardians of the Galaxy

August 13, 2014 • 18 Comments

Divergent

I enjoyed the Divergent trilogy, but I have often said I liked it but didn’t love it, and this is true of all three books. It seems to me those who were most passionate about the first book hated the way it ended, but for me, my feelings for the books are mostly consistent. So when I say I liked but didn’t love the movie, I’m saying it was a pretty good adaptation of a pretty good book. It hit all the high points (that I remembered) and also explained itself well to those who have not read the books (like my husband).

I do have one complaint about the movie, though, and that is I did not like the way Caleb was portrayed. I’m not sure if it was the writing or Ansel Elgort’s portrayal of him or both, but he came off so flat and dull, and I really liked him a lot in the books (yes, even during Insurgent, though I am still upset we don’t get a full explanation of his motives in Allegiant).

One thing I did like about the movie more than the book is that the Tris and Four romance was less prominent (though it still existed, so don’t freak out if that’s something you can’t stand to lose!). Though because of the pacing of the movie their interest seems a little sudden, but I was relieved we didn’t get multiple make-out scenes.

I think most of the actors/actresses did a great job portraying their characters, and would recommend the movie to fans of the book or to anyone who’s interested.

Guardians of the Galaxy

I have to say, I was wary of Guardians of the Galaxy. The movie looked like it was directly aimed at 10 year old boys (maybe it was?) and it just looked too different from the Marvel cinematic universe I have come to know and love as the various Avengers’ films have rolled out. Thankfully, it turned out better than expected. It is different from the others, and the humor primarily used is not necessarily my favorite brand of humor, but it has funny moments and even tender moments. I also appreciated the fact that the characters started out as unlikable misfits that somehow turned out to be more likable misfits.

As far as its weak points go, Guardians was pretty formulaic, and I found myself guessing correctly on a few things before they were revealed. It’s no Winter Soldier, and don’t let anyone else tell you any differently.

The villain, Ronan, also left something to be desired. We are told he’s a bad dude, and he seems like a bad dude, and when given such a powerful weapon you know things can get really, really bad, but it all ended up a bit forgettable at the end. I even momentarily forgot who the villain of the movie was a few hours later. Oops.

If you’re a fan of Marvel, I would recommend it. It’s fun and a unique addition to the universe’s mythology.

Also check out:

Matt says it’s fun back lacks a little on heart

What are your thoughts on Divergent and/or Guardians of the Galaxy?

Mini Movie Reviews: Nonstop, Tron, The Lego Movie, and Mansfield Park

July 30, 2014 • 13 Comments

I’ve been watching new (to me, anyhow) movies and been slacking on the reviews! Here’s my one paragraph thoughts on four films…

Non-Stop

Non-Stop was pretty much a non-stop adrenaline rush, other than its slow beginning and then somewhat wrapped-up-with-a-tidy-bow-on-top ending. This, like Taken, is a Liam Nesson movie that really makes you think twice about traveling. It’s an interesting idea and I was really invested in what was happening, but the reveal was a little disappointing for reasons I can’t fully explain (not because of spoilers so much as I just don’t know to explain it!), and then the ending was kind of like, “OK, yay Liam Nesson saved the day, movie over.” I don’t know, I just would have liked to have been thought through a little more after an intriguing premise. Other than the suspense, another upside to this film was actually the characters.

(Note: This is the same director as the Liam Nesson film Unknown, which I have similar complaints about, though I liked Nonstop more.)

Tron

If you go into Tron expecting it to be 80tastic, you’ll get exactly that. It was a little confusing too, especially in the beginning, and I would have been much more lost had it not been for my familiarity with Tron: Legacy. But the idea is interesting, and I really liked how these initial ideas were further developed in Tron: Legacy.

The Lego Movie

I had zero interest in this movie, but I had many friends who insisted it was great, and more of an adult movie than a kid movie. Well, these friends of mine have kids, and I think maybe their opinion has been somewhat diluted by this. I enjoyed it pretty well at the moment, and it made me laugh, but with a heavy-handed message to parents and the crazy fast pacing, it didn’t quite reach “everything is awesome” level for me, and ended up more on the forgettable side. (P.S. Unikitty is awesome though. Hands down my favorite character.)

Mansfield Park

Finally! This was the last Jane Austen novel I had zero exposure to, and I was finally introduced to Mansfield Park via the 2007 adaptation. I enjoyed it, but it felt so short, and I really want to see the slightly older version that has Jonny Lee Miller. But the actors and actresses in this adaptation were really good, and Hayley Atwell was the evil Mary Crawford! As a big Peggy Carter fan that broke my heart!

What movies have you seen lately? Have you seen any of these?

Tag Archives: reviews

Share

Share

Share

Share

Share