Do You Hear The People Cry?

It was one of the most anticipated movie musical adaptations in recent memory, and has been one of the most successful, recently overtaking Mamma Mia as the highest grossing movie musical in the UK. But does it live up to the hype? I'm personally not a musical fan, and I hadn't seen the West End show but I was still looking forward to seeing it. However, I think people need to calm down about it and stop getting so worked up about a film which they need to accept is flawed.

 

Okay, so a spoiler-free plot synopsis for those of you who, like me, have/had only the vaguest idea of what it was about. Convict Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) is granted parole after he served twenty years because he stole a loaf of bread (really!) but skips his parole so that he can live a free life, reinventing himself as mayor of some French town. However, he is soon discovered by police inspector Javert (Russell Crowe) and goes on the run with Cosette, the daughter of factory worker-turned-prostitute Fantine (Anne Hathaway). Then a few years later, there is some political disruption culminating in the June Rebellion of France, led by Marius (Eddie Redmayne), a bunch of students and a young waif. Needless to say, shit proceeds to go down.

Firstly, if you don't like singing, just turn away now. The film is 99% singing - I'm not exaggerating - with only the odd word or phrase spoken normally, which I don't really understand. Like, go all-in or do like most musicals and spontaneously break into song. Right, now that's out of the way, let's begin.

 

There has been a lot of talk about the performances in this film. Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway both recently won Golden Globes and are nominated again for Oscars. I'll get onto hers in a minute, but starting with Jackman, it must be said that clearly he is having the time of his life. It's not a cheerful role by any means (hello, the clue is in the title) but he obviously relishes in what he's doing. However, the fact that I recognised this first time round is not necessarily a good thing. I was just very aware a lot of the time that I was watching him acting, rather than getting lost in his performance. It was good, but I've seen better in the last year that I would have preferred to be recognised over him.

And hey, speaking of being overrated, please step forward, Anne Hathaway. I'm not saying she's bad or that I didn't like her performance, but I think when you take a step back and look at the film from a wider perspective, for me she didn't actually stand out from everybody else. Yes, her rendition of I Dreamed A Dream was super emotional and brought a tear to my eye, but I don't feel that anyone deserves an Oscar for that alone. I won't say any more because my personal infuriation with her will come out (*coughblandcough*) but even after seeing it I'm still upset that she's the sure thing this awards season.

I think Russell Crowe has been getting a lot of unnecessary flack for his role. No, he's not a great singer, but he isn't appalling. I went in expecting Pierce Brosnan-in-Mamma Mia-esque screeching and really it wasn't that bad! But maybe that was because my expectations were really that low. Perhaps that should be my advice: expect Brosnan and it won't be awful! The rest of his performance was fine; he does villainy really quite well, probably because he has that sort of face.

But really the best performance of the film was Eddie Redmayne. I can't believe he isn't getting more recognition for his role as Marius, he was so brilliant. There was one song he did a capella where I was nearly on the floor weeping with how emotional it was. I just wasn't expecting to be so overwhelmed by his acting. He and his merry band of rebels (they're not really merry, of course) were engrossing and I wanted to wave a flag and build a barricade of furniture to help them. In particular Gavroche, the wee little street urchin, was a delight, though I think they maybe just borrowed the Artful Dodger from Oliver! that day because there seemed to be no difference in costume, accent or attitude. But I digress. The rest of the supporting cast are on top form too: Isabelle Allan as the young Cosette was just wonderful and she should have a bright career in theatre ahead of her with a voice like that. Amanda Seyfried is more than acceptable as the older Cosette; relative newcomer Samantha Barks plays her role as lovesick Eponine with grace and she delivers a heartbreaking number; and Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen are predictably wonderful as a couple of innkeepers, and bring some much needed comedy to the proceedings.

 

But, as you may have guessed, this is not a happy film. Tom Hooper took the radical decision to record all vocals live to better enhance the performances and ensure the end songs were as raw as they could be. It really works, as for once I actually felt like singing wasn't just random in a film, but that I could feel the emotion and understand it better through song. However, there are some questionable accents, which maybe we should have predicted considering the number of non-Brits who have roles. But really, why did no-one have a word with Hugh Jackman when his singing started to sound a bit Irish... and then got more and more pronounced? And I really have no idea why Sacha Baron Cohen did a French accent when no-one else did. I know that the film is set in France and that they are all French characters but it did sound a bit odd that he was the only one.

And let's not forget, it's long. Coming in at nearly three hours, it's not an easy ride by any means. However, I think it actually adds to the effect: not only will you be emotionally drained, but you'll feel like you literally sat through the seventeeen years presented in the film until you just feel a sense of relief at the end knowing it's over, which adds to the catharsis. I do hope that is what they were going for and that wasn't just my own experience, because I've just made them sound clever for editing a film to nearly three hours, which no-one should do really. Also, they probably did overstretch it and it ended up kind of taking ages to wind down. I kept thinking, "this is the end now... oh wait, this is the end... okay, this is..." etc. It ended up dragging after the rebellion scenes and they could have probably cut it down into neater, slightly more managable size by doing something about that.

It's a beautiful film though; the cinematography really makes it feel like you're there, either nearly drowning as you try to haul a ship into dock or wading through a sewer or it gets you so close to the gunfights that you can almost smell the gunpowder. And the attention to detail is stunning, not just in sets but also in the costumes and make-up, and this is something that should be recognised. After seeing the film, where they had the budget and the time etc to do all that, I just don't understand how it could be a theatre production and have the same effect; certainly I don't see how it could be as grand and lavish, but maybe I'll just have to go to the West End and see for myself.

Verdict: As much as I enjoyed it and got very emotional, I was never 100% absorbed in it. It's like the cinematic equivalent of a teenage boy losing his virginity: it gets overexcited, it climaxes too early and too quickly and spends the remainder of the film dragging out a not-quite satisfying ending. It grabs you by the throat and emotionally punches you repeatedly for nearly three hours until you feel like you need a long lie-down to recover. And my final thought: give Eddie Redmayne some damn awards!

****

Trailer:

Breaking Down Breaking Dawn Part 2

Was it seriously a year ago that I posted my review of Breaking Dawn Part 1? I can't believe how quickly this time has gone, it felt like a year was unbearably far away when we left off. And here it is, the final installment of a franchise that, like it or not, has changed the face of cinema. And hell, does it bow out well.



These are the most decent posters out there. I always hate how much they photoshop them, there's nothing wrong with the way any of them look normally!

For the record, I'm going to try my utmost to make this spoiler-free - or as spoiler-free as an adaptation can be - because I'm so happy I didn't know what they had changed. I'd advise anyone who doesn't already know the big twist to really try to not find out before they see it, because the impact will be so much more massive.

For those of you who don't know (i.e. non-fans or those who have been living in a cave), Breaking Dawn Part 2 begins immediately after Part 1 leaves off: Bella has awakened as a vampire and is living happily with her new husband, hybrid baby and the baby's boyfriend, until a big misunderstanding puts the whole family in danger of elimination from the vampire head honchos, the Volturi. They therefore need to gather as many "witnesses" (a slew of new, previously unmentioned vampire characters) to come and fight with them. Then shit goes down, and surprisingly, it's brilliant.

Having seen it now four times, with a further two cinema trips planned, I can say without a shadow of a doubt that this film is the best of the series, and it is my favourite. What is absolutely astonishing is that they were able to make an utter turd of a book into a very enjoyable, engaging and emotional film. Every part of  the film is at the peak of its brilliance, whether it be the acting (impeccable), the effects, the music, and actually, the story. This is one of those very rare occasions where the film is better than the book. Seriously.

We'll start with the acting. The central cast have had five films now with their characters, and the polished performances really shine through. Everyone seems a lot more relaxed, and that's probably because of the more light-hearted nature this film takes. Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart again showcase their chemistry and give their best performances of the series, probably because they're actually allowed a whole range of emotions (happiness, for example). Even Jacob gets to calm down and, excluding the weird paedophilia (try and explain it all you want, it's still not okay), he's actually quite amusing. I can't imagine Team Jacob will be too impressed with his comparitively limited screen time (Jacob's a wolf for a lot of the film), but to be honest, I didn't really care, I'm not a huge fan of his anyway, as you well know. Also, Michael Sheen is back! Yay! And he's even more mental than he was in New Moon. I'm a big fan of his anyway, he always puts so much into his work. He's ridiculously camp and creepy and wonderful, and deserves awards. And that laugh! You thought the one in New Moon was creepy... just wait. All the supporting cast are good too, but no-one really stands out, save for maybe Peter Facinelli (Carlisle). But you can tell everyone is giving their all and making the most out of their small roles. Finally though, I have to give a special mention to Billy Burke, who has played Bella's father, Charlie, so well for five films. He always makes me laugh so much and he can also make me cry, and he's just so lovely in this. I'm just sad we don't get to see more of him.

Without trying to sound pervy, I'd have liked to have seen more sex. It's mentioned a lot in the book, and I just don't understand how anyone can think that one scene would suffice, when they're meant to be at it like rabbits constantly. One scene fifteen minutes in and then tantalising teases throughout disappoints me slightly. And whilst I'm at it, another thing that annoyed me was the complete dismissal of the love triangle that's been going on for four films. I get that Jacob now has something new to obsess over (it's a baby! It's still creepy!) but seriously, there's only one very subtle reference about the fact that not two days ago (in the time of the plot) he was completely in love with his new love-interest's mother! I'm not saying that they had to keep bringing it up, but really, they needed to mention it in some way.

One of the things I was most nervous about before I saw this was how they were going to introduce the abundance of new characters in this film. I've never liked that aspect of the book, and seeing all the promotional posters for each individual new character (there are lots) made me wonder how on earth it was going to work. But actually, I was mildly surprised, in a good way. I thought they were all going to be badly underwritten and underdeveloped spare parts, which most of them are, to be fair. But they have some stand-out additions who I'm sad we won't actually get to see more of. In particular Garrett, played by the lovely Lee Pace (can he be in more stuff, thanks), who brought some nice humour and became one of the very (very) few new vampires we actually care about. I see potential for a spin-off with him if Lionsgate decide to actually go ahead and make more Twilight films (please God don't do that). But overall, not a bad job. Yes there are blatant racial stereotypes (the Irish are ginger and wear green, one of the Romanians looks and sounds like the Count from  Sesame Street and the Amazonians are accompanied by tribal music). And no, you won't even remember 90% of their names but actually it doesn't really matter; they're no more than glorified extras. It's just a little frustrating that these people take up screen time that could be spent on others (read: Edward and Bella).

Now, Renesmee. This was going to be tricky however they decided to do it. Stephenie Meyer famously delayed signing over the film rights to the final book because she didn't believe that special effects in films were developed enough to portray the baby realistically. Well, they still aren't. The baby/toddler just didn't look real, and therefore just looked bloody creepy. It's only when Mackenzie Foy actually gets to play her real age that Renesmee doesn't look like a doll or something even I could have whacked out with Photoshop. But on the plus side, she did a good job having to play so many different ages and be somewhat realistic, so kudos to her. And, if you look at Mackenzie, Rob and Kristen all in a row, it's really scary how much she looks like she could actually be their child; they look so similar! And also, Rob and Kristen are super-cute as parents.

I have to talk about the twist, without talking about the twist so as not to give anything away for those of you who still haven't seen it and haven't found out yet (how either of those things is possible is beyond me). It's really very clever how they manage to make a big event out of the notorious non-finale, and yet they still stay faithful to the book. It's the sort of effect I can only imagine working on screen, in text it just wouldn't have been the same. If you've seen the film, you know what I mean. I bet Stephenie Meyer was over the moon when she found out what they were planning to do since she obviously got bored with the story herself when writing it. But it's very shocking - I sat there the first time I saw it with my mouth agape in shock for about ten minutes, and my friend nearly broke my wrist clutching it so hard. Even second time round, when I knew it was coming, it still managed to shock me again. I'll say no more, but you won't see it coming if you don't already know about it. It's a bold move, and it pays off.

Not really important, but I wanted to mention the opening and ending credits, which I thought were very stylish and emotional respectively. The production team have never done opening credits before, but the little montage of freezing nature ws very beautiful and ramped up the anxiety for just a couple more minutes. And the ending credits were very special, letting everyone who has appeared in the films have their little shining moment to take a bow. And leaving the big three until the end and doing something even more extra-special for them was pretty much the twisting knife that lets you know it's really over. Sob.

As ever, I talk about the music. I've always championed the soundtracks and I think that people who don't even watch the films should listen to them because they're brilliant, and I think this one is my favourite. There isn't one song I dislike on it, even the one by Nikki Reed and her husband, who I was livid got on there in the first place. I can actually listen to the soundtrack and picture the scenes and cry because I get so emotional about them ("Ghosts" by James Vincent McMorrow and "Speak Up" by POP ETC are the two that get me every time). And of course, the score. I love it. I'm so happy Carter Burwell, composer of the first film, came back, and he did such a smashing job with it, and also incorporated the New Moon and Eclipse scores in there too even though he wasn't involved in them. I'm just annoyed that the Higher Powers (darn you, Summit Entertainment/Lionsgate!) have delayed releasing it so I can't have it on a loop as I go about my life.

Last time round, I think I said they did the best with what they had. This time, they took what they had and made it so much better than it is on the page. It may be the best film, but it won't convert any non-fans. But then it doesn't need to. It's just had the eighth biggest US opening ever and the biggest UK opening of an American film ever. It's going to be successful and, as the other films have proved, it doesn't need the approval of petulant, arrogant critics and isn't affected by the petty sniping of haters.

I debated a lot about what rating I was going to give this film, and in the end I couldn't decide. My head is telling me four stars, my heart is telling me five. So I'm going to compromise, and for the first time in the history of this blog, I'm giving it four and a half stars. Or nine out of ten, whichever works for you.

 

 



P.S. If you're a fan, bring tissues. The end is super emotional.

 

Trailer:



 

Also, for those interested, here are two interesting articles.

 

This one explores the aforementioned impact Twilight has had on cinema.

http://www.empireonline.com/features/the-twilight-legacy

 

And this one, by the wonderful Mark Kermode (who I met at the premiere!), tries to defend Twilight from all you haters out there, and he makes some very interesting points.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/nov/10/twilight-breaking-dawn-better-than-star-wars?intcmp=ILCMUSTXT9386

 

Some Films I've Seen Recently...

I know I've been silent for a long time, but I've been away on holiday and been generally busy, so I can only apologise. But I've seen a few films recently, not new, but that deserve a review, so I'm going to do a few short ones in this post.

Attack The Block

I watched this film a few weeks ago and I still crack up when I think about it. It was refreshingly funny; the one-liners were superb, and based on this I think first time writer/director Joe Cornish has a bright future in this industry, and I'm excited to see what he's going to do next.

It was fresh and appealing to a wider range of modern youth, an audience which I don't think is targeted enough. Yes, you have all the franchises and comedies etc, which are supposed to draw in that sort of crowd, but I think a lot of teenagers will actually relate more to this film, mostly due to the fabulous cast and the dialogue, which uses more of the common teenage vernacular, and this use of slang is what is going to make teenagers sit up and take note of films being made if more are done like this.

I'd have liked it to have been scarier, but the original plot and the look of the aliens more than makes up for that slight disappointment. It is a nice revamp of alien invasion flicks, so much so that it sounds actually believable.

As for the cast, I think it was a good idea to have a young, relatively unknown cast, and the biggest name was Nick Frost, who isn't in it a great deal, which is good because I having seen it I'm glad that nothing detracted from the main youth cast. John Boyega (who portrayed Moses, the leader of the gang of yoofs), could have a very nice career if he keeps giving performances like this. (Side note: I feel like I should give a special mention to my good friend and regular commentor on the blog, Garen, who is followed on Twitter by John Boyega. She's immensely proud of this fact.)

****

Trailer:

Young Adult

I watched this on the plane to Florida recently, and had to try really hard to control myself so I didn't burst out in uncontrollable fits of laughter. It's very very dark humour, which suits me fine, but Juno writer Diablo Cody delivers another fine script. It's an interesting premise - what happens to that Queen Bee when she grows up? The answer, according to Cody, is a super-bitchy, self-centred immature creature - essentially an older version of the teenage thing.

Charlize Theron deserved more recognition for her performance as the narcissistic teen-lit author whose writings reflect her own life. I mentioned in a post earlier this year that a lot of people in the industry were confused as to why she hadn't been nominated for awards, and now I can see why - it's probably the best performance I've seen of hers (admittedly, I haven't seen them all, including her Oscar-winning role in Monster). But she gave a better performance than 99% of the other female leads I've seen, and certainly better than at least three of the Oscar-nominated performances this year.

I like as well that this film isn't predictable. I thought I was able to tell what was going to happen from early on, but it has a surprising ending which isn't necessarily pleasant, but it's certainly a good thing that it didn't go down the obvious route and become another superficial flick.

****

Trailer:

We Need To Talk About Kevin

Another of the female performances that was overlooked this year was Tilda Swinton's in this, which is even more of a travesty than Charlize Theron. But not just that, every aspect of this film deserved much, much more recognition than it got; it was virtually flawless.

It is a truly brutal and horrific film, but the subject matter is handled well, considering how dark it is. I hadn't read the book so I didn't know beforehand what was going to happen, though I was able to guess the general climax of the story.

Tilda Swinton has never been better, in my opinion, and that is saying a lot considering what a fantastic actress she is. But she was completely convincing and conveyed her character so well. Her supporting cast were also commendable, including John C. Reilly as her husband, who should do more serious roles, as he was a revelation; also, the two actors who played her son at different ages - Jasper Newell as young Kevin gave one of the best child performances I've seen for some time, and Ezra Miller is suitably sinister as the teenage Kevin.

Essentially, the film is perfect, and it's an absolute travesty that not only was it virtually ignored at the awards this year, but also that it hasn't reached a wider audience. I highly recommend that everyone sees this. It's by no means a cheerful film, but it has stayed with me for a long time.

*****

Trailer:

The Descendants

So after all that positivity in my other mini-reviews, I'm closing with highly acclaimed The Descendants, which I did not enjoy by any stretch of the imagination. I went into watching this thinking it must be moderately good based on all the critical acclaim it got, but really, I was incredibly bored after three minutes and it didn't pick up as time dragged on. Yes, it's the hideously pretentious film the academies love, but really, nothing happens. It's slow, without a lot going on, and there's nothing to really engage the audience. The characters are not likeable, the plot is dull as dishwater, and George Clooney is very overrated, as is the whole film.

I can't believe it won Best Adapted Screenplay at the Oscars this year over films such as Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, and films not even nominated such as We Need To Talk About Kevin and The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, both of which deserved it more. And as for Clooney winning many awards and nominations for his role, well, it's not surprising since the Academy do like him a fair amount, but a lot of other more deserving actors were left out.

I didn't enjoy it, and personally I thought it was very overrated. I'm glad I didn't spend money going to see it, put it that way, but I'm annoyed I've now lost two hours of my life on this film which I could quite happily have gone the rest of my life without seeing.

**

Trailer:

Ok, that's it for now, but since I'm poor and my social life seems to have dried up I'm pretty much constantly watching films, so expect some more posts soon.

The Fairest Of Them All

There have been two adaptations of The Grimm's brothers' Snow White this year, and from the moment those two trailers were released everyone knew which one was going to be the better. And I'm very pleased to say that Snow White and the Huntsman more than lives up to the expectations. Yes, there's blood-red lips, snow white skin and raven black hair, there's an evil queen, a mirror, a prince and an apple, but this is genuinely not Snow White as you've ever seen it done before.

In this re-imagining, the evil Queen Ravenna (played wonderfully by Charlize Theron) tricks the newly bereaved king, kills him on their wedding night and imprisons his daughter in a tower for years. Now, with her powers waning, her magic mirror tells her to consume the heart of the one fairer than her, Snow White (Kristen Stewart). Except, of course, she escapes her prison into the Dark Forest, so Ravenna recruits a widowed alcoholic Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth) to bring her back. But Snow White's good heart and pure nature make the Huntsman reconsider, and instead helps her lead a rebellion including eight dwarves and Snow's childhood friend, Prince William (Sam Claflin) to bring down the evil tyranny of the Queen...

It must be said that it's a very beautifully shot film, very artfully done. Director Rupert Sanders, previously a well-respected director of video game commercials, makes his feature-film debut in stunning style, and at times this almost overshadows everything else about the film. The special effects are dazzling, but also imaginative, and so detailed as well, it actually feels like a different world. It's clear to see the influence of other directors on Sanders, especially Guillermo del Toro - the comparisons are easy to make between this and Pan's Labyrinth in terms of style, and as that is also one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen that is by no means a bad thing.

In terms of performances, it's a little bit of a mixed bag. Charlize Theron basically steals the show - and quite rightly. She is absolutely perfect as the Queen obsessed with aging, power and beauty, and she's very chilling. She's scary, but at the same time she isn't a one-dimensional villain; her backstory actually makes her very believable and it's easy to see why she is the way she is. She's manic and terrifying, and does a lot of screaming at people, but never goes to the point of melodramatic. Even her possible insanity (where did that mirror man come from?) doesn't feel contrived or staged, but completely understandable once you grasp what's gone on in her life. I'm trying not to dwell too much on the borderline incestuous relationship she has with her brother (why is he watching her take a naked milk bath?!), but even that just effectively adds to how creepy the character is. Theron displays a performance here that reminds the audience of what a fantastic actress she is. She is my new queen.

I was a little concerned about Kristen Stewart, wondering whether she may not become a little annoying as the film goes on, but I'm very pleased to report that she does a fantastic job as the titular heroine. Having heard interviews with Kristen talking about the character, it's nice to actually see her dedication to the development of Snow, and to see that no, she isn't a perfect person as we all believe, and she isn't just a damsel in distress. I was also worried she wasn't going to be believable as a leader in battle, but seeing her journey and what she goes through does make it convincing (as is her accent, I might add!).

I do have a little bit of a problem with Chris Hemsworth, regretably. I adore him, I do, but he could have done better. It's nice to see his character journey, but I feel like the Huntsman could have been written better. He's definitely a role that could be developed further if the rumoured sequels do happen (more on that in a bit). But he does bring some comedy to the film in his early drunken state, and the relationship between him and Snow White is enjoyable to see unfold, for the most part. Where I have an issue is in the sudden development of a romantic relationship between the two, which feels really random. He says she reminds him of his deceased wife, and she doesn't say anything about her feelings towards him at all, but it keeps being hinted at in the last section of the film and it doesn't really fit. It's much better if they stick with the mentor-student type relationship, or an older brother kind of thing. Also, his accent just barely passable. I know they made him Scottish because they wanted to emphasise difference between him and the nobility of the Queen, Snow White and Prince William, but it just didn't work. Nobody would have questioned why he also had an English accent, they should have just stuck with that since we know he can do it from Thor.

The dwarves are kind of underused, even if they are brilliant in what we see of them. With the likes of Nick Frost, Ray Winstone and Toby Jones, among others, they bring a large part of the film's comedy in their interactions with each other and the Huntsman, but because they don't come into the film until about half way through, they don't really have time to develop properly; it seems like all the effort the actors exerted to play the roles - going to "dwarf camp" and having small actors teach them the movements - was almost wasted as they weren't really given their chance to shine. To be fair, there are moments when they really engage the audience, in particular Brian Gleeson, who plays Gus, who is so adorable. Now I don't like to say this, because he's a brillaint actor usually, but the one dwarf I didn't like was Bob Hoskins, whose only role seemed to be to repeat "she will end the darkness" and variations thereof constantly every time he's on screen. It didn't need to be said the other 357 times after Chris Hemsworth had got the message.

As for the more supporting cast, again it's a little mixed. Sam Claflin as Prince William is lovely, breaking the mould of fairy-tale princes and actually getting stuck into the action. His relationship with Snow is adorable and I still root for them to be together; it's helped, I think, by showing them as children, which is so cute and does tie in nicely to some of the stuff that happens later in the film. As for Lily Cole though, I don't know why they made a big deal about her being in it - I'm not a fan of hers really anyway, but she's in all of three scenes and one of those is where she gets the youth sucked out of her by the Queen anyway - she's really very forgettable, and actually not a character I want to be expanded if/when they make the next one.

Yes, it's a predictable outcome even before the film begins, but the only true rebellion against the original story is to have the Queen win, and that's just a little bleak (although actually there are times when I did root for Ravenna, but that's down to Charlize Theron's fantastic performance really). The ending could have been better - without trying to spoil too much, the "Messiah" comparisons were a little annoying, and the fact that nobody questions how Snow White had suddenly risen from the dead irked me. It was obviously left open for a sequel, but I don't actually know what they could do with it; there's still room for the characters to be developed further, but I don't know what a believable compelling storyline would be - it's all about the Queen really, isn't it?

Saying that, there were moments which were really special. Parts of the film that were unexpected, such as the encounter with the village of women were surprisingly enjoyable and I liked the way they were embedded into the storyline. The prologue part of the film, in which all the backstory is explained, is a particular highlight, as it's so detailed and perfect to fully understand the rest of the film. The changes in the characters are also welcomed - Snow White is not a damsel in distress, but also she keeps her femininity rather than just becoming a woman-being-a-man action hero. The Queen has such depth that it's hard not to empathise with her at least a little bit; even the prince isn't your ordinary run-of-the-mill fairy tale prince who swans in and saves the day but is actually just the most blah character in history, but he too has proper balls. It's dark stuff, too: Snow White has a mental magic mushroom-enduced trip in the dark forest, the Queen ages rapidly and repulsively and is clearly very mentally unstable, and it doesn't shy away from death and violence (keeping it at 12 levels, though, obviously - though it could have been pushed slightly more, I feel). I also liked the way they redefined all the traditional moments of the story, such as the poisoned apple and the magic mirror; it was refreshing, and it actually resulted in the film deserving to say it's a reimaging, and not just another average adaptation.

What's really good about this version of the tale is that it's really timeless. There are themes that can be related to modern day life, mostly in terms of feminism and the effect of what a child is told in their youth. Ravenna, having been told by her mother that a woman will only succeed if she is beautiful and young, is shaped into this power-hungry women because she believes that all women are used by men and then discarded - this could not be more relevant in today's society, where women are still valued for their looks and youth. Obviously they are trying to then promote the contrasting upbringing of Snow White, who is told that a good heart will lead you to good places, but both of these really stand out as themes which make what feels on the surface to be a very medieval tale into a timeless message regarding the perception of women.

In terms of the technical parts of the film, it really is brilliant. The costumes are gorgeous, and the detail they went into on Ravenna's outfits is exceptional - I love how every costume she wears has some sort of dead thing on it, whether it be feathers, fur or bones, to reflect her character bringing death and despair to everything. The sets were all spectacular, with the English coast being transformed perfectly into a battle ground, and the castles giving a striking feel of despair. But also the outdoor settings in the forests are beautiful, with the contrasting dark and blooming environments just emphasising how special both of them are (there's a lot of contrasts in the film, in case you haven't already gathered. I'm pretty sure it's intentional). The score (you know I love the scores!) is simply superb. I'm a big fan of James Newton Howard anyway, and his style really fits this film. It's probably the best score I've heard so far this year, and I will listen to it constantly for about the next month (I'm listening to it as I'm writing this). It matches the mood of each scene perfectly, and really is just triumphant. And it's so sad to know that it probably will not be in contention for any proper awards because of the type of film it is, and will be overlooked when it really is sublime and deserves proper recognition.

Verdict: Yes, there are parts that are to be expected from a fairy tale adaptation, but the way Snow White and the Huntsman so wonderfully revolutionises the story means that this isn't a standard film. It's genuinely one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen, and I'm looking forward to seeing what Rupert Sanders has to show us next, if this is only his first offering. A dedicated cast and crew must be commended for what they have managed to produce, and strong central performances from the leading ladies are what really make this film a must-see.

****

(I don't normally plug stuff like this, but the behind-the-scenes stuff and interviews from this film are really good, so check out the official Youtube channel for all their videos. Though don't if you want to avoid spoilers, because there's lots there.)

http://www.youtube.com/user/SnowWhiteHuntsman/videos