![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Doesn't anybody see her at all?
I need that I ATEN'T DEAD card again. In the last few days, I have seen Blow-Up, Persona, and Stardust (2007), and I can state unequivocally that Stardust was the least weird of these three. Blow-Up reminded me strongly of early Angela Carter: I'd have cast David Hemmings as Honeybuzzard. Conversely, Persona was like something Hitchcock and Brecht might have collaborated on, except that the concern with self and silence and response is all Bergman's own. ("Faith is a torment. It is like loving someone who is out there in the darkness but never appears, no matter how loudly you call." —The Seventh Seal.) And after a slightly rocky start, Stardust was extremely fun: I may write up some of my character reactions when I'm a little less fried, but for the record I am fully in the camp of De Niro's Captain Shakespeare as awesome.
Tomorrow, oysters in Milford.
Tomorrow, oysters in Milford.
no subject
I loved Stardust. Will be curious to hear more about what you thought--I've never read the book, and am now slightly scared, lest whatever differences might be between should prove jarring.
Tomorrow, oysters in Milford.
CT, or...? Enjoy, in any event.
no subject
I think film-to-book should be much less jarring than book-to-film.
CT, or...?
CT.
no subject
Ah. That's good, I suppose. I was mostly concerned on account of that it was such a sweet story. If the book were much less so, I'm not sure I'd want to read it. Or at least not right now.
CT.
Ah. Nice town, there. Are you back home now?
no subject
I'm glad.
It is like loving someone who is out there in the darkness but never appears, no matter how loudly you call.
I know the feeling . . .
And after a slightly rocky start
It felt too fast to me--like they were rushing to get to the Robert De Niro scenes. And I liked those scenes, though I'm still not sure they were in the right movie. Still, I did like the movie. But only about a tenth as much as I liked the book. There's nothing in the movie as beautiful as any one of Charles Vess's illustrations.
no subject
Hm. I had almost the opposite reaction—once we hit those scenes, I felt as though the movie figured out what it was actually going to do, where the preceding set-pieces had been sometimes very beautiful and sometimes a little awkward; the tone coalesced. But I was not a passionate lover of the book; the small or substantial changes made to the story mostly did not bother me.
There's nothing in the movie as beautiful as any one of Charles Vess's illustrations.
Okay, I might agree with that. His illustrations for Stardust are breathtaking.
no subject
Charles Vess on the other hand. That's love.
no subject
I love The Sandman. I have arguments with some of his interpretations of mythological figures, but that cycle of graphic novels is truly amazing. I have felt similarly about none of his prose work. Some of the short stories stick with me—for some reason, "Keepsakes and Treasures: A Love Story" is the one that comes most readily to mind—but otherwise, while I do not dislike his writing, his style sort of leaves me flat. But this could always change.
no subject
I certainly felt like it was where the director's hand was surest.
where the preceding set-pieces had been sometimes very beautiful and sometimes a little awkward
I definitely agree with that. And although I don't think Stardust is one of Gaiman's better works, I have a tendency to prefer slower, more long winded tones. I also missed the Tori Amos tree, the "fuck", and the book's ending. At least, I think I miss the book's ending--I wish I could find my copy, but I seem to remember the book having a sort of anti-"happily ever after" that I rather liked. But I could be remembering that wrong . . .
And, feel free to call me a pig, but I really think Michelle Pfeiffer was too old for the role. They needed someone very young, someone they could therefore age more flexibly.
Okay, I might agree with that. His illustrations for Stardust are breathtaking.
I think they were my favourite part of the book.
no subject
Yes. There's something about the very quiet all-lowercase profanity that simultaneously makes and takes the mythic drama out of the starfall. I was rather disappointed that was left out.
and the book's ending. At least, I think I miss the book's ending--I wish I could find my copy, but I seem to remember the book having a sort of anti-"happily ever after" that I rather liked.
You remember correctly: it has the bittersweet ending of immortality; the slow dance of the infinite stars. I did not dislike the film's ending, because of the way it was grounded in the exchange of hearts, but it did surprise me a little.
They needed someone very young, someone they could therefore age more flexibly.
Eh. I thought she was also awesome. And I realize I may never have seen her in a role where she wasn't enchanted: all I can remember her from is Ladyhawke.
no subject
Yes oh yes. I figure, even if someone is virulently opposed to the film just on the grounds that it's not and can never be the same as the book, they just have to love that bit regardless.
no subject
no subject
Cool!
no subject
I was entirely prepared for the character not to work, and he was brilliant.
no subject
no subject
That was Jason Flemyng, whom I think I have seen only in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen—his Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde was one of the frustratingly rare good bits in that film that I obsessed about some months ago.
no subject
no subject
I feel as though I should know a counter-argument to this statement, but I'm not sure I've seen enough movies. Also my standards for weird may not be set correctly.
no subject
no subject
Thanks. I'm trying not to disappear.
...or maybe midgets
Am I going to have to bargain with goblins?
Again?
I bet it's goblins.
no subject
no subject
Prrrr.
no subject
no subject
It was agreed on Wednesday that not only would Ultraviolet Catastrophe make an excellent punk band, their first single should be "Black Body Radiation." We'd all have listened to it.