Faithful translation + convincing acting + claustrophobic isolation = decent vamp movie
Once again, I read the source material before I saw the film adaptation. They did a good job; bonus points for stretching one graphic novel into a 113-minute movie without straining story or the pacing too much. (I felt it was a bit slow, but I also knew about the twisty-ending, so I am not a fair judge. My sweetie said it moved along just fine, however.) I was curious going into the movie whether the writers would stray too much, as they tend to do when their inspiration is inked, not typed. Nope, they did a good job there, and the actors did a great job of really making their desperation relate-able. It's got to be pretty hard to be thrown into day-for-night for 70 days of filming. I would be jetting off to a Caribbean island where the only thing that I would have to be leery of is the local water and making a fool of myself after too many mini-umbrella-ed drinks!
When I first heard that the movie was being compared to 28 Days Later for the carnage-factor, I was curious. I mean, I know the movie was going to be about a town being slaughtered, but to me, the story is more about the cat-and-mouse game to be played out between the vamps and the survivors. They did a good job of spinning that out, but man, were those vamps wasteful with their initial glut! I would have thought that they would have kept a few more like cattle, to save for later. To me, the ripping rather than biting seemed like a waste; no wonder these vamps were hungry--they play with their food too much. What use is red snow?
What really impressed me was the birdseye view of the carnage; that was neat in its execution.
The leading actors, Josh Hartnett and Melissa George, did a really credible job as two butt-kickers who have fallen out, but once teamed up, are greater than the sum of their parts (or issues). I think they spent a tad too long on their strained relationship (seriously, after being locked in an attic together for more than an hour, I would have to talk things out! What else is there to do?). I am glad that the writers didn't make up any "issues" for them; this was not a relationship drama, it was a survival drama.
The human characters met or exceeded my expectations, although I was a little underwhelmed by the vamps. In the graphic novels, I took their demarcated speech to mean that it was sibilant, not some Slavic-tinged language. C'mon, it's got to be hard to talk around those teeth, so they still would have needed the subtitles. I guess it was easier to make the actors unintelligible in a systematic way than to have them speak English.
...
--More to follow, as a 'comment'--
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I did take a bit of an issue with the idea that the surviving group *had* to move, first to get food, then to the sheriff's station, then finally to the machinery out-post (whatever it was called). Seriously, stay put; if they haven't found you yet, why do you need to stick your necks out? Getting food is important though, and the scene in the general store did open the way to the ending. I get that, but why then to the sheriff's office? Why not straight on to the machine outpost (mysteriously still running, with lights). I know that we have to get back to that Disposal-from-hell; they showed it to us in the beginning, so we know that at least one baddie is going to have to be thrown in to it.
But really, with three days left, I would just sit tight. I would rather make it three days without water or food if I had the sunrise to look forward to. The movie of my life as vamp-bait would be much less exciting; not only would I not be in the frozen tundra in the first place, but I would have chosen to run around earlier, while there were still enough people around to provide cannon-fodder/distraction. There would be no last-minute dash for iron-clad safety, and I definitely would have smothered the old man in his sleep. less cinematic in my version, but at least I wouldn't be running up the stairs in a horror movie with a psycho tearing after me. Nope nope nope!
So, enough said (or nearly so). The ending was as good as it was in the book, although other reviews have said that members of the audience found it unintentionally comical. I can't see it, but hey, I am not the type to go see any of the Saw sequels. I am happy that they stuck to the content of the first graphic novel, because more would have been biting off more than they could chew (har har). I do wish that they had hinted at a sequel (and I give them permission for more artistic license with the plot on that one, so that it might end up being more cohesive than the remaining graphic novels). Steve Niles drew me (however reluctantly at first) into the rest of the graphic novels. I want to see more; I want to see Stella open up her 'can' (you know what kind I am talking about!). We got a glimpse of her hardening resolve in the final moments of the film, and there is more story to tell, so I am looking for a sequel.
I had a good time, and I can see why some reviewers might not have. My prediction is that he target audience is not going to pay attention to them anyway, and that this movie will have a decent box office return, but I can see it being even more popular as a rental.
Post a Comment