The Lovely Bones (HD on demand)
Obviously, PQ and AQ will not be rated because it wasn't a blu, but the sound shook my house and had some of the best panning effects I've heard and the PQ was incredible (the reviewer on this site said the PQ is as good as it gets).
Film: 3 1/2 stars (out of 4)
I know I'm going to get a lot of slack for my rating, but I rate films how I see it. Yes, this film has a 33% on Rottentomatoes and yes, Ebert gave it 1 1/2 stars. This marks the single greatest deviation I've ever had from Ebert when rating a film. There have been less than 5 times ever in which my rating has differed more than a full star, and this is one. My review will focus on negating Ebert's take.
Although I love Ebert, his review is incredibly off-base. Despite admitting that the film has exceptional acting (which it does) and good technical qualities, he gives the film 1 1/2 stars and solely blames Peter Jackson. His review should not be given much credence for this fact alone. His rating is solely due to his misconception of the point of the film, which he believes to be an almost glamorization of the afterlife for a girl who was brutally raped (happened in the book but not even really implied here) and murdered (never even shown). Because he considers this to be "deplorable" he gave the film a very poor rating. I rarely see Ebert do this, but sometimes he does rate films based solely on emotion and not on what it deserves and this is such an instance, which is a shame because he didn't understand the film at all, which I find baffling (that being said, neither did many of the critics who had a similar view--I'm not sure how they missed the point so blatantly) (single worst run on sentence ever--the former English major in me is embarassed).
It is an unfortunate reality that children are raped and murdered but it happens everyday. I haven't read the book, although it's on my shelf to be read when I'm done with my current book, but there's a reason why it was such a phenomenon--it attempted show the pain of such an unspeakable event for both the victim and the family being eased. It's meant to show that although a child can undergo such a horrific event, his or her death can bring people together and can alter lives in a way that may not be possible in life. The other point is that although it may seem unfair that a child should have to undergo such an event (correction: it is unfair, obviously), he or she can still experience a world of unearthly and eternal bliss. So, in essence, the point of the film is that although something unfair and terrible may happen during life, one's eternal life can still be blissful. For the devastated relatives, sadness and depression will still occur (I like that this can't be altered--more realistic), but just the belief that the deceased is still with you is enough to pull them through.
I find it odd that Ebert hated the film for its wrongly interpreted message, as did many other critics, but films that encourage anarchy like Fight Club or the attempt at eliciting sympathy for an admitted Nazi mass murderer like The Reader (a best picture nominee) can escape unscathed. Yet this film is not allowed a pass, despite being less offensive even if it was interpreted like Ebert thought.
In a way, the film is actually quite beautiful.
[Show spoiler]The scene with the candle flickering, with Mark Walhberg watching, is one of the most beautiful scenes I've seen involving someone alive and someone dead.
I agree that there are scenes which seem to trivialize the murder, such as the odd scene involving Susan Sarandon and her antics at the home (which was an entirely pointless group of scenes) and the cartoonish montage of sledding in Heaven (I found the rest of the Heaven scenes to be very fitting and often very touching. They are also incredibly well filmed). However, these scenes can be forgiven when the rest of the film is so good.
Walhberg and Weisz are great as grieving parents. Weisz has a great ability to convey bottled up emotions, as she showed in The Fountain and The Constant Gardener (Oscar win). Wahlberg was great in his role. Saoirse is truly an actress worth watching, as she showed in Atonement. Stanley Tucci, in an Oscar nominated role, is terrifying and extremely creepy.
I found the directing to be incredible. I wondered how Jackson would handle a more intimate film after his previous four epics (I haven't seen his earlier work), and I think he did a great job. The special effects range from beautiful (Heaven) to disturbing (bathtub), but every scene is meticulously created and filmed.
I will get a lot of heat for saying this, but this should have been one of the 10 best picture nominees. It's better than Avatar (which I liked a lot, for what it was), District 9 (which I did not like at all), and An Education (which was good but not great). So, of the films I've seen (still have a few more worthy candidates, like The Last Station, Coraline, The Road, and A Single Man, as well as the foreign films which I'm sure would have at least 2-3 nominees), these are my list of films that should have been nominated (not in order):
1) Up
2) Up in the Air
3) The Lovely Bones
4) The Cove
5) Sin Nombre
6) The Stoning of Soraya M.
7) The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (does it qualify because it was released abroad last year, or does it not qualify because it was released domestically this year?)
8) Harry Potter and the Halfblood Prince
9) The Hurt Locker
10) The Blind Side
Top 5:
1) The Cove
2) The Hurt Locker
3) Sin Nombre
4) The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
5) The Stoning of Soraya M.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Linear Mode
