1617
« on: May 13, 2012, 04:06:50 AM »
My head is spinning a bit right now (from both having seen the film and from the spirits enjoyed afterwards), but I'm in full control of my faculties.
Altogether, 32 of us met at my friend's house at noon, and - despite it being early in the day - we shared two small glasses of champagne each to start off the festivities. It was one joyful toast. From there, we went in our caravan to the cinema, forming a long line at the ticket stand, and gathered in the lobby, waiting for a few to hit the concession stand (very few can afford it). From there, we went to the appropriate theater and filled almost two rows. We were the majority there. Most of the other attendees were of middle age - I saw only one teen who was in the company of parents. That was most telling. Despite the PG-13 rating, it appeared that everyone, save one, would've been able to attend an R-rated film. After several previews and the warning to shut off all cellphones, banning even texting, it began.
I loved it. Everyone did. Was it perfect? No. Was anything in DS ever perfect? No.
First, regarding the "controversy" that this film was a spoof or send-off of the original, not one thought so, including me. We saw nothing in it designed to denigrate the show everyone on this message board loves. Did it have comedic elements? Of course, especially the fish-out-of-water of Barnabas trying to adjust, adapt and understand life two centuries later. Some were slapstick, but most were logical. We laughed, and not because we felt that the movie was "making fun" of anything from the beloved OS, but because we considered it all true. We sympathized with Barnabas trying to fit in, and one of the best scenes was him talking with Carolyn about attempting to do just that. It was funny, but we could feel his attempt to figure out how to behave, how to be accepted. Many, if not most, of us have been in those situations. We want to be accepted, to belong. The film's Barnabas portrayed that nobley, with a good deal of comedy. He was confused and exasperated. He was trying his best.
And now for the characters.
The movie Barnabas was wonderful. He was a completely sympathetic character, just like the original. Despite his being a "reluctant vampire," he tried to move beyond it and do what he could for the family he loved. Coming from another time and culture, he struggled with trying to fit in, to understand, to keep himself secret, but it's hard to keep one's self secret all times and the wrong things slip out (and the film's Elizabeth constantly covering for, and "correcting" him was spot on).
So, speaking of Elizabeth, she was a different incarnation from the original (or the '91 reforming). She had class, style and forthrightness. She didn't care about her own problems, she cared about her family. And she was not above doing what it would take to protect it.
Her daughter Carolyn was a wonderful manifestation. I had "concerns" about lowering Carolyn's age from 19 to 15, wondering how that would work, but it did. I could only envision Carolyn as a later-teen who was more independent and going to bars and swinging with the guys to the latest tune on the jukebox. That's what she was in the OS and '91. But she captured the cynical, post-tween child that I remember we all were. It was a reimagining, and it works.
I should say, before I continue, that because of what I had read about the film, and its divergence from the OS, that I would try to think of it as a whole new thing, just like when I read Hawkes Harbor, the rewritten novel that was suppose to be included the in the failed HarperCollins novel resurrection that died. SE Hinton changed names of people and places to get it published after it had been rejected by the HarperCollins PTB as "too graphic." So I tried to read it as a first ever incarnation, even though I knew who each character was. But it didn't work. Her novel was DS, even though reimagined in a different way, and despite its divergence from the OS, I still liked it. The same with this film. It's not the same - it's different, but it's still our DS.
Roger, like other characters, was also different, a more cold, allusive, uncaring man. The OS had him as a b*st*rd at times, especially regarding his son, but he would always redeem himself. Not so here. This was a different Roger. He didn't care about his family, including his son, unless he could get something out of it. I wasn't the least bit surprised when Barnabas realized how shallow he was and he chose to take the one of two ultimatums Barnabas gave him. That scene, involving David, was one of the most emotional in the film. A few of my friends shed tears.
David was an incredible expose. Unlike the original, he wasn't a cruel little snot (even though he liked to get his licks in against Carolyn, but what little boy, with an older neo-sibling around, doesn't do that?), but a lonely, suffering child. His aunt refused to believe him; his psychiatrist (Dr. Julia Hoffman) refused to believe him. Only Vicki gave him a small bit of hope, as did Barnabas. Barnabas' affection for him was truly moving.
Ah, Victoria Winters. This was the best portrayal of her ever. Alexandra Moltke was good (since she set the standard), but her wimpy, whining "I don't understand" annoyance made her eventually a stone, and to be perfectly honest, when she left the series (with a few episodes of "Icky-Vicki"), it was time. I considered the '91 version to be just, plain stupid (sorry Taeylor!). This Victoria wasn't sure what she needed, but she was sure to get it. And making her an amalgamation of Victoria/Maggie was brilliant. The flashback scenes were enough to fill in the details. I was absolutely ecstatic that my beloved Maggie Evans was in the movie, and she wasn't some slattern as in the '91 version. Burton and Depp did their homework.
Willie Loomis was a great character, even though he was obviously more based on the '91 version than the original. He was enough of a comedic relief that didn't cross into the ludicrous, like the '91 one.
Angelique. Now there's an evil vixen. For me, the prologue explained enough of her infatuation with Barnabas and her driven desire to destroy the entire family over centuries. I especially loved the scene where it's stated that her hatred for what Barnabas did to her (by rejecting her after using her), did not really constitute hatred, but obsession, otherwise she would've outright killed him. That's so true. She knew he was still "alive" in his chained coffin, and the fact that he was would've driven her to slowly torment the Collins family rather than quickly destroy him in the hope that he would see what she had accomplished over the centuries, despite her surprise that he was freed.
And now we come to Dr. Julia Hoffman. This isn't the same Hoffman from the OS, HoDS or '91. And that's good. I'm glad that Bonham Carter decided to go on her own version. The Julia-in-love-with-Barnabas was good the first time, maybe the second, but by the third it was old and tired. She found Barnabas "fascinating" because of his "condition," and conducted her experiments not because of any concern for him, but for what it would mean for her. That is a totally different Julia. Unlike all the Julia's we have known from the past, all with good intentions, this was a Julia that was totally self-absorbed and concerned for her own welfare. Why must Julia be portrayed solely as a caring individual? Because she was that way in the OS? In HoDS, she was willing to murder Barnabas because he wanted to be with Maggie and not with her, despite all she did for him and was in love with him. In the '91 version, she wasn't much better. They changed her for those portrayals. Why not take it to its logical conclusion here, if they had transformed her before?
And now for one character that was my favorite: Mrs. Johnson. I loved, loved, loved how they made her into an elderly, and age-afflicted, housekeeper. She didn't have one line in the movie. She had obviously lost a good deal of her cognitiive abilities because of her advanced age, but the family kept her on because they felt a duty to her, despite her inability to do things the way she use to. I found that so heart-warming.
With most of the major characters covered, now for the rest.
I found the prologue okay, unlike others who think it was the best part of the film. It did capture the reason why Barnabas became a vampire, but even though it had the gothic nature (and the soundtrack containing wisps of Colbert), I don't see why others (including here) thought it was the best part.
The opening credits, with Victoria/Maggie on the train heading towards Collinsport, with Nights In White Satin playing as the soundtrack, was fantastic. The sets were all incredible, as was the filming. References to the culture of 1972 were spot-on and not overplayed - it was correct, nostalgic and the Barnabas as a fish-out-of-water were done correctly. The entire concept of Barnabas trying to help his family overcome Angelique's attempt at destroying them gripped me (and all my friends). The only thing I didn't like was Carolyn being a you-know-what at the end, despite the hints thoughout the film. I thought that was contrived. Something more should also have been made about David and his association with Laura, his mother. But I'm glad that Barnabas, with Vicki, found that Angelique's curse had been broken, although not in the way either would've wanted. I do see so much for a sequel.
Again, was it perfect? No. How could a movie take over 1,200 episodes and compact it into two hours? Well, how could HoDS take the same and compact it into a move of just an hour-and-a-half? How could the '91 version do the same within 13 episodes? Both failed. Even the OS failed. But it's still all here. If it didn't form the minds of millions of people, this movie never would've been made. I'm grateful it was. It's my DS, just as much as the OS, NoDS, NoDS, '91 ('04, which I've never seen) are. Burton and Depp did an incredible job. I appreciate it, even if no one else might not.
As the credits rolled, we all remained as other shuffled out (as most do). When we left, the next band of fans and erstwhile interested folk were waiting to enter. Most were middle-aged, just like those when we saw it. Some asked us: "Is it good? Is it like the show?" Those of us who remembered said: "Yes. You'll love it."
We went back to my friend's house. Spirits were poured as we insatiated ourselves and then sat down to a "dunch" (a combination of lunch and dinner). We all talked about the movie and toasted it again. One of my friends, who originally hated the show, said "that's the best movie I've enjoyed in a long time." Then, those of us who grew up with the original were bombarded with questions.
If I could afford it, I'd see it again. And again. But for now, I'll have to save my money to buy the two soundtracks and, eventually, the DVD.
My DS lives again. I don't care if this film flops. Thank you, Burton and Depp. You've given to me what I've spent my life enjoying, warts and all. Warts are a part of DS, from the OS to this movie. If they weren't present, it wouldn't be DS. Much of what the late, great, Dan Curtis (to whom this film is dedicated) did on the OS and the '91 was just downright stupid and insulting - please, no one, tell me that it was "fantasy;" - fantasy doesn't have to be stupid and insulting and Dan Curtis should've known better, especially the second time around. But we love him and what he did. In the same vein, I love what Depp and Burton did. It's my DS, and I'm glad it has come back from the grave.
My only other concern has been trying to market this film, as Hollywood always does, to the "target group" of 18-24. They weren't there when I saw it, but the over-40's were. And they loved it. It's time for Hollywood to understand that people who are 18 don't have that much money or sophistication. Okay, so a movie like The Avengers has broken records. It happens. The bottom line for Hollywood is the almighty buck. That's understandable. The 1% need to eat, too (even chateaubriand every day). But if the over-24 crowd is appreciated and things are marketed towards them, then maybe the 1% can have some Bernaise Sauce on their chateuabriand. I have no intention of seeing The Avengers. Neither do any of my friend (most have no concept of what it is). I finally tried to watch Avatar a couple times on TV, while I never saw it in the theater (because the ludicrous animated special effects made it annoying). It's the most "profitable" movie in history. I tried, regarding it, and all times it has failed.
Okay, I'm done with my review and rants. Wrapping it up, I loved this movie. It is DS.
Gerard
Show Posts