HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS: PART 2.

This is it, folks. The final film for my favorite series' (books and films). It would have been so sad if it turned out to be terrible, especially since a lot of people were waiting on Part 2 to form their opinion on the film as a whole (with Part 1). So how did it do? The film picks up right where Part 1 left off. Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) has gotten the Elder Wand--the most powerful wand in existence--while Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione (Emma Watson) are still trying to figure out how to find and destroy Voldemort's remaining Horcruxes (items that include bits of Volde's soul that they have to destroy before they can kill him). The search takes them from Gringotts bank to Hogwarts where they will face off for the final battle... but not without other final confrontations, like with Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) and Severus Snape (Alan Rickman). At this point, it's a question of who is good, who is evil, who will live, and who will die, (and who ends up together)... all of which, of course, you know if you've read the books.

It's really hard to talk about the film without doing a book-to-film comparison. So to avoid falling into a trap of writing a review that won't satisfy book readers only or movie watchers only, I'm going to split this review (much like the last book) into 2 parts. The first part will get the book comparisons out of that way, and then we'll move on to the straight movie stuff (the more technical aspects, I suppose). So if you don't care to read my thoughts on how it was as an adaptation, you can skip this first part. Otherwise, keep reading!

AS AN ADAPTATION

Part 1 took the majority of the book in its time frame, leaving Part 2 with maybe the last third of the story. The only major sequences left include Shell Cottage, Gringotts, Hogsmeade, Return to Hogwarts, The Diadem Hunt/Room of Requirement, The First Battle, The Prince's Tale, The Forbidden Forest, King's Cross, The Final Battle, The Short Ending, and The Epilogue. I know that actually sounds like a lot, but a bunch of those aren't incredibly long even in the book. And like any other adaptation, there are changes, but I personally don't feel any of them are for the worse (except maybe one). So let's look at the scenes (I'll lump some of the lesser ones together when I talk about them).

1) Shell Cottage/Gringotts. The whole sequence is done very closely to the book. Shell Cottage is a short build to the upcoming action sequence, giving us background on Wand Lore and a bit on Bellatrix's vault. Of course, this builds up to the heist scene which is only really different in that the Death Eater (Travers, I believe) isn't there, but is replaced by another goblin that works at the bank. The other main difference is that the duplicating treasure in the vault doesn't burn them, but it does still duplicate. It's a thrilling sequence that ends in an epic dragon ride.

2) Hogsmeade/Return to Hogwarts. The Hogsmeade bit in the book isn't all that huge--it's just the Trio setting off alarms upon return and getting taken in to safety by Aberforth. They get some more background on Dumbledore before Neville shows up and takes them back to the castle. This essentially stays the same. There were a few minor things cut, but nothing major. Most of Dumbledore's background had been removed from both films anyway. I did like, though, that they at least attempted to give some explanation for Harry's mirror shard that he had in Part 1, just still not how he ended up getting the shard in the first place. Still, at least they gave some sort of explanation and didn't just leave it completely open.

The Return to Hogwarts was mainly getting the Trio back and re-introducing practically every student and teacher that has ever been in the series (and was still alive). They didn't bring everyone back here, and obviously there wasn't the big "Percy redemption" scene since all the Percy stuff has been cut from the films. There was a scene added that was interesting with Harry confronting Snape in front of students (the scene is kinda in the book, just a bit different. It's clever, though.

3) The Diadem Hunt/Room of Requirement. This is pretty much exactly how I remember it in the book, with the exception of I believe Blaise Zabini in the place of Crabbe (since the actor was pulled out of the film after being caught with drugs). We really haven't seen school ghosts in these films for a while (I believe since the fourth film with Moaning Myrtle), so seeing one here (and the effects slightly different) was a fun sight. Not to mention the Room of Requirement scene was just as suspenseful as when I read it for the first time. Also during the Diadem Hunt is a scene with Ron and Hermione going into the Chamber of Secrets to get a Basilisk fang, something that was only mentioned in the book (since we just followed Harry). Purists might have issues with it, but I thought it was fantastic seeing that set again when the kids are all grown up (and of course the great kiss that follows).

4) The First Battle/The Prince's Tale. There's not much to discuss on the First Battle, since it's mainly just running around the school fighting Death Eaters, but it is done very nicely and quite epically. You still don't get to see a lot of the funnier moments from the books, though (like Mandrakes and throwing crystal balls). However, what everybody wants to hear about is The Prince's Tale. It's one of the best moments in the entire series in the books, and I do think it translates very well to the screen. There are, of course, a couple moments that were left out (the complete "Snape's Worst Memory" scene)--but you still fully understand what's happening. I think this scene did just like in the book: It makes you flip emotions on two characters you've been following the whole series. So yes, I believe it continues to be one of the best sequences of the films, as well.

5) The Forbidden Forest/King's Cross. The Walk to the forest was a devastating read the first time I read it. Yes, I cried. There's a good moment between Harry and Ron/Hermione, but the rest of it is slightly rushed, losing a bit of the emotion of that final walk. Though you still get the same emotions from the Resurrection Stone scene, which was done very well... all leading up to the "confrontation" with Voldemort, also done well. For King's Cross, the only real difference was that Harry wasn't totally naked when it starts out. Otherwise, it's almost totally the same as the book (including the final line by Dumbledore).

6) The Final Battle. This is where things change up from the book quite a bit. After Harry reveals himself in the book, he hops under the Invisibility Cloak with Neville, they're caught on fire, and Neville jumps out and kills Nagini. The fight moves into the Great Hall, where Harry and Voldemort chat (mostly Harry taunting Voldemort and Harry explaining why Voldemort can no longer hurt them--the power of love and sacrifice, just like Harry's mother did with him). And Mrs. Weasley fights Bellatrix. Only a couple of these are in the actual film. The battle rages on, Mrs. Weasley does do her epic line and battle, and Harry and Voldemort continue on, even flying and merging throughout the sky at one point. Ron, Hermione, and Neville all attempt to attack Nagini. All of this culminates in yet another Priori Incantatem-esque sequence ending with Neville killing Nagini and Voldemort being destroyed almost simultaneously.

These changes are both good and bad. I do love how they juxtaposed attempting to kill Nagini with Harry and Voldemort's fight. That was a brilliant concept that was pulled off very well. However, what was lacking was the explanation of how Voldemort couldn't harm them, as well as Harry's taunting and calling him Tom, showing he was no longer afraid. Granted, the book's version of how Voldemort dies always felt a bit anticlimactic to me, and the film at least attempts to remedy that, which I applaud.

7) The Short Ending/The Epilogue. After this, the book just kind of... ends. And then we get the much-discussed (in both book and film) epilogue. The film is similar to the book, where they just kind of go off, say a few lines, and it ends. The epilogue is just as cheesy as in the book, and almost word-for-word (but without the sidenote that Neville is a professor at Hogwarts). And the epic swell of the original Hedwig's Theme to end it all is very emotional and fantastically done. But speaking of Neville, there's a bit of a fan-service bit that's hugely different from the book. Most fans really wanted Neville and Luna to end up together in the books, but JK Rowling admitted that Luna was a bit too weird for him. Instead, we get a great moment where Neville declares his love for Luna, followed by an awkwardly cute after-battle moment where they sit next to each other. It's so cute and fun and damn what purists say--I liked it!

AS A FILM

First and foremost, this is definitely a Part 2. The first film is 2/3s of the book, and this film is the last third. Because of this, many might feel--like with Part 1--that it's incomplete (the first film has no ending, this film has no beginning). But I think the main issue is that people are looking at this as 2 separate movies (or possibly comparing it to something like Kill Bill). However, these films should be seen as one long film, possibly with an intermission. If you do it like that, then--to me--you lose those problems. There's a definitely beginning, middle, and end. And depending on how you like the Deathly Hallows story to begin with, this can still make or break it for you.

That being said, though, I will review this as the one part it is, as if it were a standalone--even though it goes against how I feel. The biggest issue I've read is that many feel it to be a rushed film. I can understand that at times (and it definitely feels the swiftest of all the movies), but as a whole, I think the pacing works just fine. There's not a whole lot of deep story or introspection in this part of the book as there was in the first half (that's what all that slow build-up was for in the Part 1, where people complained it didn't move fast enough... now people are saying it's going too fast! But I digress).

Anyway, because of the fast-paced nature of this film, the long, beautiful shots of scenery are gone from the cinematography, but it's still a very nice looking film. The best shots come in during the final battle sequences, which is at least half the film. It has a very epic feel to everything, with something different going on everywhere you look on screen (and all of it looks amazing). And the music score fits in just as well, giving it its grand scale.

Acting-wise, everybody is pretty top notch, but there are two standouts that definitely need to be mentioned and/or focused on. First is Maggie Smith as McGonagall. The woman finally gets her due after all these films of being slighted. The woman is a total badass in this film, with a mix of seriousness, dramatics, and humor. And Maggie Smith looks like she's having a blast doing it. The second, and most important, is Alan Rickman as Severus Snape. He hasn't been given much to do since the first film, though he's played the character to absolute perfection. And he's been harboring a secret told to him by JK Rowling herself about the character allowing him to do such. Now he's finally able to relish this tidbit of information and act it out brilliantly. The pain and emotion he shows is palpable and heartbreaking. And The Prince's Tale sequence (and/or the flashback sequence that reveals the truth, to all you non-readers) is--as I stated earlier--one of the best moments in not only this film, but in the entire series.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the film has some changes, but it's still a pretty damn good adaptation of the last third of the book. Some people will say both films should have been shortened and merged together, but then there would have been complaints anyway from fans for cutting too much out. Then there would have been complaints from non-readers for things feeling rushed in order to keep in all the important things. In cutting it into 2 parts and keeping very close to the source material, some thought Part 1 was too slow and Part 2 was too fast. It's an incredibly difficult book to adapt as a film, but I personally feel they made the right choice. I loved both films separately, and I know as soon as Part 2 hits Blu-Ray, I'll be watching both back-to-back... which is how I think the film(s) need to be seen.


Royale With Cheese

(P.S. Was that rating really that much of a surprise?)

(P.P.S. Because I know people are interested, this movie made me almost cry at about 4-5 different points throughout the film. Yeah... it was close.)

Podcast: Reel Insight #39 - Alan Rickman.

Already listened to the last episode of the Demented Podcast, but you're just itching to hear me on something else? Well, I was the last winner of the Quotable Quotes for the Reel Insight podcast, which means I got to join the RI ladies for the third time. As per usual, I got to pick an actor and, this time, went with Mr. Alan Rickman.

The audio is kinda funky throughout because internet connections and Skype weren't all that nice to us while recording, but it's nothing too bad. Jess and I in particular just sound like we're doing a good Stephen Hawking impression every now and then. Anyway, here you go and enjoy (if the player isn't showing up for you, just follow this link instead):

ALICE IN WONDERLAND.

I tried going last weekend, but it kept being sold out. So I went this weekend instead. And my showing was still relatively full, but it didn't get that way until right before the movie started, so it was easy enough to get it early. Anywho... let me prelude by saying I have no deep connection or obsession with the original cartoon movie or the source material. I also do not obsess over Tim Burton, though I do enjoy (most of) his movies. And it didn't bother me in the slightest that this one followed his formula: Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, twisted designs, and black and white juxtaposed against brighter colors. In other words, what every other movie blogger/review has been bitching and moaning about for the last year hasn't bugged me whatsoever. In fact, most reviews I've read have focused on the fact that it's Tim Burton being Tim Burton, while I looked at the movie purely as a movie and not as a "Tim Burton" movie. That being said, let's get into it.

This film acts like a sequel of sorts where Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is grown up and about to be proposed to by a Lord. But when she runs off to go think about it, she falls down the rabbit hole yet again. Despite growing up with strange dreams of Wonderland, she doesn't recognize any of it and can't figure out what to do, which causes some of its bizarre characters to wonder if she's truly "the" Alice. You see, Underland (not Wonderland) has been taken over by the tyrannical Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) because she controls the dangerous Jabberwocky. But it is apparently Alice's destiny to regain the Vorpal Sword, return it to the White Queen (Anne Hathaway), and become the champion that will slay the Jabberwocky and return peace to Underland. To help her are some memorable characters including, but not limited to, the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp), Tweedledee and Tweedledum (Matt Lucas), the Cheshire Cat (Stephen Fry), and Absolom the Blue Caterpillar (Alan Rickman). Other actors to grace this film include Crispin Glover, Michael Sheen, and Timothy Spall.

There's not a whole lot to say about the movie. Let's start with the positive. Visually, the movie is magnificent. There are a couple issues here and there, but for the most part, the CGI is wonderful to look at. The story itself is also interesting, though there are a couple logic holes here and there. For instance, if the Cheshire Cat can evaporate and do whatever he wants, what stops him from just destroying the Red Queen himself? He's already damn near invincible. Also (bit of a spoiler here), there's kind of a leap of faith to take that the Bandersnatch will change sides just like that (end spoiler here).

Acting-wise, it was about half and half. Mia Wasikowska does pretty good as Alice, and Johnny Depp, Stephen Fry, and Matt Lucas are the next stand-outs. In fact, I really only had three issues with certain characters. First was Crispin Glover's character. Something about how he moved really irked me and just came off as overly fake, like they weren't done with the CGI but released the film anyway. I really didn't care for that character overall. The next big issue I had was with Anne Hathaway. I don't know whether to blame Hathaway or Burton, but the way the character was portrayed was just... stupid. It was overly regal and just plain silly. Her hands wear always up like a drunken T-Rex, and she had to flow about and spin around to make any kind of basic movement. It was all incredibly annoying to watch. Luckily, though, she's not in the movie all that much. The last little irksome bit was actually with Depp. I'm sure it was to help portray his character as, well, mad... but his constantly changing accents bugged me. Sometimes he'd be British, sometimes Scottish, sometimes... well, who knows? It was more of a subtle thing, but it still bothered me a bit.

Those were actually my biggest issues with the movie. It didn't blow me away, but I didn't hate it. The visuals were outstanding, and most of the acting was pretty well done. The story was engaging, though it did start to drag a bit near the third act. I just wanted to get on with the battle already. Again, I'm not sure how one would take it if you're an Alice fanatic or if you have a bias against Burton for being too similar in all his movies, but if you aren't those types, then I'm sure you'll find it at least pretty good and enjoyable.


I Am McLovin!

(P.S. The 3D aspect of it was pointless. Besides maybe a couple scenes here and there, there wasn't any point to having it in 3D).

HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE.

Half-Blood Prince is my favorite of the 7 books. I've been looking forward to this film for so long, and after everything I've heard recently, my expectations were super high. So I finally saw Half-Blood Prince at midnight last night. I went straight to bed after I got home (as I had to be at work in the morning), so I've had plenty of time to let things sink in. But you know what? My feelings are exactly the same as last night: This movie is brilliant and blows all the others out of the water.

The movie picks up pretty much where the last one left off, and Harry (Dan Radcliffe) is about to begin his 6th year at Hogwarts. But Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) shows up and takes him on a bit of a side-journey to have a talk with an old professor of Hogwarts, Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent), to try and get him to come back. Later, Harry and friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) notice Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) up to something strange, beginning a bit of an obsession from Harry toward Draco. And then there's Professor Snape (Alan Rickman) who makes an Unbreakable Vow with Draco's mother, Narcissa (Helen McCrory) and Bellatrix Lestrange (Helena Bonham Carter) to help Draco out in his mission that Voldemort has set him. And this is all before they even get to Hogwarts. Once back at school, emotions run high as everybody is feeling romance in the air, including Lavender Brown (Jessie Cave), who has an enormous crush on Ron, and Hermione, who is starting to realize her feelings toward Ron, as well. And then there's Harry's growing crush on Ron's sister Ginny (Bonnie Wright). But not all is light within the school. As Draco continues his secret mission, Dumbledore puts Harry up to the task to get buddy-buddy with Slughorn for a very important reason.

I am a fan of the books and the films, so I'm going to try and make this as fair of a review as possible. I will try to review it both as a film and as an adaptation. Let's start with the actors.

Jim Broadbent's Slughorn, while looking nothing as described in the books, plays him perfectly. His acting, shifting between whimsical and serious, is spot on. Of course, we also have some of the more background players moving to the foreground, such as Draco, Ginny, and Snape (not a background player in the books, per se, but definitely has been given a smaller role in the films as of late). Tom Felton, though with few words, shows us Draco's internal struggle to do the task he has been given, and it's brilliantly played when push comes to shove and the moment finally comes. Ginny, as well, while having almost no lines in the previous films, really shows us that she can play Ginny just fine when asked.

But then we have Snape. Oh, Alan Rickman, how great you are. You've been the perfect casting choice of the entire series, and you still claim that throne. Although Snape appears to come to the foreground even in the book, he's honestly not in it as much as you probably think he is. In fact, I had a discussion just today that the person felt Snape wasn't in it as much as the book, but as huge of a role he plays in the book, he's actually not in it as much as it seems. It's kind of a "Jaws" effect. He's always around, and most things seem to center around him, but he's not always there. Is that to say he's not in the movie a lot? Absolutely not. He has a large role in the film, as well, and plays it to perfection as usual.

Then there's the Trio: Harry, Ron, and Hermione. This movie is downright hilarious, and most of it is thanks to these three (and Lavender, who was obsessively brilliant). But for the first time in a long time, I felt Emma Watson really captured Hermione again. When her hand shot up excitedly in the air to answer a question, I grinned wide. And there's even a fun bit where her hair gets all frizzy and bushy, which had to be a nudge to the fans. I also loved "drunk" Hermione (too much Butterbeer!). Then you have Rupert Grint who also, finally, found a great balance between comedy and loyalty. And then you have Dan Radcliffe, who had some exceptional moments, particularly the Cave scene and the Felix Felicis scene (which is just hilarious).

But the top bill... and I can't believe I'm actually saying this... has to go to Michael Gambon, who--for the first time--acted Dumbledore perfectly. Like Slughorn, there was a perfect mix of whimsy and serious. But the kicker? I think for the first time, I actually saw Michael Gambon smile. And boy, does that make all the difference.

Of course, there are other, smaller characters that did well, too, like Luna (who is great as always). And funnily enough, after my Flitwick complaint recently, he was actually given some dialogue in this film (although one of those dialogue moments was to mention choir practice... oh well). And McGonagall actually gets some decent screen time for once, as well.

Overall, on all the actors' parts, the movie was a great film of expressions. I mean, a lot of the parts (seriousness, heartbreak, fear, comedy) were expressed purely through facial expression, and expressed well, which really says something.

As an adaptation, besides the characters being acted perfectly, the movie does very well. Total purists might not like it for things cut out, but I felt what was cut out wasn't purely necessary to begin with (as long as they're able to include the missing information somehow in the final film, as some was important). For instance, there were three important aspects from the book that were declared cut that had some fans up in arms. These scenes were half the memories, the 'Battle', and the funeral. Let's take these one at a time.

In the book, there are about 6 or so memories into Voldemort's past. In the film, there are 3 (one being a completed version of another). These memories are important in figuring out what Harry has to go after in the final story to help defeat Voldemort. With the memories cut from the film, Harry doesn't exactly know specifics on what to go after... but it works fine. Harry knows what he's supposed to be doing, and in the final book, there really wasn't too much of a need for Harry to know specifics. And if we're lucky, the Trio will just figure it out themselves, making them look much smarter and more important in this mission (because, as we know from the book, that didn't happen too often).

And then we have the cut 'Battle', removed because David Yates felt it might become repetitious due to the battle in the final film. And I agree. There didn't need to be a battle in this one, and the way they did it was just fine. There's still destruction (and one Auror does actually get blasted), but the stealth mode worked, and it will make the final battle that much more epic. As for the funeral, again, unnecessary. In the book, Harry pretty much pays little attention to it anyway, and it's over before you know it. And there's still a nicely done gesture anyway. The movie ends pretty much exactly the same as the book... the Trio talking about what to do next. Actually, I think this is the first time in the movies that the movie has actually ended exactly how the book did. And if the movie seems to just stop, that's because the book did the exact same thing. The movie, like the book, is basically just a setup to the final installment(s).

And speaking of setup, I loved the little nudges the film gave for those who had read the final book (especially the Harry snake-head thing when he touches the ring). And I'm also glad they didn't muck things up (Luna didn't actually see Harry with her SpectreSpecs... and expelliarmus is cast at the end of the movie (which I started getting worried about when it didn't happen immediately)). And there were also some fun in-jokes for those who are knowledgeable of the earlier books/films (Like when Slughorn asks if Aragog had a family, and the tone in Harry's voice when he goes "Oh yeah" is just great).

If I had any complaint about this film, it would be the downplay of the Half-Blood Prince subplot. The potions book really is downplayed in the film, but it was never really that important in the grand scheme of things even in the book, so it's not like it really mattered. It did what it was meant to do (and by God, the Sectumsempra scene was even better than I could have hoped). Draco's mission also became much more obvious in the film than in the book (though I'm not really sure I could say that since I had the book spoiled for me before I read it). But it was still incredibly obvious what he was trying to do. Though in the realm of cinema versus books, I'm not sure that's a bad thing, really.

Some might complain about all the romance, but the book was the same way... and I thought it worked particularly well (in fact, some of it I thought was better than the book, mostly because the book couldn't do the brilliant facial expressions like the film could, not to mention some brilliant lines not in the book). The romance is rarely at the forefront of any scene, but it's a part of a many of them. I even liked how they got around one of my only annoyances of the book, Tonks' moping about mysteriously, later for us to discover is about Lupin. The film? Just puts them right together and gets it over with. Smart move, I say. But if you complain about the love and relationships in Harry Potter, you're missing the point of the series completely. As is said at the end of the Half-Blood Prince book (paraphrasing), one should be proud to see a little more love in the world... because remember, in Harry Potter, love is the most powerful magic. And what better episode to center around love than the one where Dumbledore comes to the forefront? Plus... they're teenagers.

I know this is an incredibly long review, but how could I not talk about the music and cinematography? Nicholas Hooper's score is just beautiful. I gave it a listen before the film came out, and it's just as great in the film as it is out. And the cinematography by Bruno Belbonnel (Amelie and Across the Universe) made an outstandingly gorgeous film. Every shot was so beautiful, it really set this film apart from all the others in visuals, including Prisoner of Azkaban. I really can't stress enough how gorgeous the film is.

Overall, the film was near perfect for a Harry Potter film (Deathly Hallows might trump it simply because it has 2 films to tell its story). It was gorgeous. The music was beautiful. The acting was completely, by everyone, spot on. The movie was hilarious (much funnier than anticipated). There was a perfect balance of dark and light (and when it was dark, it was pretty dark, so I'm really surprised this movie got a PG rated... I'm still not sure how). As an adaptation, there were things cut out and some things added in, and a few things changed, but everything seemed to work. What most adaptations try to do is either be like the first two films and try to put every detail in or be like Goblet of Fire and try to be true, but make it really choppy due to things cut out. For the first time, I've really felt that a Harry Potter movie took the essence of the book and made it into its own creature--staying true to the story and the book, but doing other things of its own volition that separated the book and film and letting it work on a cinematic level. I could go on endlessly about this film, but I'll spare you. Let's just say I can't wait to see it again and again.

Royale With Cheese

(P.S. Did anybody else's heart skip a beat and/or breath get caught in their throat at that final "...Please." right before the occurrence?)

2 In 1: Sweeney Todd and Little Shop of Horrors.

If you can’t figure out the theme for this 2 In 1 just from knowing something about either movie, it’s a theme of romance, dark comedy, singing, and murder. That’s right! The dark romantic musical comedies of death and murder! Or something like that. Anywho, as stated in the title, I finally got around to seeing Sweeney Todd, and I’m pairing it up with one of my favorite movies growing up, Little Shop of Horrors. So here we go!

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

Sweeney Todd is a revenge story about unrequited love with almost every character in the movie (at least the love part). And it stars at least a good fourth of the cast of the Harry Potter movies (okay, so that’s an over-exaggeration… but seriously, you could probably combine this movie with Gosford Park, and you’d have practically every important adult role in Harry Potter). But anyway, to the film: Sweeney Todd (Johnny Depp), once Benjamin Barker, is a scorned barber whose wife and baby daughter were stolen away by an evil Judge (Alan Rickman) and his ambiguously gay sidekick (Timothy Spall). Over the years, he plots revenge before finally coming back to London to exact it. He meets Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter), a meat-pie shop owner, and together they work together to help exact Mr. Todd’s revenge on those who have wronged him.

I have to say that the first half of the movie almost lost me. The music wasn’t overtly catchy (with a couple exceptions), and it was just kind of bland (no help to Tim Burton’s drab coloring scheme). But then the second half of the movie picks up once Sweeney loses it completely and goes utterly insane. The song immediately after that part, the one about how to get rid of the bodies, has to be my favorite from the movie. It was darkly hilarious and reminded me of something Stephen Lynch would sing. So yeah, the second half was much better than the first half.

On the subject of the music, the songs were either hit or miss—hit being the previously mentioned song, miss being the one and only song (albeit a short one) Timothy Spall attempts toward the latter end of the movie (unless I forgot another, but I think that was it). Some were catchy, some were just plain good, and some were either too weird (like Sacha Baron Cohen’s song) or too boring. And as the movie is almost entirely nothing but singing, that means the movie is really either hit or miss at times.

I think acting-wise, everybody did a really good job, even Sacha Baron Cohen (after I got over the weirded-out phase). Depp is brilliant as always, and Carter and Rickman were equally as good. Timothy Spall bugged me the most, but I think that was just the character, not his acting. He was just… odd. But the kudos’ for this movie go to the young Ed Sanders who played orphan-boy Toby. He did really well, especially the emotions on his face at the end of the movie.

Of course I have to mention the visuals. I sustain my thoughts that I had prior to seeing the movie: what was bleak and gray was very bleak and gray; what was bright and colorful was very bright and colorful. There was no in-between, and the majority of the movie had grays and blacks (and the occasional white to show off the blood red).

I’m not sure what else to mention about it. I think those were really all my major thoughts. The movie was pretty good, but it could have been better. Though, also to help me boost the score up to the point I do is not only because there were parts able to keep me on my toes, but I was caught off guard at the end with a twist I wasn’t expecting. I love it when movies can do that. It always makes me appreciate the movie more. And I really do appreciate what this movie did, even if it was disturbing (though I might have enjoyed it more had I not watched it with my mother, who was complaining about the blood and such for the entire last half of the movie).

I Am McLovin!

Little Shop of Horrors.

Back in 1960, Roger Corman made a cult classic in two days using left-over sets and such from a previous movie he had finished early (with a cameo by a very young Jack Nicholson). Years later, it was turned into an off-Broadway musical, which would later be adapted by Frank Oz and Howard Ashman into the 1986 musical extravaganza! Seymour Krelborn (Rick Moranis) is a skid-row orphan working under Mr. Mushnik (Vincent Gardenia) at Mushnik’s floral shop. He’s desperately and longingly in love with co-worker Audrey (Ellen Greene), but she’s shacking up with abusive and sadistic dentist, Orin Scrivello, DDS (Steve Martin). But after a total eclipse of the sun, Seymour discovers a fly-trap-esque plant and takes it in. He names it the Audrey II, and it immediately brings instant success to the bankrupt shop. But then Seymour discovers a deadly secret: the plant can only survive by drinking blood. So he feeds it his own blood until it gets too big and starts talking (voiced by Levi Stubbs of The Four Tops), requesting that Seymour go out and kill people to feed him.

This movie was my favorite growing up (which explains quite a lot, really). I’ve watched it an uncountable amount of times, and I know the words and lyrics backward and forward. It’s dark, it’s funny, it’s romantic, and it’s scary. This movie still creeps me out at times, and I hate being around plants in the dark. The one specific scene that will never ever stop scaring the crap out of me is toward the end when Audrey II calls up Audrey (who lives right across the street) and sings to her. Audrey slowly turns to her window and sees this enormous plant staring and laughing at her from across the street. God, just thinking about that scene creeps me out.

The singing is done very well, and Rick Moranis really has some pipes in him. Great voice. Really, every song is a classic with me, even if they aren’t my favorite (such as the more romantic ‘somewhere that’s green’. However, after I heard about the original ending and the irony around that song and its original purpose, I came to appreciate it much more).

And speaking of the ending, this movie has one of the most famous stories in cinema. They shot the original ending, the one taken from the stage play, where everybody dies and the plants take over the world, but it did poorly with test audiences. So they spent millions of more dollars to film a happier ending just to please the audience. That’s Hollywood for you. But I’ve seen the original ending, as well, and it’s pretty creepy (though the last frame of the happy ending is creepy in itself, too).

And this movie is cameo-central. There’s Bill Murray as the pain-loving dentist's patient (originally played by Jack Nicholson in Roger Corman’s version), and he has, hands down, the funniest scene in the entire movie. And he and Steve Martin improv’d the entire scene. Hilarity. There’s also Christopher Guest, John Candy, and James Belushi (also, as I just realized, for another Harry Potter reference, Miriam Margolyes is also in the movie (she was Professor Sprout in the first two HP movies)).

I really don’t know what else to say about this movie. I love every inch of it. I really recommend it to people who like musicals, dark comedies, or just anything twisted in general. It’s great fun (for the whole family!).

Royale With Cheese