I’ve seen and read several things lately and haven’t written about them. Some of them I wanted to, so I’d best do it before it’s completely pointless.
Spoilers definitely abound, so if you care… don’t read.
Troy
Let’s work chronologically backwards. This was the last movie I saw at the theatre, and as I told E, the people who are frothing at the mouth about it were apparently confused as to what it was going to be. It is not an adaptation of the Iliad. It does not purport to be an adaptation of the Iliad. The title of the movie is not ‘Homer’s Iliad’ or any variant thereof. It is “Troy”, which says to me, here’s a movie that involves Troy in some fashion. And this expectation will not be disappointed. The story is massively simplified and updated — Priam has what, 100 children in the originating myths? They ruthlessly cut out all of the unimportant ones and several of the important ones (notably, Cassandra makes no appearance in this movie), paring the number down to the two you absolutely cannot do without: Paris and Hector. The gods, rather than being direct, physical participants, are not seen. This, I think, was a wise choice. It was more realistic to have them firmly off camera; people tend to read in to occurrences after the fact, when they can spin the results in the manner they wish. There were things which happened which were contrary to myth (for instance, the war took about 3 weeks rather than 10 years), there were things which happened according to myth (Odysseus came up with the horse), there were things that happened that were neither contradictory nor agreeing. The plot hung together reasonably well, and most everyone behaved pretty ICly, which is about all that I expect from any movie, let alone a literary adaptation.
Van Helsing
This was an interesting idea. Not being a fan of or very knowledgeable about monster movies in general, I cannot comment on how much of this was cribbed from classic movies of that genre. But the plot was weaker here than Troy. There were several points where I felt like avenues were not explored simply because the writers were too lazy to come up with the answer to the questions that had been raised. For instance, Dracula keeps going on about how he knows about Van Helsing’s past. He finally states that Van Helsing was the one who murdered him, and says a few more things which are neither explained nor really reacted to. Perhaps they’re just leaving it open for a sequel, but the script could have used some tightening. Overall though it wasn’t awful. Not as good as Troy; I won’t be buying the DVD; but I’ve seen worse.
Shrek 2
It was good. Cute and clever and with very few parts that annoyed me. Will it stand the test of time? Not at all. It’s too in-jokey and mired in current popular culture references. 50, even 20 years from now, I expect a lot of the jokes to be hard to understand. Like the first Shrek, it has not the staying power of a Disney classic. Pure fluff, it amuses and then is eminently forgettable.
Mean Girls
More fluff, but live action fluff this time. There were a few painful moments in this movie, but for an SNL associated picture it was nothing short of miraculous. (Amongst movies in general it was less so, but it was above average at least.) I don’t know if it’s DVD purchase worthy, but it might be. The script was reasonably clever, and though the end was pretty stupid, the middle part mostly makes up for it.
On to television…
The Friends finale annoyed me a bit. For something they clearly had all the time in the world to work on, there were several bits in the script that did not make any sense to me. First, the fact that the babies came home from the hospital approximately two hours after they were born. This does not strike me as realistic, especially in an adoption situation. And then there was the whole Rachel and Ross thing. I’ll be candid: I didn’t want them to get together at the end. They were over. The fact that they continued to dance around the issue seven or eight YEARS after they had broken up just emphasized their patheticness and inability to move on with their lives. In one sense they deserved each other, but in another it would have been far more cheerful an ending if it had shown them able to get over the past and make rational, reasonable decisions. But it didn’t. And why didn’t it? Someone suggested to me that it was because they needed to be together for the final scene — an OOC requirement artificially imposed on the plotline that caused it to twist. I’m inclined to believe this is the case, and it is unfortunate! Because without that restriction, more sense could have been had. Ross could have gone -with- Rachel instead of expecting the woman to give up -her- growth and dreams for a sad loser not willing to make the same sacrifice for her. (And that just made me sad. The show began with Rachel escaping from that box, and it ended with her leaping right back in.)
West Wing
More satisfying, but nonetheless upsetting! Poor Josh. My main comment here is the fact that I didn’t recognize Jason Isaacs right away. In fact, I didn’t realize it was him until I saw his name in the credits. I felt dumb. And it made me want to watch…
Peter Pan
Bought the DVD. Worth it. I’m glad they cut the original ending scene, but they shouldn’t have cut out the whole Mr. Darling flagellates himself bit.
Love Actually
Also got this DVD, and it was again worth it. Mostly I had just wanted to see the movie again, as it strikes me as one of those that I’ll be able to watch over and over again, but I was pleased to find that the DVD contains reams of deleted scenes, most of which are excellent.