tobiwalker
Juni 2018 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen2
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Rezensionen38
Bewertung von tobiwalker
I read the book shortly after it was published in 1962 and again about ten years ago, so was eagerly awaiting the 2018 film version (which disappointed me terribly). I was a little nervous about watching this version but, after reading some of the user reviews, I took the plunge and was so glad I did.
The most important part of the book for me was the relationship between the three young people: Meg, Calvin and, of course, Charles Wallace. Meeting Meg and Charles Wallace felt just right but it was when we met Calvin that I knew at last I'd found the film adaptation I'd needed for so long -- Gregory Smith WAS my Calvin.
The 2018 film has more spectacular effects but this version has the kids who made the story interesting. It also ends with a very positive message -- a bit drawn out but satisfying, and making me want to revisit the book, again.
The most important part of the book for me was the relationship between the three young people: Meg, Calvin and, of course, Charles Wallace. Meeting Meg and Charles Wallace felt just right but it was when we met Calvin that I knew at last I'd found the film adaptation I'd needed for so long -- Gregory Smith WAS my Calvin.
The 2018 film has more spectacular effects but this version has the kids who made the story interesting. It also ends with a very positive message -- a bit drawn out but satisfying, and making me want to revisit the book, again.
For starters, I'm not a thirteen-year-old girl although I once was, and I've been reading science fiction since before I was thirteen. I've also watched alien invasion movies from the 1950s on, and so nothing any filmmaker can do really brings a fresh approach to the genre.
This film was formulaic. The villains telegraphed themselves. But the acting was good, the pacing good, the special effects also good. At the end I found myself caring enough about the characters to want a tv series featuring their ongoing challenges. Doesn't that make a movie worthy? That you come away wondering what you, yourself, would have done in the situation and wanting to follow the adventures of those actually in it?
This film was formulaic. The villains telegraphed themselves. But the acting was good, the pacing good, the special effects also good. At the end I found myself caring enough about the characters to want a tv series featuring their ongoing challenges. Doesn't that make a movie worthy? That you come away wondering what you, yourself, would have done in the situation and wanting to follow the adventures of those actually in it?
If this movie had been released as originally scheduled, it would have been a treat for the aging fans of Ray Harryhausen and his Dynamation epics. Instead, it feels like a relic frozen in time.
Stop motion was a horribly onerous process of moving puppets and props frame-by-frame that gave us King Kong in 1933 and Harryhausen's 'The Clash of the Titans' in 1981, with several classics of the genre in-between. CGI and Jurassic Park made the process obsolete; meanwhile, this sat on the shelf never able to raise enough funding for post production.
The stars of these movies were rarely the actors. They were, instead, the fantastical elements of the animated characters. As a throwback to the time Harryhausen movies thrilled a generation of kids like Joe Dante, John Landis, Tim Burton and Steven Spielberg, 'The Primevals' is perfect, flaws and all. To modern eyes, it's clumsy and confusing and makes perfectly clear why stop-motion animators like Phil Tippett and Jim Danforth bowed to the cinematic special effects juggernaut that was CGI.
If you can imagine yourself a ten-year-old in 1965, when a ticket to the Saturday afternoon cost a quarter and a box of candy cost 5-15 cents, this is the kind of movie you would have been thrilled to see.
I am so thankful it was finally completed. RIP David Allen.
Stop motion was a horribly onerous process of moving puppets and props frame-by-frame that gave us King Kong in 1933 and Harryhausen's 'The Clash of the Titans' in 1981, with several classics of the genre in-between. CGI and Jurassic Park made the process obsolete; meanwhile, this sat on the shelf never able to raise enough funding for post production.
The stars of these movies were rarely the actors. They were, instead, the fantastical elements of the animated characters. As a throwback to the time Harryhausen movies thrilled a generation of kids like Joe Dante, John Landis, Tim Burton and Steven Spielberg, 'The Primevals' is perfect, flaws and all. To modern eyes, it's clumsy and confusing and makes perfectly clear why stop-motion animators like Phil Tippett and Jim Danforth bowed to the cinematic special effects juggernaut that was CGI.
If you can imagine yourself a ten-year-old in 1965, when a ticket to the Saturday afternoon cost a quarter and a box of candy cost 5-15 cents, this is the kind of movie you would have been thrilled to see.
I am so thankful it was finally completed. RIP David Allen.