Sublimes créatures

Okay so here is the deal with this movie. no it doesn't follow the book exactly, but then again, what movie really does? I read all the books in this series about 3 years ago and just finished the last in the series recently. The movie got the main events pretty much right so that is all that matters. The effects were pretty amazing and I have nothing to complain about on the acting. But the only thing that bothers me is that people keep calling this Twilight.

For one, Twilight has poor acting and a stupid story line. I read the books before the movies, and they were only okay. This has a fantastic story line and it is more... realistic i guess. Yes it has magic and what not but he likes her because of her! Not because he "just cant stay away from her". The movie does have a lot of romance but it's more believable that they really care for each other.

It is an insult comparing this amazing book and pretty good movie to Twilight. Yes if you like Twilight you should like this too, just because Twilight was made into a movie first does not mean that this should be compared to it. It is not a Twilight copy. Especially if you read the book, it is for a much more mature mind.

Despite the mixed/average reviews, decided to see 'Beautiful Creatures' anyway as someone who did enjoy the book series, liked the idea of the story, enjoys films that fit under the same genres that this does and who really likes to loves a lot of the cast members in other things. Other than the reviews, what did make me a little nervous too was the constant references by many to the 'Twilight' franchise, am very much indifferent to that franchise to put it lightly and the best film from it ('Eclipse') is only slightly watchable.

Will get the comparisons out of the way. 'Beautiful Creatures' is in my mind much better than any of the 'Twilight' films combined, better made, much better acting (the 'Twilight' films only had like two good actors, whereas even with the accents the acting mostly wasn't an issue for me here) and the story, for all its problems, interested me more. 'Beautiful Creatures' is by no means perfect and would hesitate in calling it great, only generally found it slightly above average, but judging it as a film on its own merits (rather than frequently comparing it to the books, of which the film is a pretty poor adaptation of) it's a better film than given credit for.

Starting with the bad things, 'Beautiful Creatures' would have leant itself better to a film series rather than just one film, because there is a feel (and it was what was pretty much happening) of elements of two or more books in one film, which made it feel rushed and cluttered. The caster mythology could have been delved into much more, because that did tend to be convoluted (anybody who has no knowledge of the books may find themselves lost). Particularly towards the end, before the film ends in a vague and rushed way complete with a clumsy twist, it is not a surprise that book fans found the ending too much of a slap in the face.

Also found some of the earlier portions of 'Beautiful Creatures' to be too exposition heavy, with some clunky dialogue and the pace in need of a tightening up. The Lena's first day at school portion was very badly acted by the secondary cast, was really cringing, and written in a very bad teen school comedy film way. It has been said numerous times about the Southern accents being bad, do agree with it veering on either extreme of come and go (Jeremy Irons, accents never really has been his forte and this is coming from a fan of his) and exaggerated (Alden Ehrenreich) of the main cast. And it's even worse for the secondary cast playing characters that are very broadly stereotypical, that is true of a lot of Southerner portrayals on film, and never feel like real people.

Conversely, 'Beautiful Creatures' is a surprisingly good looking film, it was clear a lot of time, effort and money went into it. Especially loved the locations, with a big standout going to the Ravenwood mansion and the photography is both beautiful and gothic. The costumes are also ni nicely done, the kookiness of those of the Ravenwoods (including Eileen Atkins with a pink wig!) added to their mysteriousness, and the dinner table scene sees some editing and lighting that are wonderfully psychedelic without giving me too much headache or dizziness. The music fits quite nicely too and was hardly unattractive to me on its own, am big on both those things when it comes to music in film so both are good positions to be in.

The script is flawed early on but as the film progressed the snappier, more intriguing and tighter it became. Macon, with the film livening up by quite a bit when he appears, has some of the best lines and that's in his first scene alone. The story isn't perfect, but enough of it does compel with two scenes in particular standing out. One was the dinner table scene, along with Ridley's flashback that was the most striking scene visually, and the other was the Macon and Sarafine confrontation, the chemistry between Irons and Emma Thompson sizzles and seeing a clash of the titans-like moments between two great actors is always great to watch. The likeably natural, no awkwardness here (actually did get the sense that they were in love), chemistry between Ehrenreich and Alice Englert also helps as does the confident direction.

Found Ehrenreich and Englert to mostly not be bad at all in their roles, Ehrenreich's accent is not the best and he overdoes it at times but the quirkiness and likeability is there. While Englert is more subtle without being sullen or expressionless, did root for Lena myself having been treated like an outcast in school for prejudicial reasons too. They are very well supported, outshone even, by the veteran cast, with Atkins and Martina Martindale doing a lot with small roles and Viola Davis bringing sincerity to hers. The authors had Irons in mind when writing Macon and one can tell because not so good accent aside he was made for the character, and he looked like he was having fun while bringing gravitas and menace. Thompson even more so, camping it up deliciously and nearly stealing the film, and the same goes for a truly delightful Emmy Rossum.

Summarising, not quite beautiful but far from ugly. 6/10

Im 33 years old and probably not in the main-group for this movie (teengirls maybe). But me and my friend got a free ticket and went for this movie we would normally not had seen.

But i was charmed. The young actors played well, was cute and had chemistry together. We smiled many times, and the effects was good. The story was OK, and i have never read the story this movie is build on.

This is a good movie i think, and probably they will make more movies so we see how the story will go. I found it fun with the southern small town fun of religious narrowness. And the fight between good and evil is a fight in many of the fantasy-movies, and that was a red line in this movie and worked good.

Fun also to see Emma Thompson, she did a awesome actor-work.

A common criticism of BEAUTIFUL CREATURES is that it doesn't do justice to the original novel, which is often the case when the book is really good. I had not read the book prior to watching this but am now eager to do so.

Regardless, BEAUTIFUL CREATURES is vividly filmed with good performances by Alice Englert, Alden Ehrenreich, Emmy Rossum, Rachel Brosnahan, and just about everyone else. Another frequent complaint seems to be that there is not enough in the magic/special effects department: True, but the relative sparseness here adds a necessary realism and highlights what spectactics the film does have. The townspeople of Gatlin, South Carolina, are stereotypical Bible-thumping yokel-rubes, but that serves its purpose in the way it contrasts Lena (Englert), who is just about the only character who does not speak in a deep-southern accent. It also helps in how Ethan (Ehrenreich) and his buddy Link (Thomas Mann) completely defy their hickish appearances. BEAUTIFUL CREATURES captures the whole Southern Gothic tradition quite well. One way or another, the relationships in this film are very real. BEAUTIFUL CREATURES also walks the thin horror-comedy line most admirably.

On the dimmer end of things, the whole texture of the film is a little slow and murky, and it would probably have been a little better with a few minutes cut here and there.

The story has an original premise in that's it has a fairly familiar ideas (witches and magic - one of the oldest subjects for stories - strange kid moves into town and changes everything, secrets about the town are unveiled etc.) but the focus is on how the caster girl's powers affect her and her feelings of being outcast all her life, and the story revolves around a teen romance with a twist.

I went to see the film expecting to follow Lena, the caster girl who is struggling with the powers of light and dark inside her, but was (pleasantly) surprised to see the story was generally told from the point of view of her love interest Ethan, the 'normal' boy who falls for the outsider when everyone else shuns her. He's a very likable character, clearly passionate and compassionate, and has a good sense of humour that provides fresh light on the sometimes dark story matter.

It was also a bit creepier than I expected. There is conflict between the light and dark casters, as well as these elements within the characters, fighting for supremacy - danger and fear run through the film, and you will be surprised more than once.

Personally I found this film really entertaining, though I understand many fans are unhappy with the adaptation and I'm considering reading the books myself. I thought it offered everything, humour, action, fear, a sweet romance, a healthy dose of magic - and it's fresh! This is a solid, quality young adult movie.