Movie Review: The Lovely Bones. WITH SPOILERS!
OK, so with the light of dawn, I’m not quite as mad about the movie adaptation of the book. But at 1 a.m., I finally broke down and took a sleep aid because every time I would settle in to sleep, the images would begin and I didn’t want nightmares. So I would perk up and try to shift my thoughts somewhere else.
In all fairness, perhaps the written word does not disturb me as much as visual images. But I do think there is more to it than that. I got the book out and my husband and I will re-read it, fresh after watching the movie so I can have a witness.
In the book, the girl dies in the first 15 pages. I didn’t keep track in the movie, but they took a really long time to set up the characters, and to set up the creepy guy and for the murder to take place. Then, following the murder, (she isn’t raped in the movie as she is in the book), they show the scene of creep-man’s bathroom where you see mud and blood everywhere, and a straight razor sitting on the side of the sink. OK, that is enough to do me in. I don’t recall any of that imagery from the book. It was bad enough the way she died in the book but that wasn’t the REASON for the book. The murder was the catalyst of the book.
They spend a WHOLE lot of time focusing on the family dynamics after the murder and OK, I’ll have to re-read it, but I don’t remember that the creep was a mass-serial killer…was he? Who kept scrapbooks and newspaper clippings and a sketch book of his trap contraptions? They spent a great deal of time on HIM. And the Family, and the Dad. Not so much on the Heaven transition.
As I remember the book, a girl dies in a bad way, and then has an experience of the afterlife that was very different than anything I’ve ever encountered, I thought it was interesting. And as I remember it, she was instrumental in solving her own murder…that was the purpose for her staying longer.
I don’t recall a budding romance, or her channeling into a girl from school who could see spirits so her boyfriend could give her her first, and last kiss.
From my perspective, they got it all wrong. They focused on the grisly and the spooky and the suspense and left out the spiritual which is what *I* thought the book mainly focused on. The love and the transition, along with justice for creep-man.
I didn’t used to think of myself as a prude, so it makes me feel like an old person…like my mother or grandmother to say that I find so much of movies and TV increasingly upping the ante on the fear, violence, brutality, sexuality, and dysfunction of the world and everything needs to be loud, flashy, multiple frames per second assault on the senses. Is that due to my age?
Part of my frustration at times, is the over-the-top portrayals of spirituality, life after death, ghosts, etc. I quit watching Medium and Ghost Whisperer because they just kept making it scarier and scarier, and more brutal. Ghost’s don’t appear that way. I’ve never seen ONE who showed up mangled or in the gruesome form in which they died. They appear, most often in the way they were happiest, at an age or time that you would most recognize them…not all ghoulish and freaky. While I’m happy that media is starting to take an interest in the supernatural and spiritual in a more mainstream way, they are portraying it in a way that makes it frightening to people and keeps in shrouded in a place where the average person dare not go. That’s a problem…a separate problem from this movie.
I wish we had gone to see Dear John instead. Maybe next weekend.
With all due respect, how long has it been since you read the book? I feel that it is you that missed the point of the story not the director. While I can understand where you are coming from by the lateness of the murder, I also understand that for the film to set up the characters for the people who have not read the book. While it would be great if everyone had read the book already, the point of making the movie was not just to make it for the book readers. Also I thought you would like to know that Mr. Harvey was a serial killer, and Susie did posses Ruth in order to kiss ‘The Moor”. Also you seemed upset that they spent time focusing on the family dynamics after the murder… that’s the entire point. Its a story about how Susie tries to cope with her murder while watching her family cope. I’m sorry that you came away from the movie with such a low opinion of it, but it might not be your type of film if you think Dear John has any value as a film. Personally I think The Lovely Bones is beyond the film intelligence level of the people of La Grande since our theatre only kept it for a week, but played the stupid chipmunk movie for like 20 years.
Cherrie Ward
Reply:
February 13th, 2010 at 10:35 am
Wow…touched a little nerve much??
You’re right that it has been quite some time since I read the book. I am rereading it now. But it took the book 15 pages for Susie to die. The point was not for it to be this suspenseful murder mystery. The point was the spirituality and a different way of viewing afterlife, so I still disagree with you on it’s merits as adapted to film. But that’s OK. I’m well aware that people will really like it and others will not. The emphasis, and the supporting characters were very different. I will concede that there are details I didn’t remember.
To malign LaGrand-ites for their lack of artistic integrity in appreciating a film you clearly enjoyed seems a bit extreme. In general, the local response (by attendance) matches the national response. It has not been a popular film despite being a popular book.
Oh, and I wasn’t so much upset that they focused on the family dynamics, but they were totally different, and the emphasis and weight was wrong. In my opinion. I know we will not agree. We have different taste in movies. Hey, why don’t you write a separate movie review since you liked it and would like others to enjoy it too. Balance is always good to have. I respect that you enjoyed it. I wasn’t personally attacking YOU.
And I think I would LOVE Alvin AND Dear John. And the rest of the nation seems to also.
I wasn’t personally attacking you either, though I have no remorse about passing judgment on the viewing tastes of this town. Granted I put most of the blame on The Granada, rather than the viewers. Something about the reception of a film seems to have slipped past you though, while a film can make plenty of money because it was hyped up well in its trailers, that does not mean it was actually a good film. For example: Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel was rated 3.3 out of ten. and Dear John was rated 5.3 out of ten. The Lovely Bones received a 6.8 out of ten. (www.imdb.com) Which is still not a stellar score, but is certainly better than the previously mentioned scores. I can appreciate your connection to the nation on whether or not you would like a film. But personally, if the nation jumped off a bridge, that doesn’t mean I would follow them.
Cherrie Ward
Reply:
February 15th, 2010 at 9:46 am
I think it would be fascinating to talk to the person who wrote the screenplay to see how and why they arrived at the decisions of what to include and emphasise. Those aspects have my primary objection.
In re reading the book (which I am in process of now), I see the places where there were many things I had forgotten, and I also see WHY I had forgotten them. There are many places in the movie where the decision was made to create an entire scene out of a single sentence. That’s interesting. And to me, the movie lost the primary emphasis of the book. The minor details can be expected.
I choose to restrict my comments to the movie vs book adaptation rather than to casting insult to a town, a business, or the national will (despite perhaps sharing some of your views on that, it’s not really relevant here). I would be more interested to know, for example, why and in what way you loved and enjoyed the movie, and what you appreciated about the way the screenplay was adapted from the book. So far, by way of contrast, I haven’t heard anything to explain your position, other than to disagree with mine. Tell us what you loved about the movie, I really do want to know. I think that would be way more interesting in this forum.
I read one review that stated it was a fantastic film and “every parent should take their child to it” and the primary reason for that being that “children needed to know it was an unsafe world and to be aware”. I disagree with this position, (perhaps not the reasoning behind it, but the method to achieve it) but it certainly showed me the wide range of thought.
I’m content to agree to disagree, and would really be interested in your positive thoughts about the movie to contrast with mine.
The biggest thing that I liked about the film was that it was able to include small details without getting bogged down trying to bring everything in. Thought I must admit I was sad that they left out the science camp that Lindsey went to as well as the affair that the mother had with the police office. I could understand why they left them out because they weren’t as important to Susie as the other things that were going on with her family. The director and his team that worked on visual effects also did an absolutely amazing job with creating Susie’s heaven, and in fact brought the books descriptions to life beyond what I expected. I would like to agree with you to an extent of your questioning as to why all children should see this movie. While children should learn that not everyone they run into out in this world is a safe person to be around, I do feel that the bathroom scene when Susie is finally connecting the dots that she is dead is a little to disturbing for children. I want to close first by saying that I am sorry that I offended you with my opinion of the La Grande movie taste, but to also say that I am not directing that comment at you. I think that you write well, and you are certainly entitled to dislike a movie and post a review that reflects it. We just have very different tastes in movies.