To be honest, what really put me off reading the book and seeing the film was Richard and Judy and their book of the month:eek: I should be honest and say they were sliming all over the thing and talking as if they'd written it themselves. I've seen it in bookshops and been tempted but am reluctant to read anything Judy Finnegan says is entertaining!:(
To be honest, what really put me off reading the book and seeing the film was Richard and Judy and their book of the month:eek: I should be honest and say they were sliming all over the thing and talking as if they'd written it themselves. I've seen it in bookshops and been tempted but am reluctant to read anything Judy Finnegan says is entertaining!:(
Mind the book is brilliant !highly recomended! as for the film im gonna watch it after the 19th and make my own opinion despite the fact its differant from the book and having negative so called " film critics" reviews but on u tube punters give it excellent reviews ..usually when a film gets bad reviews its usually very good ...films are personal anyway ! what one person likes another doesnt ..that why we all have opinions ..give the book a try !...then watch the film!
I read this book on holiday about 3 years ago and cried my eyes out. I then passed it over to my OH and when he got to the last page, he had tears in his eyes. It was so moving, even more moving since I lost my mum, haven't been able to read it since.
I doubt the film will live up to the book but I wil give it a chance.
I think it's well worth seeing for the performances of the girl who plays Susie, Saoirse Ronan (or however you spell it) and Mr Harvey. No-one else really gets much screentime but that's made up by how brilliant certain 'in-between' parts look and a few shocking moments where you're like 'wow' stunned.
The book is definitely more of a TV movie-type material and with Peter Jackson trying to make it more cinematic I think that knocked a few fans.
Mind the book is brilliant !highly recomended! as for the film im gonna watch it after the 19th and make my own opinion despite the fact its differant from the book and having negative so called " film critics" reviews but on u tube punters give it excellent reviews ..usually when a film gets bad reviews its usually very good ...films are personal anyway ! what one person likes another doesnt ..that why we all have opinions ..give the book a try !...then watch the film!
Thanks for that, I'm going away in a few days and usually buy a book to read, I will definately go for The Lovely Bones and give it a try and ignore the fact that the ex- This Morning bores recommended it!
I was surprised that a film was ever made out of this book.
I read the book from cover to cover in a day because it is compulsive reading. That said I didn't really like it. But that is because I find books that deal with things as distressing as this really quite hard going.
I also didn't like the end of the book because
although the murderer died he wasn't properly bought to book for what he did in public court and her parents never really found out what had happened
But, as I say, I was surprised it was made into a film because it was a very personal book and I wasn't quite sure how they would make the scenes in heaven gel with the action on earth in a film.
I haven't seen it yet, I'm not sure I want to. Also I grew up in the same area as Milly Dowler and was about a year older. I think that's what made me feel very uncomfortable about the book and why I'm reluctant to see the film. It's just a bit close to home.
Thanks for that, I'm going away in a few days and usually buy a book to read, I will definately go for The Lovely Bones and give it a try and ignore the fact that the ex- This Morning bores recommended it!
Despite the bad reviews elsewhere !The Sunday Mirror last sunday made it there "film of the week " and gave it 4/5 rating !...the main annoyance for me is why Soarise Ronan got ignored for the oscars for this film !
Just got back from watching it (i've never read the book), and i really enjoyed it, although i'm not sure "enjoy" is the right word to use for a film about child rape/murder!
It was a well told story with some very good acting. I did feel that the more understated "inbetween" sections where Susie was in the endless corn field/disturbing forest worked more than the OTT "running on a giant grass ball" sequences though, so i guess i understand where some reviewers are coming from when they say that Peter Jackson went a bit overboard on the effects. The whole thing did look absolutely stunning though.
Overall, i'd give it 8.5/10, maybe even a 9/10.
I don't think the film should have been a 12A though, the subject matter itself i feel is a bit too much for anyone under 15, and it did have some pretty gruesome scenes in it. I can't honestly see anyone 12 or under wanting to see it to be fair, it's hardly a film for kids.
Just got back from watching it (i've never read the book), and i really enjoyed it, although i'm not sure "enjoy" is the right word to use for a film about child rape/murder!
It was a well told story with some very good acting. I did feel that the more understated "inbetween" sections where Susie was in the endless corn field/disturbing forest worked more than the OTT "running on a giant grass ball" sequences though, so i guess i understand where some reviewers are coming from when they say that Peter Jackson went a bit overboard on the effects. The whole thing did look absolutely stunning though.
Overall, i'd give it 8.5/10, maybe even a 9/10.
I don't think the film should have been a 12A though, the subject matter itself i feel is a bit too much for anyone under 15, and it did have some pretty gruesome scenes in it. I can't honestly see anyone 12 or under wanting to see it to be fair, it's hardly a film for kids.
Gonna see this on monday looking forward to seeing it ...been reading alot of the british punters who have seen it today (the usa one s go over the top ) and virtually all give it a brilliant review ..but have said its very emotional!!!ive always thought that it should have been certificated a 15 and perhaps shown another 20 minutes to show some of the deleted scenes peter jackson has omited in his cut!..and like you say the heaven scenes should have been cut to include more of the book content but ill review it in its own right having loved the book!
He was awful. It also didn't help that he was far too old to be paired with Saoirse Ronan and as a result had a creepier vibe to him than Stanley Tucci's paedophile character.
In the book Ray is a lovely character but since the movie miscast him horribly and cut out everything to do with the character that gave him any depth at all (Ray being suspected of Susie's murder), he seemed shallow, creepy and pointless in the movie.
There must have been some unknown actor in need of a big break who could have been given the role because this is one of the worst cases of miscastings EVER.
I read the book when it was first published and a couple of months ago - and loved it both times. Went to see the eagerly anticipated film this afternoon and was disappointed. The scenes on earth are fine and stick more or less to the book (lots cut out though, but not surprising), but the heaven scenes were awful and a very poor and sloppy interpretation in my view. I expected more from Peter Jackson - heaven (or the imbetween) at times looked like a British Gas advert
I read the book when it was first published and a couple of months ago - and loved it both times. Went to see the eagerly anticipated film this afternoon and was disappointed. The scenes on earth are fine and stick more or less to the book (lots cut out though, but not surprising), but the heaven scenes were awful and a very poor and sloppy interpretation in my view. I expected more from Peter Jackson - heaven (or the imbetween) at times looked like a British Gas advert
This sums up exactly how I feel about the film. I went to see it last night not having read any reviews so not sure what to expect and was very disappointed.
Comments
Mind the book is brilliant !highly recomended! as for the film im gonna watch it after the 19th and make my own opinion despite the fact its differant from the book and having negative so called " film critics" reviews but on u tube punters give it excellent reviews ..usually when a film gets bad reviews its usually very good ...films are personal anyway ! what one person likes another doesnt ..that why we all have opinions ..give the book a try !...then watch the film!
I doubt the film will live up to the book but I wil give it a chance.
I saw the trailer the other night and immediately thought 'I've got to see that film' and became interested in it.
don't get your hopes up , it isn't very good.
I think it's well worth seeing for the performances of the girl who plays Susie, Saoirse Ronan (or however you spell it) and Mr Harvey. No-one else really gets much screentime but that's made up by how brilliant certain 'in-between' parts look and a few shocking moments where you're like 'wow' stunned.
The book is definitely more of a TV movie-type material and with Peter Jackson trying to make it more cinematic I think that knocked a few fans.
Thanks for that, I'm going away in a few days and usually buy a book to read, I will definately go for The Lovely Bones and give it a try and ignore the fact that the ex- This Morning bores recommended it!
I read the book from cover to cover in a day because it is compulsive reading. That said I didn't really like it. But that is because I find books that deal with things as distressing as this really quite hard going.
I also didn't like the end of the book because
But, as I say, I was surprised it was made into a film because it was a very personal book and I wasn't quite sure how they would make the scenes in heaven gel with the action on earth in a film.
I haven't seen it yet, I'm not sure I want to. Also I grew up in the same area as Milly Dowler and was about a year older. I think that's what made me feel very uncomfortable about the book and why I'm reluctant to see the film. It's just a bit close to home.
Having said that tho my OH who loved the book also loved the film.
No fortunatly its not shown in the film ! if a lot more was shown in the film adaptation off the book ! the film would be an 18 certificate!
Despite the bad reviews elsewhere !The Sunday Mirror last sunday made it there "film of the week " and gave it 4/5 rating !...the main annoyance for me is why Soarise Ronan got ignored for the oscars for this film !
It was a well told story with some very good acting. I did feel that the more understated "inbetween" sections where Susie was in the endless corn field/disturbing forest worked more than the OTT "running on a giant grass ball" sequences though, so i guess i understand where some reviewers are coming from when they say that Peter Jackson went a bit overboard on the effects. The whole thing did look absolutely stunning though.
Overall, i'd give it 8.5/10, maybe even a 9/10.
I don't think the film should have been a 12A though, the subject matter itself i feel is a bit too much for anyone under 15, and it did have some pretty gruesome scenes in it. I can't honestly see anyone 12 or under wanting to see it to be fair, it's hardly a film for kids.
Gonna see this on monday looking forward to seeing it ...been reading alot of the british punters who have seen it today (the usa one s go over the top ) and virtually all give it a brilliant review ..but have said its very emotional!!!ive always thought that it should have been certificated a 15 and perhaps shown another 20 minutes to show some of the deleted scenes peter jackson has omited in his cut!..and like you say the heaven scenes should have been cut to include more of the book content but ill review it in its own right having loved the book!
I was not interested too much in the inbetween but more in what was going to happen to the paedophile in the story...
Great performances from Stanley Tucci and Soarise Ronan....
Only Peter Jackson's cinematography and Stanley Tucci's performance elevated it over some random made-for-TV Lifetime movie.
Some terrible scenes (2 minute comedy granny montage out of nowhere
4/10
He was awful. It also didn't help that he was far too old to be paired with Saoirse Ronan and as a result had a creepier vibe to him than Stanley Tucci's paedophile character.
In the book Ray is a lovely character but since the movie miscast him horribly and cut out everything to do with the character that gave him any depth at all (Ray being suspected of Susie's murder), he seemed shallow, creepy and pointless in the movie.
There must have been some unknown actor in need of a big break who could have been given the role because this is one of the worst cases of miscastings EVER.
This sums up exactly how I feel about the film. I went to see it last night not having read any reviews so not sure what to expect and was very disappointed.
It was a painfully slow build up and just when the film should've got going I felt they decided to end it in a hurry.
Not a satisfying film. 5/10