Godzilla: King of the Monsters

Spoiler-free!

In this sequel to the 2014 Godzilla, the King is back -- here to protect the Earth yet again by fighting off even more Titans (giant monsters sleeping under the Earth). The human side is filled with the returning cast of Sally Hawkins and Ken Watanabe's scientists, and new faces in Bradley Whitford, Charles Dance, and Ziyi Zhang, and a new starring central family in Kyle Chandler, Vera Farmiga, and Millie Bobby Brown.

That roar = fingernails on a chalkboard x 1000. My ears are still ringing.

I would like to say that it doesn't matter what the humans are up to because we have epic monster battles to get to, but that isn't true. And I'd like to say that the apocalyptic rampaging is insignificant compared to the heart of the matter which is the human characters and their personal struggles -- but I can't say that either. This movie is a mixture, and both sides suffer for it. There's more of the monsters this time than in 2014, and that takes away from replicating the calculated character journeys, but they couldn't do away with the humans altogether, so their side is focused on often, though in a more going-through-the-motions, shorthanded style to allow for more destruction.

I always want to care more for the human characters in movies, and I did care for the central family here. They had a complex dynamic on page but the longer the film went on, the more plot holes opened up and began leaking soul everywhere. In the end they hang on but only just; and I liked the characters less in the end than in the beginning. I really wanted to like Kyle Chandler, doing his usual Distant Dad Who Cares bit, but so much of the significant actions are given to everyone else surrounding him. It makes sense when they're technically more capable, but if there was a human lead, he was it, and he got to be heroic in only one instance.

He was also in King Kong (2005) and this movie is in the same universe as Kong: Skull Island. Idk why I think that's cool.

Vera Farmiga got most of the character arcing, but her arc was too complicated for the movie to pull off in the time allotted, and it felt cheapened in the end. Millie's character wasn't much to speak of -- a normal brand of good -- but she brings so much natural energy to her every moment of screen time. She's a star. Or she would be, if they existed these days. She's the kind of person who doesn't need a unique character to disappear into -- she can carry a movie like a classic leading lady. Charles Dance is Charles Dance; excellent. Bradley Whitford is a scene-stealer, but when is her not? And Sally and Ken are given respectable focus but take too much away from others (like Kyle) and the film would've been improved without them.

Okay, the people are out of the way -- now for more monstrous things. High carnage has its thrilling moments but overall the result seems less than was promised. Four unique beasts is "better" than the last movie's three, but scaling back was necessary to prevent an incoherent mess. I saw this movie because I figured if I wanted to ever see it, a big screen would be ideal. But the epic visuals promised in the trailer were a let-down. Events take place disproportionately in the dark and rain, so the "epic" cinematography is monochromatic and distant, then the "in-the-battle" shots are hectic and grainy. And that gorgeous shot of Mothra under the waterfall? That's the extent of her looking beautiful. Elsewhere she glows so brightly it "over-exposes" the camera, or she doesn't glow at all and looks dull.

Shots of her glowing as she flies around are treated like the Second Coming, complete with hilarious angel choruses. Elsewhere in blatant yet confusing symbolism, we have this shot. 

The 2014 made everything dark and rainy too, but that movie was about ambiance, mystery, following the people as they follow the wake of the monsters, rarely having direct contact with them. I was bored by that film at times, but in retrospect I appreciate what it was trying to do. This movie attempts to course-correct -- they heard the 2014 was too slow-paced, so they speed things up, but they over-correct and fall into ridiculous territory too many times. Godzilla isn't some force of nature in creature form anymore, he's some kind of sentient being who does his noble duty of protecting the Earth because he's good and wise or something. He'll make expressions in this movie that make him almost humanoid. It weird and too much for me.

The coolest thing about the 2014 was the return to gritty realism. This movie keeps that in its physical aspects like the visuals and the dialogue and serious tone, but it's so over-the-top and silly in what happens, it all seems disingenuous. I have nothing against silly and over-blown monster madness (I loved Kong: Skull Island after all!) but this film doesn't embrace the silliness, it pretends that it's not. It's not the seriousness or the silliness that's a problem, but the dissonant combination that indicates this movie had no clear or determined vision for what it wanted to be.

Try to please everyone and you'll wind up being middling all-around. 

Another victim of catering to the common denominator of fans. If that's all it wanted, I certainly can't say anything against the plan. It's appealing enough to please those who want to be, and has enough moments of interest to keep those on the fence from frustration. The only problem is it may not make much of a profit at this rate, so perhaps cheap gratification on a big budget wasn't the best plan after all. Oh well, the Earth goes on turning. Fictionally, that may be all due to Godzilla, but in the real world, the King of the Monsters is just another passing blip -- to be enjoyed and forgotten.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - May

Last month I saw Shazam! Unicorn Store! The Perfect Date! The Man Who Killed Don Quixote! And, Avengers: Endgame!

Unicorn Store (review) and The Perfect Date (review) were Netflix watches and also the worst of the bunch, but still enjoyable in their own ways. I loved the heart and soul of Shazam! (review) but there were a bothersome flaws from time to time too. Avengers: Endgame (review) was a mostly pleasant experience since I was ready to be pandered and fan-served to, but that doesn't mean I didn't take issue with anything either.

But the best of the bunch hands down was The Man Who Killed Don Quixote (review) which I rented and rewatched multiple times, and it only seemed to get better and more brilliant each time, going from overwhelming fever dream to intricately choreographed dance between reality and fantasy. It's still a film that won't appeal to all, but the only way to know for sure is to watch it.

I'm not super hyped for any movies this month, but there is a next season of a great Netflix show I liked, and a few flicks that I might get out to see too. What looks good to you this month?


The Intruder
In theaters May 3rd; PG-13
I wouldn't normally include a movie like this because they don't usually catch my attention, but the special circumstance here is that I keep hearing hype (or maybe call it anti-hype) that it's quite bad, but kind of in a good way -- or maybe really quite good but everyone will say it's bad. Something like that, haha. Anyway, seems like something I might enjoy watching with my brothers for so-bad-it's-good kicks. No theater trip though. Dennis Quaid does seem quite hammy!




Clara
Streaming May 3rd; no rating
Well this one caught my attention by being a scifi movie (I'm so easy) and then I was amused by recognizing the actors from oldish TV shows -- the guy was the lead in Suits and the girl was McGee's sister on NCIS -- and it gave me flashbacks to my cable days. Oh and the two are real-life married which is always cute. The movie looks more like a drama and then low-key scifi but that makes sense, and the trailer implies some kind of scifi development near the end too, so yeah, I'll keep an eye out.




Pokémon Detective Pikachu
In theaters May 10th; PG
I thought this was just called "Detective Pikachu." Huh. Anyway, boo to me because I never watched, or played, or did whatever it is people do with Pokémons. I think I get the premise though. It's the trailer that won me over really, with how odd yet funny Ryan Reynolds's voice sounds coming out of cute realistic Pikachu, and how they played Holding Out for a Hero without an ounce of apology -- it give me the impression of being a Deadpool movie but rated PG. (They even both have the initials DP!) And if that's what it ends up being like, I definitely want to see -- history with Pokémons or not!




The Rain - Season 2
On Netflix May 17th; MA
This is a Danish-language scifi series where the rain was infected with a deadly virus. The last season ended in a way that made me wonder how it could continue in an interesting way, and based on this trailer they figured it out. They closed off elements in season 1's storyline, and are now adding new connected elements -- like apparently Rasmus is super-powered or something. And going in new directions. I loved the tone and the characters, and the story was neat presenting familiar apocalypse tropes in a freshly compelling way. I will 100% be watching this!




John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum
In theaters May 17th; R
I like John Wick because of the simple straightforward plot that doesn't need much exposition or conversation to drive it, so that the emotionally-driven stylish action can constantly be front and center. Chapter 2 muddied that formula too much for my taste, so I'm hoping Chapter 3 will be a return to full form. The plot is simple. But the trailer also shows a lot of dialogue scenes, so I guess we'll see.




We Have Always Lived in the Castle
Limited release May 17th; not rated
I heard of this book but never read it. It's a mystery thriller, set in the 50's or 60's I suppose, and it being based on a book gives me more confidence that the story might be good than the trailer does. It's got an appealing cast too, with Taissa Farmiga, Alexandra Daddario, Sebastian Stan, and even Crispin Glover! Seems like the sort of flick that won't need to be particularly good in order to entertain me.




Aladdin
In theaters May 24th; PG
I was vaguely interested in this before, and I guess I'm not totally apposed to watching it ever, but since I was more interested in Dumbo and never got around to going to that I'm not even going to bother trying with this in the theater. I relatively liked the idea of a live action Aladdin but the tone and everything is so much an uninspired copy that I doubt it'll be what I wanted. My brother is a fan of the animated too, and thinks seeing this will taint it which is probably true, so we may not even see it for laughs. I expect it'll be good for a laugh, though, personally!




Brightburn
In theaters May 24th: R
The idea of a horror movie with a Superman-powered character is admittedly interesting, but I just can't see it being something I'd truly enjoy unless it had a great, meaningful twist in there somewhere. So I'll pay attention to what others think but it's a no thanks at the moment. I expect it'll be objectively good though.




Godzilla: King of the Monsters
In theaters May 31st; PG-13
Despite the aggravatingly slow pace of the 2014 Godzilla, I found the good parts of it good enough to have natural interest in this sequel. But then, based on the trailer it looks like an actual improvement over the first. Maybe the filmmakers heard the bored complaints. It looks like it better embraces the inherent cheese of its subject, and puts even more effort into appealing visually -- while not completely abandoning the subdued tone of the first. Ken Watanabe and Sally Hawkins are back, but no more Aaron Taylor-Johnson or Elizabeth Olsen. Added are Vera Farmiga, Millie Bobby Brown, Kyle Chandler, and the great Bradley Whitford. I bet I'll be in the theater for this one since I'm sure it'll be at it's best on a big screen!

Upcoming Movie Roundup - December

I had a very productive Movie-November, watching Thor: Ragnarok, which was entertaining but far too shallow and irreverent (review here). Then Murder on the Orient Express, which was a lovely and well-performed production (review here). And then Justice League which wasn't the worst movie ever but sure did feel like it after all that promise and hype (review here).

Then I caught up on some other 2017 movies I missed in theaters -- Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, which was better than expected and the most scifi fun I've had all year (review here); and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, which was worse than expected with low expectations, and really quite sad. I doubt I'll get around to reviewing it.

Also I forgot to mention it in November, but I also watched Netflix's Punisher, and it was fantastic. Frank Castle in all his jarringly violent glory. I just finished it last night, and it may be the most thoroughly great thing Marvel-Netflix has done. Review on that probably coming soon!

December looks to be slowing down a bit, mainly because I don't have much interest for Oscar-grab season. There's only one must-see for me -- Star Wars, of course, but plenty of others to keep a close eye on too. Are you excited for Star Wars 8? And is there anything else on your radar this month?


The Shape of Water
Dec 1st(limited); R
Sally Hawkins is great, Michael Shannon is great, Guillermo Del Toro is great, and his style of fantasy is great. The trailer is beautiful and unusual, and it looks like the kind of dark and serious fantasy I'd probably love. I won't be seeing it in theaters, but probably will someday. And reviews are saying it's great, so whenever I do see it, it will be with high expectations.




November Criminals
Dec 8th(limited); PG-13
Oh, I thought that after Baby Driver, Ansel Elgort would stick to grown-up movies. This movie screams teen movie that wants to be grown up so that's kinda awkward. It looks like it deals with serious issues, but then teen movies deal with serious issues they rarely do a good job. Based on a YA novel of the same name, which isn't necessarily a bad thing since novels are more likely to have cohesive plots than movies generally, so there is that. Still, I doubt this will be anywhere as good as it apparently wants to be. Also, it has the word "November" in it's title, yet is coming out in December...?




Bullet Head
Dec 8th(limited); R
Haha, this looks like the kind of movie I'd enjoy no matter how bad it is. Adrien Brody is always a plus. And there's also Antonio Banderas and John Malkovich... and some kind of monster that looks like a large zombie dog or something. Nice.




Star Wars: The Last Jedi
Dec 15th; PG-13
(Why no "Episode VIII" in the title??) Who needs any other movies this month -- we have Star Wars!! I'm very excited for this of course but also a bit nervous. I think because after Ep 7 we now have expectations about this trilogy so the stakes have been raised. From the beginning I was most excited at the prospect of Ep 8, because I expected it would take a darker turn like Ep 5 did (though hopefully it will be less similar plot-wise than 7 was to 4) and because I have loved all of Rian Johnson's movie's so far. He has excellent storytelling instincts I think, and always puts emotional umph into his films, while still making them super enjoyable and entertaining. But directors like him have been stifled by big studios before. Star Wars is only part his baby now, and he can't possibly have full control. But it may very well work out perfectly, so here's to that! The trailer looks gorgeous and intriguing... all the great new characters are here... the hype is hyping... I'm ready!




Beyond Skyline
Dec 15th(limited); R
This month's obligatory non-mainstream scifi movie apparently is this -- starring Frank Grillo. Apparently a sequel, or just set in the same universe as another movie I guess. It actually looks like a bigger film than most I mention, with some creative and well-animated aliens. Plus Frank Grillo does the tough-guy action hero very well. It probably won't be great, but it does look like pretty solid entertainment, and not the sort of thing that only a scifi-obsessed person would be interested to see. However, it is hard for me to tell, because I'm definitely scifi-obsessed.




Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
Dec 20th; PG-13
And this is basically the same idea as the above movie: Probably some solid entertainment, and not much more. The only difference is that this is a big mainstream release, which will make all its shortcomings all the more disappointing. I do like the idea -- how they updated it -- but beyond that, it doesn't promise to be much like the Jumanji we know, or very worthwhile on the whole. The Rock, Karen Gillan, Jack Black and Kevin Hart star.




The Greatest Showman
Dec 20th; PG
More light entertainment, but I guess it's more appropriate here, being a musical loosely based on the life of P.T. Barnum, who was... a showman. In the movie, Hugh Jackman plays him, and creates a circus, and it all looks very razzle-dazzle. He's got a supporting cast of Michelle Williams, Zac Efron, Zendaya, and Rebecca Ferguson, and some original songs. If nothing else, it is sure to be entertaining show.




All the Money in the World
Dec 22nd, R
When I went to see Murder on the Orient Express, they played the trailer that had Kevin Spacey in it. This trailer was published two days ago... and now it's Christopher Plummer. I'm kinda wondering why Spacey was cast in the first place, because they had to use makeup to make him look old. Anyway, most of my interest in this movie is because of the last-minute tossing out and replacing, but ignoring that, the movie looks like a good movie. How much of a good movie, I don't know, but I doubt the change-up could have seriously effected the quality. It's not exactly the sort of movie I'd be eager to see unless it has a happy ending, but I certainly am curious. Michelle Williams stars, with Mark Wahlberg.




The Post
Dec 22nd(limited); PG-13
And what would December be without an Oscar-grab movie? Sure, others might also be Oscar-grabs, but this movie is literally nothing else. It ticks the right political boxes, teams up Meryl Streep with Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg, and is so try-hard it's making me uncomfortable for it. I like Spielberg, but boy, not like this. I'll wait for Ready Player One.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - June

In May the only movie I went to see was Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. And while I enjoyed the mess out of it in the moment, it hasn't made much of a lasting impression. Check out my review of it here! I still want to see the other releases I mentioned eventually, and may go see Pirates after a while, but right now is my busy time of the year, and theater trips must take a backseat for a bit.

This month looks to have two must-sees to get to over summer, plus quite a few that will be staying on my radar as they pass through! What are you most looking forward to seeing in the month of June?


Wonder Woman
Jun 2nd; PG-13
Well -- no matter what happens with the film, we know they can make a super epic trailer out of it! It looks a bit like Thor and a bit like Captain America: The First Avenger, but it's got a female lead and comes from DC. Wonder Woman was one of the best parts of Batman v Superman, so from my perspective her film has the potential to be the best film from DC since The Dark Knight. It appears to have a coherent and interesting plot which is promising, and the flood of overwhelmingly positive responses so far is creating some huge waves. I'll certainly be seeing this one in theaters, though probably not for a little while due to extreme busyness. At this point it doesn't seem to be too much to hope that all the hype it's built up for itself will be lived up to!




Dean
Jun 2nd (limited); PG-13
Ah, the classic indie film, with the kinda goofy-looking, low key depressed and cynical lead, who wanders through a mildly aimless but pleasant jaunt of a plot, falls in love (maybe) and feels a little better by then end (maybe). Yeah. I may sound a bit cynical myself about this, but honestly this is the kind of flick I'd spend all day on lazy Saturdays watching if only I had access to more of them. So put me on the waiting list for this one too. Bonus: Kevin Kline!




The Mummy
Jun 9th; PG-13
The beginning of a new universe franchise of connected monster films including Jekyll and Hyde and Frankenstein and such -- they're calling it Dark Universe! But they're a bit behind. This flick seems to be more of a remake of the Brendan Frasier version then the 1932 original, but whatever. No matter it's to-be connections or general quality, one thing is almost certain: that it will be entertaining. That is Tom Cruise's specialty. I also enjoyed Sofia Boutella a whole lot in Star Trek Beyond so I'm looking forward to her playing a potentially over-the-top villain like this! As for quality, we'll have to wait and see.




The Book of Henry
Jun 16th(limited); PG-13
This movie has been making some waves coming up -- maybe mostly because it's directed by Colin Trevorrow who has a small but good track record and is set to direct Star Wars Episode 9. It also has both Jacob Tremblay and Jaeden Leiberher, two of the biggest child actors right now, and Naomi Watts who always puts everything into her performances. The plot is unexpected and unusually serious for a film with a child lead, and the trailer, as ominous as it is, also has some extra ominous undertones that are making me wonder if there's gonna be a happy ending here. If I see it it'll surely stress me out, but right now it looks like it would be worth it. The movie also promises Lee Pace, but unless I missed him, he doesn't appear in the trailer.




Maudie
Jun 16th(limited); PG-13
A performance-driven indie. This one's about the Canadian folk artist Maud Lewis, played by Sally Hawkins, and her husband, Ethan Hawke. Since it's based on a true story, I'd imagine they play up the drama a bit to make it more interesting, but it does look like a sweet tale, and I like the two actors, so if ever I get the chance I'll probably give it a watch.




Kill Switch
Jun 16th(limited); R
Okay... a scifi film starring Dan Stevens. Yes, take my money! But wait -- what's this? A catch? Turns out most of the movie is in POV so we won't get to see his face, doing all that acting stuff? Why? We already had to deal with this issue in Beauty and the Beast. Can someone make an awesome scifi movie with Dan Stevens and actually put Dan Stevens in it please? Besides him the movie doesn't look too great, but because it's a scifi, and because Stevens is in it (however little) I'll probably still watch it at my earliest convenience. I expect I'll be disappointed though.




Transformers: The Last Knight
Jun 21st; PG-13
Ugh. The over-stimulation is for real. I could barely even stand the trailer. It is nice to see Josh Duhamel back though, but that's about it. If you enjoy these movies chances are this one will be no different, but for me it's looking even bigger than the last one, which means it'll be even better for making fun of it whenever we can get it for free! Enjoy it how you can, right?




Baby Driver
Jun 28th: NR
Haha, I was about to say this might be my most anticipated movie of the month! No "might" about it friends -- if this isn't the highlight of my movie-June, there isn't gonna be a highlight (okay fine, Wonder Woman could easily be a highlight, but you get my point). Edgar Wright directs this one which is all I really need to know, but it will also feature a boatload of music (makes sense with Wright) and all long cast list of Ansel Elgort, Lily James, Kevin Spacey, Jon Bernthal, Jon Hamm, and Jamie Foxx. The trailer makes the film look super stylish and tightly edited (Wright, again). Seriously, there is no bigger draw than the director, and the premise out of which you know he can make one killer film! (With one killer track!)

Godzilla

Spoilers throughout.

Oh boy... here we go again. Godzilla is back, and literally bigger than ever. Let the mayhem commence!

Obviously, the one point of this movie was to show off the giant creature with some giant special effects, but it had a surprisingly not-stupid plot, which took its sweet time in setting up, and building up. This effectively accomplished two goals: to make the film long without too much effort or plot direction, and to build suspense for the monster, both of which I appreciated.

Ken Watanabe and Sally Hawkins do science and discuss important plot points in thick accents.

I was also surprised to find that, in spite of a sneakily misleading trailer inhabited by only one creature, this flick featured more than that advertized and famed one; in fact, there were three. Another good surprise, as I enjoyed the two over-sized praying mantises who feed off of radiation even more than our titular hero. They had better motivation, they looked way cooler, and in movies like these, I root for the villain (okay, to a certain extent). These guys make their appearance earlier too, and honestly that was the best part of the film; afterwards there was a drooping decline all the way to the end. There were scattered "wow" moments throughout of course, like the very cool skydiving scene, but that was only about thirty seconds of awesomeness, and it was the longest of the blips of awesome.

Father and son visit the ol' homestead-turned-nuclear-wasteland-but-sike-not-really, aka, District 13.

The decline was actually related (and related) to the death of Bryan Cranston's character, Joe. I did not see that coming, and can only think that it was necessary so that we wouldn't question why Aaron Taylor-Johnson's character, Joe's son Ford, had to step up and be the main character (main human character that is). Taylor-Johnson wasn't a terrible lead, but he really didn't have much to do since the film is really constantly lead by GCI coolness, and compared to the beginning when Cranston effortlessly dominated the screen, (no monsters to compete with did make it easier) it was a drop down to the son's level. Still, I wasn't watching to critique acting abilities so I enjoyed his leading performance as well as the film allowed. And he did do a nice job taking care of the little kid separated from his parents-- aww! I also enjoyed Elizabeth Olsen's character of Ford's wife, and amused myself trying to imagine how they'll be as the new additions to The Avengers team.

Godzilla, evil giant mantises, and nuclear bombs are just a warm-up for Ultron!

But enough of the humans; here, the bigger the character is, the bigger the character is -- and they fed the monster admirably. And not a little amusingly. Forget the mindless monster who just wants to trample skyscrapers; this Godzilla is arguably more heroic than Ford. If that look he gives Ford as he's disappearing into the dust cloud from the building that just fell on top of him wasn't a perfectly rendered look of a tragic hero, I don't know what is. Also, what other reason can there be for his doggedly hunting down the Mantises if he doesn't even eat them, but after destroying them, just plops majestically back into his watery dwelling, like the Lone Ranger riding off into the sunset? No -- he's no mindless beast; he's a roaring guardian; a trampling protector; a dinosaur knight. Teaching us the animal kingdom's favorite lesson -- that we shouldn't pollute our planet!

Rawr.

But even our big-headed, little-armed friend from the Jurassic era plays second fiddle when it comes to either exploring his massive squishy heart or impressing us with his massive scaled muscles and vocal features. It's always about the looks, isn't it? Yep, this film is all about those expensive effects, and even I -- I, who firmly believe that effects are only used well if they're used to enhance the meaningful content -- have to admit that it was the greatest part of this film. But you know what? It wasn't as great as they would like us to believe. I couldn't help but notice the very interesting fact that most of the monster action was contained in nightfall -- a good time for monster battles to take place to be sure, but also a good time to make a hard job easier on animators too, yes? And the one time we see Godzilla fully in the daytime, it is clear that darkness is his best lighting.

But whatever, I sure did have a lot of fun watching it all!

This was hands down the best movie that rides on GCI action that I have ever seen; it is the king! But king of disaster flicks and Michael Bay isn't exactly what that big, heroic guy would have heroically, stoically, and monstrously hoped for. Humans. When will we never learn? Oh well -- until the day we do, we will enjoy ourselves with toppling buildings and rampaging monsters!

Persuasion (2007)

Ah, another adaptation of a Jane Austen novel. Persuasion isn't as popular as some of Austen's other novels though. This one is more serious, dramatic, and (almost) despairing. Anne Elliot, at the ripe age of twenty-seven is resigned to being an old maid. Eight years ago she had the affections of a man, who she loved in return, but he was a nobody, and her high-ranking family would have nothing of it. She was persuaded to nullify the engagement, and Fredrick Wentworth left and joined the Navy. Now he is quite accidentally back in her life, a Captain, just as handsome as ever with a great fortune, and still not married. Will they get a second chance, or are they doomed to misunderstandings, and bitterness, secretly longing to rekindle the past?

The answer of course, is yes, to all. And that shouldn't be surprising even if you've never seen or read Persuasion before. It's a romantic drama -- what else could happen? It's not the destination after all, but the journey that we love, and with Jane Austen at the helm, you know the journey is going to be a good one.

Anne Elliot, heroine.

Persuasion is different from most of Austen's other novels in one major way; it's not very much of a comedy. It still has her wit, and there's still those moments to laugh at, but the wit is deeper -- mellower -- and you laugh very thankful that you're not in that annoying or otherwise unpleasant situation. This movie embraces all that drama boldly. The filming style is elegant and not overdone, with deep blue undertones matching and creating the mood. Simple shots let you take in the natural beauty of locations, and creative camera work and editing in the right spots embellish the story stylishly.

Interestingly, this is one period drama where I actually appreciate the men's costumes more than the women's. Not that the women's are bad at all, they are very nice and at times wonderfully ridiculous, but the men look really good and like real gentlemen in this film, and especially Captain Wentworth, though it doesn't hurt that he's actually very handsome anyway. And also acted very well by Rupert Penry-Jones -- he's a wonderful Austen hero.

Captain Frederick Wentworth, dashing hero.

They definitely got him right in the adapting process. And the rest of the cast looks good and right too. Sally Hawkins' appearance as Anne is good, she's past her bloom, but not ugly, but I don't enjoy the way she acts as much-- too timid and breathy, and it's slightly annoying at times. Anne's sisters Elizabeth and Mary are both also -- and much more often -- annoying, but they are supposed to be, so that's a praise. Anthony Head as her father, Sir Walter Elliot is brilliant. He's very good at being angry, but the way he preens in the mirror is what really gets me. Mr. Elliot is wonderfully pompous, though perhaps a bit too much, I begin to wonder how Anne could stand to be around him. As for the rest of the cast I have no particular praises or criticisms.

Anne's sisters, Mary and her husband Charles, and Elizabeth, and father Sir Walter.

The adaptation for the most part of the film is good, and follows the book well, but then near the end, as if by requirement, everything falls apart, for what seems to be no reason other than saving time. It's pretty disappointing, especially if you like the "letter scene" from the book as much as I do, and at only an hour-and-a-half, you'd think they could spare some time to make the end match the beginning and middle. But my biggest criticism has to be that kiss -- first of all, totally inappropriate for the era, but then good grief, it takes them what seems like hours to lean in, until I feel like yelling at them to just get it over with already. By then, I'm obviously kind of out of the romantic mood of the movie.

I guess it's a good thing, then, that it waits til then end to come undone; up until then I get to enjoy everything immensely, and that's exactly what I do. So much so, that I keep going back and watching it again, so I guess I must think that the good outweighs the bad. It is, after all, only about ten minutes of disappointing, to the hour and twenty of reserved, aching romance, thoughtful, real characters, and that wonderful, insightful, classic storytelling distinctive to Jane Austen's talented hand.

Twelve!