dan-likes-trees Posted February 17, 2011 Posted February 17, 2011 Just went to see this. It's had mixed reviews so I was anticipating being underwhelemed, especially considering Alex Garland / Ishiguru / Mulligan involvement had the bar high. I love the sci-fi aspect, yet how underplayed it was. More just an interesting setting than a full on science fiction. I guess kind of like Time Traveller's Wife. I'm not sure what to make of the ending. As my friend put it, 'why didn't they just run away?' To an extent I think the idea of them being raised, almost 'programed' to know their future, but then the idea of them crying / whatevs because they couldn't get an extension (or whatever they called it) didn't really fit. Also, not sure that they needed to spell out the metaphor quite so much at the end. Also, it was beautiful and the music was great. Plus, I am completely in love with Carey Mulligan Just completely lovely. I have the book, so I should probably read it so I can say the book was better and pretend I read it first.
Ashley Posted February 17, 2011 Posted February 17, 2011 I read it a few years ago and wouldn't mind seeing it but in no rush. I got free tickets but they were the night of my birthday. From what I can remember of the book. Don't their bodies weaken? Thus wouldn't running away be ultimately futile?
Paj! Posted February 17, 2011 Posted February 17, 2011 Oh I need to see this before it goes out the cinemas. I'm so in the mood.
dan-likes-trees Posted February 17, 2011 Author Posted February 17, 2011 I read it a few years ago and wouldn't mind seeing it but in no rush. I got free tickets but they were the night of my birthday. From what I can remember of the book. Don't their bodies weaken? Thus wouldn't running away be ultimately futile? That would explain it. I got the impression that they only weakened as a result of having organs removed (which would make sense, obvs). But if they weaken naturally at around that age then that would make the plot make alot more sense. Dunno if the film explained that though (or I might have just been being dim). Oh I need to see this before it goes out the cinemas. I'm so in the mood. Do it. Probably won't be shown for too long. Aparently in bombed at the US box office. Ash: Is the book worth reading? I've bought it, so really I have no excuse, but then I've bought quite a few books that I haven't read...
EEVILMURRAY Posted February 17, 2011 Posted February 17, 2011 Once again Knightley displays her talent of not shutting her mouth during film posters. Might be worth a look though.
Solo Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 That poster makes me want to eat my fist. The previous version is much easier on the eyes. This isn't showing in my area (Hertfordshire) so I'll need to take a trip into Londontown. I heard the Barbican has a lovely cinema.
Ashley Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 The Barbican is nice. As is that previous poster.
Supergrunch Posted February 19, 2011 Posted February 19, 2011 I have to say I didn't much like the book, although that may be in part because I was horribly spoiled, but it general I found everything a bit forced. I hear the film is terribly depressing, which probably means it's close to the original.
dan-likes-trees Posted February 20, 2011 Author Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Just like to add how much I love this song Which is possibly because it's exceptionally well used in the film. Yes. Edited February 20, 2011 by Ashley
Recommended Posts