Friday Recommends, movies, Uncategorized

Friday Strongly Does Not Recommend: The Lovely Bones

This may look like heaven. Don’t be fooled.

x

Bad movies are a dime a dozen. Disastrously bad movies are more rare. The Lovely Bones is one of them.

A disastrously bad movie needs to squander great potential. The Lovely Bones is based on a pretty good book, by Alice Sebold. It’s directed by Peter Jackson, who made some movies about hobbits that you probably watched. It has a cast that features Mark Wahlberg, Rachel Weisz, Susan Sarandon and Stanley Tucci. (More on him in a second.) And the character Susie Salmon, the fourteen-year-old girl who, after she has been murdered, narrates the story from a place called The In-Between because it is neither heaven nor hell, is played perfectly by Saoirse Ronan. You’d think the hardest thing about making this movie would be casting Susie. That’s the only part the filmmakers got right.

The Lovely Bones veers between family drama, stalker thriller and fantasy mumbo-jumbo during those interminable In-Between scenes when Susie sees trees and and gazebos and fields of wildflowers. Jackson did not need special effects to make Heavenly Creatures. He should’ve been banned from using them here.

What’s especially vile is that Tucci’s character, the killer — “George” — is practically fondled over by the filmmakers. You get the impression watching this movie that Jackson is most fascinated not with Susie’s netherwordly predicament nor her parents’ grief but with the twisted, perverse workings of George’s mind. But what’s going on in that mind? What compels the man to rape and murder young girls? We never know. Who would want to know? So why does Jackson warp his movie to accommodate this sicko?

Roger Ebert put it best when he said, “The Lovely Bones is a deplorable film with this message: If you’re a 14-year-old girl who has been brutally raped and murdered by a serial killer, you have a lot to look forward to.”

So why did we watch it? It was free at the library. It’s also one of those movies you’re suckered into giving a chance because you figure it can’t be as bad as everyone says it was. Right? Wrong. It’s worse.

What’s especially nefarious about it, though, is that you keep watching it thinking that, at any moment, it will inexplicably (and despite all evidence to the contrary) become a good movie, or at least an intriguing movie. There must be some satisfaction in seeing Tucci’s douchecreep get justice, right?

But no. There is absolutely none. Get this (this is not a spoiler alert, because you’ll never watch this movie, so no alert needed) — Tucci dies when an icicle falls and hits him, causing him to stumble over an embankment and fall to his death … where no one finds him and no one in Susie’s family ever finds closure. That’s right. Death By Icicle. And nobody finds the killer. But everybody seems sort of happy anyway.

Do not waste your time on The Lovely Bones. We had to cleanse our palate immediately after finishing it. Finding Nemo was a good choice. We should’ve just watched that one twice.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Friday Strongly Does Not Recommend: The Lovely Bones

  1. Usually Stanley Tucci elevates everything he’s in. That said, wouldn’t see this for the same reason I won’t watch “The Road”. Loved the book, don’t want to see it ruined.

  2. Erin read the book; I did not. But Erin read it so long ago she couldn’t remember all the details. Plus she didn’t looove it, so it wasn’t as though she was sacrificing much to see the film version.

    I will never watch The Road for the same reason. Nor Never Let Me Go.

    I wonder what Alice Sebold thought of the movie. Maybe she doesn’t care, given that she’s laughing all the way to the bank. But a really bad film adaptation kills any desire to read the book. (Not so a mediocre film adaptation. I can think of several bland films that still made me read the book afterwards.)

    And then you’ve got the movie tie-in editions with the film cover on the book which remind you no matter how good the source material may be, it was an abominable experience on the big screen. So why would you read it?

    In other words, there were two murders in this movie. George killed Susie Salmon, and Peter Jackson killed Alice Sebold.

  3. “But a really bad film adaptation kills any desire to read the book.”

    Wait. Aren’t all movies adaptations of books?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s