Customer Reviews

The Lovely Bones

5 star:		(60)
4 star:		(44)
3 star:		(38)
2 star:		(31)
1 star:		(26)

 

 

I never read the novel, so that might be the reason I'm not as critical as most when it comes to The Lovely Bones. Peter Jackson as many critics have now said, may not have been the perfect fit for this movie. He is a wonderful visual director, but his vision of the in-between feels out oddly out of place. The CGI is well done and quite beautiful, but it did nothing more than distract me from the characters that I was beginning to care about. Thankfully these sequences were just short enough to not ruin the experience. The acting was pretty solid. Mark Wahlberg is often hit or miss, but he was suprisingly believable here. Susan Sarandon provided some offbeat humor and Rachel Weisz was decent, even though her role was thinly written. The two standouts were Saorise Ronan and Stanley Tucci. I see a big career in the future for this young actress. There is something about her that grabs and holds your attention. Stanley Tucci was creepy to the core, though I find it hard to believe that anyone would think he was normal. The way he looked and interacted with people should have sent up major red flags. There were two scenes of suspense involving his character that were well executed. The music hit the right emotional notes when needed and the story itself proved horrific enough to make a strong impact on me.

The Lovely Bones is getting bashed way too heavily by most critics. I know it has its share a flaws, but the fact that I was thinking about the film all the way home from the theater shows the true power it possesses if you go in with an open mind.

3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars

Some drama films are the kind that you feel emotional resonance for the characters, feel mildly engaged by the plot, think about it for a few seconds after leaving the theater, get into your car, get pissed off at a stupid driver, and quickly move back into your own life. The Lovely Bones isn't that kind of movie.

Director Peter Jackson, of Lord of the Rings and King Kong fame, doesn't seem like the most obvious choice to direct the adaptation of the seemingly untouchable Alice Sebold novel, but he does his best, by staying close to the source material, but occasionally taking things out here and there. He also brings alot of ah-mazing CGI shots that are so gorgeous, they may be worth the price of admission alone, and I doubt we would've had that type of a movie if anybody else had directed it. However, you get the feeling that Jackson paid too much attention to the CGI aspect, while he could've dealt with the center plot issue with more directorial sensitivity, mocking the same way the book was written, and that's what stops this from being a perfect movie.

The plot centers around Susie Salmon (played by Saoirse Ronan), a 14-year-old girl who is raped and murdered in 1973. Ronan was absolutely perfect in this role. She showed promise in the 2007 film Atonement, where she also played a terrified youth who is dealing with an unbelievable situation. In the film, Susie is watching over her family, the boy she was in love with, and her killer -- from her own personal heaven.

Stanley Tucci nails his role, playing the demented serial killer Mr. Harvey. He gives a particularly chilling, and uncannily believable performance, showing more versatility with every film he makes, you can tell that he really got lost in this role, because his part isn't one of those where you find yourself wondering what the actor has previously starred in -- you see his character, and he does a damn fine job at it.

Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz and Susan Sarandon play Susie's family, and each of those roles require the actor to display quite alot of emotion, grieving her loss, and they all do terrific work, causing you to feel the extreme remorse that their characters do, and I really don't know if better actors could have been selected to play the respective parts.

Nikki SooHoo plays Holly, a girl who Susie meets in heaven, another victim of Mr. Harvey. Her role is particularly memorable, serving as something of a reassuring voice to the Ronan's character, and I see her doing great things in her future, because, while being an unknown actress, she shows just as much talent as the other actors in this all-star cast.

The core of this movie, however, the reason to go and see it in a packed theatre, doesn't lie in its acting, or the writing, or even the direction. It lies in the story. We've all wondered what happens to us after we die. The Lovely Bones suggests that we go to a world that we think is perfect, but we're still haunted by the things that troubled us in our lives. And while the movie leaves you heartbroken, wanting to spend every day you have on this earth as your last, it leaves you pondering your own life, the significance of it, how you'll be remembered. And that's something I particularly like in a film, when it not only moves you to the point where tears are flooding your eyes, but when it leaves you with a great deal of psychological issues to ponder, about your own life, and what comes after your life is ultimately over. And that's what The Lovely Bones does. And while staying true to the source material, that's all a fan of this story can ask for.

I'm a fan of the book this movie is based on, and although Peter Jackson took some liberties with the story, the result was an emotional and visually stunning film. "The Lovely Bones" tells the story of Suzie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan), a 14-year-old girl who is murdered by a neighborhood predator (Stanley Tucci). As the Salmon family copes with their tragedy, Susie's spirit hovers in the "in-between" that exists between heaven and Earth. Unable to let go of her previous life, Susie keeps a watchful eye on her family and her murderer, hoping that justice will ultimately be served and that she and her loved ones can finally move on.

I appreciated that the film didn't show Susie's violent murder on screen, which would have been extremely disturbing. The film does a fantastic job of portraying Susie in her in-between world, which is beautiful to watch. I wish Susan Sarandon was given more screen time, because she is hilarious in her role as the drunk grandmother. Tucci gives a terrifying portrayal of a child killer, and Ronan's performance as Susie is very understated and sincere.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie very much.

What's up with you people rating it 3 or under stars. Are you freaking kidding me?! This is one of those rare films I would see again and again. It's beautiful, it's haunting, it's the kind of film you cannot walk away from and not be moved by it or dare I say even changed by it. Susie did an awesome job acting and should have been nominated by the Oscars as she was by the Golden Globes. Her murderer was rightly so nominated. It departs somewhat from the book, if you recently read the book and then see the movie, the departures may bother you. Best case scenario is if you see the movie first or haven't read the book in many years and then see the movie. I love both the book and the movie. While this is fiction, it takes a subject that we all know is quite real and it does so, so beautifully, so eloquently, so respectfully, I dare you to watch this movie and walk away with a dry eye and unaffected. It's just not possible.

I long ago realized critics are like wild animals feasting on a carcass. Once one tears away at the flesh and finds something to feast on, more swarm in and work their jaws. Truly, I cannot fathom what led so many critics to pan this film.
Is it the book? No. It is its own work and every bit as entertaining and engrossing. Every element of the film drew me in; it was paradox of sorts, as real as it was surreal. I found myself cringing at one moment and tearing up at another. I never noticed the acting because I believed the characters to be real; the movie brought to life the 70's in a way few have for me. Now, an hour after I finished watching it, I find myself wanting to re-visit the film, this time paying more attention to the craft of the thing.
Years ago, when I was young with small children, I lost my husband to a sudden, violent death in a plane crash. I understand the spiritual connection that lingers. I imagined many times what the transition might have been like for him as he left behind those he loved. I still at times catch my breath as I think of him and wonder if he still sees us and remembers. Perhaps that is the reason I love this film: it is part thriller, part exploration of death. Its poetic and haunting handling of loss carried me along and will long stay with me.

17 years ago we drew slips of paper for our term paper assignments in forensic science at Harvard. I got the hardest, serial killers. What I learned still haunts me to this day. The press is constantly getting it wrong mixing up mass murders with serial killers. Serial killers get a degree of pleasure I seriously doubt we normal people can understand. They're wired wrong. But once they discover that the dominance and control they exert over their victims gives them the ultimate thrill they cannot stop. They rehearse, they practice, they study, they strive for perfection in kidnapping and murder. If caught they can no longer enjoy their ultimate thrill. They can only lie in their prison bunk, masturbating to their memories, awaiting execution. Think about the ultimate thrill, is it jumping out of an airplne for your first parachute jump, is it climbing El Capitan, is it scuba diving to maximum depth and looking up to see the surface hoping the bends will not defeat you, is it surfing a 60 foot wave, is it riding a bike on the edge of a cliff, or racing it down a steep moutain through the trees? A serial killer's rush is greater. Alice Sebold must have some profound insight into the psyche of the serial killer. Now I have to read her book.

Lovely Bones, directed by Peter Jackson, winner of three Oscars for his Lord of the Rings movies, director of King Kong (Widescreen Edition). LB features Oscar winning actresses, Rachel Weisz, and Susan Sarandon. Lead actress, Saoirse Ronan won a nomination for her supporting role in Atonement.

When a creepy neighbor kills a 14 year old girl, she gets caught in the in between world between heaven and earth. One wonders if the killer will be brought to justice, or will he continue his behavior unabated, and who might be next, and what will finally release her from her bonds to earth.

As you watch, Lovely Bones explore themes of spirituality, forgiveness and justice. If you're wondering, it does not go into the gore and violence of her death, and like all such stories, if you care to look beyond the surface, and go deeper it has a cautionary tale to tell. It might be instructive for a teenage girl, who, maybe is unsuspecting, to watch a movie like this, and for her parent to make a point of watching it. It's good to know that while such things do happen, they are not common occurences.

In this movie, Peter Jackson creates a symbolic world of subconscious imagination and imagery, like snippets from a dream, so our girl lives in the in between, partly the creation of her own imagination, and partly the creation of her grieving father, with whom she has a close connection. So, while there is no direct communication by word, there is recurring symbolic communication, and you can notice many things.

You can notice, corn on the table, a cornfield, just planted and mature and inviting, a love letter that flutters through the breeze, and lands in different hands, a safe where remains can be kept, a trophy taken from a girl, and will the killer accidentally get caught with it. You can notice lighthouses, the same tree, roses blooming and decadent, figurines, a safe, a sink hole, a street map that looks like a Film Four logo. Hmm. Lighthouse Entertainment. Hmm.

There are even parallels between the girl's father and killer. Both like to make small intricate models, and this becomes interesting when the ships appear. Ships in a bottle, ok. Dolls houses not ok.

I particularly liked the performance of Mark Wahlberg, who emotes without overstating. Stanley Tucci, goes against his usual type, and gives a perfectly creepy performance as the killer. He might even get an Oscar nomination. I found Rachel Weisz performance odd but very intriguing, somewhat under emotive or under acted. I found the alternative world interesting, reminiscent of What Dreams May Come, which was more visually compelling, although a very heavy movie.

One thing that did not make sense was the safe. This hugely heavy box, he is able to put in an underground structure, put the bones in, yet is unable to move the safe by himself, so how does he get it to his house, how does he get it out of his basement and into his car, yet he needs help moving it a few yards to a sink hole.

I liked this movie a lot, although it was a bit long, and there was too much narrating by the girl. Part of the fun of watching a movie is your own imaginary experience, and a lighter touch on the narration would have worked much better. I wonder if you found this review helpful..

As the story opens, the narrator, 14-year old Susie, tells us she was murdered. We then see a cringe-worthy scene (that doesn't actually show any violence) and Susie leaves earth for "the in-between;" a nice place, but not quite heaven. She watches her family as they cope with her death and the years pass.

I liked the book a lot, which is odd considering it's about a girl who is horrifically killed by a pervert. Except for that one scene, however, the book was uniformly upbeat and uplifting and brought me to happy tears. Susie loved being in her heaven, which looked like her beloved school and she could order peppermint ice cream anytime and never get told, "It's seasonal." The movie changes quite a lot of important plot points, the most notable being that Susie's "in-between" is set in a big field amid beautiful mountains, but she's not happy there and is usually agitated or confused. Instead of being joyous, the movie was very scary and relentlessly sad.

Young Saoirse Ronan (already an Oscar-nominee) is perfectly cast as Susie - all wide-eyed innocence. Stanley Tucci is subtly creepy as her killer, but wasn't quite loony enough. Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz were too young and beautiful to play her parents, and Susan Sarandon was obnoxious as her grandmother. Several characters who played key parts in the book were reduced to bit parts. The movie was very intense, but also very depressing, while the book left me comforted.

Bottom line: If you haven't read the book, you may well find this movie enthralling. I thought too much emphasis was placed on the strikingly visual after-life, while the hopeful message was missing entirely.

"The Lovely Bones" should have been a great film in the hands of Peter Jackson who had directed acclaimed "Heavenly Creatures" back in 1994 (feature debut for Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynskey). "Heavenly Creatures" is a film about intense fantasy and grim reality, some intriguing combination of topics in common with the story of a murdered 14-year-old girl Susie Salmon, the heroine of "The Lovely Bones." Sadly, what we have here is a big sloppy mess of a movie that just doesn't know what it wants to do.

Peter Jackson, so intent on the effect-ridden world, never allows us to connect to the characters, including Susie herself. A horrible thing happens to her family, but we don't know much about her parents, young brother and sister. Yes, computer graphics are pretty impressive, but soon we realize this has little to do with the story, or possible themes like metaphorical and spiritual meditation on the loss. Indeed, the story doesn't know where to go, and the film hits the nadir when Susie's free-spirited grandma steps in as "comic relief." Judging from this (and the film's cloying finale), Peter Jackson seems to have forgotten that Susie has not just died, but is brutally murdered.

One cannot blame the actors for portraying one-dimensional characters. Saoirse Ronan, so impressive in "Atonement," is pretty good, considering the difficult role she is required to play. Cast-against-type Stanley Tucci is not bad. Actually, he is so good at becoming the character he plays that we start wondering how come people around him missed the obvious thing.

Not having read the original bestselling book, I have nothing to say about the liberties Peter Jackson had taken to film "The Lovely Bones." I only imagine that Alice Sebold's book is far more subtle and thought-provoking. The hugely disappointing adaptation is not likely to appeal to either the readers or the viewers.

This movie is deeply moving. If you want to see what a spiritual psychic sees on the other side, then you'll appreciate the impressively true and visually stunning visuals. This story is about the soul of a young girl who can't move on to the higher realms because of her traumatic death. Things unfold in a realistic way on the earth plane and she is able to influence this earth plane enough to get resolution and "let go."

Visually stunning. True to form in regards to the afterlife. Deeply moving for anyone who has faced the loss of a loved one and needed help in letting go.

A traumatic story line and at the same time a profoundly beautiful movie. Highly recommend it to spiritually-sensitive people, not to people who live in their critical/rational mind and insist there's nothing more to life.