HEALING HANDS III [TVB]

Written by Bridget Au 

"TVB has a major problem when it comes to producing profession series – it assumes that everyone who is a doctor/lawyer is rich, speaks English, refer to each other with English names, drive nice cars, go to bars after work everyday, and sleeps with everyone and anyone in their social circle."

SPOILERS ... SPOILERS ... SPOILERS

Chinese Title
“Miu Sau Yan Sum” (roughly translates to deft hand compassionate heart)

Year
2005

No. of episodes
40

Cast
Lawrence Ng Kai Wah as Ching Ji Mei (Paul)
Bowie Lam Bo Yee as Lai Kwok Chu (Henry)
Gigi Lai Zhi as Frances
Melissa Ng Mei Hang as Sarah
Bernice Liu Bik Yee as Betsy
Moses Chan Ho as Lam Man Chi (M.C.)
Raymond Cho as Heung Jong Yan (Chris)
Maggie Siu Mei Kei as Man On Sang (Anson)
Supporting Cast:
Michael Tong Man Lung as Edmond
Sam Chan Yu Sum as Angus
Claire Yiu Ka Lei as Grace
Halina Tam Siu Wan as Phoebe
Belinda Hamnett as Martha

Foreword
I have never liked the Healing Hands series. In fact, I hate them. I find them pretentious, biased, and lacking of an engaging, or even logical, storyline. Even the acting isn’t that great. There is one redeeming factor about them, and it is that they have excellent characterization. Despite this one saving grace, the third instalment to this doctor series joins its predecessors as ultimate failures when it comes to good scriptwriting. And the fact that it is 40 episodes of utter crap as opposed to 20 or 30 makes this even worse. I urge you not to read ahead if you’re an HH fan.

Plot
Paul reclaims his crown as the champion of failed relationships ending in death when it is discovered that Tracy (his girlfriend in HH2) has committed suicide. Sinking into depression, he takes a brief holiday to receive therapy following Frances’ advice. Frances herself is traumatized when her lawyer boyfriend Edmond is murdered and she is responsible for examining his corpse (she’s a coroner). Lonely souls that they are, they briefly date other people before getting together. Hurrah.

Henry continues field dating but is troubled by his receding hairline. His romantic storyline has him sandwiched between the much-younger Betsy, his trainee in ER, and Sarah, a straightforward, no-nonsense doctor who specializes in bones.

The ambitious M.C. is tested when he suffers from numerous problems such as his incomplete recovery from SARS, the closing of his clinic, the death of his mother, and most significantly, his frosty relationship with his young son Joe. Though this relationship improves drastically with Sarah’s help, M.C. is torn when Joe’s mother Martha returns to fight for custody.

Anson and Chris get married, but are devastated when a medical check-up reveals that Anson’s unborn child will have Down’s Syndrome. Their relationship becomes strained due to differing opinions about whether to keep the baby. And guess who doesn’t want the baby – you’re right.

Add in lots of scenes in bars, bad or exaggerated English, lots of narrated preaching at the end of each episode, nice cars, luxurious homes, and people dying and getting revived in the ER and you’ve got HH3 in a nutshell!

Evaluation of Cast and Characters
Paul is a wonderful character; calm, rational, and above all, an excellent doctor and good man to the core. Problem is, his love life sucks. I am so tired of TVB killing off his girlfriends, just give the man a wife and get over it! As for the actor, Lawrence Ng really does look like a doctor, and he gives Paul an attractively gentle, intelligent demeanor. He’s not too great at romantic scenes, though.

Way back in HH1, I thought it was TVB’s joke of the year when they casted Bowie Lam as the flirtatious, field-dating Henry. The guy isn’t handsome by any standard and doesn’t look anything like a doctor, even with his lab coat on. His performance in the HH series is nothing great dramatically, although he is very dryly funny as Henry.

I can’t stand Anson as a character and Maggie Siu is the reigning Ice Queen of the HH series. However, she does make an interesting and at times convincing couple with Raymond Cho. Raymond Cho himself is an actor I have never thought as compelling, but his silly, genuine Chris is the one of the few HH characters I enjoy watching.

Bernice Liu is one stunning girl but she is a terrible actress. You can’t have it all, you know.

Gigi Lai’s Frances was one of the more tolerable characters of this series – average performance, mostly because she didn’t have to cry.

Moses Chan’s M.C. is another character I enjoy watching and Moses is surprisingly adept at giving M.C. his ambitious, face-means-all personality. The child actor who played his son Joe was a joy to watch and was the only thing that kept me from falling asleep while watching this series.

Melissa Ng and Sarah are both boring. Period. Ditto Michael Tong and Edmond. Sam Chan’s minor role was likeable, but he disappeared shortly after resigning as a doctor. Claire Yiu was quite ok as Grace.

The Barf Bag (Oops, did I forget the Loot Bag? No I didn’t)
TVB has a major problem when it comes to producing profession series – it assumes that everyone who is a doctor/lawyer is rich, speaks English, refer to each other with English names, drive nice cars, go to bars after work everyday, and sleeps with everyone and anyone in their social circle. Files of Justice is the infamous lawyer series known for this, and Healing Hands is the doctor series that preaches these oh-so-great, pretentious-as-hell TVB stereotypes.

What is laughable about this is that nearly none of the actors speak understandable English. The two most used English words in here are “CLEAR!” (pronounced more like ‘keeeeryuh!’ because you know TVB actors have problems with the letter L) and “adrenaline” (a word butchered by Bowie Lam in the ER scenes). All the other English words are the characters’ names – which make the dialogue seem full of English, when really, the only people who can speak the language even remotely decently in this series is Melissa Ng, who grew up in San Francisco, Moses Chan, who lived in Australia, Sam Chan, who was educated in London, Bernice Liu, who grew up in Vancouver, and Belinda Hamnett, who is of mixed heritage and doesn’t even have a Chinese surname. And you know what? More than half the people in that list aren’t even main characters in this series. Oh the irony.

The awful English isn’t even the worst part of this series. Nor is it the horrible date-all-your-friends-until-they-die-or-get-cancer relationships. The worst part is all the preaching about life by cancer-ridden people at the end of each freaking episode. This series had characters spouting metaphoric dialogue like no tomorrow and made me feel like I was going to die the next day. I need to stop writing this review because the pain from watching this series is rushing back.

Hmm, you know what. I think I’m going to give this series an even lower rating than A Handful of Love. The horror!

To Watch or Not to Watch, That is the Question
One guess as to whether I recommend this series …

You’re right.

Rating

Read More

WARS OF IN-LAWS [TVB]

Written by Bridget Au

"Aside from the incredibly annoying acting and characters, it would definitely be the childish antics meant to be funny. Some of them are funny if you’re in a silly mood, but to me it was definite overkill and most of it was forced."

SPOILERS ... SPOILERS ... SPOILERS

Chinese Title
“Ngor Dik Ye Maan Lai Lai” (translates to my unreasonable mother-in-law)

No. of episodes
20

Theme song
Sung by Myolie Wu and Liza Wang

Cast
Liza Wang Ming Chuen as Seuk Lan Gak Gak
Myolie Wu Hang Yee as Tin Lik
Bosco Wong Jung Jak as Mao Chun / Mo Ming Yan
Shek Sau as Mao Chun’s father
Lam Suet as Mao Chun’s grandmother (paternal)
Christine Ng Wing Mei as Hao Hao
Eileen Yeow Ying Ying

Foreword
This series sparked intense headlines all across Hong Kong entertainment media as soon as it was released, from rumours of Myolie and Bosco becoming a couple, to Liza Wang telling everyone who cared that Myolie was the one young TVB actress with the most potential, to Kenix Kwok probably losing half of her older fan population by dissing Liza Wang right before the TVB awards that year. Then there are the reviews… people singing praises about this series as if it were the most wonderful thing that they had ever encountered, to coming just short of pronouncing Liza Wang a deity for her performance in this series. But you know, there is always that one dissenting voice. And I am that dissenting voice. Oh, I am so proud.

Plot
I don’t want to waste my breath retelling the storyline because it is really basic. So here is the story in two paragraphs or less: Mama’s boy Mao Chun is accidentally set up with gang thief’s daughter Tin Lik in an arranged marriage – he was supposed to marry some nobleman’s daughter. Mao Chun’s mother, Seuk Lan Gak Gak is furious and tries to make life hell for the uneducated, loud-mouthed Tin Lik and the latter does the same with or without provocation. It does not help when the young couple actually do fall in love with each other as Mao Chun is constantly torn between the two women in his life. The marriage is further strained when his mother schemes to have him take a second wife, when she herself becomes infuriated when after discovering that her husband made a promise to an ex-lover to go back and marry her.

The immature catfight between the two women dissipates as ‘tragedy’ ensues – Mao Chun is framed for murder as his family unites to clear his name. Yippie doo dah.

Comments
You know, it took me a good 5 episodes to even see through Liza Wang’s 10 layers of foundation (and she still looked unbelievably old with all her wrinkles and lines) so I apologize if I’m the only one who’s not going to rave about her performance here. Over-makeup aside, I just cannot fathom the 60-year old Liza in a ‘spoiled princess’ role. Educated, classy, royal – fine, Liza Wang can do this. But is her character classy/elegant? She was supposed to be, and she claimed to be throughout the first half of the series because she was a ‘princess’ and all (let’s all conveniently forget the fact that her status only comes from the fact that she’s a distant cousin of the Empress and not at all biologically related to the Emperor) – but everything from the way she spoke to the things she did towards Tin Lik proved otherwise. This character and Liza Wang’s overacting is a big reason why this series was a pain to watch. Oh, and let’s remember that her character knows surprisingly little and acts unbelievably childish for someone who’s supposed to be of the aristocratic class. Useless, classless character.

And then comes Myolie Wu as Tin Lik. I love Myolie, I really do. She is a truly gifted dramatic actress but let’s just say that comedy is not her thing. She irked me to no end as the loud-mouthed, rude, uneducated Tin Lik. Tin Lik is supposed to be a likeable, Xiao-Yan-Zhi type of character who is loud, impulsive, but genuine and warm and I’m sorry, Myolie’s performance does not do it justice. Why? Because when she speaks in this series, her whole face moves. Eyes, mouth, nose, ears, and head as a whole all roll around and jerk from side to side. Overdone, viciously annoying performance that can only be rivalled by Liza Wang’s. And her character is stupid and useless as well. I am sure plenty of people found her cute. I didn’t.

Bosco Wong foreshadows his success and shows great potential in this series, but can you imagine having Mao Chun as a husband? What a passive, wimpy, useless mama’s boy! I think I would have strangled him to death first before I strangled his mother, that’s how useless he is.

Like son like father. Shek Sau’s Fung was a wimp of a husband as well. This series is full of useless people, including the gossipy in-laws/relatives.

Let’s not even get to the ‘veteran’ actress who plays Shek Sau’s mother/Liza Wang’s mother-in-law. Her name escapes me at the moment (it’s something like Suet Lei or Lei Suet…something with Suet in it) but frankly I do not care – except I do have to thank this actress because at this moment, weeks after watching this series, I am STILL laughing at how bad she was.

Christine Ng gives the one tolerable performance in here as the soft-spoken, gentle Hao Hao. Everyone else was ok but forgettable.

The Negative
Aside from the incredibly annoying acting and characters, it would definitely be the childish antics meant to be funny. Some of them are funny if you’re in a silly mood, but to me it was definite overkill and most of it was forced.

The Positive
It was better than Healing Hands III.

To Watch or Not To Watch, That is the Question
Watch for the hype, or if you’re like me and wanted to jump on the bandwagon to see just how great this series was and then regretted it.

Rating


Through the Grapevine
Bosco and Myolie, as stated in the foreword, were thrust into the paparazzi spotlight as the hottest young TVB rumoured couple of the moment after this series was aired – are they actually together? I personally think so but TVB frowns upon their artists publicizing their real-life relationships.

The Kenix-Liza war that raged in the TVB awards of the year began when both were considered hot nominees for the Best Actress award – Kenix because out of the Big Sisters of TVB (Ada Choi, Jessica Hsuan, Gigi Lai, Maggie Cheung), she is the only one to not have won the award yet, and Liza Wang simply because she is TVB’s most powerful woman. In a press interview, Kenix mentioned that Liza should be given the Lifetime Achievement Award (previously given to veterans such as Law Lan and Chung King Fai). Liza was rather offended, responding that she wasn’t yet of age to receive that award. So followed a flurry of negative press for Kenix, and probably destroyed the poor woman’s “turn” for the award for the next 10 years. I feel bad for Kenix, I believe her when she said that the comment was out of respect and that it was taken entirely out of context. Not that she deserved the Best Actress Award either – oh yeah, Liza won it (surprise, surprise).

Fans of this series (unlike me), take heart – TVB is already planning a sequel à la Square Pegs – Life Made Simple… in other words, a sequel set in modern times, tentatively named “Ngor Dik Ye Maan Sum Poh”, which, predictably, translates to my unreasonable daughter-in-law.

Read More

SOULMATE [Kr]

Written by Bridget Au 

"But for being a Korean series that is creatively funny and not a melodramatic, formulaic Korean drama, I give this series four stars."

SPOILERS ... SPOILERS ... SPOILERS

Year
2004

No. of episodes
24 (technically 12 that are broken down into 2 "parts" each)

Genre
Romantic comedy

Cast
Shin Dong Wook as Dong-wook
Lee Soo Kyung as Soo-kyung
Choi Phillip as Phillip
Sa Gang as Yu-jin
Otani Ryohei as Ryo Hei
Jang Mi Ae as Min-ae
Jung Hwan as Jung Hwan
Kim Mi Jin as Mi-jin

Foreword
The title of this series makes fools of us all. Soulmate is not your average melodramatic Korean tearjerker. Exaggerating and playing on various gender / dating stereotypes, it is an insightful and hilarious look at how we behave in relationships. More specifically, it explores how we unconciously react and attempt to escape from relationships we don't belong in and thus end up with our 'soulmate'. It loses a lot (or all) of its romantic comedy charm at the end of the series, but is overall a commendable, underrated effort from Korean drama.

Plot
The storyline can be split into two main love triangles / squares.

Soo-kyung - Phillip - Min-ae - Ryo-hei
This series begins by introducing couple #1, Soo-kyung and Phillip, who have just become engaged. SK knows something is dearly wrong when she recalls how horrified she was during the proposal but was forced to say 'yes' due to the fact that it occurred in the very public setting of a subway train. Phillip's eyes are also straying towards Min-ae, the resident slut who is currently flouncing in a fling with Ryo-hei. Ryo-hei doesn't really care about Min-ae's playing antics, as long as she comes back to him in the end.

Things turn ugly when Phillip finally confesses he loves another woman, and the heartbroken Soo-kyung leans on Dong-wook for support. Ryo-hei and Min-ae, oddly, have a 'happy' ending... though something tells me that it's not really an ending at all.

Dong-wook - Yu Jin - Soo-kyung
Former player Dong-wook is forced to settle down in a parental match-up with Yu Jin, the only daughter of a high-ranking businessman who is the only reason to watch this show (more on that later). They seem to do relatively well, until small things such as Dong-wook forgetting that Yu Jin hates honey mustard and Yu Jin trying too hard to be like Dong-wook spells doom. The relationship finally crumbles when Dong-wook realizes he has feelings for Soo-kyung. Too bad so sad for Yu Jin.

Classic Line
There is a lot of pricelines dialogue and moments in this series that are just too funny. My favourite - when Ryo-hei, Dong-wook, and their friend see a couple getting married, one of them says: "I've always wondered why the groom wears black and the bride wears white at a wedding. Shouldn't they wear the same colour?" "It's obvious isn't it? Getting married is like a funeral for a guy, so obviously he has to wear black!".

On Characters and Acting
Sa Gang: She is sweet, she is funny, and she is cute in a very clued-out way. Normally my tolerance level for character stupidity is pretty low but Sa Gang is simply adorable. She is the one reason to watch this little-known series. Fantastic performance.

Soo-kyung is rather bland in terms of dramatic acting but she has great comic timing. Shin Dong Wook is at times both frustrating and likable as the playboy, but this character doesn't really allow him to show his dramatic acting chops, whatever they may be. Phillip Choi was also quite ok.

Jung Hwan and Kim Mi are hysterical as their silly, hormone-driven characters and Ryo Hei is dreamily gentlemanly. Jang Mi Ae's physique makes her very convincing as the hot-to-trot Min-ae, and she really portrays the heartbreaking player-girl well.

The overall positive attribute of this cast is that all actors have great chemistry with each other, whether it be romantic, friendship, or even as nemesis.

Huh?
1) How did Soo-kyung and Dong-wook fall for each other? That part was way, way too rushed. Being able to hear someone's thoughts was a tacky plot gimmick and a totally unbelievable reason for falling in love with someone.

2) So what happened between Ryo Hei and Min-ae? It seemed they were just back at square one where Min-ae didn't really want to commit to a relationship and Ryo Hei was left waiting... again.

3) What about Phillip? How do you start off proposing to the love of your life and then fighting for the town slut with another random guy at a bar a week later?

To Watch or Not to Watch, That is the Question
In short, there are many parts of this series that are complete gems, but the sum of the parts and the way they were pieced together was in general, too rushed and unconvincing. But for being a Korean series that is creatively funny and not a melodramatic, formulaic Korean drama, I give this series four stars.

Rating

Read More

RATATOUILLE [Mov] [Ani]

Written by Funn Lim

"A masterpiece and to me perfection."

SPOILERS ... SPOILERS ... SPOILERS

Year Released
2007

Genre
3D animation, 100% guaranteed by Pixar themselves.

Reminder
This review is on the English/US version.

Cast-Character
Taken from IMDB.com

Patton Oswalt ... Remy
Ian Holm ... Skinner
Lou Romano ... Linguini
Brian Dennehy ... Django
Peter Sohn ... Emile
Peter O'Toole ... Anton Ego
Brad Garrett ... Gusteau
Janeane Garofalo ... Colette
Will Arnett ... Horst
Julius Callahan ... Lalo/Francois
James Remar ... Larousse
John Ratzenberger ... Mustafa
Teddy Newton ... Lawyer (Talon Labarthe)
Tony Fucile ... Pompidou/Health Inspecto
Jake Steinfeld ... Git (Lab Rat)

Summary
Taken from IMDB.com

Remy is a young rat in the French countryside who arrives in Paris, only to find out that his cooking idol, Gusteau is dead after a scatching review by the feared reviewer, Anton Ego who took offense with Gusteau's motto, "Anyone can cook". When he makes an unusual alliance with a restaurant's new garbage boy, Linguini who did not have the culinary gift but has a good heart, Remy defies all odds to become a cook despite the hatred of his species in teh kitchen world and the scepticism of his rat father against the humans who kill them mercilessly.

Comments
There may be disputes as to whether Bugs, Monsters Inc and the recent Cars were good enough to be called Pixar productions, the truth is I love all of Pixars' previous efforts, including those dissed by many. I love the colours of Bugs, the humour and touching scenes in Monsters Inc and the sheer imginativeness of Cars. Any Pixar flick, whether good or those they say very bad is still much better than any 3D animation out there, Disney included although I love Chicken Little. It has become a standard argument to compare Pixar's latest effort with Pixar's previous efforts because in terms of the looks, the story and the execution of it, no other productions can ever compare with Pixar except Pixar themselves. Of course this is like blowing your own trumpet but when one is good, one is good. My most favourite Pixar movie seems to be dictated by which is the latest, because each one seems to get better than the previous effort. The last effort was Cars. Although The Incredibles may be funnier or more relevant, but Cars to me is a better effort because how can you tell a story occupied 100% by cars? How do you animate cars? Well let the sifus at Pixar show you the way. My most favourite Pixar flick is still Finding Nemo because even now what I could see is still as gorgeous as the first time I saw it, the story as funny and the characters as engaging. I am also a sucker for those against the odd types of stories that if done well can be inspiring but if done badly seems too forced just so to let the underdog win. The ads for Ratatouille was on since a year ago and I was immediately captivated by the premise of the story; a rat who wants to be a cook and who is picky about what he eats. How can that be?! Immediately I knew this poor rat was in for the biggest fight of his life to realise his ambition and I knew it was going to be fun. I may sound like a psychic or a seer but when it comes to Pixar, anything is possible and if it is impossible, let Pixar do it and anything will become possible. After watching Ratatouille, I now believe rats can cook and rats do know how to keep themselves clean. Call that the power of entertainment.

I will make no doubt my love for this movie. But my love goes beyond just being entertained. Like all other reviews that have been positively glowing towards this Pixar's latest effort, this review will be as glowing, if not more so. Do be forewarned; you may need your sunglassess when reading this review.

This movie reminds me of Babe which remains as my most favourite movie of all time. I am sucker for underdog stories, especially when one is not supposed to do that particular thing. Like Babe, a pig who dreams of being a sheepdog. Or like in Happy Feet, a penguin who can't sing but has a talent for tap dancing, a movie which ranks quite high in my all time favourites. I love a story about breaking the mold, going beyond what is expected of you and achieving the impossible. And combine that with a story about food, to me that's pure perfection.

However, for the life of me I really didn't know what to expect from this movie to tell you the truth. How were they going to show a rat cooking? Like how could Marlin from the sea save Nemo who is in a fishtank? Well, this is where the power of imagination, a little bit of over the top dreaming and some dose of practicalities could make this possible.

I was so eager to watch this movie, the moment it came out on Thursday 16.08.2007, I was buying the ticket on 17.08.2007 and watching it on 18.08.2007 at 11.00AM show at TGV cinema at Cheras Selatan. The ticket was RM7-00! Morning show you see. The time seemed to go by so slowly that week but once the weekend came, boom! Went by so fast. The movie was not very long, since I left the cinema at 1pm. But every moment in that movie was magical. The graphics were beyond excellent, the music score very suitable, the dialogue witty, the characters engaging especially little Remy himself, the ending was unexpected but still as great and the food....oh the food...so hungry...so very hungry.... all looked so real. I especially love the scene where the animators tried to animate what good food feels like as Remy showed to us the musical colours and musical beats. Reminds me of The Three Caballeros.

But what makes the movie so great is the story, the unbeatable aspect of this movie. Whatever others may criticise it as saying it is the usual fare, unbelievable or even insulting to the French, the point is I believe French culinary is chosen because I suppose it is the epitome of high class dining and being an art form and Remy a rat simply because it is capable of being cuter than a cockroach and a rat is an enemy of the kitchen. It is like an oxymoron or whatever when the entire premise of the story is a rat who dreams of being a cook.

What is great about the story, believe it or not is that it is highly original. Of course nothing is original about an underdog fighting for a place in this big bad world, but a rat? In a kitchen? Cooking? How then does he communicate? How does he move the saucepan? Isn't a rat dirty? Diseased even? Remy is a very clean rat, he likes being clean and he takes particular care on what he puts into his stomach, eventhough he may be a rat. He is also nimble and agile, so he can jump up and down as he finds the ingredients, the herbs and spices to add into a soup or a dish. As illustrated in an earlier scene, he could even operate a saucepan and made an omelette. But how can he cut, clice, stir and serve?

Well the genius at Pixar figured that out by the help of a very clumsy but nimble kitchen boy, Linguini. When we first met Linguini, he was desperate for a job and he really can't cook. In fact even the rat can cook better but then the rat has talent. Linguini has heart and since Remy is a very smart rat who can read and understand human language, Linguini can talk to Remy and Remy could respond by gestures. And oh, how expressive a simple gesture can be and the genius at Pixar has outdone themselves in that department. But then if a car can emote, why not a rat? After much trial and error, Remy discovered he can control Linguini's movement like a puppet by pulling his hair. So Remy stays hidden on the top of Linguini's head inside the top hat and pulled Linguini's hair to move him around. Linguini himself didn't mind these manipulation as he slices and cooks and reaches for the spices whilst trying to hide the fact that there is a rat under his hat. His boss, the executive chef by the name of Skinner was no amused when clumsy Linguini turned out to be a Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and he thought he saw a rat with him all the time. At the same time Linguini was to inherit the restaurant Gusteau, once headed by the great chef Gusteau whose words of advice to aspiring chefs inspired Remy and also infuriated the fearsome food critic, the pale thin glum looking Anton Ego, whose last review on the restaurant practically killed off the restaurant's reputation and Gusteau himself. But Remy took to heart Gusteau's advice that he heard over the TV and also with Gusteau appearing as his conscience, that anyone can cook and not everyone can be great but greatness can come from anywhere which has become the driving force behind the story. When Anton Ego heard of Linguini's success he was eager to crush it and challenged Linguini to cook him something. But Remy and Linguini were having some misunderstanding thanks to Linguini who didn't acknowlege Remy and Remy taking revenge on Linguini by opening the door of the kitchen and let his fellow rats steal food from it and Remy in a moment of weakness almost resigned to his own fate as a rat but then he realised he wants to cook and he is a cook. His passion and love for food and cooking led him back to Linguini who was felt he didn't do justice to his Little Chef. The last stand was between Remy and Anton Ego and there lies the significance of the title of this movie, ratatouille. To see how Anton Ego reacted to this dish and what he subsequently wrote and narrated at the end of the movie which closely reflect myself as an amateur critic was a powerful statement of admission of when something's good, you can't destroy it even if you wanted to simply for the sake of destroying it. Whilst I doubt anyone can ever know the executive chef of a restaurant is a rat, I love the ending with Remy and Linguini's story. But what I love most is the story of Anton Ego. His scenes may be few but pivotal to Remy's fate and in the end he is the heart of this very heart warming story.

And what a heart warming story it is. It won't cause you tears, it is not a tear jerker but it does make you think. Just because it has a cute cuddly looking rat by the name of Remy doesn't necessarily make this movie about a cute cuddly animal. It is about daring to dream, it is about going beyond what others think is your destiny, it is about being passionate about something, about talent, about reflection, about a good heart and most of all it is about recognition. Recognising a good person and payment in kind of his kindness, it is recognising talent even from the most impossible source and encouraging that talent and it is about recognising what is missing from ones soul and when found, fill it with joy and warmth and admitting that "anyone can cook". Like that tagline of this movie, greatness can come from anywhere, and it takes an animated movie about a rat who dreams of being a cook to tell the cynic in all of us just that.

The voice acting is also excellent and I am just too glad that it is not filled to the brim with famous stars just for the sake of having famous stars. I have never heard of the actor who voiced Remy, the voice that voiced Linguini is reportedly a Pixar employee, Ian Holm, Brad Garrett and Janeane Garofalo's voices were unrecognisable to me and each one has the French accent and as in the tradition of a pixar flick, we have again John Ratzenberger. But it was Peter O'Toole that nearly stole the show from the other cast with his sinister, dark and arrogant Anton Ego, whose character quite live up to his own name. You could hear his disdain, his arrogance and his hatred for what Gusteau stood for. He does look like Christopher Lee and I am quite surprised why Christopher didn't voice this character instead. He would have done a great job too but you know, Peter O'Toole really nailed the character, as in every voice actor in this movie.

Only the most foolish will have anything to criticise about this movie. And to those who feels this movie transmits sublime insults and stereotypes of the French or women, I am sorry to say the point of this great story is lost in these people. But then you can't cater to all, and to each his own opinion. Of course certain things are universal and if one chooses to be a rebel for the sake of being a rebel, the plight of Anton Ego is perhaps most apt to describe these special group of rebels. And hopefully like Anton Ego, they will be able to have the capacity and the broadmindedness to admit that when something is good, it is good.

Verdict
Pure brilliance and stunning visuals. But the best is the heartfelt story. A masterpiece and to me perfection. I know some boycott animated film, thinking it is for children only but this story has many levels and on deeper levels on adults who have been through that stage in life where we doubt ourselves eventhough we know we have what it takes to realise that dream, this movie will tap into that inner you and hopefully like Remy, despite the odds against us, I hope we too can achieve our dreams. This movie deserves repeated viewings and it is a must to watch it on the big screen to appreciate the level of details. But most of all, this movie can be enjoyed by everyone of all ages and it is perhaps one of those very few things in life in entertainment that both adult and child can both find something they like, like the Harry Potter books.

Bon appetit!

What is Ratatouille?
I believe the dish is chosen in part due to its humble roots (so it is like Remy himself) and the play of word, RAT-tatouille. The name as reminded in the posters is pronounced at Rat-Ta-Too-Ee. Rat as in a straight rat and not the rat's rat.

Taken from imdb.com, Ratatouille is a tasty French Provençial dish made from stewed vegetables. The dish is versatile and can be served with rice, potatoes, French bread or itself can be a side dish. Its main basic ingredients consist of tomatoes, onions and zucchinis. The name of the dish appears to derive from the French touiller, "to stir", although the root of the first element "rata" is slang from the French Army meaning "chunky stew".

From what I can read in the forums, some didn't find it tasty. Maybe that is because of the universal dislike for all things vegetables I suppose. It sounds tasty and from what I could see in the movie, it looks quite delicious. By the way all the food in the movie is real, prepared by a real chef.

Virtual set tour
Yes! You can actually visit the set pieces in Ratatouille itself! Click HERE to find out more.

The DVD
Is out! A pity though. I can't find the The Making Of feature. I really wanted to know the actors behind the voices! So I searched it and found a featurette in youtube!





More Info
For more info, pictures, screencaps and stirring reviews by us commoners, visit Imdb.com.

Read More

THE GOLDEN COMPASS [MOV]

Written by Funn Lim 

"The one and only reason why this movie ultimately fails. The exclusion of the book ending is the single biggest mistake made in this movie and that to me ultimately killed this movie."

SPOILERS ... SPOILERS ... SPOILERS

Released In
2007

Based on
The 1st of 3 books called His Dark Materials written by Philip Pullman. In US the book's title is The Golden Compass, in the rest of the world, The Northern Lights. Contents of both books are the same.

Cast-Character
Nicole Kidman ... Marisa Coulter/Mrs Coulter
Daniel Craig ... Lord Asriel
Dakota Blue Richards ... Lyra Belacqua
Ben Walker ... Roger
Freddie Highmore ... Pantalaimon (voice)
Ian McKellen ... Iorek Byrnison (voice)
Eva Green ... Serafina Pekkala
Jim Carter ... John Faa
Tom Courtenay ... Farder Coram
Ian McShane ... Ragnar Sturlusson (voice)
Sam Elliott ... Lee Scoresby
Christopher Lee ... First High Councilor
Kristin Scott Thomas ... Stelmaria (voice)
Edward de Souza ... Second High Councilor
Kathy Bates ... Hester (voice)

Plot summary
Taken from imdb.com.

It was no ordinary life for a young girl: living among scholars in the hallowed halls of Jordan College and tearing unsupervised through Oxford's motley streets on mad quests for adventure. But Lyra's greatest adventure would begin closer to home, the day she heard hushed talk of an extraordinary particle. Microscopic in size, the magical dust- found only in the vast Artic expanse of the North -was rumored to possess profound properties that could unite whole universes. But there were those who feared the particle and would stop at nothing to destroy it. Catapulted into the heart of a terrible struggle, Lyra was forced to seek aid from clans, gyptians, and formidable armored bears. And as she journeyed into unbelievable danger, she had not the faintest clue that she alone was destined to win, or to lose, this more-than-mortal battle...

Comments
The Golden Compass, aka Nothern Lights, the 1st part of the trilogy known as His Dark Materials is visually stunning with generally superb performances but ultimately falls horribly flat due to uninspiring direction and bad adaptation from an otherwise rich source of material.

And that is the end of my review but being me I must explain why I feel The Golden Compass is a disappointment and is a classic example that when things go wrong, they go terribly and boringly wrong.

I never quite like the book and frankly never quite understand the meaning and significance of dust, deamon and Lyra Belacqua. However what I do like about the book is definitely two of the most engaging characters one would come across in a book that can incite as much passion in the reader as hate. Then there's the interesting concept of deamon (pronounced as demon), your soul in the form of an animal that can interact with you and walk with you. It's like having your soul as your pet, your ultimate best friend, your soul mate, your confidant and in one review the possible fear that the entire movie will be turned into a walking zoo. In a way the fear was true.

New Line Cinema which also produced Lord Of The Rings billed this movie earlier on as the next Lord Of The Rings. Somewhere along the way the tagline disappeared and resurfaced and then the movie came and there came the confirmation; so far no other fantasy flick, not even Narnia nor Harry Potter movies could beat Lord Of The Rings when it comes to visuals, action scenes and more importantly, and this being the single reason why The Golden Compass failed miserably, clever adaptation of an otherwise very thick book. Granted, the Lord Of The Rings books are thick, so thick that there are a lot of unnecessary plots and stories that Peter Jackson and gang could delete, rearrange, rewrite and rework on it. The Golden Compass is a bit like the Harry Potter books, every page seems to be a wealth of plot and information so the adaptation is difficult. But unlike Peter Jackson who grasped the meaning of the books and its direction, Chris Weitz , the director of The Golden Compass who also wrote the screenplay failed miserably in producing a coherent storyline. By the end of the movie you still won't know what is dust. Not that you're supposed to because it takes 3 books to explain the importance of it but at least the 1st movie should get you excited to see the 2nd or even read the books, but this movie will probably discourage you.

The problem is many folds, the major ones are because of wrong emphasis on plot points and more importantly deletion of the ending of the 1st book.

The emphasis in this movie is Lyra and her journey. Ok, that's quite like the book. But to me the book points beyond her journey. It points to her discovery that the way things are are not always the way things are. It is a cruel world, as she witnessed in the last scene of the 1st book which drives her to do what she will do later. As a child she is carefree, happy, undisciplined and innocent in a childlike way but gutsy also. What happened in the end thought her about betrayal, the break of trust and the cruel intentions of someone she cared about that she never thought of. Along the way she will discover more things, so it is really like the journey of education of Lyra Belacqua into womanhood. This movie got the 1st part correct but later on the movie's Lyra is nothing more than just an observer. She does not seem to participate. Every thing that happened could be compartmentalised and she was never fully fleshed out. She is brave but for no particular expressed reason. There is no reason to drive her, no purpose other than rescuing her friend Roger that was kidnapped and all those reviews which said the reunion was very moving must be sleeping when watching the movie. I found that scene like its surrounding in the Gobbler's lab; too sterilized and sanitised. It was not emotional, it was not moving, it was just "let's get this over with so that we can move on to the next scene". One scene does not serve the purpose of the other, it does not drive the other, it is just like a sequence of pictures that hopefully when pieced together will present a story which did not.

The only scene that was exciting to watch was of course the talking Polar Bears, one of which was voiced wonderfully by Sir Ian McKellan. In fact there are a few cast members from LOTR although they may not be in front of the camera. Christopher Lee for one was superb as Saruman in LOTR but in here as a member of the shadowy Magisterium, he seems more like a scary old caricature. He has no important role to play in the movie except to look sinister which he naturally does look that way.

Almost every character in this movie seems to be populated by a character that has a name and an identity and a role to play in the book but in the movie they became walk on roles and wasted.

For example, Serafina Pekkala played by the beautiful and now more English than the English (in her accent), Eva Green. She may not have a big role in the 1st book but her deamon and herself played a very important role rather than just to fly in, talk, battle and fly out. Lord Asriel, played by the magnificent Daniel Craig had a small role in the book which is even smaller in the movie, however a pivotal role. He is the Saruman of LOTR in the sense that he is always talked about but rarely seen. Characters in the book seems to discuss about him, a lot but we rarely see him. His actions are the ones that impact the plot and Lyra's decision later on and will provide for the biggest cliffhanger a book can give which the movie edited out. However in here he is nothing more than a walk on role with a wink or two for his niece, Lyra when in the book he is not only formidable, but almost mad in his pursuit of the dust and cruel in a good way. You know some people may mean well but they do things that are the opposite and Lord Asriel I am sure is a man who believes that the end justifies the means. The movie neither showed that nor even suggested that. He was simply shown as a formidable man, and with a snow leopard by his side, one would of course automatically agree he is a formidable man without much question to why and how is he such a formidable man. Then there's Mrs Coulter, played convincingly by the very cold looking Nicole Kidman. Whatever criticism one may have over her botoxed face, I am sure she as a mannequin can still out-act perhaps all those young stars today, namely the overrated Keira Knightley. In the entire movie perhaps only Mrs Coulter and the deamons had some resemblence of characterisation. Pantalaimon, Lyra's shape shifting deamon had more coherent role than all others eventhough he was rarely in one shape. Stelmaria, Asriel's deamon was a walk on character with one line whilst Coulter's daemon, the mute golden monkey had a better characterisation than the human counterpart. Iorek Byrnison the polar bear was a character to behold but much of his history was changed although his fight scene with the bear king was spectacular although unrelated to Lyra's plot. It serves no purpose other than to show some good action scene of many CGI bears. Anyway his name was changed if I remember correctly but that is because of a very good reason; in the book his name was very similar with the bear king's name so for practical reasons it had to be changed.

Although the Daemons fared better, I do feel one reviewer was right to point out the fear he or she had that the movie will turn into a zoo. It almost felt that way in the beginning but after a while even the daemons seem to fade away. I like the scenes where when the human is killed, the deamon just disappear in a golden poof. But after seeing it for I don't know how many times it tend to get boring. Anyway I am so going to name my next dog Daemon.

Then there's Lyra. I don't know about her, I am confused as to my feelings about her. I just feel she is more like a bystander than a participant. She seems to just act gutsy and spunky and a bit scared sometimes in quantities that can surprisingly be measured like a recipe but in the end she seems to me a pretty empty character. It could be fleshed out more but again the editing and storytelling failed her.

I do not know whether the problem lies with the story adaptation or the editing. I saw some edited scenes and I feel perhaps the director was not given an opportunity to present the story he wanted to present and he was forced to edit some scenes that in the end prove crucial to the story. Which is why I admire Peter Jackson. Not only did he get financing for 3 movies at one go, he managed to keep the story he wanted to tell, even if he was a bit long winded, he actually got the spirit and the story right. So maybe the director of The Golden Compass didn't get the same leverage and so he had to cut.

The first he cut was of course the role of the magisterium in the movie. It was toned down. I have no complains about that because even when toned down by the way the characters dressed, they are obviously people from the church, only more severe, more like an organised government than men of God. For all the protests that parents or churches may have on the impact of this movie, they're overblown. Moreover the books, like Daniel Craig kept repeating himself is against organized religion and not against God per se. So not much is lost although the magisterium seems more like cartoon villains that real villains. Anyway with so little of them in this movie and so much cut from the book, if ever book 3 was ever to be adapted, how does one film the scene where Asriel and Mrs Coulter kill God? Well not the real God anyway, but an angel who tookover God.

Of course there were many scenes which connect book 2 and 3 with book 1 were also deleted from the script, like earlier on the meeting between Asriel and the scholars. If I remember correctly that scene was changed significantly. From who actually put the poison into the wine glass of Asriel, to why Asriel asked Lyra to hide and observe to how the presentation was done which includes the head of a famed explorer who will have a significant impact in book 2 and its lead character(s). It also changed and toned down significantly the conversation or rather the chilly exchange between the cold Asriel and the stubborn Lyra which quickly established the man Asriel is, the girl Lyra is and the lack of closeness in their relationship. All these are important because it introduces Lyra in a favourable light in the sense she is one determined girl and how harsh Asriel can be but again all deleted, cut out or changed for reasons I do not know why. Maybe to make Asriel more sympathetic perhaps?

And then I must talk about the significance of the golden compass in this movie which was significantly reduced in the movie to the point that it is just a compass. I don't remember the book ever referring to it as a golden compass which this movie did, it is called alethiometer. I know, a mouthful but oh so exotic. In the book it played a very big role in helping Lyra seperate between good intentions and bad and helped her out in some sticky situations. It also signifies how special Lyra is because even the scholars, after years of study of the books on the symbols on the alethiometre could not decipher what the compass was telling them, so when Lyra could simply on instinct, she was indeed special. It was the compass who told Lyra Mrs Coulter didn't mean well and helped to bring about the tragedy she would face in the end with Asriel. But the movie really downplayed the significance of the compass and instead emphasised more on the bears so it would have been more appropriate to call the movie after the bears.

The dialogue seems a bit strange too towards the end where Lyra calls Iorek as "my love" or something like that. A bit too affectionate, a bit unlike her since she is a tomboy who spurns such affectionate terms. I don't know, the dialogue seems a bit strained to me.

Then there's the end scene. I read what was missing from the movie so I knew. I also saw some of those end scenes in the trailer. You know the scene where Asriel kisses Mrs Coulter? That was the end which was cut. A great pity. But what I didn't expect how fundamentally wrong it is to change the ending as the producers did that well, fundamentally killed this movie with one single snip. The director said in light of the audiences, he wanted to have an uplifting ending. Oops! This movie will go down in history as the one movie that looks down on its audiences because we the audiences want not an uplifting ending but an ending worthy of a cliffhanger. The book gave that to us. I didn't like the book but the ending was shocking, thrilling and made me take up the 2nd book and read which of course did not start where it ended. Anyway the director and producers underestimated the audiences and why it performed below expectations is simply because of this one moment of disastrous executive decision. They should have left the ending as in the book because it will show many things; the disintergration of Lyra's innocence, the possiblity of the evilness of Lord Asriel, the confusion that Mrs Coulter is facing, the heartbreak of losing a friend by trusting the wrong people which causes guilt and most possibly a wealth of a special effects scene that will blow all other special effect scene in all other fantasy flick to smitherin. Moreover it will call for oscar moments like great performances. In fact you can see that one scene of the reunion between Asriel, Roger and Lyra where Daniel Craig in the space of 30 seconds showed so much of change in his expressions that I feel it is such a great pity it was deleted. The director kept saying it will be the beginning of movie no. 2, if it is ever made which it will be made but maybe by a different director but the impact will be lost.

Or maybe it is the storytelling itself. The director is well known as a 1st time fantasy flick director. Well there are others like him but the results seem to suggest he didn't understand the story or was overwhelmed by the special effects. There are many scenes of grandois, like he was in awe of the technology, like the scene about the plane that Mrs Coulter and Lyra boarded and especially the repeated view of the gyptian ship. In fact that had me feeling very impatient with the never ending shot of that ship sailing along and I counted, 3 times. Of course it wasn't that long but it felt that long whilst for the characters it was more like touch and go without much substance. Clearly the director may have had an idea what he was doing at first but ended up being really lost in the big set pieces and mega special effects and stuff.

Which is a great pity because he had assembled a fine cast, except for a debatable few.

Daniel Craig may have a 10 min or less walk on scene but his scene was perhaps one of the more intriguing because Lord Asriel is intriguing. In fact the author Philip Pullman seems to spend quite some time writing about this character, and since he had a snow leopard by his side, he must be one special character. However Daniel didn't play the character as I read it. He is still cold, stern but not cruel, not demanding, not persistent, no formidable enough, not harsh enough and definitely not those who seems to believe the end justifies the means. In the book you seem to get all that in the first part, and a very exciting chilly relationship between Lyra and her much respected uncle. He never seems to love her and even till the end I doubt he had ever loved Lyra. He gives me an impression he is not only all that, he is also obssessed. Maybe 10 min of role may be too much to ask for so for all the time given to Daniel, he did really well. And then I saw the deleted scene where he met Lyra and Roger who came to rescue him, looking handsome and well shaven, there seems to be madness glinting in his eyes and he scolded Lyra. That scene was awesome and showed some resemblance to my favourite character in the book that I love to hate. Oh yes my favourite but I hated Lord Asriel eventhough I can't disagree with his actions although we can debate whether what he did, that is sacrificing someone to achieve a greater purpose is really all that noble and for a good cause. Daniel, after the editing seems to present a softer and much amused Lord Asriel, unlike the one I read in the book. A good interpretation I suppose but again 10 min of scenes is hardly enough time for such a remarkable actor to present his character fully. I doubt anyone could. I think even Anthony Hopkins needed more time to make good the character of Hannibal Lecter. But I must say, Daniel Craig is charismatic. His daemon however, Stelmaria was such a sad case of wasted character. He doesn't seem to interact much with her. I can't feel the closeness. A bit of a pat on her head would be nice.

Nicole Kidman was stunningly beautiful as Mrs Coulter, and yes very plastic. So what? Mrs Coulter is conniving, cold and quite heartless in the beginning until mother instincts kicked in. I thought she was magnificent and amongst all the adults her character actually had the resemblance of a character in itself. But yes too much botox could limit the expression but I feel she still has it. She is as charismatic as ever, a capable actress and though their partnership in The Invasion was panned as without chemistry, and in this movie they never met (well in the edited version anyway), I like the idea of my favourite actress and favourite actor together. They can try to out-act each other. Her Mrs Coulter is soft, cold, passionate, cruel, flexible, hard... she is everything of the opposites and I feel she is the one depiction that most resembled the character in the book although some pivotal scenes had been changed, like her role in the kidnap of the children was suggested, not shown like in the book. Fantastic performance but alas, limited by bad editing. People are now blaming her for the failure of the movie for mega success due to her box office poison. Ever thought perhaps the director failed her?

Eva Green had so little scene I could not even bring myself to comment about her performance. However her English accent, same as in Casino Royale is getting too English you know. Other than that no comment.

Sam Elliott. Lots of hair I must say, snowy white. Probably the only American character in this movie and a cowbiy to boot. Great? Not enough screentime or rather useful screentime to be that but competent. Again the problem is the director and editing I suppose. The original choice was Samuel L Jackson. I wonder why he didn't get cast? Because it would have been a good choice.

The actors who provided the voices, like Sir Ian McKellan as the bear was magnificent and commanding. He grabs your attention from the first growl, of course the sight of a bear working is also one of the reason. Freddie Highmore as Pantalaimon is magnificent as well. He breaths life into Pan and gave him a sometimes mischevious edge although in the book it was Lyra who was more mischevious. I always felt if Freedie Highmore were to be discovered earlier he would have been a better Harry Potter than Daniel Radcliffe. Definitely a better actor although not much of a looker. Kristin Scott Thompson was surprisingly in this movie and as what? Stelmaria's voice! Two lines and her job was done. Pity.

Then there were the other characters. Mostly underused, mostly caricatures but overall competent in their respective roles.

And we have Dakota Blue Richards. A guarantee for your child to be a child star is to name her Dakota. She is pretty. Looking mature beyond her age, she will grow into a very beautiful girl and in a strange way resembles Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig. And tall too for a 12 year old. Now her accent may be sometimes on and sometimes off but who cares? This is her very first movie, very first acting job and amongst all the big guns and special effects and the enormous budget, she did ok. Ok, so everybody said she was stunning but I beg to differ. I feel she could have been better. She is slightly better than Daniel Radcliffe when he first started, much much better than Emma Watson, a lesser Abigail Breslin, more natural than the freaky Dakota Fanning but not in the same or near the same league as Haley Joel Osment, Joe Mazarro and of course Freddie Highmore himself. But she will grow, she will probably get better or like Emma Watson, annoyingly worse. Anyway for her first performance, she is still obviously an amateur. There were many scenes you know she was mentally preparing herself to deliver the lines, waiting for her cue and then trying as much as she could to utter the lines with the appropriate emotions. The way she would walk forward and deliver her lines suggests that. I wouldn't say it was the worst of all debuts but frankly she was ok but not that great. She is not the reason why this movie will succeed (that is because of the bears, daemons, Eva Green, Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig) and she will not be the reason why this movie fails (the director, the producer) nor will she be the reason that there will be the 2nd and 3rd movies (that will be dependent on the producer, the audiences and the box office). But she does play a role but like in the movie I am not quite sure what her role is, yet. Hopefully there will be the 2nd and 3rd movie to explain her character, her role and see her growing as an actress. As for now, I find her adequate but not mind blowing. She can do better, and hopefully more naturally.

After writing so much, I feel the reason the movie fails is not because of:-

1. the controversy
2. the performances
3. the visual effects
3. the costumes
4. the haphazard adaptation which plays a big role but not the ultimate role
5. the deamons
6. the bears
7. the story
8. the supposed anti-god story
9. the amount of audiences shunning this movie

It is because of:-

1. the poor adaptation
2. the decisions to cut certain scenes
3. the uninspiring direction of a very inadequate and unsure director who let others walk all over him and commited suicide by buthering his own movie
4. the producers who somehow felt people needed a more uplifting ending
5. the uplifting ending
6. the confusing plot, helped no less by 2, 3 and 4 above
7. the underuse of certain actors
8. the overuse of certain props
9. the no use of the book in a good way
10. the fear of creating controversy, thus toning down of certain aspects of the book

But ultimately to me it is because of:-

The one and only reason why this movie ultimately fails. The exclusion of the book's ending is the single biggest mistake made in this movie and that to me ultimately killed this movie.

For that I feel really sorry for Nicole Kidman because she got blamed. How unfair. How unfair indeed.

On the upside, there should be a surge in the sales of the books since everybody would really like to know how does the movie compare to the book itself. And that is a positive thing.

Verdict
Watch it simply because I want enough of box office figures to justify the making of the 2nd and 3rd movie and hopefully the producers will stop meddling into the director's creative process, find a competent director and find someone who knows how to adapt a book into screenplay properly.I do think the visuals alone is worth a watch. If you're not bothered, then avoid this mess and just rewatch LOTR for the fantasy element, Casino Royale for the drool element and To Die For and Dead Calm to remember why Nicole Kidman is such a good actress.

Interesting Observation
Did you see the lady who played Farmer Hogget's wife in Babe and Babe : Pig In The City?

She was Lyra's ermmm nanny (?), Mrs Lonsdale at Jordan College aka Oxford. Her real name is Magda Szubanski.

I find that immensely interesting simply because there are so many familar faces. Let's see...

LOTR gang
Christopher Lee (the man of trilogies I tell you)
Sir Ian McKellan

Worked with Daniel Craig as lover
Eva Green for Casino Royale
Derek Jacobi for Love Is The Devil
Nicole Kidman for The Invasion

The deleted scene
Which ironically was ripped from the upcoming game. Major spoiler but not much since you will have to read the book to know what happened next. Elements of it can be seen in the extended trailer. Just look for a clean shaven Daniel Craig.



The official trailer


Fantastic Stuff
Check out the official website for your personalized daemon in About the film > Meet your daemon, check out the 1st 5 min of the film in Lyra's World, some nice wallpapers and play the alethiometer.

And in Lyra's World, find the character of Mrs Coulter and Lord Asriel. There is a play button on each photo and in each clip you will find an audio clip with Daniel Craig reading a passage from the 1st book describing Lord Asriel's feelings and encounter with the seductive Marisa Coulterand of Nicole Kidman reading a passage describing Mrs Coulter's feelings for Lord Asriel. A must hear if you can find the link.

Read More