Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Movies and TV => Topic started by: fuzzyoctopus on July 18, 2004, 05:18:08 PM
-
yeah, I didn't know if there was already a thread for this, but...
Trailer!
http://www.pathea.com/ghibli/2000/howl/Howl_Trailer_20040626.avi
Or, just look at the page and link to it yourself. Since the trailer is of course in Japanese, those who haven't read the book may be completely lost. They have tranlated the text on the site.
http://www.pathea.com/ghibli/2000/howl/
ETA: I personally think that Calcifer is shown as being much cuter than he ought to be, but he's too cute for me to complain that much.
-
That's one I haven't read yet. Still working on the Dalemark Quartet.
-
You *definitely* need to read Howl's Moving Castle. It's one of my favorites of her books!
-
Calcifer does not, however, have cute little stubby legs.
-
just realised this comes out next month.
-
Assuming it even comes to Utah....
I'm looking forward to it. As far as I know, it's the first adaptation of a major English language fantasy novel into an anime format. The book was pretty good, and I'm very interested to see Miazaki's interpretation.
And yes. The fire demon looks FAR too cute in that trailer.
-
I'm sure it will come to Utah, Jordan's commons will get it just like they did the last two Miazaki films.
-
There is an american trailer (ie, in English) here:
http://aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=19966
Calcifer only shows up once in it, but he definitely isn't cute. It looks so freakin' good.
-
I'm sure I'll enjoy the movie, I'll just always be sad because I know I will NEVER get my husband to read the book and he'll never know how good it is.
-
Yea, I absolutely LOVED this book. My first Diana Wynne Jones read, and now I am an avid fan. I liked Spirited Away, so when I learned from the DWJ website that Howls was being made into a movie by the same guy who did Spirited Away and Kiki's Delivery Service, I was very excited. And that was like last year.
Since then, EUOL has introduced me to the other anime films by Miyosaki (excuse me for probably butchering his name) such as Nausicaa and Princess Mononoke. I am VERY interested in seeing his interpretation of DWJ's Howls, so as soon as anyone knows it is in theaters let us know here.
-
Ok, people. None of the links to the trailer work. Could someone pretty, pretty please find a working link to the trailer? Please?
-
http://www.apple.com/trailers/disney/howls_moving_castle/
Good old apple.
-
EUOL informed me that Howl's Moving Castle IS coming to Salt Lake. It will be at Jordans Commons as of June 17. We don't know if it will be at any other theaters. I am way excited, and can't wait to see it. ;D
-
Howl's party on the 17th or 18th, then. Chimera will be going. Who else is in? We could do a matinee, for those who can do such things. Actually, a 5:00 showing would work perfectly, since I'll have to be in Salt Lake anyway that evening for writing group.
-
Is that next Friday? If so, I'd like to come. But I can't make a 5:00 pm showing.
I'd be available for a Saturday showing virtually any time.
-
Is that next Friday? If so, I'd like to come. But I can't make a 5:00 pm showing.
Yeah, seriously, some of us actually do have 9-5 jobs here.
-
I like Friday at 5 pm myself but Saturday works too.
-
So, given a choice between Howl's Moving Castle and Mr. and Mrs. Smith, which would you guys go to see?
-
Howl's Moving Castle.
Why, cause it's fantasy, has brilliant animation, and is less likely to have objectionable material.
That and I disike the to main actors in Mr. and Mrs. Smith.
-
I second 42.
Howl's Moving Castle is one of my favorite books, and I have been really impressed with Miyazaki's (butchering his name again, I'm sure) work. I haven't been impressed with any of Angelina Jolie's, and the previews that they have been showing FOREVER don't really entice me.
But I CAN'T WAIT for Howl's next week!!! Stacer--wanna come down from Seattle for a Saturday showing? ;)
-
Well, he doesn't like animation, so we're going to have to work on that. He still hasn't even seen The Incredibles. So tomorrow night most likely will be Mr. and Mrs. Smith.
Stacer--wanna come down from Seattle for a Saturday showing?
Don't tempt me! :) He might not even feel up to a movie by the end of the day tomorrow (Fridays are usually down days, end of work week kind of thing). I don't know if I'll find someone to go see it with here. I'll go see it alone if I have to--as in, if I end up on my own tomorrow, it's Howl's for me.
But I'm going to be playing my first ever D&D campaign tomorrow afternoon (ah, summer hours), so, afraid there's no way I'd have time for a drive to Utah this weekend--though I do plan on it sometime this summer, probably sometime in July. Though now I might be flying to Chicago in two weeks, so that might be enough travel/exertion for me between that and *hopefully* finally getting my stuff.
-
Howl's Moving Castle definately.
Unfortunately, it's only showing in the El Capitain today (that's in Hollywood and just won't work, being gone from Mathias that long--it's probably also ridiculously expensive).
Where did you guys get this info about the showing on June 17th? Maybe it's coming to a theatre closer to me around then too.
-
That's weird. It opens here today.
-
:P
Go ahead . . . rub it in.
-
Well, it's not like I'm going to go see it. At least, not tonight. Now I'm going to see Seattle's best bookstore. But that's all I know. :)
-
So who really wants to go? We need to get a definite time and list of names. I may have a baby shower Sat afternoon--my friend wasn't sure if the shower was on Sat or Mon, and I won't get the invite for a couple of days. That would be up in Salt Lake, though.
So I say we shoot for later on Saturday, since most people said Friday didn't work for them. Who is planning on going? Does that soudn good to you? And EUOL-- what were you thinking?
-
This movie had a very limited release this weekend, but it's income per-screen was higher than anything else in the country except Mr. and Mrs. Smith. That's pretty cool.
-
Change of plans. Since nobody has been commital, and EUOL and I talked last night and found that Friday worked better, we are going on Friday. We're saying something like a 7 showing, so people who work 9-5 can still come, but if no one else goes we might hit a 5 to get the matinee price.
Let us know quick if you want to go.
-
AAARGH! I wasn't being non-committal. I didn't have time to get on the internet yesterday. And I'd really like to go. And I REALLY can't make it on Friday until 8pm at the earliest.
:(
-
Oldie Locks--I put in a vote for a movie after 8 so you can come. A late movie doesn't bother me--I don't sleep anyway. We won't be doing Saturday--sorry if that worked better. I know that Spriggan, EUOL, and I are planning on going, possibly also some of EUOL's roommates. Someone needs to get the times. I'll try to see what I can scrounge up with google right now.
Anyone else who wants to go, please post here. I think Mistress of Darkness was considering it, and maybe fuzzy too, but they haven't posted.
-
Okay, the times at Jordans Commons for Fri June 17 are either 7:30 or 10:15. Like I said, I'm okay with a later movie so Oldie Locks can go. But I don't have the final say. A lot depends on what EUOL and Spriggan want to do.
There is a movie at 4:45, if we wanted to go really early. And this is the opening night of the movie here--do you think that will make it crowded? I wouldn't think so for an anime film, but you never know.
-
except me. I always know.
-
I think Mistress of Darkness was considering it, and maybe fuzzy too, but they haven't posted.
MoD lives in California, so she won't be going with you. :( I won't either, but hopefully I'll see it sometime this weekend. But also, hopefully, the movers will be coming this weekend, and I'd rather have my stuff than go see the movie on opening weekend. Perhaps I'll see it during the week sometime next week.
-
MoD lives in California
That's right--she posted something about that. I forgot.
Yay for Californians! I'm a SoCal girl myself. ;D
-
I should be able to make 7:30. I'm dropping the kids off at 6:00, and I'll head up from there. Of course, I'm more than happy to catch a later time if it means that I can hang out for a bit. ;D
-
Old One,
I have Morag picking up tickets for me and Chimera. It probably won't sell out, though. We're meeting in the lobby at 7:10.
You may want to Fandango a ticked or something, however, just in case. (Or you could call the theater and see how it's selling. If it's selling out, you could buy them over the phone. Jordan Commons lets you do that.)
-
Der Trailer von Howl: http://www.timewastersguide.com/view.php?id=1094
Rabid fans, start your engines.
-
Saw it. Really liked it, though it did have some problems. Will comment more on it tomorrow when I am more coherent.
-
CAUTION: There are **spoilers** in this post.
Howl's was beautiful visually. However, as has happened with other Miyazaki films, such as Spirited Away, Nausicaa, and Princess Monoke, there were parts that were just bizarre to me. I don't know if that is due to a lack in the story, or due to the cross-cultural jump. Mononke and Spirited were fascinating to me because I learned about Japanese folklore, but that didn't change the fact that there were parts that were a little difficult for me to follow.
In his review Skar wrote:
A big part of understanding characters in a story is seeing what they do. But those actions have to fit in with the story, effect must flow from cause. In Howl's Moving Castle the characters do inexplicable things on a regular basis. And when I say inexplicable I mean it. You're left staring at a big screen in a darkened theatre wondering, "What? Why is she doing that? Why is that happening? What the heck is going on here?" I'm sure there were favorite scenes from the book that had to be included in the movie to avoid rabid fans complaining bitterly about the things that were left out; unfortunately, some of those scenes fit like a pair of shoes fit in the refrigerator. There's no problem with space, but you're left with the troubling sense that you really don't know what's going on. As I said, those of you who read and liked the book will probably be able to unconsciously fill in all those gaps and get a lot of enjoyment out of the movie.
Surprisingly, I believe that having read the book will not stop you from asking "What? Why is she doing that?" There were plenty of moments like that for me--particularly with the Witch of the Waste, who was entirely changed in the movie, and not (in my opinion) for the better. Having read the book only helps give a background, because it is only the basic structure of the world and the characters that Miyazaki uses. Miyazaki changed a lot of the plot to make it his "own" (which, to some extent, I am okay with--I believe adaptation requires a director to do just that), but I feel that a lot of the gaps in logic came from his changes.
Even the ending, which Skar called "deus ex machina." Miyazaki left out an important fact of Sophie's character--that she is a powerful witch in her own right with the power to give life to inanimate objects. She doesn't realize she has this power until the end of the book, and it is this power that makes it so she can re-animate Howl's heart without killing him or Calcifer. Miyazaki's ending, lacking this, was more of like the answer to a riddle. Once Sophie finally understood that Calcifer had Howl's heart, all she had to do was put it back inside him. Which begged the question--why couldn't Howl do it himself? It made more sense in the book, because Howl and Calcifer needed Sophie's magic.
Still, even with some gaps in the logic and a bit of meandering in the plot, I still really enjoyed the film. And it WAS beautiful visually--it makes me miss traditional animation, now that Hollywood is doing only CGI films (and often rather ugly ones at that).
-
Someone should change the title post to include **spoilers** now.
-
Oops. Sorry.
I don't have that power. But I'll edit my post so it warns not to read it if you don't want spoilers.
-
CAUTION: There is an inane spoiler in here--it concerns how many earrings Howl wears! ::)
I remembered something! I was so excited that I remembered that I had to get online and post right away.
For those of you who saw the movie with EUOL and I last night (that would be Spriggan, OldieLocks, Morag, and some others who I can't remember their name on the board), you might remember that I was complaining about Howl having two earrings. I felt it made him look just too girly--probably because in the trailer I assumed the effeminate person with earrings and blond hair was the witch of the west, and I couldn't get over that initial impression.
I did make the comment that if he had worn one earring I would have been okay with it, because I had seen something like that before. Everyone gave me a blank look, and I kind of trailed off, because I *knew* I had read/seen a time period where the men were wearing one earing--a large jewel, to signify wealth. But I couldn't remember, and so had no facts to back me up. I had a mental image, but I couldn't place if it was an image from a movie or a mental image I created from a scene I had read in a book. The image, though, was of a richly dressed man with a large jewel dangling from one ear.
Just a couple of minutes ago I was thinking of it again (when I can't remember something it will nag at me forever) and suddenly it hit me like lightening! It was in Elizabethan England! When I was in London last Spring, I saw several productions of Shakespeare in traditional dress, as well as went to several museums that displayed paintings of male courtier dress in the court of Queen Elizabeth. The men dressed as extravegantly as the women, and it was fashionable to wear one large hanging jewel from an ear. Which is why, I suppose, that I would have had no problem with Howl having one of those dangly earrings--there was precedence in my mind. Two, however, was just too much.
So I'm not crazy. I really did see men in costume wearing one earring, as I maintained. It was in Shakespeare's time. Although that was a much different time period than what Miyazaki was going for in this film.
-
I had a few "what's happening?" moments, myself. Just got back from watching it. But even with those--and remember, I've read a lot of DWJ, but not Howl--I really enjoyed the movie. That makes much more sense, though, that Sophie has her own powers. I kept wondering why her age kept wavering back and forth toward the end. It was pretty funny in parts, too. All in all, I think I'd watch it again.
Now I need to go read the book so I can know how it compares.
-
**spoilers**
The age-wavering was actually Miyazaki, not DWJ. Sophie stays old until the spell is broken in the book. And that was one change that I really enjoyed. I felt it showed character growth for Sophie--particularly that scene in the field of flowers, where she almost breaks free and is young, but then gets scared and reverts to being old. I felt that Miyazaki very effectively used the changing back and forth to show that Sophie was still using a front to protect herself.
I, too, would like to see it again. I can't get the music out of my head, either. Which is alternatively entertaining and maddening.
-
**spoilers***
Yeah, I got that feeling that it was Sophie's strength that was breaking the spell, but sometimes it felt as if it was the love between her and Howl, so Miyazaki seems to be leaving it open. I gotta read the book.
-
You'll definitely want to read the book. It was the first DWJ I read, so I'm quite partial to it. What ones of hers have you read? I expect Fire and Hemlock, since that is a folklore retelling. If you haven't, you should. Have you read the Chrestomanci books?
-
I have Fire and Hemlock and the Dalemark quartet. I've also read most of the Chrestomanci books. I also have The Power of Three, which is actually my favorite of hers. Very nice. You should read it if you haven't. I'll have to find the book description on the back of book and share that with you--I can't describe it for fear of giving away something important.
-
We saw the movie yesterday. We liked it.
-
I know this is kind of degenerating into a discussion of DWJ, but she *did* write the book, and there wouldn't have been a movie without the book, so I guess it is okay. I'll be happy to discuss the movie more, but I feel like I already commented on it.
So I have been slowly making my way through all of Diana Wynne Jones's books. I started with Howl's and then read its sequel Castle in the Air, then made my way through the four Chrestomanci books, which I all highly recommend (Witch Week might have been my favorite, but you need to read The Lives of Christopher Chant and Charmed Life before you read Witch Week or Magicians of Caprona if certain characters are to mean anything to you). There is a new Chrestomanci book that I haven't read yet, so I can't recommend it. DWJ is very prolific--I've read Dogsbody, The Darklord of Derkholm, Witch's Business, Aunt Maria, Eight Days of Luke, Fire and Hemlock, The Time of the Ghost, The Ogre Downstairs, Mixed Magics, and The Tough Guide to Fantasyland (although the last is more of a spoof dictionary, not a novel).
I haven't read the Dalemark quartet or The Power of Three. If the latter is your favorite, stacer, I will definitely have to pick it up. I've also heard that Archer's Goon is the best, and I still want to read Homeward Bounders, A Tale of Time City, Year of the Griffin, Deep Secret, and the Merlin Conspiracy. And the new Chrestomanci book. She has so many good books!
I don't know if I could pick a favorite of DWJ. The one thing I can say of her is that I have yet to read a book of hers that I did NOT like--and considering the amount she has written, that is saying something.
-
Dalemark is second on my favorites list of hers, though it has internal consistency problems. If you search the boards sometime in the last two years for "Dalemark," I'm sure you'll find the thread we had about it some time back. I can't remember how long ago now.
-
Review on Slate: http://slate.msn.com/id/2121089/
Warning: lots of spoilers in that review.
I think that the reviewer has a point about Sophie not being her own woman in the film. Nevertheless, I still enjoyed it. I probably will enjoy the book more, when I get around to reading it.
-
I'm not overly fond of Dalemark except for Spellcoats, which I loved. The new Chrestomanci book, Conrad's Fate, is quite good though it seemed to end a little too quickly. I don't often finish a book and feel like it needed to be about fifty pages longer.
I really liked the movie, though I think I like it better as a separate thing from the book. I wish Miyazaki had kept in more of the book, especially with Sophie and Howl's relationship.
-
I really liked the movie, though I think I like it better as a separate thing from the book.
After taking a film and literature class in which we discussed adaptation, this is the way I view movies adapted from books. You kind of have to--the techniques used in literature are not entirely transferable to the visual medium of film, and vice versa. I know that at times I am alone in this. My professor called the people who are horrified by any change made from book to film as "guardians of the text." I will admit straight up that I am not one of those guardians. I actually liked *gasp* the LoTR films better than the books! (I know, I know, some of you will cry blasphemy.) And Ella Enchanted--I loved the book. But I have found that I am one of the few people who also liked the movie. And usually the complaint I hear against the movie is not that it was poorly done or badly acted or that there were holes in the plot (all of which I would be interested in listening to and discussing), but that it wasn't like the book. Oh, big waa.
An adaptation, I feel, should have the mark of the director--the "new" author. If it is exactly the same as the book, than read the book. Books are usually better. A film is a different medium, and it deserves to be viewed as such. Not that I think a director can't keep the spirit of the book--in fact, he should. But he doesn't have to be a slave to every detail. There needs to be room for creativity.
I found the review at slate interesting. I can see where she is coming from, but it still seemed a little bit of a fangirl complaining because her favorite book has been "desecrated." (Note: I am taking the liberty of assuming that Bidisha is a woman's name.) She said that the book was more Miyazaki-esque than the film, and she had some basis for it. However, I still found that funny. Wouldn't whatever Miyazaki does be Miyazki-esque, rather than some other author's work? Can't Miyazaki do something different, rather than what he has done before? Isn't what he is doing right now Miyazaki-esque?
Now, I love the book. And I really enjoyed the movie. And the movie was not without flaws. But I don't think that the fact that the movie is not exactly like the book is a valid criticism. Perhaps I misunderstood the reviewer's argument, but once you got to the heart of it, that seemed to be her complaint.