Inkheart, great movie!

@thorgrym (677)
United States
January 25, 2009 6:53pm CST
Well, I took my family to see Inkheart today. I don't want to include any spoilers here, so I will just say that we all really liked the movie. While it took some license with the book, the author Cornelia Funke was involved with the production so it stayed fairly true to the story. The cast includes Branden Fraiser, Jim Broadbent, Helen Mirren, Paul Bettany, and Andy Serkis. Have you seen the movie, or do you plan to?
10 responses
• United States
26 Jan 09
I guess it is good to hear a positive review. I expected them to take some liberties because it is such a long book and there are some scenes that would be a little repetitive to watch on screen... plus driving through the mountains to get to Capricorn's hideout/village.... that went on for four or five pages which would probably translate to an easy 20-30 minutes on screen. Personally, there is not a single person in the main cast who I think fits in their role. Helen Mirren as Aunt Elinor is the only one that might be close, in my mind. When I read the cast list, I am not kidding, I nearly cried. I can't stand Brendan Fraser, personally, and he is probably the member of the cast I was most worried about. However I have wracked my brain and cannot for the life of me come up with a good fit. Maybe Paul Blackthorne.... David Tennant would have been my ideal choice for Dustfinger, not Paul Bettany. Bettany is too.... the only word I can come up with is "pretty." When pretty boys like him play shifty, unsavory roles like Dustfinger they come out looking like a pretty boy who is trying to play a shifty, unsavory character. And Emily Osment, or maybe a complete unknown, as Meggie. But that's just my opinion. I will still probably wait until it's on the free rental list at Hollywood Video... Thank you, though, for offering a review, having read the book.
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Well, I can tell you that I didn't even recognize Bettany. I had forgotten he was in the movie, and I spent most of the time wracking my brain trying to figure out who the actor was. It was until the closing credits when I saw his name that I went, "OH! THAT is who that was!" The thing with Dustfinger is that you never really know if you can trust him, and Bettany did an excellent job with that aspect. Fraser did a good job. He does have some acting quirks that seem to show up in all of his characters, but there was no evidence of them here. Mirren was fantastic - like she could be anything OTHER than fantastic. Eliza Bennett, Meggie, is relatively unknown with only a couple of movie credits - including Nanny McPhee - and TV shows under her belt. Given Meggie's importance in the story (the book is targeted at pre-teens/teens after all), I am glad that they got somebody with at least a little experience. I couldn't see Emily Osment in the role, though...AnnaSophia Robb perhaps, but not Osment. Good thoughts! Thanks for sharing them!
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Oh, I forgot to mention... The scene through the mountains was given just enough weight in the movie. I was impressed by the splendor of the mountains and was not bored by the amount of time spent on it. You get the idea that they did not have a short drive, but you do not suffer through it along with the characters. Really, the cinematography was beautiful...well worth seeing it on the big screen just for that. Either way, video or big screen, I am sure that you will appreciate the movie.
@loved1 (5336)
• United States
20 Feb 09
Get a load of this! I just got the second book in the series "Inkspell" and noticed something interesting on the dedication page. It says "To Brendan Fraser whose voice is the heart of this book. Thanks for inspiration and enchantment. Mo wouldn't have stepped into my writing room without you, and this story would have never been told." It goes on to thank some others, but I thought it was interesting that she should mention him specifically and credit him for so much. I might just have to go see this movie after all.
@SomeCowgirl (32266)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Isn't Nicholas Cage also in the movie? Was it as fantasy as it looked in previews? I doubt we'll go see it in theatres, we're not for theaters anyway, but just want to know in case we rent the movies.
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
No sign of Nicholas Cage in this one. Helen Mirren was in National Treasure 2 with Cage, though. ;) It has some fantasy aspects, but it is not other-worldly at all. As I said in the original post, I don't want to post any spoilers, so I won't go into too much detail. Kind of Narnia-esque in that the real world meets a literary world, but 99% of the story occurs in the real world.
• United States
26 Jan 09
It is absolutely fantasy!!! Here is the page on Amazon.com for the book. Scroll down to the "Product Description" to find out what it (the book, anyway) is all about.
• United States
26 Jan 09
Pasting link, take two..... http://www.amazon.com/Inkheart-Cornelia-Funke-Hardcover/dp/0439852706/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1232947174&sr=1-2
@GardenGerty (105555)
• United States
26 Jan 09
I must live under a rock, as I have not heard of it at all. I may have to go read a review or so just to feel informed.
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Just wanted to note that, at the time of this posting, your rating is a palindrome - 15451 - cool! Anyway, it was a fairly quiet release. It was a little late to release from when it was supposed to come out. We saw a preview a while ago but then nothing for quite some time. I am not sure why it was delayed. At any rate, I wouldn't worry about getting crushed by that rock...I think you are safe from living under it. :)
1 person likes this
@GardenGerty (105555)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Thanks for the note of the palindrome. I may start a discussion about it. LOL (also a palindrome).
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Only too happy to make note of a palindrome! :)
@atchmon (140)
• Philippines
7 Apr 10
I watched the movie first before reading the book.. I admit the movie was great, and that's why I read the trilogy.. but the books are more exciting..
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
7 Apr 10
Books are almost always better than the movie. The great thing about the movie, though, is that a lot more people were influenced to read the book(s). I think that it will always be a debate about whether it is better to read the book before seeing the movie or vice versa. By reading the book first, you are able to develop your own ideas of what the characters look like, sound like, etc. Watching the movie first implants the visions in your head for you. However, the movie might also expose you to a great story that you might otherwise have missed. Thanks for your response!
@loved1 (5336)
• United States
19 Feb 09
I have read all of the responses here but still have something I just have to ask. I really hate it when a movie is a lot different that the book..I HATE IT. So I just finished this great book and went online to check out the movie trailer, and while watching it notice that it looks like they have incorporated the wizard of oz into the story! There was absolutely NO reference to the wizard of oz in the book Inkheart! The more I watched the more references I saw. Not just Toto, but a falling house, tornado, etc. What the heck is that all about? Did you read the book? If so, did you still think it was a good movie even after all the liberties they took?
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
19 Feb 09
They added the Wizard of Oz as being the mother's favorite book when she was a little girl. When they visit the aunt in Italy, the daughter reads it and discovers her ability in doing so. I thought it was a nice way to provide a connection between mother and daughter. I don't think that it was too much of a departure from the story and it certainly provided for some nice visuals in the movie. The addition does not detract from the story in my opinion. I think that it worked well.
@gtargirl (5385)
• United States
27 Jan 09
This is definitely one I've been wanting to see. Love these kind of movies and I don't mind looking at Brandon Frasier for a couple of hours.
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
27 Jan 09
Definitely worth seeing this movie. :)
@jillhill (37383)
• United States
26 Jan 09
I almost went today....but at the last minute we changed our minds and went to see Bride War.....and it was a good chick flick...
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Unfortunately for us, if it is not a family-oriented movie, we won't see it in the theaters. Plus, with the cost of tickets, we need to be fairly selective about our movie-going experience. We probably won't go out to another movie until the next Harry Potter. Thanks for the recommendation, though!
@Ravenladyj (22937)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Ya know I've never heard of this movie until today when my daughter brought it up..She said she heard it was good and she wants to see it..I'll have to keep an eye out for it when it comes out OnDemand since we dont go to the movies..
@thorgrym (677)
• United States
26 Jan 09
Well, my 9 year old daughter informed me that we would be buying the DVD as soon as it was released. My 12 year old had just finished reading the book so the movie wouldn't spoil the ending for her. It was a relatively quiet release, though. We saw a preview for it a while ago (I think the trailer accompanied 'The Seeker') and then not much else...
@verabear (797)
• Philippines
1 Feb 10
Wow, this discussion is a year old already and yet I haven't seen the movie! I bought the book around the same time that the movie was released here in the Philippines but didn't get to read it until now. I finished the movie and can't wait to get a copy of the movie so I can finally watch it too! Glad to hear it was a great one, and I expect that there will be a lot different from the book.
@ladym33 (11007)
• United States
1 Mar 09
No I have not see it yet, but I do plan to. I know it was a good book and it looks like a good movie and I also like te cast. I am sure we will like it, we will likely see on Spring Break hopefully it will still be at the theater then, if not we will catch it on DVD.