Why is there no mention of the remarkable "Life of Pi"? Talk about ambitious--this was a book that everyone said could never be adapted for film. "Life of Pi" is a rare breed: a technologically groundbreaking, visually breathtaking film with heart. It was not so much a film as an experience. But Mr. Grella would rather cite overstuffed costume-dramas like "Anna Karenina" , which, except for Jude Law's performance, are hollow at the core. Everyone I know who saw "Life of Pi" was moved to tears and said that, like the book, it was a life-changing experience that stayed with them for days. I have read Mr. Grella's reviews for years, and I get the feeling that he operates from the head and not the heart, and that actually being touched by a film is low on his list of criteria. But to be moved, to live vicariously, to cry, to feel something--isn't that exactly why we go to the movies?
Re: “The better (not necessarily best) movies of 2012”
Why is there no mention of the remarkable "Life of Pi"? Talk about ambitious--this was a book that everyone said could never be adapted for film. "Life of Pi" is a rare breed: a technologically groundbreaking, visually breathtaking film with heart. It was not so much a film as an experience. But Mr. Grella would rather cite overstuffed costume-dramas like "Anna Karenina" , which, except for Jude Law's performance, are hollow at the core. Everyone I know who saw "Life of Pi" was moved to tears and said that, like the book, it was a life-changing experience that stayed with them for days. I have read Mr. Grella's reviews for years, and I get the feeling that he operates from the head and not the heart, and that actually being touched by a film is low on his list of criteria. But to be moved, to live vicariously, to cry, to feel something--isn't that exactly why we go to the movies?