Dear Roman,
After having seen your latest movie I was thinking about it for quite some time and I would like to ask you some questions on it. First of all, production design. Sorry to say, but the streets of London always looked like a film set. Some horse leftovers on the ground doesn't make any difference. Life in those streets was rather artificial, as well. How to describe that in a lively way, you can read in Dickens' book. Some scenery shots were really bad. Was somebody painting glass for you? Who was your gaffer? And then the actors: Most of them come from the London area, I suppose, but does that mean they are authentic ?
What about the children? Nice faces put in old clothes don't make poor homeless pickpockets. They speak like well educated middle class kids and their life didn't appear miserable at all. Head of the gang Dodger looked like he enjoyed playing in a movie. The dog was not scary, Sykes wasn't scary, and what was Toby Crackit for in your version ? Finally Oliver. Well, he had to endure some bad treatment, but I did not see the desperate yet strong boy that Dickens described so well. Did you?
Frankly, Roman, I was bored. I love books, I like movies but this one was all so predictable and uninspired, and it is much too long. You had one excellent idea, however. Ben Kingsley. What a presence! Fagin is the one character that really lives. In the end it seems you wanted to give Ben an extra dramatic scene to let him prove how good he is, but he doesn't need to proof anything anymore, you know that.
So please forgive me when I ask: Why did you make this completely unnecessary movie ? Contract obligations ?
Respectfully,
Hellmao
After having seen your latest movie I was thinking about it for quite some time and I would like to ask you some questions on it. First of all, production design. Sorry to say, but the streets of London always looked like a film set. Some horse leftovers on the ground doesn't make any difference. Life in those streets was rather artificial, as well. How to describe that in a lively way, you can read in Dickens' book. Some scenery shots were really bad. Was somebody painting glass for you? Who was your gaffer? And then the actors: Most of them come from the London area, I suppose, but does that mean they are authentic ?
What about the children? Nice faces put in old clothes don't make poor homeless pickpockets. They speak like well educated middle class kids and their life didn't appear miserable at all. Head of the gang Dodger looked like he enjoyed playing in a movie. The dog was not scary, Sykes wasn't scary, and what was Toby Crackit for in your version ? Finally Oliver. Well, he had to endure some bad treatment, but I did not see the desperate yet strong boy that Dickens described so well. Did you?
Frankly, Roman, I was bored. I love books, I like movies but this one was all so predictable and uninspired, and it is much too long. You had one excellent idea, however. Ben Kingsley. What a presence! Fagin is the one character that really lives. In the end it seems you wanted to give Ben an extra dramatic scene to let him prove how good he is, but he doesn't need to proof anything anymore, you know that.
So please forgive me when I ask: Why did you make this completely unnecessary movie ? Contract obligations ?
Respectfully,
Hellmao