Voice from the Stone
Directed by Eric D. Howell
Starring Emilia Clarke, Marton Csokas, Edward Dring
Before going any further, please know that I saw the Shudder edit of the movie first. I knew there was more potential to it, and that is when I came across Howell's edit.
Also below - Parts 1 and 2 of Howell's edit. These are links that come up on Vimeo, sound is a little low.
Howell's edit - This is a far better version of the movie. Whereas the edit on Shudder tries to force a supernatural atmosphere, Howell's offers a far more pleasing, familiar, challenging sensory experience - I feel like I tasted the rabbit on the table or felt the castle walls against my finger, almost lingering. The characters were less mysterious, which makes for more thorough performances and story, but it also reminds us of ourselves - not cliché, but complete - Howell's edit has metaphors and analogies that were weaker in the other edit, but are really part of our lives here and now.
Clarke and Csokas perform half their roles in facial expression alone and it is splendid, high quality acting. They are not haunted by some ridiculous specter but rather fear, grief, and other frightening things that we all know. Dring's Jakob is frustrating, but I don't think it is unrealistic or simply the character, but rather the frustration we all feel when we cannot connect with people close to us. I think the supporting roles of Alessio and Lilia (Remo Girone and Lisa Gastoni, respectively) were much more poignant and powerful this time, à la classical Greek supporting/portentous roles.
I still think that, like any offering, this movie will appeal most to a certain crowd, but I also think that a much large audience awaits it if it is ever re-released. Fans of movies such as Like Water for Chocolate would embrace an edit such as this much more, and audiences who appreciated films with a foreign film feel to them would be much more likely to want this movie if they knew it existed; loyal, passionate, invested movie-goers, which could honestly be most of us.
I don't know why a decision was made to reduce the movie to something else. It did not work, was not profitable, and was insulting to everyone involved and to the fans. The author, the director, and the screenwriter had created and shaped a story with minimal chaff and acting representative of actual, talented performance.
Shudder edit - First and foremost, Wloszczyna's review of this is crap. It's almost like she read other reviews but didn't watch the movie. In fact, most of the reviews are as bad. The movie is a complex, romantic tale, with each character alluring in their own way, with *some* Poe-esque, gothic overtones, possibly, but it is its own permeated setting - what fills it isn't a slow-paced horror or thriller, but a deep romance and grief.
Clarke's Verena is exceptional at emotional maladies for good reason, yet she finally comes face-to-face with one beyond her immediate experience. As she stands her ground, she finds herself entrenched in a battle that is not supernatural, but psychological and symbolic of a certain spirit. Much like Czokas' Klaus, the exterior is aspirational for Verena, but a necessary performance.
Czokas plays an wounded and grieving lover well, and exudes an intimidating but brittle shell in his Klaus. He is not weak, but his strength is untested and scared. He is unpredictable, but thorough, as though summoned from the 1950's romantics of European authors and directors. I can see him in a noir setting for his childhood, but successful transition in his adolescence through adulthood, but never losing the heavy existential vulnerability.
Young Dring is appropriately frustrating and confusing, defiant but inviting. The seeming cliché is based more in reality than in a fictional archetype and is important, necessary; the most painful grief is often presented by children, and difficult for adults to come to terms with. He is no less complex and injured than the adults, but he is, rightfully, not the plot of the story, but the vessel, in a way.
The minimal supporting cast is wonderful but ominous, as though weapons strewn about a house in a mystery; their purpose is deliberate and will be seen, but we do not entirely trust them. However, they are well-kept in their secrecy.
Ultimately, it seems as though reviewers were impatient and jaded in their work. I am no expert, but I know this movie was different than their depictions, and better than their words.
Directed by Eric D. Howell
Starring Emilia Clarke, Marton Csokas, Edward Dring
Before going any further, please know that I saw the Shudder edit of the movie first. I knew there was more potential to it, and that is when I came across Howell's edit.
Also below - Parts 1 and 2 of Howell's edit. These are links that come up on Vimeo, sound is a little low.
Howell's edit - This is a far better version of the movie. Whereas the edit on Shudder tries to force a supernatural atmosphere, Howell's offers a far more pleasing, familiar, challenging sensory experience - I feel like I tasted the rabbit on the table or felt the castle walls against my finger, almost lingering. The characters were less mysterious, which makes for more thorough performances and story, but it also reminds us of ourselves - not cliché, but complete - Howell's edit has metaphors and analogies that were weaker in the other edit, but are really part of our lives here and now.
Clarke and Csokas perform half their roles in facial expression alone and it is splendid, high quality acting. They are not haunted by some ridiculous specter but rather fear, grief, and other frightening things that we all know. Dring's Jakob is frustrating, but I don't think it is unrealistic or simply the character, but rather the frustration we all feel when we cannot connect with people close to us. I think the supporting roles of Alessio and Lilia (Remo Girone and Lisa Gastoni, respectively) were much more poignant and powerful this time, à la classical Greek supporting/portentous roles.
I still think that, like any offering, this movie will appeal most to a certain crowd, but I also think that a much large audience awaits it if it is ever re-released. Fans of movies such as Like Water for Chocolate would embrace an edit such as this much more, and audiences who appreciated films with a foreign film feel to them would be much more likely to want this movie if they knew it existed; loyal, passionate, invested movie-goers, which could honestly be most of us.
I don't know why a decision was made to reduce the movie to something else. It did not work, was not profitable, and was insulting to everyone involved and to the fans. The author, the director, and the screenwriter had created and shaped a story with minimal chaff and acting representative of actual, talented performance.
Shudder edit - First and foremost, Wloszczyna's review of this is crap. It's almost like she read other reviews but didn't watch the movie. In fact, most of the reviews are as bad. The movie is a complex, romantic tale, with each character alluring in their own way, with *some* Poe-esque, gothic overtones, possibly, but it is its own permeated setting - what fills it isn't a slow-paced horror or thriller, but a deep romance and grief.
Clarke's Verena is exceptional at emotional maladies for good reason, yet she finally comes face-to-face with one beyond her immediate experience. As she stands her ground, she finds herself entrenched in a battle that is not supernatural, but psychological and symbolic of a certain spirit. Much like Czokas' Klaus, the exterior is aspirational for Verena, but a necessary performance.
Czokas plays an wounded and grieving lover well, and exudes an intimidating but brittle shell in his Klaus. He is not weak, but his strength is untested and scared. He is unpredictable, but thorough, as though summoned from the 1950's romantics of European authors and directors. I can see him in a noir setting for his childhood, but successful transition in his adolescence through adulthood, but never losing the heavy existential vulnerability.
Young Dring is appropriately frustrating and confusing, defiant but inviting. The seeming cliché is based more in reality than in a fictional archetype and is important, necessary; the most painful grief is often presented by children, and difficult for adults to come to terms with. He is no less complex and injured than the adults, but he is, rightfully, not the plot of the story, but the vessel, in a way.
The minimal supporting cast is wonderful but ominous, as though weapons strewn about a house in a mystery; their purpose is deliberate and will be seen, but we do not entirely trust them. However, they are well-kept in their secrecy.
Ultimately, it seems as though reviewers were impatient and jaded in their work. I am no expert, but I know this movie was different than their depictions, and better than their words.