> Probably the best live-shot Cinderella I've seen. Disney has done it again. Everybody knows Cinderella story and what this film gave was as it is with the help of modern CGI works. When I heard about the Disney's live-shot version is getting ready, I had a serious doubt, but not anymore. Nowadays, the filmmakers know how to pull it off a big budget movie with ease. Especially from Hollywood, if one market fails, it will raise in another as the recent example was 'Age of Extinction'. I am glad this movie met a great success despite it was not a surprise material as a story, but was as the quality of product. The movie runs nearly for 100 minutes, that does not feel too long as the narration had a wonderful pace. Everything was awesomely handled by the director of 'Thor'. It's a new era of the live-shot movies, which borrows the stories from the fairytales, folklore and classical animations. Recent 'Maleficent' was one of the great examples and this film as well enters the book of triumph. Lily James was very good, I haven't seen her much, because she's kind of a new actress in the spotlight. She's cute and adorable, I love to see her in many movies in the future. While Cate Blanchett, I never had any disbelief in her and she delivered it perfectly. An ideal movie for a family to watch at the weekend. I think children would love it, so at least watch it for them, with them. 7/10

Go to full review

Good watch, could watch again, and can recommend. I'm honestly concerned that this isn't a movie that anyone is going to watch again and again, but it's a solid watch, and a definite improvement over the 1950 animated classic, though I can't say this touches "Ever After" for me. The original story was somewhat lacking, but had fantastic animation for the time, along with voice acting and writing parallel with the movies of its time. I'm somewhat sad to say that is a fair difference in quality compared to modern standards. Disney very much kept this dumbed down for younger audiences, and I expect them to have more fun with scenes like "lizard footman eats a fly", but in the very least they steered away from realistic cg talking animals (a creepy factor in many of the live action remakes), though they do make a very specific nod to it at the beginning of the movie. While I do think they managed to improve on almost ever facet of the original, it certainly isn't without flaws. The casting is all over the place, which, I'm sure, affected the odd character development. Oddly, the less important characters, the men, in this case, are fine, I really have zero to say other than I rather like Nonso Anozie in anything he's in, and I did think the bit about "Kit" was a rather inspired thing. I understand that Kate Winslet has had a villainous kick the past few years, and she plays "stuck up snoot" very well, but seeing Helena Bonham Carter come in to give us "the fairy godmother who ain't got time for dat" really makes me wonder if they just weren't paying her enough to care. It would have made more sense to let Winslet elevate the fairy godmother (one of the only things that really wasn't) and let Carter goes Bellatrix Lestrange as the Wicked Stepmother. Sophie McShera did a marvelous job of making me hate her character, and Holliday Grainger kept making me see Katherine Heigl if we could keep her away from tanning beds, so they both did a marvelous job as wicked stepsisters (honestly, probably the best performances of the movie). For some reason though, they made a very strange decision to make all the wicked women gingers, though not with a very convincing dye job. I don't know if it was supposed to be representative of their tacky fashion and the ability to dye hair at the time, or if Disney really thinks gingers don't have a soul, but it was a blaring message, if illegible. What makes me think that they don't care at all is Lily James. She's lovely, she did a good job with the role as written, and I'm dying to see her in anything else to see if any of the oddities were her, or she's done just as good as Winslet with the roles they were given. Cinderella is traditionally a "fairest in the land" look, given that it's the middle of Europe, I imagine northern was exotic once upon a time, or at least certain people thought so she is traditionally very blonde and very fair. Lily James is neither (in this, despite some of the posters), so I thought they were taking a more Germanic look with a more honey colored hair....but it is also very oddly colored, and perhaps we wouldn't have notice if it wasn't for her very prominent BLACK eyebrows (which I have nothing against, I actually think they're lovely) which would have been simple enough to die to match. Alternatively they could have abandoned blonde altogether (plenty of versions do). It is just very odd to spend millions of dollars to do something purposefully (and repetitively) to make it look like they don't care and objectively make their movie worse. Overall, it's this sort of attitude that seeps into the movie at different points. It could have been a masterpiece, but instead, everyone knows it's a guaranteed paycheck on the title alone and made something that ends up being rather average despite itself.

Go to full review

An improvement on Disney's past attempt from 1950. I do like the animated version from the studio, but this 2015 release of <em>'Cinderella'</em> makes for a more enjoyable experience in my eyes. Lily James and Richard Madden are smart choices to play Cinderella and Prince, while Cate Blanchett is impressive as the Stepmother. Helena Bonham Carter (Fairy Godmother), Stellan Skarsgård (Grand Duke) and Nonso Anozie (Captain) are also noteworthy. The premise has a few changes, the ending plays out slightly differently compared to the '50 production - to positive effect. It also makes the nastiness of Blanchett's character unmistakably clear, I actually felt hatred for her - which wasn't the case, at least to the same extent, with the original. Good viewing.

Go to full review