The first trailer is out for Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones, based on the best-selling novel by Alice Sebold that rode Oprah’s Book Club to stardom. (This was back when Oprah was pimping new books, before she’d turned her death gaze on the classics.) The film is about a 14-year-old girl who is raped and murdered and who narrates the story from a vaguely defined afterlife known as the “in-between.” The film’s visuals look strong, and certainly not as roughly queasy as Jackson’s work on The Lord of the Rings or The Frighteners (never forget!). That said, the trailer is cut like DreamWorks has no idea how to market it: It alternately plays like a family drama, a metaphysical fantasy, and a really B-level thriller. What’s more, though the protagonist reveals the identity of her killer at the beginning of the book, the trailer probably shouldn’t have gone nearly as far as it did to showcase the killer and the eventual ramifications of his blown identity. Basically, the movie won’t treat that info as a spoiler, but the trailer needs to, and it drops the ball spectacularly.
The trailer will be attached to prints of Julie & Julia, out this Friday. (If the embed breaks, you can also find it here.)
*THAT'S* peter jackson?
why did i think he was fatter?
like g. del toro fat?
but yeah, that trailer sorta sucks.
maybe i'll go watch heavenly creatures again. nothing beats kate winslet running around for 2 hours like she's hopped up on dexatrim.
Posted by: gp at August 5, 2009 9:52 AM
Why is Peter Jackson so skinny? It's freaking me out, man.
I still cannot for the life of me remember if I read this book. I think I read something similar that came out around the same time, but not this one. But I cant' remember. Oh, well, looks like it's time for a trip to the library.
I swear every time I see Peter Jackson he looks more and more like Dominic Monaghan. What exactly was going on on the Lord of the Rings set?
I'm trying to keep an open mind about The Lovely Bones, but I did really like the book. I haven't read it in a long time though, so maybe that'll help me not hate it immediately.
Yeah, that trailer was all over the place. I would think that Peter Jackson has the power to review things like this before they are finalized, so I blame him. Why show Tucci? Too much.
Posted by: Kballs at August 5, 2009 10:14 AM
It still freaks me out to see how THIN Peter Jackson is now. It's like he lost half a person. Unnatural!
What a mess of a trailer, but this looks good. Better than the book, anyway. I really didn't like it. The ending will still piss me off, though.
Won't somebody please get Peter Jackson a cheeseburger?
Posted by: beingclear at August 5, 2009 10:27 AM
Has anybody read the book and is it any good?
I read and enjoyed it a few years ago, but this trailer doesn't capture it well. It really doesn't look like they knew how to market this movie.
I remember reading (on this site?) that the whole production was halted a year ago because nobody could agree on what "heaven" was supposed to look like. I think, in the trailer, heaven was the only thing that looked interesting to me.
Posted by: annoyingmouse at August 5, 2009 10:29 AM
Is that really how you pronounce Sarandon's name?
Posted by: avocadolime at August 5, 2009 10:35 AM
Has anybody read the book and is it any good?
I read the book last year. I really enjoyed most of it but the ending was TERRIBLE. It was so stupid and bad that it actually made me angry. Hopefully, they will make the end less moronic in the movie.
Posted by: Elle at August 5, 2009 10:43 AM
They made this into a MOVIE? Uhhh.....why?
Posted by: Kate at August 5, 2009 10:44 AM
Ugh, I hated the book. ... But now that I think about it, I don't remember why.
I think I detested the version of heaven as portrayed in the book, and then there was a super cheesy spoilerific moment at the end that made me groan.
I don't think I could watch this movie because of that. That, and because it's three movie trailers trapped on one reel. 1. British boy loves American girl in the early 70s, late 60s... seen that before. 2. Girl goes to heaven, touches peoples lives back on earth... hmmm. 3. Crime thriller! Stanley Tucci! Cops with bad 70s hair! Violins!
I like violins!
Posted by: noah at August 5, 2009 10:48 AM
Sounds like the feel-good movie of the year. Why does (or did) Oprah love depressing stories so much? She's a buzzkill.
They probably think if they sell it as a "ghost story," they'll get some teen girls. Doubtful. It seems obvious that the only people who will go to see this are middle-aged and past-middle-aged women. You know, the prime demo that Hollywood craves.
Lots of people seem to think so, though I've yet to read it. It's on spot 14 of Pajiba's "The Generation's Best Books" (http://www.pajiba.com/guides/the-generations-best-books.php).
Posted by: Thijs at August 5, 2009 10:52 AM
I had hopes for the movie, based purely on Peter Jackson's involvement but I think it will be as much of a let-down as the book. I really thought the book was going to be grittier and a challenge to read, but it was no "The End of Alice" I'll tell you that much.
**SPOILER**
Did anyone else who read the book think it was ridiculous that her soul entered someone else's body so she could experience non-rape sex?
Posted by: snarla at August 5, 2009 10:57 AM
I really didn't get the whole Lovely Bones craze. I didn't think it was that good of a book. It has been quite a while since I read it, and it was one of those that I broke down and read after every girlfriend of mine was like "OMG seriously this is the greatest book you will ever read!", so it could have been a reaction to that.
Anyway, I'm glad to see Saoirse Ronan around. I thought she was the best thing in both Atonement and I Could Never Be Your Woman.
Posted by: Mimi at August 5, 2009 10:59 AM
Anyway, I'm glad to see Saoirse Ronan around.
And Saoirse Ronan is going to turn into that Palm Pre woman in those commercials. That, or a precog.
Posted by: noah at August 5, 2009 11:36 AM
I read this book quite some time ago. I remember liking it, but I can't remember all of the details, the ending and so forth. The trailer seems a bit wrong to me though. I need to read the book again.
Posted by: Pinky McLadybits (aka Dangle McGee) at August 5, 2009 11:41 AM
i vaguely recall tolerating most of this book OK. My mom REALLY liked it so she passed it to me. By nature I have to dislike what my mother likes (she bought me a copy of KPax for fuck's sake.) But I will probably see this movie eventually mostly because I wish Susan Sarandon was MY sassy grandma.
Posted by: JenVegas at August 5, 2009 12:00 PM
I tried to read this book at my sisters bidding but found it somewhat tedious and dull. HOW EVER, watching this ad and seeing that Jackson seems to be channeling some of the magic of Heavenly Creatures, the dark and twisted harshness of life and tragedy, interlaced with the ULTIMATE escapism...intrigues me...this is something i will probably be seeing if only to satisfy the hunger i've had for a Jackson film of this caliber since...well, The Frighteneres(to clarify, it is my opinion that Frighteners was his last decent film and Heavenly Creatures his only excellent one...the whole LOTR debacle was just a painful....thing)
Posted by: nadine at August 5, 2009 12:37 PM
Get it, the ship in the bottle is a metaphor..for like....think about it!
I liked the book...the movie seems to have a different tone...looks cool, effects-wise, and I LOVE Stanley Tucci but...I don't know. That book made me really sad. Don't know if I'd sit thru the film (even if it isn't how I remember the book).
Heavenly Creatures was brilliant, tho. One of my favorites. So nutty. :)
The book is a fairly interesting read for the most part, until you hit the ending, and then it loses its way completely and becomes plain daft! Yes, snarla, I agree with you -- that whole premise is beyond ridiculous.
Posted by: Mnemo at August 5, 2009 1:55 PM
Fuck you, Dustin, and yes, I will say this after every Lord of the Rings diss. I will save questioning your sexuality for the RyRe Green Lantern movie.
Posted by: George at August 5, 2009 1:56 PM
I actually finished the book, which shows a high level of commitment on my part (I tend to buy a bunch of books, start them all valiantly, and only finish the ones I'm really into). I remember liking-not-loving it. Trailer looks good, though disjointed. I remember initially hearing that Jackson was doing this and thinking "huh, wonder what the hell he saw in the project." Clearly, he's gonna go visuals and effects crazy. The trailer makes it all look super promising and it all looks gorgeous to look at, if nothing else. I'm giving everyone the benefit of the doubt and just saying it's a case of not-great trailer.
I remember Ryan Gosling was supposed to be in the Mark Wahlberg role. Might have been interesting, though I don't think I would ever be able to buy him and Rachel Weisz as a couple.
Oh, and the book wasn't an Oprah pick. Books sometimes become popular these days even without her approval. Crazy, I know.
Anyway, I think I'm going to give the book a read, since everyone here seems kind of ambivalent on it. Plus, the film's got Susan, Mark, AND Rachel. If the book's any good, I may want to see this.
Posted by: Katie (KP) at August 5, 2009 2:18 PM
Wow. Lots of familiar faces in that trailer; even Rose McIver (the current yellow Power Ranger).
Posted by: Rykker at August 5, 2009 2:37 PM
Hmmm... I'm getting a "paramount removed this due to copyright" whatever error.
I was looking forward to the trailer too, largely because I read the book several years ago and for the life of me I can't remember a damn thing about it beyond the basic premise.
Posted by: Eva at August 5, 2009 3:08 PM
RE whatBENwatches
"Oh, and the book wasn't an Oprah pick. Books sometimes become popular these days even without her approval. Crazy, I know."
Sorry, my bad. It sounds like the kind of depressing stuff Oprah always recommends, I just assumed it was one of her anointed books.
Posted by: Slash at August 5, 2009 3:25 PM
I actually LOVED this book when I read it a few years ago, but I think I'm going to need to revisit it before seeing the movie (it's a policy of mine). I wonder if I'll find it as amazing as I did before.
I seem to be the only one here in the Pajiba community that wasn't put off by the ending...
Posted by: DontStopNow at August 5, 2009 3:29 PM
I really loved it too, for reference.
Posted by: mere at August 5, 2009 3:43 PM
Snarla: Yes. I hated the ending. Up until that dippy bit, the book was an interesting portrait of deep grief, but the schwing into half-assed magical realism to get a rape victim laid was insulting in its simple-mindedness.
Let's hear it for book-grudges! Sebold, I'll never forgive you.
Posted by: Nora Rocket at August 5, 2009 6:35 PM
That trailer gave the whole fucking movie away! What's the point of seeing the movie now?
Posted by: RAT at August 5, 2009 7:46 PM
I really enjoy the book and revisit it every once in a while just because I think Sebold writing style somehow conveys so much sadness through humor. I even liked the ending (which everyone seems to hate and think stupid) because it made total sense to me. Susie was pulled away from her world because of the rape, and it makes sense that during her time here she would want to experience a version of that that is actually loving and intimate. I'm also surprised by people saying that this ending is completely implausible. After all, most of the book deals in implausibility and requires a fair amount of imagination.
Also, I never thought the icicle thing was Susie's doing. I actually thought it was just... karma. Maybe I haven't read enough into it?
Whatever, I enjoy it. Movie seems to have a completely different tone from the book though.
Posted by: dene at August 5, 2009 11:14 PM
Ummm...In the book...the killer's revealed on like PAGE THREE! So stop crying about the "big twist" being spoiled...its not a "whodunnit".
Posted by: Sean at August 6, 2009 2:05 AM
God, this looks abysmal. My worst moment was either the bit where all the leaves blow off that tree, or - eh, any other moment.
I don't have anything to say about the film, and I haven't read the book--though I'm compelled to check out a synopsis and take a gander when my workload is a little lighter.
***
Anyway, I'm saying this as someone who used to work in a bookstore, so I'm basing my statements on attitudes and incidents that I encountered personally. You know, lest I give off the impression that I'm in attack mode, and not relaying stories.
On the topic of the Book Club: I think it's almost a fact of science by now that Oprah (whatever you think of her) is operating on some different wavelength. I thought the A MILLION LITTLE LIES debacle was asinine, and THE SECRET makes my left ovary want to choke the right one. But, I don't have a problem with the books.
I don't align with her mentality on a lot of things, but I really do think she's in a bit of a 'damned if you do, damned it you don't' situation.
First, the books weren't substantial enough, now they're pitching the canon, and I don't really understand what the problem is. Do we have to be so contrary that we aren't allowed to read a book that she has read? What if we like some of the choices? It just seems like there's a smug attitude around this topic that's poisoning a lot of people. Why?
It's funny, too. There are a lot of people who won't countenance say, Faulkner. Not because they don't like modernist novels, or stream of consciousness writing, or the way Father Time gets twisted around. Not because of personal tastes, rights? Some people just have to be SO superior that a little stamp is all it takes for them to hitch their haughty train to their self-righteousness wagon. Oh, good. You didn't have to read a book!
If one is sooooo much better than the suburban plebes, how come Soccer Mommy in her sweater set is better-versed in American Literature, Papa?
So, by making yourself more ignorant than someone else because of intellectual prejudice, you're smarter, and then you win? Great, you win at art.
Anyway, if you really want to get your brain busted and rent in twain, go find some Laurence Sterne.
Posted by: Jo 'Mama' Besser at August 6, 2009 9:52 PM
I love Jo Mama Besser.
I'm like 99% sure this was an Oprah Book Club book, and my sister read it and gave it to me. I can't remember everything, but I don't remember it being so fantastical and pretty in my mind. I kind of want to see what Peter Jackson's doing with that.
The ending was a bit bad, first with the sex thing, and then with the icicle bit. I think the icicle bit could have stayed, and the sex bit thrown out. But overall, I enjoyed it.
Posted by: Maggie at August 7, 2009 5:22 AM
I have to agree with dene. I don't really understand why most people didn't like the end. Sure, it was implausible, but large parts of the book relies on the suspension of disbelief. Also, Susie was yanked out of the world as a teenager. Despite the circumstances under which she died, it makes sense (to me, anyway) that she would be curious about experiencing sex with Ray. I did enjoy the book, though some of the characters were maddening (the mom, for instance). Call me corny, but after the years of heartache the family endured in the wake of Susie's murder, I thought they deserved some happiness and peace.
Posted by: Sarah at August 7, 2009 2:52 PM
I just finished the book, within 2 days. I absolutely LOVED it, and I am not a reader. I have to say, the end was quite disappointing to me, however. I had hoped that justice would be served, giving the family some sense of closure, as they move on in their lives. But I think what many of the previous posters are forgetting, is that Sebold's point to this novel, was not the murder of Susie, but the aftermath, and how it affected the family.
I have watched the trailer, and since I am fresh out of the book, I have noticed that the trailer captures many things that are in the book. I am hoping that means the movie will follow the book closely. I cannot wait for its release.
Posted by: willow at August 10, 2009 4:33 PM
Video ads popping up after each page view? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
*THAT'S* peter jackson?
why did i think he was fatter?
like g. del toro fat?
but yeah, that trailer sorta sucks.
maybe i'll go watch heavenly creatures again. nothing beats kate winslet running around for 2 hours like she's hopped up on dexatrim.