The Lovely Bones (2010)

Directed by: Peter Jackson | 135 minutes | drama, horror, thriller, fantasy, crime | Actors: Rachel Weisz, Mark Wahlberg, Saoirse Ronan, Susan Sarandon, Stanley Tucci, Amanda Michalka, Jake Abel, Michael Imperioli, Charlie Saxton, Reece Ritchie, Rose McIver, Nikki SooHoo, Thomas McCarthy, Andrew James Allen, Anna George, Carolyn Dando , Stink Fisher

Movie viewers today can’t be blamed for thinking that Peter Jackson is only gifted or interested in making epic adventure films. His directing jobs for ‘The Lord of the Rings’ and ‘King Kong’ cover more than fourteen hours of compelling film spectacle, but his immensely popular “splatter comedy” ‘Braindead’ is also one big extravaganza in cult circles. And yet he also has an eye for intimate drama. Not only within its large-scale blockbusters (after all, who can forget the bond between Sam and Frodo or Kong and Ann Darrow?), but also as film genres. Fifteen years ago, he made an extraordinarily captivating film adaptation of the true story of the complex relationship between two teenage girls and how, when under pressure, it resulted in murder. So it’s not surprising that Jackson, along with regular writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, has taken on the task of adapting Alice Sebold’s novel “The Lovely Bones”, which is also a murder mystery. and focuses on the experience of a teenage girl. Jackson has plunged into the project with the help of an outstanding cast and original ideas, and expectations are obviously high (again) after his previous successes. And the director certainly does not have to be ashamed of the result, although the whole is less (impressive) than the sum of its parts.

There is a lot in the film to get excited about. The narrative structure of the film is original and (potentially) comprehensive. First of all, what is special is that the story is primarily told from the perspective of the deceased girl Susie. From a sort of portal between heaven and earth, she reports her thoughts and observes the developments of her family, friends, and murderer, on earth. Usually, films focus solely on the experience of the remaining family members and how they deal with the loss of a child. Now, of course, attention is also paid to this, but the story is a bit less predictable because of the “second-hand” perspective. The easy melodramatic pitfalls are now bypassed. In addition to the world of Susie and that of the family, the life of Susie’s killer and how he develops and copes with his horrific deeds is also often looked at. There are even more points of view, but this is the most fascinating trio. Because of these different storylines, the film remains varied and themes are exposed from different sides.

However, this approach also has a downside, namely that not all lines and characters get the chance to be sufficiently exposed. If Jackson had (allocated) the same time now as for his spectacle films, characters could have come into their own better, but that time is not here. Unfortunately, this means that in none of the cases the viewer is really put in the shoes of the different characters. The father of the family, played by Mark Wahlberg, is obsessed with (finding) his child’s murderer and pretty much freaks out and the mother (Rachel Weisz) has even less to do; she tries to get on with her life – practically ignoring the tragedy – but can’t because of my hubby. And the killer’s story really focuses only on his attempts to get away with his crimes and, later, his need to get back into killing, as told by the observing Susie. Perhaps this is more than we can expect in a wide-ranging film like this – we don’t have to expect a character analysis like in a film like ‘The Woodsman’ – but precisely because this character is portrayed so provocatively by Stanley Tucci, you have as a viewer the need for more.

Even the central character, Susie, leaves something to be desired in her development or experience. Perhaps this has to do with the choice of the film makers to go wild with the imagination of the world in which they have ended up. This kind of in-between heaven, which seems to be discussed briefly in the book, has here become a kind of Holiday on Ice, Efteling-like dream world, full of candy cane colors and kitschy tableaus. Sometimes it is indeed interesting in terms of content – ​​such as when Susie walks on a colorful beach where gigantic bottles with boats in them (like her father makes) wash up and explode – but there is little added value to see Susie with her new girlfriend sliding past ice sculptures or already dancing with her butterfly suit to have fun in the tall grass. After all, this isn’t heaven yet, and Susie should really only be concerned with her own missed opportunities, the fate of her parents, the killer, and her own connection to all these people. As a viewer you never have the feeling that you are experiencing all those frivolities together with her. They seem to exist purely so that Jackson can once again unpack with his special effects. It’s precious time that could have been better spent on character development and theme building. But it must undoubtedly have been quite a task to keep the narrative structure of the book intact. Precisely because almost everything takes place in the girl’s head and you have a lot to do with thoughts and inner dialogue, it is difficult to film this catchy without just spooning up text.

At the same time, it’s nice that we get so many insights into different lives and luckily the actors know how to take the sometimes scarce script and characters to a higher level. Rachel Weisz brings her limited role to life through her empathetic performance, Mark Wahlberg is above all solid, but manages to suggest a warm bond in some scenes with his children and (the vision of) Susie’s spirit, Susan Sarandon provides the whole with a welcome, if at times abrupt, comic note, and Rose McIver, as sister Lindsey, nicely takes over the investigator role from her father in the final act of the film and lets the viewer sympathize with her when she is on the trail of the killer. But the highest credit goes to killer Stanley Tucci and Saoirse Ronan as the late Susie, who both carry this film and keep the viewer interested at all times. Ronan, who previously impressed in ‘Atonement’, here is a perfect embodiment of the late adolescent girl, who is insecure, hopeful, in love, and rebellious during her life, and confused, fearful, sad, angry, and joyful during her (almost -)dead. She knows how to communicate all emotions convincingly and a (second) Oscar nomination would therefore not be inconceivable. Stanley Tucci, in turn, is a convincing, hair-raising killer. When his George Harvey approaches Susie in the cornfield to carry out his horrific plan, the shivers run down your spine. His sometimes high-pitched intonation, his quasi-casual way of speaking, his eager, fleeting glances… you’ll want to yell at Susie to go home right away.

The crucial confrontation scene between murderer and victim is very effectively directed by Jackson, with a cautious pace, and, towards the end, lots of close-ups on the faces and hands when things get really tense. And the situation – Harvey lures the girl into a shack underground – seems implausible, but the way the scene plays makes it really plausible that a sane girl could make such a decision. Harvey also plays it very cunningly. He says he wants to show something beautiful, but if Susie can’t, he will show it to the other girls in the village, who will love it. That makes Susie curious. When she then looks down into the open hut and he asks if she wants to be the first to see it, she can’t refuse such an exclusive offer, can she? He really makes it seem like she’s allowed to do something exclusive, which she can proudly tell everyone about later. But in the hut the tone soon changes and she is irretrievably lost.

Jackson also knows how to film and edit his film very catchy. Sometimes, however, he stretches things just a little too far, so that it all seems a bit too contrived. For example, the use of scale is very interesting in the scenes in Harvey’s house, where Jackson puts the dollhouses the man is working on in the foreground and suddenly the face or body of the giant man appears behind them. But when the police later come to take a look and they look at the structures, a very emphatic “peek-a-boo” is played by having the officer and Harvey look at each other through the dollhouses. Also an essentially very exciting parallel-cut when Lindsey just finds an incriminating scrapbook at the killer’s house, and he comes home in the meantime and listens if he doesn’t hear something by chance, is brought too much to rush. And the ultimate fate of the “best” man is very easy, and, like the dumping in a large pit of an important object just before, is very reminiscent of the end of Jackson’s magnum opus, ‘The Lord of the Rings. ‘.

‘The Lovely Bones’ is an ambitious film adaptation that succeeds on many points, but unfortunately also falls short on several points. Especially when it comes to drama and characters, this weighs heavily. The film aims to be anything, offering suspense, drama, humor, fantasy, action and romance. Perhaps this is too much of a good thing. Because a film about loss, about moving on with your life (and your death), and about the bonds that have formed around the loss of Susie (her Lovely Bones) should make a deep emotional impression. However, this one remains. However, the viewer can enjoy a fascinating, original film.