Bolt is a fun easy to swallow romp with a soft accessible palate of caricature and lush picture-scape that easily pleases the eyes. It does not boggle the imagination nor is it an exercise in stylistic pacing, comedy, or characterization, but it's a welcome family film without pretension that offers a feel-good adventure that I certainly enjoyed. The film does have a surprising amount of human touch despite the formula and pre-packaged cute that I expected the film to use as its main source of energy. It follows yet another journey (typical of the 'cgi talking animal family film' genre) of a Buzz Light year-esquire white American Shepard with an altered perspective of reality, a notably emaciated cat, and a hamster that derives it's laughs from being a parody of the overzealous fan-boy that says "Awesome!" all the time (quite effectively, however). In the film Bolt is actually disturbingly exploited, as he is made to think he and his owner are in actual danger on a consistent basis. One wonder's how his supposed loving owner Penny would be able to take one day of that, but alas it isn't taken so seriously, as it's a premise needed for the film to exist. It was due to this however that I sympathized with his character, and the added lack of humanity came from the fact that Mittens, Bolt's accomplice for the journey, is a stray that once had a home. The emotion in this respect is treated rather typically but it strikes the right chords to teach a valuable lesson which is often absent in films featuring cute dogs and cats. The only main character un-abused by people is Rhino the hamster, who offers much of the comic relief between the confused Shepard and the captive struggling feline. The film is animated well, no shocker there for films from high-end companies like Disney, and the character movements, especially from the pigeons, keep up the spirit of animated zest. There are even some great action sequences; the fake scenes from the TV show (that are featured in the previews like they're the main film) are great as well as the more down to earth scenes. The conclusion's emotions are a tad forced, and a lot of other elements are predictable, but Bolt picks up enough steam and plays with it's situation enough to warrant it's place as a genuinely good animated film.
Reviews
43 Reviews
WALL·E
(2008)
"Wally" is a charmer
27 June 2008
Pixar's latest animated romp doesn't fail to entertain with its consistent heart and warmth, being rather distinctive from Bird's projects. It's a film that I believe is easy to swallow, borrowing heavily from heartwarming films like City Lights but maintaining its expected Pixar sheen of dictating its emotion from pure human essence and experience. That goes strictly however for the construction of the unlikely relationship between the film's title hero and his romance with E.V.E, a very lively and interesting supporting character. Love will find a way, even if it has apparently left the human species, who have lost themselves amongst material consumerism. The film goes along this path, emphasizing touch, beauty and compassion as essential elements to living, and how the technological extensions of ourselves have come to embody our past nature.
The two main characters set off a series of events in a very strongly influenced by "2001:A Space Odyssey" setting. The references aren't exactly subtle, and perhaps the film's universe relied to heavily on this influence, as well as the storyline. The environment and animation however were expectedly beautiful to look at. In terms of the lack of dialogue in this film, it was rather a daring move, but the film is still expressively similar to its dialogue-ridden predecessors. The music and riveting 'computer-acting' substituting as the voicing was enough to pull the common film-viewer through, similar to DreamWorks's film Spirit: Stallion of the Cimmeron (without its narration) or even classic toons of the 50's and 60's. It was all executed well but not originally. The strength of the interaction scenes comes from the level of detail and care put into them; it's simple yet effective. This film speaks to adults in ways that aren't attainable in so-called mature cinema (films with overwhelming complexity and the inclusion of themes children shouldn't see). People see Pixar films as a way to escape and to laugh at curiosity and simplicity, somewhat of a trigger to what's left of their dwindling childhood memories. Wall-E incorporates this into a familiar sci-fi landscape that sparks even more enticement and gives the romance of the two characters whimsical interest, making for dazzling visuals and an all around pleasing adventure. So what held some of this back for me was the low-level satire. The fate of the humans was simply that of such in the film Idiocracy with the crude humor extracted. All the humans are proportionately hefty in red jumpsuits and flying chairs. For me, I found that imagery uninteresting, and I didn't even like looking at; not because of the proposed exaggerated fate, but because of the sheer lack of imagination. Wall-E does exercise a lot of established joking beliefs, such as machines taking over for us causing us to become fat and useless, and humans destroying the entire planet. Shockingly, the portrayals don't come of as overly cynical or smug, because it maintains a communication of our nature that everyone can appreciate. The film is special in that the environmental message didn't hijack the story such as in "Happy Feet" because it was essential to the story.
However, the film's greatness is held back strongly by a lot of these elements, mainly because their so elementary. The humans' emotion toward the end of the film are also tacked on, and although it may be part of the story that the humans are so vapid, they still play a strong part in the story of the little robot, yet they're severely reduced to the point of causing the film to lack scope. The film does a handsome job at crafting the relationships, but it shows considerable weakness in other areas that are made up for with the ever-so-pleasing cgi visuals and 'cutesy' humor that depends on how much and when the robots will exhibit a sweet little glistening of human emotion. It's all apparent from the title, Wall-E, in which we would prefer 'Wally', as he's a huggable and sympathetic character that personifies the sensation of longing and soul with just his character design alone. The film is essentially about spirit and oncoming banality, which could be easily related to much mass-produced animated films, and "Ratatouille" comes into mind here too with that theme. So while it delivers, I found it less then a masterpiece, but still a piece worth seeing for sure, and a great inspiring addition to animated cinema.
The two main characters set off a series of events in a very strongly influenced by "2001:A Space Odyssey" setting. The references aren't exactly subtle, and perhaps the film's universe relied to heavily on this influence, as well as the storyline. The environment and animation however were expectedly beautiful to look at. In terms of the lack of dialogue in this film, it was rather a daring move, but the film is still expressively similar to its dialogue-ridden predecessors. The music and riveting 'computer-acting' substituting as the voicing was enough to pull the common film-viewer through, similar to DreamWorks's film Spirit: Stallion of the Cimmeron (without its narration) or even classic toons of the 50's and 60's. It was all executed well but not originally. The strength of the interaction scenes comes from the level of detail and care put into them; it's simple yet effective. This film speaks to adults in ways that aren't attainable in so-called mature cinema (films with overwhelming complexity and the inclusion of themes children shouldn't see). People see Pixar films as a way to escape and to laugh at curiosity and simplicity, somewhat of a trigger to what's left of their dwindling childhood memories. Wall-E incorporates this into a familiar sci-fi landscape that sparks even more enticement and gives the romance of the two characters whimsical interest, making for dazzling visuals and an all around pleasing adventure. So what held some of this back for me was the low-level satire. The fate of the humans was simply that of such in the film Idiocracy with the crude humor extracted. All the humans are proportionately hefty in red jumpsuits and flying chairs. For me, I found that imagery uninteresting, and I didn't even like looking at; not because of the proposed exaggerated fate, but because of the sheer lack of imagination. Wall-E does exercise a lot of established joking beliefs, such as machines taking over for us causing us to become fat and useless, and humans destroying the entire planet. Shockingly, the portrayals don't come of as overly cynical or smug, because it maintains a communication of our nature that everyone can appreciate. The film is special in that the environmental message didn't hijack the story such as in "Happy Feet" because it was essential to the story.
However, the film's greatness is held back strongly by a lot of these elements, mainly because their so elementary. The humans' emotion toward the end of the film are also tacked on, and although it may be part of the story that the humans are so vapid, they still play a strong part in the story of the little robot, yet they're severely reduced to the point of causing the film to lack scope. The film does a handsome job at crafting the relationships, but it shows considerable weakness in other areas that are made up for with the ever-so-pleasing cgi visuals and 'cutesy' humor that depends on how much and when the robots will exhibit a sweet little glistening of human emotion. It's all apparent from the title, Wall-E, in which we would prefer 'Wally', as he's a huggable and sympathetic character that personifies the sensation of longing and soul with just his character design alone. The film is essentially about spirit and oncoming banality, which could be easily related to much mass-produced animated films, and "Ratatouille" comes into mind here too with that theme. So while it delivers, I found it less then a masterpiece, but still a piece worth seeing for sure, and a great inspiring addition to animated cinema.
Kung Fu Panda
(2008)
Kung Fu Panda
6 June 2008
The hard-headed folks at Dreamworks just won't back down when it comes to their consistent choice to produce only the animated genre of slapstick comedy despite constant unnecessary comparisons to Pixar by most audiences. Here however, I feel they've finally succeeded in forming a well-crafted comedy that references itself and its genre without any manipulative occurrences of incessant cute (despite featuring one of the universal symbols) or thin framework. One of the first cgi Dreamworks romps to lack pop culture (shockingly less than Pixar's Cars) the pacing in the film shines, as well as the slick camera work and surprisingly effective fight sequences. Particularly, there was a true sense of environment to the animation, but also a sense of peril and physical boundaries in the well choreographed combat scenes. The story is expectedly predictable as well as the clean message, but the film comes together as referential fun comedy with likable and moderately inspiring situations despite the nature of the film. There are no mean-spirited jokes, and just the right amount of heart are out into them (not too much or little) so that it begins to approach what made the first Shrek enjoyable. It makes great use of its animation, tying in it's comical pacing with a lot of great physicality. I thoroughly enjoyed the characterizations, barely noticing or caring that they typically come to us from cherry-picked A-list celebs in an attempt to drag in theatregoers. Despite that, they bring their A-game with voice work, and the audience besides the actors have fun for once. In my opinion, it's one of Dreamworks' best after they canned their 2d films. I did not see that coming, with the eye-roll inducing premise.
Horton Hears a Who!
(2008)
Who would've thunk?
17 March 2008
Unlike many Dr. Seuss Nazis, I wasn't about to have a conniption if Blue Sky's "Horton Hears a Who" wasn't 100 percent faithful to the source material, but only if it were able to develop an actual idea and personality all its own. Of course, I'd have to visit the twilight zone to observe any innovation of that sort that isn't wretched and vile such as the likes of "The Cat in the Hat". Shockingly, this bland little inoffensive children's flick was the first modern Seuss remake I've seen that didn't apply gross out humor or reprehensible scenes that shouldn't be shown to people under age 12 (actually, to anyone with cognitive brain functioning). This is clearly evident in that it differed from the hard hitting and uninspired gags like those in the Ice Age films and settled for a warm almost verbatim cgi recreation of the classic children's tale, sexism and all. The animation is passable, lacking any interesting exercise of the medium. It has nice color scheme and basically everything else it needs to satisfy the most tightly-wound fans of the original story. That being said, the film becomes nothing more than it's source material. The characters lack dimension, and the film as a whole remains flat, only given any sense of character from Suess' mind. The films occasional meanderings include an overly long Japanese anime spoof, funny in its own right but adding nothing but confusion to the rest of the film's content. The message of the movie is certainly welcome, whether you're simple enough to hijack a nice children's story to tout anti abortion ideas, or if you want to take from it what a small child would; to care about others despite their differences, status, or what other people may think about them. It's all the magic of what makes the books so enticing. Perhaps it's even effective enough to pose the first pieces of philosophical ideas in youngsters. Aside from all that, it's a fun film and moderately tolerable for those the kids drag along. It really should be questioned however if four years of labor and expense should only come to this. Truthfully, even though none of these Seuss films really do it for me cinematically, this was one of better ones.
The Water Horse
(2007)
A rather pointless and banal tale
27 December 2007
"The Waterhorse" may be from the same writer of "Babe", but the plot and direction in this particular film are very much inferior. The story surrounds the discovery of an aquatic creature (the famous lochness monster) which looks pretty much like a cross between a plesiosaur and an estemmenosuchus. Supposedly a solitary creature (the story goes as far as to say only one can exist at a time), a small boy living in the Scottish countryside believes he's a needed caretaker for the thing, and even in one moment in the film implies that the monster, fully grown, should have remained in his unstable household. Also, we are shown the supposedly elusive animal, whose photographed tail would make the front page of a Scottish newspaper and it's own documentary on the Sci fi channel, leaping and bounding out of the water like a killer whale on steroids, and being so personable that it even exhibits many anthropomorphic and social traits, yet it's somehow invisible to rest of the public, and for the rest of all time.
But enough fun picking at the film's logical errors. Given that the film resembles many other films almost verbatim (E.T., The Iron Giant, Free Willy) it makes it all the more annoying and irritating that it doesn't set out to do anything else but show off the cgi of the creature, the character that we are supposed to care about basically because the film tells us too. Or maybe we're motivated to find the creature endearing because of little Angus' love for it... and yet the film doesn't give a rat's behind about a loved pet meeting its demise very undeservedly so by the "adorable" creature. For all of the film's screen time, the animal screeches, gorges itself, grows, and attacks. Yet, the film can't decide if it wants to be dark, or a cute little family fable, so it settles for the middle. The result is an unredeeming, inoffensive (chances are the kiddies didn't even realize the creature their supposed to love actually ATE the dog), formulaic and extremely predictable snorefest for adults. It's a film that attempts to balance moments of attempted parallels of drama and slapstick shtick straight out of "Cheaper by the Dozen" to amuse the children. It does nothing but detrimental things to what the film is trying to accomplish, or perhaps so IF it's trying to accomplish anything other then to amuse those with their brains shut off. Young children will benefit more if you show them the wonderful "Babe" again.
But enough fun picking at the film's logical errors. Given that the film resembles many other films almost verbatim (E.T., The Iron Giant, Free Willy) it makes it all the more annoying and irritating that it doesn't set out to do anything else but show off the cgi of the creature, the character that we are supposed to care about basically because the film tells us too. Or maybe we're motivated to find the creature endearing because of little Angus' love for it... and yet the film doesn't give a rat's behind about a loved pet meeting its demise very undeservedly so by the "adorable" creature. For all of the film's screen time, the animal screeches, gorges itself, grows, and attacks. Yet, the film can't decide if it wants to be dark, or a cute little family fable, so it settles for the middle. The result is an unredeeming, inoffensive (chances are the kiddies didn't even realize the creature their supposed to love actually ATE the dog), formulaic and extremely predictable snorefest for adults. It's a film that attempts to balance moments of attempted parallels of drama and slapstick shtick straight out of "Cheaper by the Dozen" to amuse the children. It does nothing but detrimental things to what the film is trying to accomplish, or perhaps so IF it's trying to accomplish anything other then to amuse those with their brains shut off. Young children will benefit more if you show them the wonderful "Babe" again.
Bee Movie
(2007)
Laughs in my theater
2 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Isn't that all that really matters? Bee Movie is harmless entertainment for the whole family. With a much appreciated 'message' about respecting all life (well sorta of), I find it hard to admit that Bee Movie's humor is low rank and dry, but at least we are spared the potty jokes typical of this genre. For harder laughs like myself, the film may feel a tad bit long, but I almost guarantee that younger ones will be thrilled. Which isn't to say that the writing aims mercilessly at cheap laughs and extreme levels of pop culture to get easy laughs. An interview from the Bee Movie cast revealed that the film started with a title, and that is no shock, seeing as the movie does deliver entirely from that premise. I found myself admiring the film's quirky unpredictable style. The film just goes anywhere and everywhere, you can practically see the guys responsible for the movie just having a good time between every plot turn. The film is to say the least, immensely unbelievable. You'll have to suspend your disbelief to the level of a Saturday morning cartoon, and sure more could have been done with this weak premise, but I feel the film should be congratulated for tackling such a strange storyline. The film is artless and the animation is just average, but don't go in expecting "Toy Story", bring your children, and you'll be fine. At least, any movie that can make a screening room full of children gasp in sadness when a bug gets stepped on is number one on my list.
Cars
(2006)
A Valiant effort
25 August 2007
As soon as I saw the teaser trailer for Pixar's next installment "Cars", I just knew they wouldn't be able to pull off the magic again. After actually seeing the film I found out they did, well, kinda-sorta. What I love most about John Lasseter's "Toy Story" was it's engaging premise, characters, and situations, wholly unbelievable yet you willingly went along with it. The result? It was immensely entertaining, even moving. With it's on point humor and 'realism', the film succeeded with leaps and bounds, not necessarily requiring an amazing story to launch it into brilliance. I immediately realized that making automobiles with windshield eyes and mouths truly exist in their own world would be a challenge. Many children have a natural fascination with cars, but not really in such the way it is done here. Pixar's usual amazing imagery does "Cars" a big service, but in the end, Lasseter manages to keep audiences engaged by humanizing the likes of Owen Wilson and Larry the Cable Guy. You really get the feeling that this film was nurtured with the same TLC as some of Pixar's finest, but the subject matter, and certainly the clichéd story, force the film to to run out of gas. Some of the characterizations are more matching to much of the non-Pixar releases; human ethnicity based and that being the reason for the laughs. Also missing is the correct amount of wit, inventiveness, and hilarious dialogue such as in "Toy Story", although it comes in sporadic amounts with hits and misses. "Toy Story" of course had nostalgia on it's side and cleverly transformed that into a play representation that both adults and kids could really enjoy. I'm afraid much of our emotional connection to cars are limited. And so, I respect "Cars", even though I really think it isn't that good, at least as compared to Pixar's other films. With Nascar boring unfortunates dragged to it's confines by interested fans around America, it is truly a miracle that "Cars" succeeds in the way that it does. It's good for one ride, but it's impact is lacking for another spin.
Kirikou and the Sorceress
(1998)
Kirikou est mon ami
13 August 2007
The film's animation at first threw me off a little. The cgi combined with the less than eye-popping hand drawn animation give a certain cheap feel, and the movement was reminiscent of stop motion. But as the film commenced I accepted it more and then I connected to film's visual style. Certain sequences had stunning artwork, and of course the character's designs that were true to West African culture was nice to experience. It shows where animated film can go. Family friendly films need not be restricted to talking animals and humor, but they can be an artistically produced story that depicts an influential venture into another culture. The film is indeed that, drawn and told true to West African tradition. Although, the story is entertaining in it's own right, with some non-traditional elements enhancing that. It employs the common premise of a hero, born with amazing gifts for really no reason, but his strengths do not trivialize his obstacles, and his decisions are admirable. All of the characters are human, including the villains, which in much American animation is doomed to a fate as simple-minded as the reason for the villain's evil side. Kirikou and the Sorccress is a story of morality, responsibility, prejudice and triumph. It's not really foreign for the average Disney film, but the story's unique presentation, score, story conception make it an animated film not to be missed.
The Road to El Dorado
(2000)
No masterpiece, but certainly a wonderful must-see
9 August 2007
While the complaining against Dreamworks' pop culture-laden cgi feature films continues to drag on, many seem to forget that back in the day the company has produced some pretty good, even excellent inspired animated films. It's just that no one came to see them, while the universally hated Shark Tale raked in twice it's budget, and "Shrek the Third's" only disappointment is that it didn't gross as much as it's highest grossing of all time predecessor. Notably the criminally underrated "Sinbad" and "The Road to El Dorado" stands out amongst Dreamworks' older films. Aside from so eye-catching animation (even though the incorporation of cgi get a bit distracting at times), the film contains some of the most sparkling chemistry between characters that I've seen. It's witty one-liners are enough to hold the film during the duration of it's running time, but where the story lags the characterization is the film's winning element. Dreamworks films were always the type to diverge from the Disney formula. Here, the protagonists aren't exactly cuddly or warm, but they're human. They make for an immensely entertaining film, which doesn't pad on any cliché 'celebration of culture' theme such as Disney's "Pocahontas" or Dreamwork's lack luster "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimmeron", but allows the story and characters to speak for themselves in a genuine way. Catering to the accepted standards for a 2d animated film is kept much to a minimum, aside from the inclusion of one wine-induced song. The film's comedic sophistication (and perhaps the film's somewhat strong but necessary sexuality) is almost too much above the heads of younger ones, which added to it's trouble in the box office and resentment from other older viewers. Still, I'm certain any adult interested in animation would find the film entertaining in a way that many other animated films fail to deliver, and perhaps if more adults were willing to branch out they would as well.
Pocahontas
(I) (1995)
Great music enhances a story refusing to exit Disney's rules for safe film-making
24 July 2007
I hate to admit, but Disney's Pocahontas, a film near and dear to my heart, is indeed severely flawed. Aside from the film's wonderful beautiful imaginative score, the true core of the film, the character relationships, and the depiction of another culture are frighteningly one-note. Pocahontas can be considered a true children's film. There isn't really anything of substance to engage a mature viewer outside of the die hard Disney/children's entertainment addicts, and admittedly without the film's inspired songs, it would be pretty banal. The film truly aims for a satisfactory portrayal of Native American Indians. Nothing objectable, nothing indecorous from what we expect from Disney. Unfortunately, the story and characterization fall along the same guidelines. The film establishes the Native American society as very close to nature, and that the invading colonies basically aren't. The cultural gaps between the protagonists are hastily filled with several occurrences of Disney 'magic' and the like. The film is missing a true human core. Most of the criticism seems to come from the fact that the film is grossly inaccurate on the real story of the pubescent Indian and the fully grown settler. I find such criticism unfair and irrational. The film doesn't aim to please devout historians, but more importantly, Disney has no intention of creating their first PG-13 animated cartoon. And here the film succeeds in that children can watch a film with the name "Pocahontas" that hints to the familiar story taking place in Virgina, a noticeably 'flat' Virigina. Which brings me to a not very often mentioned criticism. The 'Virgina" in the film resembles some place in Colarado. I admire the film's stylization, but I have a slight qualm on not being able to appreciate flat Virgina in it's own beauty. It seems even more problematic in a film who's major theme seems to be nature and the often overlooked wonders of it amidst rapid industrialization and economical corruption. That minor criticism seems to personify the bigger picture in why the film 'fails'. It settles for a shallow look into culture and prejudice that's easily accessible to children but leaves adults unmoved, aside again from the amazing music that the Disney Co. does finest. And really, the music makes the film, not-really-profound dialouge aside.
Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
(1975 TV Short)
Shorts for children should be a little more intelligent in morality
17 July 2007
I felt compelled to comment on a little film I found lurking around youtube because, aside from it's ludicrously lame material, it oozes potential as something that could be brilliant incorporated into a future full length film. Rikki-Tikki-Tavi is an admittedly inspired adaptation of a pretty silly and insensate fable from The Jungle Book by master animator Chuck Jones. It follows the story of a mongoose who gets rescued by a family of rich European colonists and gets named the short animated film's title. Just the family's luck in timing, they acquire the animal that's known for being successful at defeating venomous snakes right at the same moment some cobras, for no logical reason other then maybe not adopting Rikki's fruit-a-vore diet even though nature suggests otherwise, start causing trouble. When Rikki isn't busy attempting to eliminate India's indigenous snake population, he's talking to birds and muskrats (instead of eating them), snuggling by his master the young boy who discovered him, and being consistently successful in deterring the deadly evil snakes. He of course gets constant praise, and the film's tone never changes. He fights he wins, he fights he wins, he fights and, wait for it...he wins. The message ends up being: snakes are evil, and animals that are naturally capable of killing them are heroes. Appropriately Rikki has an annoying voice that makes him sound like some buff superhero. The characterization's of protagonists and antagonists seem to be dictated on the general consensus of how cute and warm blooded the animals are, and killing solves everyone's problems. Okay, the real problem with the film is it's core idea of sympathizing with British imperialism, but that's not enough reason to write the film off; because you don't agree with it's ideology. However, the film's simple-mindedness messes with it's impact and makes it empty. It's a quickie short without a heart, and has no appeal except for it's oddness and nostalgia; it's better off left in the books. I'm one of the lucky ones to not have encountered this cynical little tale in my childhood.
Happily N'Ever After
(2006)
Makes "The Wild" look like "Toy Story"
5 July 2007
This is the type of film that makes you want to ask, "why?" and "what went wrong here?" The film appears literally to fail on levels, and the effect is pretty painful. From the makers of the poor "Valiant" comes a film that exceeds that film is sheer inventiveness and low sense of humor. However, even "Valiant" is superior in characterization and story. "Happily N'ever After" is about as sophisticated as it's title. With a story that seems to have been ripped verbatim from "Shrek" but executed 50 times worse and the inclusion of uninspired voice acting, the film plummets from bad to almost intolerable. I found myself a little heavy-eyed toward the middle of the film, which is a special feat for an animated film. What makes this film fail horribly is not plainly the story, but the film's false sense of reflexivity. It has an embarrassing sense of being above the fairy tales that we all know, and it thinks it's being clever with the inclusion of a younger 'hip' short-haired princess and the supposedly unconventional twist that she doesn't end up with the moronic "prince". How smart. I never saw the fact that she would end up with the boy band-esquire dishwasher coming. But the film thinks that's an interesting twist, as well as changing how the fairy tales are "supposed to be". The princess protagonist has an uninteresting sense of this, not done in the fun way of Shrek's princess Fiona. And so the film lags along. It's supposed to be a comedy but delivers not even a chuckle. Even the cheap aims for humor fall miserably short.
As for the animation, I certainly don't discredit films for having a modest budget. I'm going to assume that this film had just that, but the result was very uneasy on the eyes. Mainly the colors on the forms of the characters that look less complicated than video game graphics stand out. It's just a very unattractive palate. There seems to be no saving grace, or any emphasis to any aspect of the animation. It seems to aim for just colored images on the screen. There's no interest in stylization either. Good writing could certainly save uninspired or cheaper animation, but this film is painfully devoid of such, not like the superior low budget comedy "Hoodwinked!". That film attempts to soar above it's animation limitations and succeeds in doing such. I always though that interesting unconventional ideas should be experimented with on lower budgeted animated films. "Happily N'ever After" delivers a clichéd, laugh-less story with no interesting characters or whimsy that's sure to even turn off the easily entertained youngster. Basically nearly no redeeming value, or reasons to watch.
As for the animation, I certainly don't discredit films for having a modest budget. I'm going to assume that this film had just that, but the result was very uneasy on the eyes. Mainly the colors on the forms of the characters that look less complicated than video game graphics stand out. It's just a very unattractive palate. There seems to be no saving grace, or any emphasis to any aspect of the animation. It seems to aim for just colored images on the screen. There's no interest in stylization either. Good writing could certainly save uninspired or cheaper animation, but this film is painfully devoid of such, not like the superior low budget comedy "Hoodwinked!". That film attempts to soar above it's animation limitations and succeeds in doing such. I always though that interesting unconventional ideas should be experimented with on lower budgeted animated films. "Happily N'ever After" delivers a clichéd, laugh-less story with no interesting characters or whimsy that's sure to even turn off the easily entertained youngster. Basically nearly no redeeming value, or reasons to watch.
Felidae
(1994)
Interesting...
2 July 2007
I don't find "Felidae" interesting for it's confusing story, which I must admit, I lost interest in. The plot sure does tackle a lot in the story, from genetics to animal cruelty to surreal dream sequences (all of which, when viewed outside of the story are still interesting to see animated), which I'm sure is somewhat true to it's literature source material. The plot is all trite dialogue and the characters aren't interesting enough to be engaging. In fact, they sort of repel the viewer out of the story and leave you with the animation to view.
I don't find the film interesting for it's extremely violent content. Although I must say, this film takes the cake as the most violent animated film that I've ever seen. It's got "The Plague Dogs" beat, as psychologically disturbing as that film is. It doesn't come close to the presentation and sheer gore of this film. Or even, I wasn't shocked by the fact that the film has the only animated sequence of mating that I've come across, but that fact did have a lot to do with what I found so interesting about this film.
I find the film fascinating because, aside from the obvious fact that we're hearing the feline characters, perhaps not literally, speaking a human language (depending on what what version you find, I could only view the English dub) and going about activities that are very human in nature (pertaining only to the whole mystery aspect), this is the most accurate depiction of animalistic behavior that I've ever seen in animation, at least by anthromorphization standards. This is most revealing in the attitude of the protagonist, upon discovering an admirable character's death, (after clichéd film conventions would call for otherwise) recovers instantly and never dwells in the past with his feelings focusing on that time. An odd thing for a human to digest, but so seemingly true for animals not as sentient as us and caring more toward long time family members (at least it seems that way). Due to this, the overall effect it that the film is isolated from our mentality. It's the only film I've seen that doesn't seem to recognize that it was conceived by humans.
I wouldn't say I felt much after watching this film, aside from witnessing something so different that it makes you really ponder the possibilities of animation, which really should be stretched to more artistic lengths, given it's vast flexibility and tendency toward being accepted by a mature audience despite it's absurdities.
I don't find the film interesting for it's extremely violent content. Although I must say, this film takes the cake as the most violent animated film that I've ever seen. It's got "The Plague Dogs" beat, as psychologically disturbing as that film is. It doesn't come close to the presentation and sheer gore of this film. Or even, I wasn't shocked by the fact that the film has the only animated sequence of mating that I've come across, but that fact did have a lot to do with what I found so interesting about this film.
I find the film fascinating because, aside from the obvious fact that we're hearing the feline characters, perhaps not literally, speaking a human language (depending on what what version you find, I could only view the English dub) and going about activities that are very human in nature (pertaining only to the whole mystery aspect), this is the most accurate depiction of animalistic behavior that I've ever seen in animation, at least by anthromorphization standards. This is most revealing in the attitude of the protagonist, upon discovering an admirable character's death, (after clichéd film conventions would call for otherwise) recovers instantly and never dwells in the past with his feelings focusing on that time. An odd thing for a human to digest, but so seemingly true for animals not as sentient as us and caring more toward long time family members (at least it seems that way). Due to this, the overall effect it that the film is isolated from our mentality. It's the only film I've seen that doesn't seem to recognize that it was conceived by humans.
I wouldn't say I felt much after watching this film, aside from witnessing something so different that it makes you really ponder the possibilities of animation, which really should be stretched to more artistic lengths, given it's vast flexibility and tendency toward being accepted by a mature audience despite it's absurdities.
The Plague Dogs
(1982)
One of the most effective animated films ever made
1 July 2007
Most animated films are created to emphasize sanitized beauty. Animated films not only recreate our preconceptions of life and movement in an artistic and accessible way, they have the ability to impact viewers with more efficiency when the medium is taken to new unconventional heights. Why is "The Plague Dogs" animated? While most animated films have allowed us to admire aesthetic beauty, many times of nature, "The Plague Dogs" is a cerebral experience that hits home even more through the fact that animation is usually used for more uplifting stories. In addition, the animation style perfectly suits the raw nature of the film. It's a film that could easily makes it's point by plain shock value, but instead it drives it's point home in a more meaningful manor. At first glance, the film has a simplistic message, mainly 'violence against animals is bad'. However, the message expands with the film's profuse symbolism. Several other scenes evoke the sense of bleakness in the animated world and the confusion that the animal protagonists go through. I don't know how much realism is applied to the animal testing facility depicted in this film, but what I do know is that it's painful to digest. Not basically because of the obviously terrible conditions, but because I know there are far worse situations occurring in this world being perpetuated on animals and humans alike. And that's what makes the film succeed so well. The color scheme is dark and gritty, and without the addition of computers in the animation, the resulting look is visually depressing, but extremely appropriate. Aside from all this, what happens to the characters still comes as a shock and feels genuine. The characters, aside from the notion that they are 'speaking English' are true to their species' character. The film is tragic and begins and ends in futility. However, the effect is not to deliver a simple-minded heavy handed message like it appears on the surface. Like the hunting scene in "Bambi", it presents the perspective of characters who are victims of the unfortunate part of existence. Much like the point of tragedy, we must confront our fears of morbid occurrences because it gives us a more profound view of the world and may lead us re-think or focuses in life (whether or not you disagree with the focus of the film). It's a more than appropriate theme for animation, and strongly effective as a film in itself. It may be hard to get through, but it's a must-see.
My Beautiful Girl, Mari
(2002)
A nice but forgettable fantasy tale
21 June 2007
Perhaps due to the fact that I couldn't access the English subtitles with the original Korean voice actors, I found the voice work engorging and mild. Also, I was surprised that a film that deals with the theme of growing up and moving on (a subject that usually gains instant sympathy from myself), didn't particular move me. I compare this film to Miyizaki's masterpiece "My Neighbor Tortoro" where fantastical characters accompany the overall theme of common childhood hardships. In "My Beautiful Girl Mari", the fantasy may or may not exist, but I found it not really relevant to the progression of the story. In fact, the story did have more depth and interest then the images and occurrences that took place in the metaphysical universe in which the protagonists meet Mari, an odd-looking floating female in white. Maybe because of the nature of the film's two protagonists, I couldn't really connect with them connecting emotionally to the nature of the fantasy. Certain aspects in the film's emotion do succeed however, such as the important friendship between the the boys. It makes the film's ending more touching and meaningful. The soft, soothing music also complements the story's tone and animation framework.
"Mari" is interesting due to it's unique artistic style. The animation is not the common type used, and it makes for a more interesting visual appeal. I saw a lot of potential however in the story and deeper meaning of the film, and found it quite lacking.
"Mari" is interesting due to it's unique artistic style. The animation is not the common type used, and it makes for a more interesting visual appeal. I saw a lot of potential however in the story and deeper meaning of the film, and found it quite lacking.
Finding Nemo
(2003)
Everyone Loves Nemo!
20 June 2007
Being a film that titillated female viewers, children, and even some men alike, "Finding Nemo"'s awe-inspiring animation and wonderful voice work may have caste the illusion that this well-made little film is something of a masterpiece. In reality, Nemo floats well, but there's not much beneath the surface, making it an enjoyable but over-hyped cgi flick.
The film borrows heavily the pacing formula of the brilliant "Toy Story", and that's not really a bad thing. What gives the film it's mass appeal is undoubtedly, aside from the stunning graphics, the characters. Although I couldn't really connect with them, I can see why so many enjoy watching them. Dorry is the conventional half-wit (Sid from Ice Age, Donkey from Shrek) who for no real reason other then for conventional cinematic interest, finds herself accompanying Marlin on his journey to locate his missing son out of the vast ocean. Just a small twist, she has short term memory loss. I comment frequently on the use of the suspension of disbelief. I don't usually have a problem with it, depending on the context and how often it's used. Here, the unreality of the film leaps out at me with it's teeth barred. Not everyone who boats lives by the shore, and even though Marlin was lucky enough to have his son's captor live so close to the ocean, just how was he planning on getting up there without the help of a winged sympathetic fish-a-vore? Still, the film has enough whimsy for that not to get too problematic, but it allows the writer a lot of area in creating the story, and I wasn't as impressed with the results as others, aside from the films sporadic strong points.
Dorry is bubbly and fun for many to watch. Just like with the tepid "Ice Age", it takes more then a character who's easy on the eyes and ears to become a character worthy of layering. She doesn't really improve or change much over the course of the film, she just occasionally in a very Disney-like fashion unintentionally helps Marlin escape some near fatal situations. Marlin has the task of forming a friendship with her, because she can grow a tad bit annoying. There's Nemo, who's blow up at his father seems rather unwarranted. I'd assume Nemo knows his siblings were killed by the hundreds, and I'd think he'd at least sympathize with his father for being so overprotective. He can still get upset, but to use the word "hate"? And of course there's the tank gang, another hoot to watch (each having a cartoon personality), and the serious Gil.
Back to the story, it's basically our heroes almost getting eaten, and nemo's attempts at an orthodontist's office to escape his aquatic prison. Some of the sequences succeed better the others. The film also revels in not demeaning animals who happen to be carnivorous, another plus. The film also quite well provides more then shallow entertainment for everyone, and I mean everyone. As long as you're not to young to watch a movie, "Finding Nemo" is accessible. That's the film's strongest quality, but aside from that, it really isn't anything much more. Some of the emotion seems trite and ill-proportioned, moving back and forth from believable to not so much. Being a kid's flick, it certainly is better then many other films out there. It just doesn't tackle that much in order to be considered over so many other films, which is usually the case. The story is very linear and it doesn't amaze that well outside of itself. The animation not only delivers, it delivers a natural biome that in itself is one of the most amazing places on earth. The animation on the fish is glorious, capturing the realistic way in which real fish move and partnering it with comedic human movement. The animated reef with it's human makeover, however, is even more brighter and colorful then most actual reefs. The film is like an inviting turquoise pool with a temperature of 85 degrees. And with a riveting score and perspective camera angles, the film launches itself away from other shtick to become noticed, but in my opinion, not really all the praise is worth it.
The film borrows heavily the pacing formula of the brilliant "Toy Story", and that's not really a bad thing. What gives the film it's mass appeal is undoubtedly, aside from the stunning graphics, the characters. Although I couldn't really connect with them, I can see why so many enjoy watching them. Dorry is the conventional half-wit (Sid from Ice Age, Donkey from Shrek) who for no real reason other then for conventional cinematic interest, finds herself accompanying Marlin on his journey to locate his missing son out of the vast ocean. Just a small twist, she has short term memory loss. I comment frequently on the use of the suspension of disbelief. I don't usually have a problem with it, depending on the context and how often it's used. Here, the unreality of the film leaps out at me with it's teeth barred. Not everyone who boats lives by the shore, and even though Marlin was lucky enough to have his son's captor live so close to the ocean, just how was he planning on getting up there without the help of a winged sympathetic fish-a-vore? Still, the film has enough whimsy for that not to get too problematic, but it allows the writer a lot of area in creating the story, and I wasn't as impressed with the results as others, aside from the films sporadic strong points.
Dorry is bubbly and fun for many to watch. Just like with the tepid "Ice Age", it takes more then a character who's easy on the eyes and ears to become a character worthy of layering. She doesn't really improve or change much over the course of the film, she just occasionally in a very Disney-like fashion unintentionally helps Marlin escape some near fatal situations. Marlin has the task of forming a friendship with her, because she can grow a tad bit annoying. There's Nemo, who's blow up at his father seems rather unwarranted. I'd assume Nemo knows his siblings were killed by the hundreds, and I'd think he'd at least sympathize with his father for being so overprotective. He can still get upset, but to use the word "hate"? And of course there's the tank gang, another hoot to watch (each having a cartoon personality), and the serious Gil.
Back to the story, it's basically our heroes almost getting eaten, and nemo's attempts at an orthodontist's office to escape his aquatic prison. Some of the sequences succeed better the others. The film also revels in not demeaning animals who happen to be carnivorous, another plus. The film also quite well provides more then shallow entertainment for everyone, and I mean everyone. As long as you're not to young to watch a movie, "Finding Nemo" is accessible. That's the film's strongest quality, but aside from that, it really isn't anything much more. Some of the emotion seems trite and ill-proportioned, moving back and forth from believable to not so much. Being a kid's flick, it certainly is better then many other films out there. It just doesn't tackle that much in order to be considered over so many other films, which is usually the case. The story is very linear and it doesn't amaze that well outside of itself. The animation not only delivers, it delivers a natural biome that in itself is one of the most amazing places on earth. The animation on the fish is glorious, capturing the realistic way in which real fish move and partnering it with comedic human movement. The animated reef with it's human makeover, however, is even more brighter and colorful then most actual reefs. The film is like an inviting turquoise pool with a temperature of 85 degrees. And with a riveting score and perspective camera angles, the film launches itself away from other shtick to become noticed, but in my opinion, not really all the praise is worth it.
The Incredibles
(2004)
A bewildering combination of brilliance and despondent themes
18 June 2007
I want to congratulate director Brad Bird on one of the most original animated opening sequences I've seen. From the very start of the film, the viewer is all ready to submerge into a film that takes animation and "children's entertainment" to a whole new level, and this level isn't just pretentious gibber concocted to look revolutionary. This is the real thing. And it's almost a superb film. But I must take strong, even drastic conflict with the underlying themes that the film presents. What makes the "The Incredibles" both excellent and reprehensible is Bird's writing that unfortunately overlooks and neglects aspects in it's presentation. At least I hope so. The film leaps back and forth from a respectable animated film into something dark and ugly, and, amongst such, paints a gloss over it and claims accessibility to children. It is such a fact that I pray is never repeated.
Bird's writing flounders in the very fact that it is trying to promote a message, and not a silly one. While doing so in the context of a superhero film, the film meanders back and forth from being real and fantastical. Essentially, the film can't decide what it wants to be. Does it want to pay homage to classic comics where elements of our reality are taken for granted or does it want to portray a strange new world where supers are taken out of context and applied a different role in the society? That is, the film begs to be taken as some kind or allegory, at the time maintaining, even emphasizing it's seriousness. The film contains fantastic voice work from the whole cast involved, and toward the middle of the film there are some impressively convincing moments of drama and suspense. What is further done with this is utterly disappointing. The film sporadically morphs back into a comic book where the lives of everyone except our heroes are meaningless, as is the physical and emotional pain of these characters. Some situations that involve very serious acts perpetuated by the protagonists are never resolved and are thusly deemed as acceptable. This is evident from the very start of the film when our hero, who's personality is much more like the appearances of the characters in "Monster's Inc", derides the talent of the soon-to be powerful villain as a youngster and never cares to say anything about it until years later, when the tables are turned. The film's message is to point out that "no, we aren't all special", and I can live with that to a certain degree because it's true for the most part. But one wonders if these certain facts are necessary for smaller children to digest? Perhaps this film isn't for them at all, and that's fine. What do I as an older person think? I think these themes scream some pretty reprehensible notions, and it killed any entertaining factor that "The Incredibles" had, as well as making me dislike the characters. Aside from our hero's treatment of Buddy and his hardly fairly matched boss in the beginning, when you view what occurred in terms of the film's overall theme it fails to mesh into anything we'd think as admirable if you're the average caring person. Buddy's child-like enthusiasm for his talent is not a bad thing, but it is treated as such. One talent is favored over the other, and I'm not sure why. Justifably, Buddy seeks out to be like his ex-hero and is killed for it. Wait, I'm completely aware of Buddy, who's later turned into Syndrome, is a serial killer. But what can we say about the depiction of a struggling person desperate to be labeled what is considered "special" as a vicious murderer? Something just isn't right here. It isn't helped by the very fact that virtually every non-super is either looney or negative in nature.
There are further questionable sequences in the film, including the aforementioned violence occurring toward the end, that even while in self-defense, it is not believable when compared to the same intensity of other scenes involving the protagonists in mortal danger. I certainly do demand that films, despite the lowered standards for family entertainment, be further observed beyond their entertainment value or admittedly very good direction. Still, the film is also to be commended for it's artistic landscape, a somewhat 1950's universe laden with modernist design. A true rarity animation for adults is, and this so disappointingly has to offend in an unusual and problematic way.
Bird's writing flounders in the very fact that it is trying to promote a message, and not a silly one. While doing so in the context of a superhero film, the film meanders back and forth from being real and fantastical. Essentially, the film can't decide what it wants to be. Does it want to pay homage to classic comics where elements of our reality are taken for granted or does it want to portray a strange new world where supers are taken out of context and applied a different role in the society? That is, the film begs to be taken as some kind or allegory, at the time maintaining, even emphasizing it's seriousness. The film contains fantastic voice work from the whole cast involved, and toward the middle of the film there are some impressively convincing moments of drama and suspense. What is further done with this is utterly disappointing. The film sporadically morphs back into a comic book where the lives of everyone except our heroes are meaningless, as is the physical and emotional pain of these characters. Some situations that involve very serious acts perpetuated by the protagonists are never resolved and are thusly deemed as acceptable. This is evident from the very start of the film when our hero, who's personality is much more like the appearances of the characters in "Monster's Inc", derides the talent of the soon-to be powerful villain as a youngster and never cares to say anything about it until years later, when the tables are turned. The film's message is to point out that "no, we aren't all special", and I can live with that to a certain degree because it's true for the most part. But one wonders if these certain facts are necessary for smaller children to digest? Perhaps this film isn't for them at all, and that's fine. What do I as an older person think? I think these themes scream some pretty reprehensible notions, and it killed any entertaining factor that "The Incredibles" had, as well as making me dislike the characters. Aside from our hero's treatment of Buddy and his hardly fairly matched boss in the beginning, when you view what occurred in terms of the film's overall theme it fails to mesh into anything we'd think as admirable if you're the average caring person. Buddy's child-like enthusiasm for his talent is not a bad thing, but it is treated as such. One talent is favored over the other, and I'm not sure why. Justifably, Buddy seeks out to be like his ex-hero and is killed for it. Wait, I'm completely aware of Buddy, who's later turned into Syndrome, is a serial killer. But what can we say about the depiction of a struggling person desperate to be labeled what is considered "special" as a vicious murderer? Something just isn't right here. It isn't helped by the very fact that virtually every non-super is either looney or negative in nature.
There are further questionable sequences in the film, including the aforementioned violence occurring toward the end, that even while in self-defense, it is not believable when compared to the same intensity of other scenes involving the protagonists in mortal danger. I certainly do demand that films, despite the lowered standards for family entertainment, be further observed beyond their entertainment value or admittedly very good direction. Still, the film is also to be commended for it's artistic landscape, a somewhat 1950's universe laden with modernist design. A true rarity animation for adults is, and this so disappointingly has to offend in an unusual and problematic way.
Ratatouille
(2007)
Pulls the most out of an okay story
17 June 2007
Ratatouille is a major step up from a lot of last year's animated fare, and a vast improvement from last year's Oscar winner for best animated feature. Here we re-discover sweet simplicity amped up with the expected story-telling techniques of Pixar, and here's the kicker, no heavy handed messages hammered in with a drill, but there certainly is a message and it's delivered with subtler grace despite some flaws. Although, aspects to the message are borderline confusing if you over analyze the reality that occurs in the film, but the film doesn't scream for over-analyzation in the same fashion as "Finding Nemo". For me, the animation slightly overpowers the story, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. The film is directed, camera-wise, with the same interesting techniques as "Happy Feet", but the film has more in store. We get to see the world mainly from Remmy's perspective, and it's visually exciting. The camera-work is what makes the film's physical humor work so well. More on the artistic scheme, the film looks really great. Particularly the lighting stands out. The colors are very lush and detailed; very accurate toward a real city-scape. Then the rat's fur are very impressive, it moves against the wind and gets wet very much like real rat hair. Don't let the detail in the clothes get past you either. The film manages to find a balance between superficial realism and animated characters. The character designs for the humans are marvelous (Bird seems to get much humor out of the smaller villains as seen in the past "Incredibles" and the non-Pixar film "Shrek") and the rats, while moving a lot like real rats still have acceptable personalities and animated form. So we feel like we're entering an animated world that is fleshy and real. Speaking of such, other animated marvels are the organic forms of the food. As real as the food in the film is, the film rightfully capture the spirit of the plot it pursues. It introduces the viewer into the world of fine-dinning and develops something rare in today's animation, a bleeding heart.
Story-wise, that's the only area where I can detect any trace of criticism. I felt at times, dare I say it, that the emotion was a little bit forced. There were just certain times I didn't understand a certain character's frustration. Also, I felt uneasy about the films unusual balance of fantasy and realistic themes, such as how the reactions to rats were carried our toward the end of the film and how it blends into the films major theme and other suspend disbelief occurrences. That lack of coherent continuity gives a writer a lot more flexibility in how to tell the story. In other words, it's kind of a shortcut. But it's an observation that is made up for by other successes in the film. The film very impressively for an animated film delivers some conventional themes with a little more depth (to truly enjoy it, I'd recommend erasing the fact that rats often carry disease from your mind). It's cute without embarrassingly forcing it and unpretentious. The very fact that what makes it work may fly over the heads of small children isn't a reason to condemn it. It's true though that I feel that younger kids may get a little restless halfway though, and not just through my own experience at the theater. however, this is another great film for an older audience to enjoy a simple well told story. As for whether it will have that lasting effect that Pixar films usually carry, only time will tell.
Story-wise, that's the only area where I can detect any trace of criticism. I felt at times, dare I say it, that the emotion was a little bit forced. There were just certain times I didn't understand a certain character's frustration. Also, I felt uneasy about the films unusual balance of fantasy and realistic themes, such as how the reactions to rats were carried our toward the end of the film and how it blends into the films major theme and other suspend disbelief occurrences. That lack of coherent continuity gives a writer a lot more flexibility in how to tell the story. In other words, it's kind of a shortcut. But it's an observation that is made up for by other successes in the film. The film very impressively for an animated film delivers some conventional themes with a little more depth (to truly enjoy it, I'd recommend erasing the fact that rats often carry disease from your mind). It's cute without embarrassingly forcing it and unpretentious. The very fact that what makes it work may fly over the heads of small children isn't a reason to condemn it. It's true though that I feel that younger kids may get a little restless halfway though, and not just through my own experience at the theater. however, this is another great film for an older audience to enjoy a simple well told story. As for whether it will have that lasting effect that Pixar films usually carry, only time will tell.
Surf's Up
(2007)
I will not comment on Happy Feet in this review
8 June 2007
They both have penguins. Big Deal. Whoops...does that count as a comment? Anyway, "Surfs Up" is not a terribly original but fresh and new hilarious comedy just in time to kick off summer. Shot in a unique mocumentary style (that may possibly fly over the heads of youngsters), the visuals are flashy and the look of the film digests well. Water animation seems to be rapidly progressing. The sand forms foot prints. The palm fronds sway in the wind. The film looks great. The story is a cliché, and we know what will happen in the end. The point of the film isn't however to construct philosophical debate, have an amazing story or even create memorable characters. It's a fun comedy, and it's humor is more sophisticated then other past animated comedies such are "Shrek 3". It has a more subtle reflexive quality. We know the story, the characters, and we know the familiar plot (quite like last year's "Cars"), but it isn't the fact that they're penguins that makes the film funny. We only get a few moments were the penguins act "penguiny". They are what they are for pure aesthetic value. A bipedal animal (perfect for surfing) that usually dwells among ice makes for a more pleasing artistic scope. And we're bored with humans. The film succeeds with it's sense of wit. A character like tank, another reflexive villainous character like Peter La Fleur from "Dodgeball", is a hoot to watch. The same for main protagonist Cody Maverick, a familiar trophy craving teen who is easily out of place amongst the elders. The film will win no Oscars, but animated films need not be restricted to epic stories and exercises in perfection. However, it is rather uncomfortable that the genre in America is restricting itself to this type of humor. Or really, does all animation have to be humorous even? But, at least this film takes the convention one step further. The documentary style doesn't wear out its welcome or include any truly objectable material for a PG film, and with a sparing running time of 85 minutes, it's fun to see something different.
My Neighbor Totoro
(1988)
There should be more films like this
5 June 2007
So simple, so poetic. Two young girls move to the country and discover to helpful furry friends. "My Neighbor Tortoro" is a celebration of childhood and imagination and the film is executed brilliantly. The plot is the least of the film's worries. It just goes with the flow, and yet it's fully allowed to. The major conflict in the film doesn't arrive until past the middle, but its odd narrative is more of its subtle beauty. Without to much apparent conflict, we're invited to watch the flashes of fish in the river and uncover odd critters that live in the attic. And so, the magic in the film subtly blends with childhood discovery. There's tadpoles in a puddle, and cute little critters that disappear when chased. There's a big critter with an inviting stomach. The hand painted fluid and organic animation is beyond gorgeous and very appropriate for the earthy flair to this film. Speaking of earth, I find films like these to be the best advocates of environmental protection. We're not padded over the head with anything, but the image of a bottle in a clear lake leaves a strong impact to all viewers. That of course is just another side theme in the film, the importance of nature, and more importantly, it's a non-objectable message. It breaths for me like a painting, and yet the atmosphere is so relaxing and engaging. I don't hesitate to accept the world the little girls create/experience. The messages are those that everyone can relate to. I never grew up Japan (or found any magical creatures that I can remember), but I could certainly identify with the film's two main characters. And if you didn't have a great childhood, sit back and enjoy the adventures of the two eager little girls in this wonderful little film that's also a landmark in animation.
Porco Rosso
(1992)
Another Miyazaki film that defies conventional feebleness
5 June 2007
Another home run for Miyazaki, Porco Rosso epitomizes what makes his films so superior. Here, Miyizaki breaks from his brilliant fantastical films for a more real metaphorical adventure, adding to his great body of work. The ending is somewhat predictable, but we don't anticipate the conclusion, we enjoy the ride there. Porco, a self-important bounty hunter is cursed with the look of a pig, but the appearance seems to be the least of his personality problems. The way the characters interact in the film brings out the beauty of the subtle metaphor. Much more attention is focused on Porco's character then his appearance, and with good reason. The other characters in the film are spirited and multi-layered. One admirable thing that occurs in many Miyazaki's films is the absence of a pure evil villain. We can just sit back and enjoy everyone, flaws and all. Life.
Underneath this charming little tale, there's something profound lurking beneath the surface. What succeeds in the story is suitably matched by the animation. I'm not into planes myself, but the battle scenes displayed in the film were done marvelously. I was instantly engaged into this whimsical world that feels as natural as the reactions toward Porcco's appearance in the film. This film also has the greatest sense of humor I've seen from a Miyazaki film. A light touch that's just accessible to everyone. This is my first non-fantasy from the great director. Seeing this just increased my faith in the talent of the director. It's much more of a drama despite Porco's questionable 'curse'. All in all, this is just what makes the film leave a bigger impact. A superb accomplishment in story-telling and characterization that easily joins the ranks of "My Neighbor Tortoro" and "Toy Story" as some of the greatest artworks for children of all time.
Underneath this charming little tale, there's something profound lurking beneath the surface. What succeeds in the story is suitably matched by the animation. I'm not into planes myself, but the battle scenes displayed in the film were done marvelously. I was instantly engaged into this whimsical world that feels as natural as the reactions toward Porcco's appearance in the film. This film also has the greatest sense of humor I've seen from a Miyazaki film. A light touch that's just accessible to everyone. This is my first non-fantasy from the great director. Seeing this just increased my faith in the talent of the director. It's much more of a drama despite Porco's questionable 'curse'. All in all, this is just what makes the film leave a bigger impact. A superb accomplishment in story-telling and characterization that easily joins the ranks of "My Neighbor Tortoro" and "Toy Story" as some of the greatest artworks for children of all time.
Lady and the Tramp
(1955)
Lame Ending
19 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This is my opinion. There's no such thing as a great film with a terrible ending.This is the reason why "Lady and the Tramp" remains to me one of the worst films ever to ever some out of the Disney animation studios and be considered a "classic". Although I must admit, this film has always been one of those treasured classics of my youth. I thought I'd revisit the magic. An hour into it, I relived the "magic" all the way to the famous spaghetti scene. Disney at its best. I just didn't remember the ending, and now I know why. It was a complete and utter cop out that made no sense. From the beginning, we view Lady growing up from a frisky young pup to a sophisticated "lady" only to be swept off her feat and seduced by a street-wise Tramp. Their courtship lead to the inevitable, and so everything is great until Lady finds out more about her new bo, the obvious. What causes us to buy any redemption in Tramp's character? The big conclusion is, Tramp becomes a hero by defeating a challenging opponent...a rat. Before we know it, the film has cut to Lady draped over her new companion with babies. I have a hard time believing a rat would be considered a big opponent to overpower for a dog, but even if so, it doesn't excuse the lack of development in the characters, which is replaced by some lousy deus ex machina. And so there it is. The conflict is really never resolved. We see no evolution in both of the characters. That abrupt cut at the end defeats the purpose of the whole film. With some charming moments, that I'm now believing to have been motivated by some more dog-like desires, the film is a nothing film due to some bad writing. The rat doesn't help.
Shrek the Third
(2007)
Well I had fun
19 May 2007
If you judge "Shrek 3" on its own, it isn't as terrible as some seem to think it. Sure, the film is pointless and mediocre, dismembers some of the qualities that made use fall in love with the characters in the first place, uses babies as an excuse for another film and merchandising...yikes that doesn't sound so good. But the truth is, I was entertained by this film that seemed like a really good straight to video sequel. It's humor sure was clever enough to exceed "Shark Tale". Perhaps that isn't a huge compliment, but the animation is up to its usual quality and, to my delightful surprise, the new additions to the Shrek cast didn't overtake the story of have any moments of grating 'cuteness'. The film still has those laugh out loud moments.But still, this film doesn't touch "Shrek" and even dwells in the shadow of the less stunning "Shrek 2".I think this film is a clear sign that the series should come to an end. The writers have run out of ideas, and another attempt would surly be another weak attempt that would have to be condemned. The whole film is treated as seriously as Fiona's amphibious dad's death. When I left the theater, I didn't come out thinking I'd just seen one of the most anticipated films of the year, and if it wasn't for the hordes of children around me, I surely wouldn't have given it a second thought. Still, the film is worth seeing...once.
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
(1988)
Sutured with care
19 May 2007
By some kind of miracle, "Who Frammed Roger Rabbit" received a PG rating despite its very dark themes, segments of non-cartoonish violence, and prominent sexuality. This very fact made it hard for me to enjoy this well-crafted film-noir. But even if the film had received an appropriate rating, nothing would excuse its divergence from the supposed nature of cartoons in the film. The 'toons' are supposed to exist to make people laugh, but character Jessica Rabbit has grotesque features very much aimed toward her sexual parts, like she was conceived from some beyond help geekoid. Sure I remember the hilarious "Little Red Riding Hood" shorts that involved a very frisky wolf, but Rabbit's character was emphasized so disturbingly beyond her importance as the femme fatale in this mock film-noir. I wasn't laughing. Still, there are very clever homages to the nature of 'toons' (and underlying tones that allude to racism and genocide) that make the film work. The toons are blended so realistically into the story, technically and thematically, that I will praise it for such. Loopy cartoons and 1940's film noir should be wholly analogous to each other, but here they work to a level that makes it feel like this genre has always existed. This idea does much favor to the film's aesthetic appeal, and the animation appears to be computer animated with its use of shadow, despite the dark tone coloring. It was certainly a technical achievement. I'm sure the film inspired future efforts of the odd mixing of defined groups of entertainment, "Happy Feet", "Space Jam" and "Shrek" all come to mind, the latter being one of the better films in my opinion. So certainly, it is a big contribution to the animation medium.
Cat City
(1986)
Just a light film
18 May 2007
This film took me a while to watch I must admit. Despite its Hungarian roots, I felt like I 've seen this film before...when I was about 8. Aside from the proficient spoofs of Bond movies, which I admit I don't have a serious interest in, the film doesn't seem to appear to aim for anything more then comedy aimed at those who do. The animation was very reminiscent of the animation from the 60's, in which I wouldn't place to much blame on a small budget film like this. But the movie doesn't survive in any advanced cleverness, at least from my American point of view. There were some moments when I chuckled. The film isn't completely devoid of intelligence, and the characterization, mostly with the antagonists, is strong. In fact, they earned the most laughs, specifically the troop of rats hired to take out the James Bond-like mouse hero and the bumbling cats who hired them. Many of the character designs and situations are imaginative. I also like the scene with the bats and the smooth saxophone music. There is a chance the English dub (no other choice on the DVD) is of lesser quality, but I think it's obvious that the film isn't easily accessible outside its intended audience. All in all, not really a must see for animation fans. It just doesn't stand up well on its own.
Tell Your Friends