Mrs. Speculator and I have been excited about WALL-E for some time, finding the trailers to be engaging and cute, and relying on the cachet that just coming from Pixar brings to a movie. And of course, the reviews for WALL-E have been huge, describing it as one of the best movies of the year. So it was with big expectations that we took our nephew to the movie this past week. And we all enjoyed it a good bit, but I appear to be in something of a minority when I suggest that it isn't all that it was made out to be.
First, the good news: the animation, especially in the scenes that take place on Earth, is just spectacular. Except for WALL-E's friend the cockroach, everything on Earth is animated in a super-realistic fashion. If you've seen the trailers where WALL-E is chased by grocery carts, they are great evidence of the verisimilitude of the animation. Of course, this leads to wondering about the value of animation for the viewer if it is so life-like that it can't be distinguished from real actors, but that's a subject for another time. Suffice to say that the animation is engrossing and absorbing so that when they end up on a spaceship with people animated not so meticulously, it's a little bit jarring.
And there is WALL-E himself. He is a thoroughly engaging character, expressing more personality than any other characters in the film. The much-discussed first half-hour of the movie, with its lack of dialogue, is an extended set piece spent filling out the character of WALL-E (and the problems with Earth to some degree). WALL-E may be the perfect naïf, expressing what is best about people without any of their foibles or faults. I'm reminded to some degree of the best Charlie Chaplin films, where generally the naïve hero is just moving along innocently in his life's patterns until something disturbs them and he has to cope. That WALL-E's emotional foundation comes from repeated viewings of Hello Dolly! only enhances his naiveté a well as giving the animators opportunities to have WALL-E dance.
WALL-E's love interest, EVE, is initially less developed than WALL-E, but she grows into a more fully realized character as the film moves along. She has purpose beyond WALL-E's single-minded devotion, and is often faced with difficult choices that resonate with audiences of all ages. The viewer expects that she will persevere and manage to save the human race as well as WALL-E, but it is the verve with which she acts and the setting of those actions that sets this film apart. I think a really strong argument could be made that she is the true hero of WALL-E, much as the hero of Rain Man is Raymond's brother rather than the Rain Man himself.
Unfortunately, the glowing reviews of WALL-E generally indicated that this was a message movie, and I had expected denser plot and a moral, much like Ratatouille. However, this is not a complicated movie at all, with a really straightforward plot. I find myself arguing with myself that this should not be considered a weakness for the movie, and am slowly winning that battle. But while engaged with the animation, brighter viewers may not be quite so with its basic premise that "good guys always win out in the end." I've seen articles with people expressing concern about the movies views on commercialism and obesity, but those are not what the movie is focused upon. That the Earth cannot sustain life is a fairly standard science-fiction trope and how we get to that state is never explicitly stated. That the world seems dominated by a single global corporation is also fairly common in science fiction and the source for more humor than any diatribes. And if anyone complains about the obesity of the humans aboard the starship Axiom, they missed the explanation given by the movie—extended stays in space remove bone mass. Laziness and corporate sloth is not the cause of the humans' appearance, it is the effect of a scientific premise that the movie deftly explains.
Ultimately I find myself making two comparisons. First, I can't help thinking of Ratatouille, perhaps my favorite movie of 2007: WALL-E is animated far more realistically and meticulously (which is saying a great deal given how stunning the animation for Ratatouille is), but its story is not nearly so engaging. Its main character is equally loveable but not nearly so developed as Remy in Ratatouille. I also find myself making mental comparisons with the 70s science fiction film, Silent Running. Again, the backdrop is an Earth in the midst of an ecological disaster, and again humans and robots must work together to try to save mankind. There are as many differences in the movies as there are similarities, but the lasting images from both of them are the robots stars as metaphors for the goodness inherent in their human masters.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
The Incredible hulk
And so, with moderate fanfare and some head-scratching, Marvel decided to do a remake of The Hulk, this time letting you know it was going to be much better than its 2003 incarnation by adjectivizing its title: The Incredible Hulk. Of course, "much better" is relative. I find that I am in a minority when I talk about how much I actually liked the 2003 incarnation. Despite the advertisements, the earlier version was about much more than "Hulk smash": it spent some time dealing with the psychological circumstances that led to their being a Hulk, basing it on good part (it seemed to me) on Peter David's wonderful run on the comic. Unfortunately, the weighty mass of preconception that came with just the name "Hulk" combined with aggressive advertisements that focused on fight scenes created expectations that Hulk would just be a video game brought to film. So its slow and artistic moments, its character development, were lost on the fanboys who wanted to see destruction and mayhem. This is not to say it was a brilliant film—it certainly had some flaws—but that I enjoyed it and its potential and found it to be better than the general response to it would indicate.
My nephew and I went to see this latest incarnation last week, him looking forward to carnage and mayhem and me trying to get past the comparison automatically set up in my head. I suppose it's a good thing that, in that comparison's place, The Incredible Hulk spends a lot of time trying to formulate a different comparison, one with the 70s TV show starring Bill Bixby. The opening credits are a flashback sequence, giving a pictorial background to the story—and Edward Norton is doing exactly the Bill Bixby routine as he is irradiated, using a bright green set of crosshairs that aim directly for his forehead. Later in the movie, we get to see Bill Bixby in a cameo clip from The Courtship of Eddie's Father, and we even get to see a hitch-hiking Bruce Banner, trudging through the rain beside a highway, while the memorable hook from the TV show's theme song is played. All of these are a reminder to the audience that this movie is a tragedy—like the TV show, this story is about a man trying to overcome his personal demons that send him into a psychopathic rage and destroys any meaningful relationship he tries to have. Of course, a thoughtful analysis of the first movie would point out that that's exactly what it was about as well.
Edward Norton is pretty solid as the unwilling Bruce Banner. It doesn't take a lot of effort to have a range of emotion from mopey to thoughtfully depressed. Everything Banner does is suffused with a sort of weariness, as if he has done it all before and it's all going to fail; imagine Eeyore as an alter ego. It's only in the action sequences when he shows any other emotion, and even then it is generally limited to panic. Banner is also not a very deep character, but then, delving into the roots of the character is what supposedly killed the first movie incarnation. William Hurt does a fine job of scene-chewing as General Thunderbolt Ross, but again the role does not call for a lot of range as an actor. Hurt is especially strong when he repeats his self-promoting lies as his rationale for chasing Banner and the Hulk. Unlike the TV show however, Ross, as the Hulk's persecutor, never really gets his comeuppance and sort of fades away at the end of the movie, ineffectual and a target of derision for the cameo appearance of Robert Downey, Jr., as Tony Stark. Liv Tyler, as Betty Ross, is petulant and pouty…except before she finds Banner is back in her life. There is a lot missing here—fans of the comics know the relationship between Betty and Bruce, but if you are not up on the relationship, you have to assume a lot. Clearly Banner cares for Betty, but it's not clear for the majority of the movie whether or not this is a spoken affection or if he has hidden it from her. And though it seems pretty clear, there is still room for argument. They spend a lot of time not talking about themselves though there clearly is some emotion between them. It's just never really clearly defined, which may bug people who don't know the story.
Unfortunately, Tim Roth is woefully miscast as Emil Blonsky. It's clear that Blonsky is a bulldog type of character, never letting go of anything until it is defeated. But even when Roth is in his uniform, he doesn't look anything like a black ops soldier. He's short and not very developed…and why would an American soldier have such a broad English accent? Similarly, Tim Blake Nelson is a strange casting for Dr. Samuel Sterns, to whom Banner turns for help in resolving his radiation problem. Nelson is manic in his performance, a geek on speed, and mostly a distraction from the events of his scenes. I'm not saying his role requires subtlety, but he overwhelms what are supposed to be tense moments with Jerry Lewis-like mannerisms: I kept expecting him to paw Liv Tyler and shout "Lay-deeee!"
So, The Incredible Hulk has a lot of one-dimensional roles and a storyline that does not separate itself from earlier incarnations. That leaves the special effects. And frankly, they're "meh." There are three and a half fight/chase scenes, one not involving the Hulk at all (Banner being pursued over the rooftops of a city in Brazil) and the half involving a firefight between Blonsky's team and a Hulk who is never clearly seen. Of the two remaining, the fight on campus is the best, as Hulk tries to overcome the technology that Ross and Blonsky throw at him, including sonic guns. And the much ballyhooed fight between the Hulk and the Abomination just doesn't make sense. I expect a few liberties to be taken with science, but the ones used in the movie are extreme. And the tactics that Ross and the supposedly well-trained Blonsky employ are just ludicrous. At one point, Ross and his helicopter pursue the Abomination across the rooftops of Harlem, firing 50-caliber machine gun shells into the roofs of apartment buildings without any qualms. It was more than my suspended disbelief could handle.
What I left the movie with was a deep sense of ambivalence. It was a diverting way to spend an afternoon perhaps, but even my Marvel zombie nephew just sort of shrugged this movie off. There was very little memorable about it, and I suspect that has nothing to do with the acting, but the writing. It's not even very good eye candy.
My nephew and I went to see this latest incarnation last week, him looking forward to carnage and mayhem and me trying to get past the comparison automatically set up in my head. I suppose it's a good thing that, in that comparison's place, The Incredible Hulk spends a lot of time trying to formulate a different comparison, one with the 70s TV show starring Bill Bixby. The opening credits are a flashback sequence, giving a pictorial background to the story—and Edward Norton is doing exactly the Bill Bixby routine as he is irradiated, using a bright green set of crosshairs that aim directly for his forehead. Later in the movie, we get to see Bill Bixby in a cameo clip from The Courtship of Eddie's Father, and we even get to see a hitch-hiking Bruce Banner, trudging through the rain beside a highway, while the memorable hook from the TV show's theme song is played. All of these are a reminder to the audience that this movie is a tragedy—like the TV show, this story is about a man trying to overcome his personal demons that send him into a psychopathic rage and destroys any meaningful relationship he tries to have. Of course, a thoughtful analysis of the first movie would point out that that's exactly what it was about as well.
Edward Norton is pretty solid as the unwilling Bruce Banner. It doesn't take a lot of effort to have a range of emotion from mopey to thoughtfully depressed. Everything Banner does is suffused with a sort of weariness, as if he has done it all before and it's all going to fail; imagine Eeyore as an alter ego. It's only in the action sequences when he shows any other emotion, and even then it is generally limited to panic. Banner is also not a very deep character, but then, delving into the roots of the character is what supposedly killed the first movie incarnation. William Hurt does a fine job of scene-chewing as General Thunderbolt Ross, but again the role does not call for a lot of range as an actor. Hurt is especially strong when he repeats his self-promoting lies as his rationale for chasing Banner and the Hulk. Unlike the TV show however, Ross, as the Hulk's persecutor, never really gets his comeuppance and sort of fades away at the end of the movie, ineffectual and a target of derision for the cameo appearance of Robert Downey, Jr., as Tony Stark. Liv Tyler, as Betty Ross, is petulant and pouty…except before she finds Banner is back in her life. There is a lot missing here—fans of the comics know the relationship between Betty and Bruce, but if you are not up on the relationship, you have to assume a lot. Clearly Banner cares for Betty, but it's not clear for the majority of the movie whether or not this is a spoken affection or if he has hidden it from her. And though it seems pretty clear, there is still room for argument. They spend a lot of time not talking about themselves though there clearly is some emotion between them. It's just never really clearly defined, which may bug people who don't know the story.
Unfortunately, Tim Roth is woefully miscast as Emil Blonsky. It's clear that Blonsky is a bulldog type of character, never letting go of anything until it is defeated. But even when Roth is in his uniform, he doesn't look anything like a black ops soldier. He's short and not very developed…and why would an American soldier have such a broad English accent? Similarly, Tim Blake Nelson is a strange casting for Dr. Samuel Sterns, to whom Banner turns for help in resolving his radiation problem. Nelson is manic in his performance, a geek on speed, and mostly a distraction from the events of his scenes. I'm not saying his role requires subtlety, but he overwhelms what are supposed to be tense moments with Jerry Lewis-like mannerisms: I kept expecting him to paw Liv Tyler and shout "Lay-deeee!"
So, The Incredible Hulk has a lot of one-dimensional roles and a storyline that does not separate itself from earlier incarnations. That leaves the special effects. And frankly, they're "meh." There are three and a half fight/chase scenes, one not involving the Hulk at all (Banner being pursued over the rooftops of a city in Brazil) and the half involving a firefight between Blonsky's team and a Hulk who is never clearly seen. Of the two remaining, the fight on campus is the best, as Hulk tries to overcome the technology that Ross and Blonsky throw at him, including sonic guns. And the much ballyhooed fight between the Hulk and the Abomination just doesn't make sense. I expect a few liberties to be taken with science, but the ones used in the movie are extreme. And the tactics that Ross and the supposedly well-trained Blonsky employ are just ludicrous. At one point, Ross and his helicopter pursue the Abomination across the rooftops of Harlem, firing 50-caliber machine gun shells into the roofs of apartment buildings without any qualms. It was more than my suspended disbelief could handle.
What I left the movie with was a deep sense of ambivalence. It was a diverting way to spend an afternoon perhaps, but even my Marvel zombie nephew just sort of shrugged this movie off. There was very little memorable about it, and I suspect that has nothing to do with the acting, but the writing. It's not even very good eye candy.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Kung Fu Panda
I have documented here my growing interest in the current run of martial arts films, which, as I think about it, seems to run a broad gamut—from the epics like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Hero to some of the more comic ones, like Kung Fu Hustle. I've never seen any of the so-called chop-socky movies, in part because when they were played on Saturday afternoons when I was a child, I had no interest in what appeared to me to be really poorly put together films on the cheap (which also explains why I've never sat through an entire episode of Doctor Who not made in the 21st century). But now that I have seen the heights that can be reached with the martial arts genre, my horizons have expanded, and I'm willing to take some risks. In fact, Mrs. Speculator and I are looking at using our new DVD subscription service to find some of the better made chop-socky movies.
So along comes Kung Fu Panda, right in my wheelhouse. First, it's animated, and it takes a great deal for me not to see first-run (that is to say "first in a series") animated movies. I haven't seen Madagascar or Ice Age because the subject matter just did not appeal to me, but I'm pretty up to date with everything in the last decade (except Persepolis, which wasn't here long enough for me to catch…must add to movie queue). And it's got Jack Black, a man whose comic talents I have admired since what I consider to be his break-out movie, High Fidelity. And it appears to want to follow the growing tradition of serious-minded or seriously-intentioned martial arts movies. And yeah, it's got a panda. Who doesn't love pandas? But more importantly, it's got a snow leopard!
The movie starts with what is clearly a dream sequence, as Po the panda (voiced by Jack Black) saves his town from marauders, getting the attention and then admiration of the Furious Five, students in the local dojo and each representative of their school of kung fu—mantis, snake, crane, monkey, and tiger. The animation in this sequence is breath-taking, stylish in the way that the very best Samurai Jack episodes are stylish and engrossing. I was jarred as the dream sequence comes to an end, as they all must, and the animation resorts to what is more like the standard CGI we see in animation today. This is not to say that the animation is not lush and beautiful, but it is distinctly western and, well, normal, compared to how the movie starts.
Then we are given the back story for Po, the son of a noodle merchant who idolizes the Furious Five, who really are heroes in his home town. When the local dojo master, Oogway (voiced by Randall Duk Kim), has a vision that an old enemy is about to escape from prison, he decides it is time to name the Dragon Master, the martial artist who will be given "the secret to ultimate power." The town gathers at the dojo to watch the tournament, fully expecting one of the Furious Five to be named. Po tries to attend, but comic forces keep him from arriving on time to get a seat, and his Wiley Coyote attempts to get in the dojo result in him gathering Oogway's attention and ultimately the title of Dragon Master.
For Po, this is a dream come true. For the inscrutable Oogway, it is circumstances simply as they must be. But for Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) and the Furious Five, it is an abomination and they are dead set to have Po quit his training so that a real hero can step and save the town from its potential destruction. Shifu terrorizes and mocks Po, and the Furious Five attempt to ignore him. And meanwhile Tai Lung the snow leopard (voiced by the awesome Ian McShane) does escape from prison and is makes his way to the valley.
What follows is, in some ways, pretty predictable. Shifu and the Furious Five learn lessons about judging books/pandas by their covers. Po learns to believe in himself. And Oogway remains inscrutably zen. But along the way, some pretty amazing things happen: we learn the back story of Shifu and Tai Lung, told in flashback and employing a third animation style, a sort of mix between the dream sequence and the "normal" mode. Shifu is gently scolded by Oogway, then figures out the methods by which he can train Po to meet his potential as the Dragon Master. And there is just stunning martial arts, beautifully choreographed and then animated, lovingly mixed into the story. My only real regret is that we are given hints that the Furious Five have individual personalities, but they are never developed very far. It's a shame as several of them feel as though they could support their own movies, but they really are more plot devices than characters in this story.
I'll not give away any spoilers, but the movie really doesn't do anything surprising plot-wise. But it is the characterization and the stunning animation that make this so wonderful. It simply is lovingly crafted and a joy to watch, even as it goes where it has to go. Somehow, amazingly, Black and Hoffman seem to have a good chemistry that works through their characters and also add to the sense of fun that pervades the movie. And it has one other feature that makes it stand out against a lot of current animation, which was pointed out to me by other reviewers: the humor is confined to the movie. There are no references to our non-animated world that jar you from the setting of Kung Fu Panda. While such moments are funny, part of their humor comes from the disjunction of a fantasy character making references to 21st century pop culture. Kung Fu Panda instead relies on its own story and its craft in telling the story, to grow jokes from the ground up, making the movie that much more timeless in its theme and effort. The best Pixar movies operate in the same way, and it's nice that that philosophy has moved from just that studio.
So, while its story is generally light and airy, Kung Fu Panda is extremely well told, and its animation ranks up there with the work in Ratatouille, though not as complicated. I strongly recommend this movie, not just as an appetizer for the upcoming WALL-E but for its own virtues. I can easily see owning this and going back to it on occasion, much as we do for The Incredibles and will for Ratatouille.
So along comes Kung Fu Panda, right in my wheelhouse. First, it's animated, and it takes a great deal for me not to see first-run (that is to say "first in a series") animated movies. I haven't seen Madagascar or Ice Age because the subject matter just did not appeal to me, but I'm pretty up to date with everything in the last decade (except Persepolis, which wasn't here long enough for me to catch…must add to movie queue). And it's got Jack Black, a man whose comic talents I have admired since what I consider to be his break-out movie, High Fidelity. And it appears to want to follow the growing tradition of serious-minded or seriously-intentioned martial arts movies. And yeah, it's got a panda. Who doesn't love pandas? But more importantly, it's got a snow leopard!
The movie starts with what is clearly a dream sequence, as Po the panda (voiced by Jack Black) saves his town from marauders, getting the attention and then admiration of the Furious Five, students in the local dojo and each representative of their school of kung fu—mantis, snake, crane, monkey, and tiger. The animation in this sequence is breath-taking, stylish in the way that the very best Samurai Jack episodes are stylish and engrossing. I was jarred as the dream sequence comes to an end, as they all must, and the animation resorts to what is more like the standard CGI we see in animation today. This is not to say that the animation is not lush and beautiful, but it is distinctly western and, well, normal, compared to how the movie starts.
Then we are given the back story for Po, the son of a noodle merchant who idolizes the Furious Five, who really are heroes in his home town. When the local dojo master, Oogway (voiced by Randall Duk Kim), has a vision that an old enemy is about to escape from prison, he decides it is time to name the Dragon Master, the martial artist who will be given "the secret to ultimate power." The town gathers at the dojo to watch the tournament, fully expecting one of the Furious Five to be named. Po tries to attend, but comic forces keep him from arriving on time to get a seat, and his Wiley Coyote attempts to get in the dojo result in him gathering Oogway's attention and ultimately the title of Dragon Master.
For Po, this is a dream come true. For the inscrutable Oogway, it is circumstances simply as they must be. But for Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) and the Furious Five, it is an abomination and they are dead set to have Po quit his training so that a real hero can step and save the town from its potential destruction. Shifu terrorizes and mocks Po, and the Furious Five attempt to ignore him. And meanwhile Tai Lung the snow leopard (voiced by the awesome Ian McShane) does escape from prison and is makes his way to the valley.
What follows is, in some ways, pretty predictable. Shifu and the Furious Five learn lessons about judging books/pandas by their covers. Po learns to believe in himself. And Oogway remains inscrutably zen. But along the way, some pretty amazing things happen: we learn the back story of Shifu and Tai Lung, told in flashback and employing a third animation style, a sort of mix between the dream sequence and the "normal" mode. Shifu is gently scolded by Oogway, then figures out the methods by which he can train Po to meet his potential as the Dragon Master. And there is just stunning martial arts, beautifully choreographed and then animated, lovingly mixed into the story. My only real regret is that we are given hints that the Furious Five have individual personalities, but they are never developed very far. It's a shame as several of them feel as though they could support their own movies, but they really are more plot devices than characters in this story.
I'll not give away any spoilers, but the movie really doesn't do anything surprising plot-wise. But it is the characterization and the stunning animation that make this so wonderful. It simply is lovingly crafted and a joy to watch, even as it goes where it has to go. Somehow, amazingly, Black and Hoffman seem to have a good chemistry that works through their characters and also add to the sense of fun that pervades the movie. And it has one other feature that makes it stand out against a lot of current animation, which was pointed out to me by other reviewers: the humor is confined to the movie. There are no references to our non-animated world that jar you from the setting of Kung Fu Panda. While such moments are funny, part of their humor comes from the disjunction of a fantasy character making references to 21st century pop culture. Kung Fu Panda instead relies on its own story and its craft in telling the story, to grow jokes from the ground up, making the movie that much more timeless in its theme and effort. The best Pixar movies operate in the same way, and it's nice that that philosophy has moved from just that studio.
So, while its story is generally light and airy, Kung Fu Panda is extremely well told, and its animation ranks up there with the work in Ratatouille, though not as complicated. I strongly recommend this movie, not just as an appetizer for the upcoming WALL-E but for its own virtues. I can easily see owning this and going back to it on occasion, much as we do for The Incredibles and will for Ratatouille.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
A couple of days before going to see this movie, I had the misfortune of having the entire thing spoiled for me in an online forum. One effect of that was to work harder to clearly indicate when I would be giving spoiler information about books and movies. The other was to make me very scared. It seems things are moving along in the Indiana Jones universe. As much as we might like, we cannot randomly return to the setting of these adventures and expect Indy to always be in his 30s and fighting the good fight. If this were a book or comic series, it would be easy to shoe-horn stories between existing adventures. But actors get older and trying to use make-up or CGI to make them appear far younger for the length of an entire movie is, among other things, too depressing to conceive.
It's clear from the outset that the wheel has turned. No longer is Indy dealing with Nazis or unscrupulous collectors—the enemy this time is the Soviet Union and all the evil they signified in 1957. And pretty early on, we can see that there is a shift in the danger Indy faces as well, as KGB agents led by Cate Blanchett break into America's warehouse of weirdness for a specific object, while ignoring the Ark of the Covenant, the centerpiece of the movie that got all the attention. No longer is mysticism the focus of Indy's work; it is technology that turns the world now, and the Russians wants what we have. If this isn't clear enough, the first extended chase scene is closed with the 20th century's worst nightmare, the explosion of an atomic bomb. The faces of mannequins burn off in a subtle allusion to the close of Raiders of the Lost Ark, when that same Ark melts the faces of Nazis who presume too much.
Unfortunately, the story has to deal with the years since we last saw Indy. We find out that he fought for the OSS in World War II, continuing his escapades and receiving may honors for them. This is not enough, however, to keep the taint of the red scare from him; since he has now dealt with KGB agents, the CIA has no way of ensuring his loyalty and so they black-list him. On his way to his new job, he is found by Mutt Williams (Shia LaBeouf) who has come to him at his mother's direction to enlist Indy to rescue her from her kidnappers (that it is the same KGB agents really comes as no surprise). And off they go to the Amazon (completing another interesting circle with the opening of the first movie) to find Mutt's mother and friend.
What follows is the standard series of adventures based on the slimmest of clues. While Indy is once again brilliant in his deduction, it becomes painfully obvious that he is pretty clueless about people. This is not a side of him with which we are familiar: we know he is focused when on an adventure, but he is actually written to be pretty obtuse about personal matters here. It's not really a problem—more of a quirk—and his lack of deduction allows major reveals to come as surprises to some of the audience. The storytelling is wonderfully fun, hearkening back to the set pieces that were so exciting in the earlier films. And the CGI work is breathtaking, in a much more understated way than in most summer blockbusters. Unfortunately those set pieces skew a little close to earlier works of Lucas and Spielberg, enough to actually become something of a distraction, but not enough to ruin the movie for me.
What I find most interesting is the clamor against the general direction of the conclusion of the adventure. To be hoest, it was this that had me worried when it was spoiled for me. But all I can say is that it works for me. I would have preferred something in the tenor of the first three films, but I understand why the movie went where it went, so long as the movie is considered as the end of a generation. Again, paranormal is replaced with technology. At one point Indy mourns his father and companion Marcus, while at another he reminisces about his adventures as a child (a nice reference to the unfairly ignored series, Young Indiana Jones). The movie concludes with a new day dawning, both in the general thrust of the adventures of Indy and in his personal life. The door has been closed on a chapter of history and culture marches on.
Harrison Ford is stalwart as Indy, fitting back into the role much as into a pair of comfortable slippers. LaBoeuf is solid as Mutt, a young man who has interesting traits that make him something more than the standard sidekick. Karen Allen is also good in her return as Marian Ravenwood. Blanchett chews the scenery nicely as the lead KGB agent with an interest in unexplainable phenomenon. It is clear that the door remains open for a new series of films featuring Mutt, but it is my hope that they are never made. The series has progressed from the classic 30s and 40s serials to the campy B-grade science fiction movies of the 50s and early 60s. It is a natural progression and Mutt a fine character for them. But the focus of the series has been Indy, and he has entered a more relaxed place in his life—including a cushy new position. The potential for further adventures for him is apparent, but the character is only going to get older and become something of a self-mockery. I'm fine with the place that the series ends up.
Now if they want to figure out a way to tell some of the stories of Indy in the OSS, that would be something worth seeing.
It's clear from the outset that the wheel has turned. No longer is Indy dealing with Nazis or unscrupulous collectors—the enemy this time is the Soviet Union and all the evil they signified in 1957. And pretty early on, we can see that there is a shift in the danger Indy faces as well, as KGB agents led by Cate Blanchett break into America's warehouse of weirdness for a specific object, while ignoring the Ark of the Covenant, the centerpiece of the movie that got all the attention. No longer is mysticism the focus of Indy's work; it is technology that turns the world now, and the Russians wants what we have. If this isn't clear enough, the first extended chase scene is closed with the 20th century's worst nightmare, the explosion of an atomic bomb. The faces of mannequins burn off in a subtle allusion to the close of Raiders of the Lost Ark, when that same Ark melts the faces of Nazis who presume too much.
Unfortunately, the story has to deal with the years since we last saw Indy. We find out that he fought for the OSS in World War II, continuing his escapades and receiving may honors for them. This is not enough, however, to keep the taint of the red scare from him; since he has now dealt with KGB agents, the CIA has no way of ensuring his loyalty and so they black-list him. On his way to his new job, he is found by Mutt Williams (Shia LaBeouf) who has come to him at his mother's direction to enlist Indy to rescue her from her kidnappers (that it is the same KGB agents really comes as no surprise). And off they go to the Amazon (completing another interesting circle with the opening of the first movie) to find Mutt's mother and friend.
What follows is the standard series of adventures based on the slimmest of clues. While Indy is once again brilliant in his deduction, it becomes painfully obvious that he is pretty clueless about people. This is not a side of him with which we are familiar: we know he is focused when on an adventure, but he is actually written to be pretty obtuse about personal matters here. It's not really a problem—more of a quirk—and his lack of deduction allows major reveals to come as surprises to some of the audience. The storytelling is wonderfully fun, hearkening back to the set pieces that were so exciting in the earlier films. And the CGI work is breathtaking, in a much more understated way than in most summer blockbusters. Unfortunately those set pieces skew a little close to earlier works of Lucas and Spielberg, enough to actually become something of a distraction, but not enough to ruin the movie for me.
What I find most interesting is the clamor against the general direction of the conclusion of the adventure. To be hoest, it was this that had me worried when it was spoiled for me. But all I can say is that it works for me. I would have preferred something in the tenor of the first three films, but I understand why the movie went where it went, so long as the movie is considered as the end of a generation. Again, paranormal is replaced with technology. At one point Indy mourns his father and companion Marcus, while at another he reminisces about his adventures as a child (a nice reference to the unfairly ignored series, Young Indiana Jones). The movie concludes with a new day dawning, both in the general thrust of the adventures of Indy and in his personal life. The door has been closed on a chapter of history and culture marches on.
Harrison Ford is stalwart as Indy, fitting back into the role much as into a pair of comfortable slippers. LaBoeuf is solid as Mutt, a young man who has interesting traits that make him something more than the standard sidekick. Karen Allen is also good in her return as Marian Ravenwood. Blanchett chews the scenery nicely as the lead KGB agent with an interest in unexplainable phenomenon. It is clear that the door remains open for a new series of films featuring Mutt, but it is my hope that they are never made. The series has progressed from the classic 30s and 40s serials to the campy B-grade science fiction movies of the 50s and early 60s. It is a natural progression and Mutt a fine character for them. But the focus of the series has been Indy, and he has entered a more relaxed place in his life—including a cushy new position. The potential for further adventures for him is apparent, but the character is only going to get older and become something of a self-mockery. I'm fine with the place that the series ends up.
Now if they want to figure out a way to tell some of the stories of Indy in the OSS, that would be something worth seeing.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Speed Racer
I'm having a hard time coming up with a review of this movie. The discussion of it I have seen has been nearly universally negative, with the notable exception of At the Movies with Ebert and Roeper. When I tell people that I went to see Speed Racer, the response has generally been fear and concern for my well-being. And yet, I really enjoyed the film and find myself feeling really defensive about it.
First off, there's the plot. You don't have to know anything about the Racer family to get into the movie. Everything is explained in a nice series of interspersed racing moments and flashbacks in the first fifteen minutes. The Racer family builds and races cars, Speed is obsessed with racing as a child and grows up to become one of the world's best race car drivers, and something mysterious happened to his older brother Rex whom Speed nearly worshipped. I have some quibbles with how the fortunes of the world's finances seem to depend on the outcome of races, but I understand the conceit as it is described. I'm willing to let it go as partial hyperbole from a narrator who is too close to the action. And I can also shrug it off as a future world where I don't know the details of the inner workings. I just accept it, recognizing it as the lynchpin that the movie is based upon and then move on.
Eventually Speed's family is threatened by the evil corporations and he fights back in the only way he knows—by racing them. And those race scenes are a whole lot of fun. It's a little jarring to find that Speed usually races I the Mach 6 while the Mach 5 is his personal vehicle, but it makes sense within the story. Most of the time, Speed races on tracks, so the Mach 6 doesn't have any gadgetry other than the jacks—and in this movie, all of the race cars have those jacks. But when Speed sneaks off to race in a road rally, the Mach 5 is modified to contain all the cool gear that we remember from the cartoon. Each device is deployed at least once, except for the remote controlled camera hawk, which actually was my favorite gadget from the show. And their use is ingenious and fun.
As for the actors, I think they do a really strong job giving life to the fairly flat personalities from the animated series. John Goodman, Susan Sarandon, and Matthew Fox just shine as Pops and Mom Racer and Racer X, perfectly carrying off the caricatures and expanding them as far as the plot will allow them to grow. Christina Ricci lights up the screen as Trixie, though she is underused in the story. Paulie Litt embodies the annoying little brother, Spritle, really well, and his chemistry with his monkey Chim-chim, is dead on as well. Roger Allam just chews the scenery as the diabolical Royalton, and it works because this is a movie of excess. The worst performance in the bunch was Emile Hirsch as Speed. His delivery is flat throughout, showing very little emotion about anything, even when he is supposed to be extremely angry or happy. Nicholas Elia, who plays Speed in the flashbacks, shows a lot more range in his acting than we ever see from Hirsch.
As for the rest, it is eye candy. The scenes are filled with vibrant color and motion, making it clear this is about movement. The cinematography is fun, using interesting methods for scene cuts, and moving camera angles. And the race scenes are just over the top, pushing CGI to its current limits and probably expanding the technology such that what we see here will be commonplace in the future. The races are thrilling, even if they defy the laws of physics, but I didn't come to this movie expecting realism. Generally the events in the races are easy to follow, despite the jump cuts, flying camera angles and brilliant flashes of light and color. In fact, I understood those scenes better than I could figure out the fight scenes in Transformers.
And so I don't know why Speed Racer is being panned. It never promised to be a sweeping drama about the life of a young race car driver. It is a fine adaptation of a childhood favorite, almost slavishly following the storylines and themes of the animated show. It never felt to me that it had any pretense of being other than what it was, and it turns out to be a whole lot of fun. I think kids would just fall in love with it, especially with Spritle and Chim-chim, and adults who were fond of the show really don't have any reason to complain. Even adults just looking for escape should enjoy it. I don't feel any compulsion to see it again, but I'm really glad I did see it, on the big screen and with digital sound, before it unfortunately is relegated to half-price movie theaters. I'd recommend it to anyone, but they should try to see it before it gets away.
First off, there's the plot. You don't have to know anything about the Racer family to get into the movie. Everything is explained in a nice series of interspersed racing moments and flashbacks in the first fifteen minutes. The Racer family builds and races cars, Speed is obsessed with racing as a child and grows up to become one of the world's best race car drivers, and something mysterious happened to his older brother Rex whom Speed nearly worshipped. I have some quibbles with how the fortunes of the world's finances seem to depend on the outcome of races, but I understand the conceit as it is described. I'm willing to let it go as partial hyperbole from a narrator who is too close to the action. And I can also shrug it off as a future world where I don't know the details of the inner workings. I just accept it, recognizing it as the lynchpin that the movie is based upon and then move on.
Eventually Speed's family is threatened by the evil corporations and he fights back in the only way he knows—by racing them. And those race scenes are a whole lot of fun. It's a little jarring to find that Speed usually races I the Mach 6 while the Mach 5 is his personal vehicle, but it makes sense within the story. Most of the time, Speed races on tracks, so the Mach 6 doesn't have any gadgetry other than the jacks—and in this movie, all of the race cars have those jacks. But when Speed sneaks off to race in a road rally, the Mach 5 is modified to contain all the cool gear that we remember from the cartoon. Each device is deployed at least once, except for the remote controlled camera hawk, which actually was my favorite gadget from the show. And their use is ingenious and fun.
As for the actors, I think they do a really strong job giving life to the fairly flat personalities from the animated series. John Goodman, Susan Sarandon, and Matthew Fox just shine as Pops and Mom Racer and Racer X, perfectly carrying off the caricatures and expanding them as far as the plot will allow them to grow. Christina Ricci lights up the screen as Trixie, though she is underused in the story. Paulie Litt embodies the annoying little brother, Spritle, really well, and his chemistry with his monkey Chim-chim, is dead on as well. Roger Allam just chews the scenery as the diabolical Royalton, and it works because this is a movie of excess. The worst performance in the bunch was Emile Hirsch as Speed. His delivery is flat throughout, showing very little emotion about anything, even when he is supposed to be extremely angry or happy. Nicholas Elia, who plays Speed in the flashbacks, shows a lot more range in his acting than we ever see from Hirsch.
As for the rest, it is eye candy. The scenes are filled with vibrant color and motion, making it clear this is about movement. The cinematography is fun, using interesting methods for scene cuts, and moving camera angles. And the race scenes are just over the top, pushing CGI to its current limits and probably expanding the technology such that what we see here will be commonplace in the future. The races are thrilling, even if they defy the laws of physics, but I didn't come to this movie expecting realism. Generally the events in the races are easy to follow, despite the jump cuts, flying camera angles and brilliant flashes of light and color. In fact, I understood those scenes better than I could figure out the fight scenes in Transformers.
And so I don't know why Speed Racer is being panned. It never promised to be a sweeping drama about the life of a young race car driver. It is a fine adaptation of a childhood favorite, almost slavishly following the storylines and themes of the animated show. It never felt to me that it had any pretense of being other than what it was, and it turns out to be a whole lot of fun. I think kids would just fall in love with it, especially with Spritle and Chim-chim, and adults who were fond of the show really don't have any reason to complain. Even adults just looking for escape should enjoy it. I don't feel any compulsion to see it again, but I'm really glad I did see it, on the big screen and with digital sound, before it unfortunately is relegated to half-price movie theaters. I'd recommend it to anyone, but they should try to see it before it gets away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)