I came real close to liking Shutter Island. I appreciated its beautiful visuals, it's attention to detail, it's superb performances, and everything else you can expect from a filmmaker like Martin Scorsese. In the end, however, I felt cheated. This is another one of those movies that is less of a movie and more of an overly long episode of "The Twilight Zone." In other words, it's a complete story set up just for one twist. But, in the set up of this we have a very great character study of Ted Daniels, played by Leonardo DiCaprio. We have a story of a man dealing with his own demons, and coming to grips with his past. The problem is, the twist is supposed to be a twist, rather than a plot point. Martin Scorsese missed the chance of life time by keeping the truth of DiCaprio's past until the third act.
Ted Daniels is a Federal Marshall investigating a decidedly "progressive" mental institution, full of all the criminals (or as the Administrators correct him, the patients) no other facility can handle. One particularly dangerous patient has gone missing. The Hospital staff is almost unwilling to help him, and he soon realizes that they do not wish for him to uncover the truth- That there are shocking, horrific experiments being performed on these patients. However, in true M. Night Shylamalan fashion, this all just a set up for a huge plot twist that is apparent to anyone with an IQ over 40 who has seen the trailer. It's not long before a moody and involving psychological thriller becomes "The Village" right before our very eyes.
There is a lot to love in this film, despite being Scorcese's weakest attempt. I expected a series of disjointed images and an extremely nonlinear motif made up to confuse the audience. Instead the story played out, slowly introducing more and more elements into the story ton prepare us for the big reveal. Wait, why prepare us for the big reveal? Aren't we more interested, at this point, about the story they set up so far? Around the corner is a story that is just as interesting. Unfortunately, its simply one act of the film. When that happens, our original story is left in the dust. So we are left with two halves, both good, but yearning to be something more.
In 2001, I was "A Beautiful Mind", about Mathematician John Nash, who suffers from various illnesses that force him to see these elaborate visions. This is disguised, quite well, for the first portion of the movie. We learn about his delusions before he does. Anyone who knew anything about the person before seeing the movie knew from the beginning, and that did nothing but enrich the film. It's a sad day when Martin Scorsese should be taking notes from the director of "The Grinch."
** out of ****
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Black Dynamite
Here is a late review, for a movie that received a justifiably limited release, playing in mostly black communities ignoring the fact that Black Audiences today have long since forgotten about the Blaxploitation Genre. Truth is, most people have. Sure, we all know it. Hell, Quentin Tarantino won't let us forget that. Sure, just about anyone can watch Black Dynamite, and laugh at sophmoric humor regarding decapitations and penis reduction, but to really appreciate it, you are going to need knowledge of the seventies exploitation film well outside of "Shaft" or "Coffy".
Black Dynamite is the most badass of the badass. He's a shameless womanizer, but in this sort of film that does not keep him from being the purely righteous, heroic figure. Neither does the trail of bodies he leaves in his wake. He's on a mission to find out who killed his brother, which interestingly enough coincides with his other mission, which is to get the drugs off the streets. Him and a rag tag group of Black Militants soon find out there is something bigger (in a shocking moment of Batman like proportions) at hand.
I, for one, am impressed out how exciting and stylish the intentionally badly shot action beats were. This is wall to wall excitement, even if most fights consist of pose offs and show offs. Only liners are almost 180 per minute, proving that star Michael Jai White has the ability to transcend the boundries of space and time. I'm reminded of films like "Slaughter" or even some of the old New World films.
Characters come in and out randomly, others monolog to the camera. The dialog is delivered half heartedly. It's a risk, making a movie that is intentionally bad. Often times, you'll end up with bad special effects, bad acting, and not a trace of believability. We can't just look at the Lost Skeleton of Cadavra and laugh at the intentionally visible strings. For the joke to work, you need to make it look like an accident. Black Dynamite plays it off fairly well, though the half hearted speeches from the supporting cast do get to be irritating. By the last half hour, the film jumps the shark, and exits the "Blaxploitation" genre by going to places the genre never goes. Sure, it's funny. The movie is absolutely hysterical. But I liked watching Black Dynamite following in the footsteps of Shaft or Slaughter.
The reason Black Dynamite works is because Michael Jai White plays the character earnestly. He can say the most ridiculous lines, and we believe that's just how Black Dynamite talks. He's surrounded by over actors (who do their job well) and the aforementioned sacks who don't even bother. Perhaps if we just kept the first two, the movie could have been just a bit better.
*** out of ****
Black Dynamite is the most badass of the badass. He's a shameless womanizer, but in this sort of film that does not keep him from being the purely righteous, heroic figure. Neither does the trail of bodies he leaves in his wake. He's on a mission to find out who killed his brother, which interestingly enough coincides with his other mission, which is to get the drugs off the streets. Him and a rag tag group of Black Militants soon find out there is something bigger (in a shocking moment of Batman like proportions) at hand.
I, for one, am impressed out how exciting and stylish the intentionally badly shot action beats were. This is wall to wall excitement, even if most fights consist of pose offs and show offs. Only liners are almost 180 per minute, proving that star Michael Jai White has the ability to transcend the boundries of space and time. I'm reminded of films like "Slaughter" or even some of the old New World films.
Characters come in and out randomly, others monolog to the camera. The dialog is delivered half heartedly. It's a risk, making a movie that is intentionally bad. Often times, you'll end up with bad special effects, bad acting, and not a trace of believability. We can't just look at the Lost Skeleton of Cadavra and laugh at the intentionally visible strings. For the joke to work, you need to make it look like an accident. Black Dynamite plays it off fairly well, though the half hearted speeches from the supporting cast do get to be irritating. By the last half hour, the film jumps the shark, and exits the "Blaxploitation" genre by going to places the genre never goes. Sure, it's funny. The movie is absolutely hysterical. But I liked watching Black Dynamite following in the footsteps of Shaft or Slaughter.
The reason Black Dynamite works is because Michael Jai White plays the character earnestly. He can say the most ridiculous lines, and we believe that's just how Black Dynamite talks. He's surrounded by over actors (who do their job well) and the aforementioned sacks who don't even bother. Perhaps if we just kept the first two, the movie could have been just a bit better.
*** out of ****
Friday, February 12, 2010
The Wolfman
The Wolfman is a film that does everything right, but still comes up short. Benecio Del Toro is perfectly cast as Lawrence Talbot, who becomes the titular Wolfman in this remake of the Lon Chaney classic. His Father, played by Anthony Hopkins, knows what he is early on in the film. This is Hopkins at his most chilling since "Silence of the Lambs". Despite his well delivered dialog, his character seems to lack the human element that would allow audiences to connect. Meanwhile, Hugo Weaving is on the trail of the beast, from a Gothic town called Blackmoor all the way to a brooding turn of the century London. This is a vision of London that would make Jack the Ripper squeemish. Then again, the Wolfman is so brutal and merciless he makes Jack the Ripper look like the gentleman he allegedly appeared to be.
The camera angles in the fog mislead you, giving a false sense of space. This creates unease, and sets up wonderful scares. I must confess, however, I am still waiting for those. Very often a loud noise preceeds a terrifying vision. Haven't we seen that before? Other times, the mysterious growling is nothing more than the faithful dog. Universal may not have invented the horror film, but they certainly gave it the prominence it has now. So why do they resort to, in a remake of one of the greatest horror films ever made, doing the same old tricks? Even in films like "Gremlins" they try a new spin. Or in more effective chillers like "Drag Me to Hell", they actually do them so well the manage to provoke an actual jump. Hitchcock said the thrill isn't in the bang, but the anticipation of the bang. Again, I have to confess, I can't recall a moment where the anticipation was more than "So, are we going to see Rick Baker's wonderful make up again?"
I do not mean to be too harsh to a film that I thoroughly enjoyed. What it lacked in suspense it made up for in mood. What it lacked in terror it made up for in action. This film plays to director Joe Johnston's strengths, which is both a blessing and a curse. He crafts characters wonderfully, and has an award-worthy sense of style and adventure. This is the perfect man to helm much bigger, grander projects than this. Or even just another dumb and lovable Mummy film.
As it is, this movie stands alone. It's a carefully made tribute to the classic Universal Monster flick, while also pushing the combined franchises into new directions. Blood and gore are constant in this movie, but not gratuitous. People died by the boatload, cities are devestated, yet you find yourself hoping that Emily Blunt's Gwen Conliffe reaches Talbot before the show stealing Hugo Weaving. You want Inspector Abbeline (Weaving) to redeem himself before the time runs out. He is perhaps the most multidimensional character in this film. He's skeptical about the Wolfman, but upon learning the truth appears to be the slightest bit sympathetic. Of course, there isn't time for that, he's got a Werewolf to kill before it kills again.
This is a very near miss. It's action packed, furious fun, with just enough black humor to satisfy. It's full of great visuals and a wonderful cast. Too bad it just isn't that scary. It's definitely an enjoyable film, and gets my recommendation. Unfortunately I'll have forgotten about it tomorrow.
**1/2 out of ****
The camera angles in the fog mislead you, giving a false sense of space. This creates unease, and sets up wonderful scares. I must confess, however, I am still waiting for those. Very often a loud noise preceeds a terrifying vision. Haven't we seen that before? Other times, the mysterious growling is nothing more than the faithful dog. Universal may not have invented the horror film, but they certainly gave it the prominence it has now. So why do they resort to, in a remake of one of the greatest horror films ever made, doing the same old tricks? Even in films like "Gremlins" they try a new spin. Or in more effective chillers like "Drag Me to Hell", they actually do them so well the manage to provoke an actual jump. Hitchcock said the thrill isn't in the bang, but the anticipation of the bang. Again, I have to confess, I can't recall a moment where the anticipation was more than "So, are we going to see Rick Baker's wonderful make up again?"
I do not mean to be too harsh to a film that I thoroughly enjoyed. What it lacked in suspense it made up for in mood. What it lacked in terror it made up for in action. This film plays to director Joe Johnston's strengths, which is both a blessing and a curse. He crafts characters wonderfully, and has an award-worthy sense of style and adventure. This is the perfect man to helm much bigger, grander projects than this. Or even just another dumb and lovable Mummy film.
As it is, this movie stands alone. It's a carefully made tribute to the classic Universal Monster flick, while also pushing the combined franchises into new directions. Blood and gore are constant in this movie, but not gratuitous. People died by the boatload, cities are devestated, yet you find yourself hoping that Emily Blunt's Gwen Conliffe reaches Talbot before the show stealing Hugo Weaving. You want Inspector Abbeline (Weaving) to redeem himself before the time runs out. He is perhaps the most multidimensional character in this film. He's skeptical about the Wolfman, but upon learning the truth appears to be the slightest bit sympathetic. Of course, there isn't time for that, he's got a Werewolf to kill before it kills again.
This is a very near miss. It's action packed, furious fun, with just enough black humor to satisfy. It's full of great visuals and a wonderful cast. Too bad it just isn't that scary. It's definitely an enjoyable film, and gets my recommendation. Unfortunately I'll have forgotten about it tomorrow.
**1/2 out of ****
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Sherlock Holmes
Before Sherlock Holmes, I was treated to a preview of the latest Kevin Smith opus "Cop Out". A spoof of buddy cop films, that will no doubt end up instead of a film to mock the formula, show why we shouldn't follow the formula so closely. Almost immediately after, I see Holmes and Watson, together, stopping some sort of demonic ritual. Complete with a deduction that might as well be a one liner, I thought to myself "How about, instead of making spoofs, we go back to actual buddy cop films?"
That's what Holmes is. It's a buddy cop film. It's the story of a unconventional, aloof, brilliant man, and the straightlaced smart-yet-still-average partner. Like Mel Gibson and Danny Glover, Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law have excellent chemistry.
Downey and Rachel McAdams, who plays love interest Irene Adler, not so much. Perhaps a better actress or a more well defined character might be a bit more interesting. She is a perky Femme Fatale who too easily becomes a sad, lovestruck tragic figure. Imagine that character, but played without any sort of real range of emotion. Luckily, her scenes are limited.
Holmes and Watson have just solved their last case together, and Watson is anxious to be free of Holmes and live an average to normal life. Holmes, anti social, arrogant, and overall unlikable to many spends much of the movie trying to find ways to bring his friend back. Meanwhile, Watson keeps finding himself excuses to join Holmes as a former Villain, Lord Blackwood, seems to have risen from the grave.
After a first act that sort of lingers on for way too long, our heroes fight and think their way through a series of brawls, secret passages, deductions, and deathtraps that could have only come out of republic serials. As much as an ode to the classic adventure film as "Indiana Jones" (but without the quality, unfortunately), it's a fun little film. With enough of that Classic Sherlock Holmes style to, if not please, satisfy the purists.
*** out of ****
That's what Holmes is. It's a buddy cop film. It's the story of a unconventional, aloof, brilliant man, and the straightlaced smart-yet-still-average partner. Like Mel Gibson and Danny Glover, Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law have excellent chemistry.
Downey and Rachel McAdams, who plays love interest Irene Adler, not so much. Perhaps a better actress or a more well defined character might be a bit more interesting. She is a perky Femme Fatale who too easily becomes a sad, lovestruck tragic figure. Imagine that character, but played without any sort of real range of emotion. Luckily, her scenes are limited.
Holmes and Watson have just solved their last case together, and Watson is anxious to be free of Holmes and live an average to normal life. Holmes, anti social, arrogant, and overall unlikable to many spends much of the movie trying to find ways to bring his friend back. Meanwhile, Watson keeps finding himself excuses to join Holmes as a former Villain, Lord Blackwood, seems to have risen from the grave.
After a first act that sort of lingers on for way too long, our heroes fight and think their way through a series of brawls, secret passages, deductions, and deathtraps that could have only come out of republic serials. As much as an ode to the classic adventure film as "Indiana Jones" (but without the quality, unfortunately), it's a fun little film. With enough of that Classic Sherlock Holmes style to, if not please, satisfy the purists.
*** out of ****
Saturday, December 19, 2009
The Princess and the Frog
Tiana seems to be the exact opposite of a Disney Princess. She was not born into royalty, she does not dream of some prince to make everything perfect for her, and she doesn't spend hours singing about how there must be something more. Instead, she works dilligently so that one day, she may open her very own restaurant. She has almost no social life, so it seems, as her only interest in Mardi Gras is serving Gumbo.
Meanwhile, we have the visiting prince. He's foolish, lazy, and has spent his last dollar. He has been cut off from his family fortune. Needing money, he makes a deal with a witch doctor known as the Shadow Man. Apparently, he didn't understand the subtext to such bold statements as 'I see green in your future" and the various hop puns.
It's only a matter of time before Tiana comes into contact with Prince Naveen, who convinces her to give him on kiss, so that he may turn human. But there is a catch- Tiana is no Princess. Only a Princess can change him back, after all. Seems that frog-kissing by non royalty has unexpected side effects. This is the extent of what you have seen in the previews for the last year and a half.
Tiana and Naveen search for a kinder, gentler Voodoo practicioner in hopes for a way to change them back. What else should be expected then them falling in love. Still, it's not the what, but the how. In a different movie, there would be one moment where the hearts and minds change. This film manages to show it gradually, between comical interludes by the necessary talking animal companions (a poetic cajun firefly, and an Alligator who wants to play Jazz).
This movie, while it suffers from being not a return to the classic Disney film but a return to formula, works. It's light, positive, and very well put together. Though I find I'm more interested in seeing the characters interact, and any time the story progresses I feel they were not done with the previous moment. Some bad jokes meant to appease the immature male audience take away from more tender moments.
I doubt this film is the beginning of a new Disney Renaissance. It's a very flawed, imperfect film. Perhaps it needed just a few more (or less) rewrites to reach the level of some of the classics I remember watching as a kid.
Well, at least we got a good little film out of it regardless.
*** out of ****
Meanwhile, we have the visiting prince. He's foolish, lazy, and has spent his last dollar. He has been cut off from his family fortune. Needing money, he makes a deal with a witch doctor known as the Shadow Man. Apparently, he didn't understand the subtext to such bold statements as 'I see green in your future" and the various hop puns.
It's only a matter of time before Tiana comes into contact with Prince Naveen, who convinces her to give him on kiss, so that he may turn human. But there is a catch- Tiana is no Princess. Only a Princess can change him back, after all. Seems that frog-kissing by non royalty has unexpected side effects. This is the extent of what you have seen in the previews for the last year and a half.
Tiana and Naveen search for a kinder, gentler Voodoo practicioner in hopes for a way to change them back. What else should be expected then them falling in love. Still, it's not the what, but the how. In a different movie, there would be one moment where the hearts and minds change. This film manages to show it gradually, between comical interludes by the necessary talking animal companions (a poetic cajun firefly, and an Alligator who wants to play Jazz).
This movie, while it suffers from being not a return to the classic Disney film but a return to formula, works. It's light, positive, and very well put together. Though I find I'm more interested in seeing the characters interact, and any time the story progresses I feel they were not done with the previous moment. Some bad jokes meant to appease the immature male audience take away from more tender moments.
I doubt this film is the beginning of a new Disney Renaissance. It's a very flawed, imperfect film. Perhaps it needed just a few more (or less) rewrites to reach the level of some of the classics I remember watching as a kid.
Well, at least we got a good little film out of it regardless.
*** out of ****
Avatar
Sam Worthington provides a monotonous narration at the beginning, where he essentially tells you everything you are seeing on screen. He also talks with a certain awareness of what is to come, and maybe this narration is actually part of his final video log. It didn't feel like that to me. Then again, you can move any sequence of the movie to any point and it would still be the same. There is actually one case where a monolog is cut within a thought, a scene stuck in the middle, then continues on as our hero is chased onward by a giant bird-like creature.
This is a "Woo" moment for Worthington, as he only has two settings in this movie- apathetic and woo. No matter how much emotion is in the words, he seems to be reading the script from a teleprompter. Sam Worthington is a much better actor than this movie leads you to believe. Sigourney Weaver manages to steal scene after scene, hopefully earning her an Academy Award Nomination. Zoe Saldana, who recently got the in with the nerd crowd (the same target audience in this film) by playing Uhura in Star Trek, also proves she is more than a pretty face by giving a performance that transcends the many layers of animation.
Worthington's Jake Sully is a disabled officer of the U.S. Marines who is put into this "special project" on a distant planet. He is to put himself into the physical body of a Navi, a member of the native race, and try to win their trust. Though he is working with a group of scientists with good intentions, his loyalties remain to the Marines, who want him to force the Navi out of their homes so the Marines can plunder a rare mineral. That mineral is called "Unobtainium." The mineral doesn't matter, which is why they gave it the only possible name more honest and to the point as "McGuffinium". Perhaps the could have called it "Plotdeviciton".
When he gets in, we have ritual after ritual, while he wanders through a mystical glow in the dark forest. There were times when I wondered if I was actually watching a cartoon. Cameron's CG landscapes are convincing by day, cheesey by night. Not once, however, did the Navi seem even one third as real as District 9's "Prawns".
They say this movie is all about it's graphics. While I will say that they fail to deliver, they are great to look at nonetheless. James Cameron would have you believe that the only way to see this movie is in IMAX, in 3D. Save yourself the up charge and appreciate the beauty without distorting it.
After a while, Jake has a change of heart. Or so he says. Truth is, there is nothing in his character that shows he ever had any allegience to the Marines at all, which robs us of a decent, albeit cliched, character arch. The Marines are vague bad guys. So void of personality, with a lack of a clearly defined motive this might as well be about zombies. We have the Corporate interests telling the Marines to get the Unobtainium. The Marines, however, are simpletons who only want to kill. And if the fact that that's essentially all they do isn't enough, they pretty much say it flat out. Because apparently America can't understand things any other way.
Why does the Colonel hate the Navi so much? If you give him a real motive, it doesn't diffuse your satire. It actually helps bring it to a whole new level. I had the same problem with District 9, but at least you saw the slums, you saw the crime, you can actually imagine how somebody can think of them as subhuman at some stretch. Not even General Custer would treat the Native American's with such disdain.
The evil, cliched Colonel, when given scientific evidence that the ecosystem is actually an intelligence, says "It looks like a bunch of trees to me." That dialog should set the tone of something like "Ferngully: The Last Rain Forest". Not a 300 million dollar action epic. Not a film that has been called an Oscar contender even in pre-production.
The movie isn't without it's high points. There were some sequences that were so fantastic they gave me that sense of awe and wonder that I look for in any great epic. But they were too far, too few. It's a real shame when you can't get into a movie until the Third act.
** out of ****
This is a "Woo" moment for Worthington, as he only has two settings in this movie- apathetic and woo. No matter how much emotion is in the words, he seems to be reading the script from a teleprompter. Sam Worthington is a much better actor than this movie leads you to believe. Sigourney Weaver manages to steal scene after scene, hopefully earning her an Academy Award Nomination. Zoe Saldana, who recently got the in with the nerd crowd (the same target audience in this film) by playing Uhura in Star Trek, also proves she is more than a pretty face by giving a performance that transcends the many layers of animation.
Worthington's Jake Sully is a disabled officer of the U.S. Marines who is put into this "special project" on a distant planet. He is to put himself into the physical body of a Navi, a member of the native race, and try to win their trust. Though he is working with a group of scientists with good intentions, his loyalties remain to the Marines, who want him to force the Navi out of their homes so the Marines can plunder a rare mineral. That mineral is called "Unobtainium." The mineral doesn't matter, which is why they gave it the only possible name more honest and to the point as "McGuffinium". Perhaps the could have called it "Plotdeviciton".
When he gets in, we have ritual after ritual, while he wanders through a mystical glow in the dark forest. There were times when I wondered if I was actually watching a cartoon. Cameron's CG landscapes are convincing by day, cheesey by night. Not once, however, did the Navi seem even one third as real as District 9's "Prawns".
They say this movie is all about it's graphics. While I will say that they fail to deliver, they are great to look at nonetheless. James Cameron would have you believe that the only way to see this movie is in IMAX, in 3D. Save yourself the up charge and appreciate the beauty without distorting it.
After a while, Jake has a change of heart. Or so he says. Truth is, there is nothing in his character that shows he ever had any allegience to the Marines at all, which robs us of a decent, albeit cliched, character arch. The Marines are vague bad guys. So void of personality, with a lack of a clearly defined motive this might as well be about zombies. We have the Corporate interests telling the Marines to get the Unobtainium. The Marines, however, are simpletons who only want to kill. And if the fact that that's essentially all they do isn't enough, they pretty much say it flat out. Because apparently America can't understand things any other way.
Why does the Colonel hate the Navi so much? If you give him a real motive, it doesn't diffuse your satire. It actually helps bring it to a whole new level. I had the same problem with District 9, but at least you saw the slums, you saw the crime, you can actually imagine how somebody can think of them as subhuman at some stretch. Not even General Custer would treat the Native American's with such disdain.
The evil, cliched Colonel, when given scientific evidence that the ecosystem is actually an intelligence, says "It looks like a bunch of trees to me." That dialog should set the tone of something like "Ferngully: The Last Rain Forest". Not a 300 million dollar action epic. Not a film that has been called an Oscar contender even in pre-production.
The movie isn't without it's high points. There were some sequences that were so fantastic they gave me that sense of awe and wonder that I look for in any great epic. But they were too far, too few. It's a real shame when you can't get into a movie until the Third act.
** out of ****
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Fantastic Mr. Fox
George Clooney leads an all star cast of voice actors who are genuinely portraying the characters on the screen. That's a relief. "Kung Fu Panda" and "Shrek 3" had me worrying that, from now on, the characters would be based around the actors they found instead of vice versa. Clooney is good in the role, despite being constantly outshined by co-star Meryl Streep.
Together they are Mr. and Mrs. Fox, who are (as you can guess) foxes. Mr. Fox is a former chicken thief who, at the request of his wife, found a different line of work. He is an unsuccessful columnist who wants nothing more than to move out of his hole in the ground, and into a nice tree. A nice tree in a bad neighborhood, it seems, as he finds himself next door to Boggis, Bunce, and Bean. Three farmers so mean the local children sing songs about them.
The Farmers are uninterested in their new neighbors until Mr. Fox is unable to keep his desire to steal chickens in check. His actions alone cause his family, and all his neighbors to move deep underground. Mrs. Fox reminds us that the story will end when everyone dies, unless Mr. Fox can change his ways.
The rugged, often flat (it is a Wes Anderson film, after all), look of the film just adds to the growing absurdity of a film that starts with talking foxes and ends with an assault-by-pinecone war against the three farmers. At what point was it made clear that the animals could talk to the farmers? Most of the film, you get the impression that the farmers see the animals as just primal beasts. Irrelevant, really. The film never quite jumps the shark. If it does, it's such a gradual take off I didn't even notice.
The film is funny, as it is also very touching. There aren't many jokes or punchlines, just classic situation-based comedy mixed with witty dialog. This is a film where, you can honestly see all the elements working together to form something better than the sum of it's parts. Perhaps the greatest thrill of the film, however, is the fact that I am now convinced that, despite advancements in cell and computer animation, Stop Motion is hear to stay.
*** out of ****
Together they are Mr. and Mrs. Fox, who are (as you can guess) foxes. Mr. Fox is a former chicken thief who, at the request of his wife, found a different line of work. He is an unsuccessful columnist who wants nothing more than to move out of his hole in the ground, and into a nice tree. A nice tree in a bad neighborhood, it seems, as he finds himself next door to Boggis, Bunce, and Bean. Three farmers so mean the local children sing songs about them.
The Farmers are uninterested in their new neighbors until Mr. Fox is unable to keep his desire to steal chickens in check. His actions alone cause his family, and all his neighbors to move deep underground. Mrs. Fox reminds us that the story will end when everyone dies, unless Mr. Fox can change his ways.
The rugged, often flat (it is a Wes Anderson film, after all), look of the film just adds to the growing absurdity of a film that starts with talking foxes and ends with an assault-by-pinecone war against the three farmers. At what point was it made clear that the animals could talk to the farmers? Most of the film, you get the impression that the farmers see the animals as just primal beasts. Irrelevant, really. The film never quite jumps the shark. If it does, it's such a gradual take off I didn't even notice.
The film is funny, as it is also very touching. There aren't many jokes or punchlines, just classic situation-based comedy mixed with witty dialog. This is a film where, you can honestly see all the elements working together to form something better than the sum of it's parts. Perhaps the greatest thrill of the film, however, is the fact that I am now convinced that, despite advancements in cell and computer animation, Stop Motion is hear to stay.
*** out of ****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)