Archive for the 'Movies' Category

Beware Spoilers!

My sister and I went to see wall·e this afternoon.

After the extraordinary success of Ratatouille, I had high expectations for Pixar. Pixar has consistently offered excellent films with lovable characters, engaging stories, and exquisite imagery. When Disney bought out the studio, I was seriously worried that their independence and creativity would suffer — Disney’s in-house animation projects had been famously bad up to that point. Home on the Range and Brother Bear come immediately to mind. I was worried. Ratatouille started production before the acquisition. I believe wall·e is the first Pixar film produced fully under Disney ownership.

When I saw the early wall·e trailers, I became more worried. The trailers disclose a lonely robot cleaning up the mess humans left on Earth. I worried the story would be saturated with oh-so-fashionable environmentalism.

But none of it was to be.

Yes, the Earth is a mess. Yes, it was run by a mega-corporation called “Buy ‘n’ Large.” Yes, the characters spend much of the movie running around after a plant. Yes, the humans are fat and lazy. But it is not an environmentalist movie. It is not an anti-consumerism movie. It is not an anti-technology movie. And it is not an anti-man movie.

Once again, Pixar creates instantly lovable characters, tells an engaging story with a positive message, and does it all with incomparable skill and beauty.

wall·e is, so far as we know, the last surviving member of a swarm of robots built to clean up all the trash that had accumulated on Earth. The humans left for a nice, leisurely, 5-year cruise on a great luxury starship called Axiom (I can’t tell if this is significant — would anyone care to theorize?) while the wall·e robots (built by the ever-present “Buy ‘n’ Large” corporation) stayed behind to manage the trash.

Well it seems there was too much trash, or something happened, and 700 years later, wall·e is the only robot still working, and the trash is still there, and the humans haven’t come back.

In the meantime, wall·e has developed a personality. He has a home where he collects interesting stuff from the trash. He has resilient little cockroach for a friend. He has a favorite movie — Hello, Dolly! — and dreams of putting on his Sunday shoes and dancing with a beautiful woman. Robot. Whatever — it’s endearing.

The Earth is, so far as we are shown at the beginning of the film, anyway, barren of plant-life. The beginning is dominated by reds and yellows and grays, except for glimpses of what used to be a great civilization, where there are faded blues. But no green. No plants in evidence. Until while working one day, wall·e comes across an old refrigerator. He cuts it open and inside discovers a tiny plant, which he takes home to add to his collection.

One day, a ship arrives. A probe ship, which deposits a new robot on Earth - eve. She is a sleek, powerful, advanced machine sent to search the Earth for plant life, as a sign that mankind can finally return. She and wall·e develop a friendship, and wall·e gives eve his most prized possession — the tiny plant. This triggers eve’s primary directive and she shuts down and waits for her ship to take her back to the Axiom. A distressed wall·e tries to wake her, but eventually resigns himself to a merely protective role. When her ship comes, wall·e hitches a ride.

The residents of the Axiom have, over the 700 years they’ve been in space, grown into fat, sedentary, creatures with stubby little legs and unable to move about under their own power. They whiz about the ship on hovering recliners that keep them permanently ensconced in their own little overstimulated electronic bubbles. They never take the time to look around themselves. And the only one who appears to do any work (such as it is) is the practically redundant ship’s captain, who takes a back seat to the robotic autopilot, auto.

Something has gone wrong with mankind, but it isn’t commercialism or individualism or egoism. It’s laziness. Laziness as a result of having around a huge workforce of sustaining robots willing to work for free. Laziness due to complacency — a lack of a desire to advance. Laziness due to a lack of ambition. Laziness, it turns out, enforced by the upper echelon of robots, lead by auto, who are confused (much like hal-9000 was in 2001: A Space Odyssey) by a classified directive issued by a frustrated President in the early days of the cleanup effort.

wall·e and eve work together, without sacrifice, to return the ship to Earth. The useless captain, having learned of human life and culture on Earth from the ship’s computer, cries out, “I don’t want to survive, I want to live!” He lunges from his recliner and takes down auto, allowing the ship to return to Earth. The humans are excited to start building a new home for themselves. And as it turns out, the bleak, barren Earth from the beginning of the film is only a small corner. While the Earth is still a bit of a mess, it is not barren — it is teeming with plant life, ready and waiting to one again serve as a perfect environment for man.

The virtues are hard work, tenacity, and selfish love. The vices are complacency and thoughtless obedience. The universe is a benevolent place full of wonders and opportunity. And at the end, the guy gets to dance with the girl.

wall·e is a delightful film, and completely upholds Pixar’s excellent reputation.

****1/2

PS: I do have to say that there was one sour note, however. The Peter Gabriel song, “Down to Earth,” trampled on the movie by treating it like the environmentalist paean some people will likely mistake it for. The song played during the closing credits over images of mankind, helped by the robots, rebuilding the Earth into a home. It was awful. You can look up the lyrics yourself if you want, but basically they made it seem like the humans were returning to be stewards for nature, rather than live on Earth. It was disgusting.

Update: Jennifer Snow has an excellent review over at Literatrix.

Spoilers, as usual.

The sum and substance of my Indy IV experience consisted of me repeatedly chanting at the screen:

Please don’t let it be aliens!
Please don’t let it be aliens!
Please don’t let it be aliens!

Guess what?

It was aliens.

Each of the first three films had a supernatural element–The Ark melted Belloq’s face, the Shankara Stones burned through Indy’s WWII Mark VII British gas mask bag, and the Holy Grail healed Dr. Jones, Sr.’s gunshot wound. But these were all ambiguous. There was a little bit of magic, but it wasn’t explained. It was almost an afterthought, added to complete the mythical nature of the stories.

Indy IV is entirely unlike the first three in this respect. The Indiana Jones franchise has officially jumped the shark.

And I really have very little else to say about it. There was an absolutely awful scene in a soda shop early on–pure exposition–that felt forced, awkward, and was horribly edited. And Cate Blanchett’s accent kept slipping from Eastern Ukrainian Commie Uber Bitch into Lady Galadriel every time she said “Dr. Jones,” which was quite obnoxious. And don’t forget Mutt’s instantaneous, barely-explained, and preternatural ability to perform very physically demanding tasks with apparent ease: fencing with one foot in one car and the other in another; swinging through the jungle on vines; &c. Now I know Indiana Jones stories aren’t supposed to be very realistic, but this was off the deep end.

In short: the George Lucas Hand of Death strikes again!

**

Oh well. At least it wasn’t awful.

Two words spring immediately to mind: formulaic and shallow. Not that there’s anything wrong with being formulaic and shallow - indeed many formulaic and shallow pictures nonetheless rake in the big bucks - but formulas become predictable, and predictability kills immersion unless the characters are interesting enough. Here, they weren’t. They just weren’t developed enough to make me care.

Batman Begins follows much the same formula, but in that film, we had real character depth and conflict. We dig into Bruce Wayne’s motivations. We don’t do that with Tony Stark, so we don’t care about him. The film becomes a vehicle for impressive but vapid special effects and an intolerable string of ham-handed set pieces (accompanied by obnoxious, repetitive, heavy metal riffs) showing them off.

You slavishly follow a formula so you don’t have to think about plot. Use a plot with an established success rate, dress it up in the latest SFX bling, and rake in the dough. It really isn’t art.

It had some good moments. Even some of the set pieces (most of which made it into the trailer, which, having seen the film, I can now say was an absolute masterpiece of editing and marketing) were nice, even if overdone. It managed to keep my attention, if superficially, and didn’t stagnate. My favorite moment has a fake-bald Jeff Bridges yelling at Unnamed Also-Fake-Bald Scientist that Tony Stark was able to built some cool techy thing in a cave with spare bits, and the scientist responding “But I’m not Tony Stark!”

I hated the score because it was overwrought, intrusive, and added nothing to the experience. And Gwyneth Paltrow got royally screwed by the main unit focus puller during the balcony, almost-kiss scene. And there were more continuity issues (e.g., Gwyneth’s shoes mysteriously change while she’s sneaking into Stark’s office at the end of Act IV) than there ought to have been in a film of this budget. They skimped on principle photography almost as much as they skimped on the plot. Just goes to show that having a big post budget for effects can’t make up for shoddy source material.

**

Some movies just aren’t available in any other format. I once had a roommate who had a large collection of movies on laserdisc that were either unavailable on DVD or were otherwise greatly superior to the DVD versions. Among them was The Cheap Detective, written by Neil Simon and starring Peter Falk, Madeline Kahn, Eileen Brennan, Stockard Channing, Sid Ceasar, Dom DeLuise, Abe Vigoda, and a half-score of others in a WWII detective spoof. It is one of those comedies, for which Simon had a penchant, that was able to pull off absurdity without devolving into farce. I actually like it better than its more-popular predecessor, Murder by Death.

Anyways, The Cheap Detective was filmed with an aspect ratio of 2.39:1. But it was only ever released on VHS in pan-and-scan, which chops off over 44% of the picture area. The currently-in-production DVD available in the US is also a pan-and-scan copy. The film was only ever released on video in its full width on Laserdisc, in 1995.

Unfortunately for me, I no longer have that roommate. So I no longer have that Laserdisc copy of The Cheap Detective.

Allegedly, Amazon.ca sells a hybrid disc with both a pan-and-scan and a widescreen transfer. I don’t know why this is only sold in Canada. As it stands, the 1995 Laserdisc release is the only complete copy of the film ever published in the US home video market.

I was going to buy the Canadian disc until I found out that the shipping from Canada costs more than the disc itself. I have a birthday coming up here pretty soon, so if anyone is looking for an inexpensive (under $20USD) gift that I would really, really appreciate… well, nudge nudge wink wink.

I am giving serious consideration to not watching the Academy Awards for the first time in … counts on fingers … nine years.