Another year, another of the same... Well, not entirely. I'll admit I was pleasantly surprised that Birdman won Best Picture, and that it was tied with Wes Anderson's Grand Budapest Hotel with its number of nominations: nine total. Both were great films and I highly recommend checking them out if you already haven't seen them.
There is only one true Birdman.
In terms of animation however, the Oscars have delivered yet another predictable, non-deserving win. As with last year, several of the voters on the board admitted to not even seeing most of the nominees outside of a couple of mainstream movies. (The same also goes for the Shorts categories and Best Foreign Language Film.) As a result, Big Hero 6 won. I have nothing against Big Hero 6, in fact I favorably reviewed it earlier this year. It is a fun movie, but nothing out of the ordinary or outside of Disney's comfort zone. It's infuriating that either Pixar or Disney win each year just because they are Pixar/Disney. Personally, I would have either chosen The Song of the Sea or The Tale of Princess Kaguya as the best film. Both moved me in ways that none of the other nominees did and have gorgeous artwork to boot. At any rate, I digress. What did you think of this year's Oscars?*
Two trailers for the two best animated films of the year.
* PS: I will get to reviewing Kaguya and The Song of the Sea, asap. The local theatre will finally be showing them, and I have been waiting to properly see them on the big screen.
Let's take an in-depth look at one of the most unique thrillers of the 1980s.
In the 1986 film, Manhunter, Michael Mann makes heavy use of color saturation, a variety of camera angles and other visuals to convey a heightened sense of mood and tension. All of these elements give greater insight into the movie’s theme and its character development. This is especially apparent during the scene where Rheba McClane spends the night over at Francis Dollarhyde’s house. Even though the scene only lasts for about six and a half minutes, it is a crucial part of the film because it helps the audience understand and sympathize with Dollarhyde, despite that he is a serial killer and Manhunter’s primary antagonist. At the same time, however, there is a sense of disease and apprehension that looms over the relationship between Dollarhyde and Reba.
Company: Polygram Filmed Entertainment, Working Title Films, New Line Cinema
Year: 1991
Country: United States, United Kingdom
Today, I review another cult film…uh-oh.
If Drop Dead Fred succeeds at anything exceptionally well, it's being exceptionally annoying. Despite having garnered a small fan base over the years due to how bizarre and irreverent it is, this film is a chore to watch due to its unlikable characters and scattered plot. Drop Dead Fred was met with mixed to negative reviews upon its release. The movie earned back only $14 million at box office. Its current critic rating on Rotten Tomatoes is at an 'impressive' nine percent. And Gene Siskel stated that it was, "Easily one of the worst films I've ever seen," and was, "made in shockingly bad taste." So with that stated, let's take a dive into this slapstick nightmare.
The film begins with a young girl, Elizabeth (Lizzie) Cronin, being read a fairytale by her mother, Polly, while in bed. When Polly tells her daughter that the story ended happily ever after with the girl marrying the prince, Elizabeth enquires, "How do you know?" Polly says it was because the girl was well behaved, which causes Elizabeth to state, "What a pile of shit!" Charming. I'm sure this movie's opening lines went over well with all the parents and children in the crowd.
After some opening credits, the movie abruptly cuts to 21 years later. Elizabeth (Phoebe Cates of Gremlins fame) has grown up to be an unhappy adult. She is unsatisfied with her current state in life and strained relationship with her domineering mother. Lizzie has also recently divorced her husband, Charles, who is in love with another woman named Annabella. Shortly after trying to talk with Charles, Lizzie's wallet and car are stolen. On top of it all, Lizzie arrives late for work and loses her job, which causes her to be chewed out by Polly again. Back at her childhood home, Lizzie becomes desperate. She decides to seek help from her childhood imaginary friend, Drop Dead Fred, as a last ditch effort.
Because everyone knows that struggling with depression and having a mental illness is hilarious.
The titular character reappears when Elizabeth foolishly decides to release him from the jack-in-the-box her mother sealed him away in many years ago. After opening this Pandora's box, Fred proceeds to wreck havoc and crack unfunny jokes. He is an obnoxious hybrid of Beatle Juice/Peewee Herman portrayed by the late British actor, Rik Mayall. However, Lizzie tolerates Fred's potty humor, immature antics, and lewd behavior because he gives her a release from her oppressive mother. Frankly, I'm not seeing how this movie is supposed be funny yet. It's just making me feel kind of sad.
Thanks movie, I don't think I'll be able to sleep for a week now.
Soon after, Fred decides to start accompanying Elizabeth so that they can pull pranks on unaware bystanders and people they dislike, just like old times. The only catch is nobody can see Drop Dead Fred except for Elizabeth. Polly becomes concerned with her daughter's increasingly strange behavior (which includes talking incoherently, sinking her friend's house boat, and pouring wine on herself) and takes her to see a psychiatrist. Lizzie is given a pill prescription to rid herself of thoughts about Fred. But, of course, this doesn't work. As Fred becomes increasingly more crazy and out of control, Lizzie finds him harder and harder to deal with. Too make matters worse, Fred's behavior has began to sabotage the relationship Lizzie is trying to rebuild with Charles.
While Drop Dead Fred desperately tries to be funny and unconventional, the 'humor' in this film either falls flat or, more often than not, either annoys or offends the audience. Without the right balance of lightheartedness and genuinity, a comedy movie about a depressed protagonist is simply not funny. It's mean spirited...That is unless you actually happen to find jokes such as picking boogers, throwing poop at people, and staring up women's skirts funny.
And to think this film is sometimes marketed as a 'family movie.'
The characters are also woefully lacking in development. Polly is either too over the top to be a believable personality or else she is underplayed. Her actions sometimes don't even seem that mean or spiteful. Sure, Polly acts over protectively, but the way Lizzie responds to her mother's concern often just makes her end up looking really immature. (And, yes, I am aware that is probably part of the movie's intent. However, the audience is supposed to sympathize the most with Lizzie.) Phoebe Cates does an ok job considering what she's been given to work with, but Elizabeth spends most of her time moping (which makes the audience feel uncomfortable) or else awkwardly interacting Fred (which also makes the audience squirm in discomfort). As for Drop Dead Fred himself, well…this article has already talked enough about what's wrong with him.
The relationship between Elizabeth and her mother feels flat despite its large role in the story.
Watching his movie was one of the most miserable experiences I've had in a while. Drop Dead Fred is an uneven sloppy mess of a film. The fact that the titular character is introduced as both the film's center of conflict and as Lizzie's savior is an ill advised plot twist. This may have worked in the hands of a more skilled director, but considering Ate de Jong's track record their was no chance of that. Drop Dead Fred is a film at war with itself. It can't decide wether it wants to appeal to children or adults. In the end, it hardly appeals to anyone.
Love them or hate them, Hollywood insists that sequels are here to stay. So what better way to celebrate (and scorn) them by creating a list in their 'honor'. As a follow up to my previous post, I have listed five of the most memorable and deplorable film sequels ever created below:
5.) The Best: The Rescuers Down Under
The Rescuers Down Under is one of those few movies where the sequel is arguably better than the original. While the original Rescuers film is generally recognized as one of the better films to come out of Disney's dead period (i.e. shortly after Walt Disney died), its 1990 sequel is largely overlooked due to being released between The Little Mermaid and The Beauty and the Beast, as well as premiering during the opening week of Home Alone. It's a shame because The Rescuers Down Under is a truly fun, action-packed movie. It is arguably the closest Disney has come to releasing something in the vein of Indiana Jones or Crocodile Dundee.
The storyline centers around a young, Australian boy named Cody. Cody befriends a large, endangered eagle (Marahute), but is held captive by a poacher when he refuses to tell him the eagle's location. Fortunately, the titular Rescuers, a pair two mice (Bianca and Bernard) are alerted and decide to embark on a dangerous mission in order to save Cody. At the same time, Bernard attempts to ask for Bianca's hand in marriage but is constantly interrupted by Jake, a charismatic kangaroo rat, and must over come his own incompetence. It should also be noted that The Rescuers Down Under was the first Disney film to be made using the digital CAPS system and the fantastic flight sequences of Marahute were animated by renowned animator Glen Keane. (Keane stated that the films of Hayao Miyazaki were a major influence on the film's flight scenes, specifically Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind.)
5.) The Worst: The Blues Brothers 2000
Making a sequel between more than a decade is, more often than not, a recipe for disaster. Such is the case of Blues Brothers 2000 (which despite what it's name may suggest was released in 1998). 2000 takes place 18 years after the first film, when Elwood Blues is released from prison. He is told that his brother, Jake Blues has died and so has his surrogate father, Curtis. (This is the film's way to cover up for the deaths of the two actors that portrayed Jake and Curtis, John Belushi and Cab Calloway respectively.) Elwood also discoverers that he has second brother, Cabel Chamberlain. However, Cabel turns out be a member of the Illinois State Police. Thus Cabel is not that keen on Elwood's plan to reunite his band, after what happened the last time they played. 2000 is basically a rehash of the first film, with almost the same plot and same jokes. The only difference is that this film constantly falls to be funny and tends to drag a lot of the time. Both critics and audiences responded negatively to the film. It only earned back a pitiful $14K its $28 million budget. The only good thing about Blues Brothers 2000 is its soundtrack and it still is not as good as the original film's music. If any thing, buy the CD. Avoid the movie.
Movie sequels have become increasingly common over the past ten years or so. In fact, there are currently over 100 movie sequels in the works, ranging from the likes of Avatar and The Incredibles to The Goonies and Mrs. Doubtfire. However, cashing in on sequels is not simply a dubious trend or even a relatively new phenomenon. They first started to appear in larger numbers during the 1970s, with Hollywood's revival and the birth of the modern block buster. When done correctly, sequels help enrich the film series's previous installment and provide greater insight into the movie's fictional world. Of course, for every good sequel, unfortunately, there are always a good number of bad ones.
Below, I have composed a list of my ten personal favorite (and unfavorite) film sequels. Please note that remakes/spinoffs will not be counted (and trust me, there are plenty of other people that can inform you about the horrors of The Star Wars Christmas Special), and neither will movies based on book series. So without further ado, here are they are:
10.) The Best: Adams Family Values
While Adams Family Values is certainly not a perfect movie, it still manages to be quite entertaining at times. As opposed to the first film featuring the Addams Family, this installment focuses more on the macabre humor associated with the comics than the madcap comedy of the 1960s television series. This largely works in the film's favor and is refreshing to see in era when family movies started to become increasingly over sanitized for younger audiences. (The movie takes several jabs at over protective parenting, such as the way we retell the story of Thanksgiving to children.) The best segments of the movie focus on Wednesday and Pugsley who are sent away to summer camp after the family's newly hired nanny, Debbie, tricks Gomez and Morticia into doing so. They quickly become social outcasts at the overly cheery camp and develop a friendship with another boy their age. The film should have kept most of its focus here, but unfortunately it doesn't. The main plot concerns Debbie (who is actually a serial killer) trying to woe Uncle Fester and steal his money. It is somewhat funny at first, but becomes tiresome after a while. Still, Adams Family Values is all in all a fun film that sports a lot unconventional humor and memorable visuals to boot.
10.) The Worst: A Christmas Story 2
Simply put, this movie, like so many other sequels, was unnecessary. Very unnecessary. It was released just last year directly to DVD and has thankfully attracted little attention. A Christmas Story 2 has just about every cliche in the book and is devoid of most of the charms of the original. The movie is set six years after the original, with Ralphie now being a teenager who only wants a used 1939 Mercury convertible for Christmas. However, when he tries to get the car off the lot he accidentally damages it, and must repair it before the police find out. The movie simply goes through the motions repeating the same jokes and gags from the first movie, but only as less funny. The film also informs as that Ralphie must learn 'the true meaning of Christmas,' but didn't he already discover it during the first film? A Christmas Story 2 was among the last of Warner Bros. direct-to-video releases due to the studio citing the decline of the market in favor of online streaming. Good riddance, it was even more disappointing to me than the Home Alone sequels. This sequel is so obviously phoned in it's just sad really.
Company: Jim Henson Company, Lucasfilm, TriStar Pictures
Year: 1986
Country: United States, Britain
Should this film be remembered as a flawed box office flop or a beloved cult classic?
Often considered to be the spiritual successor of Jim Henson's The Dark Crystal, Labyrinth is a far more lighthearted (and often rather goofy take) on a young teenager's wild imagination and European fairytales. The script for the film was conceived by both Henson and George Lucas and was inspired by the children's book, Outside Over There, by Maurice Sendak (author of Where the Wild Things Are). It featured many great special effects with complex puppetry and animatronic characters brought to life from the drawings of Brian Froud, a renown fantasy artist. Labyrinth also had cutting edge CGI effects and featured David Bowie in a staring role.
Well, cutting edge for 1986 anyway.
Despite all of the talent involved, Labyrinth was initially a box office disaster, only earning back $12,729, 917 for its $25 million budget. The failure of the film to capture the favor of audiences or critics upon its release was so profound that Jim Henson did not direct any other feature films before his death in 1990. Despite this disappointment, however, the movie has gained a steady following over the years and has become a cult classic among fantasy fans and Bowie lovers. For some reason, a sequel in the form of a manga was even published by Tokoyopop between 2006 and 2010. In 2012, another graphic novel company, Archaia Studio Press announced that it is in the process of developing a comic book prequel for Labyrinth.
Labyrinth opens with an barn owl spying on Sarah Williams, a teenage girl who is reciting lines from her favorite book (which is also called Labyrinth) in a park. After realizing she is running late, Sarah rushes home to babysit her younger brother, Toby. Sarah becomes increasingly upset when she is confronted by her impatient stepmother and discovers that her teddybear is missing from her room. She finds the toy in her Toby's room and angrily tells him that she wishes the goblins would take him away. Toby suddenly vanishes. The owl flies into Sarah's room and reveals himself to be Jareth, the king of goblins. He tells the alarmed Sarah that she must make her way through his labyrinth within thirteen hours if she wants her baby brother back. He then transports Sarah to the front gate of the labyrinth.
Sarah meets many strange creatures during her journey, three of which decide to travel with her. Hoggle is an obstinate old dwarf who is secretly a spy for Jareth. He is torn between his loyalty to his master and his friendship with Sarah. Ludo is a large and slowwitted but gentle yeti-like creature whom Sarah takes pity on after he is tormented by a gang of goblins. And finally, Sir Didymus is a small yet chivalrous (and often rather illogical) fox-like knight who rides an Old English Sheepdog. Despite receiving help from her new and rather unusual friends, Sarah must overcome several obstacles along the way, such as a Knights and Knaves logic puzzle and the notorious Eternal Bog of Stench. She must also beware of Jareth himself, who has taken a liking to Sarah and constantly tries to convince her to stay with him...
If Jareth's labyrinth has one thing going for it, it is a visual marvel. This is no surprise given the production studio and budget behind Labyrinth. While the sparse CGI that appears in this film is obviously dated, its practical effects have aged very nicely. Brian Froud's designs may not exactly be cute, but they have certain rough charm to them and transition well to the screen. The techniques used to bring the various inhabitants Labyrinth to life are technically a huge step up from those used in The Dark Crystal four years prior. The various sets and backdrops in this movie are also clearly a labor of love. (The art geek in me also loves all of the references to M.C. Escher.) Once Sarah is taken to the front of the labyrinth, it truly does feel as though she has stepped into another land.
It's easy to got lost in the scenery of this movie.
There are, however, several things that hamper this movie's entertainment value. For one, the various David Bowie songs that pop up through out the narrative simply don't suit the visuals at all. (And, for the record, I do enjoy most David Bowie songs.) Yes, it was the '80s. Flamboyancy and Glam Rock were in, but they don't have the timeless sort of quality that one would expect from a fairytale story. On a similar note, this film is rather, well, campy. Again, that may be part of the nostalgic appeal of Labyrinth for some, but it makes everything on screen seem faker than it should. Many of the goblins and other creatures in the film, for instance, are voiced with high pitched, grating cartoonish voices which disengage the viewer the moment he or she hears them. It also doesn't help that the sound effects in this film haven't aged very well either.
It may be cheesy as hell, but just try and get it out of your head.
David Bowie songs and goofy tone aside, many of the characters in Labyrinth are either flat or annoying. This is certainly the case for the film's protagonist. While Sarah's family is briefly introduced at the start of the film, the audience is not given enough time to know or fully understand them or the situation. Sarah's behavior towards her family thus comes off as very bratty. This would be more tolerable if Sarah's character were to develop more over the course of the film, but unfortunately, it doesn't, at least not by much.
Sarah, being the protagonist, does of course learn certain things on her quest. She makes amends with her brother and becomes more appreciative of her 'boring life at home'. However, she complains quite a lot through her journey and relies a bit too much on her companions, making decisions of her own only when the plot requires it. Sarah's portrayal by Jennifer Connelly leaves much to be desired. Perhaps if a more experienced actress took the part, the character would have faired better. Like several other fantasies about young girls entering bizarre worlds (such as The Wizard of Oz and Alice in Wonderland), Labyrinth is symbolic of the transition from childhood to adulthood. However, Sarah is a hard heroine to admire. Perhaps Labyrinth should have followed one of its side characters instead.
Somehow this is not as intimidating as when Gandalf says it...
While Labyrinth is aesthetically pleasing and sports many unique visuals, it won't be remembered as one of the greatest fantasy films ever created. The film's narrative is rather muddled in places, it is too campy for its own good, and its protagonist leaves much to be desired. Still, I cannot bring myself to hate this film. The concept of behind Labyrinth is rather unique and its distinctive visual style allows it to stick out from several other mediocre fantasy films released in the same decade. (Apparently, Labyrinth was initially pitched as The Wizard of Oz meets Where the Wild Things Are.) Maybe Labyrinth would be more enjoyable if it was watched muted and the viewer were to imagine what the characters were saying. While The Dark Crystal may not be as accessible to causal film viewers than Labyrinth, it is ultimately a more ambitious and, dare I say, better film.
Can a film be both entertaining and enlightening at once?
The film Princess Mononoke, has many similarities to other environmental fantasies. As in Avatar, Ferngully: The Last Rainforest and Pocahontas, the protagonist, Ashitaka, is a young man who becomes drawn into a conflict between the forces of nature and humans who are clear-cutting a large forest. The protagonist also meets a woman of another culture (in this case, San, a girl raised by wolves) whom he falls in love with. This plot structure is by no means a new one, as several people have noted that Avatar, might as well have been titled 'Dances with Smurfs' or 'Blue Pocahontas.' Due to their heavy reliance on this formula, films of this kind are often criticized for their reduction of environmental themes and failure to look at tangible solutions. However, Princess Mononoke differs from the three other mentioned films in the way it represents humanity’s relationship with nature, and the protagonist’s relationship with other cultures and minorities.
Issues Common to Environmental Epics
Is it man vs nature or nature versus man?
The main problem with many of these ‘ecologically aware’ films is that they tend to over simplify the complex relationship between man and the environment. They seem to state that nature is inherently good and superior to humanity, and that the means used to aid development are inherently bad. These movies often fail to take into account that humans, like other species, are motivated by their own survival. Although clearing land certainly has negative effects on trees and displaces other populations, it is often done to avoid issues such as human overcrowding and to feed growing settlements. Since the environment is rarely altered by a sole force, people are not often displaced by a single aggressor’s selfish actions. Realistically, people won’t suddenly stop all actives that harm the environment, because we depend on its resources. However, we can try to use technology in ways that are less detrimental to our surrounding environment.
Another issue common to environmental epics that portray native peoples are the archetypes of the white savior and the noble savage. The white savior is commonly defined as a white man who learns the ways of a primitive, nature-oriented tribe and decides to help them fight off his own people's colonialism, recognizing that the cause of the natives is just and the conquerors are the villains. This implies that, despite the hero’s apparently good intentions, people of Anglo-Saxon decent are superior to ingenious peoples. Without the help of the white man the minorities remain disempowered. The noble savage is a stock character who serves as an idealized individual who symbolizes the innate goodness of one unexposed to civilization and its corrupting influences.Noble savages are heavily romanticized and are often depicted as being more ‘pure’ and in tune with the natural world. This thinking is problematic, because it does not portray tribal peoples in contemporary reality. Instead, they are viewed as being trapped in a uncontaminated realm of nature which likely never existed.
The Environment in James Cameron’s Avatar
Avatar is largely a visual experience and relies on many plot cliches.
In James Cameron’s 2009 film, Avatar, The Resources Development Administration (RDA) is mining on the planet of Pandora to search for a rare fuel substance. RDA’s private security force is led by Colonel Miles Quaritch. Quaritch has absolutely no regard for any of the lifeforms on Pandora. He is given no backstory, save for mentioning that he received the large scars on his face on the first day he arrived on Pandora. The movie’s message is profoundly simplified by Quaritch’s unrealistic dialogue, which includes lines such as, “I can do it with minimal casualties to the indigenous,” and “We'll clear them out with gas first. It'll be humane. More or less.” The movie opts for peaceful solutions in order to find a way in which humankind and the Na’vi people of Pandora can coexist. However, Avatar quickly dissolves into a number of flashy battle sequences and explosions to show off the film’s special effects.
Guess which one is the bad guy.
Avatar’s protagonist, Jack Sully, arrives on Pandora as an ungainly military recruit. However, over the course of the film, Jack gains the trust of the Na’vi and becomes mates with chieftain’s the daughter, Neytiri. Jack tames a Toruk, a large dragon-like creature, then leads the Na’vi into battle, thus fulfilling his role as the white savior. Likewise, the computer generated Na’vi are idealized portrayals of native peoples. They are depicted with lean, muscular bodies that are largely unclothed, and can communicate directly with nature via their braid-like sensory organs.
The Environment in Fox’s Ferngully
Hot male lead? Check. Exotic Chick? Check. Native Aborigines? Screw that, we've got fairies!
Like Avatar, Ferngully’s antagonists are similarly unrealistic. In 20th Century Fox’s 1992 film, the malefactor is Hexxus. Hexxus is an ancient being that was sealed away in a tree by the fairies of the rainforest. After being accidentally released when some loggers cut down the tree, Hexxus proceeds to take revenge for his imprisonment by manipulating two of the loggers controlling a bulldozer. Portraying deforestation and pollution in this manner is problematic because it takes the blame of environmental issues off of humanity and places it on a nonexistent deity. By the end of the movie, the hero, Zak, returns to the human world and leaves the fairies alone. However, in a real world situation, the humans would undoubtedly return to the rainforest in order to harvest its scarce resources.
Additionally, Zak Young is introduced as a fit, smooth-talking character. He is shown to be superior to the other lower-class workers, who are depicted as greedy and lazy by visual references to over-consumption of junk food and their littering of their work areas, as well as the fairies who live in the Ferngully Rainforest. The fairies are impressed by Zac’s mastery of technology, as demonstrated when Zac brings the fairies together with music generated from his giant cassette player. The fairies conveniently replace the Aboriginal Australians as ‘noble savages’, perhaps in an attempt to be more politically correct. Although neither the humans and fairies initially believe that the other exists, the truly mythologized beings in Ferngully are indigenous people who are fantasized as extinct and indicated only by the remnant rock paintings. Like the Na’vi, the fairies are depicted as an ideal ‘other’, living in complete harmony with nature via extraordinary, magical means. For instance, Crysta (the fairy female lead and romantic interest to Zac) is is able to make a seed grow into a towering tree by pressing a seed in her hand and the fairies can fly trough the rainforest at impossibly fast speeds.
Still this movie manages to be pretty entertaining due to its hilariously outdated dialogue and bad '90s pop music.
The Environment in Disney’s Pocahontas
"Let's keep quiet about this film's less glamorous, real life basis."
In Disney’s Pocahontas (1995), the story takes place in a fictionalized timeline during 1607 where the British settlers of the Virginia Company arrive in the New World. They are led by Governor John Ratcliffe, who desires to obtain one thing beyond anything else: gold. Unlike the other antagonists from Avatar and Ferngully, Ratcliffe is based on a real person, as Pocahontas is loosely adapted from a historic event. This is where the film’s problems arise. The movie attempts to promote understanding between the colonists and the Native Americans. However, it also makes history easier for American audiences to swallow by glossing over the less attractive aspects of European settlement of Native American lands.
John Smith is the film’s white savior. Pocahontas risks her life to save Smith because she essentially falls in love with the first white man she sees.The movie’s underlying message, which extolls cultural understanding and the respect for others and the environment, is downplayed by the film’s focus on romantic fantasy. The Native Americans in Pocahontas are similarly fantasized, even though they are an actual group of people, not a fictional race. Along with demonstrating her care for the natural world by singing songs and having adorable animal sidekicks, Pocahontas is shown to be very attractive and voluptuous, with tan long legs, silky black hair, and almond shaped eyes. By focusing on such superficial details, however, Pocahontas, as with Avatar and Ferngully, skips over the uglier aspects of human nature and history. The plot is altered, avoiding Pocahontas’s passage to England, her separation from her people, conversion to Christianity, marriage to John Rolfe, and her death at age 21 from tuberculosis in England.
The Environment in Miyazaki’s Princess Mononoke
Nature is beautiful and terrifying.
Even though Princess Mononoke is set between the 14th and 16th century in Japan, it addresses several of the issues that are simplified or ignored in the previously mentioned films. There are no stereotypical ‘villains’ in Princess Mononoke as each side is shown to have their own needs and justifications. Lady Eboshi of Irontown is seemingly cold-hearted when she is introduced. After all, she drove the boars out of the forest to mine for iron-sand. She shot the boar god, Nago, causing him to become a demon and later pass his curse onto the protagonist, Ashitaka. However, Eboshi is shown to be compassionate. She offers prostitutes employment as bellows workers, and she secretly hires lepers to manufacture firearms. Despite that many of Eboshi’s actions are questionable it is easy to sympathize with her, especially when one considers that she is part of a traditionally marginalized group herself because she is a woman.
Lady Eboshi: Both ruthless and kind.
Nature is shown to be divine and otherworldly in places, demanding one’s respect. The forest of the Shishigami is considered to be a scared place and the Emishi are one of the few people left who respect nature and worship animistic gods. Although it is easy to be impressed at the beautifully rendered landscapes in Princess Mononoke and feel sympathy for the animals who are being driven from their homes, it is also easy to be frightened or disgusted by them. The animals are not hapless victims of cruel humans, they fight back viciously to the death. They are large and imposing, and not as cute or as marketable as the fairies in Ferngully or Pocahontas’s pet raccoon, Meeko. The deer god, the Shishigami, is also portrayed as being a rather ambiguous figure. He gives and takes away life, acting primarily as the caretaker of natural causes. The Shishigami does not become actively involved in the struggle between human development and the nature, until he is beheaded by Lady Eboshi. He then threatens to wipe out both humanity and the entire forest, as he becomes lost in madness searching for his head.
The Shishigami, giver of life and death.
Symbolically, this could represent the destructive nature of war, and the consequences it has for both sides of the battle. Ultimately, this is what Princess Mononoke is about and what Avatar, Ferngully and Pocahontas fail to address. If Eboshi and Irontown win the battle, then the forest and its gods and animals disappear. However, if nature wins, Irontown and its inhabitants will cease to exist. There are no simple answers, and the differing factions of humanity and nature can only hope to come to a solution by attempting to understand one another. The only true villain in Princess Mononoke is hate. Ashitaka combats with it throughout the film, between others and within himself, as represented by the curse which will kill him if he cannot find a cure. It is not until the end of Princess Mononoke that the curse is finally lifted, after both nature and the warring sides of humanity come to realize that they have nearly destroyed each other.
Although Princess Mononoke has an attractive male lead, he is not the typical Hollywood hero nor is he a typical Japanese hero. As opposed to being a white, or in this case a Yamato Japanese, man, Ashitaka is a member of a traditionally marginalized (and now extinct) cultural group, the Emishi.Ashitaka is initially a reluctant hero. He does not want to leave his homeland but is forced to do so after he becomes cursed by Nago. Unlike many of the samurai protagonists seen in Japanese period dramas, Ashitaka is a pacifist who struggles with his own anger. When his cursed right hand nearly strikes Eboshi, Ashitaka remarks, “If it would lift the curse, I'd let it tear you apart. But even that wouldn't end the killing now, would it?” He is torn between siding with the outcast people in Irontown and San and the animals who are being driven out of the forest, as he can relate to both groups.
Ashitaka, the cursed, othered protagonist.
San, the Princess Mononoke, is the closet thing the film offers us to a ‘noble savage’ or an ‘Indian princess.’ But like nature, San is not overly idealized in Princes Mononoke. San is a young woman, but does not wear a revealing dress. She is depicted with blood smeared across her face the first time Ashitaka sees her, after sucking at a bullet wound in Moro’s chest. She is kind to most animals of the forest, her adoptive mother, Moro, and her wolf brothers. On the other hand, her hatred towards Lady Eboshi and humans is so pronounced that she is willing to throw away her life in order to defend the forest and avenge the death of its animals. Unlike a conventional Disney princess, San does not ‘fall for the first man she sees.’ At first, she hates Ashitaka because he is human and simply tells him to, “Go away.” When Ashitaka saves San from harm in Irontown and returns her to the woods, San is furious with him because Ashitaka has ruined her opportunity to kill Eboshi. In a sense, the gender roles are somewhat reversed as Ashitaka (the man) pleads for both women, San and Eboshi, to put down their knives and talk.
As with Eboshi, San is another complex female character.
It is only when Ashitaka’s gun wound is healed by the Shishigami, that San ponders over Ashitaka’s behavior, and develops feelings for him. This causes her to go through denial at several points in the film. Moro tells Ashitaka that his desire to live with San is futile because, “My poor, ugly, beautiful daughter is neither wolf nor human. She lives with the forest, and so she too will die with the forest.” True to her mother’s words, San does not return back to the human world with Ashitaka at the end of the movie. Even though she loves Ashitaka and helps him return the Shishigami’s head, her mistrust toward humans never fully disappears. If San had gone with Ashitaka, she would have being denying an important part of her own nature.
Today, it is easy to take for granted all of the spectacular sights and fantastical creatures that appear on screen, largely due to the increasing efficiency and availability of computer animation. But prior to the 1990s, such special effects had to be done entirely by hand. There are several alternate options to CGI. Puppetry, which first originated in 3000 BC, involves manipulating inanimate objects to make them look alive in real time. Commonly described as 'mechanical puppets', animatronics were developed by Disney during the 1960s. They have brought characters such E.T., Jaws, and the Gremlinsto life.
However, most special effects were created primarily through stop-motion. The technique has a long and interesting history, being used in film for over one hundred years. Unlike puppetry and animatronics, stop motion involves physically moving objects frame by frame for each shot. Therefore, it is a very time consuming process. (Fully stop-motion animated films take an average of five years to make!) Anything can be animated using stop motion animation, be it clay, wax, Legos, action figures, dolls, or even dead bugs.
Georges Melies: The Father of Special Effects
Early filmmakers were crazy. Crazy but ingenious.
Not only did Georges Melies utilize stop-motion in his trick films, he also created illusions by using time-lapse photography, manipulating perspective, hand dying his films to create color, and by making outlandish costumes for his casts. Melies was passionate about bringing the unbelievable to life on the screen. Most of his films involve fantastical elements, be they Jules Vern inspired science fiction or elaborate period pieces. Melies created over 500 short films between 1896 to 1913. One of Melies's earliest works, "The Haunted Castle" (1896) is sometimes cited as the first horror film, although if was created to amuse people rather than to scare them. "The Vanishing Lady" (1896) is also notable. Its use of a hidden trap door made it appear that Melies 'disappeared' a young woman and replaced her with a skeleton. "The Astronomer's Dream" (1898) is perhaps the best known, and most surreal, of Melies's earlier shorts.
Georges Melies's later work became increasingly more sophisticated. Rather than being a few minutes long and merely filmed magic tricks, they could be up to half an hour long and featured actual plotlines, a cinematic first. "A Trip to the Moon" (1902) is still commonly referenced and homaged today. The short was about a group of scientists who journey across space, land on the moon, and encounter some unfriendly aliens. Melies also met great success with "The Impossible Voyage" (1904), a similar Victorian space fantasy that featured a memorable sequence where a train, carried by balloons, gets swallowed by the sun.
Although some of his later work is now recognized for its importance by film historians (particularly "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" [1907] and "The Conquest of the Pole" [1912]), critics and audiences would soon begin to tire of Melies's films. They began to notice that much of his work tended to mill over the same material and Melies's filmmaking style was beginning to become outdated. Apparently, it never occurred to Melies that he could move the camera for close-ups or long shots. With the outbreak of WWI things became even more difficult. Melies fell into debt and was forced break his contact with Pathe in 1913, and many of his films were subsequently lost. Today, however, Georges Melies's creations are becoming recognized among the public again, particularly due to Ben Kingsley's portrayal of him in Hugo (2011).
Melies's most famous work, A Trip to the Moon (1902).
Willis H. O'Brien and Ray Harryhausen
Who knew audiences would go ape for a giant gorilla?
Arguably, the first person who really made stop-motion prominent in live-action film was Willis Harold O'Brien. O'Brien grew ranch-hand in Oakland, California and held several other odd jobs before realizing that his talent for sculpting could be used in the filmmaking process. Thomas Edison was so impressed with O'Brien's work and short films that he hired O'Brien to work for his studio. Willis O'Brien made his big break in 1925 when he brought dinosaurs to life in The Lost World. He awed audiences by utilizing split screen technology to make his tiny models appear gigantic in comparison to the actors on screen. The models themselves were made of clay modeled over wire amateurs and covered with rubber. King Kong (1933) is, without a doubt, is the most widely recognized of O'Brien's work. The titular character is impressive not only due to his imposing, powerful presence, but also because of his tragic end. In 1949, O'Brien created another another giant ape for the film Mighty Joe Young. O'Brein's efforts won him the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects. The experience gained while making Mighty Joe Young helped train O'Brien's successor, Ray Harryhausen.
The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953) was Harryhausen's first solo effort. Like many 1950s sic-fi movies, the film reflected growing concerns over the use of nuclear technology. It is about a large prehistoric creature, the Rhedosaurus, that is awakened by bomb testing in the Arctic Circle and proceeds to wreck havoc in New York City. The Beast proved to be a huge international financial success. So much so, in fact, that it inspired many similar monster movies, particularly the Kaiju Craze in Japan. The creators of Godzilla (1954) were so impressed with Harryhausen's stop-motion effects that they considered using the same method themselves, but later opted for using an actor in a specialized suit due to budget concerns.
Ray Harryhausen popularized 'Godzilla' before there was a Godzilla.
Ray Harryhausen met even more recognition with his first color feature The 7th Voyage of Sinbad (1958), which would later spawn spawn two sequels, The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1974) and Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977). By this point Harryhausen had branded his stop-motion as 'Dynamation' in order to distinguish his work from claymation and other studio productions. Sinbad was a huge undertaking for Harryhausen and his small crew. They spent a total of eleven months creating the various beings and monsters needed for the film. His animation on the cyclops, the belly dancing snake-woman, and the living skeleton remain highly admired by filmmakers today. Similarly, Jason and the Argonauts (1963) met much praise for Harryhausen's work, particularly for its extended fight sequence between three actors and seven armed skeletons. The Valley of Gwangi (1969) was a dinosaur themed film that Harryhausen inherited from O'Brien, who was never able to successfully complete the movie on his own. The last film Harryhausen worked on before retiring was The Clash of the Titans (1981) which in, many ways, was a throwback to his Sinbad films, but with a Greek mythology theme. In fact, the Medusa model used in the film was a reworking of his snake-woman figure made over twenty years earlier.
Quite possibly the most impressive stop motion scene ever filmed.
The Blockbuster Era of the 1980s
Phil Tippett, special effects extraordinaire.
Following the footsteps of Ray Harryhausen, Phil Tippet caught the public's attention in 1977 when he created the stop-motion miniature chess match for Star Wars: A New Hope. Tippet continued to do special effects for the next two Star Wars films in the original trilogy, most notably animating the Imperial Walkers and the Tauntaun in The Empire Strikes Back and designing Jabba the Hut and the Rancor Pit Monster for Return of the Jedi. He subsequently received his first Academy Award nomination for bringing to life the menacing monsters in Dragon Slayer (1981). By 1983, Phil Tippet had trademarked his own brand of stop-motion as 'Go Motion' and his work remains a prominent influence on Industrial Light and Magic of Lucasfilm. Steven Spielberg admired Tippet's work so much that he hired him as the special effects consultant for Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984). The third Indiana Jones film, The Last Crusade (1989) featured a memorable stop motion sequence, where Walter Donovan drinks from the wrong cup of immortality and ages so rapidly that he turns to dust. Phil Tippett also provided stop-motion effects for Robocop (1987) and Willow (1988).
"He Chose Poorly." Indeed.
Outside of Phil Tippet and Lucasfilm, several other notable films featuring stop-motion sequences were made during the 1980s. The camp horror cult classic, The Evil Dead (1981), utilized stop-motion to create rotting corpses and various monsters, as did its 1987 sequel. Ghostbusters's (1984) Terror Dogs and the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man were also brought to life this way. The end of The Terminator (1984) is forever embedded into the public's mind, where the battle damaged Terminator pursues Sarah Conner and Karl Reese in a factory. Likewise, stop-motion was used to great effect in Aliens (1986), Beetlejuice (1988), and Michael Jackson's Moonwalker (1988).
One of the Terror Dog models (with a wire skeleton) used in Ghost Busters.
Is Stop Motion Still Relevant?
Although considered, no stop-motion was used in Jurassic Park.
In 1993, Spielberg asked Phil Tippett to create dinosaur models for Jurassic Park. A test video was made, but Spielberg later decided to drop the idea of using stop-motion in his film, favoring animatronics and CGI. Although Tippett was somewhat dismayed at first, (He reputability stated, "I've become extinct!" upon hearing the news), he adapted to the changing film industry by switching over CGI and continues to provide character designs for various extinct animals, mechanical monsters, and mythological creatures. Tippet has kept busy with his spare time, however, on a self-funded project entitled "Mad God", which harkens back to his earlier work.
Reflecting Tippet's fate and the dominance of CGI, recent live-action / stop-motion tend to be lower budget or independently produced. (One could also argue that stop-motion has also been generally avoided due to the horrific box office bomb,Monkeybone [2001].) Czech surrealist Jan Svankmajer has directed several disturbing, but daringly unique movies that blend both puppetry and animation with live actors. His best known works are arguably Alice (1988), Faust (1994), and Lunacy (2005). Elf (2003) featured numerous stop-motion characters (a snowman, puffin, polar bear cub, and a narwhale) in homage to the old Rankin-Bass Christmas specials. Wes Anderson's The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004) had undersea wildlife that was also stop-motion animated. The film fared better than Monkeybone, but wasn't exactly successful with audiences or critics either. Stop-motion is primarily used this days in parody shows such as Robot Chicken (2005- present), foreign films such as Kooky (2010), and has largely moved on to animated features.
Today, stop-motion is primarily found in smaller, independent live-action productions.
