One of the most widely talked about films last year was Ang Lee's Life of Pi, winning four Academy Awards and being nominated for seven others. Based off the award winning novel of the same name by Yann Martel, Pi is about how a young man manages to survive a shipwreck and finds companionship in the most unexpected of all places. Pi Patel is a very inquisitive and intelligent person. Since a young age, his curiosity and acceptance of others led him to follow three religions at once (Hinduism, Christianity, and Islam) much to the surprise of his family. Pi's way of thinking and behavior is accepted by his mother, but his more conservative father is not so open to Pi's beliefs and sees his son as irrational. When Pi is 16, his father decides to move from India to Canada in order to earn more money and sell most of their zoo animals. Unfortunately, the Japanese cargo ship Pi and his family is on sinks during a terrible storm. Pi, an injured zebra, a female orangutan, a spotted hyena, and Ricard Parker (a tiger) are the only survivors. Now Pi must find a way to survive alone, in the middle of the ocean, and also keep the tiger fed in order to avoid being eaten.
This was so brilliant I had to reblog it. Credit goes to Rick Slusher.
One of the best aspects about this film, aside from its stunning visuals, is the fact that it can pull off telling such a heartfelt and fantastical story with a very limited cast. The vast majority of the film takes place on a small boat in the ocean with Pi, portrayed by actor Suraj Sharma, and Richard Parker. If the film was not directed so skillfully, this situation could quickly become boring for the audience. But Life of Pi manages to keep its viewers interested by showing Pi's inner dilemmas and flashbacks as he contemplates how to survive and maintain his sanity. The way Pi must painstakingly must teach himself to fish, collect water, and tame Richard Parker will surely make many people feel fortunate for their own comparatively easy lives. Interestingly enough, Pi discovers that taking of Richard Parker has given him the motivation to stay alive. This is not just because Pi is fearful for his own life, but truly cares for the tiger. At one point, Richard Parker even falls off the boat and is unable to climb all the way back up and is left hanging helplessly on its side. Pi could have left Richard there, but instead lets Richard live because he sees the tiger as his only friend left in the world.
If situations become tense, sometimes it is necessary to take risks.
Another interesting aspect of Life of Pi is that audience is left to interoperate wether or not Pi's fantastic journey actually happened the way he said it played out. After Pi reaches land in Mexico, ending his 227 day journey, he is questioned by two Japanese insurance agents of the sunken freighter. They find his tale to be unbelievable and ask him for the 'real' version. Unable to convince the two men, Pi tells them another version. In this story, he shared the boat with his mother (the orangutan), a Buddhist with a broken leg (the zebra), and a mean-spirtied cook (the hyena). The cook kills the Buddhist for food and kills Pi's mother in a fight. Pi later returns to the boat and kills the cook. Thus, Pi is Richard Parker himself in the story. The audience is left deciding which version of the story they believe. The novelist who interviews Pi believes in the story with the tiger, despite its strangeness. It is possible that Pi may have created the story with the tiger as a means of coping with his difficult situation or hallucinated certain events (such as the carnivorous island inhabited by meerkats). However, the tiger story could just as well have happened. Either way, Pi survived his life changing journey through faith and his determination and will to live.
Speaking of the movie's special effects, one of the most remarkable things about the filming of Life of Pi is that all of the ocean scenes were shot in a giant wave tank built from an abandoned airport. (In fact, it is the world's largest self-generating wave pool, carrying up to 1.7 million gallons!) The creation of Richard Parker and the film's other visual effects were provided by Rhythm and Hues, which is sadly facing bankruptcy. R&H was contacted for providing the special effects due to animating Aslan the lion in The Chronicles of Narnia (2005). Below is a short clip showing how Richard was brought to life.
Pi has some of the most gorgeous CGI visuals ever created.
If you have already not seen this film, do yourself a favor and rent it. Life of Pi is one of the most unique and enjoyable of movies to come out recently. Not only is it a visual feast, but it has a memorable story which may seem simple at first, but can be analyzed from different perspectives. Life of Pi is sure to please fans of the novel and many critics alike.
When part of my family was visiting the Oahu in Hawaii, they sent me this picture of a 'Family Fun Bus' with various cartoon and video game characters painted all over it. The best thing about this kitsch little piece of American pop culture? It's got Br'er Rabbit on it, a character who hasn't been seen outside of the Disney ride Splash Mountain for years due to racial controversy surrounding the film The Song of the South. (For a challenge, try to name all the cartoons appearing on the bus. If you can, you win the title of 'Animation Nerd of the Year.')
Hi all. Recently I have been very busy studying for finals which is why I have not posted for about ten days. I should begin posting regularly (every three to five days) within in the next week and half. Until then, it is likely that I may not post at all or only write very short entries. Hang in there and wish me luck! Also, thanks for over 1,500 page views. I love you guys. :)
Given Disney's long history as an animation powerhouse, it is not too surprising that several films over the years were purposed, but never came into fruition. Many of Disney's films have spent time in development hell (such as theEmperor's New Groove, Alice in Wonderland, and The Snow Queen [now renamed 'Frozen'].) Here are some of the most interesting ideas that were scrapped due to budget reasons or other difficulties.
1.) Reynard the Fox / Chanticleer
Original concept drawings of Chanticleer and Reynard by Marc Davis.
When Walt was still alive, he considered adapting the fable of Reynard the Fox and his rivalry with the noble rooster Chanticleer into a major motion picture. However, Walt later decided it would be in the studio's best interest to drop the project. This was because Reynard could be a bit of a nasty character at times. The wily fox's pranks could be very cruel. In the original tales, he often commits acts of vengeance and is not below murder. However, Disney has adapted several other fairytales with originally dark plot lines to better suit general audiences (such as the The Little Mermaid.) Another explanation as to why Reynard was abandoned would be that an antisemitic version of the story was written during the Nazi Regime, featuring a rhinoceros as a Jewish stereotype. This, however, did not stop the fable of Reynard into being adapted into a stop-motion film by Ladislas Starevich in 1937.
Why Disney abandoned the film.
What they settled for.
However, although Reynard was scrapped it greatly influenced Robin Hood (1973), which was the second film made after Walt's death. (The first being The Aristocats.) Both of the titular characters are foxes who are cunning and use many disguises to carry out their tricks. Some of the film's other characters were also influenced from Reynard, including the Sheriff of Nottingham (partially based off Isengrin the Wolf) and the fact that the inept king is a lion. Ex-Disney animator Don Bluth made his own adaptation of Chanticleer entitled Rock-A-Doodle in 1991. The less spoken about it the better.
This movie is a disgrace. Oh, Don Bluth how you have fallen.
For those curious, more can be read about Reynard and Chanticleer here and here. A book written about the film's history can also be purchased on Amazon.
2.) Roald Dahl's Gremlins
Note, these two films have nothing in common.
Roald Dahl was best known for his children's books, but also wrote several brilliant short stories and, in the 1940s, he penned a script for Disney. The Gremlins was meant to be released in the 1943. It was about a team of British pilots befriending small mischief making creatures that enjoy drilling holes in airplanes. If made, this would have been Disney's first major film to be not based upon a fairytale or folk story and to be set in modern times. The Gremlins was scrapped because the animators found it hard to make the gremlins appear sympathetic and the film was in production for so long, it would have been 'outdated' by the time it was released. A lot of money was put into advertising the film and lots of merchandising was released to promote it, but it never came into fruition. However, due to public curiosity surrounding the film, the book tie-in has recently been republished and the character, Gus Gremlin, appeared in the video game Epic Mickey.
The pilot makes an unusual new friend.
An avid fan explains the history behind Disney's Gremlins.
3.) Where the Wild Things Are
An important work, despite never being made.
Before the Animation Renaissance, Disney created a test-film based off the iconic children's book Where the Wild Things Are in 1983. It was a landmark for the studio and animation because it was the first cartoon to utilize the blend of traditional animation and computer generated imagery. Also, it was created by John Lasseter, the man who made Pixar a household name and directed Toy Story in 1995. The animation for the film was provided by Glen Keane, who later designed several Disney characters including Ariel, the Beast, Aladdin, and Tarzan. A film adaptation was considered but the technology was too expensive at the time for it to be economically feasible. This short has no relation to the 2009 movie by the way.
A clip from a documentary about Disney explaining the 30 second test.
4.) Roger Rabbit 2
Who knew the public would love a crazy albino rabbit?
Love it or hate it, there is no denying that Who Framed Roger Rabbit? made a huge impact when it was released in 1988. It was the first project by Disney to be economically and critically successful since Walt died during the production of The Jungle Book (1968). The film helped renew interest in cartoons by creating complex animation in homage to classic Hollywood. Fueled by the success, Disney would go onto create The Little Mermaid (1988) and The Beauty and the Beast (1990), entering the Animation Renaissance. So it may seem surprising that Disney never took the opportunity to cash in on Roger Rabbit by making a cheap-quel....err, sequel. Roger Rabbit: The Toon Platoon was planned as a prequel about Roger Rabbit before his Hollywood days serving in WWII. Roger must rescue Jessica who has been kidnaped by the Nazis to create propaganda broadcasts. He also later finds out his father was Bugs Bunny. This idea was so outrageous that it is obvious to see why it was scrapped. (Steven Spielberg, who helped fund the first film, felt that it would be wrong to work on the film after directing Schindler's List.)
"Here's my script. Roger Rabbit fights Nazis! I'm sure families well love it!"
The sequel was reworked and retitled Who Discovered Roger Rabbit. The plot was changed to be less controversial and was about Roger's rise to stardom. Some test footage was completed in 1998 utilizing CGI, instead of traditional animation. The test failed to appeal to Disney, partially due to budget concerns. Apparently, director Robert Zemeckis is still considering making a sequel sometime in the future.
The CGI test footage.
5.) Fraidy Cat
If Disney made a Hitchcock film...
An unfortunate victim of Disney's Eisner-era in the early 2000s, Fraidy Cat was meant to be a CGI thriller-comedy film paying homage to the works of Alferd Hitchcock. It was going to be directed by the dynamic duo Ron Clements and John Musker, who brought us such classics as The Great Mouse Detective (1987), The Little Mermaid (1989), and Aladdin (1992). The film was to star a spoiled cat who is kicked out of his cushy lifestyle when he is falsely accused of a crime.
Some brilliant concept art showing off dramatic lighting.
Essentially, Fraidy Cat was shut down because it was 'too unconventional' for the studio's standards and 'lacked money making potential'. Yet, Michael Eisner was willing to green light films such as Home on the Range (2004) and Chicken Little (2005), which were, let's face it, box-office turds and critical disasters. He ignored the fact that Clements and Musker, obviously knew what they were doing, considering that their films were big successes for Disney and they worked at the company for over thirty years! One of Disney's executives apparently said: "...who today even remembers who Alfred Hitchcock was? So why would kids in 2009 pay good money to see an animated film that pays tribute to an old, fat, dead movie director?"
This statement is either blindly ignorant or just an excuse to say the film 'has no commercial appeal.' All I can say is thank god Eisner got booted out of Disney. His type and their 'Hollywood Formulas' appeal to no one but the lowest denominator. Not only do their films not stand the test of time, they stifle artistic creativity and any originality. To see a glimpse at what could have been, more can be read about Fraidy Cat here.
Best thing Mickey Mouse did since staring in his black-and-white cartoons.
6.) American Dog
Gambling in a Disney film. Hasn't been seen since...Pinocchio?
Ok, this article has already complained a lot about Eisner, but American Dog had to be mentioned. American Dog was going to be a CGI film directed by Chris Sanders, the man behind Lilo and Stitch and How to Train Your Dragon. The plot was to be sort of 'a fish out of water' tale about a film star dog, Henry, who is ousted out of his comfortable lifestyle. Henry later befriends a large rabbit and a cat with an eye path as he tries to get home. More on the plot as follows:
"Henry, a famous TV dog, finds himself stranded in the Nevada desert. Out in the world for the first time, Henry's tidy life of scripted triumph has come to an end, and his 2,000 mile trek through the real world is just beginning. Henry is a popular dog. He stars in his own television series, in which he is a James Bond style secret agent who manages to survive the most wonderful adventures. Henry is the toast of the town, but then one day one of the stunts in his show goes terribly wrong, Henry loses consciousness, and when he wakes up he finds himself on a train, thousands of miles away from his home. Henry has been a celebrity all his life and does not know how to handle himself in this new situation, but luckily he is able to make some new friends that he convinces to get him back home."
Original character designs for Henry and Ogo by Sanders.
More concept art. The style is reminiscent of the paintings of Edward Hopper.
The project was canned not only due to Eisner's disapproval, but surprisingly by John Lasseter's as well. Lasseter apparently wasn't too fond of Leo and Stitch either, and consider's Sanders films to be 'too quirky.' Normally Lasseter's judgment is sound, but he recently directed those mediocre car movies, while condemning Sanders. (Too be fair, Sanders has always been better at coming with interesting ideas than directing.) So Sanders left for Dreamworks. It also didn't help that American Dog's plot was proposed around the same time of Toy Story 3's and Cars was also to be set in Nevada. The film was thus put on hold.
Eisner left Disney in 2005, and Lasseter (now Principal Creative Advisor for Disney) ultimately decided to play it safe. The film was completely reworked and was treated as a 'B-movie' to Wall-E. American Dog soon became unrecognizable, save for the fact that the titular character is a star who needs to return home. It morphed into Bolt (2008), a somewhat cute (but ultimately cliche and passable) movie about a dog who thinks he has superpowers. Bolt suffers the most from its lack of originality and usage of standard character designs, which lack the unique charm of Sanders's original drawings. (It also includes Miley Cyrus voicing a main character....ugh.) For those curious, a certain blog has an excellent article about American Dog's history.
The film ultimately became the generic Bolt. (Complete with the 'Dreamworks Smirk'.)
7.) Newt
The visuals were lovely, but the plot was too familiar.
Okay, technicallyNewt was an axed Pixar film, but Disney owns Pixar. The film was announced in 2008 and was to be directed by sound engineer and long time Pixar veteran Gary Rydstrom. The project was abandoned in favor of Brave. On hindsight though, this was probably the better choice. Newt's plot was very similar to two other animated films coming out about the same time it was scheduled to be released, the Blue Sky movie, Rio, and the abysmal Alpha and Omega. All three films were about two animals of opposite genders (and personalities) having to overcome their differences as they embark on some sort of journey. Thus, Pixar decided it would be for the best to avoid the issue of dueling movies. The only thing this film seemed really to have going for it was it's beautiful concept art. Coincidentally, Brave, the film that replaced Newt, sports gorgeous backgrounds and complex character rendering that required Pixar to rewrite its animation system for the first time in 25 years.
The other day, when I was out for a walk by the ocean, I found an odd object on the beach. It appears to be some sort of segmented plate from the calcified remains of an exoskeleton. Perhaps it is from some type of arthropod or mollusk (chiton)? Any information would be much appreciated!
The object from the front. It has a very smooth texture with little pits in it.
Back view of the object. It looks somewhat like a pelvis.
Side view of the object. It seems to be a calcified plate from an exoskeleton.
The way this item looks reminds me a lot of a pillbug, trilobite, or chiton. I can't help but to think of the ancient insects and marine creatures from the Cambrian Period that once roamed the Earth. It's amazing how huge insects and invertebrates could grow to be. (One of the largest being an ancestor of the millipede over eight feet in length!) Fortunately, for those who are more phobia prone, bugs this size can physically no longer exist. This is mostly due to lower oxygen levels in today's atmosphere. (Of course, if something happens to the atmosphere in the future giant bugs could return.) Some people also theorize that birds ate larger insects out of existence. What ever the case, large invertebrates are no longer with us except for in horror or sci-fi films.
I used to love to catch and play with these as a kid.
The object I found is most likely from a chiton (which is technically not a bug but a mollusk).
Terrifyingly gigantic invertebrates dominated the Cambrian.
Sorry, not possible in today's world. (Science ruins any possibility of an alien bug invasion.)
Call me weird, but I have always been fascinated by insects and how strange and unearthly they seem. Perhaps its because they are so ancient and I admire how long they have been able to survive on this planet. Insects and invertebrates are the world's most populous species. About 8.7 million are estimated to exist in the world today! Most insects are relatively harmless. (Out of all the species, only about forty are considered venomous.) Many people still seem leerily of them however. Could this be because we are aware of how huge they once were, or that we are just creeped out by how unlike us they are, or how little most people know about them?
Coincidentally, one of my favorite movies happens to be Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind(and not only because it has giant insects in it). It is 1984 Hayao Miyazaki film about a princess who must save her world from warring peoples in a post-apocalyptic future. Nausicaa is parable about how human and nature get along (or rather don't get along). The titular character must find a way in which the insects in the spreading toxic jungle and humanity can peacefully coexist because they are dependent on one another. It is truly a great film about learning not to fear the unknown and many subsequent anime and sci-fi films were influenced by it. (If you have seen both Nausicaa and James Cameron's Avatar, for instance, the forests in both films bare an uncanny resemblance to one another.)
After many, many years in production, Disney is finally planning to release their adaptation of The Snow Queen this November. Well, ....sort of. The was film originally set to be released as early as 2002 and was meant to follow the Hans Christian Anderson fairytale fairly loyally (by Disney standards anyway). It seemed like an excellent choice, especially considering that The Little Mermaid was also a Hans Christian Anderson fairytale. The Snow Queen's plot is about a young girl, Gerda, who must brave dangers to save her friend, Kai, from the elusive and cold-hearted Snow Queen. The story has been adapted several times, most famously by the Russian animated feature which was released in 1957. (More can be read about that version here.)
Illustrations from the original tale by Arthur Rackham and Edmund Dulac.
The Disney version of The Snow Queen has had such a troubled history likely due to the fact that the film entered production right after The Disney Renaissance had ended. Michael Eisner was very harsh and likely thought that this sort of fairytale film would not be successful. Many of the lackluster films produced when he was CEO were attempts to be more 'modern', but lacked the warmth and appeal of earlier Disney films (i.e. Dinosaur, Treasure Planet, Home on the Range, Chicken Little).
Eisner was eventually replaced by Bob Igner and production on The Snow Queen began again. However, the project was drastically altered. Following the new popular trend of Hollywood films, the film was given an unimaginative and cliche one-word title, Frozen. Is Hollywood implying that American audiences are so dense that that they can remember movies with names such as Hop (2011), Wanted (2008), Taken (2008), and Epic (2013)? Heck, if the executives are that lazy, they should just pitch their next film as 'Careless'. This trend has affected Disney's adaptation of Rapunzel was well. Since The Princess and the Frog 'underperformed', Disney figured that they should rename their Rupunzel movie Tangled, so that it would be a 'catchy' and 'easier to remember'.
But renaming the film Frozen is the least of the concerns. The film's plot has been changed so much that it is not even The Snow Queen anymore. Disney should try to experiment with new ideas and storylines (in fact it would be good for the company to do it more often!), but when they take a classic tale and turn it into something so generic, it only hurts the company's reputation. Here is the official press release of the plot:
"Featuring the voices of Kristen Bell and Idina Menzel, “Frozen” is the coolest comedy-adventure ever to hit the big screen. When a prophecy traps a kingdom in eternal winter, Anna, a fearless optimist, teams up with extreme mountain man Kristoff and his sidekick reindeer Sven on an epic journey to find Anna’s sister Elsa, the Snow Queen, and put an end to her icy spell. Encountering mystical trolls, a funny snowman named Olaf, Everest-like extremes and magic at every turn, Anna and Kristoff battle the elements in a race to save the kingdom from destruction."
Frozen sounds exactly like Tangled. So much, in fact Disney might as well rename it 'Tangled on Ice'. The plot is far too familiar and lacks the character development and heart in Anderson's original tale and the 1957 version. Renaming Gerda Anna and making her a princess just seems like a cash-grab to sell little girls more makeup and Barbie dolls. The proposed character designs for the film also seem very uninspired and look a lot like those from Tangled. Disney just seems to be playing it safe and not being innovative at all. This is particularly disappointing since Disney's recent efforts seem to have been trying to renew the spirit found in their Renaissance Era films.
Some lovely character designs for Gerda and Kai by the late and great Herald Seipermann.
And these....are the designs for Anna and Kristoff Disney chose.
Frozen looks just like Tangled.
Here is how Gerda and The Snow Queen looked in the original 1957 film.
Here are some sketches by Seipermann of The Snow Queen.
This is what Disney choose in the end. Not intimidating.... at all!
