Recently in Reviews Category

We're fast approaching the end of the year, folks. Alarmingly, this has been a fantastic year for film in general and theatrical animation in particular. There were a lot of animated films that I didn't see for various reasons (I have not had the opportunity to see My Dog Tulip or The Secret of Kells, though I have heard good things about both), but the ones I did see? Uncommonly wonderful.

Wonder what you missed? I'm cataloguing the best of it for you, in roughly chronological order. You should see all of these. They are all both good and important.

Coraline
This film, adapted from a Neil Gaiman novella, hails the return of stop-motion hero Henry Selick, whose beautiful direction can also be seen in The Nightmare Before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach. I saw it in theaters in 3D, and it is both beautiful and terrifying.

Ponyo
The latest Miyazaki picture to appear in theaters stateside, aimed squarely at a preschool audience. I'm convinced that it's impossible for Miyazaki to make anything that is not charming, but Ponyo is one of his weaker films. Nonetheless, it is easily the most adorable movie of the year.

Up
Funny thing about Pixar movies: I like them a lot less in retrospect than I do right after I see them. Up is Pixar's best film to date, and I loved it when I saw it, but looking back, it feels like much less of a standout.

Fantastic Mr. Fox
Two stop-motion films in a year? Holy crap. It must be an animation renaissance. And Fantastic Mr. Fox has Wes Anderson's mark all over it. It's a humorous, charming and visually beautiful adaptation of a Roald Dahl book. I think this is my favorite animated film of the year.

The Princess and the Frog
Ten years ago, I probably wouldn't have mentioned this one at all. It's a 1990s Disney fairy tale throwback, but there are more daring aspects of it that never would have made it into a Disney cartoon in the 1990s (things that feel like the influence of Pixar's hand). The animation is beautiful. The jazz soundtrack is a pleasure. It is flawed, certainly, but I'd like to see more films like this.

And, as honorable mentions, I'd like to point out a couple of very good live-action films with significant use of animation:

District 9
Pseudo-documentary set in Johannesburg after an alien craft crashes there and the (intelligent but buglike) aliens are kept in refugee camps that are more like ghettos. The apartheid parallel is obviously hard to ignore, but it never felt heavy-handed. Of note: the aliens were created entirely using computer animation.

Where the Wild Things Are
It is rare that there is a film for children that doesn't talk down to them. This Spike Jonze picture actually manages it, being instead a sort of grown-up Sesame Street. It explores that strange misery and loneliness of childhood that comes with being "that kind of kid." If you were that kind, you understand. The animation work in this one comes in on the faces of the Wild Things--the faces were computer generated on the giant muppet suits worn by puppeteers. They look amazing.

I would include Avatar on this list, except I haven't seen it yet. The visuals on that one look pretty swell, too. But even if it's crap, this has been a great year. I hope it keeps up in the next year--I'd like animation besides Pixar flicks to look forward to in 2010.

I just watched Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus tonight, and I have to say, I was not drunk enough to be watching this movie. It is terrible, and usually not even in the good way. It's sort of an exercise in endurance to sit through the bizarre "love" story and the boneheaded conversations and the fake Irishman. Racist Fake Steven Seagal was one of the few highlights, in part because of his mode of dress and in part because his only character trait was that he was racist. He is the best character in the movie. This should tell you something about the characters in this movie.

You could also play a drinking game about how often a certain establishing shot is re-used.

Honestly, though, the quality was never in dispute here: I knew it would be terrible. I think I'm just bitter about the ending. I know they were working with a limited budget, but couldn't they at least make the shark and octopus explode or something? A mega shark and a giant octopus who are mortal enemies with "a hate strong enough to overcome their survival instincts" (paraphrased from the not-really-Irish professor in the movie) should have a more climactic end battle, at least.

But on the bright side, the scenes where the shark is biting things (like battleships and bridges and airplanes) are worth the rental price all on their own. Though I only paid 99 cents to rent it, so take that as you will.

The trailers on the beginning of the disc have enlightened me about the existence of such brilliant films as The Terminators and Transmorphers. Will I watch these definitely terrible movies? Only time will tell!

On Friday I had the rare privilege of seeing Cory McAbee's new film Stingray Sam in a theatrical format (with Mr. McAbee there in person) at the Boulder International Film Series. My overall impression: it's great.

Stingray Sam was partly created as an experiment in distribution, made "for screens of all sizes" and primarily available for download online. It's formatted like an old theatrical serial--a series of six ten-minute-long episodes. I can state definitively that it looks beautiful projected on the big screen.

Like McAbee's earlier film, The American Astronaut (also highly recommended), Stingray Sam is a "musical space western," which, if you're not familiar with the genre, is exactly what it sounds like. McAbee's band, The Billy Nayer Show, performs all the music in Stingray Sam. You will want to own the soundtrack.

The series is quite funny, but it has some sweet moments, particularly with respect to the little girl. McAbee's daughter makes her screen premiere in this film, and the real rapport she has with the cast (especially her dad) comes through the screen. Emotionally, it is an entirely different kind of film from The American Astronaut--perhaps in part because McAbee didn't have a daughter yet when making the first film in 2000. In the Q&A session after the film, he also told us that The American Astronaut was very personal, whereas the goal of Stingray Sam was focused more on making an entertaining story. Take that as you will.

On the same night I also got to see a new, virgin print of The American Astronaut, so the parallels and differences between the two films were clearly contrasted. I was pleased as punch to finally see The American Astronaut theatrically--my only previous experience with it had been the old now-out-of-print DVD, which was kind of sloppily formatted and not a great transfer. It was an entirely new experience to see it in glorious 35mm.

Want to watch these films? Stingray Sam is making an international theatrical tour, but they won't be hitting most major American cities. If you aren't one of the lucky few, you can still watch the first episode online free and download the rest in digital format for a reasonable price.

The American Astronaut is currently out of print on DVD, but a new DVD is in the works and will be available in early October. If you like Stingray Sam, you will almost certainly like The American Astronaut and its soundtrack, which is available on iTunes.

In the interest of full disclosure: I love the original graphic novel Watchmen on which the film is based. I am certain this colors my opinions, both positive and negative. I tried, for the most part, to set aside my love for the book and judge the film on its own merits, but you should probably still keep my bias in mind while reading this.

Last night I finally made it out to see Watchmen a second time. I didn't write down my thoughts here after my first viewing because I was certain that my opinion would change. I was right. After letting it stew in my head for weeks, I needed to see it again to clarify my thoughts so that I could finally share my Very Important Opinions with you, gentle reader.

I've read all kinds of reviews of Watchmen. It's been a divisive film when it comes to both critical and public opinion. Some have hailed it as a genre picture masterpiece, this generation's Blade Runner, while others have accused it of being dull and overhyped (though I would argue the latter is the studio's fault, not the film's). This movie is anything but mediocre, though--it's weird and clever and funny and playfully satirical and, yes, significantly flawed, but it's not mediocre.

This is a strange film. It's not really a superhero movie except in name; it plays more like a very expensive art-house picture. It's slow-paced, talky and dense, but it's not boring. It demands thought. Much of the film feels very experimental--in structure, in world-building, in pacing, in shot composition--with varying degrees of success. It's not an easy movie to digest, and I think it's considerably improved by a second viewing. It is subtle and manages to avoid the hamfistedness that plagues superhero-movies-trying-desperately-to-be-deep (see: The Dark Knight).

I'll spare you the obligatory plot summary. The story is honestly somewhat secondary anyway; Watchmen is more of a character study of the massively screwed-up retired superheroes who make up the central cast.

All of the characters get a fair amount of screen time, though to me the film sometimes felt very heavy on Dr. Manhattan's storyline. This may be for the best, because to my surprise, Dr. Manhattan (played by Billy Crudup) was one of the most emotionally resonant characters in the film. Crudup brings a kind of pathos to his performance, and his interpretation makes the character heartbreakingly sympathetic.

But everyone in this story is a little sad, a little lost, and for the most part the rest of the cast captures this, too. Patrick Wilson plays Dan Dreiberg (Nite Owl II) so sweet and earnest that it's impossible to not like him. Matthew Goode's Adrian Veidt (Ozymandias) is different from my initial interpretation of the book's character, but I think I might like his better: he hits a perfect mix of ruthlessness, loneliness, arrogance and well-meaning but broken humanity. Jeffrey Dean Morgan plays Eddie Blake (The Comedian), a man who does a considerable number of awful things but is so devastatingly human in a few choice scenes that it's incredibly difficult to hate him.

And then, of course, there's Jackie Earle Haley's Rorschach, who steals the show every time he appears onscreen. Haley truly embodies the character--his take on our favorite never-compromising right-wing sociopath is pitch-perfect, right down to the body language and the gravelly voice. That he spends most of the film with a "sock on his head," as the actor has described it, makes the performance even more impressive. If you pay close attention, you can actually see Haley emoting under the mask, which adds a whole new level to his scenes. His Rorschach is complex: simultaneously an intimidating badass and undeniably broken--a lonely, pathetic monster of a man and a sort of child who never grew up.

The only central cast member whose performance did not satisfy me was Malin Akerman, as Laurie Juspeczyk (Silk Spectre II). I'm torn on her, to be honest--I don't think she was quite as awful as some folks have been saying. I've known women who talked like that, but at the same time, she was one of the few characters who was difficult to feel much of anything for, in part because her character was simplified, but her line delivery didn't help either. She was sort of emotionally gutted for the screen and she seemed to exist only for the sake of the male characters' story arcs. I was disappointed with her.

Akerman's performance wasn't the only flaw. There were problems with the editing, with the script, with the rigid adherence to the visuals of the graphic novel. The latter was the most distracting to me--at times it made the film seem unfortunately distant. I was also a little disappointed with the depiction of the film's violence, which was extreme and graphic compared to many other R-rated films but, at the same time, it was too stylized to be anywhere near as upsetting as it should have been.

Despite the fact that I can point out these problems to you, at this point I don't know what I would actually change about the film. Imperfect as it is, I liked Snyder's Watchmen. I might even love it. It seems extraordinarily fitting that the film adaptation of the greatest graphic novel of all time--a Grand Experiment itself, and not perfect either--would be experimental and strange and flawed.