BRAVE

Contributed by Marshall

A couple years ago I was in an airport Borders, hope you kids aren’t too young to know what a Borders was, and I came across a book that had just been released.  The title and cover art blew me away and I had a nice little chat about it with the excited cashier.  I then voraciously read it all the way home on the plane and finished it 2 days later.  I was overjoyed when I found out they were making a movie and last night went to see it in theaters.  Sadly, Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter was cancelled due to “the popularity of Ted”…so it was pulled from the schedule to make room for another screening…  Anyway, I saw Brave instead.

Pixar entered the movie industry with Toy Story as the first full length computer animated feature ever made and has been on top ever since.  More amazing is that they pulled this off in the middle of the Disney renaissance which compounded their success given that Disney became a helping hand instead of a competitor.  After the Pixar contract was up and Disney officially bought Pixar trouble started brewing and we have finally seen the consequences of this event.  Last year’s Pixar movie, Cars 2, was admitted by the studio to be not a very good film, however due to the Disney marketing machine it was the most financially successful Disney movie of all time, due to merchandising.  But why Cars 2?  After Disney bought Pixar they decided that computer animation was the wave of the future and they scrapped the entire 2D animation department and gave John Lasseter, CEO of Pixar, “independence” from Disney executives and power over the new Disney animation divisions.  This lasted well for a while with great films like Wall-e and Up while Disney floundered with bombs like Chicken Little.  So Disney pulled a fast one and sucked up all the combined resources to make Tangled which saved their reputation.  The problem was then that for 2 years or so Disney was hogging most of the talent and computer hardware to handle all of the complex lighting, fabric, and fur effects in Tangled so Pixar had to fall back on a back burner project lighter on computing requirements.  We are once again seeing the heavy hand of influence of Disney in Brave. 

 

While the younger viewer will probably be thrilled by the dark landscape, the young female protagonist, and the quirky adult characters, there is still a lot going wrong with this movie, especially when you consider that it is a Pixar movie.  First off, since I’ve gone on about the target audience, let’s talk about the protagonist.  Merida isn’t very interesting.  No surprise there, most protagonists aren’t all that interesting, but they are usually augmented by their supporting cast.  In Brave the focus is all on Merida, even though it’s her Mother that drives the plot and all of the events center around her.  Incidentally, the mother is probably the most fun and interesting character in the whole movie, and you can see the Pixar hand in making a communicative and interesting character with little dialog just through gesture and expression.  Merida is, as conforms with the Disney writing style, a perfect little princess, but she’s independent and rebellious, so we are supposed to like her.  This is all well and good but her character growth is almost nil and she gets everything she wants in the end of the movie with everyone else changing to suit her needs.  No compromise, no sacrifice, no growth, that’s what really bothered me Brave.  And I understand that it’s a trait of princess movies that the heroin gets everything she wants at the end and she has to be devoid of character flaws, but it has never been more glaring than in Brave, accept maybe in Princess and the Frog.

What’s more, the advertizing campaign both gave away the mediocrity of this film and hinted at the gender issues, and by gender issues I mean not gender issues raised by the narrative but those perceived by the marketing staff.  Traditionally, Pixar trailers have shown very little about what their movies are actually about.  Think about the Toy Story trailers that break the 4^th wall or Wall-e or Up where they would show one scene with no context.  They mastered the art of teasing you with an interesting premise and making you want to pay for the show even though you had no idea what was coming.  And the genius of that system was that they could always deliver.  However with their last two endeavors, they have released very conventional trailers with one liners and action packed sequences that give you a pretty good idea of what the movie is about.  In the case of Brave though there were actually multiple trailers created specifically to be targeted at boys or girls.  The one for boys featured Scottish slapstick, action, and the bear characters, while the one for girls focused more on Merida, her mother, and their conflicting goals.  While I have no problem with tailoring your advertizing to different audiences, I find it disturbing that Pixar did this given that they have never needed to do this in the past.  It seems as if they knew a general trailer would not be good enough and if that was the case I question why they released a finished project that wouldn’t have the wide appeal that their past movies have had.

The deplorable thing about this situation is that so far Pixar has been the pinnacle of family entertainment since 1995, and now they release a film that resembles a slapped together modern Disney feature.  As the plot unfolded I was a little concerned to see plot elements from previous Disney features like The Sword in the Stone and Robin Hood, but I gave those a pass and called them tributes, or visual conventions, mostly revolving around archery.  However after Merida finds a witch who grants her wish I was face palming the entire time as I could predict every scene.  Wicked witches, backfiring wishes, and of all things, human transformation into bears, because Disney executives are still scratching their heads, wondering why no one liked Brother Bear and are trying to justify it by cramming bear transforming into the public consciousness.  And I don’t make the comparison to Brother Bear lightly.  In my mind it’s just a step above Twilight.  But the similarities are uncanny.  Bear transformation, quirky slapstick learning how to be a bear, humility through being an animal, family member trying to kill you thinking you “the bear” killed or ate you “the person”.  It’s such a complex plotline I refuse to believe it’s a coincidence.

Probably the most noticeable failure of this film, especially as a Pixar feature was that there was no emotional investment.  No  “awww” moment that made anyone in the audience want to cry.  In all the great Pixar movies there is some form of universally understandable loss or tipping point in the story where almost all is lost.  Brave never reaches that point because it never slows down and the plot is so simple everyone knows how it needs to end.

I waited a bit to post this because I wanted to comment both on box office numbers as well as the response to Brave.  I’m a bit surprised to say that critics are almost entirely agreeing with me calling it, safe, intermittently interesting, commenting on the choppy feel of the multiple plot lines, and almost universally criticize Pixar for putting out a subpar product.  Interestingly enough though the box office numbers so far are pretty standard for Pixar’s releases, 154 million by week two.  Pixar movies have traditionally dropped in ticket sales by about 35%ish in their second week.  Brave dropped a full 48%.  So far the international response has also been luke warm which has surprised some given the Scottish setting.  Compared to the enormous international revenues of Pixar’s other film the 11 million pulled in so far is a little embarrassing especially given that it was also highlighted at the Edinburgh International Film Festival which shows Disney was banking on the international audience to pick up the slack.  It seems that the Scottish stereotypes have hurt the film and cancelled out any popularity abroad that was gained given the entirely Scottish/English cast.   

We are only coming to the end of Brave’s third week but so far it had done nothing for this reviewer than signal the end of an era.  I can only hope that Pixar and their Disney overlords learn from their mistakes quickly and get back to making movies with universal appeal and charm.

Movies Referenced:

2012-Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter

2012-Ted

2012-Brave

2011-Cars 2

2011-Tangled

2009-Up

2009-Princess and the Frog

2008-Wall-e

2008-Twilight

2005-Chicken Little

2003-Brother Bear

1995-Toy Story

1973-Robin Hood

1963-The Sword in the Stone

 

HEARTLESS

Contributed by Jeremy

Heartless is a very grim fairy tale and I don’t mean the brothers Grimm. Ugly duckling Jamie has been plagued with large prominent birthmarks all over his body giving him low self esteem and lack of confidence to seek companionship. The birthmark on his face is heart shaped, caused by his dad when he kissed him on the head at birth (or so his dad told him). His main passion is photography and he spends his days frolicking about snapping pictures of rundown buildings and trash in east London. When he’s not doing that he’s being chased by demon molotov cocktail wielding gangsters. Yes, literal demons. Or are they? By the end of the movie I’m not so sure. Yes, it’s one of those movies.

I don’t mean that in a bad way, but Heartless definitely tries to juggle a lot on its plate. This isn’t necessarily a weakness as this movie does an amazing job playing off on sheer moodiness. The movie does have horror themes but it offers so much more, the majority of the movie is painted with such a dark grim picture of despair, with no peaceful or beneficial outcome in sight. “There is no God” and “Suffering is eternal” are along some of the numerous disparaging remarks uttered in the movie by various characters which bring the point home, but amidst this despair is always the faintest glimmer of beauty and hope.

 There is hope for Jamie, as he somehow comes into contact with a strange character known as Papa B. Papa B has the power to take away Jamie’s much loathed birthmarks, but for a price. Why does Jamie make such a foolish deal with such a shady character who openly admits he exists to cause chaos?  Yes, this can be seen as very stupid, but I looked at in a fairy tale context. Many dumb deals in fairy tales have been made out of pure desperation, and this case is no different.  Papa B also has this weird Indian little girl following him around; her role in the movie is mainly to goad Jamie into committing acts of murder. 

See, the terms for that skin treatment was Jamie has to bring Papa B a human heart at the doorstep to any church (heartless…get it?). There’s even a very well done scene of pure dark humor when an arms dealer working for Papa B assigns Jamie the weapon he has to use to cut the heart out with (which just so happens to be an old hunting knife of his father’s).  And this is all in about the first less weird half of the movie.

I got to say this movie was a fun little trip. I found it pretty entertaining, even when things from a story point perspective didn’t fully mesh. I was mainly watching for the experience, and in the end it has a proper moral like all good fairy tales. 

REAL STEEL

Contributed by Marshall

 It’s nice for once to see a movie that I was excited about that didn’t turn out to be crap.  When I saw the first trailer for Real Steel I got really excited, probably more excited than I should have been, but how am I supposed to feel about a movie based on Rock’em Sock’em Robots?  I would encourage everyone to see this film and support it so I won’t go into a lot of plot detail but instead try to explain how this was executed.

This movie is based on a few sources.  First, is the 1956 short story “Steel” mentioned in the opening credits of the film where the world of boxing is dominated by robots after human boxing is made illegal.  An old boxer now pilots a boxing robot and is in financial trouble and can’t find the money to fix his aging robot.  This is the basic premise of both the short story and the movie.  While I’m not a fan of short stories converted into movies, but when your source material is also a Twilight Zone episode you know you’re dealing with winning material.  Second, the bulk of the boxing storyline is heavily based on Rocky.  The unprofessional boxer fighting the world champion for a shot at the title has been used in many stories but in this instance the references to Rocky are clear.  The champion bot’s name is Zeus, one step above the Greek god Apollo, the champion in Rocky, and the final boxing sequence is actually an exact replay of the final fight from Rocky IV.  

With these two sources we have a setup and an ending but no plot in-between.  The bulk of the film is not about where this mysterious robot came from or robot rights or Hugh Jackman making his big comeback.  The story is about a son getting his father back and the whole robot boxing setup is just a plot devise to facilitate their interactions.

The film was directed by Shawn Levy whose work I’m not a big fan of, however I know that he can do good work because he did Night at the Museum.  The real production star was screenplay writer John Gatins whose screenwriter filmography to this point has included only films that tell interpersonal stories against the backdrop of a sports theme like Dreamer and Hardball.  In my experience the strengths and weaknesses of a screenwriter are rarely taken into account when they are hired but in this instance Gatins was the perfect man for the job.

As of writing this sentence Real Steel is getting rave reviews which I support but don’t entirely agree with.  Half way through I felt like something was missing and I suspect that there was a lot left on the cutting room floor to make this film work.  There are so many characters and unanswered questions both about character and robot origins and also about the world the story is set in.  How did such an amazing robot end up in a junk yard, is anyone going to come claiming ownership, the robot seems like he might he sentient, is he, what about all that money Hugh Jackman’s character owes to people, are they going to come looking for him now that he’s famous, is it legal for an eleven year old to own a 1000 pound giant killer robot?  You can see there was a little left out.  But while this movie leaves a thousand unanswered questions, it did not distract the viewers from the central themes of the movie by answering a single one and starting a subplot that would interrupt the overarching story.

The characters in this film were well cast and well written.  If this was an action movie as it was advertised casting wouldn’t have been as important but as it turns out dialog was incredibly important and the actors had to show a wide range of convincing emotions.  I was especially impressed with Dakota Goyo who played the son.  Uncharacteristically for child actors he actually portrayed an eleven year old at age eleven.  He pulls off both tough backtalk and cute little kid perfectly, and this is important because he’s the main character.  

What’s that you say?  The only person on the cover is Hugh Jackman.  The only credited actor on the poster is Hugh Jackman.  How can I say Goyo is the main character?  While Rango was an adult movie marketed to kids, this was a kids movie marketed to adults.  This was a family film that was marketed as a violent action film and it is already proven to have hurt attendance numbers.  The entire movie is about Goyo finally getting the father he always wanted and at the same time having a father son bonding experience through their robot boxing adventures.  Jackman’s character is only there because while a small child can own a killer robot, sadly he still can’t drive, and the plot demands an adult to drive the kid and his robot to fights.  The fatherhood theme is also evident from the very beginning as the young girls from the beginning of the movie are actually the director’s daughters.  

For those who take a more careful look at this movie they will see many references to sports movies, Rocky was mentioned; The Best of Times has a few similarities.  There are more than a few references to the previously mentioned Rock’em Sock’em Robots like upper cuts that knock off heads and controlling robots with joysticks.  They also did a wonderful job creating the prober atmosphere emphasizing both the corporatized product placement of professional sports and the flashy and mechanical savvy world of street racing.  Director Shawn Levy has been quoted on his attention to detail in this film especially with regard to the near future setting saying, “The cell-phone we used five or ten years ago looks different from today, but a diner still looks like a diner."  And for the techies in the crowd the visuals were amazing with near seamless transitions between models and CGI.  I would like to point out that that John Rosengrant was credited in the opening credits for animatronics.  That this one guy half way down the list of special effects guys in the ending credits gets recognition up there with the stars, producers, and director at the beginning should tell you something about the effects.

I don’t pretend this movie is perfect because it isn’t, but it’s one of the most fun and energizing movies to come out in a long time, especially for kids.  Every kid from the audience I was in was clapping and cheering with the boxing crowds in the movie.  I’m a little disappointed that there is already a sequel in the works because this movie is so good on its own, but I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it.  This movie is well worth my $7.50 and I would watch it again in a heartbeat.  I recommend this movie for everyone.

Movies Referenced:

2011-Real Steel

2011-Rango

2006-Night at the Museum

2005-Dreamer

2001-Hardball

1986-The Best of Times

1985-Rocky IV

1976-Rocky