Showing posts with label Chronological Disney Animated Canon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chronological Disney Animated Canon. Show all posts

Saturday, December 7, 2019

"We call this making the best out of what we can control!" - Thoughts on "Frozen 2"

Note that this review will contain some spoilers for both "Frozen", "Frozen 2", and their various spin-offs.  For now, just know that "Frozen 2" is awesome, and may even be that rare sequel that not only equals but exceeds the original.  I really can't wait to do a deep-dive into it for the Princess Project when it hits home media.  Go see it.

Back when I first reviewed "Frozen", I dedicated an entire paragraph to Olaf.  As you might recall, most of the marketing for the first film centered around him and suggested he'd be a Jar Jar Binks-esque annoyance.  And then it turned out this weird little snowman was in fact a good emotional support buddy who is trying his best.  I'd go right ahead and consider Olaf a top ten Disney Sidekick.

And that status is pretty much sealed by the end of "Frozen 2", because our dear little ugly-cute snowman friend goes through an entire existential crisis.  Seriously.  To the point where Olaf's solo song has a bridge (I guess?) that is just him screaming in blind terror.  Having the cute little sidekick character suffer from extremely relatable anxiety is, if you will excuse me, a bold f-ing choice.

Especially when you consider, and I'm not the first Disney fan to make this joke, that back in the day, "Frozen 2" would've been direct to video with dodgy animation, only one good song if even that, and at least one wrong-sounding character and probably two.  The plot would be maybe Hans has magical powers and is back for revenge, or Anna and Kristoff have kids and they go on their own adventure that feels very familiar somehow, or, I don't know, Sven wants to join an all-deer country band but that'd mean leaving all his friends so he doesn't.  The best scene, unintentionally and by a long shot, would be when Kristoff yeets his entire self out a window.

Instead, "Frozen 2" is a story about getting older, dealing with change, suffering with grief, learning of the ecological and political nightmares caused long ago by your foolish ancestors and finally atoning for them, and ultimately finding the place your heart wants to be in.  It's an intense journey; "Frozen" was already pretty dark and complex, and I think that's the reason for it's enduring popularity.  But once the plot of "Frozen 2" kicks in, all our old friends are -as the young people say- Going Through A Lot.  I was half-expecting the end credits gag (which is cute, to be sure) to be Anna in group trauma therapy.  Her solo song late in the picture; man...


Speaking of, the songs!  I've more or less sold this movie to skeptics by simply stating, "This time, Elsa gets two big solo numbers."  They're both excellent, I love them both, and they're destined to be anthems.  That said, the very best song might be the haunting folk ballad lullaby we hear throughout the film that's full of spooky Fairy Tale imagery (and that, if you're like me and are inclined to notice such things, sneakily foreshadows the whole movie.)  I love that they've brought back "Vuelie" as a theme, and... I'm guessing you've already heard about Kristoff's big number...


Most of all, my very favorite aspect of "Frozen 2" is Elsa's journey, which is really the one thing I needed them to not screw up.  I will not spoil it but it is beautiful.  And not just for the fact that a long time ago I argued that while political powers are awesome, magic powers are objectively better and having both is The Best, and I'm astonished and delighted that this movie agrees with me, so there.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day!

Here's a question posed by a little kid I know and... I did not know how to answer.  I mean, I couldn't, because I haven't seen "Ugly Dolls" (and I probably will not; I'm betting most of you completely forgot there was an "Ugly Dolls" movie too).  But now I'm wondering what would've happened if we could've watched "Frozen 2", where the one very definitely a villain/bad guy character is long gone and the antagonistic forces at work are more internal and abstract.

I'm also wondering what they'd think of "Wreck-It Ralph"...

7.7.19 - "Bad Guys"

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

"I've been singing you songs all day! I'm not a bloody jukebox!?!" - Thoughts on "Mary Poppins Returns"

By all means, I shouldn't like "Mary Poppins Returns."

I was really dreading this one.  The whole idea of a decades after the fact "Mary Poppins" sequel left a sour feeling in my gut.  This was intensified by the fact that we got "Saving Mr. Banks" a few years ago, and in hindsight, doesn't it feel like the Disney studio was testing the waters for interest in more Mary Poppins?  A lot more Mary Poppins.  Not as much more Mary Poppins as more Star Wars but still, more Mary Poppins.

(Side note that "Saving Mr. Banks" is also, just as a reminder, an almost completely fictionalized and, so help me God, masturbatory depiction of historical events.  Where it turns out the Disney Studios version of P.L. Travers' stories is just the best and wasn't Walt Disney right all along and Travers was wrong and it's very good and right that Disney ignored all her criticisms and did his own thing despite her reservations, and by golly Travers even ended up loving the movie -she loved, loved, LOVED it!  This is true because the Disney studios say so in their movie about the making of "Mary Poppins" and that's now the version of events everyone is going to assume is true and there's nothing you can do about it!  I am not for even half of a second going to pretend that "Saving Mr. Banks" isn't gross.)

So anyway here we are with "Mary Poppins Returns".  And it's... good!  Look it was never going to be able to hold a candle (or gas lamp) to the original, but it is, all things considered, pretty good.  I'll never understand why Rob Marshall is The Musical Guy at Disney (I mean I know why, it's cause of that one weird year "Chicago" swept the Oscars, but I'll never understand why), and I cannot fathom why you'd hire Lin-Manuel Miranda and not have him write a single song (and the songs are fine, mind, they got me laughing and crying and humming along and everything), but it's all good.

For sure the reason all of this works is Emily Blunt.  The key is that her version of Mary Poppins is not different from Julie Andrews'; it's different from how everyone remembers Julie Andrews.  Even in the original film, Mary Poppins was a bit of a trickster, gently sarcastic, mischievous, magical, and terribly mysterious.  Chaotic Good, if you will.  "I never explain anything," she says.  Blunt's Poppins has a bit more of an edge though, and I can't help but wonder if it's because the adult Banks children don't seem to remember any of their wondrous whimsical adventures.  (Which is a plot point that sticks in my craw.  I don't think a tea party on the ceiling or a day out in an animated painting is something you just forget about.)

So how about the traditionally animated sequence then?  It's absolutely wonderful!  It's got a whole theater full of excellent character designs, a couple terrific songs, and it's over way, way too soon.  It left me yearning for more.  Man, some day some American studio's going to be brave enough to do a traditionally animated feature, I can only hope.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art!

4.29.19 - Bird Studies

Wednesday, May 8, 2019

"My God... it's full of *ads*!" - Thoughts on "Ralph Breaks the Internet"

I finally watched "Ralph Breaks the Internet", and thanks to my obligation from the early, early days of this blog to review every Disney Animated Canon feature film, I must now review it.  Thing is, I've got a lot of conflicting thoughts here, so I guess I'm going to just transcribe my internal dialogue, kind of like I did with "The Muppets" all those years ago.  Strap in...

First Thoughts: "It's good!  'Ralph Breaks the Internet' is very good!  It's as funny and heartwarming as the first film and it does everything a good sequel should do.  It brings back the characters we love, sets them off on an exciting new adventure with fun new characters, and has them grow and change and learn from their new experiences.  This is a damn good movie."

Second Thoughts: "I know right?  We know fellow Disney nerds who were wailing about the end of the world (or at least the end of this recent streak of good Disney Animated Canon films) when this movie first came out, so it's really nice to finally see it.  Goodness, this is that not-quite-as-rare-as-everybody-thinks sequel that's as good as the first movie.  Heck, we might even like it a little bit better than the first movie!

"... ... ...But..."

FT: "I'll let you get to that 'But' in a minute.  We need to talk about sequels, and Disney sequels specifically.  Even though we live in a world of franchises, there seems to be a particular feeling of dread associated with 'Ralph 2' and 'Mary Poppins Returns' and 'Frozen 2'."

ST: "We're all still traumatized by the DTV Disney sequel era."

FT: "Right, right."

ST: "A lot of that dread seems to be building off all the damn Live-Action-For-An-Extremely-Strange-Definition-Of-Live-Action Remakes.  Which, by the way, we will not be considering part of the Disney Animated Canon.  Direct theatrical sequels to films we've already reviewed here are fine, but remakes?  Ugh, no.  Anyway, this can be a nice segway into my 'But...'"

FT: "Yes, go ahead."

ST: "But on the other hand, this very funny and heartwarming movie is also very definitely what Disney has been referring to as a Brand Deposit.  So are all the sequels and remakes and whatnot.  Hell, 'Ralph 2' is particularly blatant about it: There is a whole sequence set inside the official Disney website and so help me if the opening to that sequence, taking in a vista of everything Disney owned the rights to circa last Thanksgiving, doesn't feel like 'Look upon how much pop culture we control, ye mighty, and despair!'"

FT: "I mean, that's true.  But didn't the first 'Ralph' have a lot of (ahem) Brands involved as well?  All those officially licensed video game characters hanging out?  And anyway, without that visit to the Disney website, we wouldn't have the amazing Princess hangout scene, which we loved!"

ST: "It is a great scene, but consider this dismaying observation: Disney's not only all about Brand Deposits but about Brand Integrity; the fear is that if they don't take all their property super seriously, nobody will.  That means no more 'Star Wars' characters shaking their butts to pop songs and a 'What if all the Disney Princesses had a slumber party' scene that feels like a really heckin' neutered version of a killer idea.  And it cost us a scene where Vanillope would've been all, 'Ah, shut up, Emo kid' to Kylo Ren and tell me we wouldn't do anything within reason to see that."

FT: "Oh damn.  But we still really like this movie, even with all this... this stuff that's making us slightly uneasy."

ST: "Yes, yes we do.  Still, uneasy is a good word for it.  Heck, we have 'Mary Poppins: 2 Practical, 2 Perfect' up next and, honestly, the fact that it seems to have had NO pop culture impact at all, good or bad, is worrying.  I don't think we're going to like it as much as 'Ralph 2'."

FT: "Probably not, but if it sucks, we'll have fun ranting about it."

ST: "Same format as this?"

FT: "God, no."

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day!


I saw a trailer for another movie about video game characters getting into various shenanigans and made this regretful thing:

4.30.19 - "Even My Mama Thinks That My Mind Is Gone..."

Friday, January 27, 2017

The State of the Chronological Disney Animated Canon Series

See the thing is, I reviewed "TRON: Legacy".

Let's back up.  The issue I'm wrestling with right now is the question of what I should and should not count as a Disney Animated Feature for my ongoing "Review Every Animated Disney Feature" project.  It used to be easy to answer: "Duh, it's a film with animation by Walt Disney Feature Animation.  Also, whatever Disney movies with animation in them were considered animated films by all those Disney Channel specials and montages and such.  ALSO also, whatever is listed on The Official Walt Disney Features Animated Canon Big Ol' List Thing on Wikipedia and elsewhere.  Golly, maybe this isn't an easy answer?"

So what's going on in my head right now is, like, do I have to review the new "Pete's Dragon" if I reviewed the original?  Cause again, I reviewed the "TRON" sequel.  And "TRON: Legacy" doesn't have any more or less animation in it than any other blockbuster released by Disney in the past twenty years (and I really don't want to have to revisit the "Pirates of the Caribbean" series).  And what of 2016's "The Jungle Book", which is an animated Disney film by any meaningful definition of the term?  If I review that, does that mean I have to do the other remakes of movies that are very definitely officially Disney Animated Canon features?  (Which would of course mean having to revisit Tim Burton's "Alice" movies and... no, please, God, no.)

I know all of this is ultimately up to me.  It's getting very tricky though.  Any helpful suggestions in the comments will be greatly appreciated.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day!

Thanxalotl.

1.21.17 - Janphibianuary

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

"I Will Carry You Here in My Heart You Remind Me!" Thoughts on Moana

Disney Animated Canon Movie #70*: "Moana"

Succinct review first: 😍

More so than any other animated Disney film of this new era, more so than even "Frozen", "Moana" hit me right square in the childhood.  It is damn near perfect.  I love everything about it.  Everything.

Okay, this could easily turn into a gush-fest, so let's get into specifics.  Above all else, I love Moana herself.  She's a fantastic character and such and awesome heroine.  The songs by Lin-Manuel Miranda are terrific.  The animation is gorgeous.  I love the themes of redemption and the triumph of love and life.  And my goodness, I love Maui!  I love my magic wrestler genie grandpa!

Ron Musker and John Clements are officially The Best and I eagerly await whatever they want to do next. 

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

* - Subject to change. See Friday's post.

-----

Art of the Day!

The Traditional Dog Show Studies!

11.27.16 - Dog Show Studies

Monday, January 23, 2017

"Fear ALWAYS works!" - Thoughts on "Zootopia"

Spoilers ahoy!

Disney Animated Canon Movie #69: "Zootopia"

On the morning of January 20'th, 2017, I watched literally a cartoon villain with ridiculous hair rise to power by exploiting people's worst, stereotype-based fears of each other.

That is to say, I watched "Zootopia".

I watched it again instead of The Other Thing that was happening that morning.  My little protest.  Look, I don't like to talk politics much on this here newly renamed blog O'mine.  But given today's movie, it can't really be helped.  So to get it out of the way, my reaction to the modern American political climate is, and I quote, 😣😨😭

It's a truth as old as storytelling itself that there are things you can get away with in a story about animals that you wouldn't be able to in a story where the characters are humans.  This is especially true for satire.  And it's kind of mind-boggling that Disney entered 2016 with what is essentially "Hey, Kids, Let's Learn About The Many Forms of Intolerance, Both Obvious and Insidious - With Cartoon Animals!"

Honestly, I just needed "Zootopia" to be a better movie than "Chicken Little".  It's a gorgeous movie with a deft script and probably the best character designs of any CGI Disney feature.  But I was surprised and delighted that it tried to be mature and timely.  It certainly isn't perfect (there's no such thing as a perfect metaphor after all) but it's *trying*.  It's better to try and start a dialogue with kids than to not try at all.  Expect the kids of today to look back on "Zootopia" in a decade or so as a formative experience.  No matter what, that's awesome.  I'm writing this review while watching the Woman's March on Washington and my God, it's good to feel hope again.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day!

Oh hey, new year, new title, new banner image!

1.21.17 - Birdie Sketches

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

"I'm Still Comparing My Past to My Future" - Thoughts on "Big Hero 6"

Movie #68: "Big Hero 6"

It's hard not to compare "Big Hero 6" with other recent Disney films and with other animated features that cover similar themes.  And to me, that's being unfair to this very good animated Disney feature, so rather than say that this is the best Cute Kids and Robots animation since "Iron Giant" (and, like "Iron Giant", is that vanishingly rare case of creating an excellent film by completely ignoring the source material), let's talk about how awesome this movie makes science.

Succinct version:😍😍😍

Yup, we got ourselves a Walt Disney Studios animated feature film with a matter-of-fact no-big-deal diverse cast of engineering geniuses who save the day through science.  This is awesome.  I feel like "Big Hero 6" has succeeded where "Meet the Robinsons" tried and failed, maybe due to the former having a much more streamlined plot and smaller cast of characters.  I do agree that the secondary characters should've had as bit more room to breathe (side-note: I totally understand why we're getting "Frozen 2", but I don't *get* why we're getting "Frozen 2").  But the focus of the story is on the relationship between Hiro and Baymax, and for me, they've already joined the ranks of the great Disney BFFs.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Sketch of the Day!

Appropos of nothing, have some "Ocarina of Time" fanart:
"Ocarina of Time" - The Great Fairy

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

"Look! The Sky's Awake!" - Thoughts on "Frozen"

Note: This review will contain some SPOILERS, so if you have not yet seen "Frozen," go and get that accomplished already.  In 3D, if you can.  Because it's worth it.  Like "Avatar" was worth it.  I'm getting way ahead of myself.

Movie #67: "Frozen"



Okay, first thing's first.  Yes, I was as wrong about Olaf the Jar Jar/Poochie-looking Snow Goon thing as I was about Ray the firefly in "The Princess and the Frog".  I still don't quite understand the marketing of this movie, but let's not focus too much on that now.  Just know that they did a fantastic job misrepresenting this particular character as well as the film as a whole.  Very like Ray, Olaf is the heart of this movie.  He has a lot more in common with the enchanted objects in "Beauty and the Beast" than with, say, the lemur-things in "Dinosaur" or that damn robot in "Treasure Planet".  His design is intentionally silly for reasons that will be clear maybe five minutes into the movie, and his personality (half innocent little kid, half accidentally-newly-created sapient being) is adorable.  He is the emotional center of the movie, the Morality Pet of the two sisters.  But I'm getting way, WAY ahead of myself.

It sounds like a broken record by now but "Frozen" is outstanding.  OUTSTANDING.  I took my cousin, my other cousin, and her preteen daughter for a Crazy Disney People Girls' Night Out/Christmas Present in a recently refurbished movie theater.  (They upgraded their projectors and sound systems, swapped out the old flip-down chairs for reclining leather seats, and put in huge new screens; the old theater from when I was a teenager is amazing now.)  We sprang for the 3D showing and did not regret it one bit.  Every single one of us was enthralled from the opening chorals to the end-credits stinger.  That right there is a sign of a great movie.

I hate to harp on the marketing some more but as usual, they did a stellar job of NOT representing what this movie is and/or how you will feel when you watch it.  (Just, ugh at the TV spot where one of the biggest, most emotional songs is interrupted by something silly because LOL we know you're too cool for songs in a throwback to Bronze-Age Disney musicals.  That'd be my vote for worst trailer for an animated film this season if not for the "Frisson all up and down my arms --> 'Oops, I stepped in yer "fear"!'" ad for "Walking With Dinosaurs 3D".)  That "how you will feel" bit is important.  Look at that still above.  I could have just posted it, said "THIS, this right here is why I love 'Frozen'", and saved myself a lot of typing.  It hit me square in the childhood. 

I have a couple of nitpicks, but I feel bad for even bringing them up because it feels like pointing out lose threads in the Unicorn Tapestries.  They could have done a more even balance of songs; the first half of the movie makes the second half look a little sparse, musically.  The (spoiler) death of the King and Queen could have used a little room to breathe, as could (HUGE spoiler) Hans' betrayal, which also really could have used a little more foreshadowing, though it did make the entire theater gasp, for what it's worth.  Then there are the trolls, who are already probably the most polarizing part of the movie from what I've read in other fans' reviews.  I loved their opening scene, especially how they hint at a larger mythology going on here, and I LOVE their design -- but they really started to give a bad Minion vibe somewhere in the middle of their second scene and song.

But never mind all that.  I'm going to not only call this the most visually stunning and musically terrific "instant classic" Disney movie since I saw "Beauty and the Beast" as a preteen all those years ago -- but also the most emotionally resonant.  I love the relationship between the two sisters.  And I was especially thrilled by the surprisingly psychologically dense subtext that helped define that relationship.  Here come the big spoilers: If you think about it, Elsa has basically lived her entire life haunted by the guilt of accidentally causing her little sister what's basically the magical equivalent of permanent brain damage.  (Remember, the troll healer literally has to alter Anna's memories to save her, and it doesn't look like they're ever fully restored -- I feel like a much stupider movie would have had her fully regain them for a super-dee-duper happy ending.)  She's terrified of harming Anna even more, and the specific reason why everything goes to hell in the climax is because her worst fears are actually happening.  That's some heavy stuff, and between it, the "You really ARE a bad guy" scene in "Wreck-It Ralph", and Mother Gothelle's emotional abuse, I'm okay with Disney movies getting crazy dark again.

So, incredible music (sweet mother of Walt, they're no longer afraid to do the three-songs-practically-in-a-row thing anymore!), staggeringly gorgeous visuals (oh my God that snow!  That ice!  The Rosemaling!  That scene where Anna dances with the paintings!!!) and endearing characters (I'll keep this one quick: there isn't a single dud character in the main cast).  Just, go see this.  Really, I ordered the soundtrack right when I got back so there's that.

And the short before the movie!  I almost wish that I had no idea at all what was going to happen because it turned out none of my cousins did and I felt a little left out.  I could hear their whispered reactions go from, and I quote, "Aww, I love Mickey Mouse!" to "Wow, I wonder how old this is?" to "😮" and finally "😍"   You know, I've often wondered what it would have been like to be in the theater for one of the first screenings of Chuck Jones' "Duck Amuck" and I think now I have an idea.

Before I close this out, I really need to give major props to the Rotoscopers for doing a better job promoting "Frozen" then Disney's own marketing department.  For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day!  You're still a unicorn to me, Tsintaosaurus.

11.23.13 - Tsintaosaurus

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

"... ... ... I *love* it! I LOVE IT I LOVE IT I LOVE IT!!!!!" - Thoughts on "Wreck-It Ralph"

But first, I'm 35 years old today.  I refuse to stop loving Disney animation, thank you very much.

Movie # 66: "Wreck-It Ralph"

Well, guys, this is going to be one big old gush session, because "Wreck-It Ralph" is SOOOOO GOOD, YOU GUYS!!! You guys! Guys! It's so good!

This is by far the best-looking CGI Disney feature of all; the entire second half of the movie, set in a "candy-coated heart of darkness", is a veritable feast for your rods and cones and both the characters and the worlds they venture through are top-shelf designs.  The script is terrific and (as demonstrated) it's as quotable as classic "Futurama".  I'll thank director Rich Moore for this as he is responsible for some of the best loved early episodes of both "The Simpsons" and "Futurama" -- though not, as often reported "Jurassic Bark".  It's easy to see where the confusion could come from, seeing as "Ralph" has it's own scene where, if it didn't hit you right in the enteric nervous system ("The Feels" as the kids say), I don't know if I can trust you.

On that note, I'm glad to see Disney make a feature that is overall just so joyous and fun, but isn't afraid to get dark as f*** when it needs to.  It's all in service to the story and characters, and the characters themselves are wonderful.  A few critics complained that Ralph himself is too reminiscent of the title character in "Shrek", but I have to say I loved him immediately, while I can never say I even really liked Shrek over the course of four movies.  Part of this is because Ralph isn't a misunderstood cranky innocent; the whole conflict in the movie is due to him screwing things up for selfish reasons, and his redemption arc is ultimately incredibly moving. 

Best of all, this is the first Disney movie in years where I don't feel like I have to go on and on convincing you all to watch it, because this is the first universally-beloved-by-almost-everybody-I've-met Disney movie since the heyday of the Bronze Age.  Finally we are at the point, and I am so happy to be able to say this, where I can say that the most recent major animated feature from Walt Disney Animation is the best since the last one.  I'm going to tentatively go ahead and say we're finally, finally in the Iron Age of Disney.

It's been a long rough road since the end of the Bronze Age, hasn't it?  But I think we've finally hit the end of it since Disney is finally back to knocking it out of the park each time.  "Enchanted" was quite good.  "The Princess and the Frog" was terrific.  "Frankenweenie" was good, "Winnie the Pooh" was very good, and "Tangled" was outstanding!  Hell, I even liked "TRON Legacy" a lot, and it was a sequel to "Tron"!  As for "Ralph", as I said, it's excellent; made me feel brand-new at the end of a long stressful day.   I had a big stupid grin from the sixteen-bit Steamboat Willy studio logo to the "Kill screen" at the very end of the credits.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day! Speaking of Disney and video games...

1.28.13 - "Kingdom Hearts" Sequels!

(I'll be the first to admit this really applies better to the later games in this series.)

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Dog Dies in the Beginning - Thoughts on "Frankenweenie" (2012)

Movie # 65: "Frankenweenie" (2012)

So here's the good news about "Tim Burton Presents Tim Burton's 'Frankenweenie': a Tim Burton Joint".  If you miss the earlier, weirder Tim Burton, he is... actually, no, he's not back in this movie.  Indeed, the included trailer for "OZ: the Great and Powerful" shows that he's still--

What?

Sam Raimi?!

No kidding?

Well, hell, knock me over with a feather!  Oh, wait, Burton's listed as producer, so there's that.

Anyway, the Tim Burton we miss isn't exactly back in "Frankenweenie".  But "Frankenweenie" is by far the most Tim Burtony of the recent Tim Burton movies.  It's not the most inventive thing he's ever done (it's an extended dance remix of one of Burton's own short films after all), but it's the first film in a while where it feels he actually put some heart into it.  Heck, there's even a nice little exchange in "Frankenweenie" about that very idea.

So everything about "Frankenweenie" is perfectly fine.  The animation is very good, the voices are nice, all the references to classic monster movies are clever, and the characters are delightfully weird.

Really, the only thing "Frankenweenie" did wrong -and this isn't even the fault of the movie itself- is that it arrived in theaters only about a month and a half after "Paranorman".

It's downright unfair to compare the two, isn't it?  Netflix sent me both movies within a week of each-other, so I was watching "Frankenweenie" with "Paranorman" very fresh in my mind.  And, man, that's really unfair, because I loved "Paranorman" so much, it left "Frankenweenie in the dust.  It had a far better and more profound story, much better characters, and far, far better animation and effects (those Tulle clouds!  Norman's translucent ears!  Ye gods, that final showdown!)  It's face-meltingly beautiful and it p*ssed the "Wah, think of the CHILDREN!!!" crowd right off (to which one can only say, great job completely missing the point of the movie).  Come to mention that, "Paranorman" really has more in common with "Rango", not least because it's very probable that it will be my favorite animated feature of the past year.  Stay awesome, Laika.

So, there's my review of "Frankenweenie": it's perfectly okay, but it's just okay.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Art of the Day! Trophius is a weird Pokemon; part giant tortoise, part dragon, part... tree...  Here he is holding the Sharp Beak item, and looking weirder than usual.

Sharp Beak!

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

"You'd be surprised there's so much to be done..." - Thoughts on "Winnie the Pooh" (2011)

Movie # 64: "Winnie the Pooh" (2011)

"Winnie the Pooh" is adorable and sweet and, miraculously, completely and utterly unironic, unsarcastic, and unhip (ie, it's not the bad sort of hip; more on this in a bit). It features terrific character animation by such Disney legends as Andreas Deja, Eric Goldberg, and Mark Henn and some cute songs by Zooey Deschanel and -heh- one of the songwriting minds behind "Avenue Q" and "The Book of Mormon". The animation is digital (using the ToonBoom software) but beautifully simulates the look of the beloved "Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" from back in the late 70's and the use of straight-up CGI is kept to the very barest minimum.

And "Winnie the Pooh" is also very definitely for young children (and their attendant adults of course). And it is short. Really, REALLY short. Like, barely qualifying as a theatrical-length film short. Like, were it not for the prologue and opening credits, it'd
just make it to one hour short. That short.

Now, as we have seen, short animated films are not a bad thing, especially because they tend to be tight as heck and leave little room to screw things up. So every minute in "Winnie the Pooh" is dedicated to fun character moments and furthering the refreshingly basic plot (Pooh is hungry, he and the gang get caught up in searching for Eeyore's tail, a note left by Christopher Robin gets misinterpreted and this sparks another adventure, etc.)

And I probably don't even have to explain why an animated film for children that does not include any instances whatsoever of gross-out humor, sexual innuendos, cute animals singing catchy songs with horribly inappropriate lyrics, cute animals begging to eat at Chain Restaurant You Must Beg Your Parents To Take You To After The Movie, coprophagy, or Happy Madison alumnae is a freaking
Godsend. (Side Note: You used to not have to worry about these things so much but we live in strange times.)

If there is anything negative I have to say about "Winnie the Pooh" it is that it is not *quite* as good as "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh". (In particular, the Backson song ain't got nothin' on the Hephalumps and Woozles number.) It more closely recalls a particularly lavish episode of the Saturday morning cartoon. It is however much closer to the original Disney Pooh shorts and anthology film, and the way the characters get to play with the text again is wonderful.

There is also a fantastic gag involving Owl, Piglet, and a pit trap that is way too fun to spoil here and appears as though it was written just for kids who think the way I did at that age (and still do, of course).


For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.


-----

Picture of the Day!

I hope everyone had a lovely Halloween. In lieu of a drawing, I bring you this lovely autumn market scene:

Pineland Market

Thursday, September 15, 2011

"Headed For A Lil' Bit O'Trouble" - Disney Loose End #10: "Song of the South"

OK, let's just get it right on the table right away: Yes, "Song of the South" is a racially problematic film. And there are a few scenes that are downright weird and uncomfortable.

Having finally watched the film, it is absolutely understandable why Disney doesn't quite know what to do with it. Disney's usual method of dealing with the inconvenient spiky bits in the cotton candy of their films is to cut them right out. Unfortunately, there's no way to cut out the controversial portions in "Song" without altering the film beyond comprehension. And so, "Song of the South" was put on "permanent retirement" after it's anniversary re-release in 1986.

"Song of the South" quickly became the forbidden fruit of animation fans. I'd never ever get a chance to watch it, so I ran on what little information I could get out of animation history books. And nearly all of the books agreed on one thing: The animated portions of the film are fabulous, and probably the best animation to come out of the studio's features around World War Two. But the live-action portions are so inexcusably racist, they will melt your face off.

Well, what the history books don't tell you about those same live-action portions is this: Aside from being racially problematic*, they are also really boring. Really and truly and astonishingly boring.

The only bright spot in the live-action segments is the character of Uncle Remus himself. Warm and grandfatherly, his relationship with the unforgivably annoying child characters is very believable and sweet. The film picks up once he enters the story, and he leads us into the film's big "Holy Sh*t" Moment, about fifteen minutes in.

For this is where the animation begins, and it does so in a moment of... I can honestly and non-sarcastically call it Disney Magic. There are three animated stories in all, each with a signature song that I was surprised to already know all the words to. Disney may have Vaulted "Song of the South" for good, but they have lost no love for the songs nor the animated characters. (This is as good a time as any to admit Splash Mountain may be among my favorite rides if I have to choose.)

The animation is lively and gorgeous, and what's especially interesting about the animation is the fact that it doesn't really feel like anything else Disney was doing at the time. The humor and characterization both have much more in common with what you'd see in contemporary Looney Tunes, and there are scenes in the film that are directly referenced in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit". Speaking of, the moments when live-action and animated characters interact are still something truly special to see. Indeed, the only bad thing I can say about the animation here is that there is far, far too little of it.

The animated sequences are the reason why one should go through all the trouble of finding a way to watch "Song of the South". The cultural kerfuffle over the film has, sadly, overshadowed it for... well, turns out during my research that this film has been causing controversy practically since the day it was conceived. The thing is, Disney's self-censorship of the film has just exacerbated it beyond reason. I am in agreement with the Antagony and Ecstasy blog that if Disney quietly put "Song of the South" out on a limited edition Blue-Ray tomorrow, honestly most of the people buying it would be doing so just to see what the whole hubbub is all about. Until that day comes, you will, sadly, have to find the film through unconventional means. And I shouldn't encourage this kind of thing, but what choice has Disney left us with?

Well in any case, it's far more important to note now that I have caught up on every big-deal classic Disney film that contains animation! It's been a hell of a journey, and one that I recommend to anyone with even the slightest interest in animation.

That said, I'm not stopping until Disney does. Bring on "Winnie the Pooh" and "Wreck-It Ralph" and "King of the Elves" (maybe?) and "The Snow Queen"! For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

* - "But Trish, since I don't want to go through the trouble of finding a copy of the movie, just how racially problematic *are* the live-action portions of 'Song of the South'?"

Well first off, thanks for asking a person who has actually sat down and watched "Song of the South" rather than, as I suspect, one of the many, many people who refuse to experience controversial media yet form an opinion about them anyway. But the best way to find out how offensive "Song of the South" is to *you* (and notice the emphasis on *you*,
because I simply have no way of knowing what would offend *you* as different people are sensitive to entirely different things), if you're really curious, is to just watch the darn thing yourself.

Listen, essays have been written on this subject. Long ones. By people far, faaar more qualified to talk about this kind of controversial and highly emotional issue. So I don't know what I could add to the argument, but I feel I should add something. But I highly suspect I wouldn't feel compelled to elaborate on any of this if Disney hadn't self-censored the film.

And this is because honestly, the awkward ethnic identity politics here are about as offensive as other films and animation and media from the time period.
As I said, I didn't find "Song of the South" as face-meltingly racist as I found it just really, really weird and uncomfortable. What do I mean by that? Well, remember, the less you resembled what Walt Disney would consider "normal", the more problematic your onscreen depiction would be. Which means that anything uncomfortable in "Song of the South" is in good company with other (suspiciously not censored) Disney films. What's up, Peter Pan. How's Princess Tiger Lily? More to the point, how's her entire tribe?

The most obviously offensive aspect of "Song of the South" is the very, very bizarre "American Adventure"-ish Disney spin and big giant smiley face it puts on one of the most horrible chapters in United States history... maybe. The movie doesn't state openly whether it takes place before, during, or after the Civil War and that's what most of the awkward scenes orbit around.

Okay, details. So in "Song of the South" there's a rich old white woman who lives in a mansion that just happens to be right near a field where poor black people cheerily whistle their way to work and are generally depicted
(much like other non-WASPs in Disney's movies) as weird/scary/fascinating alien Others. The word "slave" is never spoken out loud ever, and indeed the film takes the longest possible route out of it's way to avoid any racially charged language at all. Annoying Little Boy's best friend is a black kid, and the film interestingly does not approach this friendship as unusual at all. But then you notice that said best friend is conspicuously absent during the big (and ultimately kinda pointless) birthday party scene without explanation. The only truly mean human characters are a pair of unspeakably cruel poor white boys (though that's pretty loaded in its own way come to mention it). Uncle Remus lives in his own little shack and it is shown late in the film that he can pack up and leave whenever he likes. Annoying Little Boy's mother doesn't want her son playing with Uncle Remus, and in one of the more awkward scenes, Uncle Remus does not act more assertive when confronted by her. This is all because she is really really prejudiced against... storytellers. Yup.

As it happens, the film is so obtuse and reliant on outmoded ethnic stereotypes from several generations back, I found myself saying "OMG, this is so racist!" much much less often than I was saying, "uhhh?" or "wait, what?" But if I am to be truly honest, I found the racial politics in a slightly more recent film more troubling. And there wasn't anything in "Song of the South" that was so openly racist that it melted my face off the way an obscure number in this stone-cold Christmas classic did. And "Song of the South" didn't p*ss me off nearly as much as "Gone With the Wind" did, so there's that.


-----

Sketch of the Day!

Such controversy! Such drama! Let's wash it all away with in-progress turtles!

"Turtle Power" Progress 5

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

"Yellowish Puce, Nilly Nally!" - Disney Loose End #13: "So Dear To My Heart"

It's early in the summer of 1903 in the picturesque little town of Fulton County, located somewhere in the mythical turn-of-the-last-century midwest that Walt Disney so loved. And here begins the tale of what is perhaps his most forgotten film with animation in it: "So Dear to My Heart".

The film is as obscure as Disney films get. It's tucked away among the Anthology Features (obscure in their own right) like an afterthought. The very few scenes of animation within the film are at least as interesting as anything in "Melody Time" or "Make Mine Music", and include some fine moments indeed.


It's too bad the film surrounding those approximately fifteen minutes of full animation is such a slog.

OK, kiddies, gather 'round. As I said before, it's 1903 and we're somewhere in the mythical candy-colored midwest that very likely existed nowhere else but in the fertile mind of Walt Disney. As legend has it, Disney grew up on a farm where... hell with it. Suspiciously, no two accounts agree on what Disney's childhood was like. But we do know that in any case, whether it was rosy and happy or horrifically traumatic, he had a lifelong affinity for farms and for the Good Old Days.

Oh, the Good Old Days! When little boys lived with their fire-and-brimstone-and-horrible-guilt-and-blatant-contradiction preachin' grannies and did all the chores that didn't involve sewing or knitting or weaving or cooking or beating rugs with those rug-beating things. When uncle Burl Ives would come over with his guitar and his folky songs and little cousin Tildy, who has been a mite bit grumpy lately since her application to the Lollipop Guild was rejected cause her little squeakie voice wasn't *quite* grating enough. Where you could raise yourself a baby lamb to win the Special Prize at the county fair, even though that lamb is...
well, you know... black! Where boys could tromp through the deep woods where the owl blinks and the werewolf howls and the Skunk Ape screams, and look for bee trees, whereupon they could raid the beehive without incident and bring a fortune in honey into town. Where the highlight of a little boy's day was puttin' pretty pictures in his scrapbook, and hallucinating while reading it. And where the highlight of a little girl's day was pouting and whining and runnin' home cryin' to her daddy.

Aw, gee wizz! You all don't know how nice we had it back in the Good Old Days! You kids these days and yer card games and yer face books and yer motor cars and yer rap music and yer public schools and yer piercings and yer electricity and yer animal rights and yer child labor laws and yer civil rights and yer women's lib...

As you may have guessed, I have a healthy level of cynicism about nostalgia for the Good Old Days.

But all criticism aside, the animation is very pretty, and it has some truly beautiful moments. The idea is that Jeremiah (the little boy) is collecting pictures in a scrapbook and he imagines them coming to life. The animated characters interact with the scrapbook elements in really inventive ways. At the same time, all the animation is at the service of musical numbers with inspiring messages for the young audience, and these songs are very, very boring when they aren't downright head-scratching. There's a reason why you don't hear these ditties much anymore. (My gosh, "Stick-to-itivity"...)

So overall, "So Dear To My Heart" is pretty dull and unintentionally very, very weird. It's SO aggressively a product of it's time that children will likely either be bored silly or find the movie as utterly baffling as a student film. It's ultimately of interest only to the hardcore Disney animation completest.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Sketch of the Day!

8.9.11 - Maine Wildlife Park Studies

Thursday, September 8, 2011

"Believe the Lie" - Disney Loose End #4: "The Reluctant Dragon"

As I stated a while back, Disney has a long history of making-of documentaries that, while informative and often fascinating, also tend to be a bit sugarcoated. It turns out that history runs back at least as far as what could be called Disney's first-ever making-of feature, and it is one of the very strangest Disney Animated Canon films of all.

When I was a little kid, I thought that "The Reluctant Dragon" was merely a rather lavish short based on a cute Kenneth Grahame short story that would air among other compiled theatrical cartoons on the Disney Channel. I had no idea at the time that it was part of a feature until I chanced to catch that feature once on the Disney Channel. (Yes, there was a time when TDC showed classic cartoons and weird and obscure old Disney stuff from their vaults. And they also showed things like "The Harlem Globetrotters Visit Gilligan's Island". Let's not let the Nostalgia Filter get too rosy). My recent viewing of the film for this review was only the second time I have ever seen it, and it sure is a thing.

What kind of thing is "The Reluctant Dragon"? Well, it is a film that purported to show it's 1941 audience how Walt Disney made cartoons in his shiny new Burbank studio. The one with the Mickey Ave. and Dopey Drive signpost (which according to some Disney historians, was made purposefully for the film just to make the studio look more whimsical and never came down). According to "Dragon", the Disney studio is about two parts Venture Industries, two parts Emerald City, two parts Zevo Toys, and four parts Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory (especially in that genuinely lovely paint lab scene). And while it is very hard to find information about the film, this much is almost assuredly true: the happy happy 1941 Disney studio depicted in "The Reluctant Dragon" was utter horsesh*t.

You see, almost everyone onscreen is an actor. Aside from the impossible-to-imitate Clarence "Duckie" Nash and Florence Gill, there is but one moment where actual Disney legends from the time are onscreen, and their presence is all but unheralded (that's Ward Kimball, Norm Ferguson, and Fred Moore in the "How to Ride a Horse" segment). There is, naturally, an awkward realty subtext here: "The Reluctant Dragon" was released during an extremely vicious studio strike. For those in the know, it's a little hard not to notice the tension in the scenes involving actual Disney artists, particularly the one incredibly brief scene towards the end where Walt Disney himself appears (in, appropriately enough, the legendary Sweatbox).

But never mind the lie that is this making-of "documentary" (and indeed, if you do not understand how animation works, this film won't exactly help, as all the various steps are parsed out to us in random order [soundtrack, then photography, then ink and paint, then character design, then storyboard... yeah.]) What treasures does this lost little lamb of a film hold for us Disney animation geeks?

Well, I was very wrong when I said back during the original Disney Animated Canon project that there was nothing interesting here aside from the off-screen drama. You get quick (or surprisingly long) glimpses at early versions of characters who would star in "Bambi", "Dumbo", "Lady and the Tramp", "Peter Pan", and others. You get a brief but interesting look at how the famous Multiplane Camera works (although exactly *what* we're looking at isn't explained
if you don't already know), and you get the sense that Disney was basically the absurdly ambitious James Cameron of his day. You see what could only be described as the world's first animatic during the "Baby Weems" sequence (which also may have introduced the very concept of storyboards to Hollywood at large, as theorized in this Antagony and Ecstasy review.) And you get the rather sweet "Reluctant Dragon" short itself, along with a less-heralded but very cute Goofy short.

Oh, and you also get a thankfully very few but still rather alarming instances of casual sexism, racism, and arguable homophobia (oh
wow, the Reluctant Dragon himself). Which sadly brings into focus the fact that the less you resembled what Walt Disney would consider "normal", the more... problematic your onscreen depiction would be. We... might have to get into this in a bit more detail in an upcoming review.

All in all, "The Reluctant Dragon" is a fascinating little anomaly hidden among the other, more loved Disney films. Definitely something worth digging up if you can find it. Join me next week, when I will tackle the most controversial Disney animated feature film of all, as well as the... probably least controversial one (but not necessarily in that order).

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Sketch of the Day!

8.9.11 - Maine Wildlife Park Studies

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

"Took a lil' NAP where the roots all TWIST!" - Disney Loose End #44: "James and the Giant Peach"

So here's our first loose end from the Disney Animated Canon, just recently available on Netflix. Actually, I'll consider it a good thing that I had to skip this one during the time I was originally watching/reviewing the Canon all those years ago, since "James and the Giant Peach" is a very interesting, all but forgotten film that deserves a bit of elbow room, rather than a quick paragraph-long review. The same could be said of the other three films I'll be reviewing over the next two weeks.

Some years ago, there was considerable debate as to which animated features made by Walt Disney Pictures should be considered "true" Disney films and which ones shouldn't. This was largely spurred by the glut of direct-to-video/DVD Disney sequels,
as seen here, but the question is one that seems to have haunted Disney as long as I can remember. There is an Official Official List of films in the Disney Animated Canon, and even so, part of me wonders how much was added and subtracted just so Disney could say they've hit fifty films in all just last winter.

You see, back when I was a kid, if a Disney film contained animation, it was considered an "Animated Disney Animated Classic Animated Entertainment Event What is Animated." Simple enough. So clearly "Fantasia" and "Cinderella" and "Sleeping Beauty" were part of what would in the future be called the Canon, but so were things like "Victory Through Air Power" and "Song of the South" and even "TRON" (speaking of, here are more thoughts on this issue). If you were a movie and you gave Disney a reason to brag about it's animation legacy, you were in, which made a lot of sense back when Disney was hurting for things to brag about with regards to animated films. (To get a sense of what Disney was like in the late 70's through the mid 80's, picture a peacock who is desperately trying to replace his shiny display feathers, even as they are moulting.) As you can see here, when you count every notable Disney feature-length film with animation in it as part of the Canon, we left #50 in the dust years ago (then again, given the movie that gets to be number fifty by my reckoning is the much-derided "Dinosaur"...)

"The Nightmare Before Christmas" in particular has always had a strange and uncomfortable position within the Disney Animated Canon and, indeed, within Disney films period. When the film was initially released, Disney had little idea what to do with it, how to advertise it, and, most importantly (and tellingly) how to make it into a toy or a theme park ride or a Happy Burger King Kid's Club Meal. It took years and years for Disney to figure out how to appease fans of "Nightmare", and while one could argue that they are going way too far in the opposite direction, it's nice to see them doing anything at all with it. By far, the greatest bone thrown to "Nightmare Before Christmas" and it's fans is the appearance of Jack Skellington and company in "Kingdom Hearts" back before
that series went off the rails in a way that is, come to mention it, truly impressive. For this reason, I'd have felt remiss if I hadn't included it in the Canon.

And if "Nightmare" counts then, by God! so does it's immediate successor. Which brings us, finally to today's entry in my journey through the Disney animated films I'd missed out on earlier for various reasons and just recently procured copies of (and never you mind how, though mad props to those of you who have supported this project). Ah, "James and the Giant Peach", what a wonderful little oddball in the history of animated films you are. It is very sad to reflect that, while Disney has taken so very long to acknowledge "Nightmare Before Christmas", "James" might as well be completely invisible.

Henry Selick, the director of both "Nightmare" and "James", and also of "Coraline" and the impressively bizarre "Monkeybone", is, God bless him and his beautifully crazy mind, the kind of director who makes whatever Bizzaries and Fantasies he would like to watch and screw you all if you don't like it. Which is why his adaptation of a Roald Dahl storybook lies among the best Dahl-inspired films. And this is because Roald Dahl, may he and his beautifully crazy mind rest in peace, always struck me as the kind of children's book author who wrote what he wanted and never mind if there are any concerned parents who don't like it. (Maurice Sendak is a close soul-brother.) To that end, his characters tend to face the most unthinkable trauma before some kind of magical thing or other whisks them away to their Happily Ever After. And I do mean "unthinkable". Very early on in "James and the Giant Peach", we are told by the sweetly grandfatherly voice of Pete Postlethwaite (and how I miss him!) how our young hero watched on helplessly as his kindly mother and father were eaten by an angry rhinoceros.

Methinks if almost any other children's book author at all had written something like that, it would warrant a passionate 😱 

  
In a Roald Dahl book, getting maimed by an utterly random animal is Monday. Hanging with large invertebrates (here designed by the wonderful Lane Smith) is Tuesday.

The action inside and around the titular giant peach is why we're here and Selick's work in "James" is astonishing and wonderful. All the creatures have great physicality and marvelous little character moments. The same astounding attention to detail present in "Nightmare Before Christmas" is here too. The live-action bookends are a touch awkward... but I *did* just watch "Rock-A-Doodle", so I'm willing to let them slide.

So here we have a lost little gem that, I think, deserves a lot more attention. Next up, speaking of lost movies, we dig a little deeper into the Disney vault. For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

-----

Sketch of the Day!

8.9.11 - Maine Wildlife Park Studies

Friday, May 27, 2011

The Cyber-Dude Cyber-Abides. - Thoughts on "TRON: Legacy"

Movie #63: "TRON: Legacy"

Well first off, because this just occurred to me, let's marvel at the fact that an early 80's flop with a modest but very loyal cult following has been given a gigantic, ambitious, big-budget sequel (the first of a hopeful long-running franchise) by a massive mainstream studio. Whether or not you think the movie is good, that is pretty amazing.

And all things considered, I rather liked "TRON: Legacy". I've got a soft spot for the original and given how long this film has been in development and how much Disney has been crapping itself over the film promoting it, it's much better than I expected it would be.

Of course, what I mean by this is that "Legacy" is a worthy sequel to the original "TRON". And that is to say, it's basically CGI eye-candy. It has a few interesting ideas here and there and it bothered me a little in hindsight that it didn't really play around with the interesting sci-fi concepts it easily could have. But to be honest, I didn't really expect it to (then again, it is very sad that I'm conditioned to not expect interesting sci-fi from big franchise sci-fi movies). The film takes a little bit to find it's footing, the villain's evil plan is incomprehensible, and there is an early scene that rivals Jim Hawking sky-sailboarding in "Treasure Planet" in it's hamfisted attempt to show the kids in the audience how awesome the hero is. All things considered, those weren't the things that I disliked most about this movie. If you've read this blog for a long time you probably know already what I'm going to rant about in the whole next paragraph.

There are three characters in this movie who are brought to animated life via motion capture. Two of them are little virtual TRON people, so it isn't
too distracting. And of these, one of them is seen only briefly and the other is the villain so it's fine that he creeps you out a little (but oh ye Gods, when he shouts near the end...

The third character is a person from the real world at a younger age. He looks fine at first when he faces away from us and when he is completely obscured by shadows and such. When he finally faces us, he looks terrible. Completely terrible. Like, in the same year we got the Winkelvoss twins in "The Social Network", he looks like something out of "Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within". No, worse than that. He looks like he was animated by somebody who had only the most vague idea of how human cheek muscles and jawbones work but has never ever actually watched someone talk before.

But other than this, the movie is really neat.
Like the original, it's got a production design that doesn't really look like anything else that has come out of Disney, and I liked it for the sheer fact that the animation in the updated TRON universe is *really* pretty (hot dang, the new lightcycle transformation sequence!) Where the first "TRON" was basically, "Look at what we can do with computer animation!", this movie is, "Look at what we can do with computer animation NOW!" I'm genuinely sad that I didn't get to see this in IMAX.

I would be remiss if I did not mention Castor. I wouldn't dream of ruining the fun by explaining who he is or what to expect from him. Just know that Michael Sheen knew
exactly what kind of movie "TRON: Legacy" should have been (a big retro cheesy meal). He comes in at just the right moment (after the movie almost grinds to a halt and nearly reaches a "9" level of Young Newbie: "Let's go actually do something" Old Fart: "No, everything must stay the same" wallbangery). And he steals the show right out from under Not Sam Worthington. Remember when we first saw Jack Sparrow in the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" and wondered, "how the hell did Disney let this fly?" Yep, same deal here.

Quorra's another fun character and I like how she takes the old Cute Girl Who Saves the Boring Hero meme in some different directions and the little flashes of the "things humans take for granted that an alien wouldn't quite 'get'" part of her personality. The music is amazing and overall the movie is a fun ride for fans of the original. I am actually pretty curious as to where Disney's going to take this franchise from here.

ADDENDUM: As this just hit me, months later: The weirdest thing about me reviewing "TRON: Legacy" as part of the Disney Animated Canon is the fact that CGI eye-candy is EVERYWHERE these days. So why consider "TRON" part of the Canon and not, say, "Pirates of the Caribbean"? "G-Force"? "Sorcerer's Apprentice"? You cannot deny that all these films include computer animated characters.

Well, the reason why "Legacy" (and any possible future "TRON" movies although the future looks a bit dim there right now) makes the cut is simply because it's parent did. And the one and only reason "TRON" made the cut is because Disney considered it one of their animated films in the early 80's, back when it was the most impressive recent thing they had to brag about. I don't suppose anyone is going to necessarily complain that I am not reviewing "G-Force" et al, but I supposed I ought to say something about it to cover myself.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.


----

Sketch of the Day! It's a raptor! How exciting!

5.10.11 Sketchbook Page

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

"You should know that this is the strangest thing I have EVER DONE!" - Thoughts on "Tangled"

But first, happy Towel Day!

And second, "Green With Envy" "Green With Envy" "Green With Envy"!!!!????!!!!

Hooray, another Disney Animated Canon post! It's been too long. Ideally, we'll get two this week; I watched Disney movies while recovering from my cold and I now feel like approximately $990,988..

Movie #62: "Tangled"

2010 was a year full of amazing animated features. "The Illusionist" and
"Legend of the Guardians" and "Tales From EarthSea" were very nice, I loved "Toy Story 3" and "Despicable Me" and "How to Train Your Dragon", and both "Secret of Kells" and "Sita Sings the Blues" knocked my socks off for entirely different reasons.

So I hope nobody takes it as *too* much of a criticism when I say that "Tangled" wasn't as good as some of these other films, OK? I am saying it isn't as good as "Toy Story 3", for goodness sake, and what recent movies are? (I am a little anxious about this because I got a few comments that implied that readers thought my saying, "'Alice in Wonderland' didn't suck as much as I thought it would" meant "Holy sh*t, this movie was amazing!" instead of, "Literally the best thing I can say for this movie is that it didn't entirely suck.")

"Tangled" is very good and well worth a watch (it pains me that some of you may have a hard time being convinced of this but we'll get to that in a minute). Overall, comparing it to other recent D.A.C. films, I didn't like it as much as "The Princess and the Frog". (Tangent: In particular, the songs aren't nearly as good. Alan Menken is working with a new lyricist and the lyrics are... Menken needs to get Joss Whedon on the phone.) But it is a damn sight better than "Bolt". The CGI is far better and more confident than in any of the previous CGI Disney films, and it is SO pretty. Only criticism here is that you have never noticed until now that some of Glen Keane's human characters' faces are, like, 40% eyeball.

Lastly, Disney needs to get a new marketing division like woah. As with "Frog", they've done a capital job of making the movie look like exactly what it isn't (I nailed it earlier last year when I called the "Tangled" ads a "Scott Pilgrim" level of misaimed marketing). Just how worried were they about the supposed "boys think princesses are icky" thing? This little-seen trailer, on the other hand, makes me want Disney to have a copy of my portfolio to review yesterday:





For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

----

Sketch of the Day!

I like water monsters. You like water monsters. We all like water monsters, so I did a digital painting of that water monster sketch from an earlier post:

Lake Monster Logo Design

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

"Falkor, it's like the Dork Age never happened!" - Thoughts on "The Princess and the Frog"

WDW Viral marketing

Movie #61: "The Princess and the Frog"

"Princess and the Frog" is truly, truly wonderful. Easily the best Disney animated movie since "The Little Mermaid". Go see it already! Quick, before Disney decides that what we all want is more movies about talking rodents who make poop jokes.


I think I understand why I wasn't so jazzed about "Enchanted" when I saw it: it's too "Shrek"-like. (If I ever were to write a list of Movies That Are Good, Don't Get Me Wrong, But They Also Kind Of Ruined Movies Because Studios Like To Follow The Leader, I would (a) come up with a snappier title and (b) have "Shrek" very near the top.) It has that ironic detachment that the "Shrek" series popularized and flatly refuses to give in to the fact that, well, it's a fairy tale. It's corny by it's very nature. Why not embrace the corniness?
So my inner ten-year-old and I are both very happy to report that there is not one iota of snark or insincerity in "The Princess and the Frog". You cannot imagine how refreshing this is.

 
Now the trailers and commercials looked
awful. They were cut to make the movie look like something it isn't. (Trust me, the butt jokes make sense in context. No I am not kidding.) That firefly who looked like he'd be another Jar-Jar type annoyance? Turns out he's a fun character, and he even has a couple of genuinely touching moments.

Now I don't want to spoil too much but there's a scene some ways into the movie that made me sad... and then, when I heard the rest of the audience reacting the same way, it made me smile through the tears. Because this* is what great animation can do. This is what we've been missing from Disney all these years.

 
You could easily slip this movie in with the Bronze Age Disney Animated Films and it would not look out of place at all. The character animation is amazing, the backgrounds are gorgeous, and the songs are terrific. There's a great villain with an awesome song, and a musical number that uses stylized animation very similar to Tex Avery's "
Page Miss Glory". This is Disney forgetting it's mistakes from the past and going back to the kinds of things it does best. Is it a little old-fashioned? Well, yes it is. But it is a damn good Disney movie. I had forgotten how much I'd missed their classic style. Disney has won me back and I actually want to give this big scary corporation a hug.


Go and see it already, so their executives get the message! This merry throwback to Disney's classic style will stay with me for a long time. Not sure I can say the same thing about "Avatar"
...
 
* - The following is a major spoiler so here comes the hard-to-read text.


Look, this is a movie that got our whole theater to feel bad that a beetle got squished.
 
By the way, killing off the little sidekick critter for real is about the only truly daring thing in this movie. It's a pretty big deal if you're a Disney fan, but if that's not extreeeeeeeem enough for you, "Alvin and The Chipmunks 2: Ow My Childhood!" is just the next theater over.

For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

----
Sketch of the Day!!!
1.5.10 Sketchbook Page
I have no idea either.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

But there's one little loose end that deserves to be tied up, isn't there?

The DAC: The Bronze Age part two

Movie #41: "The Nightmare Before Christmas"
I'm fresh from a marathon of Christmas movies and I still feel guilty that I didn't do it during the original Chronological Animated Disney Canon posts.
Like "Roger Rabbit", you tend to forget just how amazing this movie really is. The DVD looks terrific, and I'm sure I saw sight gags that even Henry Selick wasn't aware of. Packed with terrific effects and wonderful music, this is a treasure. Plus everyone needs something a little weird during the holiday season.
The special features on the three-disc "Jack head" (not listed here, though it would certainly fit) are great fun to watch too, though they skip over one of the more interesting things about this movie: back when "Nightmare" first arrived in theaters, Disney had the damndest time figuring out how to sell it. It was actually originally released under their Touchstone banner. Toys were produced very briefly and quickly disappeared from Disney Store shelves. Fans had to wait for almost a decade before Disney woke up to the movie's cult hit status... and now they're marketing the hell out of it. And normally this would not make me sad (my Christmas decorations are sorely lacking in Halloweentown residents) but Disney seems to be marketing "Nightmare" memorabilia to a very specific demographic. That's why I say this year we steal this fandom back from the whining Emo sissypants Hot Topic.

Merry Christmas to all! For more posts in this ongoing series, go here, or click the Chronological Disney Animated Canon tag below.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The (Mostly) Chronological Disney Animated Canon - Review Index

A quick, easy-to-link-to list of every post in the Chronological Animated Disney Canon Project, for those who would like to read them in order (which you should, as they wouldn't make sense otherwise.) Everything up until the full reviews (starting with the Loose Ends) was originally written between 1/12/08 - 3/6/08 for one of my extinct Geocities websites.

Introduction: In Which Trish Embarks on her Plan to Watch Every Readily Available Disney Film Containing Animation in Chronological Order

Golden Age Part One: "Snow White", "Pinocchio", and "Fantasia"

Golden Age Part Two: "Dumbo" and "Bambi"

Anthology Pictures: "Saludos Amigos", "Victory Through Air Power", and "Three Caballeros"

More Anthology Pictures: "Make Mine Music", "Fun and Fancy Free", "Melody Time", and "The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad"

Silver Age Part One: "Cinderella", "Alice in Wonderland", "Peter Pan", "Lady and the Tramp", and "Sleeping Beauty"

Silver Age Part Two: "101 Dalmatians", "The Sword in the Stone", "Mary Poppins", and "The Jungle Book"

The Dark (Post-Walt Disney) Age Part One: "The Aristocats", "Bedknobs and Broomsticks", "Robin Hood", "The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh", and "The Rescuers"

The Dark Age Part Two: "Pete's Dragon", "The Fox and the Hound", "TRON", and "The Black Cauldron"

The Bronze Age Part One: "The Great Mouse Detective", "Who Framed Roger Rabbit", "Oliver and Company", "The Little Mermaid", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "Beauty and the Beast"

The Bronze Age Part Two: "Aladdin", "The Lion King", "Pocahontas", "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", and "Hercules"

The Dork Age Part One: "Mulan", "Tarzan", "Disney's Dinosaur", "Fantasia 2000", "The Emperor's New Groove", "Atlantis: The Lost Empire", and "Lilo and Stitch"

The Dork Age Part Two: "Treasure Planet", "Brother Bear", "Home on the Range", "Chicken Little", "Meet the Robinsons", "Enchanted", and "Bolt"

Loose End #4: "The Reluctant Dragon"

Loose End #10: "Song of the South"

Loose End #13: "So Dear To My Heart"

Loose End #41: "The Nightmare Before Christmas"

Loose End #44: "James and the Giant Peach"

#61: "The Princess and the Frog"

#62: "Tangled"

#63: "TRON: Legacy"

#64: "Winnie the Pooh"

#65: "Frankenweenie"

#66: "Wreck-It Ralph"

#67: "Frozen"

#68: "Big Hero Six"
 

#69: "Zootopia"

#70: "Moana"

#71: "Ralph Breaks the Internet"

#72: "Mary Poppins Returns"

#73: "Frozen 2"

#74 (eventually): "Raya and the Last Dragon"

#75: "I Don't Know, But Hopefully Something Good"

Related Posts:

"The Illusion of Life"

"Disney Goes to the Oscars!"

"The Sweatbox"

"Dream On, Silly Dreamer..."

"Waking Sleeping Beauty"

The State of the Chronological Disney Animated Canon Series

More Animation Marathons

* - The Chronological Disney Animated Canon

* - Don Bluth Month

* - Dreamworks' "Tradigitals"

* - The Short Animation Blogathon

* - My Summer of Sequels

* - Random 90's Animation

* - The Princess Project

I also very highly recommend the similar projects from the following people, even though so many of them make me look like a slacker:

* - Disney Tag at Alternate Ending
* - The Disney Film Project Blog
* - 100 Days of Disney Blog
* - Mousterpiece Cinema