Dreamworks #9: Shark Tale

Shark Tale - 6.7/10

If anyone was wondering why I stopped doing these for so long, the reason was 100% because I had no real desire to watch this movie again, and didn’t want to cheat by skipping it. I finally made myself sit through it, and though it wasn’t nearly as bad as I remember, I’d still say it’s probably the Studio’s weakest effort.

Let’s begin. This movie has all the hallmarks of a film designed by committee. “Hip hop slang! Pop culture references! Shallow racial stereotypes! Kids like that shit, right? Throw it in!” And they were trying so hard with the jokes. In stark contrast to the Shrek films, which were so casual and effortless with their humor, a solid half of the comedy in this movie is painfully forced. Perfect example: the inevitable never-ending stream of fish puns (see what I did there?). Had they been sprinkled throughout the movie here and there, it would have been a fun running gag. Instead, we are bombarded with them one after another for the first five minutes of the film. Katie Current. Starfish Tours. Mussel Crowe. Jessica Shrimpson. Cod Steward. Shell phones. The prawn shop. HA HA HA! I GET IT! THEY’RE FISH!

As far as casting goes, the committee’s fingerprints are once again evident. Will Smith stars as “Will Smith” playing “Will Smith the fish” as a fish. And no, there isn’t some clever movie-within-a-movie-within-a-movie framing device, it’s just layer upon layer upon layer of hack writing, phoned-in performances and general, all-around not giving a crap. It’s sad, because I know he’s perfectly capable of a sincere performance, but that clearly isn’t what was asked of him here.

Surprisingly, most of the supporting cast does very well – those not pigeonholed into the aforementioned stereotypes, anyway. Jack Black and Angelina Jolie particularly impressed me by giving actual vocal performances rather than just “lending their voices” as is so common these days. Were it not for the credits, you might not have known it was them. 

There were other bright spots too. As I said, only about half the jokes were forced; the other half actually played very well and I was laughing a lot more than I’d thought I would. The premise itself was interesting, however the lead character ruined it for me. Will Smith’s “performance” aside, the character is horribly written. Strictly speaking, he’s a jerk. Why should I be rooting for him? Moreover, we are given no reason why Renée Zelleger Fish likes him to begin with, much less why she still does at the end. His “I’ve learned something today” speech in no way makes up for the way he treated her throughout the movie, and she comes off as a pushover by forgiving him just because he says she was “right in front of [him] the whole time.” Blech. There are some unfortunate implications there that I don’t really want to go into. Suffice to say that were this a romantic comedy, his would have been the asshole character she was hung up on in the beginning before falling for the actual hero of the story (who is sadly absent from this film altogether).

All things considered, not as terrible as I remembered by any means, and probably not worth a 9 month hiatus to avoid it, but definitely not their best, and probably not one I’ll be watching again any time soon.

 

 

DAC 53: Frozen

Frozen - 8.8/10

As this was another fairy tale, naturally I've been looking forward to it since it was announced. Since the previews started appearing I've also been dreading it a bit, but more on that in a moment. The main point here is that my anticipation for this movie could not have been higher, so there was a lot of potential for me to either get blown away or mired in disappointment. For the most part, Disney delivered.

I'll save spoilers for the last two paragraphs, so let's just cover the basics. Animation: stellar. Voice cast: great. In fact, aside from Kristen Bell (whom I could not recognize despite knowing it was her from the beginning) and Idina Menzel (who occasionally sounded too old for her character but nevertheless did an amazing job), I hadn't really heard of any of these guys. And that's good! I miss the days when you could go to an animated movie and just enjoy it rather than constantly be saying, "Whose voice is that?"

The songs were a mixed bag. There was a really phenomenal one (sung of course by Idina Menzel), a couple of okay ones and one or two that felt a little awkward. Kind of like the old-time Don Bluth and even early Dreamworks movies where it felt like they were putting songs in simply because they thought they were supposed to, or something. The music itself was excellent, at least.

Characters. All right, here it is: I was dreading the snowman. From the trailers it looked like he was going to be exactly like the gargoyles from The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and we all know how much I loved those guys. Miraculously, save for one horribly out-of-place song sequence (I'm talking gargoyle bad, or even two-headed dragon in Quest for Camelot bad), he was actually a good character who served not only a necessary plot function but a symbolic one as well. Touché, Disney.

The character of Kristoff was there mostly to serve as a facilitator and a smokescreen to the plot, but again more on that in a minute. The two female leads were amazing. I loved them both and I can't really go into why until the spoiler paragraphs. All these characters and even the plot itself play a lot with the audience's expectations, a lot like what they did in The Princess and the Frog, but taken to the next level.

Okay, here be spoilers. Can I just say how much of a loop I was thrown for at Hans' betrayal? Seriously. I left the film a little baffled because there had been times when there was no need for him to keep up the charade (except from a writer's perspective to preserve the twist), but he did it anyway. I'm willing to let this go because how often do villains reveal their true nature too early and for no reason (other than from a writer's perspective to shock the audience) only to get caught. Fair enough, I guess. He just wasn't taking any chances.

My absolute favorite part of the movie was the climax. I know it's supposed to be, but this is a special case. Princess Anna has been (accidentally) cursed, and we are told that only an act of true love can save her. This is where the movie starts messing with your expectations. True love's kiss, we all assume, is the answer, because isn't it always? This serves to reveal not only Hans' duplicity, but that Anna's heart truly lies with Kristoff (as anyone who had seen any promotional material could have guessed). So then she goes out to try and kiss Kristoff, but before she can, she sees her sister about to be executed. In lieu of saving herself, she places herself in front of the sword. Even if the blow doesn't strike her, the curse will kill her, but she doesn't care because come on - it's her sister.  Of course this act of true love breaks the curse, and in sacrificing herself Anna not only saves her sister AND herself, but the entire kingdom is freed from eternal winter. You know what? I'm gonna go ahead and say it: Anna is best princess.

Dreamworks #8: Shrek 2

Shrek 2 - 8.7/10

Rarely do I come upon a sequel that I like more than the original. I could probably count them on my hands. Shrek 2 is definitely one of them.

This movie takes everything that was good about the first movie and turns it up to eleven. The writing is tighter, the jokes are funnier (and there’s more of them), and the characters have really hit their stride. It also helps that they’re lampooning not just fairy tales anymore, but Hollywood culture as well. And the pop-culture references...wow. I usually hate them, but they were so brilliant here that I couldn’t help but laugh. There are a couple near the beginning that were obviously just copying the popular movies of the time (Spider-man and Lord of the Rings to be specific), but the rest were spot on. And they’d sneak up on you. Something serious would be happening and BAM! Starbucks joke. And like the first film, they don’t stop to call attention to the fact that they’ve made a joke; they just move on and trust that you got it.

There are some new characters in this as well, all for the better. John Cleese was pretty good as the king, though sadly they didn’t give him much to do. Same goes for Rupert Everett as Prince Charming. Jennifer Saunders was fantastic as the villain, who I’m going to go ahead and spoil because who honestly hasn’t seen this that would want to? Having the Fairy Godmother be the bad guy was just one more punch that helps bring this excellent parody world home.

Of course the one who really stole the show was Antonio Banderas as Puss in Boots. A truly great addition to the cast, and it’s no wonder that he eventually got his own spin-off movie.

I was also a much bigger fan of the soundtrack in this one. Instead of relying on modern pop songs, they went a little off the beaten track and found success with songs you probably wouldn’t expect. Everything from Funkytown to Holding Out for a Hero was used surprisingly well in the context and did nothing but add to the overall experience. There were a couple of original songs too, which of course maintained the whole spoof thing in their lyrics and delivery.

All in all, unlike the last film there isn’t really anything for me to complain about. Even the clunky animation was cleaned up. This was a really funny movie that I think most people would enjoy. Oh, who am I kidding? Everybody already has.

Dreamworks #7: Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas

Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas - 8.3/10

So this is a story about Sinbad the Sailor, based on everything except Sinbad the Sailor. No, really. Despite the original tales taking place in the middle east with mostly Arabian and Chinese characters/cultural influence, this movie moves the story to the Greek Mediterranean. Greek myths are also used, although not really, since the only goddess seen or mentioned is Eris, who is nothing like her mythological counterpart, and none of the other stuff – like Tartarus – really is either. And then there’s the story itself: one friend offers himself as a substitute for execution for the other, who heroically returns at the last minute to save him. I can’t remember what this story is from – or even if it is fictional or actually happened – and it’s bugging the crap out of me, but I know it exists somewhere. And of course there’s the obligatory random made-up McGuffin. 

But you know what? I’m going to assume that at least 90% of this movie’s target audience doesn’t know any of the stuff I just said. And that’s fine. To be honest, it didn’t really affect my enjoyment of the film at all anyway. And I did enjoy it. It was an epic adventure flick along the lines of The Odyssey and Jason and the Argonauts. The characters were fun and the action scenes were really exciting. I need to expand on that: just about every character was totally badass and could pull off stunts than would make the Wachowski brothers pee their pants, and the action scenes were a shit-ton of fun to watch because of it, and also because they were really well animated.

Like Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, there is some CGI mixed in with the traditional animation. It’s used primarily for the various monsters and for the realm of chaos. Sometimes it works and looks really impressive, and sometimes it…doesn’t. The first sea monster in particular looks horridly out of place and awkward. The giant ice bird though, they nailed that one.

As long as I’m talking about animation, I need to mention Eris, the goddess of discord. The animation for the character was so creative and awesome that I can’t possibly describe it with mere words. It was so fluid; she was constantly moving, shifting form and size, wafting about like smoke. She looked, fittingly enough, like chaos personified. Her domain was done in much the same way, though because they relied on CGI for that it wasn’t quite as impressive, though still cool.

The voice work was also exceptionally well done. I knew from the credits that Brad Pitt and Catherine Zeta-Jones were playing the leads, and Michelle Pfeiffer was Eris. Thing is though, their performances were so genuine that I forgot all about that after five minutes or so. A lot of times when movies cast really recognizable celebrity voices, I keep hearing the actor instead of the character. Not so here. Mad props.

Really there isn’t much else to say about this one. A really fun epic adventure with some great action, an awesome villain, superb voice acting, and a few bits of clunky CGI integration that are forgotten quickly enough. If you haven’t seen it I can’t blame you since this one’s a little more obscure, but you no longer have an excuse. Get on it.

Dreamworks #6: Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron

Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron - 7.6/10 

One of the main differences between watching the Dreamworks films and the Disney ones is, as I’ve said, that all of the former have been released in my lifetime. The very first, Antz, came out when I was already a teenager and as such, I’ve already seen most of them and what’s more, I don’t really have any “childhood” memories of any of them. That’s what makes a film like Spirit so interesting to me; I had never seen it before and didn’t really have any idea what to expect.

My favorite thing about this movie is easy to single out: the animals don’t talk. I mean seriously, that was the coolest freaking thing. It’s what I wish Disney had done with Dinosaur. A movie with animal characters that really behaved like animals! Well, mostly. The effect was somewhat muted by having Matt Damon narrate from the first-person perspective of the horse (I think a third-person narration would have been more natural), and the horses did at times exhibit humanlike behavior and facial expressions. The latter is easiest to forgive, because I'm going to assume that A.) most viewers are humans, and B.) most human viewers are not adept at interpreting animal emotions.

The animation was pretty great – a nice blend of traditional and CGI techniques that considering the technology at the time was pretty impressive. I wasn’t as fond of the musical track. They were trying for the same concept as Disney’s Tarzan and Brother Bear, where Phil Collins sings about what’s going on and how the characters feel about it. They didn’t use Phil Collins of course, but the idea was the same. Not really sure how well they pulled it off. The songs fit and all, but none of them really caught my ear or struck a chord or anything. A bit more like Brother Bear than Tarzan in that sense.

As for the story itself? Eh, it was all right. Pretty basic, really. Wild horse is captured, refuses to be tamed, escapes, repeat, repeat. The friendship he strikes up with the young Lakota man/boy was nice and handled well, but there wasn’t anything particularly complex going on. Just a nice, simple story told from the heart. Overall I enjoyed the film and would say it’s worth a watch if you haven’t seen it, but it’s not one I’d put on my repeated viewings list.

Dreamworks #5: Shrek

Shrek - 8.3/10

This is it. The movie that changed everything. This film marks the biggest paradigm shift in animated features since The Little Mermaid brought them back into the mainstream. True, Toy Story had already proven that computer animation was a viable method for filmmaking, but Shrek showed us it was the way of the future.

Even more than that, it redefined what an animated film could be, and who it could be for. The level of adult humor and storytelling that is so common today was groundbreaking at the time. It was one of the first big-time animated films that really wasn’t for kids. Oh sure, plenty of kids saw it and liked it, but it wasn’t made for them.

The tongue-in-cheek pastiche of fairy tale convention was hardly new, but Shrek took a much different tone with it than most others did or even still do today. The production team really understood that for humor to be most effective, you don’t call attention to your jokes. Rather, you just sort of let them happen naturally and move on. That’s the big difference between this film, which still has a lot of big gags and plenty of blink-and-you’ll-miss-it smaller ones, and a film like Happily N’ever After, which is constantly reminding you what it’s making fun of, and that they’re doing their best to be wacky at every turn.

Also, for perhaps the first time I was completely in favor of the stunt casting. I cannot imagine this movie being half as good without the likes of Mike Myers, John Lithgow and Eddie Murphy. With Murphy I’ve heard mixed reactions, with some people saying he talks too much about random nonsense. I don’t understand why; that’s the joke. And the sheer amount of personality he infuses into Donkey is quite honestly one of my favorite parts of the movie.

That all being said, it’s time to take a trip down nitpicky lane. First of all, I was not a fan of their choice to use popular music of the time in the soundtrack. For one thing, it really dates the movie (Smash Mouth in particular), but it also doesn’t add the level of feeling that the parts with original scoring have, or even the more timeless songs like Hallelujah. 

Secondly, for a film that parodies fairy tale conventions, they sure use a lot of fairy tale conventions. I’m sorry, but the “twist” ending with Fiona remaining an Ogre (spoiler alert?) could be seen from a mile off, from the moment she first recited the poem about “Love’s true form”. Okay, I like the message about beauty being in the eye of the beholder, but at this point you’ve become exactly the kind of movie you were making fun of half an hour ago.

Lastly, the whole “overheard conversation misunderstanding” thing that’s been done a million times and stopped being an interesting plot device seventy years ago. Eugh, really, guys? And what bothered me even when I first saw it in high school was this: Why would Fiona think that Shrek, an ogre, would care that she turns into an ogre at night? Or that he would think less of her for it? It makes absolutely no sense and just makes for forced drama – which pulls on my gag reflex coming so soon after the forced, awkward romance. 

I was never really a big fan of the whole “dance party ending” craze that was going around at that time, either. And sometimes the animation of Shrek interacting with things (when he's eating or fighting) was a little clunky, but they were still perfecting things so I'll cut them some slack.

All that aside, this is still a really enjoyable film with some solid laughs, a good deconstruction of the fairy tale genre in general, and most importantly it opened the door for a whole new type of animated film that would come to dominate the first decade of the 21^st century. And so far the second as well.