April | 2006 | Groundlings Review 2006 April | Movie, Television and book reviews for common folk, by common folk.

April, 2006

Movie Review: Pride and Prejudice

April 19, 2006 by Dennis West

“He’s been most inconvenient since I swore to loathe him for eternity.”

I love period movies—movies that take us out of the present day and transport us through the years into a world that acts, talks and dresses differently from the way we do today. And period movies usually tell stories that just couldn’t work in our time, whether it’s because of governments, or ideologies, or mores, I feel that characters seem to be a bit more limited in what they can do, just because I am living in the same world they are and as such I feel a bit more informed in the directions the story can go.

You might think that in bringing this up, that I’m talking about movies set in Victorian England, or the Old West America, but this also very much relates to science fiction movies. Star Wars is one of the greatest period films ever, as are all of the Star Trek TV Shows and movies. It’s the removal of the story from modern sensibilities that allow the storytellers to introduce concepts and ideas that are foreign to us.

In the case of a futuristic period film, the filmmakers have limitless possibilities. They are able to make up separate histories and cultures. As is seen in Joss Whedon’s masterful series Firefly and the feature film Serenity where he jumped 500 years into the future and created a universe where civilization lived and spoke much as they did in the wild west, with a fusion of the Chinese culture and sayings.

So where is this rant coming from? Well, I just recently watched Pride and Prejudice starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen. I don’t know why I didn’t make more of an effort to watch it in the theater, but I thought it was a real treat.

Pride and Prejudice is based on a novel by Jane Austen and is about a girl named Elizabeth Bennet who meets a grumpy Mr. Darcy and vows to hate him for all eternity because of his rudeness. As the story progresses, Elizabeth learns details about Mr. Darcy that… well, that would be telling, now, wouldn’t it?

Of all the stories I’ve read and all of the movie versions of these kinds of films, for some reason I’ve missed this one, so as my first exposure to this story, it was a good experience. Though I will admit that there were parts of it that seemed rushed, or that made me feel like we just missed something that would have explained the situation better, but was cut because of time. Maybe people who are more familiar with the story can fill in the blanks and don’t miss it, but it really made me want to either read the book or watch a more complete version of it, like the BBC Miniseries.

As a period film, this movie didn’t fail to please me, the costumes were beautiful, the cinematography stunning, and the language was elegant—though as always, I needed a warm up time to tune my ear to it before I felt like I was catching all that they were saying.

It was during Pride and Prejudice that I realized what it is about movies that I like the most—their ability totally remove me from the modern world into a time and place completely foreign and fanciful. Whether it’s 150 years ago or 200 years into the future.

One more thought about Keira Knightley: I don’t know if everyone is aware of this, but she played the queen’s decoy in Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (pictured above in the foreground, Keira Knightley is on the left and Natalie Portman is on the right). Anytime you can see Natalie Portman as Padme, the handmaiden, that’s Keira in the royal dress and makeup. So I just have one question—which of the two now is the bigger star? It sure seems that you see Keira Knightley a whole lot more nowadays than Natalie. Is there a stigma associated with the Star Wars Prequels? Maybe she’s so unrecognizable in the makeup that people just haven’t made the connection to Star Wars.

Category Movie | Tags: | Comments Off
Movie Review: Chicken Little

April 18, 2006 by Dennis West

“Modern Mallard says that avoiding closure can lead to molting, and I’m already small and on top of that I don’t think I can handle being bald!”

It always seems like whenever a movie is made for the sake of something other than the story, it never fails to disappoint. For example, is there any doubt in anyone’s minds that the Star Wars prequels were little more than special visual effects portfolio pieces for Industrial Light and Magic? If you need proof, just listen to the commentaries or watch the behind the scenes stuff and take note of how often the story is talked about in comparison to the effects and production.

I had this in mind as I sat down to watch Disney’s Chicken Little. This was the first major effort by Disney to produce a CGI animated movie solo instead of in conjunction with their long time associate Pixar. Because of this, I couldn’t help but compare it to the Pixar productions as I watched it and by the end I decided it was more a showcase of their CGI animation capabilities than a movie they decided to make because the story was worthy.

But why? It had all of the cool, trendy CGI graphics and animation. What I found it lacking was heart and a well thought out story. From the trailers, one would believe that it’s all about an alien invasion, but I thought that it took too long to set up that situation and then when we finally do see the aliens, they’re gone before you know it.

The story is basically this: a little misfit chicken, named Chicken Little (shocker), is ostracized by the town he lives in because of his seemingly false claim that the sky was falling which sent the town into frenzy. In his efforts to prove him self to the town he finds that what he wants most is to prove himself to his father.

That alone sounded great to me. I really had high hopes that I’d be surprised by this movie and find that it was actually a touching father/son relationship flick. The problem is they just let it hang. It seemed like towards then end that they must have written in the script, “comedic alien invasion,” and let the gags fly. When it came to resolving the father/son conflict, there was no real bonding between father and son, but it was just that the dad turned into a pushover wanting to cater to every whim of his son’s. To me, that was unsatisfying.

But did I hate it? No. Much of it was very funny! As a comedy it worked well. I liked the premise, it just seemed like it was made up of parts of 4 different movies and it could have been great if it had just focused on one. I also like movies that are funny, but end up making us feel good about ourselves and the experience we had, it seemed like Disney was just in it for the laughs in this one.

I wish they could have focused more on one of the included plots to make this movie a bit more cohesive. Let’s see, is it a story about a misfit kid and the heartache of feeling that the whole world is against you? Is it about an ingenious kid whose incredible dexterity and ability to improvise saves the town? Is it about a father who doesn’t know how to identify to his son because he’s not as coordinated or athletic as he (his father) used to be? (A point that doesn’t jive with some of the stunts we see Chicken Little pull off throughout the movie) Is it about an alien child who accidentally gets abandoned on earth and has to be rescued by local kids and given back to the alien parents before interstellar war breaks out? (Hmm, sounds like E.T.) Any of these stories would have been fun to explore with the others becoming sub plots, but there’s really no clear main story for the movie.

But my kids enjoyed it. And I didn’t find anything in it that was offensive, except for the obligatory burp humor to make kids giggle. If I had to compare it to another movie, I would say it’s a lot like Dreamwork’s Madagascar—big on laughs, but only so-so on heart.

Category Animation, Movie | Tags: | Comments Off
Movie Review: Dragonslayer

April 13, 2006 by Dennis West

“If he’s ready to lay a dragon in its grave, he’s nothing to fear from me.”

I’ve installed a theater in my basement, well at least I’ve smoothed out a 9-feet wide wall and a wired-in surround system. I don’t have a projector of my own yet, but fortunately I am able to borrow one from work. Watching DVDs on it is VERY cool and it’s nice to have a cinematic experience with movies that haven’t been on the big screen for a long time.

Since I have this new home theater, I thought it only fitting to start revisiting movies that I really enjoyed when I was younger. The first movie I thought I’d try out is 1981′s Dragonslayer starring Peter MacNicol. This is a movie that I saw in the theater when I was 11 years old (do the math and you’ll know how old I am) and I loved it! I watched it many times on video shortly after, but I haven’t seen it as an adult. I came across the DVD on the store shelf the other day and thought that now would be a good time to pick it up and watch it on the big screen.

The story is pretty straightforward, a kingdom is being terrorized by a dragon, so a group of people set out to find a sorcerer to dispose of it. When the older, more experience sorcerer is unable to pass the “test,” his apprentice takes up the call and tries to fill his master’s shoes.

In addition to MacNicol, who plays the young sorcerer’s apprentice, Galen, this film also features an excellent performance by Sir Ralph Richardson (Time Bandits, Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes) as the senior sorcerer, Ulrich.

At first I was worried that my adult eyes wouldn’t think it was as good as I thought it was when I was young. I was also concerned that the special effects would seem cheesy compared to the new CGI stuff that’s so common nowadays. Well, my fears were unfounded. I found the story and the writing just as interesting as before, and George Lucas’ Industrial Light and Magic (ILM) produced special effects were terrific! Even the stop-motion animation of the dragon was smooth. I was also pleased that the filmmakers were able to tell the story without inserting a humorous sidekick for comic relief. There are funny moments, but they never seem out of place.

One thing that stuck out to me was how far we got into the movie before we got a clear view of the dragon instead of just a claw here and there. I’m sure that it was because of the budget constraints that made them have to limit how often we see the dragon in the movie, but I thought it served the movie well—adding a lot to the mystery and suspense. I’m sure that if it was made today with CGI, we’d be seeing the dragon all the way through the movie, but I think that would have ruined some of the tension and the awe that we feel when we finally see it.

On a side note, Star Wars fans might be interested to see a younger Ian McDiarmid (Darth Sidious/Senator Palpatine/Emperor Palpatine of the Star Wars franchise) who plays Brother Jacopus, a Christian preacher who comes around once magic and sorcery seem to be fading away.

According to IMDB, this was Peter MacNicol’s first role. Occasionally his performance suffers from putting on an English accent, but otherwise he embodies the young, naïve sorcerer-in-training that he is playing. I only wish his hair wasn’t so curly.

I would call this a severely underrated and under watched movie. If you have any interest in fantasy movies of any kind, this movie is a must see!

Category Movie | Tags: | Comments Off
Book Review: A Wizard of Earthsea

April 12, 2006 by Bryan Osborn

>
The other day, I was helping my son do some pull-ups on the chin-up bar. He asked me, “Dad, how come we do these every day?” I simply told him it was so he could get stronger and beat his last score on the school fitness test. “Do you think we could just practice a couple of days before your test and that would be all you would need?” I asked him. I was surprised when he answered yes.

I remember when I was his age though, I couldn’t wait for anything. I was even born a month premature and my mom said it was because I kept bugging Heavenly Father if I could go yet, and finally he gave in. I guess I still am a bit short on patience in some situations (I can hear my wife’s voice . . . “SOME situations?”).

Perhaps that is why I so readily aligned myself with the main character Ged in Ursula K. LeGuin’s coming-of-age novel, A Wizard of Earthsea. Ged is a precocious child who shows above average aptitude for magic and can’t wait to gain more knowledge, ultimately to his own detriment. The world he lives in is an island-based land with nothing but boats and sea-based cultures. Magic is ubiquitous and wizards are highly respected members of society.

I first picked up A Wizard of Earthsea because my current favorite author ( Shannon Hale ) included it in a list of her must-read books. As I read it, I found that I couldn’t put it down, despite the little things that bothered me about it.

In some circles, Earthsea is compared to Harry Potter, but other than dealing with a boy who goes off to wizard school, they are nothing alike. First off, the language of Earthsea (written in 1968) is somewhat detached, for lack of a better word. You tend to see things from a narrator’s point of view instead of getting inside the characters’ heads.

Another thing that bothers me about many fantasy books are all the impossible-to-pronounce made-up names of people and places. Oh, and the maps that are included to help track the action. Unfortunately, Earthsea has both. The good news is that the story is strong enough to get you past these things.

In the world of Earthsea, magic takes real exertion. You can’t just keep casting spell after spell, because you become week drained. Not to mention the fact that the world must maintain balance. If you change the weather by magic here, you could be affecting the weather adversely in another part of the world. This lesson of balance is lost on Ged as he brings a horror from the world of the dead into the realm of the living. Ged is a flawed hero who learns to combat his pride, arrogance, and above all, he learns the value of patience. Ursula allows Ged to make bad choices and then he must live with the consequences of those choices.

As Ged battles the darkness he has unleashed, he learns that this enemy is a part of himself. He ultimately learns that he must confront his problems instead of avoiding them, as his shadowy enemy only has power when Ged is afraid and retreats from it. It is difficult to admit that we each have darkness within us, but only by confronting these problems can we triumph over the evil things within ourselves.

No, this book is no Harry Potter. It is definitely for teens and adults. The journey Ged faces kept me up reading late into the night on several occasions. I even finished the book in record pace for me. In language and world creation, Earthsea is more Tolkien-esque, but a bit faster paced. Still, I am a little uncomfortable making that comparison as well. Overall, I could not put down this book and have already gotten the sequel (there are 4 books in the Earthsea saga, plus a prequel). I highly recommend picking this one up. But don’t take my word for it. Read the first chapter on Amazon and decide for yourself. You can get it for .75 cents.

Author’s note: you may remember that the SciFi channel did an Earthsea mini series a while back. Ursula hated it ( read her article ) and felt that it was untrue to her book and her characters.

Category Uncategorized | Tags: | Comments Off
Coming Soon: Cars

April 10, 2006 by Dennis West

>If there’s any studio that I’d be willing to give a “free pass” to—meaning that I’ll go see anything they make whether or not the initial previews interest me—that would have to be Pixar Animation Studios.

Pixar is the only studio I can think of that fosters an environment conducive to developing a great story above everything else. True, they are on the cutting edge of CGI technology, and have developed many of the tools used by many in the industry, but when one of their movies is on I never sit back and ogle at their technical prowess, I’m enthralled by the story.

Another thing that I really love about Pixar, is that it never talks down to the kids and never thinks that crude humor and innuendo are the only ways to keep adults who are watching the show interested. I’m never worried that my kids are going to start saying words they shouldn’t (like I was from Dreamwork’s Antz) or that they were going to ask me to explain what something meant (like why Pinocchio wearing women’s underwear was such a big deal in Dreamwork’s Shrek 2). Pixar’s movies are sincerely funny and sophisticated.

Why am I bringing this up? Because Pixar’s new movie Cars is due to be released in the theaters June 9th, 2006 and I’m not really all that keen on the concept of the story. I can’t help but think, as I watch the trailers, that this movie is going to seem like a 90 minute Chevron talking car commercial.

But, I will see it and I’m expecting to thoroughly enjoy it. Why this dogged optimism you may ask? Well, I guess it’s in large part faith in the director, John Lasseter. He was the one responsible for Toy Story, Toy Story 2, and A Bug’s Life. But not only that, if you listen to Brad Bird’s commentary for The Incredibles, you’ll hear how many times John Lasseter told him to do what it took to tell the story—that was his primary concern even if it meant increasing the budget or the running time. If you recall, The Incredibles was a remarkably long movie for an American made animated film.

So, from a Disney press release, the story of cars goes like this: “Lightning McQueen (voice of Owen Wilson), a hotshot rookie race car driven to succeed, discovers that life is about the journey, not the finish line, when he finds himself unexpectedly detoured in the sleepy Route 66 town of Radiator Springs. On route across the country to the big Piston Cup Championship in California to compete against two seasoned pros, McQueen gets to know the town’s offbeat characters – including Sally (a snazzy 2002 Porsche voiced by Bonnie Hunt), Doc Hudson (a 1951 Hudson Hornet with a mysterious past, voiced by Paul Newman), and Mater (a rusty but trusty tow truck voiced by Larry The Cable Guy) – who help him realize that there are more important things than trophies, fame and sponsorship.”

Sounds like it could be a heartwarming tale if you ask me, and with it’s G-rating, definitely something I won’t think twice about taking the family to.

On a side note, my interest in the future of Disney animation took a great leap when I heard that Disney was acquiring Pixar. But not only that, John Lasseter is the new Chief Creative Officer of their animation studios. Already there has been a stop put to production of many projects. Hopefully all of the retooling will be a good thing and we may even see traditional animation return? I hope so. Milt Kahl, one of the early Disney animation veterans said in the 70s, that the problem with Disney features was that “Walt had to go and die.” Walt Disney was the heart and soul of everything Disney put out. Hopefully John Lasseter will be just the person to bring it back.

Category Animation, Movie | Tags: | Comments Off