Showing posts with label Brave. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Brave. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Spoiled
If there's one thing I've been noticing about Disney's marketing for Pixar's films lately, it's that they reveal a lot of things... Too many things. Spoilers that help someone piece the whole plot together, or spoilers that give away something that you would not have expected... Let's dive in, shall we?
Just to get one thing out of the way, I won't discuss the Japanese trailers for Pixar films because we all know they spoil a lot. Remember on Twitter when Pixar animators immediately warned people not to watch the Japanese Monsters University trailer? Well they were right, because it does in fact spoil the entire film. I'll be focusing on the domestic and European trailers for these films.
First off, one could say that Toy Story 3's marketing made it obvious that Lotso was essentially a deceptive Stinky Pete-esque villain, though most of the marketing didn't really show too much of him when he truly showed how evil he was (i.e. having Buzz reprogrammed). It just didn't help that he was a big and elderly teddy bear with a cane. But from the final domestic trailer, you got the sense that leaving the daycare wasn't going to be easy for the toys... Remember the shot of Lotso saying "You've got a playdate with destiny!"
But the great thing about Toy Story 3's American and European trailers was that they didn't show how truly evil Lotso was, you just knew he was going to be the big villain... But in what way was the question! This is what made the shocking revelation that precedes the incinerator sequence such a shock, because you might've thought for a moment that he possibly had a change of heart.
The problems slowly began with the marketing for Cars 2. An international trailer revealed that Francesco Bernoulli beats Lightning McQueen in the first race and the second race. Gee, talk about good trailer editing... Why in the world would you spoil the outcome of two of the three races in the film? Then again, one could argue that the racing was irrelevant since the main story was the spy plot, but still! McQueen losing the Tokyo race is what drives Mater to leave and get wrapped up in the spy hi-jinks. The American trailers, luckily, didn't spoil too much. Regardless of the quality of the film itself, it's still kind of dumb to spoil key moments.
Beyond the trailers, a promo for the film that coincided with Prince William's wedding (since the Cars world equivalents of the Queen herself and the Prince are in the film) pretty much gave away the ending, along with the character images for the two. Mater gets knighted, though one could assume that it wasn't Mater who was getting knighted... But still, someone gets knighted! Yes we know the day was going to be saved in the end, but did you really have to show the hero getting their particular reward?
But that's not a problem if you don't dive into the non-trailer marketing, which I currently don't do. However, I want to avoid all trailers (except the teasers) for Pixar films. Here's where the problems get bigger...
Things really kicked into high gear with Brave's marketing...
It's a shame, because the first teaser was excellent. One of the only Pixar teasers that I'd call good, because Pixar teasers are probably meant to be mediocre. They have a joke, but they only function to get audiences that don't normally care about animation as an art form to go see their film. Remember, most audiences want comedy and "warm fuzzies" (as Disney blogger Jim Miles put it) in their animated film trailers. Drama and heavier parts? Not so much... And then people wonder why Frozen's teaser turned out to be a little comedic sequence. But this isn't a rant about American trailers focusing on comedy... What was wrong with the subsequent trailers and promos for this film?
Brave's first official trailer showed the sequence where Merida's triplet brothers are bear cubs scaring Maudie. There's also a dark split-second shot of Elinor as a bear, running. Luckily that shot goes by quick... Unless you're the type that analyzes trailers frame-by-frame. So one could deduce that the twins become bears, and there's also the shot of a brewing cauldron... It totally implies that at least someone is magically turned into a bear. Or bears.
However, the final trailer spoils the film's major twist with a mere couple of shots. We see Elinor as a bear in two shots at the end of the trailer, the first of which being the scene where her and Merida follow the wisps to the eerie kingdom ruins. This is after we've seen a more terrifying-looked bear attack her in the teaser whilst popping up elsewhere. Then the final shot of the teaser is Merida jumping in an attempt to escape from Mor'du, while her mother is trying to save her. You can totally see her!
I mean, who else would that be? Add to the fact that you saw the triplets as little bear cubs in the last teaser and several other promos, it becomes clear that Merida inadvertently has someone (presumably a witch) turn her mother and her brothers into bears. Non-animation fans who normally don't pay attention to details may not notice, since all they see is pretty animation and appealing characters... But us fans do! And people who do notice spoilerific shots in trailers!
Then some promos spoiled it as well. Apparently Disney's marketing department felt that Toy Story 3's incredibly unique viral marketing campaign could be applied to something like Brave, which is why you saw the humorous fake ads for Kilt fashion, Witch's Brew and an album called Freedom Broch. Anyways, the Witch's Brew ad reveals the witch's appearance, whereas we only heard her voice quickly in the American trailers. We even saw shots from the fishing sequence in some other promos!
But if the trailers didn't spoil things for the fans, then the film's working title did. Look, I don't like the title Brave and I think The Bear and the Bow is a much better title because it perfectly defines the story, but it also gives away the twist. Of course, Pixar went against their grain and revealed quite a few details on their upcoming slate way back in the spring of 2008... In a time when Brave was called The Bear and the Bow and the plot was detailed. Rebellious princess? A curse that affects the kingdom? People already pieced that together on forums back in the day, or at least before the teaser showed up.
Maybe it was unwise of Pixar to unveil the title so early on, maybe things wouldn't have been easy to piece together from the start had Brave been announced after May 2009, when the title change was officially confirmed. Maybe... But the trailers were too spoilerific...
Oddly enough, there were many who seemed shocked by the twist upon seeing the film. Apparently they didn't get the "mother turns into a bear" plot twist from the trailers and marketing! I can't give Disney's marketing machine a pass for that though, because a lot of other people guessed that twist...
Now we get to Monsters University, and boy did the first official trailer spoil the third act with a couple shots and some dialogue! The shots of a determined Mike in the university's door lab, monsters trying to get into said door lab, Sulley grabbing a closet doorknob and Dean Hardscrabble's voice frantically calling "Don't go in there! It's dangerous!" gave it all away for me. Right off the bat, I could tell that the two (or at least one of them, which ended up happening!) were going take a crazy risk and enter the human world... And it was going to happen towards the end of the film. The following trailer built on those shots, showing Sulley going through the closet door he was about to open and worriedly climbing a mountain in the human world!
I get it. Most audiences probably wouldn't notice or if they did, they most likely wouldn't piece it all together like I did... And I avoided everything but the trailers for this film, but after giving the second trailer one viewing, I stayed away from the final trailer. I'm glad I did!
After Brave, my new code was to never go beyond the trailers. Just watch the trailers a couple times and avoid everything else as much as possible. Now, I will avoid the trailers for their films and only watch the teasers, look at some stills and a few thing others... But that's it! I know it may sound insane, but I feel that Pixar's recent trailers are giving away way too much. I am also a bit concerned for Disney Animation, as I feel that the marketing department may go this route for that studio's film as well.
Wreck-It Ralph's official trailer came close. In the rather epic "Some Nights" montage, there was a shot of Ralph breaking his way into the cell where Fix-It Felix, Jr. is locked up. From there, I knew that Felix was going to get in some sort of trouble in Sugar Rush with King Candy and that Ralph would come to his rescue... But I didn't know why, the trailer at least kind of implied that King Candy was going to be no good. There was so much they kept hidden so nothing was really, really spoiled for me before the film opened. The international trailer on the other hand explicitly shows how Ralph accidentally brings a Cy-Bug out of Hero's Duty and into Sugar Rush. But those two sequences weren't enough... I couldn't guess what big twists were going to occur in the second and third acts of film, so I was surprised the whole way through.
So this may mean that Frozen's official trailer won't have any shots that will spoil a lot, but you never know with Disney's marketing these days. I initially didn't even want to watch the Japanese teaser until hearing that nothing in it was spoiler-heavy. I'm now wary of the upcoming official domestic trailer...
In the mean time, I'm going to be extra-cautious about Disney's marketing of their animated output...
Monday, April 15, 2013
Mark Andrews' Next Project
An original and talk of a sequel... Pixar news always brings a surprise or two...
Surely you've heard some of the rumblings about Pixarian Mark Andrews yesterday. Mark Andrews, in case you don't know, is one of the directors of Pixar's Brave. In a controversial move during the production of that film, Pixar had fired Brenda Chapman from directing the film, which was a very personal endeavor for her. Andrews, a man who is trenched in Scottish history, was given the job to direct and finish the film in such a short time frame. Andrews has made the rounds quite a bit lately, from talking about what he wants to do at Pixar (and also, "speed" up their production process) to the production history of Brave. He is also working on a new original project for Pixar.
He couldn't say what it's about or what it'll be called, so all we know is that an original film is under his watch. That makes it the studio's fifth original production that's in the works, after The Good Dinosaur, Inside Out, "Dia De Los Muertos" and Teddy Newton's untitled film. I have one theory on this film. Andrews has a very different idea of filmmaking. He is said to not be too fond of most Disney animation, but rather a fan of Japanese anime. Perhaps his new film will be a lot of different from Pixar's past films and perhaps American animated films in general. Maybe he'll essentially make an American "anime" film for the studio. Of course, this is all just speculation. Also, he'll be handling something on his own rather than trying to patch something up that wasn't his from the start. In short, I'm just as excited to hear more about this film as much as Teddy Newton's film.
But the other bit of news concerns a sequel to Brave. However, I think a lot of this Brave sequel business is being blown out of proportion. In the interview, he simply said that Pixar will only do a sequel if there's a good enough story. I for one could do without a Brave follow up. After Finding Dory, I don't want any more Pixar sequels to be honest. I don't hate sequels and I've explained in great detail why I'm not worried about Monsters University or Finding Dory, I just don't want any more Pixar sequels for a long, long while. The other reason why I don't want a Brave sequel is because the first film was Chapman's baby. Having a sequel done without her involvement, since she left Pixar last summer, would just be wrong and would also be a disservice to Chapman. It would also hurt Pixar's image, as the director change alone did enough.
What are your thoughts on Andrews' new original project? What do you think it could be like? Do you think all of this Brave sequel talk is just being blown out of proportion? Or do you think one will actually happen?
Sound off below!
Sunday, February 24, 2013
The Winners
Well, it's official. Pixar's beautiful, moving fairy tale took home the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature. That's right... Brenda Chapman and Mark Andrews' Brave. Pixar has won again at the Academy Awards. It was a tight race with some great competition, but it won just like it did at the Golden Globes last month.
To be honest, I'm not satisfied with this and a good many people aren't. Now hear me out, I loved Brave. Like I've said on here many times before, I don't think it's the extremely flawed film that others made it out to be. I felt it was a well-made, well-told spin on the typical fairy tale conventions with two very likable leads, some good humor and lots of heart. I'm not part of the "Brave is garbage"/"Pixar is no longer good" bandwagon. Not at all. I loved the film.
That being said, I felt it had some problems, but overall I think it's a very good film. Now you probably know what film I was rooting for. That's right... Wreck-It Ralph. Wreck-It Ralph was, to me, 2012's greatest animated film. It had so much good in it and very little bad. It had a confident screenplay, a very creative story that isn't in your typical animated film, excellent characters all around, a killer score and soundtrack (sans "Shut Up and Drive"), loads of references that never felt like they were thrown in to pander to gamers and of course, stellar animation and design. It was the kind of film that I want from Disney.
Walt Disney Animation Studios knocked it out of the park if you ask me. Wreck-It Ralph was risky and conventional enough for audiences, it toed the fine line between trying something new and satisfying moviegoers. Creative idea, familiar but well-done story and some twists and turns along the way. To me, it should've won, plain and simple...
Why Brave won, we may never know. Theories will probably be thrown around over the next few days. Some will say that it won because the Academy automatically awards Pixar (except if their film involves anthropomorphic vehicles) every year or because Brave was an animated film with a female lead and is a "feminist" film. I won't go into that, but some may see it that way. Why would the Academy NOT give the award to Ralph? Let a thousand theories spring forth.
My theory is that the Academy saw Ralph as a loud, noisy "video game" movie. Video games, like animation, aren't seen as an art form by many. So maybe that could be why the film didn't win. Brave on the other hand was about human beings, magic and adventure. Perhaps the mother-daughter story of the film appealed more to the Academy voters. Just look at Ralph and then look at Brave. I can see the Academy not feeling that Ralph was "Best" material. If you ask me, it would be the equivalent of them giving the Best Picture award to an action-heavy (but well-written and heartfelt) film.
ParaNorman and Frankenweenie didn't have much of a chance getting the award, because the Academy does think of box office when it comes to awards. ParaNorman and Frankenweenie didn't double their production budgets. The Academy most likely saw them as out-of-the-way flops, which is wrong because... What if those two were far superior to everything else? The Pirates! Band of Misfits? Out of all the nominees, that had the least chance at winning. Again, popularity and box office does play a part in what wins and what doesn't. Sad fact.
I will say though, it was nice to see Brenda Chapman being on stage and accepting the award with Mark Andrews. She wasn't present at the Golden Globes, and if I can remember correctly, she wasn't even invited. But to see Chapman on stage was good, so now she'll get the recognition she deserves for the film.
I am overall upset. I felt that Walt Disney Animation Studios was going to get the Oscar, one they deserved. They never got an Academy Award for Best Animated Feature before, since the category was created when the studio was being run into the ground. During its rebirth (2007-2009), it had tough competition. Bolt didn't stand a chance against WALL-E, ditto The Princess and the Frog against Up. Tangled wasn't nominated for 2010, ditto Winnie the Pooh for 2011. Here I thought this film would get it and finally prove to everyone that they are back. But to paraphrase Doc Hudson, it's just a golden statue. That being said, I wanted the win to boost Disney Animation's reputation...
Best Animated Short Film? By contrast, I was very happy with the results. Who won? Paperman... That's right, John Kahrs' beautiful and innovative meshing of hand-drawn art and crisp computer animation. While some of the competitors were impressive (particularly Adam and Dog), I was really happy to see Disney take home the award they deserved.
So... Were you satisfied with the Oscars? Are you happy with the winners? Or not? Which film deserved the award in your opinion and why? The same goes for the Best Animated Short Film category. Sound off below!
Sunday, February 3, 2013
Annie Aftermath
See all the nominations and winners here.
Last night, the 40th Annual Annie Awards ceremony took place. As usual, several films, short subjects and television shows competed for a grand prize; whether it was for best writing or best storyboards or best effects in a live action film...
One particular film went over like gangbusters at the ceremony. No, it wasn't DreamWorks' Rise of the Guardians. That would've happened if that film came out in 2010. No, no, no... This film particularly wrecked a good portion of the ceremony...
That's right. Walt Disney Animation Studios' Wreck-It Ralph took home the award for Best Animated Feature; while also winning Outstanding Achievement for Writing, Directing and Music. Alan Tudyk won for Voice Acting and deservedly so; his King Candy character was marvelous. To top it off, John Kahrs' ethereal Paperman took home the award for Best Animated Short Subject. Deservedly so. It was a win-win situation for the rejuvenated Walt Disney Animation Studios...
One minor gripe. Wreck-It Ralph did not get a nomination for Production Design in an animated feature. Sure it took home other and better awards, but Wreck-It Ralph had some of the best art direction in an animated film released in 2012, period. Handling three distinct video game worlds, I felt, was a bigger feat than what was accomplished in Ice Age: Continental Drift and Hotel Transylvania. Ralph was unjustly left out of that category... Can't say I'm pleased with that.
Aside from Ralph's victories, I felt the rest of the ceremony was overall solid, but littered with massive problems.
Remember that last Annie Awards ceremony with all the flubs? Well, it seems like the negatives were amplified here. Yes, the wrong envelope incident happened again. But even worse was when they were presenting the nominees for Best Directing for an animated television production, they showed the feature film nominees by accident! Oops...
Other than that, you had the hosts often messing up, even greats like Leonard Maltin himself. Wreck-It Ralph director Rich Moore was able to deliver a good enough speech, and even took a nice jab at the generally unorganized ceremony. Also, they started late. What is with this ceremony and why are they out of it? Many commentators, animators and writers agree that the Annie Awards need to get their priorities straight. This is supposed to be animation's "Highest Honor". If you ask me, this lack of care is a dishonor.
Pushing all those scratches aside, I felt the ceremony was somewhat balanced in its choice nominees and what ultimately won.
I was happy to see ParaNorman get a few awards, both in the character design and character animation department. I felt that the crew also deserved an Effects in an Animated Feature award as well, instead that went to Rise of the Guardians. Hard to complain, all the runner-ups in the category were very strong. I, however, felt that ParaNorman beat them all by a hair since it was a stop-motion film and the effects were very convincing. Brave got two, one for editorial and one for production design.
Frankenweenie got very few nominations and took home nothing, sadly. Ditto The Pirates! Band of Misfits, but the competition was very strong. It still would've been nice to see those two films take an award home. The rest of the animated films - from Ice Age: Continental Drift to The Rabbi's Cat - got nothing. Again, Ralph trail blazed a lot of categories. Tough competition.
However, I felt most of that was balanced... What wasn't as balanced was in the television animated categories.
If you ask me, DreamWorks' Dragons: Riders of Berk took home a few too many awards. It took home Directing, Music and Storyboarding. It beat out titles like Adventure Time in those categories, while also being pitted against rather lame competition like Jake and the Neverland Pirates. Where was Disney's surprisingly great Gravity Falls and the ever-so-creative Regular Show?
Gravity Falls managed to get some love, but a very minimal amount. Kristen Schaal took home the voice acting award, and I felt she deserved it. Her Mabel character is hilarious, and arguably the best character in that show. It also got a nomination for production design, but it lost to something that deserved it... Tron: Uprising.
Tron: Uprising was a surprise hit at the ceremony, and hopefully it'll teach the ignorant people who moved it to the midnight time slot that they made a terrible mistake. Disney essentially killed this show just as it was about to really take off. They could've had another season or two on their hands, and the Tron franchise would've been expanded long before the third film arrives to theaters. What's going on, Disney?
The series also took home the character design award, though I wasn't too fond of the character designs in the show. I felt that was one of the weaker elements, it should've gotten awards for best music or something. Nope, Dragons hogged some of that up and even had more than one nomination in a single category. The Penguins of Madagascar also had quite a few nominations. All that aside, it was nice to see something Tron-related making a splash at the Annies.
Again, some of the nominees in certain categories were plain laughable. Sofia the First? Are you kidding me? Jake and the Neverland Pirates? What? Justin Time? Yeah, some of the nominations were a bit undeserved. I would've liked to have seen Regular Show or Archer or something other than a Nickelodeon or DreamWorks show get some attention. Alas, this didn't happen.
I was also happy to see what won in the live action categories. Life of Pi's tiger, Richard Parker, was certainly an astonishing feat. It won for best character animation. Why were the effects not up for best effects in a live action film in this ceremony? The Avengers took home the best effects award. With the exception of John Carter, I felt the film's effects were stronger than what was seen in its competition: The Amazing Spider-Man and Battleship.
It was also nice to see the Annies giving the spotlight to student films too.
The lifetime achievement awards were a highlight.
Terry Gilliam, June Foray, Mark Henn, Oscar Grillo and Howard Green all made good speeches and definitely deserved their awards.
Pros
- Wreck-It Ralph cleaned up house.
- Brave, Rise of the Guardians and ParaNorman got some recognition.
- Paperman took home Best Animated Short Subject.
- Most of the "feature" nomination selections were balanced.
- The lifetime achievement award segments.
- Mark Andrews (finishing director of Brave) certainly gave quite a speech. He's fun to watch.
- The speeches the recipients made were good.
- Tron: Uprising made the rounds here and there.
- Kristen Schaal winning.
- Life of Pi's Richard Parker winning.
Cons
- Television animation nominations; a little unbalanced. A little too much Dragons and Penguins hogging up space.
- Dragons took home too many awards.
- Some of the nominations in the individual TV animation categories were weak, a lot of much stronger entries were absent.
- Wreck-It Ralph not being nominated for production design in an animated feature. Big mistake.
- Frankenweenie not taking anything home.
- All the screw-ups, the drawn-out and awkward speeches. This is a ceremony!
- Still a little too much DreamWorks. I know the whole "rigging" controversy is over, but I couldn't help but think that they had a few too many slots in the television animation categories.
What did you think of the 40th Annie Awards? Were they a bust? Or do you think they made the right choices? What about the ceremony itself? Were you peeved by the unorganized nature of the whole thing? Or did you think it wasn't a problem? Sound off below!
Friday, January 18, 2013
Pixar's Fairy Tale
~
Directed by Mark Andrews and Brenda Chapman
Co-directed by Steve Purcell
Produced by Katherine Sarafian
Screenplay by Mark Andrews, Brenda Chapman, Irene Mecchi and Steve Purcell
Pixar often gets praise for their storytelling, appropriate use of emotion and their memorable characters. One thing that I don’t see Pixar getting acclaim for is their ability to stay away from a formula. If they do have a formula, then it’s the formula of trying new things with each film. The Pixar films don’t follow the same narrative style, which is something you can’t say about a Disney film that was produced during the so-called Renaissance or most of the earlier DreamWorks computer animated films.
Pixar often gets praise for their storytelling, appropriate use of emotion and their memorable characters. One thing that I don’t see Pixar getting acclaim for is their ability to stay away from a formula. If they do have a formula, then it’s the formula of trying new things with each film. The Pixar films don’t follow the same narrative style, which is something you can’t say about a Disney film that was produced during the so-called Renaissance or most of the earlier DreamWorks computer animated films.
Brave is Pixar’s first foray into the fairy tale genre, one that inspired more skepticism than excitement. Of course, audiences got their fairy tale fix time and time again with many Disney animated films, most recently with The Princess and the Frog and Tangled. Pixar doing a fairy tale might’ve upset some because it was a genre that Disney had done many times before, but Pixar wasn’t adapting a classic. Instead, they were writing their own that was in the vein of the Grimm fairy tales and many others.
Brave began life as a personal story by Brenda Chapman, one based on her own experiences as a mother. Brave already goes against the tropes we saw in other fairy tale adaptations, and we have a mother and father who aren’t absent. In fact, Princess Merida’s family is quite complete. Merida may be rebellious and bratty, but she has every reason to be that way. She’s an adventurous and free-spirited young woman who is restrained by her mother’s staunch traditionalist ways.
What elevated this story for me was the fact that both Merida and Queen Elinor are highly flawed, but are both alike in many ways. Merida is essentially what Elinor once was, both are close-minded in their own way. Their one-way problems are looked at during the film’s much-criticized second and third acts, where Merida accidentally turns her mother into a bear and must undo the curse. To me, this is no story about bravery, but rather a story about understanding and realizing one's mistakes. Brave was not a suitable title for this film; the working title, The Bear and the Bow, was far superior. It said more about our leads and the overall story. Brave makes the picture sound like an action-adventure epic, it is anything but.
Brave has its story and leads down pat, with barely any glaring flaws. Outside of the two leads and the overall premise come a few problems, which wasn’t a first for Pixar. I firmly believe that the films made from the first Toy Story up until the third one are excellence, with only minor little flaws like any film (perfection and film don't go in the same sentence). Then came that one film they did after Toy Story 3, and to say it bluntly, it had myriad problems. I was okay with this, because Pixar can’t keep making excellent movies all the time. Once in a while, you can make a mistake or two.
Most of Brave’s problems, I suspect, are a result of what it went through: The highly controversial director change that occurred eighteen months before the film’s release date.
Mark Andrews, who ended up replacing Chapman, was a longtime consultant on the project given his interest in Scottish culture. Andrews certainly kept the story tighter than what’s given to you in the usual American animated feature, but his vision might clash with what Chapman had in mind. I can’t say that he ruined or went against her vision, because we don’t know what her complete version was like. Let’s stop assuming.
The biggest problem with Brave, for me, is the lack of those long quiet stretches that define the best animated features. Up, for a recent example, had plenty of them. Sequences where the body language plays out with no dialogue adds so much to a film, and Brave could’ve used more of this. Brave is not obnoxious by any means, but there’s hardly any moment where the film takes a real breather. It’s on the move and you find yourself sitting through the next sequence in no time at all.
Brave certainly could’ve benefited from a longer running time. The film runs a pretty quick 93 minutes, which is the norm for Pixar films or any American animated feature, but this film could’ve used another ten minutes. Looking at some of the Blu-ray supplemental features, I believe what was cut from the film should’ve been kept. Sequences that were deemed a little too long, such as passages with extended dialogue and other things, got trimmed. That being said, the pacing for the film is just too quick. The other Pixar films have the right pacing, with enough excitement and quiet moments to make for a well-rounded picture.
My other gripe is how everything outside of Merida and Elinor’s quest in the second half is handled. In the course of two days, why does King Fergus never check on Elinor? Sure, he’s busy keeping the rival clans from losing it, but he could’ve at least poked into her room to see if she was okay after he believed a bear was in the castle. The men got off the tower in the middle of the night, what exactly were they doing the next day? King Fergus simply forgot about Elinor for a whole day? Merida too?
The impending war between the clans is also muted. A deleted sequence where Merida and Elinor sneak back into the castle showed men fighting. The kingdom of DunBroch was a war zone, but this was heavily simplified to the clans all being in one room all ready to lunge at each other’s throats. Why this change was made baffles me, the original would’ve shown that things were certainly getting worse back at the castle, just in time for Merida to show up. Without this, it feels a bit anticlimactic.
Again, this leads me to believe that the film was rushed after the director change. Mark Andrews believes Pixar could make animated films at a much faster rate, so you can argue that he rushed this film, wanting to get the thing out by June 2012. Maybe a delay would've sufficed so more time could be spent fixing errors, but that would've left this past year Pixar-less. Also, if the story was problematic, how come these problems weren't solved before production began on the film? Pixar was known for excising sequences and reworking elements that didn't work early on in pre-production. With this film and the one before it, Pixar actually began trimming fully animated sequences. During production no less.
Those are Brave’s only problems, but they don’t severely stab the story in its sides. The writing is good too, hardly any dumb humor (with maybe a few exceptions) or the sort of cliches that make the adults in the audience want to put a pistol to their head. Pixar avoids this because they don’t want to talk down to anyone in the audience, whether they are 7 or 77 years old. In this film, however, they do tend to go a little too close to those conventions. The only problem with the humor is that it's sometimes there for the sake of being there, especially when it's not needed. There's a little too much comic relief when Elinor becomes a bear. I would've preferred sequences where, again, the body language did the talking and not comic relief.
I still give Andrews credit. He had to complete something that wasn’t finished and was supposedly problematic (in a sort of Jan Pinkava’s Ratatouille kind of way) in eighteen months, so obviously there would be a few problems present in the finished film. This is no different from another animated feature that goes through that. Andrews, however, might not have been the best man to do it given his rather interesting views on how animation should be done at Pixar. That being said, Andrews did a good enough job, but a lot of the brilliance came from Chapman.
It's a case of two different visions clashing on one film: Andrews went for a film with a quick pace and one that would entertain with a dose of heart, while Chapman aimed for a film that seemed deeper and maybe even more profound. I'm not knocking Andrews, because if he was given a film to direct on his own that was suited to his style, he'd probably ace it. From what I gather, the fairy tale genre isn't his thing. The difference of styles can be a little frustrating.
Brave isn't, however, a terribly problematic film in the end. For a film that went through all this, it turned out to be pretty damn good. I'll say it again, it was pretty damn good. Not mediocre or average, I felt it was a great endeavor.
Instead of a good-vs.-evil plot, Brave simply has two leads who are their own worst enemies. Both are polar opposites, and the story focuses on the relationship between the two along with a standard "race against time" plot. When's the last time a mainstream animated feature was about a mother-daughter relationship? Pixar covered the parent-child theme before with Finding Nemo, but that film was different in its own way. Nemo was simply about a father who let his fear get the better of him, and in turn, he lost his son.
Brave doesn't have any power-hungry or evil villains, unlike some fairy tales. No menacing warlord looking to rule Scotland or a dastardly witch who wants to kill someone. Brave has a witch in it, but a witch who is merely an old woman who is trying to right her wrongs, an eccentric hag who would rather be a woodcarver. Certainly after what happened to Mor'du and others, as she quickly puts it ("Too many unsatisfied customers!"), she takes on this new life.
Mor'du is no central villain either, he's just there to show the consequences of Merida's actions. Mor'du was once a villain, but is a suffering soul, simply waiting to be released and put out of his misery. This is beautifully demonstrated after the demonic bear is crushed, and it just adds more to the film's setting and the world around the characters. This leads to the magic aspect of the film. There's magic in the film, but it's woven into the setting rather than being something major. The will o' the wisps lead beings to their fate, but we know very little about the actual wisps. This world is still interesting and intriguing, and little by little, we start to find out more about the magical elements of the film. Even though there aren't many, they still use a conservative amount. I personally would've liked to have seen more, and perhaps more backstory on these elements, but what we got is fine enough.
The Blu-ray and DVD includes a short film titled The Legend of Mor'du, a short that was stylized to look like the beautiful concept art you'd normally see for an animated film today. When watching the short, I felt that it would've worked well in the film and would've given more depth to Mor'du; in turn it would've raised the stakes when Merida gave her mother the spell. In the film, Elinor quickly tells Merida about the said prince. This way, we don't know the prince became the demon bear. (Though that could've been highly predictable to some.)
The Legend of Mor'du also has its fair share of dark and mildly violent moments, which also would've worked well in the film. Brave on its own fits the typical Pixar bill: It has its moments that will frighten younger audiences, but they're there because without them the stakes are diluted. The film's darkest moments concern Mor'du. He's a killing machine that weighs a ton, that alone says a lot. Second of all, there's a sequence where Merida encounters him in the ruins of the old kingdom where everything is dark.
I love these kinds of sequences because they show that the studio is not going to pull punches. When a story calls for that sort of thing, they go through with it. Then you have the scenes where Queen Elinor loses her humanity and acts like a bear. It's another plot point that raises the stakes; and one of my other favorite things about the film. It's bad enough that Merida must undo all this while her mother tries to get used to her new form; she could easily be killed in this situation. That way, it's not completely predictable when the two journey to undo everything that has happened. Again, that's what I like about Pixar. They'll throw in a surprise like this so we don't wait for the next sequence to come without any kick.
Now what about that comic relief? It's unexpectedly a small problem in the film, which is odd considering that Pixar was able to balance comedy and drama in their other films. Brave has a few moments that are a bit questionable for a Pixar film, small things like the triplets booger gag. Was there a point to even have this in the film? It felt like a halfhearted attempt to get kids to laugh. There is enough humor in the film to make kids laugh, and Pixar doesn't try to make kids laugh. They try to make everyone laugh.
Other comic relief bits that didn't work for me were the ones with the witch; particularly the "cauldron answering machine" scene. I don't like overly modern references in period pieces (i.e. Tangled's "best day everrrrr..." dialogue), so that joke was terribly out of place. Now it's possible that this witch can travel through time (like Merlin in The Sword in the Stone) so she knows how an answering machine works, but if that isn't the case, the joke just doesn't do it for me. That wouldn't be out of place in something like a Shrek film, so that's not the kind of humor I want to see coming out of a Pixar film.
I suspect some of the weaker jokes come from Andrews, who seemed to be all for lots of comic relief. We also get a good amount of a slapstick-heavy sequences with the male characters, which are actually funny. The first brawl sequence when the clans arrive at the DunBroch kingdom is hilarious. It's very broad, but it never contradicts the naturalism of the film. Best of all, it's long enough so it doesn't lose its luster and it ends with a great gag: Elinor quietly breaking up the fighting and dragging King Fergus and the three lords by their ears!
Elinor turning into a bear calls for a lot of potential comedy, but the writers somewhat overdo it and add it to scenes where it's not necessary. After the transformation, there should've some room for drama rather than Elinor's funny reactions. The best humor is saved for the fishing sequence, where it's quietly used as a way to show Elinor's own shortcomings. The idea is funny as well; a queen with a proper demeanor trying something she'd never dream of doing. It's as effective as Merida being forced to be like her mother, as demonstrated wonderfully in the film's first act montage.
Maybe I might sound like I'm not for comic relief, but most of it works in the film. There's just some times in the film where I wished it wasn't there, scenes where we could've had something else. Again, I think a longer running time would've sufficed and maybe there would be a much more even balance.
One the best elements of the film is the way it's presented. I'm not talking about the overall look of the film, it's gorgeous, obviously. This is Pixar, of course it's going to be a visual knock-out. The Scottish highlands were stunning, and the world of these characters was handled perfectly from the kingdom design to the magical elements. Enough said there.
The character designs are what made it for me. Since The Incredibles, Pixar has pushed the boundary for human character design in computer animation after the questionable results seen in their earlier films. When I was younger, I would often have a problem with the way the humans were done in something like Toy Story, but this was before I knew about the technical limitations of the time. The Incredibles stunned 12-year-old me back when it opened, and not one moment did I feel that the humans looked off in any way. They looked and felt like human beings, rather than robots.
Pixar continued to break new ground with Ratatouille, and pushed for more abstract designs in Up. Brave has tons of that as well. Merida's hair alone has gotten lots of praise, but the design says so much about the characters and their personalities. It's just so brilliant, I can't even define it. Just look at Queen Elinor and how she's presented. It's royal and serious, but also very motherly and caring. King Fergus' design is definitely suggests his outgoing and riotous demeanor, and his massive size sums it up while adding a fun side to the character. The lords and their respective sons have such crazy designs that are so brilliant, they just ooze with personality. Even the animals are handled well. Merida's steed Angus is bulky but majestic. Mor'du moves like a brainless killing machine, while the animators try their hardest to make Bear Elinor act proper while still being a clumsy animal. The witch's loudmouth crow moves and acts like it's wired. The bear triplets' designs are a little too exaggerated (the heads are a little too big if you ask me), the only weak point in terms of the animation.
Musically, Brave is a winner. A score does so much for an animated film, and Patrick Doyle's work is another home run hitter. It appropriately ties Celtic influences with an overall fantasy-esque tone, but it's the songs that really add to it. Sometimes, the best songs in an animated film are the ones that are sung offscreen. Disney has quite a few great examples, such as the music for Dumbo and Bambi, proving that not every animated film has to have the characters themselves singing.
"Touch the Sky" and "Into the Open Air" are sung by Julie Fowlis and they fit the imagery and mood of the film so well, there's just something about them that ties in perfectly with the atmosphere. Birdy and Mumford & Sons' end credits number "Learn Me Right" is also good. All three are very Celtic-inspired, but never feel fake. In fact, Fowlis' vocals almost come off as Merida singing in her mind. It reminded me of how Disney uses singing voices for their characters (for the most part), but this isn't the case. It just somewhat felt like that to me. The beautiful "Noble Maiden Fair" is sung entirely in Gaelic, as pieces of it are used in the film itself. It's one of the few "quiet moments" that the film could've used a little more of. Last but not least is an actual musical number, performed by King Fergus (voiced by Billy Connolly of course), "The Song of Mor'du". Short, fun and amusing, it only adds to the comic nature of his character.
So visually, musically and story-wise, Brave succeeded. Brave is not any signal of Pixar's downfall, as it's not going to happen. Brave just happened to be a production that went through a lot of issues, and it's obvious that the effects of that would be existent in the first place. There are numerous Disney animated films that were troubled productions, and you can very much tell. Brave is no different, but what's really good in it tends to really overshadow these small problems. The great things on display in the film show why Pixar is lauded.
It's easy for our sensationalist media to jump the gun and focus on the film's problems and the unpleasant studio politics surrounding it. Critics and skeptics can have a fun time picking apart Pixar and reveling in their apparent "downfall". Had Disney or DreamWorks or someone else made this film, it wouldn't be as criticized as much.
I know Pixar is a studio and not a team of invincible gods of perfection. I bet they know that too. Brave being flawed is no big deal, and I personally admire the film. Brave is a damn good film and it sure has a lot more depth and substance than a lot of the other current crowd-pleasing animated films out there. Sure it isn't the year's best animated film in my eyes (I felt Disney's Wreck-It Ralph and Laika's ParaNorman were superior), but it could've been a far worse film given what it went through before hitting the silver screen.
Traditional and simplistic but never without heart and respect for the audience, Brave is another satisfying entry from the folks at Emeryville.
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Bullseye!
Pixar's Brave has taken home the Golden Globe for Best Animated Feature. Despite the fact it hasn't won in many critics circles, the well-liked picture from the hopping lamp was the grand winner of this ceremony. This begs a question: Will it have any chance at getting the Oscar?
Brave's only tough competition here was Frankenweenie and Wreck-It Ralph (I feel that the latter deserved the award); Rise of the Guardians and Hotel Transylvania didn't stand a chance. Of course, we know that the film will be going up against the two Disney releases plus ParaNorman and The Pirates! Band of Misfits for Best Animated Feature at the Oscars. I have a feeling that it won't take home the Oscar, but I'm glad it at least got something.
Awards season just got more interesting...
Labels:
Awards Season,
Brave,
Disney,
Golden Globes,
Pixar
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Stop-Motion and Disney: The Nominations
The Academy Awards have announced all of their nominations today, so what animated films made the cut? 4 out of 5 my predictions came true. How many of yours came true?
The Nominations
Brave
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
The Pirates! Band of Misfits
Wreck-It Ralph
I had thought that the French-Austrian hand-drawn animated film The Rabbi's Cat would get a nomination, given the Academy's usual routine. Ever year, they try to get an animated film (usually hand-drawn) from another country (with the exception of the UK and Japan) in there somewhere (2009 with The Secret of Kells, 2010 with The Illusionist and 2011 with A Cat in Paris and Chico & Rito), so I was pretty sure they would nominate that film or another French animated film called The Painting.
Nope, that slot went to The Pirates! Band of Misfits, a very good film. What's more important is that all the stop-motion films released this year were nominated. Wreck-It Ralph made it, deservedly, as I was hoping for. Brave also made it too, and I was somewhat convinced that it wouldn't. All three Disney releases got nominated.
So, who will take it home? Frankenweenie was a critical darling this year but not a box office success (the Academy Awards do think of box office, whether it's right or wrong). Brave got good but not great reception, but it's generally seen as a good Pixar film and not "bad" like the previous one. The Pirates! Band of Misfits got very positive reviews, but it only did moderately well at the box office. Aardman took home the award before (in 2005 with Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit), so I'm not sure if this will win.
ParaNorman and Wreck-It Ralph are the two that I think will take it home. It's going to be close, that's for sure. ParaNorman was innovative, bold, daring and pushed the envelope for what a PG-rated family film could do. Wreck-It Ralph is one of Disney's best and an overall great film, with lots of creativity, a strong screenplay and a concept that is thankfully out of Disney's comfort zone. I'll be happy if either one wins, but I'm rooting a little bit more for the nine-foot-tall colossus.
For me, I think Walt Disney Animation Studios needs a Best Animated Feature Oscar since they never got one. Being a studio that was there since the Golden Age and one that delivered some of the greatest animated films of all time, I think they are overdue for one. Laika on the other hand didn't get an Oscar yet, Coraline was up against very tight competition in 2009. It'd be nice to see them get it too.
On a side-note, it's too bad DreamWorks was left out of the race, considering how impressive their fare has been lately. Rise of the Guardians getting a slot would've been nice, but maybe next year, DreamWorks can score a spot. Everything else that was up and running for a nomination didn't seem like Oscar material to me, aside from the two Japanese animated films: From Up on Poppy Hill and The Mystical Law. When will a Japanese animated feature ever be nominated again?
Who do you think should win?
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Looking Back on Twenty-Twelve
2012 was quite a year for animation, wasn't it? As we are now in a new year, let's pause and remember the best of last year...
- Rango, Gore Verbinski's incredibly risky animated Western tale, rightfully took home many accolades and proved to the industry that you can in fact pull off big risks.
- Rich Ross, the controversial man who was the Chairman of the Walt Disney Studios, got the boot. The seasoned and film-savvy Alan Horn took his place. Disney is back on track after a relatively downer period.
- The year had three animated films that grossed $200 million at the domestic box office. While the quality of some of the films are debatable, it's still good to see animation doing fine.
- Three impressive stop-motion films graced the silver screen: Aardman's The Pirates! Band of Misfits, Laika's ParaNorman and Tim Burton's Frankenweenie.
- Pixar proved to critics that one film couldn't stop them. Brave, despite getting a good number of negative reviews, was still a well-received film.
- Pixar also announced many new things: Two untitled upcoming films (one of which is being directed by Teddy Newton), the title of Bob Peterson's dinosaur film and Lee Unkrich's upcoming "Dia De Los Muertos" film.
- Wreck-It Ralph became another runaway success for Disney, showing that Tangled wouldn't be their only big hit. They are here to stay.
- Paperman, the ethereal short film attached to Wreck-It Ralph, certainly made quite a splash. It was a six-minute miracle of innovation and technological breakthrough in the medium. That's what Disney is known for, right?
- Disney also seemed enthusiastic about the upcoming films for Walt Disney Animation Studios, such as Big Hero 6 and Ron Clements and John Musker's untitled hand-drawn project.
- Many good animated television shows continued to run successfully, and impressive new entries came in as well.
- DreamWorks kept releasing critically acclaimed films, and also scoring their first big box office blockbuster domestically (in over two years) with Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted.
- Paramount announced more plans with their in-house animation studio, and are very enthusiastic about competing with the heavies.
~
Well, with all that being said... Happy New Year everyone! What was your favorite animation moment of 2012?
Saturday, December 29, 2012
2012 Animation Box Office Stats
With the year coming to a close, let's take a look at how the animated batch did this year...
~
Dr. Seuss' The Lorax - Easily the most surprising and befuddling animated box office success of the year. Yes, the highest grossing Dr. Seuss film did gross over $200 million (How The Grinch Stole Christmas), but it didn't seem like The Lorax would get anywhere near that amount since it looked derivative from the trailers and turned out to be a very derivative film. Also add in the fact that several animated films in 2011 had unspectacular opening weekends and that the last animated Dr. Seuss adaptation (Horton Hears a Who!) didn't hit $200 million. It was suggested by some that animation was in a bit of a rut in 2011. I just think last year didn't really offer any "must-see" events, or the good stuff was a little too out of reach for audiences (i.e. Rango)
However, I've been thinking now that these kinds of family films are "the thing" now. Meaning, family films that are really more for kids than anything, but ones they drag their unfortunate parents to. I mean, explain why Yogi Bear pulled the ridiculously good multiplier that it did, and why The Smurfs did so well. These kinds of movies are hot at the moment, which is too bad, the good stuff should be making money. Worldwide, it didn't really sail. Horton Hears a Who! was no smash worldwide either, so this gross was expected, even with the film being in 3D and IMAX 3D. It made a nice $348 million worldwide. It cost almost nothing for Illumination, so it's a big success for them and everyone else involved.
The Pirates! Band of Misfits - Time and time again, I find myself wondering why stop-motion animation films have such a difficult time at the American box office. Sometimes I blame inept marketing, other times I believe it's because the subject matter in some of the films isn't really mainstream or conventional. The Pirates! Band of Misfits, I believe, suffered from both. Though I analyzed the overall box office performance earlier this year, I thought I'd address this point as well.
To a casual American moviegoer, The Pirates! would look undesirable, even if Columbia didn't market it the way they did. Not just because it's stop-motion, but because it comes off as a weird pirate film and American audiences are not truly accustomed to the animation medium to begin with. After the big budget spectacle of the Pirates of the Caribbean films, who would want to see this kind of film? Outside of us animation fans and those who are knowledgable about Aardman and the book series, no one would really. Of course, in a world where tons of adults shun animation, you really need to have something in your animated film that will interest adults from the get-go. The Pirates! really had no chance, being from a studio that makes quirky animated films that just don't seem to catch on here in America.
Of course, the folks at Aardman's home country were charitable. The Pirates! was a hit in the UK, and it did well enough all around the world. It did double its minimal budget of $55 million, so it's a moderate success for the studio. It certainly did better (profit-wise) than their last feature, Arthur Christmas. The optimist in me, however, hoped that the film would've made more dough in the states. Releasing this (a 3D film no less) right before The Avengers was an incredibly stupid move from Columbia. If released earlier in the month, it could've had time to get good legs and make more than the paltry $31 million it ended up making. Stop-motion really needs to take off in the domestic market.
Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted - Given the dwindling opening weekend totals of the DreamWorks films and the lackluster reception Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa got from audiences, I was expecting this to open with a very low total (in the $30 million range), but I guess all that colorful pizazz and singing zebra action really got people hyped for the film. Opening with $60 million, it had very good word of mouth and became the series' highest-grossing installment. Good thing too, for I believe it is the best of the series and a good film overall.
The film also broke $200 million, ensuring us animation fans that the $200 million benchmark would be reached more than once after a year where no feature did so. Over $700 million worldwide? DreamWorks certainly played their cards right with this film, and it was a much-needed super-hit for them.
Brave - I was certain that this would cross $200 million, and it did. Cars 2 only missed it by a hair, so I felt Brave would have no problem clearing that. Plus with the reception it got, it was bound to happen. It opened well (Over $60 million is the usual for a Pixar film) and had very good word of mouth, though it was more on the level of WALL-E than something like Ratatouille or Up. That being said, it is currently this year's highest grossing animated film domestically and will most likely keep that title.
Worldwide... What happened? I was thinking that this kind of fantasy film (not to mention 3D) would do Up numbers (i.e. over $400 million) overseas. Guess I was dead wrong. After all, How to Train Your Dragon grossed around the same amount. Over $500 million is good for any animated film, but it's not a monstrous total. But again, it's a big success for Pixar, once again.
Ice Age: Continental Drift - Looking at Shrek Forever After and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, I knew this fourth installment in the series would dip and make the lowest total in the franchise domestically. It sure did, but $161 million is still good enough for Blue Sky. Worldwide, it exploded. We all saw that one coming. $875 million. Biggest animated film at the box office this year, and one of the biggest of all time. Are you not surprised?
ParaNorman - Like Coraline and other stop-motion films, ParaNorman only opened with a small amount. Word of mouth seemed to be great, the film pulled a 3.9x multiplier, the biggest this year so far for animated film. Again, another masterful stop-motion film has underperformed overall. Worldwide? It didn't make much of a mark, sadly. With $99 million overall, it looks like ParaNorman isn't much of a success. It didn't double its $60 million budget. Shame, but Laika will prevail.
Hotel Transylvania - Unlike the two other spooky-themed animated films released this year, Hotel Transylvania was certainly very mainstream and accessible. ParaNorman and Frankenweenie were not mainstream and are overall films that aren't entirely suitable for an audience that wants a specific kind of animated film presented to them (unless it's Pixar making the film). This on the other hand was perfect for casual moviegoers with its star-studded cast, appealing animation and funny jokes. Yes, it's been made clear many times: American audiences would rather see an animated film like this, and not something truly creative or daring like ParaNorman.
It is currently Sony Pictures Animation's biggest film domestically with $143 million and a healthy $308 million take worldwide. The budget? Only $85 million. Again, Sony Animation knows how to make a profit much like Blue Sky and Illumination.
Frankenweenie - Despite some pushy marketing from Disney, this Tim Burton stop-motion critical darling just couldn't do it. It opened low like every other stop-motion film and crept its way up to the mid-$30 million range. Its current worldwide total is $66 million, but that isn't enough to double the $39 million budget. It opens in a few more territories in the next few weeks, so who knows at this rate. Again, another stop-motion film has underperformed.
Wreck-It Ralph - Opening with a strong $49 million (though I had hoped it would've opened with more, but Hurricane Sandy affected the box office somewhat), Wreck-It Ralph was on its way to really wreck the box office. It has done very well so far, it's looking like it'll end up somewhere around $180-$190 million. How come it will fall short of $200 million? With the buzz it has been getting, why won't in reach it? How come it couldn't outgross Tangled?
The final worldwide total is too early to tell, since other countries haven't gotten the film yet (the latest arrival will be in Japan, in March). It's not really making a stir in most countries, but it's got the chance to add a good $200 million overseas and help the great Walt Disney Animation Studios film crack $400 million worldwide. With a $165 million budget, Disney will have a success on their hands if it makes that much. It should, a lot of effort went into it and it better get what it deserves.
Rise of the Guardians - What happened? Well, I looked into it and it seemed like another case where it was a combination of bad things. However, Rise of the Guardians has scored some impressive legs and word of mouth. It should at least hit $100 million by the time it is out of theaters here in the states. Worldwide, it's doing steadily but not spectacularly. Around $300 million seems to be the final amount for this film, which is good but not as much as DreamWorks' films usually do worldwide. It's no flop, but it's no big success.
~
Overall, this was certainly a better year than last year. It wasn't, however, an excellent year like 2009 or 2010. Three films hit $200 million stateside, proving that feature animation can still thrive with mass audiences despite a rather dry year behind it. But it wasn't without disappointments: Rise of the Guardians underperforming was certainly a shock to the animation community, and while it was expected, it was still a bit discouraging to see ParaNorman, Frankenweenie and The Pirates! not doing too well. I was hoping for some sort of stop-motion revolution this year since Coraline was able to do well enough three years back, but alas it did not happen.
Another thing that irks me is that something so obviously commercial like The Lorax could open so high ($70 million) and easily coast to $200 million stateside. Brave did the usual for a Pixar film, though I was hoping it would perform like Up, but this didn't earn the very strong word of mouth that film got. Worldwide, it did well but it was no titan. I guess that was going to happen, like I said earlier. Madagascar 3's success, I felt was deserved, since it was a quality film. I'd take a "good" loud/busy/obnoxious movie over a bad one. Nothing wrong with a busy, chaotic animated film done right. Ice Age's performance, I'm happy with, it shows that people are slowly getting tired of the franchise here in the states. While I'm happy to see Wreck-It Ralph doing well, I was hoping it would crush Brave at the box office being the year's best. Oh well...
What box office performance surprised you this year? What did you predict for these films? Did they match your predictions? Sound off!
Labels:
Aardman,
Box Office,
Brave,
Disney,
DreamWorks,
Frankenweenie,
Hotel Transylvania,
Laika,
Madagascar 3,
ParaNorman,
Pixar,
Rise of the Guardians,
The Lorax,
The Pirates Band of Misfits,
Wreck-It Ralph
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Interesting Words From Mark Andrews
Mark Andrews, the Pixar story man who was given the task to finish Brave in less than two years after its original director Brenda Chapman was removed from the project, has been making the rounds lately and has mentioned some interesting viewpoints in his latest interview.
For starters, he talked about how Pixar could possibly venture into PG-13 territory, and possibly even go for films that'll carry an R rating...
Think about that for a second... Pixar films that are rated PG-13 and R...
Now granted, this is what Andrews would want to do, but he knows that it can't happen at Pixar any time soon. Andrew Stanton himself didn't make John Carter a Pixar production due to its content, and how it would inevitably earn a PG-13 rating from the MPAA. Andrews still believes in making PG-13 and R rated animated films, claiming that there is a shortage of them and that those are the kind of films he would like to see. I for one can applaud him for stating this.
I love Pixar. They make some of the finest animated family films on the market. Ditto Disney Animation, and occasionally DreamWorks. However, a big problem I have with the current mainstream animation landscape outside of those three studios is that almost everyone else makes family-friendly fluff. Once in a while you'll get something really edgy (for a family film, even) like ILM's Rango or Laika's ParaNorman, but the non-Pixar/Disney/DreamWorks mainstream animation studios play it safe by just making family-friendly films. We need more "adults-only" animated films, and not ones that try too hard to be "adult" and end up becoming embarrassments in the end.
Over the last couple of years, we've only seen a few mainstream animated releases that got a rating higher than a PG such as Shane Acker's 9 and Fox's The Simpsons Movie (which was obvious). Very few of these films are successful for a good reason, as a lot of them come off as films trying to be edgy for teenagers but they end up not appealing to anyone at all. Teenagers are an audience you shouldn't go for when marketing animation, since teenagers usually shun animation to begin with unless it's something dressed up in coarse language, graphic violence or sexual content. Films like Titan A.E. and Treasure Planet are fantastic examples of how marketing animation to teenagers backfires.
That being said, I have no idea of what kind of plans Andrews would have for a PG-13 animated film. His work in Brave shows that he's not afraid to put material in that would frighten younger audiences, and as such, the film was once again targeted by the same parents who normally moan about the "kiddie flick" being too much for their children. As such, I don't think Pixar "has" to make a PG-13 or R rated film. All that matters is that they have a good story and one that doesn't pull its punches, in which Pixar films never do.
But... I'd like to see another animation studio make films that'll garner a higher rating while also telling a great story and not being cynical about it. I don't want them to make PG-13 and R-rated films for the sake of doing it, I just want some studios to be a little more daring. Rango and ParaNorman may have been PG, but they pushed that rating's boundaries.
Anyways, Andrews does make a good point in saying that there should be more "adults only" fare out there. I personally don't want Pixar to go that route unless the story they have calls for it, because if they just go for a PG-13/R film just to be edgy, it'll backfire...
Unfortunately, Mark Andrews also presented a controversial idea, and that is to ramp up Pixar's production schedule and bang more films out at a time. Andrews admits that coming to Pixar off of a TV background was quite the experience, and how much slower things were, but the Brave director feels that the studio should speed up their productions.
Remember the scene in Toy Story 2 where Geri, the cleaner (and, ahem, chess player) Al calls to fix Woody, arrives? Al frantically asks him, "So... Um... How long is this gonna take?" Geri simply replies with "You can't rush art!"
You can't rush art... This is literally Pixar's motto. They know that a good film will come when it's ready. This is common knowledge in animation, you can't just launch something into production that isn't even ready. Pixar films spend years in development before taking off, and changes are also made as late as actual production. Andrews compares Pixar's process to carefully filling the individual holes in an ice tray, he would rather, in his words, put the tray under the sink and fill it all up.
Andrews still understands story, but again, it's something you can't fly through. To his credit, finishing Brave and fixing what were perceived as story problems in such a short period of time was no easy task, and for the most part, he did quite well. Despite some flaws, Brave still holds together nicely even if it isn't very tight. However, I'm just hoping that Andrews isn't assuming that Brave being a critical success means that you can take as little time as you want on animated films. He happened to acquire a story that had a lot of strengths developed over the course of five years.
Anyways, I thought that piece was interesting. What did you think of Andrews' comments?
Monday, December 10, 2012
Who Will It Be?: Oscar News and Revised Oscar Predictions
As Oscar season gets closer and closer, the more we find out. The critics' circles are currently picking the films they deemed the best of the year. Of course, they also have a slot for animated features. So far, the results have been... Interesting, to say the least.
It seems as if Tim Burton's Frankenweenie is getting a lot of love, on top of getting warm reception from critics. The Boston Society of Film Critics and The New York Film Critics Circle went for Burton's re-imagining of his 1984 short film. I have not seen the film yet, but I'm happy to see that stop-motion is getting some form of recognition.
Another stop-motion great got props from the Washington DC Area Film Critics, Laika's brilliant ParaNorman. How this one isn't edging out Frankenweenie on its story, creativity and originality is beyond me. Not that I'm decrying Frankenweenie, it could very well be a better film or one that's equally supreme, but ParaNorman seemed like it would be the year's best-received stop motion film.
The National Board of Review was the only force rooting for Disney's Wreck-It Ralph, which is the film I am personally rooting for in the race (as well as the Annies, of course). Perhaps the video game theme, the loud and busy pacing of the film and the familiar story turned off other critics. Or maybe they just felt that it held the film back from being the best of the year. That being said, it's still a very well-received film that's sure to at least get a nomination. I'm glad that one circle called it the best.
Brave, on the other hand, hasn't gotten any love. I have a strong feeling that the Academy Awards are just going to leave Pixar's film out of the race, since it got good-but-not-great critical reception. Then again, it was relatively more successful with critics than most of the films released this year, so it may get by on that. Disney's "For Your Consideration" ads are effective and striking, but who knows where that will get the film.
So what does that mean for this year's Best Animated Feature category? Here are my revised predictions for the Oscars.
Earlier Predictions
Brave
The Painting
ParaNorman
Rise of the Guardians
Wreck-It Ralph
Current Predictions
Brave
Frankenweenie
ParaNorman
The Rabbi's Cat
Wreck-It Ralph
I had assumed that The Painting, a 2011 French animated film that will be released here this year, would be the foreign title to snag a nomination. This is the Academy's deal now, as they want to honor animated films from around the world instead of American endeavors. However, I think the nomination will go to another French-Austrian animated film, The Rabbi's Cat. This hand-drawn animated film also got a nomination for Best Animated Film in the Annie Awards, so I think it'll be the Academy's foreign animated pick.
I eliminated Rise of the Guardians, as the reviews were positive but the consensus is that it isn't anything beyond something simple. DreamWorks is pushing for a Best Picture nomination for this film (and Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, which is absurd if you ask me), but I have a feeling that it will be left out of the race due to the reception it has gotten plus the box office numbers. The Academy Awards won't nominate a film that's deemed a box office dud or failure. This doesn't apply to independently released foreign films, for the most part. The Academy does tend to contradict the "box office" rule. (After it, it is the Academy Awards...)
I kept Brave and Wreck-It Ralph, because both films got better reception than most of the animated films released this year. Brave might be axed in the end if the Academy doesn't feel like giving three slots to Disney, or if some behind-the-scenes work gets it booted out. There's no way Frankenweenie can be cut at this rate, given the acclaim it's getting, but the box office returns may hold it back from winning. Wreck-It Ralph got a small piece of the acclaim, but Brave didn't get any. It might just not make it.
But if Brave were to go, what would take it's place? Another foreign animated film? Perhaps the Academy will also nominate The Painting or something else. Maybe Aardman's The Pirates! Band of Misfits? That got warm reception, though a few dissenting voices thought it could've been better. Anything else? Well something like The Lorax or Hotel Transylvania certainly has no chance, so it's either Brave or a foreign film. I still think Brave has a good chance because the film still got praise from a good number of critics. The critical reception was Cars-level.
ParaNorman also remains on board given some of the love it's gotten, and there's no way the Academy Awards should snub the film because it's a Laika film, the critical reception was great and the film is seen as a real game changer for animation (which I believe it is).
So there you have it, three Disney releases (unprecedented), a foreign feature and a Laika film. Out of those, who do you think would take home the prize?
What are your Best Animated Feature predictions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




















