Saturday, November 28, 2009

2010 Academy Awards for Best Animated Feature, really early thoughts

Inspired by my last-night Black Friday purchase of Coraline, I thought I'd check out what the buzz is for Oscar for cartoons (one of the few categories I still care about) - and found out that far from being the Up vs. Coraline slugging match I thought it would be, there are 20 possibilities, and the contenders will be expanded from 3 to 5 contestants.  Here's my ranking (with a lot of uncertainty at the top):

1. Coraline - I know it's odd for me, a die-hard Pixar fan, to expect and half want a Burton-esque (and I do dislike Burton's style, though Sellick isn't Burton, and I think that does show in Coraline) film whose creators have openly disparaged Pixar's efforts (the behind-the-scenes book consistently had the animators deriding Rataouille for having "cute" rats, and the interviews with the team on YouTube have them subtly or not-so-subtly saying that CGI, even Pixar's CGI, is either inhumanly perfect, not a "real" animated performance, or not "timeless" enough compared to the "hand-crafted" look of stop-motion) to win.  But the phenomenal likeability and animation of Coraline herself, a heartbreakingly brave and spunky heroine, I think deserves a fair shot against the somewhat unsatisfying structuring and characters of Up (more on that later).  Which is not to say that Coraline doesn't have problems - I think the script is often quite weak, only saved by incredibly strong voicing and animation, and they both alter the ending annoyingly by having a boy come save Coraline (though it's a bit more subtle than that, it's still annoying that he's there at all), and cut out the most powerful scene in the book (Coraline's flashback about her dad and the bees).  But I'm glad I bought it, and think it does have a strong chance.

2. Up.  Of course - Pixar has dominated the category with only a few upsets (and those, like Cars, weren't hard to understand why - though I do like Cars, I don't think it's what the Academy was looking for - I am curious about why Ratatouille, for all its brilliance, beat Persepolis).  But I was frustrated with both the structure of the story - the ending really didn't feel as if it really followed from what went before, and the best part of the story was the first five-ten minute synopsis of a marriage - heartbreaking and warming simultaneously - and nowhere else does the film aspire or achieve that kind of deep emotion - especially not with the rather annoying kid and his predictably broken-home backstory.  I admit this is a bit harsh, but I was expecting a bit more from my favorite animation company - I mean, they've made my absolute favorite superhero film (beating even Spider-man 2 and Batman Begins) and made me cry about car racing and robot romance (both of which are concepts I find really annoying, especially with Wall-e's bad science - but it worked anyway because of the sheer power of the storytelling and structure - which is where I really think Up falls down - not failing absolutely, but not nearly as strong as any of Pixar's other stories).

3. Ponyo - I'm not either Miyazaki or anime's biggest fan, and I haven't seen this one (only seen Spirited Away and Howl's Moving Castle - which were very sweet, gorgeous, yet off-puttingly odd and bizzare and unfollowable at the end), but Miyazaki transcends anime's low-budget bad animation, and has won in the past, so even though this one's getting "It's not as good as previous Miyazaki films" reviews, I would say that it has a chance against "It's not as good as previous Pixar films" Up and Coraline's beautiful yet flawed chances.  And I would like to see it at some point.  I'm just not expecting a whole huge lot.

4. Fantastic Mr. Fox - I have to say this film interests me not at all - I've not seen Wes Anderson's films, nor do I want to.  I have read the book - and like Where the Wild Things Are, I just can't understand why people are making films of these books.

These are the only ones I think are almost certain to be on the five-film slate.  The next few are ones I expect to be hotly contesting for the last spot.

5. 9 - though reviews have been very, very bad for this one, the sheer beauty of the ideas and animation (at least, according to reviews) may boost it up - as might Tim Burton's name attached to the producing credits.  However, I a) don't like Burton, b) don't like post-apocalyptic; c) don't like crummy stories and bad dialogue, which is what the reviews are crediting it with, so I have little desire to see this one.

6. A Christmas Carol - Unfortunately, despite my newfound love of Dickens (yay Little Dorrit!), this film has waaay too many strikes against it for me to want to see it anytime soon: 1) I hate Robert Zemekis; 2) I hate Jim Carrey (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind notwithstanding, this does not look like it's going to be another one of those); 3) I don't like motion-capture animation; 4) Beowulf didn't get any real animation nods.  So, I neither want to see it (I'd rather reread the excellent book - see there's a book that does deserve a good adaptation - just don't think this is it - or listen to the radio dramatization) nor expect it seriously to win - but it might get on the shortlist.

7. The Princess and the Frog.  Honestly, I don't much think it looks any good - I'm much, much more excited about Rapunzel - but it might have a good shot at the shortlist since Disney's making a big deal about returning to 2D animation (which it should - I just don't think this is really looking that interesting from the trailers).  I doubt I'll see it before DVD, though - and I won't be rushing even then, unless someone I trust gives it a huge rec.  Like I said, Rapunzel looks much more interesting.

The rest of the films really, really don't look to me like Oscar material - but you never know - I wouldn't have picked Shrek for it either, and it did win.  But I hope none of these make it - as much as I would like to see some of them.

8. Astro Boy - it looks cheap, silly, and dumb.  But the design might garner a bit of attention.  I haven't really heard any buzz about it - but the trailer just looked, well, you know.

9. Monsters vs. Aliens - I actually do want to see this, but mostly because of the clever parody of the Alien vs. Predator in the trailer - I hate horror, and seeing it sent up like that made me happy.  But it's so deliriously silly I just can't imagine anyone taking it that seriously as a contender - but then, Kung Fu Panda (for behind-the-scenes reasons) beat Wall-e in the Annies, so it might have some kind of thing going for it.  But I don't think anyone seriously will vote for it at the Oscars.  Again, I do still want to see it, despite thinking it will be very, very silly.

10. Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs - I admit to not being able to finish Ice Age 1, on account of the absolutely repuslive main character.  And the trailers looks absolutely idiotic.  And yet it's the most profitable animated movie of the year worldwide.  What the heck, world?  I have faith that even the Academy won't vote for it, though.

11. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs - I dislike the book - it really creeped me out as a kid - but the cheery, sunny character design makes me want to give it a try.  Despite that, or maybe because of that, I seriously doubt a mad-scientist kiddie book adaptation with cutesy design will make the shortlist - I don't think Meet the Robinsons or The Tale of Despareaux did either, and this film looks sort of like a mash-up of those two.  I think I'll like it better than either of those two, at least, I hope I do.

12. Tinker Bell and the Lost Treasure - I am a giant Peter Pan fan (the play, book, and 2003 film, not the Disney version, just to clarify), and so I feel morally obligated to watch these films.  And I do like them, for sweet, pretty, nicely animated direct-to-DVD poorly written and structured films.  But despite the fact that I plan on enjoying this one, I seriously doubt it's anywhere close to being on the Oscar voters' radar.

13-19. I admit to not knowing or caring anything whatsoever about these films, and don't seriously expect them to be on the shortlist: 
Battle for Terra
The Dolphin – Story of a Dreamer
Mary and Max
The Missing Lynx
Planet 51
The Secret of Kells
A Town Called Panic

20. Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel.  Do you really have to ask why this is at the bottom of my list?  I watched the first one (and by the way, how in the world is this getting an "Animated feature" nomination?  It's well over 1/4th live-action, isn't it?), and wanted to claw my eyes and ears out - I simply do not understand why idiotic adult + stupid immature rude annoying chipmunks = good movie.  If this makes it anywhere near the shortlist, I will know that the Oscars have lost even the semblance of relevance.

So, way more than anyone ever wanted to know about my animation-nerd-ness.  But I'll be keeping my eye on these - as they're pretty much the only films I really care about winning any awards this year.  I mean, the other films I've seen this year (Teminator Salvation, Star Trek, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, New Moon, and The Young Victoria) are unlikely to win anything other than best costumes, maybe a few acting nods, best score, or best special effects.  Though I do like the score race - since I love filmscores.

Posted via email from Ian's posterous

Monday, November 23, 2009

And the numbers are in for my last Rutledge paper...

AND IT'S A 98!  WOOOOOHOOOO!

Now I just have to write my 20 pager.

Posted via email from Ian's posterous

Test and Amazon Deal

This is a test to see if my posterous will actually import to my facebook and Livejournal.

But to make it a semi-real post, I just found out that Amazon's giving away $3 gift certificates for mp3s!  Just check out the Amazon mp3 section - it should show up somewhere - but only this week, since it's for Black Friday.

I got three tracks:

- The Meadow from the New Moon soundtrack - a score excerpt by Alexandre Desplat (though it's actually an arrangement - for some reason, the actual mp3 isn't downloadable).
- Farewell to Lorien - from the Two Towers special edition score - a bonus track from the Fellowship of the Rings Special Extended Edition.  I listened to this when I borrowed the special score from the library about six or seven years ago, but I only bought the original score release (which is gorgeous).  Now I have the extra one as well!
- Due for Flute and Piano, by Aaron Copland, movement 1.  I recently did a semi-presentation on 1950s art music for my Introduction to Cultural Studies class, and listened to some late Copland I'd never heard of before as a result, including this absolutely gorgeous piece.  It reminds me of a cross between Appalachian Spring and Fanfare for the Common Man - spare, clear, pastoral, angular, sweet, and utterly beautiful.

Farewell To Lorien (Bonus Track - Album Version) by Lord Of The Rings 2  
Download now or listen on posterous
20 - Farewell To Lorien (Bonus Track-Album Version).mp3 (8714 KB)

Duo For Flute And Piano/I. Flowing by Aaron Copland  
Download now or listen on posterous
08 - Duo for Flute and PianoI Flowing.mp3 (9857 KB)

Posted via email from Ian's posterous

Friday, November 16, 2007

A Collocation of Discursivity

So, I was disappointed by the portrayal of Eowyn in the film The Return of the King. I was surprised and delighted by Miranda Otto in The Two Towers, so it wasn't the acting. Rather, it was the complete loss of what I loved about her character in the novel.

A little to the left facing them stood she whom he had called Dernhelm. But the helm of her secrecy had fallen from her, and her bright hair, released from its bonds, gleamed with pale gold upon her shoulders. Her eyes grey as the sea were hard and fell, and yet tears were on her cheek. A sword was in her hand, and she raised her shield against the horror of her enemy's eyes.

...the face of one that goes seeking death, having no hope.

Still she did not blench: maiden of the Rohirrim, child of kings, slender but as a steel blade, fair yet terrible.


Quoted from The Return of the King, Book V chapter 6.

So, on the zee pictures:



Um, it looks like she's blenching to me.

Also, how hard is the original chronology of the fight to follow, anyway? Theoden is down, she stands between the kings, talk talk talk, she laughs and takes off her helm, the Witch-King's beast leaps into the air and then falls on her, she strikes off its head, she springs back, the Black Rider rises, cries and breaks her arm with his mace, she falls to her knees, he stoops for the kill, Merry stabs him in the back of the knee, he stumbles, she totters up and stabs him, he is destroyed and she falls on his mantle. But nooooo, Jackson has to rearrange it all: Theoden goes flying - whee! more exciting, see?, Witch-King tells it to eat away, Eowyn runs in between (so far, so good), dialogue is exchanged (but in the wrong order), beast charges (no flying), Eowyn chops off its head, the Rider rises, Eowyn blenches ferociously, the morningstar (not mace!) whirls about, is parried weakly once and then breaks her shield and arm, she falls back on the dead horse, the Nazgul grabs her by the throat and threatens her with terrible dialogue, Merry stabs him the back of the knee, Eowyn falls back again, then stands up all nice and tall and proclaims her non-man-ness, then draws back her arm for a very drama...er lame looking stroke, which takes way too long, and then her sword goes flying (not splintered!), the Witch-King implodes, she holds her arm looking rather dumb...really, why the changes? I understand that some things are necessary, but the scene is visual and exciting in the book. These things were really unnecessary.

I suppose this might be counted as not blenching, but at this point, she's supposed to be tottering, and instead we get inspirational feminist quips:



Bother. At least she looks about right, though I think the lighting in this scene is too warm. I always imagine this scene as rather cold, grey-blue, matching the despair of her mood. Oh, and lots of upward camera angles, both to show Merry's POV and to emphasize her heroism without lame dialogue additions.

Funnily enough, I was watching The Princess Bride, and I think that Buttercup in the first 30 minutes of the film is a lot better Eowyn than Eowyn in The Return of the King. Right look, right attitude, and even the same description - eyes as grey as the sea (oh, wait, she's describing Wesley. Never mind - but the wording is exactly the same;-).

So, this is how I think Eowyn should look in that scene:

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Metagenre Thoughts

So, this summer, I read a lot of fantasy (mostly Terry Pratchett), and I did some reading up on the sci-fi/fantasy subculture (and I don't care if some think sci-fi is a dismissive title - I apply it happily to myself). I found that there are two major types of fantasy - "high" and "low." That got me thinking in another direction - the direction of the mystery genre. Mystery writers began writing cool, intellectual, polished stories featuring geniuses like Sherlock Holmes, Lord Peter Wimsey, and Hercule Poirot. These writers wrote during the high "Golden Age of Mystery writing." They were followed stylistically by Josephine Tey and P. D. James (and possibly Laurie King). However, near the midpoint of the Golden Age, writers like Dashiel Hammett and Raymond Chandler ushered in the "hardboiled detective novel," firmly established in gritty detail, much more focused on both the drudge work of following clues, and the hard action (and often sex) rather than intellectual reasoning. Since that time, other than a few (like James and King) who remained in the Golden stream, most detective novels followed this "low" path, diverging into many tiny subgenres like the police procedural, the gumshoe/private eye, and many more.It seems to me, from the research I did, that fantasy followed a similar path: starting with the "high" writers, significantly Tolkien, Lewis' Narnia, LeGuin's Earthsea, fantasy was full of nobility, rarified speech and syntax, and world-threatening plots. However, as the genre developed, writers split off into "low" fantasy - subgenres such as the wish-fulfilling and unashamedly plagiarizing Sword and Sorcery type, the gritty, dark deconstructions such as LeGuin's follow ups to Earthsea like Tehanu, witty spoofs like Pratchett, and even some great psychological studies like Lewis' Till We Have Faces.So, I see a parallel pattern. Starting with a "norm" ("high fantasy" or "golden age mystery"), writers in these two genres began by portraying a genteel (mostly) world with characters who faced deadly threats to society/the world with grace and brilliance (moral or intellectual). Soon, however, other writers splintered away into many subgenres which were given a blanket metacatagory ("low fantasy," um, I don't think there is a overarching metacatagory for all the mystery subgenres, but the phenomenon is similar), which either merely added darker/grittier content or takes concepts in the "norm" genre and examines it from a new perspective (psychology, satire, deconstruction, lower class, etc).Perhaps an interesting topic for a paper sometime...In several years, of course. :-)

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Hello!

Well, this makes my third blog (fourth if you count facebook - which I don't), but since I hope to cross post all three (or some such low number) of my thoughts on all of them, we shall see how much good signing up does.

Until I get my interests edited, here's a bit about me:

Christian
Calvinist/Reformed/philosophical compatibilist/etc.
Conservative in name and nature
English Lit/Piano major in senior undergraduate year
from Minnesota, going to school in Tennessee
Baptist, but not Southern

Fan of:
Jane Austen
C. S. Lewis
J. R. R. Tolkien
Joss Whedon
Sherlock Holmes
Orson Scott Card
Tamora Pierce
literary criticism and analysis, though with reservations about both subversive crit and criticism of complaint (or whatever Bloom called it - as absurd and pretentious as he gets, I think he's dead on in that respect. Well, that and his judgment that Poe couldn't write)

So, there me is. In all my less-than-glory.