Ponyo: the ocean feels very warm

Hayao Miyazaki is one of my favorite filmmakers, one of my favorite artists, and a champion of originality. Although his movies are considered Japanese anime, viewers have a better chance of learning of Miyazaki through Disney than through more traditional anime.

Miyazaki has stressed many times his fascination with a child's point of view. Previously, he explored this idea in My Neighbor Totoro and Spirited Away. Ponyo marks another journey into adolescence and childhood through the child's point of view. Everything seems very large, and not too complex. The world and the its ocean are big and mysterious to the two main characters, Ponyo and Sōsuke.

The story follows a humanoid fish (referred to as a "goldfish," but looking like a little human girl) named "Brünnhilde" by her father, but later named Ponyo. The goldfish swims away from her father, a caretaker of the sea, to view the world above, and soon possesses a desire to be human. She is found by a five year-old boy named Sōsuke, and they each take a quick liking to each other. Afterward, they are separated, explaining their friendship to their parents, and then brought back together again, only to truly prove their relationship in a test of love. In the midst of all this, Ponyo's parents (wizard and goddess) struggle to maintain balance in the sea as they realize their daughter's true (yet unnatural) passion to evolve from a mystical sea creature to human being in the world above.

Ponyo has a slightly different look for a Miyazaki film. The backgrounds are executed with a much softer tone, almost with pastels and water colors, as opposed to delicate realism. In keeping with the theme of water, everything visual is round and bulbous. There's hardly a straight line to be seen in the movie. The animation of the characters also seems to be a little looser than in Miyazaki's previous movies. The characters' outlines appear to be moving more than usual, giving their bodies more physical expression.


Some of the best parts of the movie, in my opinion, are those featuring ocean waves and the shapes coming from the sea. Rather than a realistic looking ocean and storm (already a complicated task), Miyazaki and his crew took what sounds like an easier and more experimental approach. This time, the exaggeration of the waves, looking like morphing bulbous blobs, is easier to understand. The waves are also a lot of fun to watch. This is the first time in a while where I was having fun watching the animation, rather than just admiring the technicality of it. The waves are dark and looming, but there's something funny and amiable about them.


A big part of the story deals with parental relationships. Sōsuke at first glance has an average relationship with his mother, but is later shown to care very deeply about her. He also shows concern for her, especially when his father (a ship captain) has a habit of working overtime. Ponyo's parents, by comparison, are more unique, as they have mystical elements. Ponyo's father, Fujimoto, is very layered: he is shown to be a stern wizard who despises humans (despite being one himself at one point) and is devoted to the well-being of the sea. Despite these traits, he truly loves and cares for his daughter and other children, and in the end, accepts Ponyo's decision. Ponyo's mother, Gran Mamare, is a looming sea goddess, with great beauty and gentle insight. The scenes with Gran Mamare are among my favorite scenes in the movie.

I can't say enough to praise the film score. Joe Hisaishi's music has been a crucial part of Miyzaki's movies since their first collaboration on Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind, close to 25 years ago. I found myself getting the chills at the sound of the primary theme of the score, which mostly played during scenes under the ocean and scenes involving Ponyo's mother, Gran Mamare. The music in these scenes is loud and operatic with an emphasizing choir, enough to make a full-grown adult feel small. There are also parts of the score that are reminiscent of Richard Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries," (Miyazaki has stated that part of the story and setting is inspired by Wagner's Die Walküre).

I am glad this got a theatrical release here in the U.S., thanks to Disney. I have to admit I had great concern over the English dub. What made me nervous right away was the casting of Frankie Jonas (youngest brother of the Jonas Brother) and Noah Cyrus (Miley's younger sister) and Sōsuke and Ponyo respectively. The Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus are big Disney stars, and here they casted their siblings, which strikes me as Hollywood nepotism. Surprisingly, these two kids do a great job: their voices are emotive and clear, and right to the heart of the young characters. Tina Fey (of Saturday Night Live and 30 Rock) portrays Sōsuke's mother, Lisa, and also managed to bring heart and warmth to the character. The rest of the actors (Liam Neeson, Cate Blanchett, Lily Tomlin, Cloris Leachman, Betty White, Matt Damon) are all pretty good, even though a couple of them have only minimal dialog. I also have to admit, I feel a little uncertain about Liam Neeson's performance (and I say this as a Neeson admirer).

Ponyo is one of the warmest movies I have seen in a theater in quite a while (not since the Wallace and Gromit movie four years ago). The movie ends with a sense that anything can happen, but happiness and balance are now full circle. Miyazaki hasn't lost his touch, all of his movies are timeless, and Ponyo is no different. I will be remembering Ponyo for a long time.

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs...not there yet

Being a part of the New York animation scene, I am biased to be pleased that there is a place like Blue Sky Studios nearby (previously located in White Plains, NY; now relocated to Greenwich, CT). But being pleased with a studio that makes animated feature films doesn't count for how I feel about their output. So far, I find each of Blue Sky's movies to be mindfully flawed in some way (or ways). Ice Age: The Dawn of the Dinosaurs, the third installment of Blue Sky's Ice Age movies, is just as flawed, but not enough to keep me from enjoying the movie.


The story of Ice Age 3 is probably my favorite so far in the Ice Age films. The "herd" is still together, and true to form, they can't live with each other or without each other. Wooly mammoth partners Manny (Ray Romano) and Ellie (Queen Latifah) are expecting their first child, yet Ellie seems to be suffering the least of her extended family. After discovering three lone eggs in an underground cavern, Sid, the unhealthy yet optimistic sloth (John Leguizamo) decides to care for them. When they hatch into baby tyrannosaurus, their mother attacks above ground looking for them, and takes them (and unintentionally) Sid back into the cavern. The rest of herd rush into the cabin to find him, and happen upon an underground jungle populated by (thought to be) extinct creatures.



The story is pretty decent. The herd is portrayed from the start to be something of an extended family (something I enjoy seeing in stories). I love the action element to the story, but there are great moments of comedy interspersed throughout. My favorite scene has to be when the herd is trying to cross through a toxic cave, and when they breath in, the toxic gas causes them to go uncharacteristically happy and hysterical. The stories of the previous Ice Age films were okay, although I like the first one the least (the human characters were boring and unnecessary), and the second was only a mild improvement.


The best part of the movie is the overall look. Recently, I became a fan of illustrator and character-designer Peter De Sève, probably best known for his New Yorker magazine illustrations. The designs of the characters are wonderfully balanced between needing to be 3-dimensional, looking unique and distinctive, and wordlessly expressive. In fact, Mr. De Sève recently started up a blog, which includes some of his pre-production drawings for the movie. His designs of Manny, Diego, and Sid are very distinctive of one another, and all have traits that define their personalities (like Diego being very sharp looking with a few rounded edges, Manny all hidden away by tusks and fur, and Sid with tiny eyes and a carelessly round belly).



The designs of the rest of the "herd" are cute as well: Ellie is a lot softer looking than Manny, and I love the manic appearances of twin possums Crash and Eddie. The new character, Buck is my favorite new design, for the biased reason that I love weasel characters.


The wooly mammoth characters, Manny and Ellie, are impressively animated. Not only are they shown to be large and rotund, but their tusks and wool cover most of their faces. This leaves their eyes as the primary source of facial expression, which the animators do a fantastic job of accomplishing.


The biggest flaw of Ice Age 3 is the dialogue. I find most of the dialogue (if not all) to be predictable, which drives me crazy. I like being surprised by what a character says (especially in humorous situations). This is a flaw evident in all the Ice Age movies. I constantly find myself cringing at some of the dialogue, and I just want to pause the movie so I can correct the dialogue to myself. I was especially displeased with the character of Buck having an Australian accent, thus making the dialogue one big cliché after another. Maybe it would have helped if the accent didn't have so many references to Australian dialect (i.e. "You'll never find your mate,...MATE").


None of the voice acting helps the dialogue out. I personally don't like the celebrity casting Blue Sky places in its movies, although I can appreciate what it does for the reputation of the movies themselves. Ray Romano's portrayal of Manny in the first movie seemed a little too close to his comedy persona, but in Ice Age 2 and 3, his performance is much smoother and not as forced. John Leguizamo, of course, always impresses by keeping himself masked with a happy lisp when playing Sid the Sloth. The rest of the cast (Queen Latifah, Denis Leary, Simon Pegg, Seann William Scott, Josh Peck) isn't too impressive, and don't give the characters as much depth as their appearances offer.


The Scrat and Scratte subplot is at times very sweet, very funny, and a little creepy. As in the previous movies, Scrat, a "saber-toothed squirrel," is still obsessed with gathering acorns, except this time he meets his match in a female counterpart, Scratte. Throughout this story, Scratte managed to outsmart Scrat in getting a particular acorn, most of which end in pain for Scrat (the weirdest part being a scene that evokes the chest-waxing scene in The 40 Year-Old Virgin). Eventually the two fall in love, only for Scrat to be torn by between his love for her and his absurd acorn obsession.


Eventually her nit-picky attitude opens the door for him to pursue his acorn, which leads the two prehistoric squirrels back to their previous conflict. Long story short, he ends up losing both his precious acorn, and (quite possibly) his one true soul mate. Aside from the aforementioned chest-waxing, I quite enjoyed this little subplot. Not everyone wants to admit it, but the reason Scrat's little adventures are so enjoyable is the lack of dialogue, and total reliance on physical comedy, something harking back to the early days (or prehistoric in this case) of cinema.


What more can I say (if I haven't said enough). This is my favorite of the Ice Age films, but its not the best movie ever. I still mind the dialogue flaw very much. However, its still nice to see computer animation that's not overdone, and still has a simplified, yet stylized look. Still, my thoughts on Blue Sky movies remains unchanged.

The Secret of Kells

Here is a film with which I had no expectations whatsoever. I don't know the filmmaker (Tomm Moore), the studio (Gébéka Films), or the story. But in the end, all I can say is The Secret of Kells is a fantastic movie. Great animation, great story, great acting, and it is short yet complete.


I thought the film would seem a little strange to someone with no prior knowledge of Celtic mythology. But that proved not to be the case.


The film takes place in Ireland in the 9th century and follows twelve year-old Brendan. An adventurous boy by nature, Brendan is in the care and shadow of his strict uncle Abbot, whose sole concern is the safety of the Kells Village from the oncoming Viking attacks (in Irish terminology, the Vikings are referred to as "Norsemen"). One day, the village receives an elderly visitor, Brother Aidan, who introduces Brendan to the valuable and fantastical Book of Kells. As the film continues, Aidan inspires Brendan to develop his imagination and complete the book, all the while narrowly avoiding the severe disapproval of his uncle.


The art direction, from a first glance, is reminiscent of the shows currently on Cartoon Network. This, surprisingly, helps to move the story along. The combination of simplicity with fantasy setting keeps the story from getting caught up in technological detail. But that's not to say the art direction is terrible. Quite the opposite: it has one of the best art directions I have seen in any animated feature of the last decade.



The color scheme of the movie is very distinctive. The film's primary colors are, unsurprisingly, green (an Irish tradition) and white (which gives the sense of the world surrounding the Irish). The most drastic change in the color scheme comes at two points: when Brendan is learning and working on the Book of Kells, the palette is made up of various warm colors, giving a feeling of comfort while Brendan becomes engaged in his new found interest; the other points are the scenes involving the Vikings (aka the Norsemen) where the dominating color is red, signaling danger and anger.


The music is an impressive component of the film. Some of the score is provided by French composer Bruno Coulais, who provided a haunting ambient score woven with Celtic melodies. The score goes beautifully with the fantasy-related sequences. Elsewhere, music is provided by Kíla, a Celtic folk group, whose sound adds a feeling of authenticity to the scenes within the Kells village. The psychological aspects of Coulais's score with Kíla's Ireland meets the World sound makes for one impressive soundtrack.


It is exciting to see a country's unknown animation talent getting unleashed. I have never known of any Irish animation, not even indie (I've probably missed something, feel free to correct me). But The Secret of Kells has given me hope for hand-drawn animation. I don't know what's next for Ireland. Technically, the film is one third Irish, one third Belgian, and one third French. Still, for me, the film is all Irish. The Irish have always had a film scene, and this may be just a new addition to their country's film culture. Or it could be the start of something interesting....

Harry Potter: the Half-Blood Prince is still in the Title.

I wrote an entry some months ago about how much I enjoyed the Harry Potter film series. The entry is pretty open-ended, and there is still much about the films to be praised, and (at the time of writing it) there are still 3 more films in the series. Now one of those 3 has been released, and I am ecstatic.


(images copied from Yahoo Movies)

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is part six in the series (both book and film). The story picks up just a few weeks after the end of the last installment, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Despite going through what may have been the worst year of his life, Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe, always remarkable) is slowly but surely keeping his feet on the ground, and has shed some of his erratic behavior from the last movie. Now he seems to have a firm grip on what's going on around him, and it shows when, for the first time, he starts to realize his feelings for Ginny Weasly (Bonnie Wright), his best friend's sister.



The acting is spot on, as usual. The movie's primary newcomer is Jim Broadbent, playing Hogwarts professor Horace Slughorn. The character of Slughorn almost mirrors the mood of the movie overall. Slughorn is a very excited yet nervous person, whose naive (yet comedic) nature hides a dark secret he has yet to forgive himself for. Its the same as the rest of the movie, which has an ominous feeling overall, despite many moments of charming comedy. Jim Broadbent's performance is exceptional in capturing these moods and hidden emotions. The scene in Hagrid's hut has to be the centerpiece of Broadbent's performance.



A further kudos to Michael Gambon as Albus Dumbledore, his fourth time out. His performance as Dumbledore is always outstanding. The performance can be described as playing him like a drowsy sleepwalker who is always aware of everything around him. In words, that probably sounds like a criticism, but it is not. Especially in this movie, the character displays a sense of fear and ominous expectation.



What more can I say about Alan Rickman's performance as Severus Snape? Rickman is a remarkable actor, and he knows how to manipulate emotions in the strangest of ways.



A lot must be said for director David Yates, who's directing of the series has improved remarkably. Although Order of the Phoenix was very enjoyable, there were flaws which I minded more than the other films. I found the pacing of the movie 5 to be too quick, and some of the characters were given less screen time and development than before (in fact, book 5 is the longest in the series, while movie 5 is the shortest so far. Sadly ironic, don't you think?). But this time, Mr. Yates appears to have learned from his previous experience, and directed with a beautiful pace and careful timing for each character.




The characters of Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) have been given tremendous development. More than in the previous movie, here they really do support Harry, without drawing too much away from their own issues. Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) is given his biggest role in the series, as he is now made a part of Lord Voldemort's Death Eaters, but later revealed to be against his will. He is shown to be disturbed by the actions he is being forced to do, showing that despite his own bigotry, he is unwilling to act on them.



Bellatrix Lestrange (Helena Bonham Carter, terrific as usual) is given a bigger role than previously, as she goes from being introduced as the first female Death Eater to a rather vicious and devoted follower. Another newcomer to the series is Helen McCrory as Narcissa Malfoy, a role that is to be larger in the next installment.



Visually, the scenery is unchanged from the previous movies. But now, everything is colored differently, with an emphasis on gray. This is to show that the world is aware that something is wrong; that there is a storm coming. The attacks that start the movie (Diagon alley, and then the London Bridge) really set the tone. Bruno Delbonnel is the movie's cinematographer, and he does a nice job of giving the movie a lush yet slightly desaturated look.



Among the few minor complaints I have is the music. Nicholas Hooper, the film composer, worked on movie 5 and did a fantastic job. This time, however, much of the score, save for the very end of the movie, seems to be repeated from the previous film. I would have liked to hear some more alterations and new music for this film.



A second complaint I have is the placement of the scene where Snape makes the unbreakable vow with Narcissa Malfoy. It comes after we see Harry meeting Dumbledore at the beginning. I would have rather the vow scene come before we catch up with Harry, that way, we can maintain a sense of secrecy, outside of Harry's knowledge.

And finally, not much too go on here, but I think the Half-Blood Prince subplot wasn't focused on enough. It doesn't become significant until the end. I won't spoil it, but I will say its a moment of tragic irony.



All I can say now is I am super excited about the final two installments. These last two movies make up the seventh installment, as the producers saw fit to give the final book a really big sendoff. My thinking exactly. Much of the cast from throughout the series will be appearing, so everyone gets a proper sendoff or comeuppance. And looking at movie 6, I am confident David Yates will pull off an extraordinary finale.

Brüno: he'll turn you on, then turn you off.

Sacha Baron Cohen is one of the greatest living actors. That may sound over the top, but I firmly believe it. He may be cited as being primarily a comedian, but there is more to him than just being a funny man. I've always likened him to a persona like Groucho Marx, and a chameleon like Peter Sellers. But even in that case, Baron Cohen is something completely original and on his own. Even with his own characters, he has an uncanny ability to turn any role he is given into his own alter-ego.

Baron Cohen's chameleonic talents are presented again in another feature length film. Brüno, like Borat (2006), is based on an alter-ego of Baron Cohen's, that of Brüno (no last name given), a flamboyant, gay Austrian fashion reporter and interviewer. And especially like Borat and Ali G, the comedy of Brüno not only comes from the title character's persona, but from Baron Cohen's flawless ability to interview and then humiliate unsuspecting citizens and officials (most of which are unaware of the charade). It is a dangerous and painful comedic exercise.

Unfortunately, Brüno doesn't totally live up to expectations. The movie is painfully entertaining, but suffers from a weak plot. It is technically similar to Borat, but seems to focus more on the extremities of the character. One of the weakest parts of the story is Brüno himself, whose short-comings don't seem plausible enough. The character of Borat was given plausibility in that he was from a country with cultures alternative to the United States. Brüno, however, is just a mass of idiocy, blind egotism, and spoiled judgment. Most of the humor is extreme homophobia, enough to confirm one's own sexual orientation.

In the film, Brüno loses his job as a fashion reporter in Austria after he is blacklisted for disrupting a fashion show (due to him trying to wear a disastrous suit made of velcro). With his desired fame stalling in Austria, he decides to head to Los Angeles with his assistant (who harbors a secret crush, much like Smithers on The Simpsons). Everything that follows is based on his desire to be world famous, no matter what the reason is. Through it all, he fails at: interviewing celebrities; attempting to make a sex tape with Ron Paul; trying to solve political imbalance in Israel; adopting an African baby; and attempting to go straight.

Some of the deception used in the film is a testament to Baron Cohen's abilities. But it doesn't get the same reaction from everyone. After Borat, it seems like a lot of people are more interested in which parts of the movie are staged, and which parts are the real deal. It has already been confirmed that the Ron Paul sex-tape attempt is real (and just as painful for the audience to watch). Others are easy to figure out, such as when Brüno is in Israel, and he is chased by the locals for his offensive outfit (the timing suggests that it is real, and not refined).

On a technical level, there is not much else outside of Baron Cohen's credits. Director Larry Charles (who also directed Borat), manages to make some stylistic changes in adapting to a more flamboyant subject matter. Still, that shouldn't short change Mr. Charles, whose directing and writing credits are rather impressive. But as mentioned before, a lot of the humor comes from the shock value and (harmless) attacks on the unsuspecting public. So really, this movie has a life beyond most of the people involved.

What was unnecessary? The gay sex, although meant to humorous, could have been shortened in length (for those who have seen the movie, no pun intended).

Does he succeed at anything? Yes. He manages to exploit parents who are so desperate for fame they will exploit their infant children through overly religious and politically incorrect photographs. He fills up time in his failed TV pilot with some impressive penis acrobatics (really, they are quite impressive). And he manages to give Mel Gibson a new name: "Der Führer."

The Simpler way is UP

The opening of a new Pixar/Disney is always eventful. Commercially eventful that is. Not much is celebrated at the artistic eventfulness of a new Pixar movie.

There are elements that tend to repeat themselves throughout Pixar movies. That just happens to be the way they write. However they are less repetitive than other studios. Every Pixar movie has a plot different from the last, and they always demonstrate a willingness to try something new. There's something new to the plot of Up for sure.

Up tells the tale of Carl Fredrickson (wonderfully voiced by Edward Asner), a 74-year old widower with with limited social interests and an aversion to change (I can relate a few parts of Carl's physique and personality to my own grandfather). Carl's beloved wife, Ellie, fulfilled a part of Carl's life that was always shy, and both shared an interest in adventuring. However, they were never able to take their dream vacation to South America before Ellie's time came. After being threatened and then court ordered to leave his house of many years to make room for a growing city, Carl decides he must head to South America now, before his own time comes. Unexpectadly, Carl, a former balloon salesman, tethers thousands of helium ballons from his fireplace, and lifts the house from its foundation. Carl then pilots the house from there on, after which we realize the house represents Ellie in Carl's eyes. And that's only the first 10 minutes.

The Incredibles was Pixar's first feature to have all humans as the main characters. Up is another venture down that road. People will read this and think of the animal characters in the movie, but story-wise, the humans control all the actions. Up marks Pixar's first time having an eldery figure as the main character. It might have been done before to a lesser extent somewhere, but this is a major release today. Interviews with director Pete Docter have suggested an uncertainty to how young audiences will able to relate to a 74-yeard old man. But Mr. Docter and co-director Bob Peterson always seem confident, as I'm sure of the movie's writers and crew are. And besides, its a quiet truth that animated features are not just reserved for children, but for adults as well.

The whole story is based around relationship issues. Carl Fredrickson lost his beloved wife and closest companion (nicely illustrated four minutes into the movie, with minimal dialogue). He later meets a young boy scout, Russell (voiced by newcomer Jordon Nagai, and modeled after Pixar animator Peter Sohn), who is later revealed to have issues with his distant father. Then there's the bad guy, a nearly 90 year-old adventurer genius (nicely portrayed by Christopher Plummer), whose relationship with society (and the rest of the world) was damaged years ago, due to skepticism versus enthusiasm. Even the main dog character, Dug (played very lovingly by co-director Peterson), has master and peer issues, as he is the happy outcast in a group of dogs devoted to their paranoid genius of a master. I love movies that deal with developing relationships and regret over previous relationships. It may sound complicated to some, but it really isn't.

Pixar's movies are not complicated. These movies are coherent for sure. But Up appears to have a simpler plot compared to Pixar's last few movies. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Its good to relax. But Ratatouille and Wall-E are quite sophisticated in terms of plot (i.e. rats trying to integrate into the human world; a robot left alone on earth, yet ends up reaching out to humanity). I'm probably reaching too far, but that's how I see it. Up is a simpler tale of a widower wanting to fullfill something that is, in fact, possible.

There's a sense of mild child abuse in the movie, except its portrayed as accidental, so there's nothing to cry over. Russell, the boy scout who accidentally gets stuck on the floating house, finds himself in several dangerous situations throughout the film (I was reminded of moments in Rescuers Down Under and Jurassic Park). He gets dangled a few times from dangerous heights (always a movie favorite, even in fantasies), nearly gets injured by rabid dogs, and almost dropped from a flying durigable.
Does this bother me? No way. I'm just praising the new levels Pixar's writers have reached.

Design wise, there's really nothing new to the movie. Like all of Pixar's movies, everything is just as saturated as everything else, while delicately lit. That's not a bad thing at all, as it looks carefully constructed to suit the story. Its just that I had a discussion with a friend recently about how saturated all computer-animated movies look.

My biggest criticism (and so far only) is over the last few minutes of the movie. Its a happy ending, but I wasn't satisfied with it. It didn't seem original enough, and I guess I expecting some other things to happen. I guess I thought Russell would be convincing someone that he wasn't abducted by the crotchety old man. The rest of the story is great, and I just wish the end had a little more originality than Carl and Russell reliving something Russell shared with his own father.

That's it for Up. I will probably be seeing it again soon. Of course, that also means I will be seeing the new Pixar short, Partly Cloudy, directed by Peter Sohn. All I can say is that I was never big on the idea of babies coming from the sky. And I think this was by far Pixar's most disturbing short film. That may change, but that's how I feel now.

And we're back to seeing a trailer for next year's release, Toy Story 3. We can only wait and see if Pixar can pull a third one off, and without actor Jim Varney and writer/actor Joe Ranft. Still, Pixar got lucky with Toy Story 2, because they were very serious about it, so there may be nothing to worry about.