The Little Mermaid... She's Gotta Have It.

With this week's Disney announcement that The Little Mermaid will get 3D rerelease treatment (along with other pictures) that put The Lion King back on everyone's lips, I thought it was time to republish this piece on the classic film...

The Little Mermaid (1989)  | Directed by Ron Clements and John Musker Screenplay by Roger Allers, Ron Clements, and John Musker (very loosely based on the Hans Christian Andersen fairy tale) | Music by Alan Menken Lyrics by Howard Ashman | Starring the Voices of: Jodie Benson, Pat Carroll, Kenneth Mars and Samuel E Wright | Production Company Walt Disney | Released 11/17/1989

American members of Generation Y or Z and beyond may have a good deal of trouble imagining this but it's true: once upon a time, animated movies were considered highly uncool. They were strictly for babies. Teenagers disdained them. Adults took their children under duress. They barely caused a ripple at the box office. The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences ignored them. CGI was not part of the national vernacular. Strange but true.

In a very short window of time, from November 1989 through February 1992, three major events changed modern perceptions of the animated film in a gargantuan way. Let's take them in reverse order: The third big-bang was the moment when Beauty & the Beast (1991) was nominated for six Oscars including Best Picture, the first time that a cartoon had received that pinnacle mainstream honor. The middle part of the three-part revolution was when hipster American audiences began to discover that there was more to the form than Walt Disney. Katsuhiro Ôtomo's Japanese sci-fi spellbinder Akira was the key that opened the door for anime, now very big and influential business in America. But the first key event in animation's rebirth (stateside at least) was the release of Disney's "28th animated classic" The Little Mermaid; an orgasmic reawakening of the most flexible and fantastical of film mediums...

"She's Gotta Have It!"

The heroine of Disney's modern breakthrough film is Ariel, a teenage mermaid. Since this is a fairy tale (and a Disney one at that) she's also a beautiful princess: the youngest daughter of King Triton who rules the ocean. Only trouble is, despite her quick smile and high spirits, she's restless and unhappy... dissatisfied with her life of privilege under the sea. She wants to trade up. Literally. Since this is a late 1980s film (and a Disney one at that) she's also the headstrong entitled type. This princess isn't going to whisper her need. She's no Oliver with his meager allotment of gruel, politely asking for more.

music, sexuality and animated evolution after the jump... 

Click to read more ...

Cinema de Gym: 'Megamind'

Editor's Note: In Cinema de Gym, Kurt writes about whichever piece of whichever movie was playing while he cardio'ed. I wish my gym would play movies.

Kurt here with the first Cinema de Gym column to tackle an animated film. Megamind seems to be the lesser of at least two 2010 CG toons to pin the spotlight on the villain instead of the hero (the greater, of course, was Despicable Me, that darkly random Steve Carrell curio). As the titular swollen-headed baddie, Will Ferrell even has a henchman he refers to as "Minion," a la those adorable Tic-Tac Oompa-Loompas that Carrell bossed around. Of what I saw, Megamind offers some cozy glee, with handsome, colorful action setpieces, but it doesn't take long to tell that it's low on the animation totem pole, and unlike Despicable Me, no worries if it's not on your catch-up list.

It also stars the voice of Brad Pitt, and by the time I walked in, Pitt's character, Metro Man, had already been vanquished/defeated/pushed-aside-until-the-winding-down-of-the-second-act by Megamind, his vainglorious nemesis. The centerpiece of what I caught was a scene in which Megamind and the movie's Lois Lane, a reporter voiced by Tina Fey, stand on opposite sides of a catwalk encircling a syscraper-sized Metro Man monument, admiring the curvature of his literally cut-from-stone features. At one point, the two – well, she and a shape-shifted version of our villain – head downstairs in a glass elevator, scanning the whole height of that muscular marble man.

It was a fitting bit of star-gazing during this special week of Pitt adoration. On Tuesday I caught the impressively, refreshingly sophisticated Moneyball, and I'm happy to say I've never been more pleased with a Pitt performance (if ever he deserved an Oscar nom...). I didn't get to hear the superstar's voice in Megamind, but I did get a little Moneyball parallel, as Jonah Hill voices Fey's reporter's flatly-rendered fat sidekick.

It's no news to anybody that animated features have become a go-to arena for comedians, whose nimble vocals are ever-amenable to over-the-top, rubbery-bright concoctions. Hill, like Seth Rogen, has become a very obvious casting choice, while David Cross (who voices that fish-headed "Minion") is a wee bit sad in just how often he's schlepping it to the recording booth. But, I guess we've all gotta make bank, and on that note, I'd much rather see Ferrell continue to pad his well-padded sellout pockets while...not having to actually see him. In that way, animation is good for comedians, assuming those comedians are ones who rose to fame, got greedy, and proceeded to say yes to every lousy project that came down the pike. The filters of fantastical illustration and family-friendly restraint work small wonders, and Megamind is to Will Ferrell what Kung Fu Panda is to Jack Black: a colorful gift of funnyman palatability.

Conclusions?

1. In this age of the especially tireless questioning of authority, Villain is the new Hero, even in kids' flicks.
2. Brad Pitt insists on being in my life this week. Redirected from my old address, the new EW with Pitt on the cover just arrived mere moments ago. Hey, I'm not complaining.
3. In truth, it's probably best that David Cross stay in the recording booth.
4. With their animation ventures ripe for corruption, and with their tendencies to freely sign on dotted lines, it's only a matter of time before we see Ferrell and Black team up for Megamind vs. Kung Fu Panda.

What's your favorite animated performance from a comedian?

The Adventures of Simba Across the Third Dimension

Michael C. here.

As a dyed-in-the-wool 3D non-believer I can’t say I was thrilled at the notion of Disney combing through the vault, “improving” titles with the latest technological gimmick as an excuse to wring more cash out of their back catalogue. The idea reeks of George Lucas style revisionism. Yet having seen Lion King 3D (opening today) I now have to reconcile this position with the fact that I thought the whole thing worked beautifully. Maybe enough time had passed for the story to feel fresh again. Maybe I was just in a great mood the morning of the screening. But whatever the reason I can’t deny Lion King 3D did what Lion King IMAX failed to do for me, which was to break through my deep familiarity with the material and hit me on a gut level.

Hey, why mince words: I had a blast.

Lion King may be the most technically polished use of 3D I’ve seen, miles ahead of any other after-the-fact 3D conversions, and right up there with Avatar and Up which I consider the gold standard. The Disney team has clearly taken incredible care with their prized title in this their inaugural attempt to access the potential gold mine of retrofitting classics. The level of detail impresses. The snouts of the lions protrude slightly in front of their faces and African plains that were formally flat paintings now stretch convincingly into the distance. Zazu becomes a breakout star since he gives the depth of field a work out every time he swoops by in the foreground high above the action. At the screening I saw there was no hint of dimness or the dreaded multi-plane effect that plagues cheaper 3D conversions.. I can honestly say I’ve never felt the urge to peek out from under the glasses, which is pretty much the highest compliment I can give to the technical job. 

Ultimately, a third dimension will never make a bad script better or make a boring movie exciting. Lion King 3D works so well because Lion King 2D did. But still, when the movie is already playing like gangbusters I can't deny the added depth can help turn things up to 11 from time to time. "The Circle of Life" wows as if it was conceived with 3D in mind from the start, and the wildebeest stampede is predictably stunning. More surprisingly the added dimension also lends increased grandeur to simple scenes like an early heartfelt talk between Mufasa and son in a vast open field. In other scenes where the newfound depth doesn’t do much– "Can You Feel the Love Tonight", for example, doesn’t exactly pop – it’s easy enough to ignore. 

How viable this will be for other Disney classics remains an open question. The group of titles that would really justify the conversion is probably slim. I can’t say a 3D version of The Jungle Book would have me clamoring for tickets. If, on the other hand, they ever give Fantasia the same deluxe treatment they have given Lion King then sign me up.

Pressing Oscar Questions / New Predictions

If you haven't yet noticed, I updated all the Oscar charts yesterday to reflect the latest shifts in buzz. As ever I am not totally enslaved by immediate buzz but try to project forward from it. I don't believe, and past experience backs me up here, that the first word from festivals is the last word on consensus. Festival audiences have, in many cases, different needs than Academy voters and the general public and even mainstream-leaning film critics.  These differing needs range from subject matter to tone to emotional and intellectual content. So there is much we still don't know about the new films winning raves. To win Oscar's heart you generally have to first master or at least make peace with three other audiences (all of which can or do overlap with each other and with Oscar but let's not complicate the matter): Critics (i.e. reviews/perceptions of quality), public (box office), media (are they interested? are their editorial angles or movie stars to keep them engaged). Festivals are the gun going off but never the finish line. So here are some questions I'm pondering.

Won't you join me in answering them?

Michael Fassbender OR Ryan Gosling? I've already pitted them against each other publically/mentally as "The Future of the Movies: Male Division" (do they have any competition?) and perhaps it's a natural evolution from that question but aren't they in direct conflict for an Oscar nod this year? Both have had amazing years with multiple films, some artistically minded, some for commerce but all of which they've been excellent in. Ryan has the more Oscar-friendly fare (Ides of March/Drive) compared to Fassy's kink (Shame/A Dangerous Method) but Fassy may have the more Oscar-friendly personality in terms of his ease with self-promotion (supposedly Gosling is unburdened by the typical Oscar dream).

I don't think there's room for both given the Best Actor field... do you?

What of Alexander Desplat?
His score for The Tree of Life seems likely to be axed for eligibility given all the other music in the film. His score for Carnage is supposedly only heard for a few minutes. His scores for the new Harry Potter and Twilight are both within long running franchises which generally don't show up in the score category since such scores tend to mix old and new themes and there's a been there/done that feeling even if the score is entirely new. Will they stiff their new favorite composer or will it be enough for them to have their all time favorite back? 79 year old John Williams has two Spielberg scores this year (Tin Tin and War Horse) after a long absence and if there was ever a time they wanted to hand him a sixth Oscar, it's probably now.

Captain America or Thor?
I've been asking this question all summer and I suspect very few people care. But hear me out: Isn't one of them going to win multiple Oscar nods? The technical fields are often hugely competitive but they're also friendlier to genre fare than the big eight. Captain America:The First Avenger has the distinct advantage in that it takes place during World War II and thus gets to show off period piece beauty in costuming (for Jeffrey Kurland and Anna B Sheppard who have both been nominated previously but never won)  and art direction (Rick Heinrichs has 3 noms / 1 win to his name) ... but Thor has a more Oscary team in costume designer Alexandra Byrne (4 nods, 1 win) and production designer Bo Welch (4 nominations) and whether or not you think that the ice planet or the mythical realm of Asgard are way too bombastically gaudy in design... Oscar loves overkill in just about any category. See last year's results for Eyesore in Wonderland and every time any pundit ever joked about "Best" being code word for "Most".

 

 Aren't "Restrained" and "Chill" Four Letter Words?
One review called Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy "marvelously chill" and the word "restrained" gets tossed around a lot for both that film and Glenn Close's Oscar bid Albert Nobbs. It's not without precedent that Oscar would embrace the chilly or the restrained but it's also not exactly the wormiest hook for AMPAS to swim towards as history indicates. What does all this mean for Gary Oldman (who our Venice correspondent claimed only raises his voice once in his film) or for Glenn Close both of whom will be waging campaigns based half on these new performances and half on their reputations as important thespians who've endured inexplicable golden snubbings.

Category Placement. To Fraud or Not To Fraud?
This question will never die and is ever a concern since modern cinema doesn't have the same clear divisions of labor as classic Hollywood in terms of "star vs. character actor". What's more many pundits, fans and agents now regularly and actively promote fraud to insure better golden opportunities for their beloved star or meal ticket. The feeling of demotion is largely a thing of the past, an Oscar being an Oscar. The unfortunate and long lasting side effect of this trend (more a tradition than trend now actually) are that real supporting players and character actors have less and less opportunities as genuine stars now rob them of their already scant opportunities for the spotlight on a very regular basis. It's almost impossible to imagine that we'll ever see another Thelma Ritter for example (sniffle). So we'll just have to wait and see how Viola Davis (The Help), Keira Knightley (A Dangerous Method), the entire Carnage cast and any of the young male leads (War Horse, Hugo, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) play it this year since all of them could theoretically opt for either lead or supporting categorization.

What the hell with the Best Animated Film category this year?
The (relative) failure of Cars 2 has left a gaping Pixar sized hole in the category that was arguably specifically designed just to honor Pixar. Rango, an early visually stunning hit, seems to have no real competition whatsoever. It's hard to see any of its competition as nominees, isn't it? There are sequels no one seems particularly excited about yet (Happy Feet 2, Puss in Boots, Kung Fu Panda 2), films that were hits that no one seems particularly excited about (Rio). Arthur Christmas is a question mark but is anyone excited about it? What's more the only event movie that's still to come (The Adventures of TinTin: The Secret of the Unicorn)  should theoretically be disqualified given past AMPAS decisions declaring motion capture ineligible. Is it time to shutter this category or do they just have to hope that it's exciting again next year and the year after? 

The Nomination Is Theirs To Lose. Will They?
Just about every pundit worth his/her salt agrees that The Tree of Life, The Help and Midnight in Paris are the three biggies with Best Picture potential to have already hit theaters. Then there are those stubbornly holding on to hopes for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part Two (I readily admit bias that I don't think it's deserving even as a cumulative honor) or The Rise of the Planet of the Apes though history suggests that it won't happen since sequels are only ever nominated when their predecessors were. Though I adamantly doubt that either has a good shot at the most coveted of all nominations, there is a first time for everything and it's true that modern franchise culture is a relatively new ubiquitous Hollywood reality and thus Oscar history might not be the best indication of how the Academy will view or soon view franchise efforts.

Should all of these films or even just three of them be nominated... well, that doesn't leave much room at all for the Christmas time films that are still withheld from eager eyeballs or the films that are on everyone's lips having just debuted at this festival or that one.

Which leads us to the final question...

Which of the unseen films will tank?
J Edgar, War Horse, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, The Iron Lady, Hugo? That's a lot of unseen fare still that even long lead festival audiences haven't gazed upon. Which do you suspect will deliver and which won't?

TIFF: Alois Nebel, Good Bye and anticipation for Fassy

Amir, reporting on my third day at TIFF. It wasn't as exciting as the first two, though I did get to talk to two directors, Jason Reitman and Mohammad Rasoulof, in person. Reitman wasn’t promoting a film, but only walking around the Bell Lightbox building – his father, Ivan, donated the land on which the festival’s home is built – and Rasoulof, who I’d assumed was detained somewhere in Iran had gained permission to leave and promote his film in person. The fourth day is bound to get better with a premium screening of Steve McQueen’s Shame on the plate but for now, let’s get to yesterday’s films.

The big one was Alois Nebel, a much anticipated Czech animated film by first time director Tomas Lunak. You might remember Nathaniel highlighted the film among his sixteen suggestions too but sadly, it did not live up to my expectations at all. I must admit however, the black and white rotoscope animation is absolutely gorgeous too look at. The filmmaking team has spent years creating this beautiful imagery from live-action footage they filmed in 35 days and the result of their work is a collection of stark images that puts you right in the atmosphere of the film. Equally impressive is Alois’ edgy and moody sound work which as Lunak explained, has taken just as much time to materialize as the film.

Alois Nebel is about the eponymous train dispatcher at a border town whose humdrum life is changed with the entrance of a strange mute man to the small community he lives in. It’s a revenge story that has roots in Czech’s involvement in World War II and the Cold War but these roots are unfortunately the film’s biggest problem for me. I was actually a bit relieved to find out during the Q&A session that I wasn’t alone in my confusion about the back story... 

Alois Nebel

More after the jump ... plus Best Actor anticipation

Click to read more ...