In the post-apocalyptic world, the sea of decay sweeps the land, devouring everything in its path and leaving the air toxic and unbreathable. In the Valley of the Wind, they stave off the spread of the sea of decay, but they otherwise let it be. Then people come from another land where they are trying to beat back the sea of decay with technology. Nausicaa, the princess of the valley of wind, resolves to stop them from destroying the world she has known and loved.
Nausicaa is one of the first Hayao Miyazaki films, and is considered to be the first film produced by Studio Ghibli (of Spirited Away fame). It has shades of some of their later works, and while it is not as polished or finely detailed as some of them, it is an excellent film, and I very much enjoyed it.
As a science fiction, there is an interesting world created in the post-apocalyptic waste. It is plain to see what they have lost from the time before. The world-building reminded me a bit of Philip Reeve's Mortal Engines series of books, in the way it alludes to what happened without making a focus of it. The focus is, instead, around the people living in this world, and the ways they have found of coping with its hardships. The creatures that live in the sea of decay are wonderful expansions, and enough within the realms of possibility that I found it easy to suspend disbelief.
The plot is brilliant and dramatic. It was based on a manga, which clearly had a significant imagination, as well as story-telling skill behind it, though I don't know precisely how much was borrowed. It was beautifully told and brought to life, with the possible exception of the ending, which I thought slightly rushed.
The environmental message that leaks through in so many of Miyazaki's films (perhaps just because he likes producing that kind of film) was very much in evidence. It wasn't too heavy-handed, though, which is good... and the message was both a vehicle for the plot and part of the plot, without detracting from the struggle that the characters were going through.
The antagonists and protagonists alike all have their strong and weak points, making it very realistic in terms of how people deal with situations. Nausicaa herself is nature-loving and kind, but she is strong, proud and determined. In all, she is one of the strongest female leads I have ever seen in an anime. She wasn't whiny or defensive; she was proactive, and well-loved by the people around her. While I don't normally tout the feminist card, especially in reviews, it was a refreshing change from some anime films I've seen with female leads who basically provide moral support and screaming.
Visually, the film is good, but not brilliant. With a more detailed animation style (such as that used in later Ghibli films), and with a higher frame-rate, this could have been a much more visually arresting film. As it was the power was in the story, which is good in some ways, but disappointing in others. However, the characters were all drawn expressively enough to carry the emotion of the film, and the plot lost nothing by its slightly primitive animation style.
While not the best Miyazaki film I have seen, Nausicaa was an excellent film. I would definitely recommend it to all anime fans (though I'm told the manga is better).
Sunday, 14 February 2010
Saturday, 13 February 2010
Review of the 1993 film 'Falling Down'
Sitting in a boiling hot car in a traffic jam, a man known through most of the film only as D-Fens stews, growing increasingly frustrated. Eventually he leaves his car in the traffic jam and takes his frustration on a journey across town by foot, leaving a path of destruction in his wake.
Falling Down is quite a scary film, in the sense, that as you watch Michael Douglas' character growing more and more insane along his path, you wonder what he will do. I was scared for his ex-wife and his daughter, and what he might do if and when he reached them. I was scared for all the people he met along the way that tried to stand in his path. At the same time, the power of it was that on some level, it was possible to understand at least part of his anger and frustration, without ever condoning his actions.
The acting in Falling Down is brilliant across the board, with each character bringing his point and purpose to life, from the main characters down to the man in the traffic jam that first meets D-Fens. The plot is equally excellent, even in its simplicity. We watch the policeman that starts to piece things together from disparate reports, and we watch D-Fens wandering through town, dealing with people in his path. The two threads coalesce excellently, in a brilliant ending that is as fantastic as it is inevitable.
The dialogue and plot are likewise brilliant, and while I couldn't tell you a lot about the cinematography, it was a visually very effective film. I think the filming achieved a lot with camera angles and the right view at the right time. A particular example would be the opening shots of the movie, as we watch the man in the car sweating, staring at the things around him in quick, distinct shots of various items that he can see. The first thing we hear is his breathing, and then the incredible noise of the traffic jam breaks through and we see him in his car-prison.
As I've already alluded, a lot of the power was in the amount of compassion that I had for the lead character, even in his worst moments. Society had not been at its best when dealing with him, and I felt for him because of that. I felt that some of the things he was rebelling against did need to be rebelled against, although preferably not in so violent and dramatic a fashion.
As with so many films that I enjoyed, I am finding it difficult to come up with negative points to balance out my own enthusiastic opinions, which makes it difficult to give a balanced review. However, as I'm only doing this for fun anyway, I'm going to stick with that... Falling Down was a brilliant film, and I think it will stand the test of time well, if not as well as other things. It's another not-for-the-faint-hearted film, but I think it was definitely worth watching.
Falling Down is quite a scary film, in the sense, that as you watch Michael Douglas' character growing more and more insane along his path, you wonder what he will do. I was scared for his ex-wife and his daughter, and what he might do if and when he reached them. I was scared for all the people he met along the way that tried to stand in his path. At the same time, the power of it was that on some level, it was possible to understand at least part of his anger and frustration, without ever condoning his actions.
The acting in Falling Down is brilliant across the board, with each character bringing his point and purpose to life, from the main characters down to the man in the traffic jam that first meets D-Fens. The plot is equally excellent, even in its simplicity. We watch the policeman that starts to piece things together from disparate reports, and we watch D-Fens wandering through town, dealing with people in his path. The two threads coalesce excellently, in a brilliant ending that is as fantastic as it is inevitable.
The dialogue and plot are likewise brilliant, and while I couldn't tell you a lot about the cinematography, it was a visually very effective film. I think the filming achieved a lot with camera angles and the right view at the right time. A particular example would be the opening shots of the movie, as we watch the man in the car sweating, staring at the things around him in quick, distinct shots of various items that he can see. The first thing we hear is his breathing, and then the incredible noise of the traffic jam breaks through and we see him in his car-prison.
As I've already alluded, a lot of the power was in the amount of compassion that I had for the lead character, even in his worst moments. Society had not been at its best when dealing with him, and I felt for him because of that. I felt that some of the things he was rebelling against did need to be rebelled against, although preferably not in so violent and dramatic a fashion.
As with so many films that I enjoyed, I am finding it difficult to come up with negative points to balance out my own enthusiastic opinions, which makes it difficult to give a balanced review. However, as I'm only doing this for fun anyway, I'm going to stick with that... Falling Down was a brilliant film, and I think it will stand the test of time well, if not as well as other things. It's another not-for-the-faint-hearted film, but I think it was definitely worth watching.
Monday, 8 February 2010
Review of the 1988 film 'My Neighbour Totoro'
Conceived as a children's film with no real conflict, My Neighbour Totoro follows sisters Satsuki and Mei when they move, with their father to a house in the countryside. In the forest near their house, Mei discovers Totoro, a spirit of nature, and she and her sister have a series of adventures.
Totoro is obviously meant as a children's film, but it still had a lot of appeal. The plot is simple, but there is a lot of the kind of magic and wonder in it that makes such fantasy films so fun to watch. Visually, the film is beautiful and the characters are all likeable.
As a film with no conflict, you would think that it would be boring. I think if I was in the mood for a crazy action film, it would be a little bit boring. However, primarily this was a happy, funny film that is meant to amuse and delight. I very much enjoyed it, and while I hesitate to use the word cute, I think that best describes much of the movie.
This would be a great film to watch if you are feeling down, or if you want to watch something happy without the usual dose of angst that accompanies many films. I don't have many criticisms, positive or negative, beyond that, so I will stop there.
Totoro is obviously meant as a children's film, but it still had a lot of appeal. The plot is simple, but there is a lot of the kind of magic and wonder in it that makes such fantasy films so fun to watch. Visually, the film is beautiful and the characters are all likeable.
As a film with no conflict, you would think that it would be boring. I think if I was in the mood for a crazy action film, it would be a little bit boring. However, primarily this was a happy, funny film that is meant to amuse and delight. I very much enjoyed it, and while I hesitate to use the word cute, I think that best describes much of the movie.
This would be a great film to watch if you are feeling down, or if you want to watch something happy without the usual dose of angst that accompanies many films. I don't have many criticisms, positive or negative, beyond that, so I will stop there.
Review of the 2009 film 'Sherlock Holmes'
When Sherlock Holmes and Dr John Watson apprehend a criminal mastermind Lord Blackwood and see him sent to the gallows, they think that will be the last of him. So it is somewhat surprising when Blackwood apparently rises from the grave, and Holmes must put his incredible intellect and deductive ability to good work trying to stop more deaths.
I had very mixed feelings when I first saw the trailer for this movie. It seemed far more sensationalist and Hollywood action film than I would have expected from the Victorian genius. However, it did look like an entertaining film, so I wasn't certain.
The result was far more pleasing than I had hoped, though, and I was thoroughly glad that I went to see the film, even while it was, in some ways as sensationalist and Hollywood action film as I had feared. None of my specific concerns turned out to be a reality, and I was instead confronted with a film that kept much of the spirit of the old Victorian hero, while giving him new life and breaking away from the fastidious old man character that populated the previous dramatisations.
In terms of plot, there is a great amount of interest and pleasant non-linearity to the Holmes plot. I didn't find it overly predictable, and I found each explanation and forward movement very well carried out. Holmes' ability to deduce facts from minimal information is as legendary as I remember from the stories, and each step left me with the same frustration that I remember Watson feeling when Holmes made jumps that no others would have been able to reach.
The mood was dramatic, but it kept enough of the intrigue you would expect of a Holmes movie so that it wasn't too cheesy (not to say it was never cheesy, because it was... but entertainingly so, rather than cringingly so). The film doesn't attempt to be too spooky, which would have detracted from Robert Downey Junior's curt and forthright Holmes. Visually, the film was stunning and very well set up and choreographed, from fight scenes to simple scenes of Holmes being eccentric in the comfort of his own, rather disorderly, home.
I think what made this film, however, was the acting. Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law do a fantastic job as the duo of Holmes and Watson, and the supporting cast around them are equally as brilliant. Downey Jr acts the true British upper class eccentric, smoking his pipe and approaching all problems with wild-eyed enthusiasm as he searches for puzzles that will challenge him. Watson, long-suffering friend of Holmes, does well at dealing with tiresome Holmes, and acting as foil, comic relief and sidekick at different moments. The other characters are equally as well-acted, from Rachel McAdams getting her 'feist' on, to the incompetent police inspector and the varied antagonists that appear throughout the film.
Put it all together, and I got an amusing (occasionally hilarious), high-budget action film, with a very good central plot-string, superb acting and an excellent soundtrack. My main criticisms would revolve around the silliness of many of the plot elements. Don't see this film if you like your movies to be rigorously historically and scientifically accurate. I also wasn't too happy with the obvious cue-for-a-sequel moment at the end, but I supposed we must let Hollywood have these things.
I can imagine that Holmes has polarised opinions somewhat, between those who think that it's a brilliant direction to take the old franchise, and those that think it's a travesty. I'm firmly in the former column, so if you still cling to the belief that Holmes should be a stately, decorous and cleanly old gentleman with a magnifying glass and a few minor eccentricities, perhaps you will not enjoy this film as much as I did. However... you might be surprised.
To everyone else, go and see Holmes, and you probably won't regret it, if you've ever liked a crazy action film. This is crazier than most, and more entertaining than most.
I had very mixed feelings when I first saw the trailer for this movie. It seemed far more sensationalist and Hollywood action film than I would have expected from the Victorian genius. However, it did look like an entertaining film, so I wasn't certain.
The result was far more pleasing than I had hoped, though, and I was thoroughly glad that I went to see the film, even while it was, in some ways as sensationalist and Hollywood action film as I had feared. None of my specific concerns turned out to be a reality, and I was instead confronted with a film that kept much of the spirit of the old Victorian hero, while giving him new life and breaking away from the fastidious old man character that populated the previous dramatisations.
In terms of plot, there is a great amount of interest and pleasant non-linearity to the Holmes plot. I didn't find it overly predictable, and I found each explanation and forward movement very well carried out. Holmes' ability to deduce facts from minimal information is as legendary as I remember from the stories, and each step left me with the same frustration that I remember Watson feeling when Holmes made jumps that no others would have been able to reach.
The mood was dramatic, but it kept enough of the intrigue you would expect of a Holmes movie so that it wasn't too cheesy (not to say it was never cheesy, because it was... but entertainingly so, rather than cringingly so). The film doesn't attempt to be too spooky, which would have detracted from Robert Downey Junior's curt and forthright Holmes. Visually, the film was stunning and very well set up and choreographed, from fight scenes to simple scenes of Holmes being eccentric in the comfort of his own, rather disorderly, home.
I think what made this film, however, was the acting. Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law do a fantastic job as the duo of Holmes and Watson, and the supporting cast around them are equally as brilliant. Downey Jr acts the true British upper class eccentric, smoking his pipe and approaching all problems with wild-eyed enthusiasm as he searches for puzzles that will challenge him. Watson, long-suffering friend of Holmes, does well at dealing with tiresome Holmes, and acting as foil, comic relief and sidekick at different moments. The other characters are equally as well-acted, from Rachel McAdams getting her 'feist' on, to the incompetent police inspector and the varied antagonists that appear throughout the film.
Put it all together, and I got an amusing (occasionally hilarious), high-budget action film, with a very good central plot-string, superb acting and an excellent soundtrack. My main criticisms would revolve around the silliness of many of the plot elements. Don't see this film if you like your movies to be rigorously historically and scientifically accurate. I also wasn't too happy with the obvious cue-for-a-sequel moment at the end, but I supposed we must let Hollywood have these things.
I can imagine that Holmes has polarised opinions somewhat, between those who think that it's a brilliant direction to take the old franchise, and those that think it's a travesty. I'm firmly in the former column, so if you still cling to the belief that Holmes should be a stately, decorous and cleanly old gentleman with a magnifying glass and a few minor eccentricities, perhaps you will not enjoy this film as much as I did. However... you might be surprised.
To everyone else, go and see Holmes, and you probably won't regret it, if you've ever liked a crazy action film. This is crazier than most, and more entertaining than most.
Review of 'Day of the Triffids' by John Wyndham.
I had a lot of preconceptions about Day of the Triffids before I read it, many of which I think stemmed from what I'd heard about the B-movie. For a start I thought that the Triffids were aliens. In fact, in the book, they are genetically engineered plants, created and farmed for their many useful properties, while their more dangerous aspects such as locomotion and a dangerous sting are overlooked.
The story of the book, however, mostly focuses on the result of a solar storm, which creates a fantastic light show across the globe. Most of the population are watching... and the following morning, it appears that everyone who was watching has gone blind. A few sighted people are left to try and forge a new life from the fall of civilisation. In the midst of this, the Triffids start to stir, perhaps realising that they have the advantage over a blind human.
Day of the Triffids has a relatively simple plot, following Bill Masen as he tries to make some sense of the world that has been left behind. He is forced to make a number of choices along the way, about whether to abandon the people left blinded, or to try and do what he could to help them. Along the way, he meets Josella Playton, another left sighted after the meteor shower. The charm of the book is partly in this simplistic plot; it is just the story of how people cope with adversity, and the kinds of things that they would have to start thinking about.
The characterisation is, on the whole, excellent, if a little dated by today's standards. However, in many respects I think that Day of the Triffids will age better than many similar science fiction stories, because it doesn't try to pretend that people are anything other than people. In the story, people deal with the crisis in a variety of different ways. Some panic, others get depressed, some remain rational against all odds and start trying to think of a way through it. This is dealt with spectacularly throughout the book, and was one of the most impressive things about it.
By far the best thing about the book, though, is the world-building. John Wyndham starts from two basic premises. First, accept the Triffids as reality. Second, accept the meteor storm that leaves most of the population blind. After those two points, everything that happens follows logically and naturally. John Wyndham creates a world that works, and stands up to enough scrutiny that for the whole length of the book, I didn't notice a single thing that stood out as being wrong or ridiculous. This is not to say that they were not there, but the book was written well enough, and clever enough, that it stood up to casual reading. And what more can you ask of a book that you are reading casually?
Finally, I cared about what happened. I was pulled through the story, interested in each plot turn and event that changed how things worked. I like books that make me care, and I like ripping yarn stories, so this book was definitely a winner.
This book is well-deserving of its place in the minds of the public, and is another on my list of highly recommended reads.
The story of the book, however, mostly focuses on the result of a solar storm, which creates a fantastic light show across the globe. Most of the population are watching... and the following morning, it appears that everyone who was watching has gone blind. A few sighted people are left to try and forge a new life from the fall of civilisation. In the midst of this, the Triffids start to stir, perhaps realising that they have the advantage over a blind human.
Day of the Triffids has a relatively simple plot, following Bill Masen as he tries to make some sense of the world that has been left behind. He is forced to make a number of choices along the way, about whether to abandon the people left blinded, or to try and do what he could to help them. Along the way, he meets Josella Playton, another left sighted after the meteor shower. The charm of the book is partly in this simplistic plot; it is just the story of how people cope with adversity, and the kinds of things that they would have to start thinking about.
The characterisation is, on the whole, excellent, if a little dated by today's standards. However, in many respects I think that Day of the Triffids will age better than many similar science fiction stories, because it doesn't try to pretend that people are anything other than people. In the story, people deal with the crisis in a variety of different ways. Some panic, others get depressed, some remain rational against all odds and start trying to think of a way through it. This is dealt with spectacularly throughout the book, and was one of the most impressive things about it.
By far the best thing about the book, though, is the world-building. John Wyndham starts from two basic premises. First, accept the Triffids as reality. Second, accept the meteor storm that leaves most of the population blind. After those two points, everything that happens follows logically and naturally. John Wyndham creates a world that works, and stands up to enough scrutiny that for the whole length of the book, I didn't notice a single thing that stood out as being wrong or ridiculous. This is not to say that they were not there, but the book was written well enough, and clever enough, that it stood up to casual reading. And what more can you ask of a book that you are reading casually?
Finally, I cared about what happened. I was pulled through the story, interested in each plot turn and event that changed how things worked. I like books that make me care, and I like ripping yarn stories, so this book was definitely a winner.
This book is well-deserving of its place in the minds of the public, and is another on my list of highly recommended reads.
Review of the 2009 film 'Avatar'
Welcome to Pandora; a verdant green world with an atmosphere that's poisonous to humans, and a considerable native population of large, blue-skinned humanoids who live in harmony with the world around them. When humans arrive in search of a mineral known only as 'unobtanium' the Na'vi fight back, concerned that the humans are destroying their world. In an attempt to negotiate peace, and become friends with the Na'vi, scientists develop the avatar project and create Na'vi bodies from a meld of Na'vi and human DNA, synchronised with the nervous system of the avatar's pilot so that the pilot can control the avatar, and live as a Na'vi. Jake Sully, a wounded ex-marine, takes on one of these avatars and attempts to learn more about the Na'vi.
Avatar has gotten a lot of bad, or at least tepid, press for being a beautiful but predictable film. People have said that although it is very pretty, it has stolen it's plot from a number of different films, and hasn't got an original bone in its body.
I feel this is unfair on avatar. To show my point, I will start out by discussing what I feel are the film's negative points:
It's true that the film is focused around an issue that's very much in vogue at the moment, and although it takes it out to a new locale, it's still essentially the same idea. Increasingly in films, the role of humans as bad guy is becoming more fashionable, and when you listen to the news, it's easy to see why this has percolated through into popular media. Much of the plot and thematic devices are reused, borrowed and adapted from elsewhere. The characters have clear and obvious traits, and nothing really surprised me about any of them. The romantic subplot was obvious from minute one, and a lot of the other plot devices were obvious, if not from the start, then from the second that their possibility was introduced so that their later use was not quite so deus-ex-machina.
So far, I guess, I'm agreeing with all of the other critics. However, and this is a big however, I thoroughly enjoyed Avatar. I sat willingly through nearly three hours of movie and was eager to find out what happened next, even when I knew what was going to happen next.
The overarching plot was very predictable; the fifty word plot synopsis wouldn't shock you at all, but there were moments when things happened that did surprise me. Without wanting to spoil anything, there were times when I hadn't predicted the outcome, and so I was saddened by the result. And, additionally, there are only so many stories, but there are a great many ways to tell a story. This story takes the science fiction telling, and many of the elements around the plot were brilliant; world design and technology design are brilliant across the board.
In some respects characterisation left something to be desired; each character had one trait that they were allowed to exploit, and one moment where they were allowed to show anything else, except for the lead antagonist, who was not allowed to be anything other than an irredeemable bastard. However (again), there was a lot that was good about the way the characters worked. The scientists acted like scientists. The soldiers acted like soldiers. The acting was, on the whole, excellent, and with slightly limited material, the lead cast did get to shine.
And yes, people are right, the film was beautiful. The 3D occasionally got in the way (for me), but for the most part added depth (hurr hurr) to the storytelling, and made it a great visual spectacle. The alien creature designers clearly had a lot of fun, but they ended up creating a wholly believable world. The human technology invented for the world is stunning, and there are some technologically very believable things. Indeed, looking at his filmography, one of Cameron's strengths seems to be creating generally accessible, but believable, science fiction. For this, he should definitely be praised.
The punch line is, of course, that if I was to make a list of movie features and rate each one individually, Avatar would score average at best in all but visual effects and world building. Yet, all of the elements come together in a superb package, that was supremely entertaining, and very good science fiction to boot. This is definitely worth seeing, and it was one of the most enjoyable films I saw last year.
Avatar has gotten a lot of bad, or at least tepid, press for being a beautiful but predictable film. People have said that although it is very pretty, it has stolen it's plot from a number of different films, and hasn't got an original bone in its body.
I feel this is unfair on avatar. To show my point, I will start out by discussing what I feel are the film's negative points:
It's true that the film is focused around an issue that's very much in vogue at the moment, and although it takes it out to a new locale, it's still essentially the same idea. Increasingly in films, the role of humans as bad guy is becoming more fashionable, and when you listen to the news, it's easy to see why this has percolated through into popular media. Much of the plot and thematic devices are reused, borrowed and adapted from elsewhere. The characters have clear and obvious traits, and nothing really surprised me about any of them. The romantic subplot was obvious from minute one, and a lot of the other plot devices were obvious, if not from the start, then from the second that their possibility was introduced so that their later use was not quite so deus-ex-machina.
So far, I guess, I'm agreeing with all of the other critics. However, and this is a big however, I thoroughly enjoyed Avatar. I sat willingly through nearly three hours of movie and was eager to find out what happened next, even when I knew what was going to happen next.
The overarching plot was very predictable; the fifty word plot synopsis wouldn't shock you at all, but there were moments when things happened that did surprise me. Without wanting to spoil anything, there were times when I hadn't predicted the outcome, and so I was saddened by the result. And, additionally, there are only so many stories, but there are a great many ways to tell a story. This story takes the science fiction telling, and many of the elements around the plot were brilliant; world design and technology design are brilliant across the board.
In some respects characterisation left something to be desired; each character had one trait that they were allowed to exploit, and one moment where they were allowed to show anything else, except for the lead antagonist, who was not allowed to be anything other than an irredeemable bastard. However (again), there was a lot that was good about the way the characters worked. The scientists acted like scientists. The soldiers acted like soldiers. The acting was, on the whole, excellent, and with slightly limited material, the lead cast did get to shine.
And yes, people are right, the film was beautiful. The 3D occasionally got in the way (for me), but for the most part added depth (hurr hurr) to the storytelling, and made it a great visual spectacle. The alien creature designers clearly had a lot of fun, but they ended up creating a wholly believable world. The human technology invented for the world is stunning, and there are some technologically very believable things. Indeed, looking at his filmography, one of Cameron's strengths seems to be creating generally accessible, but believable, science fiction. For this, he should definitely be praised.
The punch line is, of course, that if I was to make a list of movie features and rate each one individually, Avatar would score average at best in all but visual effects and world building. Yet, all of the elements come together in a superb package, that was supremely entertaining, and very good science fiction to boot. This is definitely worth seeing, and it was one of the most enjoyable films I saw last year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)