Miscellaneous Movie Musings

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

Really? Everyone else I've spoken to says Happy Feet was a preachy environmentalist movie (this from liberals, btw) that was nothing what they expected and, well, bad.

Everyone I know (locally) who has seen it liked it. Maybe it's because we're closer to a polar region than you. It could also be that we have sat through a slew of really awful kid's movies and our standards have fallen.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by CoasterMatt

I still love Bedknobs and Broomsticks...

Don't get me wrong, it's still a good movie and fun to watch.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

I thought Happy Feet was pretty amusing in an absurd way... and though it was pretty heavy-handed with the message, it was really only the last part of the movie that played host to it. The directing and animation was great, and the story was interesting... but stop-and-sing musical numbers are less interesting to me than numbers where people have a REASON to sing (i.e. they are so filled with emotion that they can't hold it in anymore) and it moves the story forward.

My other big problem with it was the incongruous name and voice of the maternal penguin. Norma Jean? Nicole Kidman's simpering whisper made me cringe. Don't they know Norma Jean's history? It could never be made into a happy penguin movie. (Or a sometimes dark one, even.)

[Alex]

Well, I can tell you that the circle of top movie critics in this country are overwhelmingly liberal and they overwhelmingly liked it (84% according to RottenTomatoes). Not that this means much.

I'm overwhelmingly libertarian and I liked it very, very much.


I find it interesting that some are turned off by the conservationist message (which isn't, in my mind, any worse than in dozens of other movies). Essentially it is the same message as Open Season a couple months ago: animals, if given their druthers, would really prefer us human stop screwing with them.

The conclusion of the conflict is really bizaare, but to my mind a good kind of bizarre.

Like I said in the Bond thread it pretty much all worked for me (particularly how the humans were handled at the end) but I can understand why people don't like it. I had the same reaction to Babe: Pig in the City. I loved it, most hated it, and while I could understand why still think they are wrong.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

but stop-and-sing musical numbers are less interesting to me than numbers where people have a REASON to sing (i.e. they are so filled with emotion that they can't hold it in anymore) and it moves the story forward.

Interesting. To my view, the penguins in this movie had better reason for their singing and dancing than in any musical ever made (primarily, it is how they find their true love and mate; though a secondary nicely absurd purpose is found in the end).

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Interesting. To my view, the penguins in this movie had better reason for their singing and dancing than in any musical ever made (primarily, it is how they find their true love and mate; though a secondary nicely absurd purpose is found in the end).

I think what interested me most about Happy Feet was the unexpected blend of live action and animation, which was done very, very well.

The music itself kinda bored me when it wasn't cute or amusing. The dancing sequences I loved.

The biggest issue I had with the film, and that I have with a lot of contemporary animated films, was the shoddy voice work. A talented screen actor is not necessarily a talented voice actor. And the only voice work that seemed at all top notch was Robin Williams, because he seems to get that the *voice* is the actor. More voice work for guys like Futurama's Billy West, and less for Nicole Kidman and Elijah Wood, etc.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Interesting. To my view, the penguins in this movie had better reason for their singing and dancing than in any musical ever made (primarily, it is how they find their true love and mate; though a secondary nicely absurd purpose is found in the end).

Yes, I would agree-- but the stop-and-sing numbers weren't necessary, and slowed the action a bit. (I'm thinking primarily here of "Somebody to Love.")

[innerSpaceman]

It was sorta Moulin Rouge on ice. If that movie hadn't been a predecessor, I don't think the pop tunes medley-after-another sung by the penguins would have worked for modern audiences. But I agree with Alex that they do have a reason to sing medlies, explained quite nicely in the film.

The Moulin connection was the only reason for Kidman to be involved with the project ... and now I quite agree her voice work for animation must cease with this film. Elijah was nominally better, but not by much. I wouldn't put his work in the "Truly Awful" category, tho.


What surprises me about the spate of famous actors doing voice-work is how many are good at it. Used to be that famous actors were a death knell for animated projects ... and professional voicers the only quality way to go. But many an actor realizes how much work can be done with the voice, and quite a few are up to expressing a character through voice alone.


Not so many in Happy Feet though. But I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and did not find it preachy in the least. Is Bambi preachy? I rather like films starring animals to express that animals would like us to stop fu<king with them. And I didn't find the Happy Feet approach to be too heavy-handed.








Get it? Feet? Handed? Tee-hee-Hee-hee



.

[flippyshark]

I'm glad that the extended cut of Bedknobs and Broomsticks is available, but I can see why the studio trimmed it. It's leisurely to a fault. About two thirds of the running time is devoted to tracking down a spell that the characters are already carrying with them, for Pete's sake.

The resemblances to Mary Popins are no accident. Walt secured the rights to the book "Bedknob and Broomstick" when he wasn't sure if P.L. Travers was going to let him make Poppins. He figured B&B was similar enough that it would be a suitable replacement project. (it ended up being made after Walt's death, spurred by Poppins' monumental success.)

This one has high nostalgia value for me, but I can see it being a tough sell for someone coming to it new.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Having never seen it, I saw the appeal. It was a fun movie. Of course, I was going in with positive thoughts because I remember rather liking the book, even though I have no recollection of anything in the book. Those fond feelings definitely carried over.

I'd be interested to know exactly what was added. I did notice the rather silly fact that they had the necessary info with them the whole time. So that's not as superfluous in the orginal version? Is the interminable dancing scene in Portabello shorter? Or gone?

Sigh, another DVD that proves, once again, that deleted scenes are by and large deleted for very good reasons.