Pan's Labyrinth

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Steve, is it possible that the subtitles are impacting your ability to enjoy the movie? I know you don't like subtitles.

Absolutely, they did. No doubt about it. And they will be a problem for me even when I watch the film again, which I haven't had a chance to do ... it's out on loan (my pleasure, ChernaJoe).

I also had a problem with the violence and brutality mixed with even so dark a fantasy world of a child. That's an element that just didn't sit right with me and weirded me out ... but now that I'm aware of it, I'll simply accept the film on its own terms when I get to re-watch it.

[Chernabog]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

I also had a problem with the violence and brutality mixed with even so dark a fantasy world of a child. That's an element that just didn't sit right with me and weirded me out ... but now that I'm aware of it, I'll simply accept the film on its own terms when I get to re-watch it.

I think the violence wasn't gratuitous -- the real world needed to be so scary that Ofelia had to try and escape (into the fantasy world, or into her own mind...).

(Plus those old fairy tales are REALLY disgusting, actually)

Again, this is not a happy tra-la-la fairy story.

Spoiler:

Though if Tinkerbell got her head gnawed off by the Pale Man, that'd be pretty fuk'n cool

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by Chernabog

(Plus those old fairy tales are REALLY disgusting, actually)

I'm pretty squeamish, but I thought that the inclusion of violence was pretty apt BECAUSE of those gorey old tales. Considering Cinderella, in which the stepsisters--in order to fit into the slipper--slice off a toe and a heel, respectively. Or Little Red Riding Hood, which involves first the eating of a human by a bear and then the slicing of a bear by a human. Or Bluebeard, for heaven's sake... which depicts the eighth wife of a rich man entering the one room she's been forbidden from entering-- and instead of a magical rose or something lovely, discovers the seven previous wives hanging on the walls and a floor soaked in blood.

In no terms is this a children's fairy tale, even if it revolves around a child. But I rather think that fairy tales weren't really for children in the first place.

[Gemini Cricket]

An interesting article re: "Pan's Labyrinth" from CNN...

"I do think there is far more an immoral position in creating a movie like 'Free Willy,' where I'm telling a kid, you know, 'If you swim next to a ... killer whale, she'll become your friend.' ... No! She will eat your ... guts and spit you out!"
Del Toro continues in a more reflective vein: "If my child watches my movies by accident, they will not try to think the world is a safe place, which it's not. Children should know the dangers of the world and not be neurotically isolated from them."

Source

[innerSpaceman]

Oh, I quite agree. But the movie's combination of real-world horror and imaginary worlds jarred me nonetheless.

That fairy tales of old had horror elements does not convince me it's right for modern audiences, or for my tastes ... which are not usually squeemish. But I think excising the nasty bits from the Brothers Grimm was a masterstroke by Disney and others who have adapted ancient fairy tales for modern films.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Then it's just a matter of taste. I'm not particularly horror-prone, but I love the gruesome nature of the original fairy tales. Thus, I loved Pan. Sure, Disney made them acceptable for Audiences of All Ages. But they're not really fairy tales.

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

I haven't really stopped thinking about it since I saw it two days ago and I've had some seriously whacked (and wonderfully horrific) dreams since.

With my love of fairy tales, mythology, fantasy and horror I was pretty sure I'd love the film, and I loved it more than I even expected. I think it's one of the best films ever made, regardless of genre, with one of the most honest, sincere and beautiful performances by a child actress. And the supporting adults, particularly Sergi López and Maribel Verdú. (I hardly recognized him from Dirty Pretty Things, or her from Y Tu Mama Tambien) were remarkable.

From the moment the narrator's voice was heard, I was hooked. So lyrical. The story immediately took route in my spine.

Magic was her way of escape (however you want to interpret its realness), but the film wasn't escapist at all. The fantasy world was as frightening as Franco's Spain.

Spoiler:

And though I can fully accept Ofelia's fantasy as being real, I prefer my gut reaction, which was that it all came from her imagination, her return to the Underworld being the last thought she had in death. I can see it both ways, and both are supported, but my way of thinking - not being spiritual or religious, but quite the escapist - the sadder reality works better for me. Her story was a tragedy, though the film still ends uplifting. Because whether or not I believe the fantasy as real, her character did. And she believed she was returned home and reunited with her family...so she was. I still mourned her death.

It was a brutal and beautiful film. Haunting score. A perfect surrealist fantasy. I found no fault with the script, the art, the history or the performances. I was in awe. GDT is my BFF 4-eva!

[mousepod]

After watching his Spanish-language films (Chronos, Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth) - I spent a couple hours yesterday watching the director's cut of Hellboy. Now, I saw Hellboy in the theater and liked it, but the combination of the extra 12 minutes plus my recent schooling in the GDT language of film had me loving it. I'm just about ready to revisit the mediocre (my original feelings) Mimic and Blade II - damn.

[Eliza Hodgkins 1812]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

I'm pretty squeamish, but I thought that the inclusion of violence was pretty apt BECAUSE of those gorey old tales. Considering Cinderella, in which the stepsisters--in order to fit into the slipper--slice off a toe and a heel, respectively. Or Little Red Riding Hood, which involves first the eating of a human by a bear and then the slicing of a bear by a human. Or Bluebeard, for heaven's sake... which depicts the eighth wife of a rich man entering the one room she's been forbidden from entering-- and instead of a magical rose or something lovely, discovers the seven previous wives hanging on the walls and a floor soaked in blood.

In no terms is this a children's fairy tale, even if it revolves around a child. But I rather think that fairy tales weren't really for children in the first place.

I actually wonder if the earliest tales were anything but stories for all ages. I can't say if spoken word was censored around the campfire when these tales were first spun. Be something to look into, anyway. Regardless, they were always dark and they were always meant to stimulate our most base and terrible fears. I'd probably prefer the Victorians hands kept out of the creepy cookie jar when they updated some of those tales. Then again, the more versions the merrier. I like my dark and my Disney Cinderellas.

[Prudence]

Originally Posted by Eliza Hodgkins 1812

I actually wonder if the earliest tales were anything but stories for all ages. I can't say if spoken word was censored around the campfire when these tales were first spun. Be something to look into, anyway. Regardless, they were always dark and they were always meant to stimulate our most base and terrible fears.

According to some theorists, the traditional, dark fairy tales are representative of rites of passage, transitioning into adulthood. I can't remember all the components, but there are elements like the quest, the first "test" that is a form of aid in disguise (like baba yaga) that provides the item or information the hero/ine will ultimately need to be successful. I wish I knew where the hell my notes on this were.