The Watercooler: 6/30/08
So, on Friday I took time out from watching movies at the LA Film Festival…to watch more movies outside of the festival. Explain to me which part of taking a break from movies by watching movies doesn’t mean my life has spun out of control.
Anyway, first up was WALL•E. I enjoyed it, but it didn’t quite grab me the way my favorite Pixar films have. It looked and sounded great. It had a great story and it was funny, but…I don’t know. Maybe I’ve just experienced movie overload and I need a break. I can’t think of a single thing wrong with it, yet it’s already fading from memory.
On the other hand, maybe I’m just tired of summer movies because the other film I saw was the documentary Trumbo and I liked it a lot. Through archival footage, old interviews and through actors reading the blacklisted screenwriter’s own correspondence, the story is told almost entirely in Dalton Trumbo’s words. It’s a wise choice on the part of the filmmakers, because the man knew how to write and it’s a treat to hear him at his best.
Those looking for a fair-minded analysis of the communist witch-hunt of the 1950s had better keep looking because this is Trumbo’s story and its sympathies are clear. I liked it a lot.
That’s all I’ve got from this end. After a week and a half of nothing but movies, I spent all day Sunday trying not to think or write about them. I still have three movies to cover plus some kind of a LAFF wrap-up, but that can wait. In the mean time, let’s hear what you have to say.
Filed under: Watercooler
Tags: Trumbo, WALL-E
Related Posts: - The Watercooler: 4/14/08
- Ebert’s Latest Sneak Preview
- “I see the worst in people.” - Daniel Plainview
- So Many Movies, So Little Time
- Cronenberg - Salon Interview
Craig: I am surprised at your reaction to WALL-E, just as I am surprised my own reaction, which has it as the best of all the Pixars, and the one with the strongest emotional resonance. Much has been made about its connection to Kubrick and Chaplin, but there’s also an element of E.T. at work here. Yes, true, the first 40 minutes are the best (only because that segment is truly extraordinary) but the Axiom section is also exceptional. You may indeed be in overload here, but if this film didn’t hit you right away on first viewing……….well………..it may not at all. Then again, your torrid week may have adversely affected your viewing. Time will resolve this. It will interesting to see what LIC readers say, but I bet there will be a similar good to excellent reaction, with viewers falling in both camps.
I did manage myself to see three other films on this unusually busy weekend, and oddly enough I liked all three, all in varying degrees. I will elaborate on another post within the hour from my summer school location, but Fatih Akin’s THE EDGE OF HEAVEN was an unforgettable film, while two others films viewed on Saturday night were for the most park quite accomplished, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW YOUR FATHER? and MONGOL.
I also loved WALL-E, I do think it slightly downshifts once in space, but as Sam has said, that first half may have been an impossbile act to follow. I think it is the most moving of the Pixars also.
I’ve read the Kubrick, Chapling references, and that’s hard to disagree with, but the picture’s sensibility also reminded me a bit of Lubitsch-it had that delicacy-that trust in the audience to catch the little things and for the little things to matter-its a funny picture at least partially about melancholia, and that reminded me of SHOP AROUND THE CORNER.
I’m seeing Wall*E and The Band’s Visit tomorrow…can’t wait. Then Choke on Wednesday, Miss Pettigrew on Thursday and Journey to the…on Friday. Just thought I’d fill y’all in on my schedule for the coming week :)
This weekend/week {I’m on holiday, so what’s the difference?} I saw Wanted, When Did You Last See Your Dather, In Bruges, Charlie Bartlett, Battle for Haditha, In Bruges, Lust Caution, Death Defying Facts, Son of Man and Beaufort.
I had fun. I have reviewed some of them already {Wanted, Bartlett, Death Defying Facts, When Did You Last…}, and hopefully all reviews will be up by the end of the week or something.
Chuck, I love that Lubitsch parallel, and that original concept of SHOP AROUND THE CORNER, a film, like you, I also adore. And “melancholia?”……….class reference, methinks. The first 40 minutes will go down as one of the greatest segments in animation history. I think WALL-E, by the way is the absolute best animated film since BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (1991).
THE EDGE OF HEAVEN rightly has been compared to BABEL, but in some ways it is a better film, if not as in-your-face soul-stirring. BABEL loses steam on subsequent viewings, because it is not a subtle film, and is often heavy-handed. Fatih Akin’s multi-cultural drama, which focuses on six characters (living in Turkey and Germany) unlike Innaritu’s film, does not link the characters in the end, despite the fact that the audience has vital information that does connect them. I believe this to be a briolliant device, wholly orginal in this sense, and one that spares us a sense of inevitability. The performances are truly exceptional, with Fassbinder stock player Hanna Schygulla delivering a shattering turn as a mother of a tragic character who in the end comes close to connecting emotionally for the first time in her life. Seeing this great film (one of the year’s best without any doubt) on the same weekend as WALL-E really makes one feel optimism about going to the movies these days, despite the junk that inhabits most of the multiplex screens.
A British tearfest called WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW YOUR FATHER? chronicles in fleeting (but revealing) snippets how a young son (and then grown man) fail to connect with an affectionate father who “shares himself” with others at the expense of his wife. Two great English actors, the incomparable Jim Broadbent and Colin Firth burn holes in the screen with performances that bare the very essence of soul-searching, and spell out the true meaning of what might separate a son and a father, and what element might still make the relationship last in the survivor’s essence forever. Not since Gilbert Cates’ deeply-moving I NEVER SANG FOR MY FATHER(1971)with Melvyn Douglas and Gene Hackman, based on Robert Anderson’s play, has a film hit it’s mark like this one, one this topic. A small minority have objected to what they felt was an unabashed penchant to manufacture tears, but the film is subtly directed and written, and these emotions are earned. I again must agree with Andrew Sarris on his intense affection for this film, which he contends “is like nothing I have ever seen before.”
Finally, I saw Sergei Bodrov’s MONGOL (right after the British film on Sat. night) and I must say I liked it a bit more than Craig did. I searched back on LIC’s earlier threads from a few weeks ago and read that Craig did like the film, but felt it was pretty conventional. I will admit that from a historical standpoint the film is completely bogus, making this glorified killer a man of ardent principals. But Mel Gibson’s BRAVEHEART, a film I have my own issues with, commits the same affronteries. MONGOL boasts stunning vistas, ravishing cinematography, beautiful music and some individual set-pieces that rank among the most accomplished we’ve seen in a film this year. Pound for pound this is a marvelous piece of entertainment, even if it is admittedly episodic cinema, which is hardly a cohesive venture.
Yes I have blabbered enough. My apologies. But this was a weekend to remember.
Nick, what did you think of IN BRUGES and LUST, CAUTION?
I’ve been sick all weekend with “flu-like symptoms” and haven’t seen a dang thing but the inside of my eyelids until now. To put it eloquently, it sucks.
Anyway, I’m hopeful that I’ll be able to catch WALL-E sometime this week. Also that I don’t have the bird flu or something equally exotic and deadly. Craig, I suspect you must be running on film critic fumes at this point. But if you traded an at-first-sight WALL-E love for what could be your only chance to see some other fantastic movies in a cinema, I don’t think you can be too upset. WALL-E will be there to revisit, should you desire. Then again, it may be your 2008 Juno (in terms of your reaction, not subject/style).
The last movie I saw was Surfwise, which I don’t think I told you guys I enjoyed a lot. The filmmaking itself could have been better, but the story and all he personalities made for riveting stuff. It may be the first movie I’ve seen to make my family look positively normal, square even. Just when you start to think American families all follow the same general path, something like this comes along to remind you how wonderfully weird we can be.
In other good news, my brother-in-law surprised me with a new MacBookPro for my birthday, just out of the blue, so I’m able to sit here in bed and write for the first time. I may never leave.
“In Bruges” was ten tons of fun, and I would love to see it again sometime, whereas “Lust Caution” was really not what I expected, I think I should see it again, not really out of the will to see it again but because I think to develop a well-rounded opinion, it deserves to be seen again. And as for those exaggerated sex scenes, please, all the hoopla…I’ve seen more provocative and revealing stuff on “Nip/Tuck,” but I understand the purpose they served; animalistic lust.
So, enjoyed “In Bruges” a lot, and feel horribly let down by “Lust Caution.”
* I really, really want to see “The Edge of Heaven,” and “Mongol,” but yeah, I’ll wait.
Nick: I must say I agree with you on both, but have warmed up to LUST. IN BRUGES remains one of the best films of the year at this point, while LUST improves on re-viewings.
I am looking forward to seeing Surfwise on DVD, jennybee, as I missed it’s short run here. Glad to hear you liked it.
I managed to have a fan-f*cking-tastic weekend camping and it worked out perfectly because while my fellow Portlanders were suffering the first 100-degree weekend of the season, I was relaxing by and in a tranquil mountain river with 80-degree weather and friends.
So I missed Wall-E, hoping to get it to this week. Glad to hear folks enjoyed it, to varying degrees. Also glad to see it found a substantial audience this weekend too.
I thought the pacing of Lust, Caution was its biggest problem, though it builds up steam (in both senses of the word) in the second half. Part of me loves a slow, luxurious movie like that, but it took a long time for me to feel emotionally engaged to the characters, and it seemed awfully confusing for awhile until I figured out what the relationships were, etc. I don’t want to have it all spelled out for me, but as it is, I think it’s a movie best appreciated on second viewing (purely speculative, as I’ve only seen it the once). The ending was lovely and powerful, though, and the acting first-rate, full of complexity and ambiguity. And the thing LOOKED fantastic, from the costumes and set design to the cinematography. Pacing, though, that’s what did it.
As far as the eroticism, while it didn’t show anything I hadn’t seen before in crasser formats, those two were more flexible than me. Plus, a lot of it has to do with the contrast between the buttoned-up, Victorian-esque sensibilities of that culture and these characters’ rigid roles within it and the animal passions raging within that bond them together despite it all. Though Ang Lee made it all al lot more compelling than I just did.
Hope you’re feeling MUCH better soon, jennybee.
Your writing and wit are as sharp as ever, so it’s not taking a big toll, thank God.
Greetings fellow Cin-ers.
The LiC offices are just starting to get back to normal (whatever that means) after the conclusion of LAFF. As I said above, I’ve still got three movies to report on plus some kind of a wrap-up, but other than that I’ll be returning you to regular blogging until AFI Fest in November, unless I get crazy and decide to go to Toronto in September…
Thanks for all your patience in the last week and a half. I know it wasn’t the most compelling blogging or the best conversation starter, but it was very good for my soul and hopefully in the end that will be good for LiC.
As for WALL-E…Don’t get me wrong, I really liked it, particularly the earth portions…I just didn’t leave the theater with that spring in my step I sometimes have when I feel I’ve seen something magical. If I get around to reviewing it (I have a draft, but it’s dicey), it’ll probably be 4-stars.
Sorry to hear you’re sick JB, but I’m glad you were able to join us anyway. May I recommend you put in Singin’ in the Rain? It’s my favorite sick-day/blue-day movie. You’re the 2nd person besides Daniel to sing the praises of Surfwise. Consider it on my list.
Nick. I’m not shocked by your Lust-Caution reaction, mine was actually similar and I didn’t warm up to it until I was literally writing about it afterwards. My review started as a regretful pan, but the more I thought about it, the more I liked it and I ended up writing a pretty positive review. I’m not saying that’ll be the case with you…I’m just saying I didn’t find it an easy film at all and it’s not surprising you were cold to it.
JB is on to something about the pacing. It was incredibly slow. Add to that so much of the ‘action’ was internal or underneath the surface…all emotional and it’s just a rough movie to absorb (for me anyway). JB is on the nose about the sex scenes too. They were powerful not necessarily because of they were graphic, but because they were intense and they showed sides of the characters they repressed in day to day life.
Anyway, thanks for bringing that movie up again. I need to see it one more time.
Sam. Head over to Alexander’s blog and check out his review of Mongol. It went up just before the festival started so I didn’t have a chance to dig into it, but I think he liked it much more than I did.
http://colemancornerincinema.blogspot.com/2008/06/mongol-2008.html
Joel, you coulda been watching movies on your iPod plugged into your car! movie slacker! (I kid…glad you were out having a life).
Cool Lubitsch reference Chuck. I’m not up on Lubitsch enough to confirm it, but I like it.
I thought WALL-E was terrific. The best way to describe the crowd last night was raucous, especially during the short that preceded the movie. Part of me wishes I’d seen it on a bigger screen with stadium seating, but the experience of a new theater (the Shattuck Cinema in Berkeley) was worth it. Lots of character to it.
I’m a little surprised, though I know I shouldn’t be, to hear a lot of WALL-E backlash right now. I’m never one to deny a movie its right to a message, but I was not bothered in the least by WALL-E’s. I know it wasn’t born of the insane green trendiness of the moment because it was written what, like, 15 years ago? And I also think enough of it was over the top so as to dilute any overtly somber message. I loved it. Still want to see it again on a bigger and better screen to appreciate the visuals, though.
Ha ha, funny Craig, but you know I’d sooner have my eyes gouged out with rusty melon ballers than watch any film or TV show on something the size of a postage stamp. Hell, I get antsy watching a movie on a laptop.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0
I’m with you on the message Daniel. I thought it was actually very subtle and mainly a subtext to a love story.
But then maybe I’m just a dumb hippie.
ahahahha….I never tire of that Lynch clip.
Speaking of hippies, I’m proud to report that tie-dye is still alive and well on Telegraph Ave.
But seriously, you’re right. My initial categorization of WALL-E is “romantic comedy.” In that context alone, it’s one of the best of the year so far.
http://www.imdb.com/chart/top?tt0910970
Somebody needs to come up with a list of reasons why IMDB lists are ridiculous.
Reason #1: Art is no place for democracy.
“those two were more flexible than me.”
I honestly thought the two lu-vers would break in half more than a few times, but they didn’t. *sigh*
Craig:
Alexander’s MONGOL review was simply extraordinary! But I am hardly surprised, as he is a fantastic reviewer who has serious writing talent. What I also loved about this piece is that I am just about in total agreement with so much he says.
He points out that prior to MONGOL, the shattering PRISONER OF THE MOUNTAIN was Bodrov’s best film. I will never forget that final show of mercy with the shotgun blast into the sky–it would move the hardest of hearts.
Alexander also points out that the makers of 300 and Stone’s ALEXANDER can only wish they could have made something as technically and narratively as accomplished as this sumptuous epic feature.
Actually, the film has received mostly excellent reviews with only a few dissenters. Alexander’s essay stands with the best of them too.
I tried to respond directly to the page under the review, but I adoing something wrong. I made several attempts, but each time lost what I had written.
i saw roman de gare sunday…
all i have to say is ‘you came in my mouth…and then you dumped me’
AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
That in itself is quite the mouthful glim….
I guess I am the only person who has not seen Roman de Gare yet. Opinions are quite mixed, and that only makes me want to see it more.
Glad you spent some time here in the East Bay Daniel. I’m busy hosting visiting family otherwise it would have been cool to meet up while you were around. Did you head across the bay to watch the amazing pride parade on Sunday? My visitors loved the time travel aspect of the Telegraph avenue hippie scene, and that of Haight.
No time of late for movies, but great to read Craig’s festival reviews and everyone’s reaction to Wall-E. The quality and informative nature of the comments at LiC is always a real pleasure.
I also saw Wall-E (do I need to capitalize the whole thing?) over the weekend and basically agree with Craig. I think it’s a good movie, definitely one of the best of the year so far, but only of midding quality within the Pixar range - not as good as the Toy Story movies or the Brad Bird films, substantially better than Bugs/Monsters/Cars.
My two reservations about it (Spoilers here) are that the allegorical/Idiocracy substance of the movie felt too pointed and pedantic, and that Wall-E himself struck me as something of a passive protagonist with a limited character arc. But the visuals were spectacular and it was a fun time, for sure.
Oh no. Two people off the WALL-E reservation. STOP THEM!
Between WALL-E and Wanted, I wonder, can anyone write satire anymore? Really sharp, biting stuff?
“the allegorical substance of the movie felt too pointed and pedantic.”
This is a curious statement indeed, especially since the writer makes claim earlier to WALL-E “being one of the best films of the year so far?!?!” Such a proclamation, methinks would not allow for a damning and mitigating disclaimer of this magnitude.
With all due respect, visuals and artistic craftsmanship can’t erase such serious charges. Does an allegorical reading of WALL-E point to its being “pointed and pedantic.” Methinks that is a serious overeading into the film’s intentions. A fully opposite viewpoint on this particular interpretation can be read on Award Daily’s recent post on “Eve” written by the esteemed and perceptive Ryan Adams. Mr. Adams not only presents superlative arguments for an astute allegorical reading of WALL-E, but he literally presents a case that convincingly shoots holes into any argument that might cause one to interpret the film’s allegory as “pedantic.” The Christ allegory and the hybrid of Christmas and Easter are particularly relevent and insightful.
The point is that no matter how great a film is, no matter how many people and professional critics praise it, no matter how resistant said film may be towards adverse reactions, there will ALWAYS be a few people who will oppose the trend.
I used Mr. Adams’ essay because it was topical, recent and it flies in the face of the pedantic theory. I did not want to use professional film criticism (although Ryan is more talented than many of these people) but rather the posting of someone who is active on these threads. Similarly, I don’t want to engage in dilaogue like “It’s pandantic.” “No it ain’t!” Yes it is!” “No it ain’t” Hence I politely defer to another respondant of unquestioned taste and insight.
Perhaps WALL-E’s greatest achievement is that it invites such conjecture in its multi-themed presentation. The idea of WALLE being a “passive” character, in view of the environment he operated in (in the first 40 minutes or so of the movie) well…………I won’t go there. I dare say that subsequent viewings of this animated masterpiece will yield additional levels of meaning. It’s THAT kind of movie.
Huh?
I think we ‘re talking about two different things here, Sam. First of all, I must confess, your writing style gives me a little bit of a headache. Second, when I say “allegorical substance” I wasn’t talking about Eve and fertility etc. as in Ryan’s piece that you mention, but the whole “everyone’s fat and lazy because of an evil corporation” aspect of the movie, which felt heavy-handed and lacking in complexity to me.
As for Wall-E being ‘passive’ I base that on two elements. First (and this might just be me), I needed more convincing that this robot was actually feeling ‘emotions’ at the beginning of the movie, which I know is part of the film’s essential premise, but part of me was constantly wondering, ‘why would they have programmed a trash compactor to watch Hello Dolly?’ Traditionally, robots-in-a-human-world, like Data from Star Trek or anyone from Spielberg’s AI is a machine first, a being capable of ‘love’ only after some deliberation and explanation.
The other aspect is that Wall-E, in screenwriting terms, only has one ‘want’, which is to fulfill his attraction to Eve and assist her in her efforts; like a robotic Forrest Gump, he remains mostly oblivious to everything else going on around him, but he also seems to be the same robot at the 20 minute mark into the movie as he is at the 100 minute mark; he never has to grow or change in order to make it through the narrative’s obstacles.
Let me reiterate, I think it’s a very good movie, just not a perfect one.
*raises eyebrow*
Nicky, so THAT’S what jennybee meant when she said FLEXIBLE.
THAT’S WHAT I THOUGHT…
I think I’m supporting Jeff when I say that the satirical element of the bloated humans is pretty lazy. It doesn’t ever go beyond the obvious joke. You have these people who have never seen earth, have lived in space for hundreds of years. You’d think they would have developed strange habits, weird ways of seeing things, etc., that could be used as insightful satire. Instead, we get the captain thinking that pizzas grow on trees.
What would Stanley Kubrick or Hal Ashby do with the same material? Much more, I suspect.
That’s pretty much my only major gripe about the film.
Damn, I want to see Wall-E. Although Craig’s disappointment is kind of a relief to me: at least I know that if I don’t like it (after all, Scranton’s previous, Finding Nemo, didn’t bowl me over like it did most people), I won’t be alone.
I watched Vanishing Point on Friday (incredibly boring, but I might have to revisit it), and DP in two parts on Saturday and Sunday, with my mom, who pretty much hated it.
I’m back in the Netherlands now, and have an exam tomorrow, so I’d better go. But: it’s my very last exam. Ever! (at least if I manage to get higher than a 3/10, which shouldn’t be too much of a problem). Yay!
Huh?
First of all, I must confess Jeff, your writing style gives me a bit of a headache. Secondly, in your original post you never went beyond the contention that you have a (general) issue with the film’s allegory. I could neither read your mind nor suppose you meant anything other than that the film’s allegorical interpretations were simplified or heavy-handed as you now clearly contend. K. Bowden also agrees with some of your statements, and bemoans the entire Axiom passage, stating that “the film would have you believe the captain thinks pizza grows on trees.”
This is an animated film aimed clearly at a juvenile audience. (even if its appeal is equal among an adult audience as well) To expect the kind of complexity presented in 2001, or A.I. or in STAR TREK would undermine the love story that is central here. Jeff takes issue with this romance and says it lacks emotional resonance due to initial motivational insufficiences, yet in its stark simplistic terms this relationship is deeply felt and fully uncompromised.
Would you rather have had a complex examination of the nature of evil in SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS, rather than the cardboard incarceration of it in the Wicked Queen, or perhaops a further explanation of what precipitates envy in the otherwise Hamlet-patterned THE LION KING, or maybe a visual elaboration of juvenile delinquincy in PINOCCHIO, or a study of truth in the same film.
Similarly the entire thrust of Data’s character (and Mr. Spock before him) was to examine the motivations that you now claim are sorely lacking in WALL-E’s character. These is no connection here—the intent of WALL-E and ST:TNG are at polar opposites.
You make claim at the end that WALL-E is a very good film, but not perfect. I’m sorry, but this is a backhanded compliment, especially in view of this damning reservations.
What IS perfect, by these standards? While America’s entire critical establishment goes bonkers over this film, we should instead on these threads nitpik and argue why we are less than impressed by a film that is roundly being calling a masterpiece in all quarters.
I don’t doubt your sincerity, but this is nit-picking and playing devil’s advocate. I could find (and look for faults) in every film ever made if I set out to do it. But these objections are simply invalid, as they negate the very goals and intentions of the film. There will always be naysayers, many of whom disagree JUST to disagree.
Saying WALL-E is very good is simply not good enough. Yes these threads are hear to have you voice your opinion, and that includes being soon named “LIC’s Resident Devil’s Advocate.”
First of all let me shout out GOOD LUCK HEDWIG! And then process this argument so I can see where I stand. I fear I’ve been lumped in with some kind of WALL-E hating mob, and that’s not true. It’s an easy 4-star movie, it’s just that The Incredibles for me is a 5.
Anyway…processing…please stand by…
Ouch. I just posted an epic comment, but the server went down and now it’s lost forever. Damnit! Let me try and reconstruct it.
Here’s my take on the fat/lazy humans at the end of the movie. I agree with Jeff that it’s pretty obvious, but I’d argue that it’s so obvious as to be quickly dismissed. It’s not the subtext to the film and it’s not the text, it’s a surface layer. The emotional core comes from the love story and this bit of satire is set dressing. As such, it’s not the foundation of the film and doesn’t harm it in any way.
It’s funny, over at Hollywood-Elsewhere, Jeff Wells seems to believe he and four or five other uber types like him are the only ones to notice the obvious and they’re all shocked people aren’t making a bigger deal out of it. http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/06/tubbyslamwhuh.php
I think if the only thing you take away from WALL-E is that Americans are fat and lazy, that’s a pretty sad state of affairs.
As for Jeff’s question about WALL-Es emotions, my take is that he did have them and that they weren’t intentionally programmed, but learned over the course of the 700 years he’d been patrolling earth.
Also, Jeff, was attacking Sam’s style really necessary? I know he came on a little strong over a pretty innocuous comment, but we’re not talking about DZ here (Sam: DZ is a universally loathed character on a different message board).
As for Sam, I know Jeff to have enjoyed an argument and a devil’s advocate role more than once here and there, but I don’t see him doing that with WALL-E so much. As you say, the critical response to the movie is through the roof, but as I’ve said before, that kind of thing is just asking for a little bit of a let down by some viewers and a little bit of unnecessary backlash by others. Jeff’s response, though his reasoning is different, seems very similar to my own: it was very good, but it doesn’t quite live up to the hype.
Plus, he’s comparing it to other Pixar films, a very tall order indeed. I’d say it blows Kung Fu Panda out of the water without even taking a deep breath, but next to my Pixar favorites it feels much more mortal. Perhaps Jeff is thinking the same thing.
For the record, my favorite Pixar movie is The Incredibles. I have a strange affection for Bug’s Life and much to my surprise I also really loved Monsters Inc. I came to all of these movies on DVD. I bought the party line that they were kids movies for years. It was only when I saw Incredibles that I understood. Anyway…Toy Story 1 and 2 are both a bit overrated in my book and so is Finding Nemo. Ratatouille is up there with my 2nd tier favorites and so is WALL-E. Cars was more than a little disappointing.
Not sure if I made all my points I’d made before getting erased, but that’s more than enough for now.
Er, spoilers.
Bad ones? Mine?
I don’t know…you mention the ending of the movie in your opening paragraph. Is that a spoiler or leading into one?
I don’t think I’m discussing anything surprisy or anything that isn’t all over the internets. By ‘ending’ I’m actually meaning 2nd half.
Alright, sounded like a spoiler to me. By “all over the internets” though, you’re implying I’ve read up on the details of the movie and I’ve pointedly avoided those. If you’re speaking to the bigger themes of the basic plot, then I misunderstood.
The problem is that this is the Watercooler, not a review comment thread, so I’m having to be extra careful trying to follow along. If it were a review, I’d skip it entirely until I saw the film, comments and all. Here, we discuss all kinds of movies including the new releases and for the most part, folks are fairly spoiler-conscious but there’s rarely spoiler-warnings in the comment threads (and I may be guilty of that too). Just being careful.
I don’t know what else I could add here. Craig’s presentation is just about flawless, and it deals with the discourse fairly, concisely and with much overiding insight. We all have our favorite Pixars (mine was RATATOUILLE up until this past week) and each choice can be ably supported.
I have no lingering annoyance with Jeff–he stated his case eloquently—even if he did find issue with my style—LOL!!!!!!!!!! however, (and I will never change) I evince a “sacred cow” position on films that blow me away, embarking on a crusade to defend them to the ends of the earth. I would specualte that sometimes I forge strong aruments, while other times I may make an ass of myself.
Last year, I went full throttle defending ATONEMENT, mainly at AD, and took some lumps in the process.
Anyway, I hereby extend an olive branch to Jeff.
Joel, I am very interested in knowing what your take on WALL-E will be. Can I ask you what your own favorite Pixars are to this point?
I like them all but Incredibles is still my favorite. Oh, Cars…didn’t like Cars much.
As always Sam, I love your enthusiasm and I know first hand how it feels when people don’t line up and bow down to my beloved favorites. I tend to take it personally. I’m trying to learn not to do that though.
Sartre, I’ve enjoyed your neighborhood and am sorry we couldn’t connect, either. I know Alexander is also away for these two days. I did not make it back over to the city for the parade, but spent time their Friday and yesterday. For some reason I’ve been here like once a year for the past few years, but I had more comprehensive tour this time around. Great little corner of the country.
Exactly Craig…..I always take it personally myself! I still have a lot to learn there! Ha!
Thanks Joel. THE INCREDIBLES is surely one of the best Pixars, and I do agree with what you say about CARS.
Thanks Craig and Sam, this is one of those discussions where one person (alongside many) obviously has a huge amount of passion for a film and others don’t have quite as much.
Sam, you said “Saying WALL-E is very good is simply not good enough.” Sorry, but it kind of has to be, because as far as I’m concerned after a single viewing it’s a very good, 8/10 movie, but not a masterpiece 9/ or 10/10 movie; and that for me, the whole point of critical discussion is to seek out these fracture points. If two people agree about 99% of a film, the 1% where they disagree is going to be where the discussion gets interesting.
To reiterate, my enjoyment was simply hampered by a few speedbumps along the way. Craig, I agree that (SPOILERS) it makes sense that over 700 years of ‘life’ that Wall-E would have gained consciousness and emotionality, except that the movie (a) the movie doesn’t tell us this - every robot in the movie is a full-fledged ‘character’ with motivations and feelings, and (b) the movie doesn’t care - it’s not an issue or a theme, which is fine and dandy but threw me for a minor loop, which once again is an idiosyncratic personal issue.
On top of that, though, was the film-as-love-story which was therefore resting on a shaky foundation, for me, and functioned unexpectedly - I mean, Eve and Wall-E’s ‘relationship’ lasted for about a scene and a half prior to her egging it up for the middle of the movie, and I could have used an extra scene or two to flesh it out.
Different strokes etc.
Fair enough Jeff, fair enough. Well said.
As far as me being the film’s biggest champion on LIC, (while the others don’t share these sentiments) this is untrue. Both Daniel and Chuck, who are two of LIC’s most thoughtful and gifted critics, stated that loved it tremendously. Check back on their earlier, ecstatic submissions on The Watercooler thread.
Similarly, Ryan Adams, a highly esteemed LIC contributor and the second in command over at AD, stated on that site that WALL-E was the ‘best film of 2008′ and then commenced to issue it effusive praise. AD head Sasha Stone has been going bonkers over the film with seemingly unreserved praise.
But I do agree that a few others have sided with your take, including Craig.
Pierre, sartre, Hedwig, Miranda, Joel, Alexander, Alison, Nick and Matthew Lucas still haven’t seen or haven’t checked in with their opinions, so the jury is still out…………..leverage……………..leverage………….oh leverage!!! LOL!
I never said you were alone.
That’s an interesting point you make Jeff about the relationship in the 2nd half of the movie, and it might go a long way toward explaining why I found the 2nd half less satisfying.
As I said before, I saw it in kind of a movie-rush-haze and I aim to catch it again to give it a fuller measure of respect. I haven’t decided whether to review it before or after.
After, methinks…………..mehopes anyway! LOL!
Just got back in from the short camping trip with the girlfriend. She’s taking a quick trip to Budapest to see her folks. I hope to go with her sometime in the near future. Anybody seen Jarmusch’s superb Stranger Than Paradise? Well, when I first saw my girlfriend in college she was a lot like Ava at the start of that. Actually, she’s still a lot like that (but better, of course, aha).
Haven’t seen Wall-E yet but plan to soon.
Sam, thank you for the very kind words about my review and writing. I’m glad you enjoyed reading the review, and liked the film (Mongol).
I love Jarmusch and I love Stranger Than Paradise.
I think Alison knows/knew the girl who played Ava. Does your girlfriend listen to Screamin’ Jay Hawkins?
Yeah, she does! Ahaha… love that movie, and I knew I had to show it to her. I’ll never forget showing it to her a few months ago (as the latter part of a double bill with Jarmusch’s student film, Permanent Vacation). Love Jarmusch as well, and am actually in the middle of posting a little somethin’ about him on my site regarding his next film, which I’m obviously very much looking forward to.
Mystery Train I think is my favorite. I should watch it again and post something on it one of these days. So many movies, so little time…
Ah, Mystery Train.
“Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!” Ahahaha…
Great memory, Craig. Yes, I do know Eszter Balint, the girl who played Eva in Stranger Than Paradise. I love that movie.
And Mystery Train is one of my favorites. I love Jim Jarmusch. And I love how he always puts rockers like Joe Strummer, Iggy Pop and Tom Waits in his films. And John Lurie of Stranger Than Paradise was leader of the Lounge Lizards of course.
The former drummer of Sonic Youth was in Stranger Than Paradise as well. Great, great film. One of Jarmusch’s best in my humble opinion.
That’s terrific that you know Eszter Balint, Alison.
Jarmusch is a splendid filmmaker. My three favorites of his are Broken Flowers, Stranger Than Paradise and Mystery Train. All three are just about perfect in my humble opinion.
I did also enjoy Night on Earth, even if it was a bit uneven. The Paris segment is wonderful. And of course Benigni’s Italian cab driver was priceless.
Sam, I’ve been pretty vocal about my love for “WALL-E” over at From the Front Row, I just haven’t joined the discussion here yet. My full review will not be published until Thursday, but here are my thoughts:
http://fromthefrontrow.blogspot.com/2008/06/more-thoughts-on-wall-e.html
Excellent points there Matthew,and eloquently presented. I like the 2001meets CITY LIGHTS analogy,and that sequence you cite as a pivotal one is indeed one of the film’s most glorious moments.
I see you point with the immediate processing of the humor in FINDING NEMO and that sophistication in RATATOUILLE,and asa result I concur that WALL-E does grow on you. I am happy you pointed out Thomas Newman’s score as an invaluable component!
I think I’d agree in general with Jeff and Craig that Wall-E is pretty damn good, but imperfect. I think the only real weaknesses of the film come in the narrative’s second act, which has already been discussed elsewhere in this thread. That said, I can see all of JeffMCM’s points in retrospect and I think he’s right on most of them (I agree with Craig regarding Wall-E’s personality and apparent emotions), but Wall-E doesn’t depend on the sort of film dialogue that has informed cinema for the last 80+ odd years: Wall-E is predominantly a silent movie and as such, it works very well.
Wall-E is very Chaplinesque. He’s the little tramp, er rascal, that is the main character but an indirect cause of much of the plot. His concerns are purely of the heart and it’s in spite of him that much of the story occurs, yet he is integral to the film itself.
(Minor Spoiler ahead)
I also have to admit that even though the film dragged a bit for me in the second act, just watching the film is one of the greatest cinematic joys I’ve had in a long while. Much of Wall-E’s first act is pure cinema and it’s truly wondrous to see a movie convey so much character development purely through movement and sound. When Eva drops her dutiful facade as her mother ship returns to orbit, spreads her wings, and zooms around the landscape like a wild animal set free from captivity for the first time…well, that almost brought a tear to my eye.
(End Spoiler)
Anyway, when I first saw Ratatouille I was mildly underwhelmed but still enjoyed it. On a second viewing, it has gone way up the scale of Pixar movies for me. I find its odd charms absolutely divine now.
Wall-E has the same potential to grow on me, deeply.
Good review, Matthew, although I’d say Wall-E is like 2001 mostly in a visual sense, not at all in thematic content or mood. Wall-E does pay homage to 2001 many times, but Wall-E felt more to me like a cross between Silent Running and City Lights I think.
In response to some of the previous comments, I also thought Wall-E’s general tone of grim environmental disaster and/or overconsumption doesn’t really play well in the second half of the film. Those themes are ultimately treated in a fairly trite manor. But since this is a family film, aimed at kids, I’m giving it a bit of a pass there.
If anything, that aspect is my biggest disappointment about the movie, which pales in comparison to how much I enjoyed the rest of it.
Hey, rock on and congrats to our Evan Derrick, who got an article linked from The House Next Door yesterday. Nice job, Evan.
http://www.thehousenextdooronline.com/2008/07/links-for-day-july-2nd-2008.html
Cool!
Indeed Joel. I really feel these issues will fall by the wayside as this film takes root in our cultural consciousness. Great postings.
Way to go Evan. I just caught up with his epic 2-parter last night and it was pretty great.
That’s terrific, Evan!
I saw Wanted very late last night (don’t ask, a friend wanted to see it) and really hated it. I’m actually right with Jeff Wells on this one. It’s a soul-deadening movie.
Must see Wall-E. Like last year, I’ve got to take a look at the Marin County Fair (checking out the concerts tonight… Joan Jett, awesome).
Congratulations, Evan. That’s awesome.
I’ve only just started to read it (it’s long and I’ll probably have to read it in installments) but it’s already a wonderful piece.
Re: Wells, how can you deaden what’s already gone?
Congrats to Evan!
Congrats to Evan indeed! A reference from the House is as close as you can come to official recognition of greatness nowadays ;-)
Oh, thanks guys. I only now noticed all of the congratulations due to Craig pointing them out to me. Much appreciated!