I don't hear NPR's movie critic Bob Mondello all that often anymore ('cause I'm not in my car as much as I used to be), but I've never heard him more excited than when he reviewed "Journey to the Center of the Earth" last week. Not the new Brendan Fraser 3D one, but the 1959 version with James Mason, Pat Boone, Arlene Dahl and Diane Baker.
Although Mondello's greatest enthusiasm by far is for the 1959 film, his best lines describe the 2008 production: "It's considerably more "real"-looking -- in a differently fakey way.... It'll just show you what Hollywood used to do, and do well, done well." Well put. As I was saying about movie blood, what we accept as "realistic" isn't necessarily realistic at all. It's as much a convention of the times we live in as anything else. Much of the groundbreaking CGI of today isn't much better than it was ten years ago, and a lot of the old CGI -- which seemed so convincing at the time -- now looks... well, better than the rubber octopus in "Ed Wood," but dated nevertheless. Even some of the great special effects movies like "Jurassic Park" (1993) don't look much more sophisticated than "King Kong" (1930) these days.
Meanwhile "Wall-E" (and "Finding Nemo") writer-director Andrew Stanton sounds like a really savvy filmmaker. He told Terry Gross on Fresh Air about a lot of the brainstorming that went into "Wall-E," and I had another one of those NPR "driveway moments" during this part of the interview:
"I geeked out at the idea of being able to do a much more monochromatic palette. That's not usually associated with animated pictures because there's this stigma of it being a babysitter or family fare and it has to have every color of the rainbow in it, and all that stuff -- which really makes me want to go in the other direction when I hear that. And I loved that just the natural setting [Earth as a big dump] required a monochromatic bent to it, at least in the beginning of the film. So it's dealing with a lots of yellows and tans and browns. It made anything primary, like even the chipped-away red circle of Wall-E's "E," or the one time you finally see something real like a plant, really stand out. It's almost like having the restraint of using a close-up and not using it until the very right moment. It suddenly has a huge impact when it's used.How cool is that? An animator who understands the psychologically effective uses of color... and close-ups!
Testing comments. The Sun-Times is upgrading our MoveableType platform, so there may be some outages...
Definitely agree with you there Jim. I loved the drained color palette in Wall-E and I certainly think it made the film more powerful as well as realistic. As opposed to the purposely 3D "JttCotE", I really did feel like I could touch the rust on Wall-E's body...
Psychological effects of filmmaking choices, and Wall-E? Perfect place for this:
After I'd seen the movie, one of the first things I thought about was their choice to incorporate live-action content (specifically, the time capsule tapes of Fred Willard).
Willard's live-action image is the first time we see a human form in the movie, so I remember wondering if the whole film was gonna be like Roger Rabbit. And then the slight (but not necessarily bad) disorientation I felt while watching an animated "human" watch a live-action Fred Willard (an actor who is, by the way, almost a cartoon in the first place).
I'd love to know Pixar's motivation behind that design choice, and whether they were intentionally going for that slight head-trip effect it had on me.
Wall-E totally looks like the robot from "Short Circuit"... minus the cheesy 80's style of course
That monochromatic half of WALL*E is also what made the interiors of the Axiom -- and the space trip to get there -- so damn jaw-dropping... and beautiful, despite so much of the Axiom basically being glitzy consumer culture.
I loved that interview with Andrew Stanton, too. It reminded me of an extra on the Amélie DVD, where Jean-Pierre Jeunet talks about the way they used colour - especially the colour blue - in certain scenes; whether you like that movie for its story etc. or not, the thought that went into some of these apparently nerdy/technical things is compelling in and of itself, I think.
It is awesome to see an animator who understands color and close-ups. Now, if only we could get some of the live action directors to understand the same things.
I recently took in "Hancock", and about half an hour into it I began to realize that every shot, or at least 90%, was a close-up. That percentage didn't change much through the rest of the film, and it began to drive me insane. "Hancock" was funny, and smart, but I wonder why we can't back up for a long or medium shot now and then. Was the art director bad? Did nobody know anything about blocking? An added bonus was that this production needed some sort of tripod or stabilizing agent for the camera.
"Hancock" isn't the only guilty party. How much longer will we have to endure this trend?
Jim, please be careful when throwing around the term "animator." Stanton is a filmmaker (with a capital "F"). Just because he uses a different set of tools than live action directors doesn't mean he isn't as versed in the language of film storytelling. He employs and directs animators.
What, no love for the Emo Phillips' "Journey to the Center of the Earth"?
Perhaps the Axiom interior is meant to be so colourful/appealing as a warning to the false allure of rampant consumerism?
Seen K.: Right you are. That was actually the point I intended to make -- this is a director of animated films who (as he himself puts it) doesn't feel he has to put "every color of the rainbow" into a "family-friendly" picture, but who understands the tools of filmmaking, whatever the form.
I blame television for the prevalence of close-ups. I read a story once about Robert Altman and some studio suit. The studio guy wanted him to use more close-ups so the movie would play better on television. Although he came from television, Altman told the suit he makes movies for the theater, so back off.
It makes me laugh thinking about it. Which other art form is asked a question like this? Do people tell musicians not to use certain instruments because it won't play well on radio?
"I'm sorry, Mr. Lennon and McCartney, but couldn't it still be a Day in the Life without a string crescendo? It simply won't play on FM. Sorry."
Link pimping: I recently wrote about something similar in the original Star Wars, which used a largely colorless palette to magnify the effect when color did make an appearance.
Cheers,
- Bob
I'm glad to hear what Gareth points out about Amélie. I think Amélie has gotten a bad wrap among some cinéphiles because it's the type of film that's generally known as a crowd pleaser. Visually however it's miles apart from your typical 'feel-good' movie and I think Jeunet deserves major props for making a film that has both mass appeal and cinematic flair.
"The Dark Knight" emplots similar psychological effects. Everything in the film is black, white, grey...very monochromatic...until Joker shows up in his purple and green offsetting the world around everyone. "Wall-E" and "The Dark Knight" are two of my favorite films this year, because they are made by people that understand this idea of visual storytelling.
I love "Amelie"!
"I had another one of those NPR "driveway moments" during this part of the interview:"
I love that - I thought I was the only person who pulled up and sat in the car for untold minutes engrossed in some NPR story or Fresh Air interview.
I think my record was 20 minutes in front of the house when Flight of the Conchords were on with Terry Gross.