Of the Best Picture winners in the 1940s, this was one of the few that I had not heard of before starting my Oscar journey. I feared that the reason I hadn’t heard of it was because it suffered a similar fate as the 30s Best Picture winners no one ever mentions any more- it didn’t age well. Just the opposite happened, however. I was pleasantly surprised to find myself enjoying artfully-made thriller.
RATING: 4 out of 5
Friday, May 11, 2012
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Oliver & Company (1988)
At times, I have been extremely patient and generous to Disney animated films. I recognized little advancements and stylistic qualities amidst the monotonous package films of the 1940s. I accepted lackluster films such as The Sword in the Stone and The Black Cauldron as, at the very least, entertainment. This however, is the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
RATING: 2.75 out of 5
An adaptation of Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist (which I have not read), Oliver & Company is the story of an orphaned kitten (voiced by Joey Lawrence) looking for a home. Initially taken in by a petty thief named Fagin (Dom DeLuise) and his pets (voiced by Billy Joel, Cheech Marin and more), Oliver falls into the lap of luxury when a young rich girl named Jenny adopts him. Fagin’s loan shark boss (Robert Loggia) looks to exploit the situation for monetary gain, forcing Oliver and his friends to band together to protect Jenny, and each other, from danger.
This film is by no means a disaster. Children will more than easily plop down in front of the TV and take this in like candy. It’s got cute animal characters, funny antics, and songs. What’s not to like? First, there are a few too many characters, leaving most flat and forgettable. Second, the songs are all equally forgettable. Third, the animation is weaker than any of the films preceding it.
Disney probably thought they had a winner on their hands. They had the vocal talents of a bunch of stars popular with adults and all the cuteness needed from the animal characters to make kids want to see the film. Too bad it turned out to be style over substance. Given the films modern setting, I understand the decision to have Billy Joel, then one of the hottest songwriters around, do the music. The problem with going the ‘modern’ route with the music is that it all feels very dated now. The beauty of Disney’s best songs is that they possess a timeless quality. Oliver & Company is missing that.
By far, the worst element of this film is the animation. The main characters all look fine but the background images are a borderline abomination to the name Disney. There is little in the way of crisp lines, definition or depth. What’s left is a mish-mash of pastels running together in loosely-defined shapes. At times, the scenery reminded me of what the world looks like when I take my eyeglasses off. While I understand that Disney has every right to adjust and change their animation style over time, standards have been set for their animation quality over the years. Too much divergence from that standard is a bad thing.
Is this film still entertaining? Yes. It’s difficult to not enjoy a Disney film. Oliver & Company simply is not as enjoyable any of the films that came before it. With a plot that drags in places to help hide how thin it is, Disney commits the cardinal sin of cinema- it bores you at times. Add on top of this some dark content that might upset some youngsters and you have the first Disney film that is only ‘okay.’ They had an astounding 50-year run of good and great films, so it’s about time Disney stumbled.
This film is by no means a disaster. Children will more than easily plop down in front of the TV and take this in like candy. It’s got cute animal characters, funny antics, and songs. What’s not to like? First, there are a few too many characters, leaving most flat and forgettable. Second, the songs are all equally forgettable. Third, the animation is weaker than any of the films preceding it.
Disney probably thought they had a winner on their hands. They had the vocal talents of a bunch of stars popular with adults and all the cuteness needed from the animal characters to make kids want to see the film. Too bad it turned out to be style over substance. Given the films modern setting, I understand the decision to have Billy Joel, then one of the hottest songwriters around, do the music. The problem with going the ‘modern’ route with the music is that it all feels very dated now. The beauty of Disney’s best songs is that they possess a timeless quality. Oliver & Company is missing that.
By far, the worst element of this film is the animation. The main characters all look fine but the background images are a borderline abomination to the name Disney. There is little in the way of crisp lines, definition or depth. What’s left is a mish-mash of pastels running together in loosely-defined shapes. At times, the scenery reminded me of what the world looks like when I take my eyeglasses off. While I understand that Disney has every right to adjust and change their animation style over time, standards have been set for their animation quality over the years. Too much divergence from that standard is a bad thing.
Is this film still entertaining? Yes. It’s difficult to not enjoy a Disney film. Oliver & Company simply is not as enjoyable any of the films that came before it. With a plot that drags in places to help hide how thin it is, Disney commits the cardinal sin of cinema- it bores you at times. Add on top of this some dark content that might upset some youngsters and you have the first Disney film that is only ‘okay.’ They had an astounding 50-year run of good and great films, so it’s about time Disney stumbled.
RATING: 2.75 out of 5
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Der Untergang [Downfall] (2004)
Without question, Adolf Hitler was one of the most (if not the most) evil men ever to walk the Earth. Children in this and many other countries learn about his hate, prejudice, and atrocities in school. History and society have all but accepted a caricaturized depiction of Hitler and his fellow Nazi goons. Hollywood especially has benefited from this neat, easily-boxed version of the Third Reich. With this in mind, it becomes understandable why this German film made everyone so uneasy.
Based on a slew of auto-biographies, historical accounts and memoirs, Downfall follows a young woman named Traudl Humps (Alexandra Maria Lara) after being selected to be one of Adolf Hitler’s personal secretaries in 1942. Admiration for her employer and Führer has faded by 1945. Traudl finds herself cut off from the rest of the world, cooped up in the Führerbunker as Allied forces tear through Berlin. She and the rest of Hitler’s minions are forced to come to grips reality, leading to a variety of reactions.
After seeing this film, I am shocked that critics and industry types were hesitant to heap praise upon it. Were they really so naïve to think that praising a film that refuses to play to Hollywood’s stereotyping of Hitler and the Nazis would equate to praising or sympathizing with Hitler? My theory is this- the critics and the suits were too scared to be honest with us. Instead, we got carefully worded reviews that spent too much time explaining why they don’t like Hitler despite liking the film or throwing in their two cents on the dialogue about the humanity of Hitler that this films potentially calls into question.
This is a great film, plain and simple. Bruno Ganz is chilling in what is probably the greatest portrayal of Adolf Hitler of all time. He is fully committed to this role and it shows. The same can be said for Ulrich Matthes and Corinna Harfouch, who play Joseph and Magda Goebbels. Their sycophantic, unflinching loyalty to Hitler is unnerving to no end. They are so twisted and disturbing that I squirmed through many of their scenes, especially towards the end, where they put their loyalty to National Socialism above the lives of their children. Sickening is the only appropriate word.
The sets for this film are equally impressive. Scenes inside the bunker have a claustrophobic quality about them. This makes the audience feel every bit as stifled and cornered as the characters on screen when the bunker comes under attack or when Hitler goes off on a tirade. While no one every fully descends to the savagery of caged rats, it is evident from the bunker denizens’ faces that they’re never too far away from doing so. This is a testament to everyone involved with the production.
Does this film show Hitler as a real human being? Yes. Hitler is kind and compassionate to many of the innocent people working for him, like Traudl. The film does not hold back on Hitler’s stern and borderline psychotic handling of his military advisors and political underlings though. The end result is a broken, pathetic, feeble man clinging desperately to power and delusions of grandeur. That is far more unsettling than any caricature will ever be, making this a powerful film that I think everyone should see.
RATING: 4.25 out of 5
Based on a slew of auto-biographies, historical accounts and memoirs, Downfall follows a young woman named Traudl Humps (Alexandra Maria Lara) after being selected to be one of Adolf Hitler’s personal secretaries in 1942. Admiration for her employer and Führer has faded by 1945. Traudl finds herself cut off from the rest of the world, cooped up in the Führerbunker as Allied forces tear through Berlin. She and the rest of Hitler’s minions are forced to come to grips reality, leading to a variety of reactions.
After seeing this film, I am shocked that critics and industry types were hesitant to heap praise upon it. Were they really so naïve to think that praising a film that refuses to play to Hollywood’s stereotyping of Hitler and the Nazis would equate to praising or sympathizing with Hitler? My theory is this- the critics and the suits were too scared to be honest with us. Instead, we got carefully worded reviews that spent too much time explaining why they don’t like Hitler despite liking the film or throwing in their two cents on the dialogue about the humanity of Hitler that this films potentially calls into question.
This is a great film, plain and simple. Bruno Ganz is chilling in what is probably the greatest portrayal of Adolf Hitler of all time. He is fully committed to this role and it shows. The same can be said for Ulrich Matthes and Corinna Harfouch, who play Joseph and Magda Goebbels. Their sycophantic, unflinching loyalty to Hitler is unnerving to no end. They are so twisted and disturbing that I squirmed through many of their scenes, especially towards the end, where they put their loyalty to National Socialism above the lives of their children. Sickening is the only appropriate word.
The sets for this film are equally impressive. Scenes inside the bunker have a claustrophobic quality about them. This makes the audience feel every bit as stifled and cornered as the characters on screen when the bunker comes under attack or when Hitler goes off on a tirade. While no one every fully descends to the savagery of caged rats, it is evident from the bunker denizens’ faces that they’re never too far away from doing so. This is a testament to everyone involved with the production.
Does this film show Hitler as a real human being? Yes. Hitler is kind and compassionate to many of the innocent people working for him, like Traudl. The film does not hold back on Hitler’s stern and borderline psychotic handling of his military advisors and political underlings though. The end result is a broken, pathetic, feeble man clinging desperately to power and delusions of grandeur. That is far more unsettling than any caricature will ever be, making this a powerful film that I think everyone should see.
RATING: 4.25 out of 5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)