| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Joe Blevins 
"Don't I look handsome?"
|
 Posted - 12/29/2009 : 03:23:50
|
I saw two films over the Christmas holiday, and I thought I might as well share my thoughts about them here.
First up was Disney's The Princess & The Frog. Naturally, the most-intriguing aspect of this one was that it was the studio's much-heralded return to traditional cel animation. On a purely visual level, Princess is an absolute delight: marvelously designed characters and sumptuous backdrops. The voice cast is, as usual in a Disney film, top notch as well. As for the music, there have been some quibbles about Randy Newman's songs, but I thought they worked extremely well within the context of the film. They're not necessarily memorable enough to be stand-alone songs (even the best of them wouldn't quite have made the cut on Newman's Good Old Boys LP), but they help to establish mood, advance the plot, and reveal character. The film also has a good message about how just wishing for things isn't enough and how one must work hard to make one's dreams come true.
Considering all this, why does Princess feel like a just-okay film instead of an instant classic? Frankly, I had some major issues with the script. The main character, Tiana, is a smart, capable, talented young woman who has set a goal for herself (owning a restaurant) and is working hard toward that goal. To me, she doesn't need any "fixing." But the movie sees it otherwise. The movie wants her to land a husband, too -- namely Prince Naveen, a spoiled, egocentric, womanizing jerk who gradually learns how to behave like a decent human being and (theoretically) becomes worthy of Tiana over the course of the movie's running time. The whole voodoo-spell-turning-into-frogs thing is just the script's convoluted way of getting these two people together. I wasn't entirely convinced that Tiana needed Prince Naveen, but seemingly everybody in the movie (except the villains, of course) was pushing for this superfluous relationship. After Up and The Incredibles, this felt like a major step backwards, storywise.
~~~~~~~
Sherlock Holmes caught me somewhat off guard. It is, there's no way around it, a movie about two men who are clearly attracted to one another and cannot bring themselves to admit it out loud. To me, that relationship -- not the actual mystery at hand -- is the central issue of this movie. Holmes and Watson are each involved in heterosexual relationships, but have an undeniable sexual chemistry with each other. The totally-in-denial Watson is even engaged to a woman and is trying to separate himself from the jealous and possessive Holmes. But, of course, Watson cannot tear himself away entirely from Holmes, nor would we want him to. Holmes and Watson are never happier than when they're on a case together, but Watson has to pretend to be moving on with his life. The actors really make this work. Robert Downey, Jr. really makes us feel Holmes' melancholy at the thought of losing Watson. There is a truly fascinating and compelling love quadrangle in Sherlock Holmes. I hope there is a sequel so we can see how this plays out.
Meanwhile, some purists have quibbled with the concept of turning Holmes into an action hero. To that, I would say that the character has already been repurposed, reimagined, and parodied in dozens of different ways, so why not let him be an action hero? He's been almost everything else by this point. To me, the definitive filmed version of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Holmes is the marvelous TV series with Jeremy Brett. This new Holmes is not for Doyle purists by any means. But then again, neither were:
* Young Sherlock Holmes
* Without a Clue
* Disney's The Great Mouse Detective
* The bizarre George C. Scott film They Might Be Giants
* Gene Wilder's The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother
* The animated series Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd Century
* The "Sherlock Hemlock" skits on Sesame Street
* A thousand other Holmes spinoffs
To me, this new film is just the latest wild take on the classic character and is actually more reverent than most of what I just listed. I highly enjoyed it. |
|
|
ChocolateLady 
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 12/29/2009 : 09:40:19
|
I'm sorry, but in regards to Princess, it sounds like they turned the story completely on its ear. The original fairytale is about a flawed princess. The frog was partially a victim of circumstance - caught in a spell by a wicked witch (much like the Beast in Beauty and the Beast). Okay, so he was turned into a frog because he was vain, but still... The lessons of the two stories are similar - the girl needs to learn to accept someone as they are on the inside, and ignore their outer appearance, while the guy needs to change what is on the inside so that he is worthy of being loved. With The Princess and the Frog, there's an additional lesson she has to learn - that is responsibility. She promised to take care with the golden ball and yet she takes it outside to the pond and lets it fall in. Then she makes a promise to the frog that she doesn't intend to keep, because she thinks the frog won't be able to get to the castle. She takes advantage of the frog, in order not to get in trouble with her father. When the frog actually does show up and she is forced to tell her father what happened and what she promised, her father tells her that "a promise is a promise" and makes her keep it. (You can tell it was a story I read to my kids often when they were little, because I thought the lesson was such a valuable one.)
From what you describe of this new version, it is only the guy who is the lout, and the girl is basically perfect. While both sides of this basic plot (nasty guy wins good girl by becoming nice, or nasty girl wins good guy by becoming nice) have been told in a billion movies before, I think I like the concept of the original better. Moreover, it sounds like the lesson here is "a woman must have a husband to be totally fulfilled", and that's a disgusting message to send little girls - especially today.
Why isn't it an instant classic? It sounds to me that the main reason is because they updated and changed the original story so much that it is no longer recognizable as being in the least bit related to the classic fairytale we all know and love.
quote:
After Up and The Incredibles, this felt like a major step backwards, storywise.
Ah, but Up and The Incredibles were both Pixar films, and this is Disney Studios - so of course it would be lacking, storywise. But even for Disney, it sounds like a step backwards. A better comparison would be Bolt, and despite how disappointing that movie was for me, it did have a far more creative storyline than this one sounds like it has.
|
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 12/29/2009 09:45:22 |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/16/2010 : 16:18:01
|
The Princess and the Frog
The most important thing about this film is that it is Disney's first that I know of with a black leading character. They have had quite a few who are not European Caucasians, but it was high time that they had a black hero or heroine. As a result, though, she is a very safe and too perfect character: they were obviously afraid of having a too-flawed black lead. Conversely, while there is a black baddie too, Disney is keen to have lots of negative stereotypes as the white characters -- a rich plantation owner type and his spoilt daughter, a sycophantic/bitter ???British??? butler and a family of buck-toothed rednecks.
Tiana's only fault seems to be that she is a workaholic and is missing out on having fun in life. I disagree that the message really is that one should work hard (although that is there too) -- when she takes this as the message from a song (instead of finding love), another character corrects her. And, frankly, love is the most important thing in life, far above building a business. The tone isn't that a woman needs a husband, but that people need love. (It's made explicit that that was the most important thing for her father, who like Tiana wanted to open a restaurant.)
Where is Prince Naveen's country supposed to be? His name is Indian and his father looks more Asian than African. Anyway, the main thing is that he is the hottest Disney character ever. 
Because I still feel so warm towards Disney showing more diversity, 4/5. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/16/2010 : 17:36:50
|
Sherlock Holmes
O.K., the plot (especially certain steps of it -- um, how did you get on top of a bridge?) and blue/green screen (bridge again) are rather shaky, but on top of the fact that Robert Downey, Jr. can do no wrong in my eyes I did enjoy the characterisation in this version.
I didn't pick up on any sexual tension when I saw it but it's a nice idea and reading Joe's comment prompted me to submit this review.
4/5 |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 11/21/2010 14:07:17 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Sherlock Holmes/Princess & The Frog
