Skip to main content

I’m going to destroy the forest. But I’m only going to do it once, so try to pay attention.

Epic
(2013)

The second adaptation of a William Joyce book in as many years (The Leaf Men and the Brave Good Bugs), Epic’s eco-fable in miniature has considerable merit. It is structurally more satisfying than Joyce’s fairy-tale-characters-super-team Rise of the Guardians (that movie wastes its high concept premise). Yet it suffers from an inability to trust in its more distinctive (better) ideas. The production team clearly felt it necessary to punch up the proceedings with standard animation plot devices and supporting characters, which cumulatively neuter the movie as a whole.


Maybe they were right; maybe the idea wasn’t sufficiently “exciting”. Epic didn’t do a whole lot of business in comparison to the more popular Pixar and DreamWorks animation brands (although the latter met with double disappointments over the last 12 months; both Rise of the Guardians and Turbo significantly underperformed). Blue Sky Studios, the animation house behind Epic, is owned by 20th Century Fox (who, somewhat greedily, also struck a distribution deal with DreamWorks this year) and has seen extraordinary success with the Ice Age franchise. Their other pictures have been less prolific; Rio was a reasonable performer but, as with all their pictures, it did considerably better internationally than in the States. Chris Wedge, VP of Blue Sky, is a multi-tasking producer, writer, and even actor (he voices Scrat in the Ice Age films) but Epic is his first directing effort since 2005’s Robots.


And it shows similar signs of Robots’ rocky road of development, banging a less standard idea into a more homogenous shape. Wedge himself admitted he was pushing readily identifiable touchstones on a young audience attuned to a diet of sequels and anthropomorphic sidekicks when he referred to Joyce’s story as “quaint” and said they had turned it into a “gigantic action adventure”. Presumably this was with Joyce’s full endorsement, since he is one of the six credited writers (his involvement in the movie world extends as far back as Toy Story).


Joyce and Wedge earlier collaborated on Robots, making it even more likely that he is sanguine over the financial necessities of distorting a text from its original shape. The most notable name on the writers’ list is James V. Hart, whose career (mostly literary adaptations) has taken in highs such as Contact and The Last Mimzy and lows including Hook and the second Tomb Raider. Perhaps he was called on to take a pass at the tale’s message (since it is more-often-than-not a pre-eminent feature of his scripts) while Tom J Astle and Matt Ember handled the slapstick and sight gags.


Either way, one gets the impression there was the potential to envisage an environment as potent as, say, The Dark Crystal. Joyce’s take on the natural world is one of a struggle between decay and growth as personified by the frightful Boggans and the goodly Leafmen. It’s a premise pregnant with philosophical potential. But then we discover that the wise queen of the Leafmen is voiced by Beyoncé Knowles, who also contributes a song to the soundtrack. It’s one of numerous examples of Blue Sky attempting to copy the marketing of their peers but lacking the slickness to fully deliver.


The queen picks her heir from a selection of unimbued leaf pods, but dies during an attack by the Boggans. She passes on the responsibility of seeing the pod to bloom to a human girl named C.K. (Amanda Siegfried), who is miraculously shrunk to insect size in the process. Should the pod flower in darkness, it will become a tool of destruction.


It’s hard to say if the half dozen writers have the Boggans in mind as representations of the evils of industrialisation, since their destructiveness appears simply one of rot and detritus. As such, one might expect a recognition somewhere of the need for balance between the two opposing forces (creation and entropy). If it’s there, it’s rather lost. As others have pointed out, the finished article is too derivative of other pictures, both in design and content (who could say that of The Dark Crystal, for all its faults?) There’s the jungle/forest idyll under threat (Ferngully: The Last Rainforest) and the (diminutive) people attuned to their natural environment (Avatar) who invite an outsider in, the key to their salvation (Avatar). Less aspirationally, the shrunken daughter and the goofy father/inventor are a direct lift from Honey I Shrunk the Kids. Throw in such stock tropes as the rebellious teenager, a couple of comic sidekicks (a slug and a snail), action-friendly set pieces (there’s an undisguised borrowing of The Phantom Menace’s pod race) and you get a movie whose personality has been focus-grouped into submission.


So it’s fortunate for Wedge then, that the picture is structurally quite tight. Heavy weather is made of the grieving human family in the early stages (C.K. has lost her mother, her father is lost in his work), but once she has been shrunk (in a visually clever sequence that allows the viewer to travel with C.K., only realising that she has reduced in size as the process ends) Epic begins to hit its marks and eventually brings back the dotty father (whose life’s mission has been to confirm the existence of the Leafmen) to help win the day.


The writing team weave some interesting ideas into the mix, in respect of both nature religions (the importance of the full moon and solstice are stressed as a means for the queen’s heir to reach germination) and whacky science (M.K.’s father believes humans look big and dumb and slow to a fly because each exists in a different dimension). But a strong theme such as the interconnectedness of things takes on all the profundity of a glib moral when filtered through the studio cookie cutter (“No one is alone”). There is the occasional moment you can’t imagine a Pixar picture permitting. For one thing, the tone is generally darker (most likely the reason for the overkill comic relief), but Wedge is also willing to roll with an anti-intuitive sequence such as the one where a cute little mouse revealed as a blood-curdling monster (there’s an amusingly morbid gag about the life cycle of a fruit fly too).


The voice cast is typically bloated with star names, although in this case they tend not to draw attention to themselves (Beyonce and Chris O’Dowd aside). Colin Farrell is solid as the elder warrior, although Christoph Walz’s Mandrake is an unexceptional villain. Steve Tyler plays a “wise” glowworm. Naturally, he also contributes to the soundtrack. This is one of those movies of selective anthropomorphism; most of the characters are flora and fauna of the forest kingdom. There are talking plant people and madcap molluscs. Yet there are also dogs and birds and mice and deer that are just plain old creatures of instinct (it’s the Mickey Mouse/Pluto thing all over again).


In some ways attempts by the lesser (as in, not the Big Two) animation houses to follow the success plan of the finely honed majors are all the more infuriating. The CGI-animated market place is well and truly a glut, but it appears to be dictating less, not more, variety. With Epic it’s the characters that suffer; they’re either unmemorable or over-familiar and you can be sure they’ve intentionally had any edges removed. Maybe Blue Sky is correct to think that way; maybe the kiddies wouldn’t want to see a version of Epic without talking slugs and snappy colloquialisms. It’s the same with the instant familiarity of the design work; the forest vistas are impressive, as are the uses of perspective between the macro and microenvironments, but there’s no personality to the character work. William Joyce appears adept at coming up with arresting ideas, so much so that its incumbent on those thinking about the bottom line to make sure they aren’t too arresting, too atypical, too disdainful of formula.


***

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Dude. You’re my hero and shit.

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
(SPOILERS) I was going to say I’d really like to see what Vince Gilligan has up his sleeve besidesBreaking Bad spinoffs. But then I saw that he had a short-lived series on CBS a few years back (Battle Creek). I guess things Breaking Bad-related ensure an easy greenlight, particularly from Netflix, for whom the original show was bread and butter in its take up as a streaming platform. There’s something slightly dispiriting about El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, though. Not that Gilligan felt the need to return to Jesse Pinkman – although the legitimacy of that motive is debatable – but the desire to re-enter and re-inhabit the period of the show itself, as if he’s unable to move on from a near-universally feted achievement and has to continually exhume it and pick it apart.

Two hundred thousand pounds, for this outstanding example of British pulchritude and learning.

The Avengers 4.18: The Girl From Auntie
I’ve mentioned that a few of these episodes have changed in my appreciation since I last watched the series, and The Girl from Auntie constitutes a very pronounced uptick. Indeed, I don’t know how I failed to rate highly the estimable Liz Fraser filling in for Diana Rigg – mostly absent, on holiday –for the proceedings (taking a not dissimilar amateur impostor-cum-sidekick role to Fenella Fielding in the earlier The Charmers). I could watch Fraser all day, and it’s only a shame this was her single appearance in the show.

The past is a statement. The future is a question.

Justified Season Six
(SPOILERS) There have been more than enough damp squib or so-so show finales of late to have greeted the demise of Justified with some trepidation. Thankfully it avoids almost every pitfall it might have succumbed to and gives us a satisfying send-off that feels fitting for its characters. This is a series that, even at its weakest (the previous season) is leagues ahead of most fare in an increasingly saturated sphere, so it’s a relief – even if there was never much doubt on past form – that it doesn’t drop the ball.

And of those character fates? In a show that often pulls back from giving Raylan Givens the great hero moments (despite his maintaining a veneer of ultra-cool, and getting “supporting hero” moments as he does in the finale, 6.13 The Promise), it feels appropriate that his entire (stated) motivation for the season should be undermined. He doesn’t get to take down Boyd Crowder, except in an incarcerating sense, but as always he is sanguine about it. After…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

You’re only seeing what’s in front of you. You’re not seeing what’s above you.

Mr. Robot Season 2
(SPOILERS) I suspect my problem with Mr. Robot may be that I want it to be something it isn’t, which would entail it being a much better show than it is. And that’s its own fault, really, or rather creator and writer-director of umpteen episodes Sam Esmail’s, who has intentionally and provocatively lured his audience into thinking this really is an up-to-the-minute, pertinent, relevant, zeitgeisty show, one that not only has a huge amount to say about the illusory nature of our socio-economic system, and consequently the bedrock of our collective paradigm, but also the thorny subject of reality itself, both of which have been variably enticing dramatic fodder since the Wachowski siblings and David Fincher released a one-two punch at the end of the previous millennium.

In that sense, Mr. Robot’s thematic conceit is very much of a piece with its narrative form; it’s a conjuring act, a series of sleights of hand designed to dazzle the viewer into going with the flow, rath…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

It’s the Mount Everest of haunted houses.

The Legend of Hell House (1973)
(SPOILERS) In retrospect, 1973 looks like a banner year for the changing face of the horror movie. The writing was on the wall for Hammer, which had ruled the roost in Britain for so long, and in the US the release of The Exorcist completed a transformation of the genre that had begun with Polanski’s Rosemary’s Baby; the realistic horror film, where the terror was to be found in the everyday (the home, the family). Then there was Don’t Look Now, which refracted horror tropes through a typically Nic Roeg eye, fracturing time and vision in a meditative exploration of death and grief. The Wicker Man, meanwhile, would gather its reputation over the passing years. It stands as a kind of anti-horror movie, eschewing standard scares and shock tactics for a dawning realisation of the starkness of opposing belief systems and the fragility of faith.

In comparison to this trio, The Legend of Hell House is something of a throwback; its slightly stagey tone, and cobweb…