Skip to main content

Someone’s got the cheese fits again.

The Boxtrolls
(2014)

I’m not quite sure how The Boxtrolls scored an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Feature. Perhaps it was purely on the basis of the stop motion craftsmanship, rather than the film as a whole? It’s good news for Laika, the studio behind it, which is three-for-three in Academy Awards nods (or four-for-four, including their contract work on Corpse Bride), but in terms of storytelling they’re suffering diminishing returns.


Perhaps this is explained by the quality of the source material of their first feature, Coraline. Certainly, it’s way out in front of both this and Paranorman. And Paranorman is superior in turn to The Boxtrolls. Based on Alan Snow’s 2006 novel Here Be Monsters!, Graham Annable and Antony Stacchi’s movie (from a screenplay by Travis Knight and David Ichioka) concerns the attempts to exterminate the titular creatures from the town of Cheesebridge. Take a wild guess as to its most prolific product; the fromage-based gags are actually one of the picture’s better features.


Laika have been bigged up as a progressive studio, but their commentary on prejudice and class boundaries here is as subtle as an Edam brick. The trolls are made out to be child-eating monsters, pursued by pest exterminator Archibald Snatcher (Ben Kingsley). Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Everyone judges by appearances, and beneath their grotesque, grunting exteriors lurk hearts of gold. They raise a boy named Eggs (Game of Thrones’ Isaac Henpstead-Wright) as their own and, equipped with his very own troll box, he believes himself to be one of their kind (somehow, Eggs also develops the ability to speak human). The Boxtrolls are merely the lowest rung of the class ladder. Their oppressor, Snatcher, longs to sit at high (cheese) table with the council of White Hats who run Cheesebridge. He has been dangled the carrot of his very own white hat if he rids the town of Boxtrolls.


On the council is Lord Portley-Rind (Jared Harris), a remote and absent father whose stuck up daughter Winnie (Elle Fanning) becomes entangled in the fates of Eggs and the Boxtrolls. This is fairly crude stuff, perfectly admirable in terms of moral lessons, but too schematic to really have a heart. Eggs isn’t just an orphan urchin, but the offspring of the town’s greatest inventor, one of such estimable character that he made friends and entertained the Boxtrolls while other shunned them. The picture is too nice to really have any teeth beneath its surface level fascination with bodily function jokes and utterly evil schemes; none of the trolls have been exterminated after all, and Eggs’ dad is perfectly all right (well, as much as he can be voiced by Simon Pegg).


While the stop motion animation is very good, there’s something possible a bit too polished about it, as if the edges have been rubbed off. It’s no wonder some have mistaken it for CGI (particularly when studios have gone down the route of producing CGI animations in stop motion style). There’s a grotesquery to the designs that, the Snatcher aside, comes across as rather generic and lacking in flair. Added to this, the colour palate is unremittingly dull and muddy, as if Laika are intent on sucking all vitality from the screen.


If the technical side is accomplished, it’s rarely matched by the onscreen antics, then. There’s one absolute standout, and that’s Ben Kingsley’s villainous voice work as Snatcher. It’s one to cherish, up there with his OTT characters in Sexy Beast and Iron Man Three, and the animators are clearly enthused by the opportunity to add body to the part. Snatcher is visualised with more than a touch of Timothy Spall by way of Gerald Scarfe, complete with an allergic reaction to cheese that causes him to hallucinate; the latter owes a debt to Eddie Murphy’s rubbery transformations in Nutty Professor.  


Kingsley relishes Snatcher’s malicious glee, and the exaggeration of his character is the closest Boxtrolls comes to Roald Dahl-esque black comedy (with a bit of Monty Python’s Meaning of Life thrown in for his explosive demise). The makers are careful even here, however, offering Snatcher redemption (“They don’t make you. You make you,” pleads Eggs/the Trubshaw Baby, addressing the illusory nature of Snatcher’s sought-after acceptance by high society).


Kingsley also has the chance to double up, as Madame Frou-Frou Snatcher’s anti-Boxtroll propaganda spouting alter ego. That Lord Portley-Rind finds Frou-Frou alluring is typical of picture that only goes in obvious directions, however (“Oh my God, I regret so much” he comments on learning the truth). They’ve even cast Nick Frost and Richard Ayoade as henchmen, whose initially clever dialogue (“You really think these Boxtrolls understand the duality of good and evil?”) grows stale. Even the meta- discussion at the end is a bit of a fizzle.


It isn’t unusual for the villains or supporting characters in an animation to be the strongest part of the picture, but in The Boxtrolls the leads are particularly weak. There isn’t much to them, aside from tapping into kids’ fascination with vulgarity (wee jokes, bare bottoms, eating grubs, regurgitating food). I’m not sure if the stiffy joke at the end was intentional (one of the now-naked trolls holds out a remote control in a suggestive position), but it wouldn’t be a surprise (there are gags about scratching one’s privates).


Stop motion animation can find wide audiences, as Aardman has proved, if not nearly as wide as CGI, but Laika appears to be ploughing a perversely narrow path of over-earnest moralising, unattractive design work and charmless characterisation. If their storytelling were up to the standard of their technique, they’d be bagging the Best Animated Picture Oscar every time.


Comments

  1. A delightful film and the animation is brilliant. It's not a dramatic commentary on the human condition... or is it?

    This review is unimaginative and demonstrates the author completely lacks any appreciation for just plain fun story telling. Maybe if it had scads of bare breasts or butchered unsuspecting university students...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hmmm, maybe. But I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel (2019)
(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

Basically, you’re saying marriage is just a way of getting out of an embarrassing pause in conversation?

Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994)
(SPOILERS) There can be a cumulative effect from revisiting a movie where one glaring element does not fit, however well-judged or integrated everything else is; the error is only magnified, and seems even more of a miscalculation. With Groundhog Day, there’s a workaround to the romance not working, which is that the central conceit of reliving your day works like a charm and the love story is ultimately inessential to the picture’s success. In the case of Four Weddings and a Funeral, if the romance doesn’t work… Well, you’ve still got three other weddings, and you’ve got a funeral. But our hero’s entire purpose is to find that perfect match, and what he winds up with is Andie McDowell. One can’t help thinking he’d have been better off with Duck Face (Anna Chancellor).

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

Our very strength incites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict... breeds catastrophe.

The MCU Ranked Worst to Best

Do you read Sutter Cane?

In the Mouth of Madness (1994)
(SPOILERS) The concluding chapter of John Carpenter’s unofficial Apocalypse Trilogy (preceded by The Thing and Prince of Darkness) is also, sadly, his last great movie. Indeed, it stands apart in the qualitative wilderness that beset him during the ‘90s (not for want of output). Michael De Luca’s screenplay had been doing the rounds since the ‘80s, even turned down by Carpenter at one point, and it proves ideal fodder for the director, bringing out the best in him. Even cinematographer Gary K Kibbe seems inspired enough to rise to the occasion. It could do without the chugging rawk soundtrack, perhaps, but then, that was increasingly where Carpenter’s interests resided (as opposed to making decent movies).

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…

Only an idiot sees the simple beauty of life.

Forrest Gump (1994)
(SPOILERS) There was a time when I’d have made a case for, if not greatness, then Forrest Gump’s unjust dismissal from conversations regarding its merits. To an extent, I still would. Just not nearly so fervently. There’s simply too much going on in the picture to conclude that the manner in which it has generally been received is the end of the story. Tarantino, magnanimous in the face of Oscar defeat, wasn’t entirely wrong when he suggested to Robert Zemeckis that his was a, effectively, subversive movie. Its problem, however, is that it wants to have its cake and eat it.

Do not mention the Tiptoe Man ever again.

Glass (2019)
(SPOILERS) If nothing else, one has to admire M Night Shyamalan’s willingness to plough ahead regardless with his straight-faced storytelling, taking him into areas that encourage outright rejection or merciless ridicule, with all the concomitant charges of hubris. Reactions to Glass have been mixed at best, but mostly more characteristic of the period he plummeted from his must-see, twist-master pedestal (during the period of The Village and The Happening), which is to say quite scornful. And yet, this is very clearly the story he wanted to tell, so if he undercuts audience expectations and leaves them dissatisfied, it’s most definitely not a result of miscalculation on his part. For my part, while I’d been prepared for a disappointment on the basis of the critical response, I came away very much enjoying the movie, by and large.