Skip to main content

What's going on 'ere?

The Secret Life of Pets
(2016)

(SPOILERS) As engineers of multi-layered screenplays, Chris Meledandri’s Illumination Entertainment are great gag writers. While Pixar slides inexorably into a stew of incontinent sequels and repetitive emotional journeys (in which every single director has to ram home the point of inclusiveness and family ad nauseam), Universal has struck a distinctive path which is, in its own way, just as unbalanced. Refreshingly, they’re not really very comfortable with all that disposably sincere, touchy-feely stuff, much keener just to get on with delivering the punchlines, but they fall short in addressing the consequences. Since they aren’t able to command cinema attendance on the basis of a five-minute short – except preceding the main featurette –  they have to somehow inflate the remaining 85 minutes with an encumbrance called plot. The Secret Life of Pets is stuffed full of great visual jokes and sly, and crude, observational humour, but it doesn’t wholly satisfy as a rounded feature, at least not in the way the best of the last two decades of CGI animation do.


And that’s because no one here seems really invested in telling a story. That should be no surprise with Chris Renaud of the Despicable Mes co-directing (even the first was thin on plot), with first-timer Yarrow Cheney (set to tackle a remake of How the Grinch Stole Christmas next).  So too the writers, though collectively seasoned, lack credits screaming substance.  Brian Lynch co-wrote Minions, similarly big on set-pieces and wafer-thing on the joining material, while Ken Daurio and Cinco Paul include other unremarkable Illumination fare on the resumés, as well as The Santa Clause 2. But they did deliver the screenplay for the really very good Horton Hears a Who! so they are capable when they put their minds to it.


Unlike the also animal-themed, alt-world Zootopia, Pets exists mostly as a peg on which to fasten a series of writers’ room brainstormed pet-based tickles. They’re good as far as they go, some hilarious, even though I continue to be amazed at just how acceptable piss and shit jokes are in U certificate movies –  what with the bare Minion arses pressing for attention in the preceding short, Illumination have no qualms about pandering to lowest common denominators – but the surrounding plot is strictly pedestrian. 


The idea (what animals get up to when their owners aren’t around) isn’t exactly a new one, the most recent iteration of note being Cats & Dogs (which, as here, egregiously offered canine rather than feline leads, and also like this one fails to realise that said felines service all the best characters and chuckles), and Renaud and Yarrow unleash a slew of animal vignettes, where they are rocking out to System of a Down, messing up the house, raiding the fridge, watching Spanish soaps (?), chasing butterflies or laser lights, and – yes – pissing and shitting. And the hit ratio is pretty high.


The problem with the picture isn’t so much the focus on a couple of hounds, it’s that that those hounds aren’t particularly endearing. Terrier Max (Louis C.K.) and pound-found Newfoundland Duke (Eric Stonestreet), vie for supremacy when Max’s dopey owner brings the latter home, despite the latter being aesthetically unappealing and having a personality to match. Max/C.K. is agreeable enough, if rather indifferent as protagonist pooches go, but Duke/Stonestreet is entirely unsympathetic, and because Illumination have little concept of character arcs (not that I’m necessarily suggesting they take notes from Pixar), we transition rather suddenly from finding him irksomely self-centred to being expected to give a flying Airedale for his fate.  


It might have been better if he had simply remained a bastard, but Illumination feels need to approximate the same beats as everyone else in town, because that’s the way all animations have to be (nothing like assuming your young audience is unable to assimilate a variety of storytelling modalities). Just as half-hearted is Max’s final scene reciprocation of love for Pomeranian Gidget (Jenny Slate), although this at least seems to be verging on acknowledging the artificial nature of such forced final curtain frivolities.


If Max and Duke are endorsement-challenged, the lead villain (Kevin Hart’s rabbit Snowball) isn’t up to scratch either. As the Empire review points out, the fluffy-but-fiendish cutie pie is an overdone gag at this point, and Hart’s quick-fire dialogue is also an overfamiliar and obvious choice. Not enough is made of his anti-owner bias, such that it services an ending where he too reverts to a cutesy pie pet. Other areas are also well-worn, but still have their stylistic merits, including a sausage factory dream sequence, and an old standby that never grows old: an animal in drag. This time it’s a pig dressed as a mother pushing a pram, adding a pleasingly warped quality to the picture for a moment or two.


And there’s enough solid observational material that the plot shortcomings aren’t a deal-breaker. Among several strong supporting characters are Albert Brooks’ red-tailed hawk Tiberius (Brooks is having a good voiceover summer, with this and Finding Dory), Chloe (Lake Bell), an obese tabby cat who looks down on dogs’ behaviour (unfortunately she also cares deep down; the gags where she doesn’t are terrific), and Pops, a wheel-based elderly basset hound with a cutting line in wizened, caustic dismissiveness (voiced by Dana Carvey, not that you’d realise).


Ozone, an underused scrawny Sphynx cat voiced by Steve Coogan, gets the prize for the best vocal characterisation, but he’s also the most inventively visualised. One noticeable aspect – as is inevitable with all the animation houses, to a greater or lesser extent – is Illumination’s signature style, from the Gru-esque mannerisms of Tiberius to the squirrels that sound a shade like Minions, so it’s very welcome to see a character so different.


Still, someone should really go for the full-on grotesque in a mainstream animation at some point, ploughing into Meet the Feebles territory, only without the prohibitive levels of jaundice and filth, to see if a shake-up can find a receptive audience. And definitely someone should call a moratorium on the incessant dance anthem cheese infecting every animation out there (“What do you mean?”, I hear you cry, “It’s the much loved singing twig starlet Taylor Swift”; here’s me pulling a cat face); this one has it plastered over the opening credits, while the Alexandre Desplat score itself is closer to a smug Randy Newman Pixar piece.


Pets’ 3D is frequently surprisingly in your face. I don’t know that I’m a huge fan of 3D used to throw things at the audience, but it works in context of a gag-based movie, even if they’re mostly more about shock value rather than funnies (ducking out the way of an alligator or viper).


I wouldn’t say The Secret Life of Pets is exactly a missed opportunity, then, since it largely makes the most of its potential for pet-based humour, but it fails to summon up anything new narratively (there’s even a tiresome final fight in which Chloe goes all Neo, out-of-the-blue, as if it wasn’t already passé when Kung Fu Panda did it seven years after Shrek). In some ways the Minions short is more successful than the main feature, not only because brevity shows them at their best, but because it highlights that there’s some way to go before Illumination can get a plot together you’re invested in; maybe Sing, in which a koala stages a, naturally, singing completion, will do that. Ironically, Zootopia took the reverse route to Pets; it wasn’t a particularly bust-a-gut movie, but succeeded because it was sufficiently confident in storytelling that it didn’t have to rely solely on emotional journeys or slapstick.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

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…

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…

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…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

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.

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

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 …