Commentary 18 Aug 2012 04:11 am
Reaching into the Grabbag
In truth, I’ve been wholly absorbed and entertained by the political Presidential race. The choice of Ryan for Republican VP just made the whole thing so juicy, it’s all I can watch on tv. Even the Yankees have taken back seat to Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, et al. It was fabulous watching Ann Coulter throw a hissy fit after a Romney aide talked about RomneyCare in Massachusetts. She screamed on Hannity’s show demanding that the aide get fired. Hilarious and wonderful. A real Reality show.
I’ve had to wait a full week to be able to post this, sorry. However I couldn’t resist sharing it, and by now, you’ve probably all seen this . . .
Right after the announcement that Ryan was the Republican choice for VP,
this came in my email.
Spam
of a sort.
But pretty funny (and accurate).
________________________
Just released this week is the trailer to Toys in the Attic a mixed media animation feature directed by Jiri Barta. It was made in the Czech Republic. The film will play in NY next weekend as part of the International Children’s Film Festival. That will take place on:
Saturday & Sunday, August 25-26, 11:00am
at the IFC Center.
The English version of the film stars the voices of Forest Whitaker, Joan Cusack and Cary Elwes and is being released to theaters on September 7th.
Here’s that trailer:
________________________
- Movies I’ve seen this week are numerous.
It all started with ParaNorman, which I kinda liked even though I didn’t find it as dramatic as I would have liked. The pacing seemed a little stodgy until the big climax at the end. And then it turned a bit too preachy in its obviousness. However, the animation is slick almost to the point where it vies with cg for fluidity. I still like my puppet animation in the Ray Harryhausen mode; I want to see the fingerprints on the puppets. George Pal seemed to have it down perfectly, and there was something to the great design of Pal’s animated films. No other like them, he was a total original. The ParaNormal characters look like they might have been designed for a Sony cg film.
However the film is very amiable and I have no real complaints. It beats out the Ice Age films.
You can see my full out review here. I also did a talkback at the screening with the two directors, Chris Butler and Sam Fell. They both seem to be intelligent and knowledgeable guys with a real love for animation.
The NYTimes‘ Manohla Dargis loved the film. “The story . . . is principally a vehicle for the movie’s meticulously detailed pictorial beauty, which turns each scene into an occasion for discovery and sometimes delight.”
The NYDaily News‘ Joe Neumaier wasn’t so thrilled with the film. “The 12-year-old boys who go to see “ParaNorman†— and who are the only ones who might enjoy it — should double up on the sugary treats to stay awake during this gorgeous-looking but zombi-fied stop-motion animated creep show. It’s as slow as a corpse, and half as interesting.”
The NYPost‘s lead critic Lou Leminick loved it. “So good, it’s scary.” ““ParaNorman’’ is probably the year’s most visually dazzling movie so far, and the stunning climax centering on an 11-year-old witch is too good to spoil.
Let’s just say this is the first movie this year that warrants a 3-D surcharge.”
- On Tuesday I saw a double feature:
The Campaign, the Will Ferrell and Zach Galifanaikis film which parodies the political battling going on around us as the two play two candidates vying for Congress. Shoddy politics play out even before either of them are elected. This is funny. Funnier than I expected but not as funny or serious as it should have been. 2 stars.
The Awakening was a British ghost story that just didn’t make it. Rebecca Hall‘s a fantastic actress as is Imelda Staunton. That didn’t matter for this film. It was dead on arrival. The ghosts in ParaNorman were more fun. 1 star for the great camerawork.
- On Thursday I saw a small little film; Robot and Frank did matter that Frank Langella
starred in it. This guy is a great talent and can bring anything to life, including this movie and the robot that works for him. (Though Peter Sarsgaard‘s voice of the robot makes it quite creepy.) It’s a sweet little film that’s pleasantly short. A nice metaphor between an aging forgetful man and a robot that wants to have his brain rebooted so he can’t testify against the inveterate thief. However, a couple of scenes, particularly one toward the end between Langella and Susan Sarandon make you realize how good the film should have been if the script and direction were better. 3 stars because it should’ve been better.
Thad Komorowski has an excellent article on his blog What About Thad which talks about Paul Murry and Dick Huemer‘s work.
Thad is doing a followup to the new
The Adventures of Buck O’ Rue book currently out on the market. This book is a collection of rare comic strips by Huemer and Murry of a short lived strip.
The article includes plenty of Scrappy talk and links to many interviews.
- Bill Benzon has an absolutely great piece on his blog, The New Savannah. He reviews the under appreciated Winsor McCay gem, The Pet. He takes a break from his detailed analysis of Disney’s Dumbo to review this movie (which he also adds to his post), and it’s worth the read. Please do it before Bill Plympton tries to rescue this film, too – or maybe I should have said wrest this film from the history of Winsor McCay.
- Speaking of Bill Plympton and Winsor McCay, his bastardized version of McCay’s film, The Flying House, is now available on DVD. I’m included as part of an amateur documentary included saying how much I dislike what Plympton has done. The one good piece on the DVD is a fake documentary (also amateur production values) supposedly showing where McCay had lived. Among the ruins Bill finds a discarded McCay film, which turns out to be . . . . but tnen, this is the only good joke on the entire video, so I won’t give it away in case you persist in buying this.
I’ve tried in vain to find a link so that you can buy the DVD. None are out there, so I assume it hasn’t been released officially. I’ve linked to Plympton’s own site where it should eventually show up. Go here.
- I’ve been going crazy (a good thing, I think) animating and reanimating and reanimating a scene from the opening sequence for POE. It’s taken a while, but I think I’ve finally gotten something of a style for the film which will enable me to incorporate all that Tissa’s done with new work from lesser animators and artists. In all honesty, the color styling and photography of the poor film I saw this week, The Awakening (see above), led me to it. That film was bad enough, but my mind was completely overwhelmed with thoughts of the work I was doing at home. Thank you Academy for getting me to that film, thank you Tissa for being so brilliant, thank you Daumier for all the inspiration, and, especially, thank you all you investors at Indiegogo for making it possible for me to work on this.
By the way, investors, the goodies are in process right now, and you should have the promised benefits heading your way, soon. I’m sorry for the delay.
on 18 Aug 2012 at 7:07 am 1.Elliot Cowan said …
We saw The Campaign last week.
It’s a missed opportunity but I haven’t laughed so much at the movies in a long time.
The scene where the kids were confessing their sins had me in tears.
on 18 Aug 2012 at 2:57 pm 2.The Gee said …
This post’s has a lot of gems in it.
When you wrote that “Thad is doing a followup to the new
The Adventures of Buck O’ Rue bookâ€, I have to ask:
In what way?
–
Related to that comic strip. I don’t believe I was the least bit familiar with that strip prior to the book being released. So, it is new to me. But, the title character’s name kind of bugged me because it didn’t seem to flow right. It’s a solid name. Don’t get me wrong. It is that it was bugging me.
It wasn’t until I read this and what Thad wrote that I realized the name is probably intended to be a pun. But, after a quick date check, does anyone know if that was the final version of the name or if an earlier version was considered?
Buck O’Rue works pretty good as a pun on BUCKAROO. But, in 1950, the comic strip King Aroo was already in production. King Aroo, from what I can tell, was likely an intentional pun on KANGAROO. In fact, the strip has a kangaroo in it (though, the examples I have seen didn’t; Wikipedia says it does have one in it though).
So, I am curious if “Buck Aroo†had been considered or not. It is a minor point. Most likely, Buck O’Rue works out better and fits the character like a glove. (i have yet to read much of it beyond what was posted on the Splog).
—
It’s great to hear anything about where “Poe†is at. I’m glad to hear you solved a problem that was being a thorn in the side. It sounds cool.
—
McCay’s “The Pet†is just wonderfully bizarre. And, I just remembered: I want to say that he actually did a similar story in one of his Rarebit Fiends comics. It didn’t go as far as the animated version goes. But, it starts either the same way or similarly. I wish I could recall where and when I saw that.
(also hope it wasn’t the result of one of those dreams caused by rarebit fiends. haha)
—
Finally, I had not see those two political images. I don’t mind them one bit but I admit I am really glad I don’t get stuff like that. I suppose there’s an abundance of photoshopped stuff like that in every election year.
Heck, I guess for some maybe it’s been a non-stop thing to make or to send or receive stuff like that for about 12 years now.
on 19 Aug 2012 at 7:19 pm 3.Thad said …
I believe Michael was simply stating that my post itself was a “follow-up” to the recent release of BUCK O’ RUE. I don’t have any books or projects in development on that or Dick Huemer.
I sort of want to see that DVD of Bill Plympton’s ‘remake’ of FLYING HOUSE. I only saw a workprint of it that he screened when he was at Cornell last year. I was kind of stymied at the time and am now even more so, because I can’t imagine what possessed Bill to undertake such a pointless project. I hope he redirects his time more appropriately and creates another original gem of his own.
on 19 Aug 2012 at 8:18 pm 4.Michael said …
You’re right about what I intended, Thad. You’re also right about Bill Plympton’s efforts on reworking Winsor McCay’s film. If, instead of try to “reconstruct” the film, Bill actually redid the film with his own sensibilities and his own comments, the film would have had some strong merit. Unfortunately, trying to make McCay’s film, he lets us see only a non-thinking disrespect for what McCay was doing. It’s so unfortunate.
The amateur documentary he’s made where he, Bill Plympton, discovers a “long lost” film by McCay is an original and absolutely hilarious. It shows Bill laughing at himself while making use of McCay’s name and work. It’s a good and solid joke that makes for a better film than the reconstruction of THE FLYING HOUSE.
on 21 Aug 2012 at 11:01 am 5.Doug said …
I would be tempted to get the Plympton DVD if, and only if, he included the original McCay version of the film. But, then again, I don’t wish my dollars to be any justification for what he did with The Flying House.
I wrote to Mr. Plympton with my thoughts and criticisms of what he was undertaking with McCay’s film and never heard back, not that I expected to (and I’m sure he had his hands full fielding criticisms from folk who are in the industry, which I am not).
I don’t think you can respect someone’s work by editing/changing it and then stamping (or should I say STOMPING?) your name on it. Sorry Bill, but its hard to justify this project.
on 21 Aug 2012 at 3:15 pm 6.Michael said …
The original McCay film is included on this DVD package. It as free for him to add the McCay film, and Bill gets credit for adding it in there.
on 21 Aug 2012 at 8:12 pm 7.The Gee said …
Sorry I didn’t see this earlier.
I misunderstood that bit about the “follow-upâ€.
There’s that discussion on Cartoon Brew where some are poohpooh-ing the Public Domain works.
The only real defense to remaking the McCay film is that it CAN be remade.
It may not the best use of creating a New Work but he can.
That said, I’ve expressed myself before about whether or not he should have put his signature style to the flesh out them bones. As others have said, that would have been worthwhile for the audience. It certainly would have made it more likely to be seen as worthwhile from anyone.
But, it exists. I hope he makes his money back. But, after spending that time making it, go for the New New!