The Secret World of Arriety

A Little Family, and a Little Magic

Hayao Miyazaki is one of those names everyone knows. Some may not remember it right off the bat, but if you mention his movies they will know exactly who you are talking about. Those films include Spirited Away, Kiki's Delivery Service, Lupin the Third: The Castle of Cagliostro, and most recently, The Secret World of Arriety. The last one is only technically a Miyazaki film, as he was one of the screenwriters and did not direct the film. However, it was still animated by Studio Ghibli, and most people will automatically call this a Miyazaki film.

The film itself, par for the course with Ghibli, looks beautiful. Even if you're not a fan of Japanese animation, you can find something good to say about how Ghibli animates their movies. They're always rich in the art style.

As for the story, it's simple enough. The film is an adaptation of The Borrowers, a story I haven't read but understand the general concept of. It's about Arriety (Bridgit Mendler), a teenager living with her parents, who are all about four inches tall. They live inside the house of a regular sized human family. To live, they have to "borrow" the things they need to survive, and things that the humans would not miss or even notice was gone. There is an argument that they are outright stealing, considering things like sugar will be missed even and (expensive looking) earrings for the use of climbing walls are not something they really need to take and will without a doubt be missed. Does it make the protagonist look bad? Not really, it's something that can be easily overlooked. That being said, even a young child may come to the conclusion the heroes are thieves, and recognition would have been a good idea.

The human boy living in the house has a heart condition, one he does not believe he'll survive from. This has clearly mellowed and aged the boy, and brings some nice dimensions to him. He's the one who ends up accidentally seeing the borrowers, and despite her father's protests, ends up spending time with him and grows a bond. This causes the borrower family to decide to move away, as they believe living in secret is the only way to survive. Which is another confusing plot choice. The family, with the exception of the maid voiced by Carol Burnett, means no ill-will to the borrowers and admit they would work together with them to survive. This kind of fault is done in other movies of this sort, and it never makes any logical sense. It would have been nice to subvert this, but instead the movie plays it straight.

But the strong part of this movie, like other Ghibli films, it the characters and their relationship with each other. As said, the human boy has a nice mellow and matured personality, as well as deep cynicism that plays out well enough. However, he also has his moments of being wide-eyed and carefree, making him feel like a real boy. Arriety is also a nice character, strong-willed and knows what she wants to accomplish, and will do her best to do it. As for the others, none of them are weak, but nobody in this film is extremely memorable. This does not mean they are bad characters, they just don't compare to other Ghibli creations just as Chihiro or Kiki. Arriety herself isn't as strong a character as those two, despite being three-dimensional an enjoyable to watch.

The film itself is good, but is not as good as some of the other Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli films. The films gets a 3 out of 5. If you're interested in watching it, or if you love Miyazaki or animated films in general, it's worth checking out, even if it is a little weaker than other Miyazaki films.



Chronicle

Got It All On Film

Taking a look at the trailer for this film didn't exactly get my hopes up. The trailer made the characters look like uncaring jerks, who just spend the whole movie messing about and not caring what happens, something that seems common nowadays in horror movies, much to fan displeasure. However, the filmmakers clearly just needed a better looking trailer, as the film itself is very enjoyable.

Very early on in the film, we realize that our three main characters are very likable people. Yes, they have their bad moments, but they are very outweighed by their nice attitudes and genuine affection for each other. Not to mention, none of these characters are remotely stupid, one even has a profound sense of philosophy. They feel like real people, who can be jerks if they want to, but most of the time are very fun to be with and have a lot to say.

The film is shot similar to Blair Witch or Paranormal Activity, everything we see was recorded onto a camera, but it really isn't a found footage film like those are. Around twenty minutes or so into the film, we learn that any camera used by a character can and will become a POV shot in that scene, and the first video camera used for footage it outright lost, the trio never get to find and edit the footage. So the film is more of a POV film with camera being the POV, than found footage, which is a clever way to avoid the question "Just how did this footage all get edited together like this". We even get soundless, black-and-white security cameras in two scenes, the later during the climax. Said climax is very innovative, switching being points of view to capture completely different angles, and really catching your attention.

The film manages to be funny, depressing, action-packed, and downright frightening, all when it needs to be. Chronicle is a good watch, and well worth your money. It's 3.5 out of 5 stars. Skip the terrible trailer, and check out the film for yourself.

Ice Age

Frozen Climate, Heartwarming Film

Ice Age was the first film made by then newcomers Blue Sky Studios, and some argue it's their best. Personally, I agree, I grew up on this film and I absolutely love it. I am not the biggest fan of purely CG animated films, I prefer to jump at something traditionally drawn. However, there are the CG animated films that capture everything you should in a good film, and this is one of them without a doubt.

The film, and it's two sequels, a third one in production, have a cast of characters we are all familiar with by this point. We have Manfred, or Manny, the big guy who is arguably the most complex out of the main three. I won't spoil why, but later in the second act of the film, we get his back story. And the beauty of his back story is that he doesn't spit it out, he's not the one to tell us. The mammoth has become somewhat of a curmudgeon by the start of the film, and while he warms up to the others, it's not in his character to come out and explain who he is. He's a great character, he's understandable, and he's fleshed out, there's nothing more I could ask.

Diego and Sid have their share of great characterizations as well. To be fair though, Diego is a better character than Sid. Diego is a villain, but he's not really evil, unlike the film's main villain Soto. Soto is fueled by his own hatred, he doesn't want to an eye for an eye with the humans who killed most of his pack, he wants to make them suffer in the worst possible way by killing an infant. Diego is just following orders, we understand he's not keen on the idea, and he has himself treat the mission like any other, a quest for food. For someone who rarely likes the idea of a character being a villain just because they are a carnivore, this is a nice subversion and somewhat of a deconstruction. Sid on the other hand, is the goofy sidekick you find in a family film, but he's isn't annoying like some sidekicks can be. If anything, he's carefree, self centered but still caring, and childlike attitude acts like glue. He's the one keeping this group together, he's the closest thing these guys have to pure innocent outside of the human infant they have to return.

And of course there's Scrat, the even bigger comic relief. Scrat never talks, only interacts with the big three once, and is a barrel of laughs for the little kids and the adults. I don't have too much to say though. He serves his purpose well, and that's all I need to say.

And outside of characters, what do we get? Beautiful animation, a rich storyline that isn't afraid to wander between being dark and being uplifting, and comedy that isn't at all pandering or lazy, but thought out and clever. This is a very good film, the only negative thing I can say is the Blue Sky will most likely never top this film, at least for me, and considering it's the first, they may or may not be good for them.

This film is a solid 3.5 out of 5. I love this film, and many others do to. Pick it up if you can find it.

Hugo

Little Kid, Big Adventure

As I've stated before, children are not stupid. The only stupidity children have is from being young, and not knowing everything yet, and yet a fair amount of children's films seem to just plain think they are stupid. They are not just bad films, they are utterly insulting to both the children who will grow up to hate the films, and the parents who will know from the start they wasted their money taking their children to see the film or buying their own copy on DVD, Blu-ray, what have you. But when a children's film gets good, which is when I call it a family film, sometimes you can get instant classics that audiences will always remember. Hugo is easily one of these films, it's the best film I have yet to see made in 2011.

Our protagonist is Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield), a young orphan boy who lives in the train station clock tower. The boy is a common thief, but only steals his meals, and small gears and other machine parts. He steals these parts to live out his deceased father's and his old plan, to reconstruct an old automaton, which is supposed to be able to write, but is long broken. Hugo himself is a sweet kid, but is also very much a kid. He's a little rough around the edges, but this is because he is fending for himself. He's not mean, he's just not that heroic, he's a three dimensional child living in a three dimensional world. He's a wonderful character.

And I am serious when I call this world three dimensional. Every side character is fully fleshed out, they have their own back story and their own story to tell. While I feel I may be spoiling something, I will add that there is no villain too this story. There is one character who is simple doing his job, which is to catch orphan children and send them to the orphanage. At first, we understand it's his job, then he shows himself to be quite mean about it, and then we see him fawning over a cute girl who works on the same floor. He's just a regular everyday man, and sometimes a certain job can make you end up a bit meaner on occasion. He's understandable, and likable, but still threatening, it's very good.

I have to mention I am one of the few people who did not see the film in 3-D, and I really wish I did. The visuals of this film are nothing short of poetry, and sometimes you can really see just how 3-D would have added to the experience even more. That aside, it is still worth seeing in 2-D, which is not sometime I can say about a lot of 3-D films I liked such as Piranha 3-D or the third Harold and Kumar. The visual style is still breathtaking, it just would have been nice to see it the way it was intended.

Hugo is easily up there with the great classic family films such as Babe and The Neverending Story, it is nothing short of a fantastic film for all ages (Disregard the PG if you wish, it is only slapped on for the fact people smoke in the film). This film is easily 4 out of 5 stars. It's brilliant, it's a masterpiece. If you haven't seen it yet, I believe there is still time. And if you have children or younger siblings you can bring along, they will thank you later, believe me.

The Muppets (2011)

We'll Always Be Relevant

The nineteen eighties seem to refuse to die. As much as we make fun of this fact, it's for the better, there were a lot of things that came out of the eighties that appeal to all ages, and always were. The Jim Henson company proves this with the fuzzy little pals called the Muppets. The Muppet Show is still very popular due to DVD sales, and the movies are quite familiar with everyone too. However, I myself did not grow up on the show, and I only saw the later movies in the series, and not that many of them either. So I did not go into this film with the nostalgia goggles most of the audience were wearing. To me this is a good thing. What makes a movie good is determined from the actual film itself, and if it's an adaptation or a sequel, that also means the film must stand on it's own, you can still enjoy it if you haven't seen the original.

And the film is enjoyable, plain and simple. I had no clue this film would be a musical until the first song started, something I would have guessed if I had seen more muppet films. The score itself is really good, those with the soundtrack will play it over and over again. Some favorites reappear, such as Rainbow Connection, which even someone like me who hasn't seen the other films is familiar with, and it got me very excited, it's the kind of song you can't hate. And like I said, all the songs seem to be this, both the original songs written for the films as well as the covers of existing songs.

And the characters, well, they're the muppets. Miss Piggy is just as Miss Piggy as ever, Kermit is just as Kermit as ever, and Fozzy is just as Fozzy as ever. They are all unique in their own way, and they are all wonderful and lovable characters. I am also happy to see attention given to Rowlfe, a character most have forgotten. I only know Rowlfe because of the show How Stuff Works found on Itunes. Rowlfe was Henson's personal favorite, so it makes me happy they give him respect in this film. Sure, he's not a main character, but he's given lines, and a very funny scene to himself, it's just a great gesture to the man who brought us these characters in the first place.

The humans get as much screen time as the muppets, and they are fun as well. Jason Segel is great, the celebrity cameos are funny, but the villains is a bit hit and miss. First off, the evil oil tycoon doesn't work so well for me, there are better villains to be had in a film, and for me it felt like the film was just reminding us that it's for children. Speaking of which, I can't say I agree with the MPAA. It's PG, but I'd argue for a G on this. In the eighties, the time period this movie is reminding us of, it would have gotten a G. The MPAA is too harsh these days, and this for me is a mild example. I can almost see the reasoning, because of the more adult jokes, but at the same time a G film should still be able to get away with that. G means General Audiences, not Children, so G should still let a good amount of things slip.

Does the film have flaws? Most films do, so it's not really a bad thing that this one does in the form of a little more than a pet peeve. If you're a hardcore muppet fan, you've been with them since the beginning, this film is great, it's perfect, everything you could have ever wanted. If not, it's still very good, but in my opinion, there's something off about that. A film should try to be great for everybody, no matter how young or old, and as stated before, without having to have seen the original beforehand if it's a remake, sequel, or adaptation. And it's a sequel to the films, and the TV series. It would have been a better film if it tried to be great for everyone, instead of just the old school fans. I called Winnie the Pooh (2011) a great film for me, but it's only a really good film if you're not a huge Winnie the Pooh fan, and this is the same situation, but still different. Winnie the Pooh (2011) was self contained, but this film was huge, and seemed to be talking to everyone, saying something like the muppets is better than anything currently on TV. And for it too only be a great film for the old school/hardcore fans just feels a little off.

But don't let that over shadow that I said this film is really good, it is very much worth checking out. It'd just be nice if everyone could recognize every single muppet, I swear even most of the hardcore fans will not be able to name every single muppet in this movie. The take thats to the modern day get a little old fast too. Kermit's attempt at a speech at how children are smarter than we give them credit is great, and he is right. The evil "Moopets" being darker and edgier to comment on how entertainment for everyone is like that now, is just a little too far. There are still a lot of show and movies for everyone out there, and the film doesn't give them credit. I agree that something needs to be done about the norm, as they can be pretty bad, it'd still be nice to hear the film give credit to the other shows, at points it can make it feel like the film is saying only The Muppet Show is worth watching. Not intentional, but for me it almost felt like that.

As said, very good film. It's a solid 3.5, nothing more or less. It's worth the rental if you miss it in the cheap seats or whatever is close by, but only the hardcore fans will watch it several times. Still, it's fun, it's a great callback to good family films instead of pandering to children films, and characters that will make you smile.