So comes summer, so comes summer movies. There are no small number of hot tickets that come out this summer. Big names. Names that I can’t ignore, like Indiana Jones, Narnia, Ironman, Hulk, Batman,… Those of us who are into the sci-fi/fantasy/superhero genres have been budgeting extra for this summer’s box office weekly offering.
The past couple years I’ve been doing at least one major review of a summer movie, usually taking some cheep shots at Capt. Sparrow’s latest misadventures. But there are no pirates this year, so I’ll begin this round of reviews with an unlikely candidate.
I went to see this movie on a lark. Honestly, I think my entire motivation for going to see this movie can be summed up in a single phrase: “Look, look! Shiney!” I did receive one positive review from Neco-chan, which also encouraged me to go to see this movie, Speed Racer.
Speed Racer is a “B Movie” if there ever was one. A movie based off from an old, cheep anime, which was based on an old, cheep comic book, using the same outlandish 3D animation FX that ruled Spy Kids, with an overused “David vs Goliath” plot infused with an overdose of sentimentality. The film was two and a half hours of alternating between watching video-game-style racing scenes and sappy moralizing on the virtues of hard work, caring for family, following your dreams, and honesty because “cheaters never prosper.” It was cliché, predictable, overtly pandering to current pop fads—it was a textbook of how to write a B Movie.
And I wish more people could produce movies as good as this one.
The problem with most (all?) B Movies is that they are trying to imitate an A Movie, but their imitation is inferior to the original. The Woznoski brothers (of Matrix fame) took on the very ambitious idea that they could flip this around. They could imitate an inferior genre and then create a movie of greater quality. It was an attempt to find the true type behind the cheep stereotypes; the perennial truth hidden in a common cliché; the intrinsic attractiveness of an overused plotline.
This is a bold move. The contemporary fad is to tear apart old-fashioned clichés or stereotypes. Irony, dark humor, or satire are more popular—and more critically acclaimed—genres. Now, I like satire too. But I’m quite aware that its popularity is a sign of the cynicism of our age. To write a movie that is straightforward and unambiguous in its celebration of traditional virtues like honesty and courage is a sign of contradiction. Speed Racer—the character as well as the movie which bears his name—has an honesty, innocence, and sincerity which I found refreshing.
(As a side note, Speed Racer’s unbending will to succeed, his personal integrity, and his heroic dedication to his family and friends is a typical Anime thing. Naruto, Rounin Kenshin, and the Elric brothers are heroes of the same style.)
I also have to say two things about the FX of this film. First, they move fast. It is dizzying. One commentator compared it to setting off fireworks inside of your clothes dryer, turning on and jumping inside for about an hour and a half. I can’t really argue with that. Second comment is that everything in the movie looks like a comic book come to life. The colors are all too standard, too bright, too colorful. There are some scenes where they do face shots, just like you have in a graphic novel. Anyway, on both accounts I thought that is was perfectly appropriate for the feel they were going for, even though I usually don’t like that sort of stuff.
Now, on several subjective levels it was appealing for me. I like driving fast, I like computer games, I like anime and graphic novels, I like shiny stuff that goes fast, I think Ms. Ricci is cute, I like the monkey, I’m a sucker for a hero story, pro-family messages, and movies with a good moral. Thus, I make no promises for anyone with different tastes. It is entirely likely that you will hate it—though you might really like it. If I had kids I would probably show it to my children, maybe buy a copy for the house. There is a little bit of language (just crudity—no profanity, blasphemy, or sexual innuendo) but other than that, it is pretty family friendly. I think that the overwhelming positive themes in the movie make it worth it.
I love when a movie surprises me on how good it is. Speed Racer is the third movie this summer has been just such a surprise (which means that I have at least two more reviews that I should write—Ironman and 21.) Unfortunately, Narnia and Indiana Jones didn’t interest me enough to write something—though I would love to post reviews by others (Jeff? Andrew? Anyone?).
4 comments:
Note: The following comment was written without having seen the movie in question (Speed Racer). Additionally, the Wachowski Brothers already have two movies on my 'It never happened' list of movies (Matrix 2 & 3). I've been known to hold a grudge about such things...
Ahh, Matthew! What would summer be without our annual discussion on the best and worst of celluloid entertainment?
I choose to not disagree with the premise you put forth. Namely, that this predictable movie can be praised for its undiluted display of simple virtues. And yet that leads me to the following question: is the bar for virtuous entertainment set so low that by just espousing virtues that should be commonplace (though not always) we must praise it and overlook its artistic warts?
Based on others' reviews given by word of mouth as well as in print, I have chosen not to budget this movie into my summer allowance. While it could certainly distract me for 120 minutes and reinforce my beliefs, I hope to strive for more meat on the bone for my $7.50 (non-matinée). Perhaps this movie, then, is not meant for me but for others. But then, for whom? Younger I doubt those much older than I would feel drawn to it. In fact, those my age are getting plenty of superhero nostalgia this summer (Indy, Batman, Max Smart). So it seems to be slanted to a younger demographic. But why would I choose this movie to show my kids? Would this be one of the better examples in movie history of those displaying the virtues of familiar support, hard work and primate companionship? Is it too much to ask for a sensible plot? I mean, even amongst those who are professional at their ability to suspend disbelief for several hours (Fantasy and SciFi Union of America, local 3791), this movie was not embraced.
In contrast, some less heralded titles (read: those who don't open between Thanksgiving through Christmas or between May through August) have come out these last few years that I would offer up to friends and my own children. For example, I have children with divergent tastes in their movie selections. I won't go into detail, but simply imagine trying to rent a movie that has appeal for Brendan through Maria for two hours. Yet several have been found and added to our "Hey, that's something we should look into getting someday" list. Walden Media is doing VERY solidly, even outside of the mainstay 'Narnia'. 'Bridge to Terebithia' and 'Water Horse: Legend of the Deep' both have strong virtuous undertones. Even the modernized 'Nancy Drew' and 'Nim's Island' played well at my house, and older favorites like 'Secondhand Lions' and 'Summer of the Monkeys' also pass the more-meat-on-the-bones test. Plus, the last one includes *three* pet primates, assuring three times as much cuteness!
Conversely, my wife recently rented '27 Dresses' which, according to our calculations, broke all records in usage of canned romantic comedy premises. My wife did not begrudge me sleeping through the last half, which should say quite a bit (though perhaps she didn't appreciate my running commentary). Was the protagonist virtuous? Well, yes, as much as I saw. Yet that wasn't enough to compensate for the same plot devices throughout the genre.
Enough of reviewing my family's own viewing preferences. The point is that more plot is needed for a movie to make the these virtuous themes resonate in your life (unless, you know, your life is like being in a clothes drier while celebrating July 4th). To me, 'Speed Racer' is equivalently the same as '27 Dresses' for their demographic. They both fill their time with predictable plots, preferring to spend more time on the fluff stuff. In Wachowski Brothers world (no, that's not intended to be a future amusement park, if only due to liability insurance expenses alone) that means explosions, lights, sounds, and open mockery of the laws of physics. In '27 Dresses', it means lots of wedding dresses, social awkwardness, flirting, and mistaken love interest. All of which is to say to their audiences, 'Hey look over here! Please pay no attention to how we got here or where we're going!' I'd rather see better plots with better actors in better movies.
In a not so unrelated note, my next review will be 'Iron Man' (onless Matt beats me to it) or 'The Incredible Hulk' (it beat out an aging Indy by a big green nose). All hail Marvel Studios! They 'get' plot, and they get actors and and directors who get it too!
Hah. I will say one thing: You couldn't pay me to watch that movie. On the other gloved and mutated hand, I loved Iron Man and the Incredible Hulk. If someone asked me to sum up my ideal man in two words, I would have to say "Bruce Banner". Good stuff. Iron Man was just a roller-coaster of fun and wit. Yes, wit: that rare quality of saying everything in one pithy phrase. Tony Stark has it. He is cool, because he's discovered that when you are *that* clever, saying that you are is not arrogance.
And IH! The movie FINALLY did justice to the idea of the Hulk- the problems and the day-to-day sweat and tears of having a power that truly is a curse, one that trades off brute strength for intelligence and control. Please go see at least one of these movies, Matt. It will raise the bar.
Wow...I didn't read Jeff's review even before I wrote my comment there. But yes! What the man said! Listen to your brother, Matteo-kun.
Thanks Angelie! Never met you, though Matteo has mentioned you occasionally. Glad to be in your good graces.
Post a Comment