The Adventures of Simba Across the Third Dimension

Michael C. here.

As a dyed-in-the-wool 3D non-believer I can’t say I was thrilled at the notion of Disney combing through the vault, “improving” titles with the latest technological gimmick as an excuse to wring more cash out of their back catalogue. The idea reeks of George Lucas style revisionism. Yet having seen Lion King 3D (opening today) I now have to reconcile this position with the fact that I thought the whole thing worked beautifully. Maybe enough time had passed for the story to feel fresh again. Maybe I was just in a great mood the morning of the screening. But whatever the reason I can’t deny Lion King 3D did what Lion King IMAX failed to do for me, which was to break through my deep familiarity with the material and hit me on a gut level.

Hey, why mince words: I had a blast.

Lion King may be the most technically polished use of 3D I’ve seen, miles ahead of any other after-the-fact 3D conversions, and right up there with Avatar and Up which I consider the gold standard. The Disney team has clearly taken incredible care with their prized title in this their inaugural attempt to access the potential gold mine of retrofitting classics. The level of detail impresses. The snouts of the lions protrude slightly in front of their faces and African plains that were formally flat paintings now stretch convincingly into the distance. Zazu becomes a breakout star since he gives the depth of field a work out every time he swoops by in the foreground high above the action. At the screening I saw there was no hint of dimness or the dreaded multi-plane effect that plagues cheaper 3D conversions.. I can honestly say I’ve never felt the urge to peek out from under the glasses, which is pretty much the highest compliment I can give to the technical job. 

Ultimately, a third dimension will never make a bad script better or make a boring movie exciting. Lion King 3D works so well because Lion King 2D did. But still, when the movie is already playing like gangbusters I can't deny the added depth can help turn things up to 11 from time to time. "The Circle of Life" wows as if it was conceived with 3D in mind from the start, and the wildebeest stampede is predictably stunning. More surprisingly the added dimension also lends increased grandeur to simple scenes like an early heartfelt talk between Mufasa and son in a vast open field. In other scenes where the newfound depth doesn’t do much– "Can You Feel the Love Tonight", for example, doesn’t exactly pop – it’s easy enough to ignore. 

How viable this will be for other Disney classics remains an open question. The group of titles that would really justify the conversion is probably slim. I can’t say a 3D version of The Jungle Book would have me clamoring for tickets. If, on the other hand, they ever give Fantasia the same deluxe treatment they have given Lion King then sign me up.

Pressing Oscar Questions / New Predictions

If you haven't yet noticed, I updated all the Oscar charts yesterday to reflect the latest shifts in buzz. As ever I am not totally enslaved by immediate buzz but try to project forward from it. I don't believe, and past experience backs me up here, that the first word from festivals is the last word on consensus. Festival audiences have, in many cases, different needs than Academy voters and the general public and even mainstream-leaning film critics.  These differing needs range from subject matter to tone to emotional and intellectual content. So there is much we still don't know about the new films winning raves. To win Oscar's heart you generally have to first master or at least make peace with three other audiences (all of which can or do overlap with each other and with Oscar but let's not complicate the matter): Critics (i.e. reviews/perceptions of quality), public (box office), media (are they interested? are their editorial angles or movie stars to keep them engaged). Festivals are the gun going off but never the finish line. So here are some questions I'm pondering.

Won't you join me in answering them?

Michael Fassbender OR Ryan Gosling? I've already pitted them against each other publically/mentally as "The Future of the Movies: Male Division" (do they have any competition?) and perhaps it's a natural evolution from that question but aren't they in direct conflict for an Oscar nod this year? Both have had amazing years with multiple films, some artistically minded, some for commerce but all of which they've been excellent in. Ryan has the more Oscar-friendly fare (Ides of March/Drive) compared to Fassy's kink (Shame/A Dangerous Method) but Fassy may have the more Oscar-friendly personality in terms of his ease with self-promotion (supposedly Gosling is unburdened by the typical Oscar dream).

I don't think there's room for both given the Best Actor field... do you?

What of Alexander Desplat?
His score for The Tree of Life seems likely to be axed for eligibility given all the other music in the film. His score for Carnage is supposedly only heard for a few minutes. His scores for the new Harry Potter and Twilight are both within long running franchises which generally don't show up in the score category since such scores tend to mix old and new themes and there's a been there/done that feeling even if the score is entirely new. Will they stiff their new favorite composer or will it be enough for them to have their all time favorite back? 79 year old John Williams has two Spielberg scores this year (Tin Tin and War Horse) after a long absence and if there was ever a time they wanted to hand him a sixth Oscar, it's probably now.

Captain America or Thor?
I've been asking this question all summer and I suspect very few people care. But hear me out: Isn't one of them going to win multiple Oscar nods? The technical fields are often hugely competitive but they're also friendlier to genre fare than the big eight. Captain America:The First Avenger has the distinct advantage in that it takes place during World War II and thus gets to show off period piece beauty in costuming (for Jeffrey Kurland and Anna B Sheppard who have both been nominated previously but never won)  and art direction (Rick Heinrichs has 3 noms / 1 win to his name) ... but Thor has a more Oscary team in costume designer Alexandra Byrne (4 nods, 1 win) and production designer Bo Welch (4 nominations) and whether or not you think that the ice planet or the mythical realm of Asgard are way too bombastically gaudy in design... Oscar loves overkill in just about any category. See last year's results for Eyesore in Wonderland and every time any pundit ever joked about "Best" being code word for "Most".

 

 Aren't "Restrained" and "Chill" Four Letter Words?
One review called Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy "marvelously chill" and the word "restrained" gets tossed around a lot for both that film and Glenn Close's Oscar bid Albert Nobbs. It's not without precedent that Oscar would embrace the chilly or the restrained but it's also not exactly the wormiest hook for AMPAS to swim towards as history indicates. What does all this mean for Gary Oldman (who our Venice correspondent claimed only raises his voice once in his film) or for Glenn Close both of whom will be waging campaigns based half on these new performances and half on their reputations as important thespians who've endured inexplicable golden snubbings.

Category Placement. To Fraud or Not To Fraud?
This question will never die and is ever a concern since modern cinema doesn't have the same clear divisions of labor as classic Hollywood in terms of "star vs. character actor". What's more many pundits, fans and agents now regularly and actively promote fraud to insure better golden opportunities for their beloved star or meal ticket. The feeling of demotion is largely a thing of the past, an Oscar being an Oscar. The unfortunate and long lasting side effect of this trend (more a tradition than trend now actually) are that real supporting players and character actors have less and less opportunities as genuine stars now rob them of their already scant opportunities for the spotlight on a very regular basis. It's almost impossible to imagine that we'll ever see another Thelma Ritter for example (sniffle). So we'll just have to wait and see how Viola Davis (The Help), Keira Knightley (A Dangerous Method), the entire Carnage cast and any of the young male leads (War Horse, Hugo, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) play it this year since all of them could theoretically opt for either lead or supporting categorization.

What the hell with the Best Animated Film category this year?
The (relative) failure of Cars 2 has left a gaping Pixar sized hole in the category that was arguably specifically designed just to honor Pixar. Rango, an early visually stunning hit, seems to have no real competition whatsoever. It's hard to see any of its competition as nominees, isn't it? There are sequels no one seems particularly excited about yet (Happy Feet 2, Puss in Boots, Kung Fu Panda 2), films that were hits that no one seems particularly excited about (Rio). Arthur Christmas is a question mark but is anyone excited about it? What's more the only event movie that's still to come (The Adventures of TinTin: The Secret of the Unicorn)  should theoretically be disqualified given past AMPAS decisions declaring motion capture ineligible. Is it time to shutter this category or do they just have to hope that it's exciting again next year and the year after? 

The Nomination Is Theirs To Lose. Will They?
Just about every pundit worth his/her salt agrees that The Tree of Life, The Help and Midnight in Paris are the three biggies with Best Picture potential to have already hit theaters. Then there are those stubbornly holding on to hopes for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part Two (I readily admit bias that I don't think it's deserving even as a cumulative honor) or The Rise of the Planet of the Apes though history suggests that it won't happen since sequels are only ever nominated when their predecessors were. Though I adamantly doubt that either has a good shot at the most coveted of all nominations, there is a first time for everything and it's true that modern franchise culture is a relatively new ubiquitous Hollywood reality and thus Oscar history might not be the best indication of how the Academy will view or soon view franchise efforts.

Should all of these films or even just three of them be nominated... well, that doesn't leave much room at all for the Christmas time films that are still withheld from eager eyeballs or the films that are on everyone's lips having just debuted at this festival or that one.

Which leads us to the final question...

Which of the unseen films will tank?
J Edgar, War Horse, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, The Iron Lady, Hugo? That's a lot of unseen fare still that even long lead festival audiences haven't gazed upon. Which do you suspect will deliver and which won't?

TIFF: Alois Nebel, Good Bye and anticipation for Fassy

Amir, reporting on my third day at TIFF. It wasn't as exciting as the first two, though I did get to talk to two directors, Jason Reitman and Mohammad Rasoulof, in person. Reitman wasn’t promoting a film, but only walking around the Bell Lightbox building – his father, Ivan, donated the land on which the festival’s home is built – and Rasoulof, who I’d assumed was detained somewhere in Iran had gained permission to leave and promote his film in person. The fourth day is bound to get better with a premium screening of Steve McQueen’s Shame on the plate but for now, let’s get to yesterday’s films.

The big one was Alois Nebel, a much anticipated Czech animated film by first time director Tomas Lunak. You might remember Nathaniel highlighted the film among his sixteen suggestions too but sadly, it did not live up to my expectations at all. I must admit however, the black and white rotoscope animation is absolutely gorgeous too look at. The filmmaking team has spent years creating this beautiful imagery from live-action footage they filmed in 35 days and the result of their work is a collection of stark images that puts you right in the atmosphere of the film. Equally impressive is Alois’ edgy and moody sound work which as Lunak explained, has taken just as much time to materialize as the film.

Alois Nebel is about the eponymous train dispatcher at a border town whose humdrum life is changed with the entrance of a strange mute man to the small community he lives in. It’s a revenge story that has roots in Czech’s involvement in World War II and the Cold War but these roots are unfortunately the film’s biggest problem for me. I was actually a bit relieved to find out during the Q&A session that I wasn’t alone in my confusion about the back story... 

Alois Nebel

More after the jump ... plus Best Actor anticipation

Click to read more ...

Disney Princesses as Fashionistas

Remember those Disney Princes in their underwear a few years back? Online illustration trends never don't involve the Disney stable of instantly recognizable characters. Now artist Danté Tyler has envisioned eight of the Princesses as Vogue cover models.

Here is Aurora from Sleeping Beauty.

Love that one eye is pink and the other blue, and it doesn't hurt that her shoulders are as sharp as the spindle on a spinning wheel.

Belle and Ariel after the jump...

Click to read more ...

Flipping Through Movie Book Pages

For no reason whatsoever on this summer day, 08/22, I pulled a few random movie books off the shelf -- i used to buy used movie books all the time as a teenager (though two of these are books from this past decade) -- and opened them to pages 8 and 22 and am sharing my favorite sentences therein with you! If it's a photo page, I shared that instead. 

Ready? here we go!

page 8

page 22

We want our viewers not merely to enjoy the situation with a murmured, "Isn't he cu-ute" but really to feel something of what the character is feeling."

from Disney Animation The Illusion of Life

*

page 8

"Thirty-six tables with their scintillating glassware and long tapers, each table bearing a replica in waxed candy of the gold statuette award, filled the entire floor space of the room," said the hotel's press release.

page 22

The plot was farfetched -Shearer and leading man Robert Montgomery have an affair at the same time her father has one with his mother -- but Mrs Thalberg looked great in her chic Adrian wardrobe and bobbed hair."

from Inside Oscar aka The Holy Bible

*

page 8

Is that goo for his mouth, or the goo for his nose?" Lucas asks wiping a bit of brown slime off Jabba's cheek with his finger.

page 22

Disneyland is a movie that invites its audience right into the screen, combining mass appeal with mechanical ingenuity.

from Skywalking: The Life and Films of George Lucas

* 

page 8

After seeing that film I was left with the understanding that the Bollywood musical and its outrageous comic tragic storytelling succeeded because of a deal that exists between the film and its audience."

page 22

from Moulin Rouge!

*

page 8

'For example, it's striking how obvious it is in retrospect that the New Wave was, fundamentally, a product of it's time: impertinent, playful, inventive; emphasizing chance, rupture, improvisation, and brilliant intuition; creating sequences that loop back on themselves like gags or that metonymically demonstrate the entire film."

page 22

Critical thought enabled them not only to approach film but to conquer it, and it became such an essential element of their intellectual growth that it came to symbolize the entire creative  process for them.

from French New Wave

*

page 8

The gypsy nature of my film life hasn't helped me resolve this disturbing sense of musical beds."

page 22

I wobbled into the building, found the office and in my best southern Brooklynese announced to the secretary, "Ah'm heah to play Scarlett O'Hara"

from Shelley Also Known as Shirley

*

Shelley Winters! Why do I have this book? LOL. The cover says it was a #1 bestseller (published in 1981)

I was just watching her in A Place in the Sun (1951) again Saturday night*. She was not exactly a subtle actress but she was definitely a born loudmouth storyteller. Some people are born to be stars but it's almost like Shelley was born to be an old loudmouth lady recalling stardom and gossiping about even bigger stars. When I was a kid it seemed like she was always on tv talking about one celebrity or another from '50s era Hollywood.

This post = SO RANDOM! 

*times have sure changed. Shelley was nominated for Best Leading Actress for this movie but today this would 100% be considered a supporting performance given that she's missing for huge passages of the film.