Showing posts with label Animation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Animation. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Felidae (1995)



**POSSIBLE SPOILERS**

Francis (Ulrich Tukur) is a cat whose owner (the cats in the film refer to humans as “can openers”) Gustav (Manfred Steffen) has just moved to a new neighborhood.  Discovering a dead cat in his backyard, Francis joins up with local curmudgeon Blaubart (Mario Adorf) to unveil the killer and expose the truth behind it all.

Martin Schaack’s Felidae is an animated film (in case the fact that its main characters are felines didn’t tip you off, though I guess this could also have been something along the lines of Look Who’s Talking Now) based on a series of novels by Akif Pirincci (I surmise this film is adapted from the first book), and without giving too much away, I’m rather surprised it hasn’t been seen by more people or been talked about more than it has.  This film could easily stand shoulder to shoulder with the dynamic duo of mature-themed cartoons, Watership Down and The Plague Dogs (or frankly any others you would care to name).  If you’re a parent, I’m not sure this is something you should show the kids just yet, however (though I’m positive there are folks who threw it on for the kids assuming all cartoons are kiddie fare, and besides, if you’re reading this, I’m going to also assume you’re the sort who knows a bit about what you and your family watch before you watch it).  There is graphic violence, including beheadings and disembowelings.  There are cats having sex.  There are (perhaps the most disturbing element) scenes of live cats being brutally experimented on by Professor Preterius (the name a clear [and fitting] callback to The Bride of Frankenstein and portrayed here by Gerhard Garbers).  So, if these are things you’re uncomfortable watching, you will want to pick something else for family movie night (or your own personal viewing, for that matter). 

Nevertheless, the adult components of the film are essential to the story, and I think had the choice been made to not depict these things in this manner, it would have done a disservice to the film’s themes.  Naturally, when you pair felines up with murder, the first thought in most people’s heads is “curiosity killed the cat,” and that certainly holds true in Felidae.  Francis is an innately inquisitive character, and he knows a thing or two about what makes cats (and people) tick.  This is summed up nicely in the opening moments when Francis comments that Gustav is a student of archaeology who makes his money writing trashy novels and moves frequently when the creative well runs dry.  But Francis knows this is little more than an excuse Gustav gives rather than dealing with his problems head on.  Francis also detects odors coming from upstairs that immediately set him on edge, but we also know there is no way he will resist the temptation to explore further, as with the killings.  This self-awareness is depicted and foreshadowed in Francis’ dreams.  In the first one, Francis is attracted to a door filled with pure white light (read: truth).  But inside the door, he encounters a faceless doctor (guess who?) who gifts him with a diamond-studded collar that transforms into a choking shackle and set of chains that drag him down to Hell.     

More alarming (yet equally in line with the above, and you can thank me later for not using the term “shocking”), is our introduction to the cult of Claudandus (a fabled cat martyr/god; the name being Latin for “he who must be concealed, locked away”), whom we are introduced to during one of their meetings.  The flock, lead by Joker (Ulrich Wildgruber), fling themselves into an apparatus which violently electrocutes them.  Whether they are killed or just stunned by this action, I’m not fully sure, because killing one’s congregation is not a great way to keep it, but the cats who go through this masochism are not shown moving (or breathing) afterward.  We know that when a religious leader is shown spewing fire and brimstone in a film, he/she is typically either crazy, false, or both.  The cats that are in the cult are curious about Claudandus, about religion, and this will get them knowingly hurt and very likely unknowingly killed.  The religious facet ties into the entirety of the film, not simply as a group of misguided cats being manipulated by forces higher up, but as the embodiment of the power of ideology/theology itself.  

Sexuality ties in strongly with both of these elements, too.  The whole idea of being in heat, of rutting with whoever is available and in proximity, is important to the film’s plot.  The cats being killed have not been neutered.  On the one hand, this plays into the idea of curiosity, since these cats cannot help but screw when the first opportunity arises with other cats about which they know nothing.  The very fact they do this places them in danger (for a couple of reasons).  On the other hand, there is the notion of the religious right’s classic condemnation of unchecked sexuality.  Taking out of the equation the idea of what constitutes cat morality (we already know cats have an idea of Hell from Francis’ nightmares) or fidelity, the violation of this theological edict conceivably damns a given cat’s soul.  In Felidae, casual sex can lead to physical and spiritual destruction.

Even if none of my quasi/pseudo-intellectualizing draws you to this movie (and there are other things going on which may; I just don’t want to give away the store, as it were), the film is structured and told in a visually interesting fashion.  Most shots not involving closeups on cats are framed with Dutch angles.  It’s fairly rare to see perpendicular or parallel lines in much of the film’s compositions, and much of the scenery appears twisted in some aspect of another.  Bright lights are also a rarity, lending the movie some verisimilitude and reinforcing its dark underpinnings.  There are also a lot of bird’s eye view perspective shots (an indication of a deity observing and judging the characters as well as a reference to the characteristic of felines to sit up high on furniture/appurtenances looking down on the world around them).  Further, the film has the distinct flavor of a hardboiled detective novel.  A character is presented with a crime and feels compelled to discover the criminals.  Secondary characters appear to both menace the main character and throw him off the trail (most notably the marvelously designed Kong [Wolfgang Hess], who reminded me of the feline version of Chuck Jones’ Marc Antony character).  Others provide clues, the doling out of which places them in immediate danger.  The protagonist alone can follow the convolutions of what’s going on, the only one beside the antagonist who can put the pieces together in the proper order.  And ultimately, this protagonist is the only one who can confront the antagonist with the truth, though the answers will likely bring a bittersweet resolution.  Slightly lighter in tone than the aforementioned anthropomorphized animations, Felidae still packs one hell of a satisfying wallop.

MVT:  The basis for the narrative is intriguing and chilling, and I feel that it strengthens even after the main mystery is solved.  In other words, it’s not a one-trick pony, and it will reward on future viewings. 

Make or Break:  When the Claudandus cult makes its eyebrow-raising entrance, you instantly know there is much more going on in this film than might be expected.  

Score:  7.5/10

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Bruce Lee and Chinese Gods (1976)

AKA: Pang shen feng; Story of Chinese Gods
Director: Chih Hui Chang

I don't even know where to begin with this one, as the size of this film's weirdness makes it nearly impossible to get a hold of. Should I start with ancient Chinese gods and their motorcycle clouds? Or the frequent dismemberment, charring, and other acts of insane violence? How about the fact that, when all else fails, the ancient gods of China have to call on the ultimate supernatural guardian of the East, Bruce Lee (sporting a cool third eye in the center of his forehead)?

There is an evil warlord who is oppressing the people of his province. His wife is a fox spirit, and although they are sexy, fox spirits are always deceitful and naughty. Disgusted by the ruler's evil deeds, the gods, one of whom can make his eyes extend way far out of his head, send a wise demigod type fellow down to Earth to talk sense to the despot. In accordance with the behavior you would expect from a ruler who murders his most loyal advisors and burns lots of people alive for the hell of it, he doesn't really see the error of his ways. Angered and frustrated, the demigod whips up a tornado that carries many of the peasants to a neighboring province, where the ruler is benevolent and honest.

The evil ruler decides to declare war on the good leader, but when his assassins fail to carry out their job, the fox spirit suggests that the evil ruler enlist the aid of the dark forces, who are pretty good at such things. In turn, the wise demigod enlists the aid of his pals up in the heavens and all out supernatural war ensues. Evil Taoist priests, monsters and demons of every possible shape and size, and god riding around on clouds that make motorcycle noises are all part of the fun. When the forces of evil send in the Three Kings of Hell as their coup de gras, the good gods summon up Bruce Lee. Yep. When God himself can't solve a problem, he calls on Bruce Lee. Wouldn't you? Bruce Lee, complete with his official silly fighting noises, materializes to kick some King of Hell ass. Bruce can do kungfu and shape shift into a stoned (not stone) dragon, among other powers he never used in his other movies but we always suspected he had in real life.

I'm not sure exactly how accurate the mythology on display is. As best I can tell, the reason Bruce Lee is no longer with us is because he had to travel back in time to like the Han Dynasty or something in order to assume his role as the ultimate god of China. He brought with him his knowledge of motorcycles and applied to it some clouds for his buddies. So, like, 90% culturally accurate.

I've really only scratched the surface of how insane this cartoon gets. This movie has more craziness packed into each of its artfully drawn but poorly animated cels than most any other film around. Was this for kids? Surely not. It shows people being chopped in half and burned at the stake, flailing and shrieking as the melt. It has demons ripping people apart and eating their limbs. I mean, sure it's the kind of movie I watched as a kid, but these kids these days are made of more tender meat. Kid friendly or not, Chinese Gods really is one of the most unbelievably fun and inexplicable things I've seen. It makes me feel a bit light-headed. The animation is not great, but you have to overlook the cheap animation and enjoy the delirium. And you can also admire the artwork, if not the outcome of trying to make it move.

Make or Break: The violence. Ostensibly made for children, this movie isn't afraid to revel in everything from people being burned alive to people being chopped to bits.

MVT: Bruce Lee's boobs. Seriously, man. It's like he hangs out with Kate Upton.


Saturday, November 30, 2013

Instant Action: Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010)



I'd never trust a guy in a spandex suit named Robin, but that's just me!

Written By: Judd Winick
Directed By: Brandon Vietti

Watching Batman: Under the Red Hood felt like a breath of fresh air. That's generally the feeling I get any time I watch a well made Batman film that isn't associated with the Christopher Nolan monstrosities. His insipid films, I've only seen the first two entries in his trilogy, have sullied the franchise to an unbelievable extent. It helps that Batman: Under the Red Hood is very well made, but even if it weren't it's different than the soul sucking film from Mr. Nolan and therefore it feels completely fresh. That being said, Batman: Under the Red Hood is a well made film, and that's why it's an enjoyable film to watch.

The story in Batman: Under the Red Hood is interesting, if a bit trite. The old friend comes back to haunt the hero shtick has been done in comic books for years. The question in a film like Batman: Under the Red Hood isn't how original the story is, rather it's how said story is handled. I'm happy to say that the story in Batman: Under the Red Hood has been handled in fine fashion. What the film does to make the story work is to couch so much of it in what exemplifies the Batman character. This isn't a Bruce Wayne story, it's a story of the man under the cowl. We see him be a detective, we get to see his process at work, and we get an almost tangible feel for why he makes the choices that define him as a hero. The destination of Batman: Under the Red Hood was never in doubt, but the journey to get there was interesting throughout.

Filming action scenes sounds like it should be easier in an animated film. The animators have the entire world at their disposal, they need not worry about physical limitations of any sort. The animated form often leads to problems in presenting coherent action. Because of the freedom that the animated form offers the desire is acted upon to do whatever the mind can think of in a scene. Batman: Under the Red Hood avoids such a pitfall by keeping the action well oriented. I was never lost for place or location in Batman: Under the Red Hood. The action made sense, and it ties into the strengths and weaknesses of the characters involved in said action. The action in Batman: Under the Red Hood is easy to follow, but it never comes across as lacking or haphazardly implemented.

Batman: Under the Red Hood is not without its flaws. The dialogue is clunky at times, and does in a few instances feel like it's coming out of a different character's mouth. My main beef was with the character of the Joker, simply put I did not like this version of the Joker. Joker in Batman: Under the Red Hood is too bland, with a performance by John DiMaggio that undercuts the contradiction that is the character of the Joker. Mr. DiMaggio is a great actor, but I'm not sure what he thought he was doing with his version of the Joker. This is probably a lot of personal bias coming into play, but if I don't believe in the Joker as a madman and a depressed funny man, then that's a big problem with a Batman film.

Flawed though it is, I still enjoyed Batman: Under the Red Hood. The folks at DC Animation are doing fine work in the superhero realm. Batman: Under the Red Hood is a well constructed action film that tells an interesting tale. The Joker isn't handled all that well, and the dialogue takes too many shortcuts. Still, I had fun watching Batman: Under the Red Hood. I appreciated the crispness of the animation and the adult themes that Brandon Vietti's film was willing to take on. If you're looking for a decent Batman yarn there's no reason to not give Batman: Under the Red Hood a spin.

Rating:

7/10

Cheers,
Bill Thompson