Avatar: The Last Rainforest

I enjoy sci-fi more than most, but I am surely in the minority in that I was not sweatily anticipating Avatar.  I didn't find the design of the blue cat-monkey people all that appealing in the teaser clip, and the robot gorilla suits were downright stupid.  I also was perplexed by the idea of this fellow running around in an avatar fighting the big bad company when his body was in a tube on the big bad company's own base.  Oops, I just accidentally tripped over the cord to your avatar-tube-projecting thingy.  Guess the battle's over.

So, with hopes low, the fam and I went to see it on prompting from my mother in law.  The same mother in law who once bought me a Winsor & Newton Series 7 brush.  She has some serious cred.

Let me sum up the plot in bullet point form:

• Man goes to paradise to exploit resources
• Man falls in with natives, specifically female native
• Man's allegiance is turned away from exploitation to preservation
• Man and natives fight exploiters against long odds

The first time I saw this it was called "Fern Gully."  Avatar was incalculably more expensive to make I'm guessing.  Well, calculable to some but not me.  I can't think in numbers that big.   Also, Crysta from Fern Gully was arguably hotter for being more human looking.  Okay... pause for a second.  Did you have an agree/disagree opinion about that "hotter" statement?  Yeah, get help.

Anyway, I guess Cameron wanted to throw a new post-911 twist to the Fern Gully traditional tale by making the natives bigger instead of smaller.  Wow!

Any fans of Hayao Miyazaki will vividly imagine Cameron scribbling notes during every Miyazaki film muttering, "Using that and that .... ooo!  and that!  And that and that..." etc.

Okay, but now to the serious discussion.... Na'vi vs. Ewoks.  Both were kind of in the same boat, except the Ewoks never seemed to give a rip about the Empire until a fruity gold robot showed up on their wooden doorstep.  So let's contrast, shall we?

Ewoks:

• tiny, furry things that could be used to sell fabric softener
• could rig elaborate traps involving logs 7000 times their weight
• killed stormtroopers by chucking rocks at them
• fought an evil intergalactic Empire run by a dude who can shoot lightning out of his hands. 
• suffered one apparent casualty during the entire battle
  

Na'vi:

• huge humanoids who can jump off cliffs and survive by bouncing from leaf to leaf
• ride dragons, and occasionally are led by a messianic figure riding a huge freaking dragon.
• shoot arrows dipped in neuro-toxin (not that the toxin matters much, since the huge Na'vi arrows are more like spears and tend to impale people when they are hit.  Oh, no.  You are now pinned to a tree through the chest and the poison on this "arrow" will kill you in less than a minute.)
• fought against a mining company run by a manager who is concerned about quarterly statements
• suffered a bazillion causalities against the mercenaries working for the mining company
• live above a huge deposit of a mineral with a really stupid name.

Okay, I don't know about you but I'd have to say Ewoks win here.   Granted, if I had to pick the cooler looking of the two I'd go with Na'vi but in terms of pure against-all-odds combat I've got to give it to the Ewoks.  Except for that song at the end of the movie.  Seriously, that made me wish the Empire had won.

Okay, so the final review result:  The movie was good.  The time zipped by and I never had the urge to look at my watch.  I cringed at the profanity, but I have a pretty low threshold for that now that I have young kids.  The violence and sexual content was pretty much Lord of the Rings level.  The 3D effects were immersive without using the "oooo! look at my 3D!" tricks.  If anyone here is on the fence about seeing it, I'd say go ahead if you can stomach all the mother nature worship malarkey.  It's funny... even the testimonial of other nerdy sci-fi types doesn't hold much water with me now.  They all loved Transformers, and that was the worst dog pile of a movie I have seen in ages.

[SPOILER ALERT]
Tragic character note:  there was one character in the movie that my wife and I agree was the most tragic of all.  There are these dragon type thingies that the Na'vi bond with, and apparently they bond for life (cough*Pern*cough.)  Well  when jakesully goes to bond with uber-dragon turok-dinosaur-hunter-thingy what happened to his original dragon?  You never see it again.  Yup, old and busted gets dumped for the new hotness.  Poor little dragon.

The Sweet Spot

Stef and I took the kids to see Ratatouille this weekend. Now before I talk about the movie I have a confession to make. I'm a Brad Bird fanboy. His first movie, The Iron Giant, was wonderful, but after it had a less than stellar box office performance I suspected his career in animation was over. I was thrilled when Pixar put him in charge of The Incredibles, which seemed to pay off since the film was commercially successful. I was again thrilled to see that Brad Bird was writing and directing Ratatouille. Sure, I would have wanted to see it irregardless, as I have loved every Pixar movie I've seen (disclaimer: I haven't seen Cars yet), but the fact that they brought Brad Bird back made me actually excited to see it. Okay, enough fanboy action.

The movie itself is great. It has wonderfully exaggerated character design, great voice acting, a compelling plot and a lovely ending. Where it really shines though is in the portrayal of mental state, from the initial visualizations of flavor, to the state of being lost in doing what you love, to being taken back to your childhood by a particular experience. It is also very funny; I found myself laughing out loud far more often than I do in a typical movie.

Side note: I react more to movies and TV since having kids than I ever did before. When I watch things with them I want to share the experience of finding something funny or tragic. I want them to share how they are feeling too, and I don't think sitting stone-faced through a movie really encourages that. I want them to see that I enjoy things and that it's okay for them to enjoy things too. Don't look for too much meaning there.

Okay, back to Ratatouille. Another of it's strong points was the physical comedy. We are accustomed to seeing animated characters in unlikely physical situations and not thinking a thing of it, so I was very impressed at how the physical comedy seemed a little crazy yet still realistic. A good example is Linguini (human main character) wrestling his bicycle in through the front door of his apartment. He has a terrible time of it, but it seems plausible. It could have been done all wrong, like the typical "fighting with the chaise lounge" scene so common in cartoons. Instead, it is beautifully animated with just the right balance of realism to invoke my own memories of wrestling bikes through unlikely places, making the scene all the funnier.

I was somewhat sad when I learned that Disney's last 2D animated film would be "Home on the Range." Not that Home on the Range was bad, but I like 2D animation, and felt that something would be lost in 3D. Pixar has always managed to capture the character of 2D animation, and Ratatouille (or Rapatooey or Rapatooney as my kids would call it) has really shown Pixar as the successor to the animation crown, if I'm not being too pretentious. Pixar movies aren't great for their technical accomplishment; they are just plain great, and Ratatouille demonstrates just how great they can be.

EDIT: Oh, yeah... the title. Something about this film just hit the sweet spot with me, but I can't really say why. I can identify so many things that I liked about it, yet I am unable to identify what makes it great.... more than just the sum of a number of enjoyable elements. I'll suppose I'll have to be content with calling it great with no plausible rationale.