It seems I have forgotten the sage wisdom of my past writer friends and mentors...
Just keep writing. Every day, no matter what.
I was admittedly discouraged by my first couple of blogs. They weren't quite written to my standards; they were stuffy, uninteresting, and rambly (see, I ironically used a nonsense word to prove a point). This is all, of course, negativity that spewed from my own brain as I read them a few days later. I am my own worst critic, after all. But I've found myself lately in need of... Something. An outlet or a platform. So here I am again, ready to take on whatever film fits my fancy. Bobis is back.
Well. I'm not exactly a Bobis anymore. Dang it! I could've blamed my absence on getting married!
~cough cough~ Now, where was I... oh yes. Onward and upward!
About Me
- Bobissaur
- A mathematician-musician-gamer-adventuer and aspiring movie critic who thinks a little too much.
Tuesday, August 15, 2017
Friday, August 12, 2016
SPOILERS!!!! Little Prince Questions Answered
This is the post contains lots of spoilers, but not necessarily a plot synopsis. I just want to address some of the tougher plot points of the film in relation to Paramount, the movie's original producer.
The Little Prince was of course marketed as a family film. It's main character is a little Girl, the animation is fanciful, the music adorable... I mean, it's based off of a children's book for crying out-loud. But it is unique in how it handles loss. Frighteningly so.
The dark undertones of death begin in the story of the Prince, who left his one true love, his Rose, to go out on his own adventure. (Note: none of the characters in this movie are named, they only have titles). He meets quite a few quirky characters in his journeys. But home-sickness starts to eat at him, and on his way back, he meets the Aviator (important character alert!) in the Sahara Desert.
At this point its safe to assume that although the two are on earth, the same rules of physics, logic, nature, supernature, what-have-you, do not apply. It is a whimsical world. But the next moment is chilling nonetheless. There is a Snake in the dessert, and he promises the Prince that he can send him back to his Rose in an instant. The method the Snake implies as he coils his body around the apprehensive young Prince... is death.
The Snake does not directly say anything about killing the Prince. But it is clearly what he means. The Prince even mentions off-handedly to the Aviator that "this body is only a shell". Then the Aviator watches as, in the distance, the Prince is bitten by the snake and falls to the ground.
Now the way the story is told, it would seem that this moment was meant to be happy. The Aviator believed in the Prince, and the Prince believed in the snake. It's implied that he went back to be with his Rose. But there are too many eerie parallels between that scene and suicide for comfort, particularly for Paramount. Perhaps test audiences were upset about it.
But the Little Prince did not "die", at least not in the traditional sense. And as the theme of memory comes to play more of an important role in the story, death/loss becomes less significant of an issue. Memory, the film suggests, sort of cheats death; if we remember those who are gone, they never truly leave us. The little Girl (who is reading and hearing about this story from the Aviator many years later) learns this throughout the film as she struggles with her own losses. It's intertwined throughout the film.
It's a beautiful way of looking at death and at loss, especially from the perspective of a child. But in this movie it is blunt, raw, and thought-provoking. I certainly have not done it justice in that little anecdote. But the point I'm trying to make is that it is not a movie a parent can just turn on in the afternoon to kill a couple hours with their young kids. At least, not at first it isn't. Some tough issues may have to be addressed.
But as I mentioned in my first review, I believe it's all worth it. Besides, death/loss is only one piece of the film as a whole. It has a lot more to say about what it means to be a child, about what it means to be an adult, and what it means to go against the grain and be yourself. It addresses a culture that is obsessed with being "necessary" and focusses on what it truly means to grow up. Over-all it is fun and adventurous. The ending left me smiling with only a slightly bitter-sweet left-over tear. Paramount, I'm sad to say, has really dropped the ball with this one. They missed out on producing a masterpiece.
The Little Prince was of course marketed as a family film. It's main character is a little Girl, the animation is fanciful, the music adorable... I mean, it's based off of a children's book for crying out-loud. But it is unique in how it handles loss. Frighteningly so.
The dark undertones of death begin in the story of the Prince, who left his one true love, his Rose, to go out on his own adventure. (Note: none of the characters in this movie are named, they only have titles). He meets quite a few quirky characters in his journeys. But home-sickness starts to eat at him, and on his way back, he meets the Aviator (important character alert!) in the Sahara Desert.
At this point its safe to assume that although the two are on earth, the same rules of physics, logic, nature, supernature, what-have-you, do not apply. It is a whimsical world. But the next moment is chilling nonetheless. There is a Snake in the dessert, and he promises the Prince that he can send him back to his Rose in an instant. The method the Snake implies as he coils his body around the apprehensive young Prince... is death.
The Snake does not directly say anything about killing the Prince. But it is clearly what he means. The Prince even mentions off-handedly to the Aviator that "this body is only a shell". Then the Aviator watches as, in the distance, the Prince is bitten by the snake and falls to the ground.
Now the way the story is told, it would seem that this moment was meant to be happy. The Aviator believed in the Prince, and the Prince believed in the snake. It's implied that he went back to be with his Rose. But there are too many eerie parallels between that scene and suicide for comfort, particularly for Paramount. Perhaps test audiences were upset about it.
But the Little Prince did not "die", at least not in the traditional sense. And as the theme of memory comes to play more of an important role in the story, death/loss becomes less significant of an issue. Memory, the film suggests, sort of cheats death; if we remember those who are gone, they never truly leave us. The little Girl (who is reading and hearing about this story from the Aviator many years later) learns this throughout the film as she struggles with her own losses. It's intertwined throughout the film.
It's a beautiful way of looking at death and at loss, especially from the perspective of a child. But in this movie it is blunt, raw, and thought-provoking. I certainly have not done it justice in that little anecdote. But the point I'm trying to make is that it is not a movie a parent can just turn on in the afternoon to kill a couple hours with their young kids. At least, not at first it isn't. Some tough issues may have to be addressed.
But as I mentioned in my first review, I believe it's all worth it. Besides, death/loss is only one piece of the film as a whole. It has a lot more to say about what it means to be a child, about what it means to be an adult, and what it means to go against the grain and be yourself. It addresses a culture that is obsessed with being "necessary" and focusses on what it truly means to grow up. Over-all it is fun and adventurous. The ending left me smiling with only a slightly bitter-sweet left-over tear. Paramount, I'm sad to say, has really dropped the ball with this one. They missed out on producing a masterpiece.
Thursday, August 11, 2016
The Little Prince: Spoiler-Free Review
Wait... "The Little Prince" came out?
Why, yes. Yes it did. But not how you probably expected it to.
But before I get into all of that, let me just say how impressed I was with this film. The characters were believable and sincere. It was beautifully done, both in story and in animation. I believe it's biggest strength in story was its ability to deliver emotionally poignant moments. Those moments, in my mind, even stand up to some of Pixar's most beloved scenes. Riley breaking down in "Inside Out". The lanterns in "Tangled". The first ten minutes of "UP". The whole ending of "Toy Story 3". "The Little Prince" had, like, three or four of these moments. That is not to say the film was perfect, however. Both the very beginning and the third act has some minor pacing issues. Even so, I believe it holds up to many of the aforementioned animated classics.
So why on earth was it only released on Netflix? The film is based off of a children's book published in 1943 by aviator/author Antoine de Saint-Exupery. It's a simple yet potent tale of a pilot who crashes in the Sahara Desert and meets a young boy. Their friendship, and the boy's own journey back to his one and only love, his Rose, is laced with themes of loss and loyalty. And the film is quite true to the text (though it takes place many years after the aviator's experience).
Naturally, American fans of the book were delighted to hear about Paramount's production of the already loved French film. But then, without warning, Paramount dropped the project only two weeks before its release date. No statement, no rhyme or reason.
Some of you may have already heard about this on the internet, but I wanted to refresh your memory because I believe that it's important to keep in the back of your brain as you watch. What does it say about our culture and our values? How does Hollywood normally treat that? What is different about this movie that may have sent Paramount away?
I can't ask more without giving away some plot. So. I will say this again: it's a beautiful film and I would highly recommend it. If you don't have a Netflix, the free trial is worth this movie. Top-tier rating, here. 9.5/10. Oh, and if you watch it with children, be ready for some potentially tough conversations... If you really want to know more, check out my next installment, where I will attempt to answer some of the questions I posed above (with spoilers).
Why, yes. Yes it did. But not how you probably expected it to.
But before I get into all of that, let me just say how impressed I was with this film. The characters were believable and sincere. It was beautifully done, both in story and in animation. I believe it's biggest strength in story was its ability to deliver emotionally poignant moments. Those moments, in my mind, even stand up to some of Pixar's most beloved scenes. Riley breaking down in "Inside Out". The lanterns in "Tangled". The first ten minutes of "UP". The whole ending of "Toy Story 3". "The Little Prince" had, like, three or four of these moments. That is not to say the film was perfect, however. Both the very beginning and the third act has some minor pacing issues. Even so, I believe it holds up to many of the aforementioned animated classics.
So why on earth was it only released on Netflix? The film is based off of a children's book published in 1943 by aviator/author Antoine de Saint-Exupery. It's a simple yet potent tale of a pilot who crashes in the Sahara Desert and meets a young boy. Their friendship, and the boy's own journey back to his one and only love, his Rose, is laced with themes of loss and loyalty. And the film is quite true to the text (though it takes place many years after the aviator's experience).
Naturally, American fans of the book were delighted to hear about Paramount's production of the already loved French film. But then, without warning, Paramount dropped the project only two weeks before its release date. No statement, no rhyme or reason.
Some of you may have already heard about this on the internet, but I wanted to refresh your memory because I believe that it's important to keep in the back of your brain as you watch. What does it say about our culture and our values? How does Hollywood normally treat that? What is different about this movie that may have sent Paramount away?
I can't ask more without giving away some plot. So. I will say this again: it's a beautiful film and I would highly recommend it. If you don't have a Netflix, the free trial is worth this movie. Top-tier rating, here. 9.5/10. Oh, and if you watch it with children, be ready for some potentially tough conversations... If you really want to know more, check out my next installment, where I will attempt to answer some of the questions I posed above (with spoilers).
Monday, August 8, 2016
Let's start at the very beginning
For those of you who know me well, you know how much I love to analyze... well, everything. It's like this weird thing in my brain. I see something, hear something, feel something, and I'm already thinking about what makes that thing tick. Why does it move the way it does? What purpose does it have? Can it be better? From the simplest of melodies to the greatest of symphonies, nothing escapes my mind's strong desire to pick it apart. Movies are no exception.
Now some would consider that a bad thing. For a time I struggled with others telling me that I ruined their favorite films. But I now embrace it. See, I critique because I love, and I love movies. When I see a good movie I just have to know what makes it so good. How did the individual elements of character, story, cinematography, editing, sound, lighting, directing, and acting come together? The only way I can truly know is to pick it apart piece by piece, noticing some of its flaws along the way. I also want to see the medium of film grow as an art form. I want to be challenged, to be entertained, heartbroken... to be swept away by a good movie. Therefore I want to hold film to the highest of standards.
If you're the sort of person who likes to just sit back and enjoy a movie, this blog may not be for you. Again, for reasons stated above, I like to pick things apart, and my standards are pretty high. But even amidst the critiques I will attempt to be objective as possible (you'll notice that I intentionally avoid most comedies.... not my thing, can't rightly be objective). So. Whether you're checking out one of my initial reviews or my in-depth analyses, please remember that art is ultimately in the eye of the beholder. Read and watch as you please :)
Now some would consider that a bad thing. For a time I struggled with others telling me that I ruined their favorite films. But I now embrace it. See, I critique because I love, and I love movies. When I see a good movie I just have to know what makes it so good. How did the individual elements of character, story, cinematography, editing, sound, lighting, directing, and acting come together? The only way I can truly know is to pick it apart piece by piece, noticing some of its flaws along the way. I also want to see the medium of film grow as an art form. I want to be challenged, to be entertained, heartbroken... to be swept away by a good movie. Therefore I want to hold film to the highest of standards.
If you're the sort of person who likes to just sit back and enjoy a movie, this blog may not be for you. Again, for reasons stated above, I like to pick things apart, and my standards are pretty high. But even amidst the critiques I will attempt to be objective as possible (you'll notice that I intentionally avoid most comedies.... not my thing, can't rightly be objective). So. Whether you're checking out one of my initial reviews or my in-depth analyses, please remember that art is ultimately in the eye of the beholder. Read and watch as you please :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)