I venture far enough to be skeptical of movies I'm excited for. My ability to come out of a theater and be marginally impressed, bored or downright spiteful as earned me the ire of many friends. I went into “Toy Story 3” with this same reserved indifference. Yes, I loved the original “Toy Story”, but it has grown closer to me with age and its cultural, even historic, influence is a plus. Conversely “Toy Story 2” was good for laughs but hit too many similar (or weaker) emotional notes of the original to be truly great. But with all of Pixar's 10 previous feature films in mind, the worst I can say is that the wonderfully animated “Cars” was a somewhat tired story, had one annoying character and a undeserving nostalgia for the 1950s.
Before “Toy Story 3,” I need to comment on the opening short film “Day and Night.” First, I will never complain of or not praise this Pixar film staple--originally used to showcase their test footage but now used as an emotional warm up act (without fail). But more than the usual charm, this short animated film gave me more reason to believe in the viability of 3D than any feature film to date--including “Avatar.” The story, scarcely describable in prose, is about the friendship two beings form when one contains a world of daylight and the other showcases--within the being's outline--the beauty of Earth's night. As if being purposefully defiant to audience expectations, the use of 3D is not used have things ‘fly towards the screen,’ but to rather add a optical layer of depth, creating a very real illusion that a world is contained within (or behind) the two animated fellows. I couldn't help but wonder if this short film was a sort of apology from Pixar. The traditional visual beauty of “Toy Story 3” is so alone in its superiority, that it may just be the most useless use of 3D technology ever. In fact, the 3D technology turns what could just be beautiful images (color, lighting, textures, etc.) into what 3D has always been: spectacle. Like many video games, the spectacle of realism/3D seems to crush any creative desire for good storytelling. For the first time ever, in this short animated film, I felt that not only was a film enhanced by 3D, but that 3D was necessary--perhaps on par with color film being necessary for “The Wizard of Oz.”
Technology aside, ‘Toy Story 3” gloriously achieved that golden moment that every movie should strive for. A moment of pure immersion in the story. When Buzz Lightyear gently grabbed Jessie's hand without saying a word...That moment I was truly lost in the movie, I was no longer sitting in a theater, but rather totally feeling for characters. I felt my heart, not my head, crying out for fictional characters. This happens about once a year for me in movies and something worth applauding. Readers of my Facebook profile will remember that I once advocated the existence of “Indiana Jones and the Concept of Mortality.” Characters that are used to fighting for their lives against all odds is an incredibly common feeling for movie audiences, even if the audience members have never physically fought for their lives. So when iconic characters seemingly give up on life, audiences can see when things are truly more important than life--in the characters’ lives and their own lives.
The movie gets dropped about a rounding error or two in my book though for limping a bit through the first act with repeated dialogue and emotions. Woody is loyal to Andy. The other toys are scared yet determined. Woody is again loyal to Andy, the other toys are again scared yet determined. Nothing is achieved or revealed over three separate scenes except reiteration. Again. Reiteration. Nothing is achieved. Redundancy is kind of annoying, isn’t it?
This hardly-a-children's film received some post-release controversy, as many parents felt the G-rated film was too intense (read: "shit-your-pants-terrifying") for their smallest children. Having no backbone, the MPAA agreed and apologized for the rating, agreeing, yes, the move should have been R-rated...or at least PG. Personally, I'd like every movie I see be R-rated just to keep anyone under the age of 17 out of the theater. Regardless, the film has complexities dealing with isolationism, corrupted values and public relations worthy of an essay, as much as any film this year. Furthermore, "Toy Story 3" is the best reviewed movie on Rotten Tomatoes--and the worst reviewed film of the trilogy--raising even more eyebrows.
Or at least three in one shot.
In the end, Pixar has made an incredible film, though one must be purified into the movie by watching a slew of trailers for other children’s/3D movies coming out in the next few months. There is no real reason every movie can't have an admirable level of ambition, if not execution. Pixar simply can't supply audiences with a surplus of quality films, so it is up to the audiences to demand quality films from other companies. More than just telling a compelling story, Pixar proved 3D can work and evolve--so now I hate the technology even more for being a repeated wasteful surcharge of $3.50.
If "Toy Story 3" won Best Picture, I doubt many would complain.
No comments:
Post a Comment