Movie Review - Gigantic (2009)

Starring Paul Dano, Zooey Deschanel, John Goodman, Ed Asner, and Zach Galifianakis
Written by Matt Aselton and Adam Nagata
Directed by Matt Aselton

I don't know that I've wanted a movie to end this year more than I wanted Gigantic to end. It's not that it was even the worst movie I've seen, but it was full of those "quirky" characters that do wacky things that people would never do in real life simply to try and provide laughs for the movie-going audience.

Paul Dano is Brian Weathersby, a 28-year old mattress salesman who has wanted to adopt a baby from China for his whole life. One day, he meets Happy Lolly (Zooey Deschanel) whose father has just bought a mattress from him. They fall in love. That's pretty much it (except for the weird subplot of a homeless guy played by Zack Galifianakis who is constantly beating up Brian...why? Because it's weird and edgy, that's why). Brian and Happy both have that solemn, emotionless indie characteristic that we see in indie movies where the writers don't know what to write about. The two of them are so blah that I never once felt anything but boredom whenever Dano and Deschanel were onscreen. Dano and Deschanel were playing characters I've seen them play before...they brought nothing new to the table here. Sure, they weren't helped by the awful script, but they certainly were poor on their own merits.

The only thing saving this movie from complete failure are the performances of John Goodman and Ed Asner as Happy and Brian's respective fathers. Goodman's character is a completely unbelievable "quirky" rich guy, but he plays it with gusto and was the only person that breathed life into the movie. Asner was the only "normal" person here and I enjoyed the performance probably for that reason alone.

The RyMickey Rating: D-

Movie Review - Up (2009)

Featuring the voice talents of Ed Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai, and Bob Peterson

Written by Bob Peterson

Directed by Pete Docter (co-director: Bob Peterson)

A painful edit to the grade has been made below...also see addition in bold below...

Unabashed and unashamed Pixar nut here. What they are able to do in terms of story and humor and animation is head-over-heels better than any other animation company working today (including my beloved Disney -- although, they're now one in the same).

I went into their newest venture, Up, with no expectations, however. The trailers never really grabbed me for some reason or another. And, it's entirely a good thing that my expectations were lowered, because, unfortunately, Up falls more towards the Cars "flawed, but still decent" end of the Pixar pantheon rather than the Wall*E "near-perfection" end.

We meet Carl Frederickson as a boy of about five and he longs to meet his favorite explorer, Charles Muntz. He dreams of one day traveling to far-off lands and just plain-old having a life full of fun expeditions. On his way home one day, he meets Ellie, a young girl his age who also has a penchant for adventure. They spark a unique friendship and through what could possibly be the most touching five minutes in a Pixar film ever, we witness in a dialogue-free, music score-only manner Carl and Ellie falling in love, getting married, making their way through the ups and downs of middle and old age, and eventually succumbing to the inevitable -- the death of a spouse. The first fifteen minutes of this film had me riveted. From Michael Giacchino's lilting score, to the top-notch animation, to the amazing caliber of storytelling without even saying a word, the Pixar folks had me onboard and loving it.

Unfortunately, they weren't able to sustain their momentum. Carl meets Russell, a cute chubby kid who simply needs to earn his last badge in Assisting the Elderly in order to become a full-fledged Wilderness Explorer. Carl's a curmudgeon and sends Russell on an impossible mission, hoping to get rid of the pesky kid. Through a series of unfortunate events, Carl decides that he's literally going to pick up his house with balloons and explore South America -- something he had promised his adventurous Ellie that they would do while they were both alive. Unbeknown to Carl, Russell has stowed away underneath his porch and came along for the ride.

And this is where the flick loses its course. It turns into part buddy comedy (of which a good chunk of the "comedy" falls flat...something very surprising for a Pixar film), part 1930s adventure serial (you know, those five/ten minute films that Spielberg mined for his Indiana Jones series). It's an admirable attempt to be sure, but neither the comedy nor the adventure can compare to the serious gravitas we've witnessed in the Carl/Ellie relationship in the film's first act. It's only when the film shifts back to this relationship that I really felt any emotional connection...which is what I expect from Pixar.

And if I'm not experiencing an emotional connection, I at least want to be laughing (see A Bug's Life as a perfect example of a non-serious Pixar film succeeding). Unfortunately, the laughs in this one seem aimed squarely at the young kids in the audience. The entire character of Dug, a dog Carl and Russell meet on their journey, fell flat for me. He was supposed to be the comedic relief, but I'm not sure I laughed at him once.

With the exception of the annoying Dug (voiced by writer and co-director Bob Peterson), the voice talent was top-notch. Ed Asner was a perfect fit for the cranky Carl. Young Jordan Nagai was able to keep Russell from turning annoying (and it was entirely possible that the character could've turned that way). Christopher Plummer was certainly pitch perfect as the villain...I just wish I could've cared for his part of the story a little more.

I realize I'm not seeming up on this film (no pun intended there), but I'd rather see lukewarm Pixar than decent Dreamworks anyday. The film looks great, sounds great (the score by the aforementioned Michael Giacchino is beautiful although slightly repetitive), and contains what may be my favorite Pixar scene ever (the sequence between Carl and Ellie mentioned above). Up is still my favorite animated film of the year at this point, although Dreamworks definitely put up valiant competition in Monsters vs. Aliens. It's just that it's not great Pixar and whenever you don't get great Pixar, you're bound to be disappointed.

Another note about 3D (this seems to be a running point of contention with me), there is nothing 3D about this film. Yes, there is depth here, but there is nothing "coming out at you." That's fine...I don't need to be grabbing for things, but I also think that if you're able to see this film simply in digital format (and not digital 3D), that'd be the way to go. I don't fault Pixar for that, but this 3D bandwagon has been something I haven't been able to jump on yet.

Edit: Unfortunately, I totally realize now that I was grading this film on some bizarre Pixar curve that doesn't apply to any other animated films. Was this movie better than Monsters vs. Aliens? Nope, not really. Better than Coraline? Unfortunately not. I'm not even sure if it's better than Cars...the lowpoint in the Pixar canon. Perhaps this will get a second viewing from me and maybe I'll appreciate it more at that point, but until that day, the B- that I originally gave this film must be changed to the more appropriate grade below. I must (try to) be fair...but please know that I'm crying on the inside...

The RyMickey Rating: C