Pixar's Sparkshorts

While looking into information on Toy Story 4 I stumbled upon Pixar's SparkShorts. This recent initiative allows those working in the animation industry to create short films using Pixar's resources and given creative freedom. Getting to see smaller projects made by lesser known talent is interesting and with the first three shorts already released on their Youtube channel it seems like now is a great time to check them out.

Purl (2019)

Background/Summary: Written and directed by Kristen Lester, the film follows Purl, a living ball of yarn, who enters a corporate, human male culture that initially alienates her.

Takeaways: While Pixar has juxtaposed realistic and cartoonish character designs in the past, most notably with Inside Out, Purl's constant interaction between the two styles is unique. It gave the short its own personality while easily keeping my interest. I could easily see Purl's unique visual style working in a feature-length film and hopefully it gets implemented into future productions.

Outside of visuals, the film's other major takeaway is its societal commentary. Many animated features focus on addressing universal themes while leaving any critiques on cultures as subtext which is not a bad move, but a more explicit commentary is welcome. Given the demographic of Pixar movies it would be surprising to see this element bleed into other productions though it can not be entirely ruled out.

Smash and Grab (2019)

Background/Summary: Industry veteran Brian Larsen, who has been working in animation since The Iron Giant, tells the tale of two underclass robots who want to break the chains that are preventing them from expressing their friendship.

Takeaways: It is hard not to get Wall-E vibes when watching Smash and Grab. From its dystopian setting to its silent robot protagonists this short seems to purposely invoke similar ideas and aesthetics of Pixar's past success. This is not necessarily a con since I love science fiction and seeing the studio explore that genre further is enticing, though it would be nice if future efforts distinguished themselves a bit more. Though this short is well-done and has heart it hues too closely to its predecessor. It comes off more as a distillation of Wall-E's themes then an expression of something uniquely its own

Kitbull (2019)

Background/ Summary: Kitbull, created by Rosanna Sullivan, is about the friendship that forms between a stray cat and an abused dog.

Takeaways: Besides 2010's Day & Night, the short film that was shown before Toy Story 3, I can not think of many prior example of Pixar exploring 2D animation. This makes Kitbull stand out as it sport a beautiful animation and a lovely art style. Its hand-drawn look imbues everything with personality and charm with designs like the kitten's looking like soemthing from a Studio Ghibli production. Pixar posted a video that showcased how the short was made and the process they used is fascinating as they used 3D modeling to layout the scenes before drawing over and animating it.

Theatrical 2D animation has been out of favor for years due to various reasons but Kitbull's smart production strategy presents a possible future for them to come back. Pixar has shown its capability of making 2D animation that looks amazing and after the massive financial success of The Incredibles 2 the studio has enough clout and earnings to take such a potentially risky venture.

Final Thoughts

The SparkShorts initiative is being more experimental than I thought it would be which is great. Each one seems to have a healthy budget so Pixar's desire to facilitate creative expression seems genuine. While Smash and Grab may have may have been too similar to Wall-E for my taste all three shorts were enjoyable and worth a watch. More shorts are going to be released in the coming weeks so there is a lot to look forward too.

Rom-Com Roundup

OOO's Love Combo is the figuart we want but not the figurart we deserve.

Romantic comedies are a genre I usually avoid because they often feel bland or predictable. In honor of Valentine's Day I decided to challenge my preconceived notions and check out three of the most talked about rom-coms in recent years.

To All the Boys I've Loved Before (2018)

Proving that invasions of privacy can have adorable results.

 Based on Jenny Han's best-selling novel this film is about Lara Jean (Lana Condor), a teenage who keeps letters she has written to every crush she had. One day those letters are mailed out without her knowledge and in the aftermath Lara Jean ends up in a fake relationship with Peter (Noah Centino), a former crush.

The biggest surprise with this film is how down to earth it can be with traumatic experiences that gives the main character some depth while making them more relatable. Lara Jean and Peter's great chemistry made it easy to get invested in their relationship and watching each of tehm let their guards down was entertaining while being believable. Of the three films this one probably had the best romance. 

Another surprise was the cinematography which was far stronger than I though it would be. Most comedies tend to use flat lighting in order to maximize shot coverage, but To All the Boys I've Loved Before bucks this trend. This film use of shadows and natural lighting grounds its world even further and makes it feel more natural then many teen comedies. Some shot compositions were also impressive in how they helped showcase character's emotional distress.

On the comedy side of things is where this movie falters. To be fair some jokes do hit and are funny, but a fair number of the fail pretty hard. Some of the material that comic relief characters are given given, such as Lara Jean's best friend, is straight up cringe worthy. Though the film's biggest problem lies in its antagonist Gen (Emilija Baranac), who is very one-dimensional and almost cartoonishly spiteful. Her lack of depth and one-note characterization ends up clashing with the grounded nature of the rest of the film.

A poor villain aside this film ended up being quite enjoyable. Its sweet and charming while also having substance that elevates it above being cinematic fluff.

The Big Sick (2017)

Kumail's happy knowing he managed to leave The Daily Show before it became insufferable.

Kumail Nanijihani plays Kumail, a struggling comedian who falls in love with Emily (Zoe Kazan). He has to hide this relationship from his Muslim parents who are trying to arrange a marriage for him. The whole situation worsens when Emily is hospitalized and Kumail has to interact with her parents.

Co-written by Nanijihani and Emily V. Gordon, this story is based on their real-life relationship. This grounding comes through in the final product with dialogue feeling natural and everything has a sense of tangibility. Kamil's dramatic weight is impactful while also feeling believable. His conflict of trying to please his parents wishes while also not letting their cultural beliefs define his life is a struggle almost anyone can relate to on some level.

On the technical side their is not much to talk about. I noticed a use of a Dutch Angle and that's about it as far as film making tricks. Its not a true fault of the film since its clear that cinematography is not its focus. Everything is in service of the characters and allowing the actors to embody their struggle. While more variation would have been welcome, its easy to accept a lot of shoot-reverse shoot when the plot is gripping and performances are good.

Kamil and Emily's relationship is nice with the actors having a good back and forth though I wish their relationship was showcased more before Emily's hospitalization. Once she gets sick her character is essentially a non-participant for the entirety of Act 2.

Far more of a drama than a comedy, it still boasts a good romance and a strong character journey. While the relationship could have been enhanced with more screen time in Act 1 it was still a great feature.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)

Most fictional aspect of this film is proposing that rich people have redeemable souls.

Rachel (Constance Wu) is dating Nick (Henry Golding). Rachel finds out that Nick's family is filthy rich. Nick's mother  Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh) finds out that Rachel's family isn't. Conflict ensues.

The film's drama is more complicated but you wouldn't know that if you judged just by the first act, which is pretty cheesy and light-weight. Once you get into the meat of the conflict in Act 2 is when the narrative's weight is felt. Themes about the toxic nature of traditionalism and how it facilitates the growth of classicism and infighting. Rachel is by far the most fleshed-out character though some like Eleanor get a decent amount of depth.

It looks like a high-budget studio production and that is not said as an insult. Crazy Rich Asians is the first major studio film in over two decades to have an entirely Asian cast which makes this movie a benchmark for diversity. Its a blockbuster that is meant to service an underrepresented so I don't mind if its visually average.

What I have no problem critiquing is Goh Peik Lin (Awkwafina), Rachel's best friend and the film's major comic relief, being super annoying. She dominates many of the early scenes she is in and her personality gets grating fast. Her entire family is meant to be funny and while they did make me laugh when they were first introduced, subsequent appearance felt lacking.

Comically lacking but thematically rich this film ended up being a fun watch.

Conclusion 

 Pleasantly surprised at the quality of each of these film with each being really enjoyable. While I enjoyed some more than others it feels kinda weird to rank them so I want to say what good ways to watch them is.

Crazy Rich Asian: It's a crowd-pleaser so it is probably best enjoyed with a group of people. If your friends or family want a movie night than this is a good option.

To All the Boys I've Loved Before: If your looking for a date night film than this is a solid pick. Its grounded and more intimate while still being very approachable.

The Big Sick: A very interesting and personal story that might be too heavy if you are looking for a fun watch. Initial viewing should probably be by yourself or a significant other who is into dramaedies.

Chalice isn't a super love themed character but his visor is heart-shaped so...it fits.

Deciphering Toy Story 4's Existence

Toy Story 4 is a movie that confuses me. After Toy Story 3 ended the franchise on a thematically poignant note it seems so odd to release another film. I am curious about this new project but cautious. To alleviate some of this confusion I have decided to delve into what is known so far about the project in order to get a better feel of what to expect upon its release.

The Talent Behind It

The film's IMDB page shows a mix of old and new talents. John Lasster, Andrew Stanton, Pete Doctor, and Lee Unkrich are all credited as story creators. All four of them are Pixar veterans who have extensive history with the franchise. Having such figureheads in charge of the story is a potential sign this new narrative may have the depth of past entries.

Though they may have created the narrative they are not in charge of the script. Will McCormack and Stephen Folsom are the movie's screenwriters and both are relatively new to feature film making. Additionally neither has much experience with animated projects with Folsom having written two episodes of Star Wars Resistance.

Josh Cooley, the director, lands in the middle of the rookie-veteran spectrum. Cooley has been a storyboard artist with Pixar since The Incredibles and was one of three screenwriters on Inside Out. He has directed animated shorts but Toy Story 4 will be his first feature-length film.

The Premise

A summary of the film can be found on Pixar's website which ,for brevity's sake, will not be copy/pasted here. This paragraph has three major details about the movie:

1.  It is a road-trip so the plot will be structured around visiting various settings and set pieces.
2. Forky, the character that premiered in the first trailer, will be a central figure in the story and his identity crisis regarding his status as a toy.
3. Woody's conceptions about the world seem to be the main theme of the narrative. It mentions that Woody has always devoted himself to taking care of his owner and never questioned this role until now.

This premise is interesting as it does buck trends established in the previous films. Instead of focusing on one central location the narrative will shift its settings throughout the story. Having the main character's world view challenged also presents some interesting opportunities to explore Woody's character.

The Marketing 

So far there have been three trailers released for the film with each having a comedic tone. Comedy seems to be the central tenet of the marketing campaign which could best be seen in the second trailer which focuses on Ducky and Bunny, two new characters who are voiced by Keegan-Micheal Key and Jordan Peele. The ad is centered on Bunny and Ducky recreating a reoccurring sketch from their show, Key & Peele. 

Bo Peep's appearance on the international poster and Super Bowl spot seems to be a play to nostalgia. Compared to the comedy this aspect of the marketing is fairly minor though.

The Verdict 

Having so many Toy Story founders still playing a hand in the new installment's creation is reassuring and the plot synopsis hints that there may be interesting themes. Though having this project's screenwriters being relative fresh faces is interesting but odd since only one of them, Folsom, has previous experience writing for animation.

The advertising push is probably the most concerning aspect of the movie. Focusing on Key & Peele is weird considering their show been off the air for years and both comedians have been successfully pursuing solo careers since its cancellation. Bringing them together for Toy Story 4 seems like a move that is a year or two too late. It makes Ducky and Bunny feel like characters from previous drafts that were brought into the final product even if their gimmick is dated, which makes me worried if there are other dated aspects. 

While the ads have not made me laugh it would be wrong to write off what the comedy will be like in the final product. Jokes have failed to land so far though that could be tied to how little I am attached to these new characters which the final film could fix. This feature is being promoted as the most light-heated in the series so while their is precedent for thematic depth it should not be the expectation.

Sorry to Bother You

Boot's Riley directorial debut, Sorry to Bother You (2018) was one of the most lauded indie films of last year, with discussion and analysis around it seemingly increasing since the New Year. Interested I went in with no knowledge of what the movie was actually about, which was the perfect way of experiencing it.

Sorry to Bother You is an absurdist comedy that follows Cassius (Lakeith Stainfield) as he gets hired at a call center and tries to climb the corporate ladder. While there is more to unpack and discuss I want to avoid any chance of spoiling it since this is an experience best enjoyed by going in as blind as possible. At its heart the film is a critique of capitalism but there are several more subject matters explored and it all comes to together to a fascinating piece of cinema.

Stylistically  this film could best be described as art-house by way of Adult Swim. Its absurdist aesthetic at times reminded me of shows like Tim and Eric or Children's Hospital but this movie avoids the raunchy and juvenile trappings of those programs. Beautiful lighting and great shot composition help visually convey the character's emotions and help endear the viewer to its weird world. Their is a lot of style on display that strengths the substance of its societal commentary while not being overbearing.



Though the style and substance complimented each other for me I could see how someone else could feel differently. It was overwhelming to me at first yet eventually warmed up to it, yet it would not be surprising if others could not acclimate to how the movie presents itself. While I cannot guarantee what you will get out of it there is a entertaining and interesting viewing experience worth having.

Tangled

In preparation to play Kingdom Hearts 3 I decided to watch Tangled (2010), the only film featured in that game that I had not watched before. Tangled seemed to spark the beginning of Disney Animation's recent wave of success though discussion around the movie seemed to die out when the studio's next production, Frozen (2013), became a cultural phenomenon.

Rapunzel is a pretty shallow fairy tale so I was surprised by how well the creative team managed to use its elements as a springboard for making a fun world. Though the world building gets off to rough start with a lengthy exposition dump that explains how Rapunzel's hair is magical and Gothel kidnapped her in order to exploit that power. It felt inelegant and sloppy though most of these writing issue are relegated to Act 1 with the movie finding its footing in Act 2.

Most of the cast is very likeable with Rapunzel being a highlight as a protagonist with a big personality but with enough agency and intelligence that she always felt competent in any situation. Her and Flynn end up having a nice chemistry with their courtship being fairly cute. Even the animal side kicks, a horse named Maximus and a chameleon called Pascal, have nice comedic moments while avoiding being annoying.

Beautifully animated and with colors the pop, Tangled is visually gorgeous. Some sequences like the fight in the canyon utilize dynamic camera work that gives the set pieces a nice sense of energy. The visual design exuded charm and it was hard not to smile at times. Character designs are nicely varied even though it does all into the trapping that many animated films have where the main character are all traditionally beautiful while the more unique designs of its supporting cast are treated as being ugly or abnormal.

Surprisingly cute couple that isn't as generic as promo pics led me to believe.

The film's biggest flaw is its antagonist, Gothel. Her position as Rapunzel's kid napper/ adoptive mother presented the writers with two possible avenues for her character's development: they could have made her sympathetic or unapologetically evil. While giving Gothel some kind of true motherly attachment to the protagonist would have been an interesting direction rich, exploring that kind of captor/captive relationship is a dark subject matter that may be too much for the movie's target demo to handle or understand.

So while I can not begrudge the writers for choosing to make her fully evil I can say that she failed to leave any kind of impression. Gothel has the motives of a crazy mastermind but lacks the larger then life personality that makes these type of villains enjoyable to watch. She mocks our heroes with petty insults and jabs that just feel juvenile and as a result she never feels like a true threat. Instead og coming across as a serious, manipulative monster she ultimately feels like a rejected extra out of a Disney Channel original movie.

Tangled was a pleasant surprise and a fun watch. It has a clunky start but it eventually settles into a nice grove. If its villian got some major reworks I could see this film being on par with many classic Disney films. Still a enjoyable movie and a worthwhile watch if your in the mood for some family-friendly entertainment.