A long, long time ago in a theater far, far away, I watched the first Star Wars movie and was enthralled. Not quite so long ago as that, in a movie theater just a few miles away, I watched the fourth Star Wars movie and was thoroughly unimpressed.
Why the different reaction? Two reasons: (1) George Lucas; (2) CGI.
Let's start with CGI.
Computerized artistry in films can be remarkable when applied with a deft hand and only when it is needed. CGI becomes problematic when it is used for no other reason than the producers can afford it. In the first three movies, the actors might have been acting against people in crazy masks and costumes, but at least they were acting. In the second set of films, the actors were largely delivering dialogue to imaginary creatures that would be added later by some guy at a computer, and their performances come off like they were delivering their lines to propped up brooms.
But the biggest problem, in my estimation, was George Lucas didn't understand why most people loved the original films. Somehow, somewhere, at some point between the 1970s and the 1990s, Lucas forgot how to make a movie that is fun to watch.
Visually stunning? Yes.
Epic? Yes.
Fun? No.
There was a swashbuckling, space pirate, nerdy machismo to the orginal films that was nowhere to be found in the prequels that followed. You couldn't help getting caught up in the action of the first three movies when everyone looked like they were having such a great time. The cast of the more recent movies all looked like they had volunteered for experimental proctological exams.
The same exact problem befell the last installment of the Indiana Jones franchise. It was loaded with CGI effects instead of the in-person stunts and complex sets we loved so much from the original films, and the actors were left dangling in the wind (or in the CGI trees with CGI monkeys) with crappy dialogue and wasted opportunities for developing their characters. I feared Harrison Ford had forgotten how to be interesting, but have since seen him in films in which he disproves this fear. Therefore, the fault must lie with Lucas and and his partner in crime Steven Spielberg. As one online reviewer wrote at the time: "George Lucas pooped on my childhood again."
So, when it was announced this week that Disney is buying Lucasfilms and the rights to Star Wars and Indiana Jones, among other holdings, I was thrilled. Oh, sure, the good folks at Disney have been responsbile fror some of the most notorious stinkers over the years, but with the influx of Pixar leadership the prospect of quality output is stronger than ever. And the sad truth is Disney really couldn't do any worse a job on the proposed new Star Wars movies than Lucas did on the last three.
Here's hoping...
© 2012 Mark Feggeler
Showing posts with label Disney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Disney. Show all posts
Friday, November 2, 2012
Friday, April 29, 2011
I Got Nothing
You know the great thing about Disney movies? There are so many of them, it doesn't matter if a few of them suck.
"Pocahantes?"
Wow! That one really sucks. Nothing like making a movie for kids that makes you feel guilty about being white. Not that I think white kids don't need to understand the ugly truths about American history. They do. I just don't believe it's up to Disney, Mel Gibson, and a personified raccoon to shove a big morality lesson down their throats.
And sucky as "Pocahantes" is, it's not nearly so miserably awful as "Hunchback of Notre Dame." You have to wonder about the thought process behind funding a kid's movie about a disfigured man, a super hot gypsy woman, and a sexually deviant clergyman. What exactly about that screamed "children's feature length cartoon musical" to the suits at Disney's not-so-wonderful world of executive decisions?
The great thing about what makes something suck is that it's entirely subjective. For instance, my list of all time most horrid Disney films differs greatly from My Lovely Wife's. Topping her list would be "Wall-E."
See? I don't understand that at all. "Cars" maybe, but "Wall-E?"
What gets Disney off the hook for its occasional putrescence is its prolificacy. (It's a word. Look it up.) For every sucky movie Disney made that tanked at the theater, there are four others that soared through the air like Tinkerbell.
My point is that anyone, even an uber-imaginative braintrust like Disney, can suffer dry spells as wide and deep as the Grand Canyon. (More specifically, the desert side of the Grand Canyon, where the Brady Bunch went on vacation and got locked up in a ghosttown jail because apparently that's hiliariously good fun.) Which is why I don't worry too much about these blog posts being perfect. If Disney can afford to suck a little, then so can I.
There are times when all the bloggerific ideas are locked tightly away in some secret little vault to which I do not possess the key. Now and then I look back at the increasingly long list of posts I've published and am surprised by a few I had forgotten. Then I read them and understand why I forgot them. They suck.
Same thing goes for the fiction I'm working on. Sometimes I belly up to the computer or notebook with all the enthusiasm in the world, but nothing worthy of being written presents itself. At these times, I force myself to write something, anything, just to keep up the practice of writing.
I know if I maintain my productivity, and achieve a prolificacy, I stand a good chance of sucking less than more.
© 2011 Mark Feggeler
"Pocahantes?"
Wow! That one really sucks. Nothing like making a movie for kids that makes you feel guilty about being white. Not that I think white kids don't need to understand the ugly truths about American history. They do. I just don't believe it's up to Disney, Mel Gibson, and a personified raccoon to shove a big morality lesson down their throats.
And sucky as "Pocahantes" is, it's not nearly so miserably awful as "Hunchback of Notre Dame." You have to wonder about the thought process behind funding a kid's movie about a disfigured man, a super hot gypsy woman, and a sexually deviant clergyman. What exactly about that screamed "children's feature length cartoon musical" to the suits at Disney's not-so-wonderful world of executive decisions?
The great thing about what makes something suck is that it's entirely subjective. For instance, my list of all time most horrid Disney films differs greatly from My Lovely Wife's. Topping her list would be "Wall-E."
See? I don't understand that at all. "Cars" maybe, but "Wall-E?"
What gets Disney off the hook for its occasional putrescence is its prolificacy. (It's a word. Look it up.) For every sucky movie Disney made that tanked at the theater, there are four others that soared through the air like Tinkerbell.
My point is that anyone, even an uber-imaginative braintrust like Disney, can suffer dry spells as wide and deep as the Grand Canyon. (More specifically, the desert side of the Grand Canyon, where the Brady Bunch went on vacation and got locked up in a ghosttown jail because apparently that's hiliariously good fun.) Which is why I don't worry too much about these blog posts being perfect. If Disney can afford to suck a little, then so can I.
There are times when all the bloggerific ideas are locked tightly away in some secret little vault to which I do not possess the key. Now and then I look back at the increasingly long list of posts I've published and am surprised by a few I had forgotten. Then I read them and understand why I forgot them. They suck.
Same thing goes for the fiction I'm working on. Sometimes I belly up to the computer or notebook with all the enthusiasm in the world, but nothing worthy of being written presents itself. At these times, I force myself to write something, anything, just to keep up the practice of writing.
I know if I maintain my productivity, and achieve a prolificacy, I stand a good chance of sucking less than more.
© 2011 Mark Feggeler
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
King Kong All Over Again
Finding the correct title for a blog post can be difficult. Good ideas don't always present themselves. In this case, too many choices have made it difficult for me to pick one.
"Why Universal Studios Sucks"
"Universal Owes Me $430"
"All Style & No Substance"
They all express how I feel about our recent trip to Universal Studios Islands of Adventure in Orlando, FL.
My first experience with Universal Studios was 15 years ago, before children, when my Lovely Wife and I were newlyweds. She has never cared for thrill rides, so we took advantage of short lines in the off season to scoot me through the more notable adventures with the least inconvenience to her. Jaws was entertaining, Earthquake was under renovation, but King Kong promised a scream or two.
I'm a fan of the big ape. Almost every New Year's Eve of my childhood, when the local channels and PBS would run classic movie marathons, I looked forward to tuning in to the early afternoon showing of the black & white classic on my 13-inch black & white TV. Although the pathetically awful 1970s remake -- Jessica Lange never has regained my respect -- had come and gone long before we traveled to the theme park, my anticipation and expectations remained high.
Twenty minutes into waiting, however, it became apparent something was amiss. The line stopped advancing. People started grumbling. The message wafted through the queue like an unpleasant odor: "King Kong is not working." Disappointed, but not wanting to waste any of our time together, we abandoned the ride. I gave it one more chance later that evening, but as I approached, a sign indicated the ride was out of commission for the rest of they day.
Our general impression of Universal Studios was one of bemused apathy. Not too bad, but definitely not Disney quality in terms of total immersion into a memorable experience.
Cut to spring break 2011.
A solid year of planning had us booked on the new Disney Dream, a short cruise that would leave us an extra day or two to accomplish something else. Since the ship's home is Port Canaveral, just one hour east of Orlando, a theme park visit seemed the natural climax to our trip. But which park? Having hit all four Disney parks hard over the past five or six years, and all of us being avid Harry Potter fans, a quick visit to the new Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios Islands of Adventure theme park seemed apropos.
Now, I wasn't expecting to skip down the lane in Hogsmeade, unfettered by long lines or throngs of fellow tourists crowding into Hogwarts Castle or the Three Broomsticks pub. This was spring break, and patience would be required. Unfortunately, along with patience came the need for drastically lowered expectations.
The first mistake we made was to follow the advice of a Universal Studios salesman I met during a recent tradeshow. He informed me the best thing to start with was Olivander's Wand Shop, since the line moves slowly for the brief theatrical presentation given before being allowed to enter the wand shop.
"The Castle can move 2,000 people through every hour, so save that for later," he said.
By the time we reached the wand shop, thanks to the early admission of resort guests and express pass holders, the Olivander's line already was over an hour long. We followed the advice and stood in line for the wand shop, watching the estimated wait time at the Hogwarts Castle behind us quickly building from 45 minutes to two hours, only to be disappointed by an underwhelming three-minute performance by an unenthusiastic "actor" in a very tiny room.
Ninety dollars later, with three plastic wands in hand, we decided to avoid the castle for a little while in hopes the line would diminish. My Lovely Wife wandered through the faux village of Hogsmeade while the kids and I rode the amusing Flight of the Hippogriff roller coaster. Our plan seemingly working, the wait time at the castle had reduced to a reasonable length, so we gave it a try.
From the outside, it's a remarkable sight. It could not possibly look more like the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry that all us movie geeks wish were a real place to which we could travel. But when you step inside, the illusion crumbles. Heck, you don't even have to go inside.
Just stand on the snaking line for an hour inside the grounds surrounding the castle, and you quickly understand how lifeless an experience your tour of Hogwarts will be. Meandering through the herbology greenhouses, there are no screeching mandrakes or assortment of moving plants. The only plants are inexpensive real ones, hung high overhead in baskets that look like ones you can buy from Home Depot for about twenty bucks. You also get a great view of a tremendous blank wall.
During the next 45 minutes -- in which time we inched forward from a portrait room with only four moving paintings to Dumbledore's office -- we discovered that Universal Studios' idea of high-quality audio barely matches that of the Country Bear Jamboree. I swear, somewhere in storage I have an old Sony Walkman cassette player with clearer sound. We couldn't understand a dang thing anyone was saying, regardless of the fact we heard each repeated 1-minute loop at least twenty times.
And if you want to talk about missed opportunities, Disney's Haunted House -- one of the original attractions built in 1971 -- offers more tricks of the eye and technological wonders than anything the Wizarding World of Harry Potter meagerly doles out. I'm not sure if anyone has told the chiefs at Universal Studios, but flat screen televisions framed up to look like moving paintings are not futuristic technology. Where were the moving staircases? Where were the ghosts? Where was that sense of wonder I expected to feel?
Then, just like years before, the line stopped moving. We were trapped in Dumbledore's office for almost thirty minutes with no park employees in sight. Dumbledore endlessly repeated his bass-heavy mumbled welcome to us. Finally the announcement came: "We are sorry for the delay. We are experiencing technical difficulties..."
It was King Kong all over again.
Considering all the work that went into making the new Harry Potter section of the park look so amazing, it's pretty sad the most fun we had as a family during the entire day came at Seuss Landing.
© 2011 Mark Feggeler
"Why Universal Studios Sucks"
"Universal Owes Me $430"
"All Style & No Substance"
They all express how I feel about our recent trip to Universal Studios Islands of Adventure in Orlando, FL.
My first experience with Universal Studios was 15 years ago, before children, when my Lovely Wife and I were newlyweds. She has never cared for thrill rides, so we took advantage of short lines in the off season to scoot me through the more notable adventures with the least inconvenience to her. Jaws was entertaining, Earthquake was under renovation, but King Kong promised a scream or two.
I'm a fan of the big ape. Almost every New Year's Eve of my childhood, when the local channels and PBS would run classic movie marathons, I looked forward to tuning in to the early afternoon showing of the black & white classic on my 13-inch black & white TV. Although the pathetically awful 1970s remake -- Jessica Lange never has regained my respect -- had come and gone long before we traveled to the theme park, my anticipation and expectations remained high.
Twenty minutes into waiting, however, it became apparent something was amiss. The line stopped advancing. People started grumbling. The message wafted through the queue like an unpleasant odor: "King Kong is not working." Disappointed, but not wanting to waste any of our time together, we abandoned the ride. I gave it one more chance later that evening, but as I approached, a sign indicated the ride was out of commission for the rest of they day.
Our general impression of Universal Studios was one of bemused apathy. Not too bad, but definitely not Disney quality in terms of total immersion into a memorable experience.
Cut to spring break 2011.
A solid year of planning had us booked on the new Disney Dream, a short cruise that would leave us an extra day or two to accomplish something else. Since the ship's home is Port Canaveral, just one hour east of Orlando, a theme park visit seemed the natural climax to our trip. But which park? Having hit all four Disney parks hard over the past five or six years, and all of us being avid Harry Potter fans, a quick visit to the new Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios Islands of Adventure theme park seemed apropos.
Now, I wasn't expecting to skip down the lane in Hogsmeade, unfettered by long lines or throngs of fellow tourists crowding into Hogwarts Castle or the Three Broomsticks pub. This was spring break, and patience would be required. Unfortunately, along with patience came the need for drastically lowered expectations.
The first mistake we made was to follow the advice of a Universal Studios salesman I met during a recent tradeshow. He informed me the best thing to start with was Olivander's Wand Shop, since the line moves slowly for the brief theatrical presentation given before being allowed to enter the wand shop.
"The Castle can move 2,000 people through every hour, so save that for later," he said.
By the time we reached the wand shop, thanks to the early admission of resort guests and express pass holders, the Olivander's line already was over an hour long. We followed the advice and stood in line for the wand shop, watching the estimated wait time at the Hogwarts Castle behind us quickly building from 45 minutes to two hours, only to be disappointed by an underwhelming three-minute performance by an unenthusiastic "actor" in a very tiny room.
Ninety dollars later, with three plastic wands in hand, we decided to avoid the castle for a little while in hopes the line would diminish. My Lovely Wife wandered through the faux village of Hogsmeade while the kids and I rode the amusing Flight of the Hippogriff roller coaster. Our plan seemingly working, the wait time at the castle had reduced to a reasonable length, so we gave it a try.
Just stand on the snaking line for an hour inside the grounds surrounding the castle, and you quickly understand how lifeless an experience your tour of Hogwarts will be. Meandering through the herbology greenhouses, there are no screeching mandrakes or assortment of moving plants. The only plants are inexpensive real ones, hung high overhead in baskets that look like ones you can buy from Home Depot for about twenty bucks. You also get a great view of a tremendous blank wall.
During the next 45 minutes -- in which time we inched forward from a portrait room with only four moving paintings to Dumbledore's office -- we discovered that Universal Studios' idea of high-quality audio barely matches that of the Country Bear Jamboree. I swear, somewhere in storage I have an old Sony Walkman cassette player with clearer sound. We couldn't understand a dang thing anyone was saying, regardless of the fact we heard each repeated 1-minute loop at least twenty times.
And if you want to talk about missed opportunities, Disney's Haunted House -- one of the original attractions built in 1971 -- offers more tricks of the eye and technological wonders than anything the Wizarding World of Harry Potter meagerly doles out. I'm not sure if anyone has told the chiefs at Universal Studios, but flat screen televisions framed up to look like moving paintings are not futuristic technology. Where were the moving staircases? Where were the ghosts? Where was that sense of wonder I expected to feel?
Then, just like years before, the line stopped moving. We were trapped in Dumbledore's office for almost thirty minutes with no park employees in sight. Dumbledore endlessly repeated his bass-heavy mumbled welcome to us. Finally the announcement came: "We are sorry for the delay. We are experiencing technical difficulties..."
It was King Kong all over again.
Considering all the work that went into making the new Harry Potter section of the park look so amazing, it's pretty sad the most fun we had as a family during the entire day came at Seuss Landing.
© 2011 Mark Feggeler
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)