Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #16: Frankenweenie

 

Director: Tim Burton

Starring: Charlie Tahan, Martin Short, Catherine O’Hara, Martin Landau, Winona Ryder

Released: 2012

Trailer

Synopsis: When Victor loses his dog, Sparky, he resolves to bring his precious pet back to life by any means necessary, even by those employed by his namesake. Meanwhile, fellow students discover Victor’s experiments and decide to partake in their own versions of said experiments, which (knowing how these films tend to go) can only go well.

 

I’ll be perfectly honest…I was not a fan of the original short that inspired this film. It has some interesting ideas, and there are some pretty emotional moments peppered into such a short film, but overall it is just average.

And I’d be lying if I said that I didn’t feel the exact same way about this animated version. Which is frustrating, because there are so many good things going for this film. The animation is really well done, probably the cleanest stop motion animation I’ve seen in recent years, at least as far as bodily motion goes. The visual style is, well, Tim Burton-y with its fun weirdness. Each character is designed in a way where they stand out as individual people and not just variations on a similar mold. Edgar “E” Gore, with his hunched back and distorted features like Igor in the Frankenstein films, and Mr. Rzykruski, who looks like an exaggerated version of Burton’s hero, Vincent Price, have easily the most memorable and interesting looking designs.

The problem is that while the overall movements of the characters are fluid, the facial animation is not as polished. A lot of the time, the characters have practically the same facial expressions despite having different emotions at different times, mostly because of the way the characters’ faces are designed. The eyes, while big, are shockingly not all that expressive. And the shape of the heads, with tapered jaws and small mouths, make it even difficult to decipher how characters are feeling at given times. This is especially shameful because a similar animated film Burton worked on, Vincent, had some incredible exaggerated facial animations that conveyed emotions effectively.

The voice acting is also very well done. Many of the voice actors play multiple roles, and they do a good job of creating separate voices for the characters without just sounding like the same person altering their voice slightly. The only truly distracting voice was Winona Ryder, who’s trying to channel a combination of her roles in previous Tim Burton projects, but ultimately creates a character who clearly sounds like an adult trying to play a child. This is especially glaring since many of the kid characters are played by kids or at least people who have high enough voices to make their acting convincing.

The score is also great. It’s classic Danny Elfman, going back to his usual fun, peppy, creepy, emotional oeuvre. Some may roll their eyes and think that Elfman is just doing his usual shtick. But considering that some of his more recent scores sounded like generic Hans Zimmer-esque fluff, it’s nice to see the man return to form.

But while there are some good things going for this film, what brings it down is the story. Not so much the story that originated in the short, or even the additional plot threads of having some of Victor’s classmates resurrect their pets. It’s the fact that this film, like The Killing Joke, tries to blend what feels like two completely different movies together. On their own, the two sets of plot threads could work as two separate films. But mix them together, and you get a very choppy film that loses much of its tension with some boneheaded storytelling choices, namely the quickly dropped love interest angle as well as how and why the townspeople go after Sparky toward the end. It also doesn’t help that the film devolves, just like Hotel Transylvania 2, into a big monster fight at the end that lacks a good deal of tension and feels like something audiences have seen a million times before.

Overall, while Frankenweenie has some decent animation and a great score, the film feels rushed and overstuffed and opts to focus on what we have seen before rather than focusing on what is really important: the relationships between the characters and how those relationship dynamics move the story along. There are some hints of elements that would work marvelously if allowed to expand and flow naturally, but the rushed story as well as the predictable beats within it quickly bury these elements.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month IV: The Final Chapter, Day 20: DOUBLE FEATURE–Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein & Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman

 

Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein

Director: Kathi Castillo

Starring: Janice Karman, Ross Bagdasarian, Jr.

Released: 1999

Trailer

 

One of the many regrets I’ve had while doing this review series is not focusing on reviewing more kid-friendly horror-themed films. Yes, there were films such as the Hotel Transylvania series and Return to Oz, but those were three family pictures out of 93 films. Today, I hope to rectify that by recommending two really good animated family films centering around Alvin and the Chipmunks, the first of which is Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein.

Yes, before the much-reviled modern Alvin and the Chipmunks franchise that is now on its fourth film, there were quality programs…okay, incredibly dated quality programs involving the chipmunk trio of Alvin, Simon, and Theodore. The one I grew up with was the ‘80s animated program that would show during early morning hours on Nickelodeon. Yes… that one. But what drew me to this film was not Nickelodeon, but Cartoon Network and their unfortunately now-defunct program Cartoon Network’s Cartoon Theater, which would show animated films during the evening. One such evening involved a double feature involving this film and its sequel, Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman. And at the time, I absolutely loved them both. But how does this one hold up now that it’s been almost twenty years since they were released?

This film’s story involves, well, Alvin and company meeting the Monster (I refuse to call him Frankenstein), who happens to be in their town because his creator, Dr. Frankenstein, is trying to hide his creation from people by…hiding out at a heavily attended amusement park? Yes, this doesn’t make all that much sense, but the important thing is that Alvin and his brothers—Theodore, especially—bond with the Monster while dealing with not only the mad doctor, but their job at the amusement park as the musical entertainment.

For those looking for a more plot-centered film…this is not the animated film for you. The plot is flimsy at best, and doesn’t quite make sense if one thinks about it too hard. Really, the main conflict between the chipmunks and the doctor doesn’t occur until about 2/3 into the film, and most of that 2/3 is introducing the chipmunks, having them get into trouble by hijacking a tour bus, and then finally meeting the monster.

But that said, it’s still an entertaining film. The shenanigans the chipmunks get themselves into are amusing and entertaining, even if they feel like they go on for a little too long in places. The tour bus scene, where Alvin is recklessly driving through the park, is fun and entertaining.

And anything involving the Monster is amusing and oddly cute (I am just as surprised as you are).

The characters remain true to the ‘80s cartoon’s version of the characters, though Dave (their surrogate father, for the uninitiated) seems a bit more clueless here than usual, especially when he hears the Monster grunt and thinks it’s Alvin.

The musical numbers peppered throughout the film are also incredibly catchy. It would have been so easy to just have the chipmunks cover popular songs at the time (looking at you, CG-munks), but the creators of this film took the time to write original material. “Things Out There” and “If A Monster Came in Our Room” are two particular standouts.

The animation for the film is decent, if a bit rough compared to the show and to its sequel. Some of the camera work is awkward, often relying on distracting pans and scans to move throughout scenes. But the animation does its job, particularly when Alvin becomes overly cartoonish during the last act of the film. He inflates, deflates, then becomes this far more zany version of himself that looks, well… see for yourself.

The ending of the film is amusing, though somewhat anticlimactic, as the last-minute conflict with Dr. Frankenstein is resolved rather quickly and without the chipmunks’ involvement. The ending itself is fine, though it does feel like the film chooses to stop there rather than actually conclude. Perhaps if they ended with one last musical number, it would have felt more conclusive.

While not a perfect film, Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein is a fun animated film for kids and adults who enjoyed the ‘80s cartoon. Even those who feel jaded about the characters after seeing the recent slew of films ought to check this one out to see what made the concept great in the first place.

 

Final Score: 6/10

 

 

Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman

Director: Kathi Castillo

Starring: Janice Karman, Ross Bagdasarian, Jr., Elizabeth Daily, Maurice LaMarche

Released: 2000

Trailer

 

And here we are, the sequel to Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein. Well, sort of sequel, as a great deal of the plot only works if one ignores the previous film. Why?

Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman centers around our furry protagonists, particularly Alvin and Theodore. Alvin keeps hearing howling noises from his neighbor’s house, and believes that the neighbor, Mr. Talbot, is a werewolf. No one believes him (to answer the previous “Why?”—that’s why) at first, until Theodore gets bitten by a werewolf and starts to show signs of becoming one. Now, it’s up to Alvin and Simon to save their brother before he turns into a werewolf forever.

Already, this film is a vast improvement over the first because it has a far stronger plot that invests the audience in the characters, particularly Theodore. Because of his sensitive nature, Theodore is bullied a lot and can’t defend himself. So, when Theodore begins to change into a werewolf, it’s satisfying (at first) to see him developing confidence and defending himself. But just like most curses, the good quickly wears off, allowing more room for the bad aspects of the transformation: arrogance and animalistic hunger. Overall, it’s a fascinating story that has decent buildup.

Centering the climax around the elementary school play is a nice touch, especially considering that the play is Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, whose transformation themes are incredibly similar to those in this film. Some of the action falls flat as the conclusion is a bit of a cop-out, but the climax provides enough tension for the audience to care about what’s going on in the film. Plus, there is a bit of an amusing aside glance when this cop-out is addressed, making it a little less painful.

The animation looks far better here than its predecessor. In the last film, the animation and designs looked rough and sketchy. Here, the animation and design work is more cleanly drawn and better animated. There are no distracting pans and scans to take the audience out of the film, thank goodness. Though, the fade effect used for transformation scenes could have been animated better, showing more of the stages rather than just fading to a normal, non-wolfy face.

The musical numbers are great in this film as well, though there are far more memorable songs here than in Meet Frankenstein. “Munks on a Mission,” “Monster Out in You,” and “Everything’s Gonna Be Alright” are all memorable, unbelievably catchy, and, yes, original compositions.

There are also some references to the original Universal Wolf Man film, namely Mr. Talbot’s name being similar to the protagonist’s name: Larry Talbot.

 

One gripe this reviewer does have with the film (because I’m apparently a curmudgeon who doesn’t like to just enjoy things) is that supposedly, this film and Meet Frankenstein are in the same universe, and yet everyone except Alvin believes that monsters do not exist. I suppose it is a spiritual sequel rather than a direct sequel, but many of the materials advertising the films (including the IMDb pages) acknowledge that these two films are part of the same series. This is also in spite of the fact that Alvin and his brothers do not have a musical career in this film and are, in fact, normal (well, for chipmunk children) elementary school kids. So, for those looking for a continuation of a larger story, this is not the film series for you. Honestly, this is nitpicking that doesn’t impact the quality of either film at all, as neither film references the other.

With that said, Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet the Wolfman is a far more engaging film than its predecessor. There is more of a story and conflict within the film, making the audience care more about the characters. Like the first film, there are catchy musical numbers and plenty of amusing moments to entertain children and adults alike.

 

Final Score: 8/10

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Tuesday Night Matinee: Batman: The Killing Joke

Director: Sam Liu

Starring: Kevin Conroy, Mark Hamill, Tara Strong, Ray Wise

Released: 2016

Trailer

 

As always, keep an open mind.

 

One of my earliest childhood memories was watching Batman: Mask of the Phantasm on video tape. I remember watching it so much as a kid, that by the time we retired it in favor of the newfangled DVD technology, the tape was nearly completely worn out.

Why do I mention this, other than the aforementioned film is also about Batman? I mention Mask of the Phantasm because it was the first time I ever saw and—most importantly—heard Mark Hamill as the Joker. Ever since the first day I watched that tape, Mark Hamill has been and always will be the true voice of the Joker.

So, naturally, when I heard that Hamill would be returning to voice the Joker once againin an animated adaptation of the most famous Joker story, The Killing Joke, I was thrilled. Adding to Hamill’s return, having Kevin Conroy return to voice Batman once again further fueled my anticipation. Finally, as the icing on the cake, the film would be a fairly (with only a few scenes added) faithful adaptation of the now legendary story: the Joker’s nefarious plot to not only cripple Barbara Gordon, but also drive Commissioner Gordon and Batman to his level of insanity.

But does this film deliver? Well, yes and no. In order to fairly analyze the film, one must analyze the film in two parts. Why? Because, essentially, the film consists of two different stories: one involving the story appearing in the film’s namesake comic book, and one involving Barbara Gordon’s past as Batgirl.

Before analyzing each part, this reviewer would like to compliment this film as a whole. For a film made to be released on home video, the sound design is fantastic. The gun shots and explosions add the necessary tension to each action scene, and sound great in a theater setting. But the great sound is not limited to just the percussive portions of the film. During the fight scenes, every punch and kick sounds painful and visceral. The action scenes, though the animation is a touch choppy, are well blocked and filmed. Combine the great sound with the great images, and you have some of the best 2D animated fight scenes I have seen in quite a while. While Mask of the Phantasm may be my favorite animated Batman film, the action scenes—while decent—certainly weren’t as stylized or exciting to watch as those in this film.

The Killing Joke portion of the story—the second half of the film—is easily the best part, as it is an incredibly faithful adaptation of the original comic. Some will argue that certain events or bits of dialogue don’t play out exactly as they do in the comic. I for one am a bit disappointed that the transitions between the past and present don’t occur as smoothly in the film, mostly because the comic’s script—written by the legendary Allan Moore—allows transitions to occur through juxtaposed images.

Yes, this difference is disappointing, but one must remember that this is an adaptation, not a direct translation, meaning that there will be occasional changes to fit the medium. What measures the quality of an adaptation is not so much how much of the story is kept as it was in the source material (though it is still important), but how it all is presented and incorporated.

This second half of film is effective in establishing an especially disturbing, creepy tone. Perhaps it’s because of the score which, from the composers’ own words, was modeled after the great scores of Bernard Hermann. Or, perhaps it’s the film’s effective use of the budget limits to create unsettling moments, such as the close-up on Joker’s head as he looks over his freshly-lit carnival with psychopathic glee. Or, perhaps it’s because of Hamill’s chilling performance as the Joker. Every line Hamill speaks crackles with life and a touch of murderous glee—this is a man who seems to have always been meant to play this character.

Hamill also does a fantastic job in the flashback portions as well, garnering sympathy from the audience in scenes that are far too short, mostly because the comic just glances over them rather than delving deeper into things like the relationship between pre-Joker and his wife. This is precisely where liberties could have been taken, expanding upon these flashbacks rather than tacking on scenes that are ultimately irrelevant to the story (we will get to that portion soon).

Perhaps the best part of this film is the song and dance portion, with Mark Hamill singing the creepy and unbelievably catchy, “I Go Looney,” whose lyrics are ripped straight from the pages of the source material. Scenes like this embody the film’s ability to balance between staying true to the source material and also supplementing it. It’s a shame that this second half is brought down by the first half of the film, the portion written almost specifically to pad out the run time.

Yes, before the excellent second half, we have the Batgirl portion of the film, which has garnered a lot of controversy for…a particular reason that this reviewer won’t disclose here. Oddly enough, my biggest issues with this part of the film do not involve the controversial scene in question, though it does come out of left field. It’s not even with the story itself—Batgirl and Batman hunting down a criminal named Paris Franz, who has an unhealthy obsession with Batgirl—which could honestly be a movie of its own. All in all, it’s this portion of the film’s sloppy handling of its limited animation budget and voice acting as well as its lack of cohesiveness with the second half that brings the film as a whole down.

While the second half hits it out of the park despite its animation limitations, the first half stumbles because of these same limitations.   For example, there are many scenes that become distracting because characters in the foreground seem to be staring out into space while one character is talking. This wouldn’t be a bad thing if these scenarios were relaxed, non-combat situations. But these often occur during scenes of high tension, where physical combat is imminent.

The voice acting is also not as great here. Tara Strong as Batgirl is especially disappointing, as a great deal of her dialogue is delivered in an unusually restrained manner that proves distracting. Strong does do a lot better with the character in the second act, however, so this lack of reasonable vocal expression in the first act is baffling to this reviewer. Conroy’s delivery as Batman in this first act is also similarly restrained and monotonic, as though he weren’t entirely comfortable with the lines he has been given. But who can blame him when a great deal of Batman’s lines in this half come across as pretentious teenage poetry about darkness, especially when compared to Moore’s more mature dialogue in the second act?

But those two issues aside, the biggest issue is the lack of cohesiveness between these two acts. It is incredibly clear that these portions of the story were conceived by two different writers, and almost feels like two completely different films crammed into one. This reviewer can see that the screenwriter, Brian Azzarello, is trying to not only craft a parallel between Batgirl’s potential “fall into the void” and the same fall Batman and Gordon potentially face, but also to give Barbara some character before she is attacked in the second act. And this character development would be fine if it amounted to anything in the long run.

By remaining faithful to the source material in the second act, the film ultimately negates the character development that came before. Instead of trying to make Barbara more than a pawn in the Joker’s plan to break Gordon and Batman, this character development just emphasizes rather than fixes the biggest flaw of both versions of The Killing Joke—Barbara is not a character, she is a catalyst. Despite all of her backstory and all that she has done both in this film and in the more expansive comics, she is relegated to nothing more than a victim and a plot device. And the fact that, despite its best efforts, this film maintains this aspect rather than subverting it, defeats the purpose of even having these additional scenes and makes this reviewer question whether or not the original story is really as deserving of the praise it gets. And this is the worst sin an adaptation can commit.

If one ignores the first act, The Killing Joke is an excellent adaptation of the original comic. But with this first act, the film is brought down a bit. Perhaps if there was a better bridge between these two stories, this could have been a better adaptation, at least in this reviewer’s eyes. Or, if portions of Alan Moore’s story were expanded upon more, rather than tacking on additional bits of story that dissipate once the main action involving the Joker begins. All in all, this film is not as bad as a good deal of critics are saying, but it certainly could have been better. As for this reviewer, this film was worth seeing in the theaters, but future watches of the film will include skipping the first act entirely and watching Mark Hamill’s magnificent return to his iconic character.

 

Now, this will be different than the final scores of other films in the past. Instead of just calculating the film in its entirety, this final score will also include the scores of each act of the film, as they are essentially two different films. There will also be a deduction in the final total, as the lack of cohesiveness between the two parts warrants a penalty.

 

Act One Final Score: 7/10

Act Two Final Score: 9/10

Final Score: 6/10      

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!