Showing posts with label Danny Huston. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Danny Huston. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

TIFF Review: A Monster in Paris

A Monster in Paris


Depending on how closely you follow the world of animation, the name Bibo Bergeron may evoke an immediate reaction. Bergeron has worked on numerous animated features but is most well known for his previous directorial efforts in The Road to El Dorado and Shark Tale. His latest film, A Monster in Paris, features Bergeron’s trademark animation style and a few musical numbers that will have you tapping your toes.

Set in Paris in 1910, when the city streets are flooded, the story centres around two friends, Emile (Jay Harrington) and Raoul (Adam Goldberg), who accidentally unleash a monster in Paris. One day Emile, a cinema projectionist, agrees to help Raoul, a delivery truck driver by day and inventor by night, make a few deliveries around town. One of Raoul ‘s stops include the greenhouse of an eccentric scientist who happens to be out of town. Ignoring the rules about not touching anything, the two men fool around with some of the scientist’s potions and inadvertently create a creature that stirs the citizens of Paris into a panic. With the entire city in a frenzy, a corrupt police chief (Danny Huston) is determined to slay the beast at all costs for his own political gains. However, It is only when a cabaret singer, Lucille (Vanessa Paradis), takes the monster in that Emile and Raoul realize that the creature everyone is afraid of may not be what he seems.

Like most of Bergeron’s films, the animation in A Monster in Paris is quite lovely. The city of Paris has a serene beauty that looks expansive when coupled with the 3D animation. The character designs are vibrant as well. Each character has a unique look that really helps to give Paris a distinct cultural, and artistic flavour. Bergeron does a good job of matching the looks of the characters with the actors doing the voice-over work. Speaking of voice work, the cast, which also features Bob Balaban, Sean Lennon, and Catherine O’ Hara, all provide good performance in their given roles. Adam Goldberg in particular really shines as Raoul. He gives the character that special spark which makes Raoul a joy to watch whenever he is on screen.


It also must be noted that the musical numbers are exceptional. Bergeron does not weigh the film down with countless musical numbers like other animated films tend to do. The songs he does include have a distinct Spanish feel and are undeniably catchy. It would not be surprising to see one or two of the songs receive a little recognition come award season.

Where the film falters is in its overall plot. Bergeron has several good ideas scattered throughout but they never seem to form together on the whole. Young children will no doubt love A Monster in Paris regardless, but adults will find the sloppy plot devices and underdeveloped characters rather bothersome. A Monster in Paris could have also used much tighter editing from a story standpoint. For example, there is a tender moment between Raoul and Lucille that arrives at the end of the film. The scene features a flashback to when both characters were kids. While the scene is nice, it is completely unnecessary by that point in the film. Their lover for one another has already been implied much earlier. The scene, or at least sections of if, should have either been introduced earlier or left out all together.

Although an engaging film from a visual standpoint, A Monster in Paris does not have a strong enough story to sustain its 90 minute running time. Many scenes felt like they are loosely tied together just to set up the actions sequences. However, as I mentioned earlier, young kids will eat it up. There are enough fun moments that will keep them glued to the screen. As for the adults, well at least the music will help to block out several of the film’s short comings.

Monday, October 11, 2010

Movie Marketing Monday

More TIFF reviews are still coming down the pipe, but for now let us welcome the return of the Movie Marketing Monday feature to this blog.


The Tourist




The Warrior’s Way


Monday, February 1, 2010

A Little Light The Edge of Darkness Be

Edge of Darkness

A character in Edge of Darkness remarks “it never is what it is. It is what it can be made to look like…” This line sums up the film perfectly. Edge of Darkness is yet another example of faulty studio marketing at its finest. Mel Gibson's return to acting is being sold as an action-packed revenge flick in the same vein as Taken and Payback. In reality, the movie is actually a political thriller that is surprisingly light on the thrills.

Based on the 1985 BBC mini-series of the same name, Edge of Darkness is about Thomas Craven’s (Mel Gibson) quest for justice after his daughter, Emma (Bojana Novakovic), is gunned down before his eyes. Soon Thomas finds himself unravelling a mystery that somehow links back to Jack Bennett (Danny Huston), the head of a nuclear facility contracted by the United States government. Thomas search for the truth is further complicated by the emergence of Darius Jedburgh (Ray Winstone), a man who specializes in ensuring that government secrets stay hidden.

The one major hurdle Edge of Darkness never seems to overcome is how close to the edge will Craven go? Every time you think he has reached his breaking point, the director, Martin Campbell, seems to pullback Craven leash. This gets frustrating after a while as it seems that all the truly interesting moments are being kept from the audience. It is as if Campbell needed to cut out the good stuff to ensure a regular running time. It is only in the last ten minutes of the film when we finally see the rabid dog inside Thomas cut loose. The sad part is that even that severely disappoints. The “action-packed” finale is nothing you have not seen in hundreds of movies before. Come to think of it, the most memorable moment in the entire film is when Gibson" goes to town" on a bookish environmental crusader who clearly has never been in a fight in his life. The mismatch of the two men is so absurd that you cannot help but laugh at the scene.

I know some will argue that the film is not about the action as much as it is about the moral dilemma within Gibson’s character. While I am sure the inner conflict that Craven, and several of the other characters , face is gripping in the six episode mini-series; it just does not work in a two hour film. Proof of this comes when you really look at how Campbell handles Gibson's character in the film. Martin Campbell tries really hard to justify Craven’s actions at the end of the film by making him witness and endure a lot of the evil things up to that point. Yet the question must be asked, is it really necessary to justify Craven's actions at all? A loss of a child is enough to make the average parent snap. Do we really need the shady corporation to do extremely dastardly things as well just so we can cheer for the hero?

Trying to moralize a person's violent action is a theme that runs throughout the picture. Whether it is Danny Huston’s Bennett perversely wondering what pain of losing a child feels like, or Winstone’s Darius philosophizing about his actions on the job, everyone is wrestling with something. Speaking of Ray Winstone, his superb acting talents are grossly wasted in the film. Darius Jedburgh spends the majority of the picture on the sidelines trying to figure out whose team he wants to play for. By time Darius does decide to make a statement it comes far too late and ultimately does not enhance the plot at all.

The only thing the Edge of Darkness did successfully was peak my interest in the original source material. I could see how the subject matter could be invigorating if given the length of a mini-series to flesh everything out properly. Sadly by truncating the series to fit a standard film running time, Edge of Darkness does not have enough depth or thrills to really make the impact that Campbell and Gibson hoped for.