Further forays into the current cinema

I was rather pleasantly surprised by Tangled, which begins with unpleasant intimations of Dreamworks but soon reveals itself as, to adapt a Godardian formulation, un vrai film Disney; the above still is from the film's very big set piece, a floating-lantern extravaganza that ranks as one of the most breathtaking pieces of animation the studio has done, ever. My full review is here, at MSN Movies.

I was somewhat less surprised by Christina Aguilera's big-screen debut (I think), the rather not-good Burlesque, but I see that I do not come down as hard on it as a lot of other critics have, as witness Marshall Fine's review. Why? I dunno; not so much a matter of being bored with shooting fish in a barrel as maybe a disinclination to break a butterfly on a wheel. Particularly when the butterfly is blonde, bats her lashes a lot, and has what Rick Moranis' Merv Griffin would call "fascinating breasts." Call me weak. I don't care. My review of Burlesque (which, incidentally, I will defend to the death as being a ton better than friggin' Crossroads, thanks), also for MSN Movies, is here. 

Comments

[Lance McCallion]

You've pretty much just sold me on Tangled, Glenn. Until this point I honestly couldn't have cared less about it, since all the promotional material thus far has yes, reeked of Dreamworks, which was disappointing from a new DIsney film. Especially after The Princess and the Frog, itself a sort of new classic in my estimation, easily among the ranks of the studio's best films and a shining example of inspired top-quality classical 2D animation. Another initial disappointment regarding Tangled was merely seeing another 3D animation from Disney after such a glorious quasi-throwback in Princess. Then again, that screenshot above does quite a bit to sway me in the new film's favor. So yeah, thanks.

[lipranzer]

"incidentally, I will defend to the death as being a ton better than friggin' Crossroads, thanks"

The smartass in me is compelled to ask; the Britney Spears CROSSROADS or the Walter Hill one?

[Bruce Reid]

The forgetful idiot in me actually thanks you, lipranzer, because I was trying to think what Hill's CROSSROADS had done to deserve the comparison, let alone the hate.

[Embarrassed Anon]

That screenshot has a more "painterly" look than most 3D computer animation (which looks rather plastic-y to me). Is that sustained throughout the film?

[Glenn Kenny]

@ Embarassed Anon: I'd say...sort of. It definitely doesn't have that overweening "plastic-y" feel you find in a lot of other stuff of this ilk. As with the Pixar stuff, the 3-D effects were largely unobtrusive, except when they were supposed to be, as in the dam-bursting water-ride bit. But the painterly feel is a constant, and a pleasure.

[Fernando]

@Lance McCallion: Just wanted to let you know that your comment inspired to finally watch THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG this morning, and I'm awfully glad I did. It's total classic Disney, a surprisingly old-fashioned feeling film, in admirable and pleasant ways. It could hardly have felt less like a movie released in 2009; I would have believed it was a lost gem from the early 1990s, or 1940s for that matter.

[Phil Freeman]

The commercials for Tangled have been TERRIBLE, so your review is damn intriguing to me. Might wind up at this one instead of that Rock movie this weekend.

[Shawn Stone]

TANGLED is lovely.

What did Walter Hill's CROSSROADS do to deserve hate? I only saw it once, long ago, but it didn't seem crazy in a good way, like STREETS OF FIRE, just crazy. And the guitar duel at the end struck me as pretty awful.

[MDRackham]

Just based on that still, it looks as though the Ellenshaw influence remains at Disney.

That's a wonderful thing.