GeekReads

Or Rapunzel, as it would've been called, if the marketing meatheads hadn't gotten to it

The Disney Animated Classics seem to go through cycles of good and bad, with a few good ones (Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Lion King, The Emperor’s New Groove and Lilo & Stitch, etc.) padded out by a bunch of forgettable fluff (The Great Mouse Detective, Oliver & Company, Dinosaur, Home on the Range, etc.) With Tangled, the 50th animated feature in the series, Disney’s at the top of its game again – the fairy tale game, that is – with an update on the Rapunzel story. Not that The Princess and the Frog was bad, it’s just that this is better.

It’s hard not to think that Pixar‘s had a very positive influence on Disney since they were “acquired” back in 2006. Starting with Meet The Robinsons (which would have been in preproduction at the time the Pixar crew came onboard), each subsequent film has improved on the last.

This movie just reeks of classic Disney – and I mean that as a compliment. Maybe they rediscovered what it means to be a Disney movie from making the self-parodying Enchanted, but from the animation style to the zany characters, you can’t help but remember back to the good old days. At one stage, I swear I was watching a new Aladdin. Almost.

The musical numbers, although written by the legendary Alan Menken, aren’t especially memorable or catchy. Oh, and Rapunzel’s and her “mom’s” huuuuuuuuumongous eyes. Oh. My. God. Seriously, she’s very pretty in that Disney Princess kinda way, but man if her eyes were any bigger you could literally drown in them (especially if this ever comes out in IMAX). If you’re not a fan of anime-style googlies, don’t say I didn’t warn you. Other than that, Rapunz… er, I mean the artwork… is exquisitely beautiful and a delight to look at. The makers spent an obscene amount of money (it’s either the 2nd or 5th most expensive film ever made depending on which way you choose to fudge the numbers) making Tangled look like it was drawn/painted despite being computer generated 3D.

See those saucer plates she's got for eyes?

It’s the usual love found, betrayed, lost, redeemed and restored cycle but of course don’t get too hung up on the simplistic plot, remembering that this is a kids movie. It’s great how Disney has made something that appeals to all ages without relying on parading its street smarts and adding sly “nudge-nudge-wink-wink” jokes for the grown-ups. still, one little thing niggled: at the start of the movie an old woman discovers a magic flower and keeps it secretly to herself by hiding it and tending it so that it would keep her young forever. But when the royal family discovers the flower, they kill it to save the Queen. So the woman was a little selfish maybe, but the royal family was outright neglectful. Disney won’t exactly win over environmentalists with that one.

My faith in Disney is restored, even though it’s likely to be the peak of this cycle considering that the 51st feature will be another Winnie the Pooh movie. As it is, Tangled is a great film to mark a major milestone in this chapter of Disney’s history.

I didn’t know this until after I met Jenny, but apparently boxing day movies are a tradition. In previous years you could pretty much rely on there being a blockbuster the day after Christmas, and for many years geeky fare has played a dominant role: The Lord of the Rings, Matrix, Narnia and Harry Potter. This year continues the tradition with the penultimate instalment of J.K. Rowling’s books and the third (fourth?) of C.S. Lewis’s.

The neon is back!

Another sequel joins the ranks this year, although Tron: Legacy has been much longer in the making – it’s a sequel to a Disney cult classic from 1982. Don’t beat yourself up if your recollection’s somewhat vague – you’re not the only one, and it’s not old age. The neon may have burned itself into your subconscious but the plot wasn’t so bright. In a nutshell, former ENCOM employee, arcade owner and hacker Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges) is searching for evidence that his ex-employer stole games that he created, but gets digitised by the company’s Master Control Program and fights for both his life, and control of cyberspace.

The sequel hits the ground running. As the master of this digital domain, Flynn creates a digital clone of himself called Clu to assist with the task of perfecting this new world. In a move that should surprise nobody, the doppelganger turns evil and his pure motives are misinterpreted and twisted into a megalomaniacal scheme that threatens reality, trapping Flynn in cyberspace. The burden then falls upon the shoulders of Flynn’s son, Sam, to discover the truth about why his father went missing, and to thwart the digital dictator’s plans.

In other words, Disney chose not to stray far from the Hollywood blockbuster formula of applying an extremely large budget to a relatively average story in the hope that by creating an eye-popping experience people will forgive the story. And to be fair, they largely succeed.

Oooh, light bikes

The computer generated graphics and special effects are impressive, being strongly reminiscent of the old while giving it a thorough modern makeover. I don’t think anybody could fairly complain that the designers did not create a deferential homage to the original. The neon suits, grid, light cycles and disc wars are back with bells on, brought to you in brain melting 3D (although for the record, most of the early parts of the movie set outside cyberspace are actually in 2D).

What did surprise me was the ham-fisted attempt at Christian allegory. There’s a total facepalm moment where Clu has this whole monologue about how the Creator (Flynn) is trying to keep the Programs from the truth.

Let me put it like this: Tron: Legacy is not going to win Best Movie, Best Screenplay, Best Actor (male or female) or most other awards. However, it is definitely a contender for Best Visual Effects, so my recommendation: check your cynicism at the door, sit back, and watch the fireworks.

A poster from the "Meet the characters" series

Toy Story 3 is a triumph for Pixar in so many ways: overcoming sequel-itis, thwarting the evil empire, and simply maintaining an unbroken string of hits – which is a lot easier said than done.

Andy is all grown up, and Woody, Buzz and the gang find themselves looking forward to either a life of retirement in the attic, or the threat of being thrown away. Instead, they’re accidentally donated to a kids’ centre where they find a new lease on life with an endless supply of kids to play with them, but all is not as well as it seems…

I found the movie to be a lot closer to the original than Toy Story 2, which is to say that I rank this one higher (but the original is still the best of course). This third and final instalment in the series does what it has always done exceptionally well, which is to combine imagination and the sense of wonder with an emotional core based in reality (unlike that other franchise, which presents vapid parables of adult issues dressed in kids’ fairy tale clothing). Only a person with the coldest heart would be unmoved at the conclusion of the movie.

The core cast of the Toy Story series

The plot of Toy Story 3 is not only entertaining in and of itself, but provides a most satisfying conclusion to the trilogy. Like everything about the series’ contrivance that allows toys to come to life when we humans are not looking, the resolution is neat, plausible and leaves nothing to be desired.

By the way, don’t waste your money on 3D for this one. It was not specifically designed for it, not does it add much to the experience, unless you really love the novelty of it, and aren’t troubled by the encumbrance of the glasses and the dimness that they cause.

And so we bid a sad, but fitting farewell to Woody and the gang (at least until they release the trilogy on blu-ray…)

—-

* Huh, I discovered that “integrous” – the adjectival form of “integrity” – is actually a neologism, one of those non-words that entered the lexicon through common usage rather than a respectable etymological history. Ah, the perils of an ever-evolving language.