Since the advent of video and DVDs, I don't go to the movies often. (For one thing I like to be able to take breaks.) But I went with a friend last night to see Wallace and Gromit: The Curse Of The Wererabbit.
I warmly recommend it. It has even better production values than Chicken Run, and to my taste it is even more entertaining and has more soul. In fact, it is the first animated movie outside Pixar I would put in the same class as Toy Story II and The Incredibles. It is just hilarious.
It has it all: suspence, humor, mystery, action, and even romance (in a big-hair, big-toothed sort of British way).
Stobblehouse sez: Way Cool.
13 comments:
As an æsthete who has elsewhere eschewed the use of the word 'content', you amaze me by embracing the words 'produciton [sic] values'. Both are entertainment industry jargon: whereas 'content' may have an arguably qualitative dimension, 'production values' are merely quantitative relative to the amount of money that has been spent, with more assumed to mean better!
http://teladesign.com/ma-thesis/glossary.html
"Content - Information of interest to a human being - sound, text, pictures, video, etc..."
"Production values - A term derived from television, film, etc. The æsthetics and quality of presentation of given information content. Note that the concept does not really measure or describe emotional, social or intellectual value. A big-budget Hollywood motion picture is said to have high production values; an amateur home movie of baby's first steps shot with a handheld camcorder is said to have low production values..."
Here is an alternative definition:
"PRODUCTION VALUES: The elements that make up the complete media product. In electronic media, production values include cuts, dissolves, color, placement in the frame, editing, etc. In print; paper quality, ink color, placement on the page, size, shape, etc."
If somebody conceives of PV to be proporitonal to the money poored in, then I agree the term is pretty trivial. But if we take it to mean simply how well is something produced, then it has meaning.
I am unable to comment on your alternative definition because you give no source, though I think the author has missed the point by listing what are mostly 'techniques'. Given a sufficiently large range of definitions, some of which could have been written by anybody and most probably were, I suppose an attempt at meaningful discussion becomes futile:
http://www.bartleby.com/73/2019.html
Your "money poored in" is a delightful accidental oxymoron on the confusion between 'production costs' and 'production values' that inspired some wag to use the latter phrase in its wry original meaning.
"Anonymous"
I am not sure what you really are protesting against. Wallace and Gromit has *both* great production values and great soul, so we all win.
Eolake,
My wife and I took my boys to Wallace and Grommit, as well as Chicken Run, and I found Chicken run much better. I thought that Chicken run had a better story, and filled the time better. I felt that W & G was stretched out to fill the time alloted to it. That said, my wife loved W & G.
I also liked Chicken Run because of the characterization of both the heroine and the old rooster, who in the end pulled through and saved them.
I disagree that Production values relate to money. I believe I've seen more than a few movies with big budgets but poor production values.
Have been watching this little discussion/spat to see where it`s going...and I still haven`t a clue....
(Why the dictionary definitions anon..what are you all fluffed up for?)
So I`m just going to mention Wallace and Grommit instead!
No, Eolake! Haven`t seen it yet, but I imagine it will be stunning!
I loved chicken run! So I imagine this will be even better.
They are just such fabulous animators and storytellers!
Just one tidbit:
Gromit and an evil dog has an action-sequence of the "fighting on top of a speeding vehicle" kind. The vehicle in question is a coin-operated toy plane from a merry-go-round. It is speeding along a ledge high on a building. And the dogs are fighting merrily.
Then suddenly the coins run out, and the plane stops cold.
The dogs stop, and search for coins. Gromit doesn't have any of the right size. So the nazi-dog pulls out a little pink purse, and, smiling apologetically, fishes out the right coin and feeds it to the plane. The plane starts speeding again, and the dogs pick up the fight!
It was a relatively quiet moment in the film, and the whole theatre was in stitches.
Well, you`ve convinced me that I`d like to see it now, so I will now try to make a wee bit of time to do just that!
A superb film. It is very well made, with lots of humourous details to look out for, like names on signs and other objects. Hard to believe every scene is created by photographing plasticene figures very, very slowly.
I thought the backgrounds were spot on - the streets and the gardens. Great use of light in the church as well.
Too many funny moments to remember. Not a dull moment. Highly recommended!
I also saw a fantastic short before it from the people who did Madagascar, about a group of penguins at Christmas. If you see that, it's a real treat!
Oh yes, that penguin short was totally hilarious.
What I like best about Park's movies are the sets, especially machines and such.
I spotted a few nods to other movies in there - The Matrix and King Kong were the obvious ones.
About the (very cool) machines that Wallace builds - do you think the ideas were inspired by the start of Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang? I'm thinking of the complicated machine that makes an egg on toast or something! Whereas with Wallace it's to do with getting up, making tea, or cheese etc. Very cleverly done.
Or maybe Heath Robinson is the inspiration?
Loved the "Middle Aged Spread" joke too.
I wonder where those cool machines came from originally. I have seen very similar things in old Danish movies from the fifties.
CAUTION: POSSIBLE WERE-RABBIT PLOT SPOILER
Last week I saw some Wensleydale cheese that's been packaged with the Wallace & Gromit characters on the front. The design shows our beloved characters as they appear in the latest film, out looking for rabbits to trap. In the background is a giant shadow of the were-rabbit behind them. If you have seen the film, then this image is surely, erm, impossible! But I won't say why incase anyone reading hasn't seen the film yet. Artistic licence maybe?
BTW, you can get some right crap featuring these characters. I've seen a shower radio in the shape of Gromit's head. Almost as bad as the Krusty The Clown rucksack I saw in town recently. The floppy ears stood right out!
Why must merchandise sometimes desecrate the shapes of our favourite characters? Think of how many tacky Homer products there are.
In terms of The Simpsons, marketing is taking a 2D character from a TV cartoon and making it into a 3D sellable object. At least with Wallace & Gromit, the characters were 3D to start with.
Post a Comment