Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Happy ending for ‘Happy Feet’

Finally, it is ‘Happy Feet’ that has won the Oscars for the best animated feature, winning over Monster House and Cars. Without sounding like a rant of a Pixar fanboy, I would like to say that Cars deserved the award.

There are few things that have made me think so. Firstly, unlike Cars, the other two movies have extensively used motion capture. Ok, that might not weigh them down much. I found Happy feet to be a little monotonous with penguins, penguins and more penguins. What if they sing and dance, it still demanded variety. And the white bg from beginning to end really hurt the eyes. Though it looked ‘cool’ in the beginning, when I came out after the end, the whole world was painted white for some time.

With Monster House, I don’t see any reason why this movie should have been animated. With mostly human characters without any supernatural abilities or that sort, this story does not demand the use of animation. It could have been made as a live action motion picture. Only the house required animation and special effects, which could be mixed with live action.

Cars’ stands out in every aspect. ‘A World inhabited by Cars’- wow that’s a great concept to start with and the animation medium has definitely brought out something to us that is otherwise impossible to conceive wholly. The characters and the environments were simply superb with amazing details. I liked the story and the narration was great. The Pixar animators (actors!) are masters at bringing the emotions out of their characters. Not a single frame in the movie was dragging or boring. Its wholesome entertainment and very well made at that too. I wonder what else does an animated movie need to win the Oscars……a message?! oh no !

Hats off to the makers of all the three movies, but definitely, the Knight with the sword should have gone the Route 66 way.


sudarsan said...

Penguins, penguins and more penguins. The same thing i felt for the movie "Happy Feet". Single-tone monotonous movie. That is what i think.
In the case of "Monster House", i don't think it "should" be taken with real human beings and special effects. 3d is an art. This art could be in any form. What is the purpose of creating portraits then? It could have been real photo.
"cars" is just awesome. The characters, animation, expression etc..etc..This movie has life. It doesn't look like the characters are CG. I even got emotional when our hero car "lightning McQueen" helped his opponent to win the second place in the final race. Awesome. just awesome.

nsiva said...

Thanks for being here Sudarsan....

Unless its a simulation, trying to create art that mimics the real world pixel by pixel is unnecessary. But still, there are two school of thoughts regarding this.

The available technology is not good enough to reproduce human movements and expressions perfectly.

Anonymous said...

Its quite surprising to know "Happy feet" bagged the oscars, n was rated the best one against "Cars".
I feel "Cars" is one of the best work of Pixar till date. Finding nemo is an equally great work too, but the former has an innovative concept "Car world". It sure should have given the Oscars for the outstanding Concept, Animation n Story line.
There was ofcourse some drag in the Happy Feet with its monotonous atmosphere and the ending was not tat keen too. Altogether it could never be compared with Cars.

Its very obvious the judges wanted to uphold the 'message' than the exceptional animation n storyline. This could be a way of encouraging new (animated) movies with some message?!


siva said...

Thanks for your comment Madhan.

Movies with messages can be made under the short film, or documentary categories. 3d animation movies should not be judged by the 'message' tag. Importance should be given to the entertainment value and use of medium as well.

Am sure Pixar will be back knocking the doors with Ratatouille(read as rat-a-too-ee). The rodents must have already smelt the cheese.