Life of Pi

An Indian man named Piscine Molitor Patel tells a young writer an adventure in his life that is said to make him believe in God. It starts when he is a little boy and is being brought up Hindu, but soon starts to learn and follow Christianity and Islam. The story picks up when his Father is forced to sell the family zoo and move his family to Canada, bringing many of the animals along on a Japanese freighter on the journey. In the middle of the night, the ship sinks, leaving Pi and some of the animals alone in a lifeboat. This fantastic tale is made up mostly of how he survives in the middle of the ocean with a Bengal Tiger...named Richard Parker.

Cast

Suraj Sharma       Pi Patel

Irrfan Khan          Adult Pi Patel

Ayush Tandon      Pi Patel (11 / 12 Years)

Gautam Belur       Pi Patel (5 Years)

Adil Hussain         Santosh Patel

Tabu                  Gita Patel

Rafe Spall           Writer

Gérard Depardieu  Cook

Who will like this movie:

While there are several scary moments in "Life of Pi", I believe that this is a story that can be enjoyed by just about all ages. However, it also has some slow-moving parts that may not keep very young viewers attention. My suggestion would be that it is not a movie for toddlers. Some of the visual splendor actually reminds me of "2001: A Space Odyssey".  And although the message is different, those who liked Tom Hanks "Castaway" should like this one as well. It almost has a feel of a M. Night Shyamalan movie (which is ironic in the fact that he was attached to write and direct the movie early on).

Phantom Thoughts

I am a little late on this movie, but seeing as how I saw it on March 14th (Pi Day) I thought it only fitting.  Watching it in 3-D is really the only way to go. The visual aspect is just to magnificent to put into words. As you may have guessed, there is a ton of CGI in it, but it done so remarkably, that you don't notice it at all. One of the main characters is Richard Parker, the name of the tiger who takes this journey with young Pi. I really could not tell where the CGI tiger began and the live action tiger ended, and THAT is an amazing accomplishment in itself.

The story of survival on the Pacific ocean is a bit fantastic and unbelievable, while being totally believable at the same time. But when taken in context of the story he's telling and why he's telling it, it all makes perfect sense.

I thought the story of how he changed his name, in fact re-inventing himself, was fun to watch. Pi makes a personal and spiritual adventure in finding out who he is and what his relationship with God is. The fact that he keeps his mind open to pretty much all religions makes anyone watching inclusive into it. This blends beautifully into the plot of Pi and Richard Parker alone and the survival of the two of them.

Although I don't think it deserved all of the accolades it received and certainly believe that there are more directors worthy of the Oscar this year than Ang Lee, I can't put up too much of an argument against them. The story was intriguing and complete. The technical execution of the special effects were flawless. And the splendor of color and brilliance that was masterfully projected upon these eyes were indescribable.

Until next time, see you in the center seat.

Oz the Great and Powerful

A small time circus magician/con-artist gets whisked away in a hot air balloon into a tornado where he lands in the mystical land of Oz. He is found by a young witch named Theodora who thinks he is the Wizard who is prophetized to be the savior of the land. The magician, who is also named Oz, meets a colorful cast of characters in his mission to figure out who is evil and who is not. Once he does, the battle is on to save the land of Oz...and to find out what kind of man he really is. 

Cast: 

James Franco as Oscar Diggs / Wizard of Oz
Mila Kunis as Theodora / The Wicked Witch of the West
Rachel Weisz as Evanora / The Wicked Witch of the East
Michelle Williams as Glinda the Good Witch / Annie
Zach Braff as the voice of Finley the Flying Monkey / Frank, Oscar's circus assistant
Joey King as the voice of China Girl/Girl In Wheelchair
Bill Cobbs as Master Tinkerer
Tony Cox as Knuck the Fanfare Player
Bruce Campbell as a Winkie guard

Who will like this

It's easy to say that anyone who has seen the 1939 film "The Wizard of Oz" will find this an interesting option. There can be a case made that even those who liked the Broadway musical "Wicked" will be drawn to "Oz the Great and Powerful" as well. However, if you're looking for the story lines from those two to match up with this new version, you will be in for a disappointment  It is more of a visually stunning and fun movie that kids of all ages will like. A warning to parents of very young or easily frightened children, this has some scary moments, especially if seen in 3-D. 

Phantom Thoughts

Let me put things into perspective for you on where I was going in to see this movie. I have always said there are 3 movies made for children of all ages that you don't mess with: "Mary Poppins", "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", and "The Wizard of Oz". That point was already proven with the Johnny Depp/Tim Burton 2005 version of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". 

Another problem right from the start is the legal battle in making the film. You see, while the L. Frank Baum book "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" is public domain and from which Disney said it takes this movie from, Warner Brothers actually owns the rights to the 1939 movie "The Wizard of Oz". That means that characters, items and designs were not allowed to be used or copied in this movie. So the Ruby slippers were not allowed to be used, the design of Munchkinland and the Emerald City were off limits, even the mole at the end of the Wicked Witch of the West's chin made famous by Margret Hamilton could not be copied. They even had to make a different shade of green make-up to not get into legal trouble! Glinda the Good witch is from the South, where she is from the North in the original.  That did not stop them, however from taking some elements from the famous film. The bubble Glinda flies in, the smoke broom, yellow brick road and the Wizard Throne room and effects he uses are all taken directly from "The Wizard of Oz". 

So if you take all those things into consideration, what do you have left? Not really that much, actually. I did like certain nods they gave to both the book and the original movie. For instance, in the beginning of the film, you see a sign for the circus that Oz is working in: Baum Brothers Circus. A reference to L. Frank Baum, the author of the book. I also was impressed with the fact that when Theodora cried, her tears left scar tracks down her face, giving credence to her eventual downfall by Dorothy by throwing a bucket of water at her. And although they started the movie in black and white and changing to color when entering Oz (as well as going from the 4:3 Academy aspect ratio and then changing to widescreen) the change itself was less dramatic than Dorothy literally opening the door to a new world. One similarity that was not welcome was the fact that in the "Wizard of Oz", Buddy Ebsen was the original Tin Man, but had to drop out due to the Mercury poisoning he suffered from the silver make-up he had on. Mila Kunis had to take 2 months off from the removal of her make-up and prosthetics used in this movie. 

The 3-D is alright even if they used that cheap "pop out" element that I hate so much. The movie is visually fantastic and a lot of the CGI was done really well. Unfortunately, James Franco erases some of the great work those computer animators accomplished with his bad interaction with those characters. My question is this: if they put all that time and effort to make the CGI characters look real, why couldn't they computer animate Franco's hands when he is "touching" them to make it look more believable or at least not take you out of the moment? They did it on "Star Wars: Attack of the Clones" when Lucas decided in post production he wanted Anikin's hand to move toward Padme before he kissed her. And no one could tell the difference. You may have not even known that until I said it just now! 

Sam Raimi also takes a page out of his own book when he uses an "Army of Darkness" approach to the Oz montage leading up to the big battle. Just like Ash who is an average guy stuck in a place where modern technology does not exist, who then with a few simple books becomes a master inventor/chemist/ engineer; Oz is a small time magician who becomes a master of illusion/electrician/chemist to pull off his fight against the Evil Witches. 

James Franco's work with the CGI was not his only fault. His performance as the Wizard was mild at best. Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz, Michelle Williams all were very good in the film as the Witches, however as much as I love Mila Kunis, her portrayal of the Wicked Witch of the East (once she turned into the green baddie) was just lacking in some way. Whether it was just the make-up and costume or if was that she didn't channel Margret Hamilton enough to be believable, I'm not quite sure. 

There's no doubt that this will be a huge success (my indifference to watching it is not enough to stop me from seeing it again with my daughter) and Disney is so sure it will be that they already have plans for a second movie. I can't imagine that it will be much better than this one, in fact I'm pretty sure it will be worse.

Until next time, see you in the center seat.