In 2001, the award for Best Animated Feature was established by the Academy and it’s first three nominees were Monsters, Inc., Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (Really?) and Shrek.
Pixar and Dreamworks were clearly the front runners, and I’d wager anyone who didn’t know better would say that Monsters, Inc took home the gold. Given what Dreamworks’ Shrek franchise devolved into, it very well should have. BUT, the big green ogre was interesting and different enough to win Oscar’s heart.
Two years later Sylvain Chomet took on the Disney double team of Brother Bear and Pixar’s Finding Nemo. Of course, Nemo swam away with it, and rightfully so I think, but animation junkies were left salivating at the thought of what Chomet might do next.
This year, Chomet, Disney/Pixar and Dreamworks are going toe-to-toe for Oscar gold. I’ve already written about Toy Story 3, so I’ll save you any more, but here’s some brief thoughts on the category’s other two nominees:
The Illusionist
Turns out we’d be waiting seven years to see what Chomet had up his sleeve. Of course, he stayed busy during those seven years, and anyone who followed his career is aware of his being fired from The Tale of Desperaux, and like me, they probably also wonder what that movie might have been under his guidance.
The Illusionist is adapted from an unproduced screenplay by French filmmaker and mime Jacques Tati. It’s the story of a hapless magician (or, illusionist) who finds a modicum of appreciation when he travels to Scotland. Enamored, a young girl follows him home, believing he is a real magician. The two develop an odd father-daughter relationship as the magician struggles to support them.
Tati originally wrote the script as a letter to his daughter, envisioning it as a vehicle for the two of them to star. While the final product is a bit different than originally intended, it still retains that estranged, familial element.
There’s little in the way of dialogue (what is there is rarely in English), which actually works well for a film like this. So much of the story is visual (Tati was a mime after all), so the lack of speech allows you to focus on his actions. It also lets the score, composed by Chomet (he’s a wunderkind, no?), shine. The music acts as a sort of dialogue, expressing the internal emotions of the characters.
It’s a excellent piece of cinema, not just as a work of animation. Pixar has been almost the sole poster child of the “animation is cinema too” argument, but movies like this show that they truly aren’t the only ones capable of using the medium to reveal universal truths.
How to Train Your Dragon
I’ve never flown. I’ve never even set foot inside a plane. Mostly because I’m terrified of heights, just the thought of looking over a balcony makes me dizzy. So, I’d have gladly gone the rest of my life without knowing what it feels like to take to the skies…then I saw How to Train Your Dragon.
Now, I’ll admit that I may be biased when it comes to this film. I’m a big fan of dragons, as well as two of the flick’s writer/directors, Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders. Seriously, there’s a shelf in my collection devoted to some of their projects, specifically Lilo & Stitch. In fact, HTTYD probably knocks Stitch down to number three on my list of favorite animated films, the first being The Lion King (a script Sanders also worked on). William Davies is the other accredited screen writer, and, well, the best I can say is that I’m not really a fan of his work (I’ll let you look him up).
Based on the book by Cressida Cowell, How to Train Your Dragon is the story of Hiccup, would be dragon-slayer and all-around failure as a Viking. When Hiccup wounds an infamous Night Fury, he discovers that the creatures aren’t quite what he’s been lead to believe.
Unlike The Illusionist, there’s plenty of dialogue here, a lot of it hilarious and sarcastic. But, like The Illusionist, much of Dragon’s intimacy lies in the unsaid. It’s really a fanciful take of the “boy and his dog” story, though this one features a dog that can fly. Well, to be fair, Toothless’ actions are more feline that canine.
It’s a brilliant exploration of what it is that makes us human. There’s so much going on, so many underlying themes (something it has in common with Toy Story 3), that I suppose a longer discussion is warranted, but it’s one I don’t have in me. I love the film for all that it has to offer, so much so that dissecting it, I think, would take the joy out of watching it. The best I can say is that, where Toy Story 3 reminds me of my childhood, How to Train Your Dragon creates such a sense of wonderment in me, that I AM a child again. As I was saying at the beginning of this discussion, I’ve never wanted to fly. Now, all I’ll ever want is to have a pet dragon of my own.
I’ll also add that I think all three films do share a very common theme. Love. They illustrate beutifully that love is indeed an emotion, but more than anything it is an action. We protect the ones we love, no matter the cost. Sometimes that means plunging into fiery depths to rescue them from the flames, but more often than not, it means letting them go, never tainting the good times you had by holding on too long.
