November 13, 2004

3D imax christmas scrotum

i went to see i (heart) huckabees today, which was funny and odd, but ultimately unfocused. but maybe the point was to say that there is no point? that a simple tidy ending would have been untrue to the whole premise that there is no easy answer, and although everything is connected, everything is maybe also meaningless? i need to have hmc see this and explain it to me. there’s too much pseudo-philosophy in here: i’m too much of a pragmatist to understand this. at any rate, dustin hoffman and especially lily tomlin are pretty fantastic in this.

after the movie, i was going to sneak into the incredibles again, but then i left and snuck into the polar express instead. i went to see the 3d imax version, which if you have to see this movie, is the only way to do it, according to hmc. it’s not a cheap “just project the normal movie on the imax screen” like spiderman or matrix: reloaded, but they actually went back and rerendered the film for imax and 3d. in fact, apparently there’s something about the imax format or proportions that required the film to be basically redone shot for shot. i didn’t really understand why, and hmc explained it to me but i think my eyes glassed over at that point.

in any case, it’s pretty impressive, in parts. at least the 3d part of it. watch the ticket float in front of your eyes! watch the train come right at you! it’s almost like watching 3d movies on sctv’s monster chiller theatre. although, did they just u-turn a train? what?

however, it’s true: all those cg kids are pretty creepy. the boys aren’t too bad, but especially unfortunately, the character played by nona gaye looks particularly creepy. i think it all comes down to the uncanny valley theory i talked about in june, where basically we can see and appreciate anthromoporphism to a point, but once it passes that point, it’s too realistic and becomes creepy to us, until it actually becomes indistinguishable from reality, at which it’s ok again because we can’t visually tell. that’s why the pixar approach which is very realistic but cartoony is fun and cute, but the pex approach ends up giving you the willies.

that being said, everyone in the packed imax theatre seemed to enjoy it a lot, and people were very positive about it afterwards, judging by the comments of the parents and kids. and that bob z certainly knows how to tug at emotional heart strings, setting up standard pat touching holiday scenes and lessons, even when forced to use synthetic animated marionettes.

maybe i should go se team america anyway just to see if they’re more or less realistic. or creepy.

anyway, it’s not a bad double feature, as the existential search in huckabees directly leads into the search for faith in polar express, either giving it a more meaningful context or rendering it utterly childish.

or maybe they’re the same? it’s all the blanket, right?

Posted at November 13, 2004 10:24 PM
Comments

team america is totally worth it for the marionette sex scene. totally preposterous, laugh-out-loud hilarious *and* hot. overall, the rendering is less realistic than animated/cg, but somehow the closeups still create the same-kind-of-intimacy, i-can-relate-to-that-character. which is really weird.

Posted by: roo at November 15, 2004 5:00 PM

Comments are now closed for this entry. Thank you for playing.