Crystal Ball #3- WALL-E

Crystal Ball #3: Wall-E

I have finally seen a full trailer for this summer’s Disney/Pixar Blockbuster, and I am enthralled. At first I was put off by the resemblance of Wall-E to the lovable vintage movie-bot Johnny 5 from 1986’s Short Circuit. However then I realized that the flat head, wide-eyed robot physically resembles many other cinematic attempts to convey human emotion through a non-human (think ET). As far as movies go, Wall-E will certainly be more of an ET than a Number 5, a milestone in movie magic as opposed to a film footnote in 1980s digital revolution (like *batteries not included.)

Wall-E is a story about the unthinkable. Or rather, the unimagineable: Robots in love. Star Wars teased this idea, in the courageously cute and chirpy R2D2 and the pompous and cowardly C3PO. However iconic Artoo and Threepeeo may be, I would hardly describe them as “loveable.” I haven’t done the research but I would guess that plastic models of the droids are more common than stuffed plush toys of them. They are intelligent, brave and useful, but hardly cuddly.

Wall-E, on the other hand, lends himself to plush toys as readily as any character in the Disney arsenal. He is made of metal, and in real life would certainly not be fuzzy or fluffy, however his fuzzy voice, cute mannerisms and curious robotic personality will no-doubt make Wall-E the target of many-a-toddlers’ hugs. Rather than just creating another loveable character to rival Woody or Shrek, Pixar studios is making the kind of movie magic that cinema is all about.

From the inception of the motion picture, filmmakers have dreamt of showing on screen things that exist only in the human imagination. Le Voyage Dans La Lune is a prime example of the infancy of movie magic. Modern filmmakers like Spielberg and Kubrik have become icons in realizing dreams on film. Think about Spielberg’s resume from a child’s point of view. He gave you an alien best friend, brought dinosaurs to life and made you think twice before swimming in the ocean. Spielberg’s collaboration with Kubrik on AI could be an important inspiration for Wall-E. AI tackled the idea of loving something artificial, but it imposed a human love on an artificial being, and barely touched on the artificial boy’s ability to love.

The enormity of Wall-E is in the ability of filmmakers to redefine the boundaries of human imagination. If a child in 1955 was asked to imagine what it would be like for 2 robots to fall in love, he or she would probably get annoyed at a “trick question.” Children now will grow up wondering if their parents’ cars get mad at them for spilling on the seat. They will wonder if their computers will miss them while they’re at school.

As I look into my crystal ball it becomes clear. Wall-E will be a mega hit this summer, and deservedly so. I hope I can get my hands on the plush toy.

In Theaters: Iron Man

Iron man was awesome. I could end this review now if I wasn’t so bent on having people read my shit.  Iron Man was funny, well-paced, well-scripted, well-cast, and had awesome, explosive visuals and action sequences.  The effects were perfect. Done by George Lucas’ Industrial Light and Magic, the CGI never caused me to question the reality of the movie.  A far cry from Jurassic Park, which had cutting edge effects for its time, but ones which you could tell were effects.

The success of Iron Man hinged on the suit, and the movie did not disappoint.  There were at least four incarnations of the suit. From its origin as a glorified killer hunk of scrap to its eventual perversion when the technology falls into the wrong hands, the suit was the star of the show; as much as or even more than the cast.

That is not to say that the cast was underwhelming, far from it.  Robert Downy Jr. was ideal for the roll, with his convincing mix of realistic charm, genuine compassion and super-inflated ego.  Gwyneth Paltrow was surprisingly successful as the absurdly named Pepper Potts.  Most people consider her acting ability to have the depth, complexity and texture of a rice cake, however as Iron Man’s right hand, umm, woman, Paltrow manages to be smart, endearing, sassy and a bit seductive.  Maybe it’s because I’m a guy and therefore, a sucker for a pretty face, but I believed the interaction between Stark and Potts, I wanted them to save the day and fall in love.

Jeff Bridges and Terrence Howard were excellent in their rolls as Obadiah Stane and Jim Rhodes, respectively Iron Man’s arch nemesis and best friend.  Bridges was icy, deceptive, and scary, showing that type of fake friendliness that you usually get from a salesman.  Howard was just the opposite: convincingly sincere and committed to both his duty and his friends.  I look forward to him being in the sequel, hopefully with his own suit.

The last thing I need to talk about is the direction of Jon Favreau.  ‘Swingers’ is one of the best movies you can watch when it come to the interactions of real (or real-ish) people.  ‘Elf’, starring Will Ferrel, is a paragon of comedic timing and irony.   Iron Man had both elements from previous Favreau films, particularly the humor, which was unexpected and acute.  Also thanks in part to the screen writing the movie was perfectly paced.  Divided in thirds, the first part climaxed at the revealing of the completed first suit.  The second climax was at Iron Mans first usage of his improved suit for its destined purpose: to kick some cave-dwelling terrorist butt.  The movie never got boring, and more important, the movie never assaulted you with overwhelming explosions or wrestling, indiscernible hunks of metal.  Unlike last summer’s ‘Transformers’, which had no sense of timing or pace and could just has easily been an infomercial for a scrap-metal smelter.

See Iron Man, bring your friends, bring your girl, bring your mom, even your little kids (as long as they keep their mouths shut.)  Oh, and stay until after the credits for a nice little motherfuckin’ tease.