Friday, February 24, 2012

Puss in Boots: Purr-fectly Mediocre

Once upon a time, great animation was the only thing an animated film needed to wow audiences. I saw Shrek 2 in the theatre, and although I enjoyed it, the only thing I remember about that movie is a spectacular scene when the land of Far Far Away is covered in pure driven snow and everything glittered and sparkled and looked so real that it took my breath away. But now, in the time of Pixar and motion capture, we are so used to top-tier animation with tireless attention to detail and realism, that we judge animated movies not just by their aesthetic but by the actual narrative. And that is where Puss in Boots fails miserably.

I saw Puss in Boots on one of the many flights I took on my India trip (I seem to have made terrible in-flight entertainment choices). Since it's up for an Oscar, I figured I must do my duty and give it a chance. Boy was that a mistake. The story follows Puss in Boots (voiced by Antonio Banderas) who is the character we've all come to know and love from the Shrek franchise, courtesy of DreamWorks Animation. He's a fluffy cat capable of disarming enemies with his big liquid eyes that make him look like a defenseless kitten, and the next minute he's slashing them with a sword and running off with their money. This movie continues the Shrek trend of bringing in characters made popular in fairy tales and nursery rhymes, so we're introduced to Puss's friend Humpty Dumpty, who grew up with Puss in the orphanage where they were both raised. Jack & Jill are the villains who are making off with some magic beans, and the movie revolves around Puss finding the beans and helping Humpty climb the beanstalk to get to the goose that lays the golden eggs. There's also a brand-new character, the nauseatingly-named Kitty Softpaws (voiced by Salma Hayek) who doesn't start off on good terms with Puss but is our hero's inevitable love interest.

That's all I can tell you about the film. I did watch the whole thing but it was so forgettable and pointless that it's not even worth delving into more of the story. There are twists and turns as you discover that Humpty may have dark ulterior motives, and you get Puss's entire life story, but none of it is particularly compelling. Before long you are looking at your watch and saying, "Really? There's still an hour left of this movie?" Unfortunately, the movie was a success at the box office because children have so few options these days that any PG film is a huge box office draw, and this means that the sequel is already underway. I can guarantee the sequel will be yet another example of lazy storytelling and stale jokes, banking solely on box office numbers to impress studio executives with a ton of money without any thought for creative innovation. Welcome to Hollywood.

By the end of Puss in Boots I was flabbergasted that anyone would choose to nominate this trite mess over something as masterful and groundbreaking as The Adventures of Tintin. But no one ever said the Oscars make sense. The reason Pixar will always be my go-to animation studio is because they have always given their stories and characters just as much attention as their animation. There's a reason they only come out with one movie a year. So save yourselves the trouble and give Puss in Boots and DreamWorks Animation a pass. You should wait for Pixar's Brave this summer, which is bound to be a far more spectacular example of what makes an animated movie Oscar-worthy.

 (This is the Brave trailer. Because I cannot bear to subject anyone to more Puss in Boots.)

No comments:

Post a Comment