"... that hangs like a tortured marionette in the church where congregants shriek about demonic puppets. 'Everybody likes him,' says Pinocchio, pointing up at what looks like a prop from Ken Russell’s The Devils (1971). 'He’s made of wood too. Why do they like him and not me?' This is just one of many profoundly philosophical questions... that Del Toro’s Pinocchio is not afraid to raise. While previous film adaptations... have prioritised a populist litany of instructional morals (honour your father, do not tell lies, do not be lazy), Del Toro’s version celebrates its antihero’s agent-of-chaos nature.... "
Writes Mark Kermode, in "Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio review – a superbly strange stop-motion animation" (The Guardian).
That's going to be on Netflix, so I may look in. I was very interested in it based on the written review, but the trailer crushed my interest. Two big problems: 1. How is that stop-action? It looks thoroughly computerized. I'm not getting the hand-crafted feeling I was expecting. And: 2. The music! It's absolutely awful. It's seems to think you're too dead to feel anything unless you are continually elbowed in the ribs, hard, and tickled, sadistically.
Based on Kermode's review, I get the impression that Del Toro determined that previous cinematic Pinocchios were right wing — that "populist litany of instructional morals" is practically Jordan's Peterson's "12 Rules for Life" — and strained to go left somehow... through chaos?
Anyway, I enjoyed the reference to Ken Russell’s "The Devils." Back in the 1980s, I had a list of 5 favorite movies that I'd trot out quickly when given an opening, and crazily enough, "The Devils" was on it. So was another Ken Russell movie: "Mahler." What were the other 2? "My Dinner With Andre" and "Aguirre the Wrath of God." And something else. Maybe I'll remember later. "Limelight"?
For the record: I don't consider "Why do they like him and not me?" to be a "profoundly philosophical question." It's a very basic childish question!
Posts
24 comments:
Ahhh yes, the woodpeckers' pin-up boy.
I also thought "No thanks." It's a soul-deadening presentation.
Making believable church goers who freak out about demonic puppets will be a tough row hoe. Is it not simply that they are freaking out about this particular demonic puppet? For me to have any hope of enjoying the movie, they will have to handle that issue in a way that does not make me roll my eyes.
I see failure for this production. The figure of the title character is unappealing—it’s hard to imagine watching him for two hours. And why the British accents?
Talk of both stop-motion Pinocchio and Ken Russell's "The Devils" brings to mind Jan Svankmajer's "Faust" (1994) which seems like a macabre combination of both films.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyW46Pbsp9k
"Back in the 1980s, I had a list of 5 favorite movies that I'd trot out quickly when given an opening, and crazily enough, 'The Devils' was on it."
Oh, Althouse!
My list was Casablanca, The Awful Truth, Ride the High Country, It's a Wonderful Life, and Singing In the Rain.
The other movie was an Italian classic… I’m looking up the name. It was Nights of Cabiria (1957)
Based on the video I think it looks like a good version. Certainly a more watchable version than the recent one churned out by Disney featuring yet another Tom Hanks character playing...Tom Hanks.
That puppet is a nightmare. Kids won't want to see it, and why would adults go see a children's story?
“ The other movie was an Italian classic… I’m looking up the name. It was Nights of Cabiria (1957)”
No, that became a favorite a couple decades later.
But I might have said, back then, “City of Women.”
I would have thought your other favorite in those days might have been "The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie". Or maybe "The Seventh Seal."
AA may not care for the effect, but the article I read made it sound like a painstaking stop motion process with puppets and carved sets. I didn't care for the recent live-action version trailer, so skipped Tom Hanks.
As for the music, I did not find the music in the trailer especially intrusive. Does absence of senses of taste and smell make one more sensitive to emotional music?
It looks smarmy and horrible. Del Toro reminds me of a very twisted Comic Book Guy. I guess he's not entirely without self-knowledge though.
"I'm really a freak in every place I go. I don't quite fit in the independent scene, I don't quite fit in the art scene, and I don't fit in the Hollywood scene, so I'm a weird strange fat motherfucker. I'll tell you this: I plan to stay that way, because there is something to be said… I think when you get comfortable, you start growing old. You are doing something wrong."
One can, however, be doing many things wrong without getting comfortable or growing old.
Making the movie.
The trailer suggests the film will be too-loud with a Spielberg-esque overwrought "joyous with wonder" score.
Too bad; that made just those few minutes nearly unwatchable for all the cliches in the music. Imagine 2 hours of that?
I recommend reading the original Carlo Collodi story. It is excellent and differentfrom the pop culture version in interesting ways.
“ Making the movie.”
Thanks. I think I’ve seen that before. I agree with what he is saying but I do not see it in the trailer. Is it possible that it’s part stop action and then filled in the computer work?
If this one is too big and noisy for you, try Pan's Labyrinth, a sad fairytale.
Looks charming to me.
My list was Casablanca, The Awful Truth, Ride the High Country, It's a Wonderful Life, and Singing In the Rain.
It's so funny how we rank movies.
Many years ago I was on a movie discussion board and somebody came up with his top 100 films.
I was like, wow. I was very impressed and thought it was a huge undertaking. I decided to try to do it, too.
I did it. In fact I had a little more than 100 films. So then I got a little competitive and I went to 200.
And then I decided to cut-and-paste all my online film commentary into the list. And the list kept going.
My damn movie list got so long, I decided to make a book out of it in 2010.
Second volume came out in 2020.
My "top 100 list" will probably hit 6,000 movies in a couple of years. The second volume was over-sized and my third one (in 2030) will be Kindle only.
My quick and dirty take on Del Toro is that he's made a lot of movies that are pretty good.
I use an academic scorecard to group all the cinema that I've seen. The A+ category is pretty elite, 320 films. And then I do A films and A- films. That's a little over 1,000 films.
The B class is larger, ranging from my highest B+, #1031 (Welcome Back, Mr. McDonald) all the way to Young Poisoner's Handbook which is probably around #2400. (I've fallen behind on my numbering).
Then I've got the damn C movies, the mediocrities, the okay, not bad, whatever. That's where most of cinema is, in my opinion. Right there in the middle. It's like the battle of the bulge or the the baby boom. If I were to illustrate where all the cinema I've seen gets rated, it's a damn big beer gut right in the middle.
Then there are the shit movies. Unlike people who do this for money, I actively avoid bad movies. I try my best not to see bad movies. I avoid the shit out of bad movies. And yet I still run into the damn things.
I've been actively avoiding Ken Russell for years. Ooo, I hate that Ken Russell! Althouse loves Ken Russell. We are on the opposite ends of the Ken Russell spectrum. Anyway, against my better judgment, I watched Lair of the White Worm recently.
Solid B! Nice!
1651 The Lair of the White Worm (1988) This is a great bad movie. It’s over-the-top, like everything Ken Russell does, but a lot of this is tongue-in-cheek and pretty hilarious. The white worm is a vampire snake god, I think. Not actually sure why the bagpipes controls the vampires. Anyway, if you’re a vampire, look out for the bagpipes. And if you’re human, look out for that snake strap-on dildo. Ouch!
I have not added any Tik Tok videos to my movie book. But I probably should because that's cinema and I've seen it. Fuck!
Also I am reasonable certain there are no F bombs in my movie book. I don't know why. Some sense of propriety in my brain? Anyway, I'll bet there are at least 10 dirty words that are not in my movie book.
(And I owe Ryan O'Neal an apology because he's rocking that scene).
What bothers me about the trailer is not the animation, but an overwhelming sense of "teaching tool" from this movie. "We have a lesson and here it is."
I loathe cinema where it's obvious what the lesson is. I loathe it because the movie becomes predictable and thus boring.
Hitchcock had almost zero interest in teaching lessons to people. His focus was almost 100% on creating dramatic moments. That's the essence of fucking drama! And he would often cut in humor, which would make the dramatic moments even stronger.
I get how many artists have a message they want to give the world. I totally get it. But you have to hide that ball or your movie will fail.
Casablanca is the artistic template for a message movie. Most people have no idea Casablanca is propaganda for a cause, and many people would hotly dispute it. That's because the filmmakers are so sharply focused on the actual drama they are creating.
"Lessons for kids" are painful as shit for adults. Cartoons that have no lessons, or unapproved lessons, are still magic. Bugs Bunny wearing a dress and kissing Elmer Fudd on the mouth works precisely because the filmmakers aren't trying to teach kids that homosexuality is okay. It works because Bugs Bunny is crossing a line and that cracks kids up (and some of us immature adults, too).
Anyway, that long-ass trailer (danger sign) screamed no humor and no drama to me.
Interesting to compare it to the Disney trailer. Not a lot of humor or drama in that trailer, either, which is probably why I never saw that one. That's another work of major art that I haven't seen because I feel like I know the damn story already. "Don't lie!" Right?
If I was remaking Pinocchio, I think I would steal heavily from Dr. Frankenstein, and dig into that primal (adult!) fear of your child, your creation, going off in a whole different direction. I'd have no trouble finding some drama or comedy from that!
Pinto Bean Cake has been given a B and is sitting at #1641. Right between Splash and any random episode of The Odd Couple.
1614 Pinto Bean Cake (2022) This is a hilarious 60-second video on TikTok by a guy named B. Dylan Hollis. I don’t know if talent scouts are checking out TikTok for future artists but that’s where I would be. I am of course highly susceptible to super-fast editing and I love the comic timing.
I don’t know if he has any range but the brief clip I watched -- six times – had me in stitches. He’s discovered a 67-year-old recipe for a pinto bean cake, and he documents his attempt to follow the instructions.
It's entirely possible that I will look at my Pinto Bean Cake ranking in June 2026 and go, "What the fuck? Why is this stupid Tik Tok video rated higher than Godfather 2?" And I'll move it down to a damn C+ or something like that.
Can you imagine the outrage if a professor changed your fucking grade two years later just because he was in a mood? We like to think our high grades (or bad grades!) are locked in place throughout all time and space. But in Absolutely Insane movie review books like mine, that shit moves around whenever the fuck I feel like it.
You should have seen what I did to that fucking Disney non-classic The Black Hole when I got around to watching that shit again. My 45-year-old self got in a quick and dirty tussle with my 9-year-old self and said, this movie is a fucking D+ at best.
Of course this is highly unfair. Different films have different audiences! Luckily for me my unfairness and bigotry is pretty much covered by my comical tone and also my catch-all book title, My Absolutely Insane Attempt To Rank All Cinema. Not only do I sum up the impossibility of my quest, I can do any Don Quixote shit I want to do, assuming my non-reading of that classic matches up with what that character does. (He's crazy, right?).
Anyway, with my beautiful title in place -- and I might be harping on this a little because the one guy who wanted to market my book for me hated the title and wanted me to do a serious version -- but under my Insane banner I can do pretty much whatever the fuck I want to do. And, critically speaking, I kind of need that flexibility if I'm ever going to complete my massive undertaking. Which of course is fucking impossible. It has to be comical because, holy shit, dude, what else could it be?
Post a Comment