Arthur and the Invisibles...anyone going?
01-11-07, 10:53 AM
#2
Suspended
It's going to be Luc Besson's last film as a director. He promised... I will of course see it. This is already getting great promotion in French-speaking territories, Quebec being one of them. (The French title is Arthur et les Minimoys.) In typical obsessive Luc Besson fashion, he first wrote and published the children's book, then directed the CG animation film, which took 7 years, something he had never done before and probably will never do again. He aimed his film squarely at the book readers. The (French) reviews are good and the director seems to have sincerely tried to aim his film at young kids, let the chips fall where they may. I can't wait.
Official multilingual site
Rotten Tomatoes is less flattering but there are still some positive English-language reviews...
including this one from Slant magazine: http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/fi...ew.asp?ID=2723
and this one from http://european-films.net/content/view/539/57/
Official multilingual site
Rotten Tomatoes is less flattering but there are still some positive English-language reviews...
including this one from Slant magazine: http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/fi...ew.asp?ID=2723
and this one from http://european-films.net/content/view/539/57/
Last edited by baracine; 01-11-07 at 11:57 AM.
05-21-07, 06:25 AM
#6
Suspended
It came out on DVD. As usual, there are almost no reviews for this, as if it was an obscure foreign film or a non-event. As it turns out, it's a stupendous piece of animation and live action, full of of imagination and fun. The film condenses a lot of action from the novel at breakneck speed, which makes it hard to take in in one 90-minute sitting.
Like all Besson films, this one is made to be viewed over and over again. The perfection is in the details and about a million incredible touches that only become apparent during repeated viewings or to a child's eye.
The film has an excellent cast of voices in English as well as in French and the script is especially literate, well-balanced and, of course, extremely well thought-out, like a Swiss clock (Besson had at least 5 years to get that part right).
Besson made a film for the ages, that unfortunately very few casual viewers can appreciate right away (a bit like The Fifth Element, which became a cult classic worldwide... after a few years). But it's certainly a keeper and a great children's film. Its animation part is on a par with the best American animation - with a wink to The Dark Crystal - and its live-action part reminds me of the involving and believable 50's family life in The Iron Giant. How can it not entertain? It's certainly a labor of love and a project that has been drawn out for many years and that still occupies its creator. As such, it is very unlike the usual Hollywood-made thowaway dreck and deserves a lot of respect.
Like all Besson films, this one is made to be viewed over and over again. The perfection is in the details and about a million incredible touches that only become apparent during repeated viewings or to a child's eye.
The film has an excellent cast of voices in English as well as in French and the script is especially literate, well-balanced and, of course, extremely well thought-out, like a Swiss clock (Besson had at least 5 years to get that part right).
Besson made a film for the ages, that unfortunately very few casual viewers can appreciate right away (a bit like The Fifth Element, which became a cult classic worldwide... after a few years). But it's certainly a keeper and a great children's film. Its animation part is on a par with the best American animation - with a wink to The Dark Crystal - and its live-action part reminds me of the involving and believable 50's family life in The Iron Giant. How can it not entertain? It's certainly a labor of love and a project that has been drawn out for many years and that still occupies its creator. As such, it is very unlike the usual Hollywood-made thowaway dreck and deserves a lot of respect.
Last edited by baracine; 05-21-07 at 07:49 AM.
05-21-07, 12:48 PM
#7
DVD Talk Reviewer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: WAS looking for My Own Private Stuckeyville, but stuck in Liberty City (while missing Vice City)
Posts: 15,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure why, but none of the "big" stores had this for anything less than $18.
I'll wait 'til it drops to $10 to grab it.
I'll wait 'til it drops to $10 to grab it.
05-22-07, 12:13 PM
#8
Suspended
Hey! I found one decent review for the film:
( http://www.mountainx.com/movies/a/ar...invisibles.php )
P.S.: Two more installments are in the works (based on his books) and they will apparently be Besson's only directorial assignments in the next four years. It seems that Luc Besson didn't give up on filmmaking, he just gave up on critics who accused him of making naive, simplistic films...
My favourite still from the film, showing the luminous photography and the incredible detail of every scene:
( http://www.mountainx.com/movies/a/ar...invisibles.php )
Arthur and the Invisibles (PG)
Ken Hanke | 01/17/2007
Genre: Animated Adventure Fantasy
Directed by: Luc Besson
Starring: Freddie Highmore, Mia Farrow, Penny Balfour, David Bowie, Madonna
I gaze over the crop of bad reviews for Luc Besson's Arthur and the Invisibles and find that I really can't argue with almost any of the complaints lodged against the film. The film is almost insultingly derivative, borrowing with wild abandon from such mismatched sources as Stuart Little (1999) and every Harry Potter movie (an arch villain whose name no one -- except the hero -- dares speak aloud?) -- not to mention The Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Dark Crystal (1982), a few touches of Tim Burton and a soundtrack that might be more at home on a Quentin Tarantino picture (in fact, some of it has been). To be kind, it's a bit of a mess -- like something cobbled together by a kid who's desperately trying to ape all the movies he thinks are "really cool."
The voice casting is another problem. It's not just that the film's French pedigree and its international cast cause some pretty dicey synchronization problems. The crux of the problem is the fact that most of the high-profile voice talent is uninspired. Among the big names on the English language version, David Bowie, Snoop Dogg and Anthony Anderson come off pretty well, and Madonna isn't disgracefully bad, but she is inessential. Jimmy Fallon, on the other hand, is annoying (probably because he's Jimmy Fallon). However, the bulk of the pricier names -- Robert De Niro, Harvey Keitel, Chazz Palminteri, Emilio Estevez, Jason Bateman -- give performances that could have been done by just about anyone. And that might have been better.
All of these points are noted in the many bad reviews. And yet, there's a kind of loopy charm to it all. That sense of a kid copying bits and pieces of "really cool" movies seeps over into the film in a good way. Besson may be close to plagiarism, and he may be wrongheaded a lot of the time, but he's ended up with a movie that you can't help but feel he wanted to make. This isn't just the crummy CGI-animated movie of the week, done to cash in on a family market that seems willing to sit still for almost any rubbish that's tossed out. No, whatever its flaws, Arthur and the Invisibles has a handmade, personal feel that finally affords it a cockeyed endearing quality.
The live-action scenes -- set in a vaguely early 1960s never-never time -- are both quaint and visually creative. (Besson seems to have endless enthusiasm for cleverly devised shots.) Plus, the performances from Freddie Highmore as Arthur and Mia Farrow as his grandmother are very good. But more, it's Besson's casual acceptance of the most absurd notions that makes it work. (Just wait till a group of Masai tribesmen show up to help transport Arthur down a telescope to the animated land of the Minimoy so he can find his grandfather's treasure and save the old homestead.)
Unfortunately, the animated scenes are rarely more than OK, no matter how fantasticated they look. The only exception to this is a stunningly strange sequence atop a giant phonograph record where the animated Arthur has a sort of dance-off with the bad guys. The animated parts lack the odd juxtapositions of the movie's live-action scenes. Besson's film may only take flight in fits and starts, but it's a darn sight more interesting than most of the family fare out there. Rated PG for fantasy action and brief suggestive material.
— reviewed by Ken Hanke
Ken Hanke | 01/17/2007
Genre: Animated Adventure Fantasy
Directed by: Luc Besson
Starring: Freddie Highmore, Mia Farrow, Penny Balfour, David Bowie, Madonna
I gaze over the crop of bad reviews for Luc Besson's Arthur and the Invisibles and find that I really can't argue with almost any of the complaints lodged against the film. The film is almost insultingly derivative, borrowing with wild abandon from such mismatched sources as Stuart Little (1999) and every Harry Potter movie (an arch villain whose name no one -- except the hero -- dares speak aloud?) -- not to mention The Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Dark Crystal (1982), a few touches of Tim Burton and a soundtrack that might be more at home on a Quentin Tarantino picture (in fact, some of it has been). To be kind, it's a bit of a mess -- like something cobbled together by a kid who's desperately trying to ape all the movies he thinks are "really cool."
The voice casting is another problem. It's not just that the film's French pedigree and its international cast cause some pretty dicey synchronization problems. The crux of the problem is the fact that most of the high-profile voice talent is uninspired. Among the big names on the English language version, David Bowie, Snoop Dogg and Anthony Anderson come off pretty well, and Madonna isn't disgracefully bad, but she is inessential. Jimmy Fallon, on the other hand, is annoying (probably because he's Jimmy Fallon). However, the bulk of the pricier names -- Robert De Niro, Harvey Keitel, Chazz Palminteri, Emilio Estevez, Jason Bateman -- give performances that could have been done by just about anyone. And that might have been better.
All of these points are noted in the many bad reviews. And yet, there's a kind of loopy charm to it all. That sense of a kid copying bits and pieces of "really cool" movies seeps over into the film in a good way. Besson may be close to plagiarism, and he may be wrongheaded a lot of the time, but he's ended up with a movie that you can't help but feel he wanted to make. This isn't just the crummy CGI-animated movie of the week, done to cash in on a family market that seems willing to sit still for almost any rubbish that's tossed out. No, whatever its flaws, Arthur and the Invisibles has a handmade, personal feel that finally affords it a cockeyed endearing quality.
The live-action scenes -- set in a vaguely early 1960s never-never time -- are both quaint and visually creative. (Besson seems to have endless enthusiasm for cleverly devised shots.) Plus, the performances from Freddie Highmore as Arthur and Mia Farrow as his grandmother are very good. But more, it's Besson's casual acceptance of the most absurd notions that makes it work. (Just wait till a group of Masai tribesmen show up to help transport Arthur down a telescope to the animated land of the Minimoy so he can find his grandfather's treasure and save the old homestead.)
Unfortunately, the animated scenes are rarely more than OK, no matter how fantasticated they look. The only exception to this is a stunningly strange sequence atop a giant phonograph record where the animated Arthur has a sort of dance-off with the bad guys. The animated parts lack the odd juxtapositions of the movie's live-action scenes. Besson's film may only take flight in fits and starts, but it's a darn sight more interesting than most of the family fare out there. Rated PG for fantasy action and brief suggestive material.
— reviewed by Ken Hanke
My favourite still from the film, showing the luminous photography and the incredible detail of every scene:
Last edited by baracine; 05-22-07 at 12:54 PM.
