Skip to main content

Lotte Reiniger's Adventures of Prince Achmed, George Lucas' Clone Wars, Wachowskis' Animatrix

 Holding Hands, my favorite thrift shop in Oxford, home of the $1 dvd, was overdue for a visit. For $19, I walked out with:

THE ADVENTURES OF PRINCE ACHMED
LAURA
GILDA
NOW, VOYAGER
THE BIG SLEEP
MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS
THE PINK PANTHER
CABARET
HARD TIMES
ANNIE HALL
THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT
A MIGHTY WIND
THE ANIMATRIX
THE KING'S SPEECH
THE CLONE WARS:A GALAXY DIVIDED
STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

I started into this stack by satisfying my curiosity and my geek need with viewings of The Adventures of Prince Achmed, The Clone Wars: A Galaxy Divided, and The Animatrix. A late one for me, but well worth a groggy Wednesday morning.

The Adventures of Prince Achmed, the world's first-ever animated feature film, released 13 years prior to Disney's Snow White & the Seven Dwarfs, ought to be something I'd heard of, yet today marks my first encounter with a truly remarkable, groundbreaking film. German director Lotte Reiniger spent three years creating and shooting Prince Achmed, using a silhouette animation style in which cardboard cutouts mounted on thin sheets of lead could be manipulated against a background. The overall effect reminds me of shadowplay or, weirdly, those sand-animations that ran on Sesame Street in the '70s - the movement of the cardboard figures has a similar fluidity in the way they change form, many morphing between animal and human.

The story riffs on Aladdin and the Magic Lamp, but not being up on my 1001 Nights I'm not entirely clear how much originates in the original text and how much in the minds of the filmmakers. Before you ask, there's a character in Disney's Aladdin called Prince Achmed meant as an homage to Reiniger's film.

Any great silent film should be able to communicate itself entirely in images, without interstitial narrative cards, and Prince Achmed does, or would, if they weren't here. This is not a tough story to understand, but the way Reiniger captures emotional nuance and creates character in this seemingly crude artistic experiment is something to see. Prince Achmed is a filmmaking achievement.

It's also not something most will watch often. It IS a silent film. There's characterizations, but no true characters without more distinct faces and voices with which to identify. It's a fascinating thing to look at, and it tells its story well, but not in a way I'll want to revisit in the way I do Dumbo. It's a curio I'm glad to own, but a curio regardless.

Each successive Disney/JJ Abrams Star Wars movie helped propel my immersion in the now non-canon LucasVerse, George Lucas's original conception of his unnamed galaxy. I like the immense tapestry Lucas allowed others to embroider within his template. It's rich in lore and offbeat characters and obscure Jedi and Sith and nooks and crannies and layer after layer. The DisneyVerse, so far, feels a little empty. In time, its streaming series and other, new properties may create an equally rich universe, but I'm not holding my breath. Meanwhile, there's all the LucasFilm material with which to reckon. Clone Wars: A Galaxy Divided marks my first dip.

Four episodes, primarily from the first two seasons, make up Galaxy Divided. I found them rewarding in pretty much every way. They add so much more texture and backstory to the Prequels. The sheer scale of the Jedi's betrayal and downfall comes across well. Even as they're winning, as Yoda appears to be in control, it's all a trap and they're already doomed. That knowledge gives all the proceedings a bittersweet quality. It's strange watching a likable version of Good Annikin serving the Jedi, not the Chancellor. It makes all their optimism and ebullience when they win so much more piquant. 

At the same time, all the episodes reinforce what continues to be central to Star Wars mythos - we can win because we have friendship and love. They have only loyalty and fear. It's a nice nessage for kid viewers and probably doesn't harm adults. The way they slide the wholesome messaging in without slowing the story impressed this adult.

Quick, anyone. What's The Matrix about?

No, stop that, you don't know. I don't know. No one fuckin' knows. It was originally about a war between humans and AI, taking place in this digital construct called The Matrix. But it was a hit. A huge one. So when the studio asked for a sequel, the writer-director Wachowskis handed them a two-for-one deal, a trilogy, its last two legs shot at once then edited into two films and released back to back, a strategy Lord of the Rings was about to employ to massive success. Problem was, the Wachowskis didn't have Tolkien's thousand-plus page source material and mythology. In fact, they had no real mythology and promptly invented it over the course of two of the most incomprehensible and interminable movies I've ever seen. 

A big fan of the Wachowskis' earlier film, Bound, and of The Matrix, its sequels angered me. They were such a gobbledygook of bullshit. Oracles and Architects and False Prophets and Trainmen and Programs meditating on the difference between words and states of being and two albinos with dreadlocks and Monica Bellucci in latex, all cuisinarted into a Richard Bach-ian mess of Eastern-Judeo profundo-babble. Everything promising about The Matrix reduced to incoherent gibberish and ill will.

So. If you've never seen the sequels, take this advice. Don't. See The Animatrix, 9 short anime films telling stories related to the Matrix's world, including a two-part history of the machine uprising that actually gives all three films some body. The Animatrix is everything the sequels are not: stylish, imaginative, exciting, sensible. It's kind of a split between then-recent Fantasia 2000, with the animators given rein to create some real art, and Ivan Reitman's cult classic, Heavy Metal, in terms of the storytelling. I don't think of myself as an anime guy, but these 9 shorts made me rethink that stance. That's a sign of a good movie. Animatrix is not only a good movie, it might be the best movie with "The Matrix" in its title.


THE ADVENTURES OF PRINCE ACHMED. Dir. Lotte Reiniger, Milestone, 1926

THE CLONE WARS: A GALAXY DIVIDED
Dee Bradley Baker, James Arnold Taylor. Dir. Dave Filoni, LucasFilm, 2008

THE ANIMATRIX
James Arnold Taylor, Keanu Reeves, Carrie Moss. Dir. Kojo Morimoto, et al, Warner Home Video, 2003





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No Return:Stanley Kramer's IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD

 IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD. Spencer Tracy, Ethel Merman, Milton Berle, Mickey Rooney, Sid Caesar. Dir. Stanley Kramer, MGM, 1963 I do not generally write about films I stop watching halfway. What's the point? I either have nothing positive to say about it or was in the wrong mood. In both cases I'm ignorant of its full length to perhaps do it justice. In the case of Stanley Kramer's 1963 comedy smash, however, I feel compelled to make an exception.  My problem with the movie is not my mood, nor disappointment because it's not the movie I once heard. In fact, my biggest problem is that I haven't heard it described in glowing terms, or any, since I was about 9. See, IAMMMMW used to air anually on one or another of the networks, often in December. My parents didn't care for it and never watched it, but my friends watched anytime it aired and talked about it in rapturous terms. Until about 9-10 years old, when it seemed to drop out of conversation, or conv...

Junkie-fatigue: Taylor Hackford's Ray

 Jamie Foxx, Kerry Washington, Terence Howard, Warwick Davis, Curtis Armstrong. Dir. Taylor Hackford, Bristol Bay/Universal, 2004 Jamie Foxx, nominated for both Supporting Actor and Best Actor at the 2004 Academy Awards, won Best Actor for Ray and, watching Ray tonight for the first time in about 15 years, I'm glad it went down that way. Tom Cruise gave a career-best performance in Collateral, for which Foxx received his Supporting Actor nod. It's a great performance, too, but no moreso than Cruise, ignored by the Academy, so it feels right to me that Foxx got his statuette for the movie where he didn't share the spotlight with a star of Cruise's magnitude. Not that it would make much difference if Foxx had some high-voltage costar in Ray, because the movie simply doesn't exist without Foxx and his essay of Ray Charles. Not unlike Coal Miner's Daughter, the other music biopic whose star picked up a Best Actor, Ray occurs from Ray's point of view, so ther...

Obligatory TL;DR Statement of Purpose

 A not-so-brief explanatory note as to how this blog works: I can't recall a time when movies weren't my passion, my compulsion, my addiction. Ever since my parents took me to see Disney's Bedknobs&Broomsticks, I've been hopeless. Born in 1967, I grew up with free range parents. They took my brother and me to all kinds of movies, often using Hollywood as a babysitter. We saw movies about which many parents today would cluck their tongues (though nothing R-rated until I was 12. My first R-rated movie was MONTY PYTHON'S LIFE OF BRIAN.) Though my parents were professionals and we grew up affluent, our home saw its share of dysfunction. Dad was in the house, but not often present. Mom, stressed and disappointed at discovering her marriage wasn't an equal partnership, took out her frustrations on me.  Without getting too far into the weeds, let me just say my adult life has been far from typical middle class stability. I've never had a career. Never finished ...