Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

Wall-E (2008) -vs- Toy Story (1995)

"Wall-E" DVD Release - November 18

The Smackdown.  "Wall-E" -- the last masterpiece to roll off the Pixar assembly line -- is out as a DVD/Blu-ray.  Remember when you first heard about this two-hour-long space-opera with barely any dialogue about robots who sift through garbage?  Who knew that it could one day step in the ring against the champion and have a real shot at victory?

So our Smackdown pits Pixar's lastest advancement in computer-animated awesomeness against the grand-daddy of them all, the first authentic feature-length computer-animated film ever, "Toy Story."  We all know the deal there -- toys come to life.  Done.  We're hooked. And ever since the film's first screening, we've been running out of our front doors shouting "To Infinity and Beyond!" as we left for work each morning.  So let's pit one set of talking inanimate objects against another set of sort-of-talking inanimate objects.  Let the best merchandise win!

The Challenger.  Way, way back, back before "Toy Story" was produced and Pixar was the animated behemoth that it is today, Andrew Stanton created Wall-E. A small, "short-circuit"-styled robot (whose name is actually an acronym for the phrase "Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class") Wall-E is the last of a line of robots left on Earth to clean up the mess we've made. Due to years of gorging consumerism, the planet has been left a giant trash-heap, too littered to possibly sustain life. In a grand gesture of social responsibility, the mega-conglomerate Buy 'N Large Corporation has encouraged humanity to take a 5 year "vacation" away from the planet, allowing their robots stay behind and restore Earth to a livable state while we all relax pool-side. Unfortunately, things didn't go as planned.

Wall-E (2008) -vs- Toy Story (1995)

Toying with Our Feelings

The Smackdown.  Something happened last night that I never thought could happen.  I waited in line for a midnight showing of a G-rated movie.  I stood in the lobby of the local AMC 20, next to a skinny, teenage kid dressed up as a boxy, yellowish robot with tank treads, and stared across the hall at a line of people waiting to see "Wanted," the brash, gun-toting, slap-your-mother ultra-violent Mark Millar-adaptation. And as I watched them, I thought to myself, "Heh, losers."  Obviously they had chosen the wrong movie to see that night. How could they possibly want to see anything else other than Pixar's newest, possibly greatest masterpiece, a two-hour-long space-opera with barely any dialogue about robots who sift through garbage?  It was "Wall-E."  And it was on.

So, today, it's "Wall-E," Pixar's newest advancement in computer-animated awesomeness, against the grand-daddy of them all, the first authentic feature-length computer-animated film ever, "Toy Story."  We all know the deal there -- toys come to life.  Done.  We're hooked. And ever since the film's first screening, we've been running out of our front doors shouting "To Infinity and Beyond!" as we left for work each morning (you haven't?).  So let's pit one set of talking inanimate objects against another set of sort-of-talking inanimate objects.  Let the best merchandise win!

The Challenger.  Way, way back, back before "Toy Story" was produced and Pixar was the animated behemoth that it is today, Andrew Stanton created Wall-E. A small, "short-circuit"-styled robot (whose name is actually an acronym for the phrase "Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class") Wall-E is the last of a line of robots left on Earth to clean up the mess we've made. Due to years of gorging consumerism, the planet has been left a giant trash-heap, too littered to possibly sustain life. In a grand gesture of social responsibility, the mega-conglomerate Buy 'N Large Corporation has encouraged humanity to take a 5 year "vacation" away from the planet, allowing their robots stay behind and restore Earth to a livable state while we all relax pool-side. Unfortunately, things didn't go as planned.

Enchanted (2007) -vs- Ever After (1998)

Fractured Fairy Tales
Review by Bryce Zabel 

The Smackdown. I was sorely tempted to smackdown the fish-out-of-water in NYC "Enchanted" with the similarly set-up "Kate and Leopold." They share structure, yes, but what "Ever After" brings to this particular party is a desire by filmmakers to breathe new life into the fairy tale concept. It's a pretty commercial plan, witness the success of the "Shrek" series. "Enchanted" brings a Disney cartoon princess to the Big Apple and lets her become a bit more human while "Ever After" stays put in the time of fairy tales but manages to make its Cinderella story feel, well, a bit more human. Which one does the best job, though, of giving the audience a fairy tale experience worth the price of admission?

The Challenger. After "Enchanted" blew everybody away over Thanksgiving weekend, my wife and I thought we'd check out what made this story of a fairy tale princess in New York City so sucessful. It starts with an air-headed wanna-be princesss named Giselle who actually first appears as an old-style Disney animated cartoon character. In animation, everybody gets introduced: the vain Prince Edward; his queen-bitch mom, Queen Narissa, the fat comic relief, Nathaniel and, for good measure, a high-spirited chipmunk. Then we get introduced to the magic well and one-by-one these characters end up popping up from a manhole cover into modern New York where they become flesh-and-blood (except for the chipmunk who goes CGI). The show belongs to Amy Adams and a great loopy performance.  Less successful is her love interest, shark divorce lawyer Robert, played by Patrick Dempsey. The animation is a compressed Disney film in a few minutes, and the first appearances in New York give up a lot of fun, but the film does sputter about on the way through its story. And let's put it this way, even if you're watching with a kid, they'll know how it ends as soon as you do and maybe before. 

"I don't mean any offense, but honestly, that step-mother of yours is a real bitch. Let's get out of here."

The Defending Champion. This is the story of Cinderella told from a highly imaginative point-of-view; namely, Cinderella was a real girl. In this world, then, the fairy tale grew out of the real event, magnified through each telling, kind of like Paul Bunyan. This means, however, that if you watch expecting pumpkin-coaches that you will be sadly disappointed. Drew Barrymore plays Danielle, a young woman who's not likely to get the chance to make much out of her life through all kinds of repressions, not the least of which is a truly frightening stepmother played by Anjelica Huston. The reason she's truly scary is not that she is written in that over-the-top way that you might expect but because she is not trying to be cruel, but her actions turn out that way. You've probably had a few bosses like this insecure tormentor. There's a romance, to be sure, between Danielle and Prince Henry (Dougray Scott) who gets to play him smart and cool. What's fascinating about this version is that Danielle and her prince get to meet and talk and the tension is that they may not be able to get together when they clearly should.

The Scorecard. Many viewing experiences are relative. When my kids were younger, we saw all manner of kids films. The attraction for me was never what was on the screen but watching my children enjoy themselves. I sat through the "Power Rangers" movies, what can I say? So, had a four-year-old been seated next to me, I think I could probably have looked at "Enchanted" as a pretty fair time of it. As a movie that has to stand on its own, though, it is one rocky experience. There are portions of it that almost make you smile, but never quite get there. There are other parts that are so convenient and so predictable, the whole affair seems forced and by the numbers. I wanted more.

"Ever After," on the other hand, was a movie I knew very little about but my daughter wanted to see it. Its level of sophistication and re-invention was a wonder. Charming, thoughtful... even, yes, surprising!  It's the best Cinderella movie ever.

The Simpsons Movie (2007) -vs- South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut (1999)

Review by Lak Rana

The Smackdown.  After nearly 400 episodes and 18 years spent entertaining viewers of all ages on the small screen, America's favorite dysfunctional family finally gets the big-screen treatment in the aptly titled "The Simpsons Movie."  In an industry dominated by flashy special effects and high-tech computer-generated animation, "Simpsons" nevertheless spares us the frills and keeps its animation style ever so simple--opting instead to deliver satirical storylines laden with witty pop-culture references.  However, "Simpsons" is not the only clever, crudely animated television series to make the leap onto the big screen.  Another little, bare bones animated series by the name of "South Park" paved the way to theaters with "South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut" almost 10 years ago--only two years after first premiering on television screens across America.  So which series made a stronger transition from television to big screen?  You'll find out in a few minutes...so... just don't have a cow, Man!

"Keep moving forward and narrowly escape death from the hands of an angry mob, or go back and fry up some nice bacon...Marge, I'll be right back!"

The Challenger.  The town of Springfield is in a state of environmental chaos after somebody illegally dumped toxic pig droppings into Lake Springfield.  EPA Chief Russ Cargill cunningly convinces president Arnold Schwarzenegger to quarantine the town in a giant glass dome to contain the problem.  When the town residents discover that their beloved Homer J. Simpson is the one to blame for all their troubles, they form a mob and force the Simpson family to flee from the bubble and become fugitives.  While the Simpsons are trying to start a new life in Alaska they discover that the EPA and the president have one last plan of action for the Springfield situation--eradicate the town by blowing it up!  Marge, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie decide to abandon Alaska immediately and return to save Springfield.  However, stubborn Homer is still preoccupied with his selfish rituals and refuses to leave the comforts of Alaska.  When he later realizes that he is nothing without his family and friends he charges back to Springfield and saves the town from its calamitious fate.  The one draw back is that there sadly isn't enough time in this fast paced movie to explore the many characters and places that audiences have come to admire from the television series.

Holy Cow! The MPAA is really serious about its rating system. Kids, don't sneak into R-rated movies or the world will come to an end!

The Defending Champion.  "South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut" takes us to the tiny little suburb of South Park where a group of parents are in an uproar because "the boys" sneaked into an R-rated movie (starring their favorite Canadian comics Terrance and Phillip) and emerged with potty mouths that quickly infect all the other kids in town.  The parents launch a wild protest against the morally corrupt movie and eventually the United States is forced to declare war on Canada.  The plot gets even sillier as we intercut to lovers Saddam Hussein and Satan in the underworld as they scheme to take over the planet.  "Park" takes full advantage of its R-rating by bombarding the audience with the rich, over-the-top, no holds barred raunchiness that we'd naturally expect from gifted writers Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

The Scorecard.  It's no secret that the the writing for "The Simpsons" television show has gone a little stale since the famed family first hit the airwaves. For God's sake...the series has had almost 400 episodes so I understand why it would be tough to keep coming up with original show ideas at this point.  Maybe that's why the plot of "The Simpsons Movie" came across as somewhat unoriginal:  Homer does something really terrible, sees the error of his ways, and saves the day in the end. 

The movie did have a strong opening sequence and first act, however the writers appeared to run out of ideas during the lazy second act and they definitely just threw some things together in the haphazard third act in a weak attempt to give the audience some semblance of closure.  Though "Simpsons" was well written overall, it still did not manage to capture the color and energy of the early television series.  This is not to say that the film was not entertaining because it did dish out bountiful servings of the sophisticated social and political humor that has made the television series a household name.

Not to be outdone, "Park" weighed in with it's own original satirical social and political humor which, because of its R-rating, it had the liberty to take further than "Simpsons."  "Park" attacked everybody and everything and did so using an unbelievable barrage of profane words and musical numbers.  The storyline was completely ridiculous and severly keen at the same time.  Writers Parker and Stone skillfully satirized an issue that is undoubtedly near and dear to their own hearts--censorship.  However, the film was not without problems as the story did get a tad bit bogged down by the more than 12 musical sequences.

And the winner is...

Ratatouille (2007) -vs- Toy Story (1995)

Review by Bryce Zabel 

The Smackdown. Pixar pretty much owns the press clippings  and praise handed out in the animation market these days because, basically, they do what they do better than anyone else can even imagine doing it. The only fair Smackdown then for Pixar's latest release "Ratatouille" is the first Pixar release "Toy Story." Rotten Tomatoes has "Ratatouille" hovering at a 96% freshness rating and critics heaping accolades on it -- so it's a fair fight. Both films give real emotional life to items and/or creatures that don't have such life like old used toys and filthy rats. The question this will come down to is this: what is the balance between hot, new ways of showing off your technology and the demands and rewards of good old-fashioned stories and characters?

"I can take you to the big leagues but you have to get over this stereotype you have of rats. Some of us are very clean rodents."

The Challenger. At a 4th of July party, my friend Randal actually suggested we go see this movie because the reviews had been so universally wonderful.  So, not knowing much more than that, we went to see it the next day, only a little chargined we didn't have little kids with us as cover. Anyway, the plot to "Ratatouille" works like this: Remy, a rat who seems to know good food from garbage, eventually finds himself in Paris in the once-great restaurant Gusteau's. He hooks up with a young klutz named Linguini (a human) and together, with Remy hiding in Linguini's chef's hat, they procede to light the Paris restaurant establishment on fire with their masterpieces. Naturally, Remy's family will sing the siren song pulling Remy to return to his rat home, and Linguini will fall in love and there will be an evil chef. One thing this movie does tackle rather successfully is the logic of communication. How to Remy and Linguini talk to each other. What you find out is that rats can talk rat-to-rat but rats can't speak to humans.

"Do you realize that in the next sequel we could actually have photo-realistic hair? Imagine the women we could get. Real women, not toy women!"

The Defending Champion. When it comes to animation films, there's no question that Pixar's "Toy Story" is the gold standard. When it was released in 1995, it was a revelation about the future of animation that blew away and antiquated everything that came before it. Most of you who are reading this have seen it, and even "Toy Story 2," but it concerns a little boy's favorite toy, a cowboy doll named Woody, and the toy that may soon replace him, the ultra-cool Buzz Lightyear who, unlike all the other toys isn't in on the joke that he's a toy; he thinks he's really an astronaut. Most of the action takes place in a couple of kid's bedrooms. The toys talk to toys and any interaction with the human world is kept at a distance. It's all about the toys because it is, well, a "Toy Story."

The Scorecard. "Ratatouille" scores more points than "Toy Story" in the next-generation quality it shows off. This is to be expected, I guess, since computers get larger and faster and we humans get smarter and more facile in bending them to our will. I loved the look of "Toy Story" but there is no doubt that the look of "Ratatouille" is even more refined. The hair on a rat's ass, for example, looks individual and realistic (except for Remy's blue hair).

But that may also be a problem. Do we really want to see a movie about a rat (and later, lots of rats) cooking gourmet food for humans in a classy French restaurant? Apparently this did not bother the vast majority of critics, but it bothered me. A lot. It messed with my rooting value so much that in many of the final scenes where I know the filmmakers expected us to cheer, I laughed at the lunacy of a kitchen full of hundreds of rats being accepted by anybody for a food critic to a chef.

On the character score, there is something wonderful about the poignancy of Woody being put out to pasture in "Toy Story" and the relationship of self-need and friendship that develops with the "other" toy Buzz Lightyear. Or when Buzz realizes he is, in fact, only a toy. In contrast, the problem of "Ratatouille" is simply that a kid who's supposed to inherit a well-known restaurant can't cook but a rat can. See where I'm going?