Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
opus

The Secret World of Arrietty (Karigurashi no Arrietty)

101 posts in this topic

... Between The Muppets and Arrietty, it's like Fox Business is a conspiracy to destroy quality family entertainment. (Though again I give them a pass on The Lorax.)

It would matter more if a majority of people took them seriously, but they've made themselves into a joke. Matt Patrick (whoever he is) starts talking about how the film is creating "Occu-toddlers" and then recommends protesting the movie by buying ... wait, what? ... yes, buying movie tickets and junk food and then leaving all your trash on the floor of the movie theater (as a protest) on your way out. He's a moron. There's no reason to think that Fox News hurt any box office results for The Muppets.

Edited by Persiflage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GOB-ComeOn.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yeah, I wondered what would happen if they watched Princess Mononoke or Nausicaa, too.

My guess?

::blowup::

Edited by opus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vjmorton wrote:

: Because OF COURSE ... a Japanese movie released 18 months ago in Japan and in production for a year before that would SO have #occupy on its mind.

Hey, have YOU checked to see how faithful the English dub is to the original Japanese dialogue? I'm not saying Disney pulled a What's Up Tiger Lily? here, but you never know. ;)

Persiflage wrote:

: There's no reason to think that Fox [business] hurt any box office results for The Muppets.

I dunno, I think it's widely agreed that The Muppets underperformed, especially for a movie that had such good reviews, so presumably SOMETHING hurt it. Big Hollywood has a theory that it wasn't Fox Business, per se, that hurt the film, but rather it was the mainstream media drawing so much attention to the Fox Business report that hurt the film. Make of that what you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big Hollywood has a theory that it wasn't Fox Business, per se, that hurt the film, but rather it was the mainstream media drawing so much attention to the Fox Business report that hurt the film. Make of that what you will.

I suppose I could agree with this.....the Fox business report deserved much less attention than it clearly got!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like Fox News/Fox Business invite this ridicule (much like Movieguide). Arts and Faith has plenty of conservative reviewers as regulars...and it seems rare that any of you guys think they are making good points. In my mind, the "outrage" reviewers who focus on "Hollywood's Evil Agendas to Destroy Our Children" make it harder for conservative reviewers when they try and raise a thoughtful point. But then what makes better press? Concern about the possible nihlism in Watchmen or paranoid claims that they aimed the movie at kids because their were collectable action figures made for the (grown up) direct comics market?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems like Fox News/Fox Business invite this ridicule (much like Movieguide). Arts and Faith has plenty of conservative reviewers as regulars...and it seems rare that any of you guys think they are making good points.

To be fair, even on MovieGuide one can find angles and opinions worth taking seriously. I expect the same is true of Fox News, although film commentary isn't exactly their stock in trade. Likely if one watched a range of Fox programming one would find some shows, hosts, guests etc. offering angles worth taking seriously (sometimes from a rightward angle, sometimes perhaps from a leftward angle). Fox Business commenting on family films seems like a recipe for self-parody.

Which elements on Fox get reported in the wider media, like which reviews at MovieGuide get commented on here, may have as much to do with outside opinions of Fox/MovieGuide and perpetuating a particular emphasis on their foibles as with the foibles themselves. For example, if some Fox commentator said that Arrietty was a lovely film, would we have heard about it here?

Edited by SDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, even on MovieGuide one can find angles and opinions worth taking seriously. I expect the same is true of Fox News, although film commentary isn't exactly their stock in trade. Likely if one watched a range of Fox programming one would find some shows, hosts, guests etc. offering angles worth taking seriously (sometimes from a rightward angle, sometimes perhaps from a leftward angle). Fox Business commenting on family films seems like a recipe for self-parody.

Yeah, I am thinking more of the film review angle. Is a business news network really suited to give commentary on films beyond what...I did not mean to say Fox hosts and guests never offer thoughtful or intelligent commentary on anything. They just seem to stumble a lot more in film and seem to find fault and odd connections in movies...they seem to have perfected "scare quote" pitches for upcoming stories (Are the _______ making kids _____?! And I am not a big fan of "Think of the Children!" media criticism, because I think it tends to fall into the hysterical, rather than reasoned discussion. This is true of such commentary from either side of the aisle.

Which elements on Fox get reported in the wider media, like which reviews at MovieGuide get commented on here, may have as much to do with outside opinions of Fox/MovieGuide and perpetuating a particular emphasis on their foibles as with the foibles themselves. For example, if some Fox commentator said that Arrietty was a lovely film, would we have heard about it here?

True...and I would suspect this is human nature rearing it's head. I mean, Big Hollywood is quick to pounce on absurdities from the left, but you don't really see them check up and find positive agreement on a subject with, say, MSNBC. The absurd stands out and is more memorable than calm reasoned discussion. It's easier (and admittedly more fun) to just point and laugh at the ridiculous.

Edited by Nezpop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F*** them.

I was gonna say, "How to tell when SDG is fasting"... but then I realized that this post was on Thursday, so he really hasn't got that excuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was gonna say, "How to tell when SDG is fasting"... but then I realized that this post was on Thursday, so he really hasn't got that excuse.

Perhaps, perhaps not. (Prescinding from the odd notion that obscenity is more excusable during special times of prayerful penitence.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was gonna say, "How to tell when SDG is fasting"... but then I realized that this post was on Thursday, so he really hasn't got that excuse.

(Prescinding from the odd notion that obscenity is more excusable during special times of prayerful penitence.)

:huh:

Obscenity is more understandable when one is likely to be irritable. If I am being odd but :cuss: in a thread about a G-rated movie is normal I really don't know what to say without :cuss: myself. This thread was going so well... I am off to mourn it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want film criticism from Lou Dobbs about as much as I want stock tips from The Three Stooges. Along those lines, has anyone explored whether Dobbs might not have some reason to try to depress the value of Disney stock? Perhaps there's a method to his myopia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russ wrote:

: Along those lines, has anyone explored whether Dobbs might not have some reason to try to depress the value of Disney stock?

Well, The Lorax is a Universal film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anywho, back to the film...

Saw this last night, and the kids and I loved it (I'm so glad that even my nearly 15 year old still appreciates Ghibli films).

Mostly I can only echo what others here have already said about the visual and aural mastery on display here. The only exception I could find to the visual wonderment was the animation of the car and its movement at the beginning of the film, which seemed surprisingly clunky for a Ghibli film. After that, everything was magical.

Also, Arrietty came the closest to having a villain of any Ghibli film in a long time (since Castle in the Sky, maybe?). Not having read the Borrowers books, I don't know if this hearkens back to the source material or not.

Lastly, the brief appearance of the

raccoon dog

was a pleasant nod to the lead characters in an earlier Ghibli film, as well as a clever linking of 2 species disappearing from the land.

Edited by Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Smedberg: FWIW, my comment about your "odd notion" was meant as tongue-in-cheek banter. To my mind, the extenuating circumstances for my barely veiled obscenity was not fasting (or sickness), but broadsides from Fox Business against the two best family films in the last year (i.e., The Muppets and Arrietty), which, given my critical emphasis on family films, I take personally. If that doesn't cut it for you as sufficient explanation, then I apologize. I didn't mean to upset anyone, as as the dead horse is now thoroughly flogged I'm sure Arrietty-related dialogue will resume.

P.S. Oops, I see I missed my window to make that clarification before Arrietty-related discussion resumed.

FWIW, feedback from readers and listeners on Arrietty has been overwhelmingly positive, but I did get one angry response from a grandmother who took her granddaughter to the film and was appalled that I had so strongly recommended a movie that endorses stealing. :huh: I wrote a lengthy theological analysis that I will probably turn into a blog post.

Lastly, the brief appearance of the

raccoon dog

was a pleasant nod to the lead characters in an earlier Ghibli film, as well as a clever linking of 2 species disappearing from the land.

Oh, I missed that! I thought they were just raccoons (I never even heard of the species you mention). I'm guessing that's because I've never seen Pom Poko, right?

Edited by SDG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, feedback from readers and listeners on Arrietty has been overwhelmingly positive, but I did get one angry response from a grandmother who took her granddaughter to the film and was appalled that I had so strongly recommended a movie that endorses stealing. :huh: I wrote a lengthy theological analysis that I will probably turn into a blog post.

If you can stomach it ... here is one of The Retarded Debates™ that Mike D'Angelo and I engage in periodicially, about a different aspect of stealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I missed that! I thought they were just raccoons (I never even heard of the species you mention). I'm guessing that's because I've never seen Pom Poko, right?

Right - here's a relevant Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The angle they take is that Arrietty and co. borrowing the things they need is a metaphor for Occupy-movement entitlement.

Were these charges leveled at "The Secret of NIMH", too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw it over the weekend, and overall, I liked it. Not top-tier Ghibli, but still pleasant enough. I wish Arrietty had spent more time on just the world of the Borrowers and their day-to-day routines and survival and left the world of the "Beans" alone and more mysterious, even ominous. (My favorite Bean-related was when Shawn tried to, um, "remodel" the Borrowers' house while the mom was home alone.) The scenes of Arrietty and her father scurrying through the house's nooks and crannies were far more interesting and involving than any scenes in which humans were involved. And I know that Sho/Shawn has a weak heart and all, but could the voice actor have imbued him with even a little bit of life?! I'm very curious to see the Japanese version, if only to see if that's how his character was originally portrayed, or if it was just a case of bad voice acting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would ever have guessed that Studio Ghibli, of all companies, would tackle a film about the difficult childhood of Sean Bean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who would ever have guessed that Studio Ghibli, of all companies, would tackle a film about the difficult childhood of Sean Bean?

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would ever have guessed that Studio Ghibli, of all companies, would tackle a film about the difficult childhood of Sean Bean?

I've been thinking about this all day and I still don't 'get it.' I'm assuming Bean didn't voice the character . . . so what exactly are you getting at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who would ever have guessed that Studio Ghibli, of all companies, would tackle a film about the difficult childhood of Sean Bean?

I've been thinking about this all day and I still don't 'get it.' I'm assuming Bean didn't voice the character . . . so what exactly are you getting at?

The boy's name is Shawn (Sean) … and he's a Bean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Secret World of Arrietty in 60 seconds. (No more 30s!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0