Life of Pi
2012 best picture nominee
Rating: 16/20 (Jen: 12/20)
Plot: It's the exact same plot as Ang Lee's Brokeback Mountain except instead of gay cowboys on a mountain, there's an Indian boy and a tiger on a lifeboat.
I made it through about 1/3 of the book several years ago before I remembered that I didn't like reading and stopped. When I heard that a movie was being made, I wondered if it was filmable. I saw previews and snippets during the Oscars, most backed with this faux-Enya music, and fully expected to hate the movie. I ended up really digging it although my date hated it. At one point, she said, "If that tiger starts talking, I'm done." And I think she rolled her eyes more during this than with any other movie. I could feel them rolling. The eye-rolling isn't entirely unfair. This little fantasy is filled with all kinds of little details that just don't seem right. Bananas, after all, really don't float. The man-shaped island, a silly rainbow, meerkats that stand around and watch a tiger devour them. A lot of this is just silly. Add in some obviously-CGI animals, and this is a little hard to take at times. Don't get me wrong. This is some of the best CGI that I've seen, and I'm amazed at what they do with these animals. You really get to the point while watching this where you can't tell what is real and what is created by a computer, and then you start doubting that any of it is real. Is Suraj Sharma, painfully sympathetic in the role as young Pi, a real person or was he made by some flabby guy with too-large glasses sitting in front of a computer monitor? What about the bulging eyes of Irrfan Khan, the guy who is also really good as the older Pi? Are they real? They kind of look like Large Marge's eyes. Ang Lee's visual effects wizards must have had a lot of fun creating these waves, tossing in some extra stars, rustling animal fur, piling meerkat on meerkat, maneuvering colorful fish just below the surface of the water. And as plastic as it all sometimes looks, it really is stunningly beautiful at times. I didn't care for a new-agey display where Pi looks into the depths of the ocean and sees a whale made out of different animals, a variety of ocean life, and eventually the sunken ship, but that might have been because of the aforementioned faux-Enya music more than anything else. For the most part, this is just gorgeous. Besides, the inability to tell what is a visual trick and what is really real matches the storytelling ambiguity, the uncertainty of the viewer in knowing what parts of Pi's story is real. The unlikely friendship--a one-sided one apparently--has a beauty that matches the visual beauty, and I almost wanted to cry while older Pi was describing his feelings but Jen's audible eye-rolling ruined it. This is fluffily philosophical and not all that dense although that gives it enough space for the viewer to have the freedom to let the thing develop a bit in his or her own mind. And although there's definitely an adventure/survival story element during the majority of the movie, there's also a lot of playfulness and humor as well. Good stuff.
watched on a small device i paid $10 rent for on plane, slept. then watched rest on laptop at home. hmmm. long intro. bad cgi. strange lessons. but moving. worst blurb ever. 14.
ReplyDeleteI didn't expect to like this nearly as much as I did. Once I understood what was going on, I realized what I thought were logical errors and cinamtic excess actually were perfect for the film. The religious metaphor caught me by surprise (I'm trying not to give too much away) and made this a borderline great movie for me. Also a 16.
ReplyDeleteJen and I didn't watch this in HD (I don't think...I don't even know what that is) or 3D (I guess it was in 3D)...HD seems to make the special effects worse. I can't imagine this looking realistic on the big screen. Still beautiful maybe.
ReplyDeleteJust out of curiosity, Cory, why didn't you think you'd like this?
if I had any extra money to spend on frivolous things... this would totally go on our bedroom wall.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wallsneedlove.com/tiger-mount/#.Ubu_grHD-M8
I hate this movie. I think I would go lower than 12 if I had really thought about it longer.
wait, what? you were going to cry? what???
ReplyDeleteIt just looked like it would be all visual. The story had much more meaning and emotion than I expected.
ReplyDeleteJen! Much respect! -Larry
ReplyDeleteI was going to give this a bonus point because it's given me a new nickname for Jen--"Richard Parker"--but I can't go up to a 17 for a cheese fest!
ReplyDeleteWatching this on a plane would have been irritating. I'm not saying it's better off a plane though.
amy really likes the survival aspect of this. i'm rolling my eyes in defense of jen. i've read the book and watched the movie, and i still dont understand shit. this is suppose to make me believe in god and be a fairly simple parable but it doesnt make any philosophical sense. maybe i'm too stupid.
ReplyDeletecory PLEASE explain this to me.
also the tiger eats the rat not the hyena. pi is an awful awful man
I'm not sure Cory is the person to explain the "God" part of this for reasons that he can explain instead of me.
ReplyDeleteI believe the argument in this--prepare to be slightly disappointed if you wanted me or the book/movie to prove the existence of ANYTHING--is that our perspective of the world is better if that perspective has a deity in it as fantastic or unbelievable as that might seem to some people. It's finding something positive in a sometimes scary and cruel world. Without God, life is bleak. It's like the two stories in this. The one completely unbelievable one with the animals has its bad moments but is ultimately pretty happy. The one with all humans and no Richard Parker is a downer.
I doubt you're stupid. You were probably just looking for something a little more, I don't know, decisive...
okay i am disppointed in your explanation, but that is probably it. was looking for something deeper, but i didnt even get this far. i look for my fantastic in other things than religion i guess. it was still the tiger that ate the rat. pi is a very very bad man. the argument could still be made that the power of the mind makes things more interesting which his story did. i dont know why this has to be a religious parable ect etc okay i could keep going peace out. 8
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm 100 percent atheist. I really liked the religious metaphor because it pulled the movie together, explaining the visuals and story that otherwise don't make sense. It turns what I thought were negatives into positives. The metaphor is simple but true. People choose the magical(God/ Tiger) over the real (amoral finite world/ murder of family). If they faced the gruesome truth it would be much harder to go on for many. The main character (and many people) would rather see things the way they want rather than the way they are.
ReplyDeleteYes, but that wouldn't even come close to proving the existence of God. I guess that's the confusing part. It just explains why people believe in a god. Pi said he was going to tell a story that would make the guy believe in God, right?
ReplyDeleteExactly. There is no proof and can be no proof. But when given the choice, the listener, like most, chooses to believe the story, instead of the truth. If the listener chooses to believe the story, he is choosing miracles...God.
ReplyDeletei guess i want the Truth, as did the japanesse shipping company. i think Pi made everything up to avoid jail time.
ReplyDeleteJail time?
ReplyDelete