Fri, October 1, 2004

DreamWorks Animation is at it again: Father of the Pride wasn't enough, so they're unloading another stinker on us as of today: Shark Tale promises more of the same lame jokes, bad puns, and tired storylines. Just avoid it, won't you?

As a regular reader of this site, you're undoubtedly aware of my boundless enthusiasm for all things Pixar: their films, their style, their people, their stock certificates. Love 'em, love 'em, love 'em. You may also be unsurprised to find out that I'm a tremendous fan of Steven Spielberg, and quite fond of his new movie studio, DreamWorks. (In fact, in the early days, my AOL screen name was JamesonSKG.) So it disappoints me to see them battling over domination of the feature-length computer-animated movie market, but fortunately it's very easy to choose sides in this fight. As fond as I am of Jeffrey Katzenberg from his days making Little Mermaid and The Lion King into truly great animated films, his DreamWorks Animation division (formerly DreamWorks/PDI or something) is clearly the Microsoft to Pixar's Apple. (By which I mean: they generate quick profits by subjecting an unsuspecting public to a cheaper, shoddier product – I only invoke the name "Microsoft" when I can use it pejoratively.) Pixar's scuffle with Disney is one thing – and Disney's psychotic self-sabotage in that situation merits an entire column all its own – but the battle with DreamWorks promises much scarier consequences. A future in which Pixar is not the dominant force in computer-animated storytelling is a bleak one indeed, especially if DreamWorks occupies that spot.

It all comes down to passion. One thing that I've always associated with Pixar is attention to detail. It's more than that, really, an unquantifiable element that – to me, at least – makes Pixar's animation immediately distinguishable from anyone else's. The way characters move, the way light and texture are used, something just clicks. As I mentioned in my review of Father of the Pride, the DreamWorks Animation style is a lazier, simpler approach. The overall concept is the same, but their output lacks the beautiful visuals, energetic animation, and fully realized characters we've come to expect from Pixar. I'll admit that I thought Shrek was pretty cute the first time I saw it, but then I saw Monsters, Inc. and I re-remembered how good computer-animated films can be. (I got serious brownie points in college for remembering the term anagnorisis for this.) There is a difference. Pixar thinks smarter, works harder, and cares more.

What worries me is that audiences don't seem to be aware of the difference. Is it possible that DreamWorks is doing just enough to convince mainstream viewers, and the public is completely ignorant of the not-so-subtle differences between the DreamWorks and Pixar styles? The fact that Pixar packs the frame with fun and entertainment, while DreamWorks leaves flat, dull backgrounds around characters who are blocked as woodenly as if they were featured in an SNL skit? The undeniable "life" that Pixar's characters have, while DreamWorks's creations seem more like waxy action figures? Not to mention the technical superiority: softer shading, finer fur detail, and greater range of movement, to name but a few.

I had hoped that even if audiences weren't sophisticated enough to consciously notice all these differences, the experience of watching the films would subconsciously draw them towards Pixar – they'd feel more engaged and love the characters more, even if they didn't know why. Judging from the success of the Shrek franchise, it doesn't seem to be working out that way. Pixar's certainly no box office slouch, don't let Disney convince you otherwise. But in a rational world, audiences would be making their preference known much more clearly: the DreamWorks movies would be earning figures more like those of Jimmy Neutron. And let's not forget the fact that Shrek won a fucking Oscar out from under Monsters, Inc. the first year the Academy gave out a Best Animated Feature award. Proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that most Oscar voters are just handing the ballots to their kids (or great grandkids). And that those kids are functionally retarded. Sad.

Because even if you set aside the differences in animation style – if, perhaps, you think I'm being a little too punctilious about it, focusing on such seemingly minor details – look at the scripts! Pixar's stories appeal to adult and child audiences simultaneously, by speaking to the child within all of us, the way Disney movies used to do in the good old days. The appreciation of the stories and the jokes are the same to parents and kids. Shrek and its ilk adopt the divide and conquer method. They provide dopey slapstick for the kids and slide innuendo humor over their heads for adults. And their stock in trade is moronic zeitgeist pop-culture references. I watched the first five minutes of Shrek 2 (DreamWorks provided the clip on the film's official website as part of their hail-mary desperation shotgun marketing approach – more on the evils of Shrek marketing in a moment) and counted handfuls of in-joke references to other recent films. The Lord of the Rings, Spider-Man, The Little Mermaid, From Here To Eternity. The original Shrek was peppered with the same – recalling The Matrix and other films as well as poking fun at Disney and its films and theme parks throughout.

These may grab a quick laugh. (Although: why? What makes it funny, the fact that you recognize it? The fact that it's ridiculously easy to "get"? The fact that it's a green ogre instead of Frodo?) But they're hardly any way to build a timeless classic. It's like throwing the Osbournes into Austin Powers in Goldmember – it immediately dates the film, and all for a cheap and frivolous joke that isn't very funny in the first place. I take some consolation from the fact that Shrek 2 will never have the lifespan that Finding Nemo will, but it'll take 15 or 20 years for that to kick in – by then, who knows what havoc DreamWorks Animation will have wrought?

They know it, too. You can tell by the all-out marketing blitz. I'm not trying to make some crazy argument like DreamWorks is outdoing Disney in the tie-ins and merchandising departments, but they go freaking nuts. They wrapped the Cinerama dome in green plastic, with Shrek antennae, for crying out loud. They gave away the first sequence of the movie online. It's an all-out blitz for those opening weekend numbers, and it's highly calculated. Whenever there's a Pixar movie coming out, you can be damn sure DreamWorks will release a DVD earlier the same week to try to sop up all the computer animation enthusiasm and dampen Pixar's returns. This year, they were going to release Shark Tale the same week as The Incredibles but thankfully something scared them off the date. (They probably just figured – as in the case of Antz – that releasing earlier might do even more damage.) Still, you can be sure the Shrek 2 DVD will hit stores the first week of November. Bush and Shrek 2 on the same day – somehow, that pretty much sums up America's ability to settle for less.

But nothing embodies DreamWorks's sloppy, copycat approach quite like their selection of subject matter. We all remember raising an inquisitive eyebrow when Katzenberg left Disney to start DreamWorks right in the middle of the production of A Bug's Life and suspiciously DreamWorks/PDI released Antz around the same time. But it was hard to get too upset about that – given the current state of CG technology, it was necessary to stick with slick, hard figures with limited movement and articulated joints; after toys, arthropods were the next logical step. (Plus, I happen to believe that in this one case, Antz is the superior film – by a nose.) But then, two monster movies (Monsters, Inc. followed by Shrek)? And now, Shark Tale follows Finding Nemo into theatres? What is it going to take for audiences to get a little suspicious – a DreamWorks Animation film about a family of washed-up superheroes called "The Amazings"? Pixar's stories are original, all developed in-house, while DreamWorks brings in Hollywood writers to adapt books or re-work ideas based on successful Pixar concepts.

It's typical when industries mature and buyers start focusing on prices rather than features. Unable to distinguish their goods, vendors begin to compete ruthlessly for market share, often by trying to undermine the distinctiveness and importance of rivals' products.

(Nicholas Carr, "Wired")

DreamWorks Animation keeps getting away with it (with the possible exception of NBC's Father of the Pride which has pretty solidly underperformed – let's hope it's the beginning of the end!) – the quickie imitations manage to appeal to apathetic audiences with their lame in-jokes like the pseudo-product-placement in the Shark Tale poster: Gup instead of Gap, Old Wavy instead of Old Navy – ha! DreamWorks draws them in by continuing to pack their casts with A-list vocal talent. While Pixar makes bold, character-driven choices like casting Albert Brooks in Finding Nemo or Craig T. Nelson in The Incredibles, DreamWorks throws wads of cash at Will Smith, Jack Black, Renée Zellweger, Angelina Jolie, De Niro, and Scorsese for a few days' work behind the microphone – and not only do the boring buzz-based choices garner audiences, DreamWorks manages to pull a PR double-whammy by cajoling newspapers to write articles about how actors are finding a new creative outlet doing voice work. Free publicity because (hee fucking hee!) De Niro's a cartoon shark! Where's the article about the ingenious creativity of putting Sarah Vowell's voice into Violet the daughter with the gift of invisibility in The Incredibles?

And don't get me started on the use of trumped-up, wholly inappropriate music to crank out yet another tie-in. Sarah McLachlan's "When She Loved Me" from Toy Story 2 is the most touching, heartfelt song from any movie ever and it served a narrative purpose, but no, everybody's humming the fucking Smashmouth tune, aren't they? It's enough to make William Steig roll over in his grave. My sister and I grew up on his Dominic and it's such a great story. I never read the Shrek book, but I'm sure it was just as good, which makes the screen adaptation all the more disappointing.

So, if you insist on insulting your intelligence at the cineplex this weekend, please do it with the Travolta/Phoenix yawnfest Ladder 49 and not Shark Tale. Don't line DreamWorks's pockets or prop up their box office numbers. Watch Finding Nemo on DVD and wait for The Incredibles – you'll be much, much happier.

© onebee · all rights reserved