The watching observer

Crossed paths

No questions are fine :) I don’t remember the peach story to well. But he did get his finger caught on one of the old fashioned washing machines. You know the ones that have the rollers to wring out clothes? He had to get part of his finger amputated as a child. Often times he hid his hands or curving his fingers   in a way where you can’t see it. Sometimes he would use a hand model in his films. But on occasion, you can see his amputated finger. He was supposedly self conscious about it.

In my favorite Louise Allbritton movie, San Diego I Love You (in which she stars as Virginia McCooley), she shares a really lovely sequence with Buster Keaton. Best of all - she is the recipient of one of Buster’s very rare smiles.

A beautiful sight.

THIS is a flounder

The original was a milestone for animated filmmaking, and this remake is live-action. This:

Is just NOT as visually hard-hitting as this:

That overhead pull-back shot looks lazy and soulless. There’s a reason the original’s filmmakers chose to bring the audience closer to Ariel’s face when she was feeling so far away from her dreams, then pulling them back more slowly. There’s a reason the hair is animated so dramatically. There’s a reason her eyebrows move and she’s not just blinking up, like a choir student concentrating on holding a high note. Go listen to Glen Keane, lead animator of this scene.

This version of Part of Your World puts all the emphasis on Halle Bailey’s (very beautiful) singing talent and none on the genuine human moments that are supposed to tell the audience a story about a relatable girl who has no way to reach her dreams.

The trailer shows incredibly dark, dreary, almost-trashy looking ocean shots. What is going on with the dirty-seashell vibe on the floor of Ariel’s grotto? Ariel’s grotto was designed to look dark in the original, but not ugly. Because everything in it is supposed to seem beautiful, to her. The one source of light comes from the one hole in the ceiling, which she treats like a window to the Surface World. Where LIGHT comes from. Because that’s how Ariel sees her father’s “spineless, savage, harpooning fish-eaters.” As wonderful and bright, instead.

THIS QUOTE from the Director of the Live Action movie about Eric: “The role of Eric in the animated film — I’m sure the original creators would agree with this — it’s a wooden, classic prince character with not a lot going on,”

Um. Excuse me, sir? Eric was one of the first Disney Princes not to fit that description.

The only thing the Live-Action Director has said correctly about Eric is that his feelings will mirror Ariel’s in the new movie. That is what happens in the animated classic, so great. But guess what? When you start that point by saying the first Eric was “a wooden, classic prince character,” you show that you don’t understand how the animated classic mirrored Ariel with him. He thinks he needs to cast a mother character for Eric to get that point across. 

Now I’m going on a mini-rant about this one specific point below the cut, because so far it’s the last straw as far as me not watching the new movie. 

Paz Vizsla...