Editorial: Elemental vs Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken

while 2023 has been a slow burn in terms of animated releases, it has been anything but in the world of animation talking points. There is so much to talk about in regards to the medium, that it is kind of funny to me that I'm getting some writer's block about it. Yeah, I've never really been good at talking about events, in regards to the writer's strike, all I really have to say is, "It's going on and people should be paid for their work". It is amusing to me, like that line from Kevin Smith's Dogma, but I'm getting ahead of myself here. One of the talking points that sticks out to me is that Disney extended Elemental's theatrical run, and in doing so turned in a very profitable feature, while simultaneously, DreamWorks had an embarrassing box office result to their animated feature, Ruby Gillman Teenage Kraken.

I find this interesting, because looking critically at them, neither film are very strong. They both have fairly familiar plots, characters that aren't really anything new, and have many similarities to other animated features, Zootopia and Turning Red namely. Yet, it seemed that audiences, for want of a better term, warmed up to Elemental, while Ruby Gillman would sink, usage of the word intentional. What made audiences, eventually, go see Elemental while Ruby Gillman flopped and was pulled before it was really given a chance?

I don't know, and I will not claim to know, but I thought this would be a good reason to really compare these two films, because like I said, they both have similar problems, but they also have their own strengths. But maybe I will get close to why Elemental became a sleeper hit while Ruby Gillman just became a sleeper.

I think the first thing to really talk about is their stories, because this is where most of both films weaknesses lie. Elemental follows Ember, the daughter of fire immigrants to Element City as she struggles to find her own way in life, while also repaying her parents for the sacrifices she made, and also falling in love with Wade, a water elemental. Immediately, the issue is that Elemental focuses on the wrong aspects of the story, while a good amount of time is set developing Ember and Wade's relationship, the stuff about her father's store was the next biggest part of the story, and while it wasn't bad, it wasn't the interesting part. The interesting part of Elemental was Ember and Wade's relationship, which they did focus a lot of time on. They also didn't really do a whole lot with the prejudice angle, and I'm kind of mixed on that, like I didn't want or need this to be another Zootopia, but when it was brought up, beyond the opening scene, it lead to a very poignant moment. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Elemental is a weak story with a very strong element to it.

The same... can't really be said for Ruby Gillman. It has some strong elements to its story, but these elements aren't as strong as the strong stuff in Elemental. Ruby Gillman follows the titular teenaged kraken as she, A) tries to blend in with human life, B) learns that she is actually royalty, C) befriends a mermaid and tries to put an end to the mermaid/kraken war and D) wants to ask a boy out to prom. Again, they really misjudged what the strong stuff of this story was, if this movie was just Ruby trying to balance her human life with her family, while also exploring her Kraken life, that would have been so much more interesting. At least with Elemental, the parts of the story that weren't as strong, still were part of the story that was strong. Ember having to decide on her happiness with Wade or repaying her father's sacrifice at his store was kind of key in their relationship. If Ruby Gillman dropped the stuff about Ruby being a princess, the mermaids and the war, the stuff about her blending in with human life and wanting to go to prom would be predominately unchanged,.

Simply put, the weak stuff in Elemental was in service to the strong stuff, while the weak stuff in Ruby Gillman was not, and that's because at its core, Elemental was about Ember and Wade's relationship, while Ruby Gillman was not about a kraken blending into human society.

I can't remember who brought this up, I think it might have been Toon4Thought, but I could be wrong, but someone brought up the idea that Ruby Gillman was potentially a multimedia franchise pilot, like if Ruby Gillman did well, it could have had a TV series, or comics, or sequels, which is a great idea because I do love these characters and I would like to see more of them, but if this is true than someone at DreamWorks really forgot the key thing about starting a franchise, you need a good starting point. I'm not going to say Ruby Gillman was bad, but whether you liked it or not, we can agree that, this is a rocky way to start a franchise. Consider Aladdin or Lilo & Stitch, both of them spawned sequels and TV series', but you can go back to both of those movies and appreciate them on their own, because the movies are the main course, everything else is dessert and snacks. It's kind of the same with starting a cinematic universe, the MCU wouldn't be a thing if Iron Man wasn't a good movie.

I think the main reason that Elemental became a sleeper hit was because the movie did have a really strong element to it, so when people talked about Elemental, they would talk about that aspect of the movie. Word of mouth is a very powerful thing in marketing. It also helped a lot that, someone at Disney or Pixar had a lot of faith in this movie, extending it's theatrical run. Elemental has a Domestic Box Office Gross of over one hundred fifty million dollars [source], with a domestic opening of over twenty-nine million. Ruby Gillman earned a domestic gross of over fifteen million dollars [source], with a domestic opening of over five million, so it's clear that the faith was not misplaced in Elemental.

Ruby Gillman is not a bad movie, honestly I don't even know if I actually dislike it, but it isn't a very strong movie. When compared to Elemental, the weaknesses just become more apparent. Elemental has its problems, but it is saved by the strength of the relationship between Wade and Ember, while Ruby Gillman couldn't really be saved by the strength of anything, because nothing was really given much time to become stronger. Whatever the case, it is clear that Ruby Gillman just wasn't enough to take down Elemental's throne. It probably also doesn't help that at the end of June, Ruby Gillman's release month, a highly anticipated feature was released that was also a subversive look at monsters and society that featured a monster girl who could shapeshift. I'm not saying Nimona was a death knell for Ruby Gillman, I'm just saying it probably did not help in the slightest.

TRON (1982) - A Groundbreaking Film Worthy of its Cult Following

 

Much like Wonder Park, I have previously talked about TRON before, when I brought up my favourite Live-Action mix movie. That was before I decided to do the Live-Action Mix marathon last year. Funny enough, I did think about doing TRON as part of that marathon, but when it came down to this and Roger Rabbit, really the choice made itself. Still, since these kinds of movies are now open for me to review, I figured, why not talk about TRON? Is it a true animated flick? No, but it was one of those movies that really helped pioneer animated special effects. We had King Kong in the 30s, and the 90s blew up with Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park, but TRON often gets overlooked in this regard, even though we haven't seen such a thing prior, or really since until maybe Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. A whole world completely created out of CGI? Sure, it's completely passé now, especially since a majority of our animated movies are completely CG, but back in the 80s, this was a game changer. Sadly, like most game changers, it was not appreciated in its time, but has a very devoted cult following. Including me, this is one of my all-time favourite movies.

Tron isn't one of my favourite movies because of the story or characters, though both are quite solid. The plot follows Flynn as he tries to some data that will prove that he programmed some games, instead of Dillinger, the Senior Executive of the company Flynn used to be employed at. Flynn gets pulled into the world inside of the computer, and must assist the program TRON in taking down the Master Control Program. A nice touch that gives the story some extra strength is that in the world of programs, users, the real world people who build and give orders to the programs, are treated as a kind of religion, which does give the film a bit of depth. One could see the movie as the programs, individual beings built by individual users, fighting against the MCP, a program that has built itself with the information from several other programs, as a tale of individuality versus those kinds of beliefs of being part of a higher calling. Whether it is or not, I can't say because I'm not the director or writer of this movie, but that is something I noticed.

Similarly, the characters are pretty fun as well. Flynn is very much a playful person, with little moments of him goofing around every now and again. I also like the detail of Dillinger's actor, David Warner, also plays Sark, a program under the command of the MCP, mirroring the relation in the real world. As much as Dillinger thinks he is in charge of the MCP, it really is the MCP who is in control of Dillinger. I also really liked Ram, and his cheerful nature. On a similar topic, the acting isn't too bad, one particular scene I noticed on rewatch is when Flynn is listening to Sark for the first time, you can tell by the look on his face, he recognizes something. In a similar vein, when Sark is staring at the ring game after it's finished, you can tell exactly what he's thinking by the look on his face. While the characters aren't bad, they aren't why this is one of my favourite movies.

Simply put, TRON is one of my favourite movies in the same way movies like Freaked or King Kong are. As movies, they're good, heck I'd even say Freaked is fantastic, but then you take into account their effects, and you really think about their place in film history. TRON is one of the first movies to use such extensive CGI, creating a whole world that only existed in codes and a few props to interact with. Some people may look at the CG and argue that it looks dated and ugly by today's standards, but I disagree. This is one of the few times I would argue that dated CG was the right choice, because the world inside of dated computers, would probably have a similar look to a dated computer effect. On top of that, the light effects on the costumes and for things like liquids is fascinating. I don't want to sell this movie only on the effects, because again the story is interesting and the characters are charming, but the thing I think back to is always the special effects.

Honestly, that is a good reason for me to do more critical and in-depth looks at my favourite movies, because that gives me a chance to really notice things and refresh my memory on things I tend not to remember. For example, the music in this movie is fascinating. There are long stretches where there is no background music, and when there is, it's oddly ambient. Also, the movie has some humour to it, not laugh out loud funny, this isn't a comedy after all, but characters have little quips and reactions that do add a touch of humour to this movie. Honestly, it is nice taking a deeper look at movies I like, because I get to find new things to appreciate about them. So, while the story and characters are not the strongest, I can't say this film is bad.

This really was an ambitious movie for Disney, I can imagine they were eager to take a chance on such a movie because of how badly they were doing after Walt's passing. Say what you will about their movies prior to the Renaissance, but they were ambitious and not very typical of Disney's output. TRON is not a movie that is going to be for everyone, I think that it is a cult film through and through. However, if this sounds interesting to you, I definitely recommend it. Though it doesn't have the best story, characters or world-building, there is still a lot to appreciate here, and I can't imagine where special effects in cinema would be today if not for this movie. It does seem like those who love this movie, really love it because much like other Disney cult hits like The Nightmare Before Christmas and Treasure Planet, it is getting a fair bit of love. I do think it deserves it, truly a unique movie for its time, and one that I keep in the back of my mind with fond memories.

First Impressions: Toopy and Binoo The Movie (2023)

Sorry guys, this is not a blog about the new Ninja Turtles movie, I'm just kinda done with that franchise. After being told I didn't have taste because I dared to not like the first episodes of Rise, I'm kind over the whole franchise. Hope everyone enjoys it, I'm skipping it. So instead, I went to see Toopy and Binoo, because I... screw it, I like these movies. Movies for young kids based on properties for young kids, they can be calm and relaxing watches, like the previously reviewed Blue's Clues and Little Bear movies. I'm not gonna lie, I think these kinds of movies are nice to watch if they're done right, and while I don't think they're up in the higher echelons of animated movies like Felidae or Treasure Planet, they still have some value to watch. Was I expecting anything out of Toopy and Binoo? Absolutely not, I expected a not-so-good but ultimately harmless kids movie, and I got a not-so-good but ultimately harmless kids movie.

Toopy and Binoo is a French Canadian book series that was made into an animated series in 2005. Funny enough, there was another French Canadian book series that was made into an animated series... You know, that kid's who's four, and each day he grows some more? Yeah, Caillou probably tanked any reputation Canadian pre-school shows could have, and I'm not going to act like Toopy and Binoo is like, Blue's Clues or Bear in the Big Blue House, it's a show for little kids made by people who only expect their audience to be little kids. I've seen a few episodes, and ultimately the show is not great. I do have to wonder why this movie got a theatrical release, no seriously, it has a theatrical release, why? I mean, I'm not going to argue that some movies don't deserve the grandiosity of a theatrical release, but I am going to say... why did a movie based on a pre-school property that hasn't done anything since 2006 get a theatrical release, I'm genuinely curious.

It's not like the movie looks that much better than the show, admittedly I don't remember much about the show, but other than the locations, the characters all look the same. I mean, this is equally a good and bad thing, because it looks like the show so it won't be odd looking to any fans of the show, but I have to think that people wouldn't really pay the theatre price to see a movie that doesn't look any better than what they can get on TV. Really though, that is just the surface level, honestly the backgrounds and locations are kinda nice, I wouldn't say they're absolutely stunning, but they aren't unappealing to look at, I may not be impressed by it, but it's not bad.

Sadly, the characters can't really have the same said about them. Most of them are just really annoying, they all have negative traits pushed into an annoying degree, Toopy himself is just unbearably narcissistic, one character is attached to her phone so much that I can't help but wonder if this is a jab at Gen-Z, two characters are annoyingly cowardly, one is annoyingly entitled, the only main character that isn't annoying really is Binoo, and that's mostly because he doesn't talk at all. I do tend to like silent characters like Gromit or the Cobbler in the Recobbled Cut, usually because it gives the animators the task of trying to communicate to the audience exactly what the character is thinking. I don't really get too much of that with Binoo, mostly because the art-style really does limit what can be done with the animation. On top of that, the characters don't really go through much of an arc, when they change by the end, we don't really see exactly how they got from point A to B.

Honestly, the movie isn't bad. It is just a movie for really young kids, and it's made exactly like that. There is a moment where everyone is worried about waking up a giant monster, but when it wakes up, it just cries. Okay, they didn't want anything that could be upsetting to the audience, okay, but there really is nothing challenging in this movie. There is no real emotional hook or gut punch, there's nothing like Steve feeling depressed about not finding one of Blue's Clues, or Little Bear and Cub going through dangerous territory to reunite Cub with his lost parents. All we get is Binoo really wanting to find his plush toy, I can see this being like, a twenty-minute special or something, not an hour long feature. There is also a minor running gag about these two characters who are meant to be identical twins, and all I can say is... Muppets did it much better.

Again though, I went in expecting a not-so-good movie, and I got a not-so-good movie, but it was ultimately harmless. Maybe some kids might start imitating some of the characters, but other than that, I can't think of anything really harmful to kids, I just think that when they grow up, they're not going to really have anything to come back to with this movie. I can definitely think of worse movies, honestly this one is going to rank really low on my worst animated movies of the year list, if it ranks at all. If you have really young kids and you want to keep them quiet for an hour, their are worse ways to do that, if you want to show your children something that they can come back to, The Little Bear Movie is on YouTube on the Little Bear - Official channel, so you can show them that instead. Do I recommend this one, even slightly? Not really, it isn't unwatchable, but it also isn't worth watching.

Space Jam (1996) - A Very Uneven and Kind of Sloppy Mess

As an animation fan, it's pretty much impossible for me to not like the Looney Tunes, their mix of ingenious writing, expertly done animation and the occasional clever bit of commentary, the Looney Tunes has earned its place as one of the most recognizable animated properties of all time, if not the most. So many of these cartoons hold up so well that they might as well have been made in the 1980s, or the 1990s, or the 2000s, we all grew up with the classics of Bugs, Daffy, Sylvester, Coyote and Road Runner, and more, to the point where we would never have guessed these cartoons probably predated our own parents. The Looney Tunes have remained pop-culture icons through highs and lows, and those lows could get deep. Since I've opened up my doors to live-action mixes like Roger Rabbit, I figured it would be fun to give this movie a review. I remember really loving Space Jam as a kid, I used to watch the VHS I had all the time, however, as with a lot of things about childhood, it's really not as good as you remember. Seriously, your childhood probably sucked more than you're willing to admit, but I digress, let's talk about Space Jam.

After retiring from Basketball, no I will not mention everything around that event, Michael Jordon takes up Baseball, only to literally get roped into playing a basketball game with the Looney Tunes against aliens from Moron Mountain who have stolen the basketball talent from NBA icons and want to enslave the Looney Tunes characters in their amusement park. On the one hand, I get it, this is a ridiculous enough plot to warrant a ridiculously cartoony cast, and it isn't like Looney Tunes didn't do spoofs before. It's just that those spoofs were of movie genres, classic stories, operas and musicals. Looney Tunes never really did spoofs or commentaries on sports and sporting communities, not like Disney did. However, this movie literally began as an advertising campaign with Bugs Bunny and Michael Jordan. On top of that, a lot of this plot is given to the rest of the NBA stars as they deal with their stolen talent, and Wayne Knight trying to pull Michael out of the Looney Tunes world, I like Wayne Knight fine, but these segments aren't really that funny.

The sad thing about this movie is, there are some decently written bits here, one of the basketball players sits in Church praying to God and then says he'll never date Madonna again, or Bugs and Daffy talking about how they weren't getting paid for any licensed merch being sold, that stuff's funny and there are some decent visual gags, but it's pretty few and far between, especially the slapstick. You would think that a cinematic venture from the late nineties would have just as good, if not better, slapstick than theatrical shorts from the 30s and 40s, but sadly no. The best example is when one of the characters gets hit by a bull, they cut away from showing us any impact and just show us the character being thrown into the sky. Come on! That's like, the basics of slapstick. There is some good humour in this movie, but it's also got a lot of weak stuff.

Speaking of weak, let's talk about the animation. Now the actual animation itself is pretty good, the characters all move fluidly and there are not real noticeable mistakes. Honestly, the blue screening isn't the worst either, like you can easily tell that Michael Jordan and the Looney Tunes aren't really interacting, but like, on the scale of bad chromo key, I'd give this a five, mid level bad. No, the real problem is the CG integration, it is all kinds of hideous. When they put a CG coating on Michael or Wayne Knight, it looks so dated, and the alien spacecraft at the beginning of this movie doesn't even look like a cartoon in the real world, it looks like an out of place CGI effect in the real world. The CG integration is easily one of the worst things about this movie.

That being said, one of the best things about this movie does have to be the Soundtrack, genuinely it's got some good tracks on it, even the title theme it's just kind of an amalgamation of random songs you'd find on a Jock Jams CD. Honestly, most of the acting isn't that bad either, I mean yeah, the NBA stars are... clearly not actors, but Wayne Knight was fine, and the new cast they got for the Looney Tunes was fairly decent, Billy West did a good Bugs Bunny, Dee Bradley Baker as Daffy Duck was almost as good as Mel Blanc, Bob Bergen did a fantastic Porky Pig, Bill Farmer (one of my favourite Voice Actors) did a quality Sylvester, and even June Foray got to return as Granny. Of course, the big guy we have to mention is Danny DeVito, everyone loves Danny DeVito and he definitely gives one of the best performances in this movie. All in all, I'd say the acting is split, though I think there are more good performances in this movie than not.

And I think that's all that is worth mentioning. Yep, can't think of anything else worth bringing up... Okay, let's talk about Lola, and though I'd rather be talking about the song by The Kinks, Lola Bunny is worth mentioning because, she's probably the most recent addition to the Looney Tunes cast. I can't think of any new character added since Lola, and if there were any who were added, they didn't stick around. She's been added to not only the 2011 Looney Tunes Show, but prior to that she was a main character in Baby Looney Tunes, and has been pretty much a staple character since. Which is fascinating, because she's kind of boring in this movie. Yeah, everyone has already brought it up, but I'm going to mention it again, Lola's character in this movie is lacking, she's just kind of the standard tomboy girl character we've seen all throughout the nineties, and though I wouldn't mind her tomboyish side still being a thing, the 2011 iteration of the character is far more memorable.

All in all, Space Jam is kind of an even movie. It has some good animation, and some absolutely awful CG integration. It's got some good voice acting, and some lackluster on camera acting. It's got a good enough plot, but not really a Looney Tunes plot. It's not the worst movie I've watched, honestly I don't think it's that much worse than The Bugs Bunny/Road Runner Movie I reviewed a while back, but much like that movie, I'd rather be watching the classic shorts, though I'll concede that this is a more original movie. Honestly, I don't know if I can really recommend this one, despite the good stuff, it's buried under mounds of not-as-good to down right awful stuff. If you're nostalgic for this movie, if you like it in that "So bad it's good" or "Dated timepiece" kind of way, I get it, but as for me, I think I'll just go back to the 1930s cartoons.