3.5 out of 5 This is the most Takahata-ish Takahata movie. It has all his major quirks: a bizarre sense of humor, traditional Japanese mythology, environmentalism, a focus on story over character, an inability to juggle a lot of characters at once, random but fun singing that strangely does not disrupt the tone of the film, and a Japanese paternal preachiness that his films barely manage to not collapse under.
A lot of the characteristics I mentioned are negative, I don't dislike this movie. If I were given the choice between it and a random Hollywood blockbuster, I would pick it every time, despite its many faults. But I'm disappointed. Most filmmakers tend to get better as they get older, or at least grow in interesting ways. Takahata did neither. As he grew in years, he exchanged complexity and intelligence for clumsy simplicity, and though the stylism he was once famed for did not go away, it was not nearly enough to cover up his declining artistic craft. He became simply a shadow of his former self, and though he was a rich and powerful man responsible for some of his country's enduring masterpieces, you couldn't help but feel pity for someone who had fallen so far, particularly because every now and then, there were traces of his old genius that exposed themselves for just long enough to give you hope.
Yes, I'm saying he's basically the Japanese Francis Ford Coppola.
The best thing about this film is the aesthetic. Every Takahata film has a great aesthetic, but this film takes it to the next level. It's better-looking than most Miyazaki films, and it has a greater deal creative designs too. A lot of hard work was put into making this film look as good as possible, from beginning to end. I'm not so adverse to Takahata's storytelling as to say you should watch this film on mute, but if you are planning to watch a film on mute, this would not be an a poor choice.
I should probably explain the plot of the film: in the 60's, during widespread urban development, a group of raccoons fight to stop their home for being destroyed. Yes, it does not make its environmental message subtly. At least Nausicaa had a strawman. This film doesn't. In fact, on a whole, it is rather disconnected from reality.
But that's not my main problem with the film. To explain, let me talk about my favorite scene. It's a romance scene between the 'protagonist' raccoon (I put it in quotes because this film doesn't really have a protagonist), and his love. It's a stunning scene, it's legitimately interesting, and the dialogue is rather well-written. It's the kind of scene you want to last forever.
And then they go and terrorize some innocent workers. Yeah, just like that. While I don't think we're supposed to think of the raccoons as universally good, we're supposed to sympathize with them and think their tricks are funny. I don't. The way they're presented, I was cheering for the humans. But even if their tricks were funny, that kind of tonal inconsistency takes the viewer right out of the moment, and it litters this whole movie.
Combined with unnecessary bizarre happenings that were not needed and break the pace of the film, and you have a ness of a movie. Takahata being serious is good. Think Grave of the Fireflies, his only truly great movie. Takahata trying to be funny is Takahata wasting the viewer's time. There are even parts of the film that are legitimately funny, but because they weren't weaved in with any artistic prowess, the audience doesn't care.
It is not a coincidence that the last five minutes of the film, which are the darkest, are also the best. I was sent dreaming of a better film, one that capitalized on the potential of those last five minutes, and of the very beginning, and of the good character interactions and depictions of this interesting raccoon culture. But as it was, I'm stuck with that film. I'm all right with that. It's just that I hoped for better.
By: Joshua A. Fagan
A lot of the characteristics I mentioned are negative, I don't dislike this movie. If I were given the choice between it and a random Hollywood blockbuster, I would pick it every time, despite its many faults. But I'm disappointed. Most filmmakers tend to get better as they get older, or at least grow in interesting ways. Takahata did neither. As he grew in years, he exchanged complexity and intelligence for clumsy simplicity, and though the stylism he was once famed for did not go away, it was not nearly enough to cover up his declining artistic craft. He became simply a shadow of his former self, and though he was a rich and powerful man responsible for some of his country's enduring masterpieces, you couldn't help but feel pity for someone who had fallen so far, particularly because every now and then, there were traces of his old genius that exposed themselves for just long enough to give you hope.
Yes, I'm saying he's basically the Japanese Francis Ford Coppola.
The best thing about this film is the aesthetic. Every Takahata film has a great aesthetic, but this film takes it to the next level. It's better-looking than most Miyazaki films, and it has a greater deal creative designs too. A lot of hard work was put into making this film look as good as possible, from beginning to end. I'm not so adverse to Takahata's storytelling as to say you should watch this film on mute, but if you are planning to watch a film on mute, this would not be an a poor choice.
I should probably explain the plot of the film: in the 60's, during widespread urban development, a group of raccoons fight to stop their home for being destroyed. Yes, it does not make its environmental message subtly. At least Nausicaa had a strawman. This film doesn't. In fact, on a whole, it is rather disconnected from reality.
But that's not my main problem with the film. To explain, let me talk about my favorite scene. It's a romance scene between the 'protagonist' raccoon (I put it in quotes because this film doesn't really have a protagonist), and his love. It's a stunning scene, it's legitimately interesting, and the dialogue is rather well-written. It's the kind of scene you want to last forever.
And then they go and terrorize some innocent workers. Yeah, just like that. While I don't think we're supposed to think of the raccoons as universally good, we're supposed to sympathize with them and think their tricks are funny. I don't. The way they're presented, I was cheering for the humans. But even if their tricks were funny, that kind of tonal inconsistency takes the viewer right out of the moment, and it litters this whole movie.
Combined with unnecessary bizarre happenings that were not needed and break the pace of the film, and you have a ness of a movie. Takahata being serious is good. Think Grave of the Fireflies, his only truly great movie. Takahata trying to be funny is Takahata wasting the viewer's time. There are even parts of the film that are legitimately funny, but because they weren't weaved in with any artistic prowess, the audience doesn't care.
It is not a coincidence that the last five minutes of the film, which are the darkest, are also the best. I was sent dreaming of a better film, one that capitalized on the potential of those last five minutes, and of the very beginning, and of the good character interactions and depictions of this interesting raccoon culture. But as it was, I'm stuck with that film. I'm all right with that. It's just that I hoped for better.
By: Joshua A. Fagan