Favorite Films: Science Fiction

Science Fiction films can be the funnest films anyone can watch. To ponder about the future and the fate of humanity is always bound to intrigue the mind. Unfortunately, like many bad comedies or empty action flicks, they can easily be handled with crassness and flooded with superficial externalities. In this case, this means seemingly justifiable pyrotechnics and senseless use of VFX — eye candy that exists for its own purpose rather than serving the film — because producers and audiences alike think that that’s what this genre is all about. Of course, they’re wrong; the real beauty of science fiction lies in its ability to move our minds and then surprise us with its visual strangeness and beauty.

Here’s a small selection of the films, both old (and slightly newer), that I watch periodically that bring out the best reasons to watch science fiction spectacles.

2001: A Space Odyssey (directed by Stanley Kubrick)

Stanley Kubrick’s groundbreaking original film based on Arthur C. Clarke’s novel practically defines the genre. The best modern sci-fi movies (such as Gravity, Interstellar etc) all pay tribute to its grand scale, epic cinematography and moments of solitary repose.

But here in Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey we go deep into the biggest questions about our existence — where we come from and where we’re ultimately heading. Beginning with the sudden appearance of the monolith during the age of the primordial apeman to the arrival of the star-child, the film covers the largest existential scope imaginable. The slow measured pace of the filmmaking gives the movie weight, balancing the ethereal with real physical tension. We can feel the scale of things — time, space, life — all the while observing the unknown yet somehow feeling a part of it. The film travels through four major segments in time and location; the discovery of tools in earthbound pre-human history, man’s journey into space, the arrival of self-aware artificial intelligence, and lastly, the death/rebirth of man. Each of the phases becomes more intellectually challenging than the previous, a fact that drove both audiences and critics alike to lose their minds in their analysis and criticism of the movie upon its initial release. Even today, there’s still no agreeable consensus as to the film’s exact happenings and their meanings, the philosophical and the allegorical seemingly open-ended.

Despite such convoluted confusion — done on purpose according to Kubrick — the film draws you in deeply. The strong single-point perspective camera provides not just clear focal beauty but a mood that complements the movie’s grandness. This feeling of scale is furthermore complemented by arguably the most powerful opening score in film history, all helping to make 2001: A Space Odyssey the ultimate science fiction experience.

Alien (directed by Ridley Scott)

Another film I watch annually is Ridley Scott’s sensational and terrifying masterpiece Alien. Promoted as a typical “monster in the house” sci-fi/horror flick, Alien is so much more. It’s a film the begins in sleep and ends in sleep, noting perhaps that humans have been comatose the whole time, not knowing the reasons for anything. We begin with a bunch of rocket scientists onboard a spacecraft set on a routine interstellar mission. But before long this crew finds itself deviating from its plans, and on its way, picks up an unsuspecting hijacker. We don’t know where it comes from or what it is, but it comes to terrify and ultimately destroy the entire crew save for one pilot, Ripley, played with strength and sensitivity by Sigourney Weaver.

I saw Alien by myself when I was quite young, in a foreign city (which is probably why I was even let into the theatre). It scared the heck out of me. And some of the scenes still throttle me today because the suspense is so brilliant, that even when you’ve seen the film, it still gets you. Aliens (the sequel by James Cameron) is also entertaining, but in a different sort of way. Weaver again, is brilliant in it, in what I would truly call a strong woman’s role (as opposed to what’s being proffered today — sexy actresses who fight fearlessly with their superpowers.) Here in Alien, Weaver’s Ripley is scared, vulnerable and resourceful. You feel her plight and admire her courage. Supplemented by H.R. Giger’s legendary designs and a quiet yet ominous score, Alien is a great film, perhaps even Ridley Scott’s finest.

Total Recall (directed by Paul Verhoeven)

I love Paul Verhoeven. His films aren’t afraid to be a little silly and fun (check out another sci-fi gem, the original Robocop). Yet, at the same time, his filmmaking skills are formidable. With astute camera work, brilliant pacing and prescient imagery, you really get into his adventures. Total Recall, starring the one and only Arnold Schwarzeneggar, is Verhoeven at his best. Set in a modern yet industrial future, it features a perplexed construction worker who’s obsessed with a series of dreams about Mars. In his search to alleviate these tensions, he goes to Rekall, a vacation company that sells virtual tours — dreams “so real you’re mind won’t know the difference.” When things go wrong, the protagonist Quaid, played by Arnold, ends up on a dangerous adventure on route to finding out his true identity.

Loaded with memorable sets and action sequences, Total Recall, is bursting with brilliant twists and turns and is just loads of visual fun. The casting is perfect — both Arnold and Sharon Stone are fabulous here — and despite the unbelievability of it all, you willingly fall right into the chase. (The same cannot be said about its remake, starring Colin Farrell despite Farrell being a superior-trained actor.) It’s a film I just want to see every once in a while, like going for a great double cheese burger with all the works.

The Day the Earth Stood Still  (directed by Robert Wise)

This is an old time gem. Despite it’s dated (1951) visual effects and simple black and white film stock, Robert Wise’s The Day The Earth Stood Still continues to carry with it real drama and feeling. The story begins with the arrival of a stranger from outer space, played by Michael Rennie, who comes to warn our species of its insensitive and harmful ways of doing things — supposedly our proclivity for war and the recent development of nuclear weapons.

Arriving in humanoid form, Rennie’s Klaatu, is calm, wise and patient despite being surrounded and later captured by the US Military upon his arrival in a “flying saucer” (yes, this is very mid-century). He later escapes, and upon befriending a widow and her young son, makes known his real reasons for being here and who he really is. With orders to destroy the earth’s inhabitants should we not comply, Klaatu’s robot Gort (which represents a fleet of the same such powerful technology that patrols interplanetary peace) sustains a menacing presence despite his low-tech appearance by today’s standards. But in Robert Wise’s film, it’s the ideas that resonate, and the care and attention to the plot and its characters. Despite its age, I still love this film. There’s a sincerity in the delivery and in the message that it conveys — that is, the preciousness of life and peace here on this tiny planet.

Brazil (directed by Terry Gilliam)

One of the strangest dystopian movies of our time, Terry Gilliam’s Brazil is a delectable visual treat. Unique in its character development and loaded with the kind of bizarre antics that are to be expected from one of the geniuses of the Monty Python crew, Brazil nonetheless makes a strong and cohesive statement about conformity and tyrannical government power. In fact, the film is all about control and the battle for physical freedom and intellectual sanity.

The wonderful set pieces alone are iconic and the characters — from Jonathan Pryce’s  befuddled Sam Lowry to Robert DeNiro’s terrorist spy Harry Tuttle — bring flavor to the scenes. Gilliam’s frequent use of wide lenses and cantered upshots, give an already strange world a buffoon-like quality, filled with ludicrous scenarios and absurdly loud human behaviour that makes this all the more surreal. It’s as if the director threw in everything that he found obnoxious in our current human civilization, amped it up a couple of notches and filled the entire world that way, everywhere, all the time.

Brazil is a powerful warning about consumer driven distraction, industrial dominance and totalitarian bureaucracy. It tantalizes with its visuals and its break-neck pacing and finishes up with a perfectly convoluted dream-like climax. It’s a film that makes you wonder what’s true and what’s not from beginning to end.

Gattaca (directed by Andrew Niccol)

This is a true thinking person’s film. Without any dependence on special effects or fancy set pieces, Andrew Niccol’s Gattaca gravitates ours concerns about mortality and the impact of one of our most prominent technologies, genetic engineering. Starring Ethan Hawke, the film features a young man who finds a job passing himself off as another person, a genetically superior human, a champion swimmer played by a very charming Jude Law, who due to a night of drunkenness is now a paraplegic. Hawke’s character Vincent aspires to travel to outer space, where life is better and free from genetic discrimination. But being born outside the world of eugenics he has no hope of achieving his dreams, at least not until he signs up to fake an identity of Law’s character, Jerome, who needs the money and the illusion that his life still has some sort of meaning.

In his pretending to be Jerome, Vincent encounters all the troubles associated with faking it in a world where everything is tracked: height, fitness levels, eye scans, and even hair and skin follicles — basically anything and everything that could identify and locate an individual in a fully-monitored society. Yet here’s the catch; because everything’s computer tracked, no one doubts the most obvious — namely that Vincent looks nothing like Jerome but since no one looks or doubts when the machines say “match,” it all works. And it all does for Vincent as he gets a job at the space launch academy Gattaca (set tastefully inside a Frank Lloyd Wright building my wife used to work at it) until a murder happens. Then things get messy.

The art direction, acting and atmosphere are subdued and appropriate. And, unlike most other science fiction movies, it’s one that portrays a future that could very well become true in the not too distant future. This makes Gattaca one of the smartest and most provocative films of its genre.

Blade Runner (directed by Ridley Scott)

Ridley Scott’s other masterpiece Blade Runner, starring Harrison Ford, is the ultimate dystopian set piece. In a world of flying cars, a vanquished sun, and androids, the big existential questions dominate this beautifully produced film. Set in Los Angeles during the year 2019 (as usual, science fiction is always wrong on the dates when it comes to technology), Blade Runner feels a bit like a futuristic cops and criminals mystery thriller, but it isn’t. Ford, who plays a “Blade Runner,” is a special agent out to spot and “retire” (kill) replicants, androids who are no longer licensed to live. In this case, the escapees are Nexus ex-military units that have come back to earth after abandoning their assignments as warrior/worker slaves. The idea of self-aware robots that look human challenges the very existence of our species and the reasons for our survival, especially given that AI robots would be superior to real humans in almost every way; beauty, strength and intelligence. But here’s the catch; these Nexus androids were programmed with an expiry date. This makes for an excellent premise.

Much has been made of the recent sequel, Blade Runner 2049 starring Ryan Gosling. It’s carries with it the same existential questions and makes a valiant attempt to provide more answers. But because it does, or tries to, it weakens the mystery. What makes science fiction like Scott’s original film so great is it takes pleasure, and gives you that same pleasure, in not knowing the truth. We live for this mystery because questions hungrily drives us forward. Complemented by Harrison Ford’s bewildered presence and Rutger Hauer’s chilling performance as Roy Batty, as well as its distinctive production design, Blade Runner will always remain a landmark film and a true favorite.

To see other Favorite Films go here.

“ACE” Your Shot

Charlie Chaplin is arguably the most iconic of screen actors. He was also likely the hardest working; he was so completely devoted to his craft that he was known to do over 100 takes to get a scene right.

When doing creative work of any kind, it’s so important to get the whole thing right. That means more than simply making one or two aspects of your work successful. The best creative work communicates on multiple levels in order to do its job as art. It’s a cumulation of creative choices, skills and soul.

“You owe it to yourself and the medium.” — Milt Kahl

An old art teacher once told me that the style of a painting or sculpture is never the issue when judging its quality. Rather, it had to do with the consistency of its message, choice of technique (or materials) and the overall execution. This all makes sense of course. Inconsistent and convoluted work confuses and conflicts with itself. Good work feels harmonious and presents a complete picture of the intent of the work — the artist’s statement. This is not easy to do.

An image from one of the most charming little sequence of shots from Pixar’s Monster’s Inc. by the wonderful Doug Sweetland. The entire series of poses and movements in the compilation all perfectly complement the mood and humor of the situation.

When I was animating, I always had a note taped onto my desk that said “ACE your shot.” It was my reminder to be true to my craft and to each individual task specifically.

A — Appropriateness

C — Clarity

E — Expression

Let’s briefly discuss what this all means:

APPROPRIATENESS: (Is it the right choice?)

Perhaps the hardest thing to do in art is deciding on what to do and how to do it. What’s the idea that’s being presented and how do we make the right story, acting, design and technical choices that would best suit the demands of the work that sits in front of us.

If it’s character animation, what’s the context of the shot we’re animating? What’s the subtext? If it’s a single painterly or illustrative design then what’s the aim of the composition? What colors, lines and shapes should be employed? From determining who the character is to what mood must be conveyed — these issues affect everything we do moving forward. And the shopping list of creative concerns is hefty: composition, choreography, overall shape, contrast, texture, style of movement, amount of movement, etc. Each of these areas requires serious contemplation, research and exploration. Many ideas and options need to be investigated and tested before settling in on a single, firm and final decision, one which can propel us in the best direction. If we don’t have the idea right, we’re gonna waste a lot of time doing, re-doing, and then finally scrapping our work altogether. Without solid planning and preparation we can be running hard and fast and end up no further than where we started. Pretty animation using the wrong acting choices impresses no one. Efficiency does NOT equal effectiveness.

This early stage rough animation by James Baxter of Rafiki from The Lion King shows the kind of thinking and creativity involved right from the beginning. Making great acting choices is what everything else in an animator’s work hangs onto. It’s the life line of the shot.

CLARITY: (Does it work?)

Clarity is essential if we hope to have any sort of solid and understandable presentation of our ideas. It’s the test of our knowledge of both the craft and the task at hand, aswell as our skill in execution. This may be on the graphic or technical/mechanical side of things. How the work appears in the final stages will determine how believable and presentable our work is. What shapes, colors and designs we employ will determine the visual exactitude of our work. If failure resides here, our work will look messy, ugly and confusing. It’s impossible to relate or like work that we can’t understand or see clearly. Excess and complexity can confuse and/or bore.

“There is not greatness where there is not simplicity, goodness and truth.” — Leo Tolstoy

And, if there’s any doubt in terms of physically believability — that is, if we’re not respecting the laws of reality in the world that our art resides in — then we’ve lost our accountability. If we’re talking animation, there must be believable weight, timing and sense of solidity in the environment. If there isn’t, we must ask why not? Is it a deliberate, creative choice or simply failure in execution? If we’ve dropped the ball, then we’ve screwed up. Don’t ever make up new narratives to justify poor execution of the fundamentals.

This magnificent scene by Milt Kahl shows the kind of clear staging, beautiful posing and perfect execution of weight and timing that makes a scene shine. The standard of care and professionalism in every artistic and technical aspect is almost always evident in every single frame of animation done by this legendary animator. From Disney’s Sword In The Stone.

EXPRESSION: (Does it connect?)

We can have the best ideas and even the most perfect graphic artistry and technique but still fail if we don’t manage to connect to the audience. And given each one of us is different, and there being no accounting for taste, reaching this lofty goal is a challenge for even the best artists. But striving to make work that connects is what we artists live for. We’re social creatures and nothing is more meaningful or gratifying than when we’re understood at the deepest existential levels.

“We thought of our characters as real living beings.” — Ollie Johnston

Great art emanates from the soul. There’s no formula for moving the audience. Creating art that stimulates requires an effort driven by passion and an inspired prescription for personal expression. Sometimes the artist’s feelings can be very strong at the inception of a project but gets distorted and faded by the time of its completion. We must hold onto the idea for a long time in order to sustain and make such honesty and truth come through. And only with practice and discipline can we learn this.

And it’s all worth it. In my opinion, this final expressive element is where appeal, power and wonder lies. That’s what ultimately makes the viewer say “wow.” It’s what endures. People feel deeply, memorably connecting with the work even if they don’t necessarily understand all the logic or effort behind it. It’s this thing that resides first inside the artist that deeply connects. And because we’re all very similar, this connective magic crosses all gender and cultural boundaries, so we see not only the artist, but ourselves in the artist’s work.

Now, while artistic or technical excellence is less meaningful without personal expression, art that fails either conceptually, mechanically or graphically would distract the audience from the essense of the work. In other words, without appropriateness or clarity, internal personal passion stays buried inside. Only when those fundamental elements support and align with the soul can a soulful experience be relayed.

In this scene from the movie Doubt, we witness total unified perfection between two fantastic actresses, Viola Davis and Meryl Streep. The kind of captivating performance delivered here, especially by Davis, is what makes film art so incredibly powerful in its ability to connect.

CONCLUSION:

It’s never easy to “ACE” our work. It requires a strong and passionate will to create, a deep devotion to mastering our craft, and an almost primal obligation for personal expression. On top of that it takes real courage.

“What would life be if we had no courage to attempt anything?”
― Vincent van Gogh