The Art of The Polar Express and The Art of The Incredibles Reviews

Anil Wanvari and Anand Gurnani explore the blossoming visual effects industry in India, where 70% of the movies utilize digital magic to wow viewers.
Posted In | Magazines: AnimationWorld

The Art of The Polar Express is a much-needed piece of film-stoppage. Yes, an art-of book affords a look into the conceptual art that inspired a feature film, behind-the-scenes bonuses like costume fittings and special effects tests, and elucidating commentary from the filmmakers — but, more importantly, in the case of Polar Express, this is a chance to halt the movie and feast your eyes. This isn’t just an animated CGI feature, after all; this is a Robert Zemeckis picture, and must represent something of a dream come true for the director.

If sweating details was a sport, Zemeckis would be a four-time gold medal-winner. He prepares and previsualizes through all points of the compass to make his camerawork smooth, his mise-en-scene sharp. Some get their kicks skydiving; Zemeckis works out how to combine his establishing shots, closeups and reaction shots into one take. The results can be breathtaking (on the grand scale, the “I See Me” dance number in Death Becomes Her; more intimately, Helen Hunt’s fainting phone-call in Cast Away). But those movies, inconveniently, were filmed, and celluloid is to hard drive as fresco is to oil painting.

Now, for the first time, he’s gone completely digital — and everything’s fixable. Now the director who tamed Jodie Foster’s darting eyebrow in a scene from Contact can get it perfect. Every performance in Polar Express began life as a data set, which means the acting, in fact the whole schmeer, is guaranteed to be Just So. It’s also Just So Much, which makes this art-of book so delicious.

Unable as we are (at least until the DVD comes next year) to freeze-frame this colossus of visual minutiae, The Art of Polar Express offers a chance to linger over some choice middle-American dream landscapes lit by a full moon. If you’ve not read Chris Van Allsburg’s book of the same name, Polar Express is the story of a boy’s midnight train ride to the North Pole on Christmas Eve. In the movie version, we find, this cozy universe has been embellished with dancing, tuxedoed hot-chocolate dispensers; a rollercoaster-crazy jaunt through Arctic glaciers; and an elf rock band. (You try adapting a 32-page kids’ book without garnishing.) Authors Mark Cotta Vaz and Steve Starkey have filled 144 full-color glossy pages with images from this new, expanded adaptation. The result almost works as a lateral-thinking children’s book of its own, albeit much longer and with the story strangely removed. As in Van Allsburg’s original, the surreal paintings of a boy’s journey across moonlit, snow-covered plains and mountains are sure to trigger the reader’s memories of similar magic moments from late-night drives with mom and dad.

Art is the focus, meaning there are lots of digital paintings in generous two-page spreads ornamented with short explanatory paragraphs that don’t delve. So while the reader only gets two sentences from Starkey (who happens to be Zemeckis’ producing partner) on the design for the Elf Bathroom, it’s enough to frame the contents of the image, which overflows with eye candy. There for the pleasure of your right hemisphere is what looks like a Santaland kitchenette with translucent green curtains, miles of chrome and tiny little shampoo bottles, all mounted onto a double sink with a staircase leading to the lip — the elves, you see, have had to adapt technology built to human scale, and this is their shower.

The color reproduction is excellent, with saturated hues and rich blacks. Big landscapes like a view of Corkscrew Mountain invite you to stand back and gawk; detailed interiors prompt you to get squinty and relish the details. (In the Grand Central Station-like Surveillance Room, where naughty/nice attributes are determined and assigned for all the world’s children thanks to a vast network of hidden cameras, it turns out there’s a clock noting the time in Hill Valley, a reference to Zemeckis’ 1985 blockbuster.)

The book includes material from all stages of production, including pen-and-ink drawings, digital paintings, photos of the performance-capture stage where the actors worked, architectural drawings, even souvenir postcards. For vintage toy fans there’s a great spread on the boy’s bedroom showing some astonishingly photoreal Tinkertoys, books and other set dressing. The text is brief at best, but of course there will be oodles of featurettes dissecting the film from top to bottom when the DVD chugs onto your shelf in 2005. Meanwhile, here’s a scenic overlook for the coffeetable.







Comments


no matter what the books say about this,the incredibals was the best animation film i have seen for years! i must admit that the first several minutes of the actual-sight of the characters,actually made me nauseous,as the odd shapes of their bodies took some getting used-to.and in this flick,the SOUND was done with out blasting the audience,which was a delight to see this adjusted to a more normal levle.the question askes,could the characters have been designed better? some-could,and some were cool.oddly, the audience never really 'guffawed'or laughed very much-just chuckles,and not like south park,which made me split my gut with laughter! later on in the film,i really was charmed by the tiney little lady,who was the super hero,european accented, costume maker.but i never got used to the big guy's 'steroid-chin' ,which just did not seem to be very much an origional in design.the 'spider' monster was also a 'retro' take off of the wild west movie monster machine-not good. and whats with the 'no lips or thin lips'...are they all IRISH? i also liked the teen age girl,with the 'one eye' covered,as that was an 'archie' 40's comic book character , take-off from 'veronica'-for sure. this film kept dazzling folks with scenes that were very clever,which interacted with all the action,but was always thinking i'm watching a 'video game'. this kind-a ruined the idea that the film will use this for marketing a video game-after the film-not good,as inserting a 'commercial' into the film for further video game players reeked of 'executive' commercialism.did disney push this?and is that one of the reasons why pixar dumped them. the story twists were very well done,and this kept me focused,even though i had only about four hours of sleep last night. i do hope Pixar shows some 'class' with out flooding the toy market-mc donalds-with licensing crap,as i do believe the garbage dumps are bloated to the top,with former plastic trash,from far too many disposable toys,from all those disney -eisner executive decisions about marketing. as for the 'express' movie,i will not go see this ,as the reviews are telling me that the characters are 'faulted' to a point that no real emotion or expressions were fourthcomming. the critics complaine about the failure to give any of these characters any 'life'? even the trailers were telling me ,this is another looser film. DAWK
Dale DAWK Mc Farlane (not verified) | Mon, 11/15/2004 - 01:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.