Save the Cheerleader, Save Cinderella?

Okay, I admit it...I have recently acquired a huge crush on Hayden Panettiere. I had seen her in a couple of movies, Raising Helen and Remember the Titans, but she never really jumped off the screen at me. This is probably because she was pretty much an infant, in my eyes, in these films. But ever since I saw her on Heroes, I have been watching a lot of movies that I would otherwise avoid just to see her cute and quirky smile. I am not alone in my willingness to pursue Panettiere movies, my wife is more than happy to watch these odd pieces of entertainment. She likes Hayden in Heroes as well.

A couple of the movies have been surprisingly entertaining. I found out that I actually liked Ice Princess, I mean I liked it a lot. It pulled my heart strings. It's right up there with The Cutting Edge as an "ice skating movie I am willing to watch." I won't watch ice skating with you, but if you are in the mood for either of these movies and I am in. I won't watch NASCAR either, but will watch The Ballad of Ricky Bobby. Racing Stripes wasn't that bad, and I already love the Seven Samurai-esque A Bug's Life.

Not all of the films have been fun though. Bring It On: All or Nothing was hard to slog through. I don't even know what I was watching. It was like watching three movies at the same time, jumbled together at random. It just freaked me out.

That said, I cannot believe just how much this young almost-woman (she is still 17) works. Now I find a Cinderella III video where she is singing! What is a poor boy to do?

Steve Austin vs. Bigfoot

Ah...Sweet nostalgia.

John Lasseter, 2D, and Glendalienism

Anne Thompson at the Hollywood Reporter, until tomorrow when she takes over Variety.com, has a link to a very good New York Times story about the future of Disney animation. The Times story is simultaneously informative about the "business" while highlighting the narrow-sighted ignorance of East Coast bias. As Kate at Fishbowl LA points out, New Yorkers don't often have the familiarity one would expect. Sometimes I think New Yorkers shouldn't be allowed to write about Los Angeles.

Below is the comment I wrote about the article, which mentions that Disney Animation is going to have offices in Glendale.

Overall, this is a very good article, which gives me yet another reason to love living in Glendale. It's great being a Glendalien.

On a side note though, it continually amazes me how articles point to 2002's Treasure Planet and its failure as a symptom of how audiences lost interest in 2D animation. Rarely is it mentioned that 2002's Lilo and Stitch was a significant success for the studio. It cost less to make ($80 million to over $120 million) and made considerably more in the box office ($145 million domestic to $38.1 domestic). Lilo and Stitch was not only 2D, but it featured beautiful watercolor background paintings. It was a true 2D experience, where Treasure Planet was more 2-1/2D with more computer modeling etc.

What is often lost in analysis is how Treasure Planet suffers from what I call, Titan A.E. syndrome (a 2000 box office flop). This syndrome is a combination of two things. First, forgetting just who the audience is for a typical (i.e. non-ultra-vi film as Alex might say) American animated film. Second, is the lack of a well written/conveyed narrative. Pixar films work because they are well written. Treasure Planet may have been Treasure Island, but it made the protagonist a whiner and added "extreme" sports elements in an attempt to attract 12-14 year old boys.

Rule #1 in animation/comics/entertainment is "if you want 12-14 year old boys to desire your product, make it for 18 year olds." Atlantis, which featured awe-inspiring designs by Mike Mignola, was a flop for the same reason. 12-14 year old boys want to watch Full Metal Alchemist, Heavy Metal, and Samurai Champloo, they don't want Treasure Planet or its ilk.

Pixar's movies tried to appeal to all audiences, either through humor, nostalgia, or pathos. The nostalgia of the collector (and its dark side) are a wonderful part of Toy Story 2. The pathos of "Kitty!" at the end of Monsters Inc. is heartbreaking, and the humorous adaptation of The Magnificent Seven/Seven Samurai that is A Bug's Life is wonderful.

It is the writing and quality that bring people to the theater again and again. I can only think of one well written animated film that failed and that was released with almost no fanfare, Iron Giant.

A Quick Glance Around the Geek-o-Sphere

According to Board Game News, Twilight Creations' Zombie Town has cleared customs and is ready to ship.

Twilight Creations is a company with a seemingly singular obsession with Zombies. I own quite a few of their games and am especially fond of When Darkness Comes which combines Board game quickness with some Roleplaying elements.

Steve Meretzky has an article up on what we can learn from board games.

The article is reminiscent of some of the comments in Steven Johnson's Everything Bad is Good for You and John Derbyshire's surprised comments regarding Age of Empires. I love it when curmudgeons find value in "pop" things.

Variety's Tom McLean gets ready for New York Comic Con. He also points out that "Graphic Novels" are the most popular format in the medium.

I don't always like the use of the term "graphic novel" to describe collections of the periodicals. To me Blankets was a graphic novel, Identity Crisis (DC Comics) is a collection of periodicals (a "trade" if you will), so is Watchmen for that matter.

SciFiChick has a list of SciFI "One Hit Wonders."

I may not agree that all of these are wonders, but it is a good list of thirteen shows that never got past season one.

In Tanzania a Bat Demon is blamed for sexual assaults.

Can I really add anything to that? Go Zotzilaha!

Evil Dead: The Musical

How the hell did I miss this?!

Robocop vs. Terminator

Buck, over at No Blasters, has embedded an awesome Robocop vs. Terminator video and provided links to two follow up vids.

Oprah: Huckster or Dupe?

Brian Lowry, television critic over at Variety, discusses Oprah Winfrey's inclusion of psychics, self-help gurus, and other snake oil salesmen in today's column. Mr. Lowry attacks the soft, approving, and non-critical way that Oprah treats theses guests. He is essentially arguing that, given the high esteem with which people view her, she should be skeptical of those who offer her audience "pat answers" to potentially difficult problems.

No argument from me, but Lowry doesn't discuss Larry King's obsession with both psychics and space aliens. No one can deny Larry King's influence, he dominates his particular niche, yet Lowry doesn't use his interviews as a comparison. King, too, presents people like Sylvia Brown with little to no critical analysis. When King did have James Randi on in 2001, Randi challenged Brown to prove her abilities. Since 2001, Brown has been back on Larry King Live. To my knowledge, James Randi has not. Even though Sylvia Brown has never followed through on her promise to prove her abilities.

Why do those who are in trusted media positions so readily embrace people who are taking advantage of other peoples sorrow? Is Oprah, or for that matter Larry King, a huckster or a dupe?