I was waiting for Mr. Bile to write his review of Pan's Labyrinth before posting a rebuttal, "Panned Labyrinth," but I was exposed to even deadlier levels of magical realism in the meantime. So allow me to fire the opening shots. Perhaps he will fight back later this week with his magic chalk that has the power to draw on walls.
In one week, I've seen two films that embraced magical realism to some degree. For those of you unfamiliar with the term, magical realism is a contemporary genre in which magic or magical creatures appear in pretentious fiction obstensively set in the real world (Not The Real World. That would actually be kind of cool. "Dude, there's a kappa in the hot tub!"), often to little effect. It's fantasy that refuses to come out of the closest. I mean, you can't expect to get your MBA with a thesis novel titled The Tengu Trilogy, Book 1: The Goblinwood Oxcart, can you?
Pan's Labyrinth is a good example of what I hate about magical realism. Though there is a connection between the fairy tale C-story and the Spanish Revolution plot, the consequences of the the fairy tale could be interpreted as coincidental. Goat Boy and Eye Hands never come out of the walls to aid the Resistance. Hey, I've got a great idea. Let's remake Big Trouble in Little China and have all the monsters only appear to Egg Shen and Eddie Lee. (Actually, that sounds pretty cool, too. It would at least explain why Miao Yin looks about as Asian as Pamela Anderson. "They were crazy Asian guys the whole time!")
Pan's Labyrinth is textbook magical realism. Did the magic make a difference or was it all imagined? What if there are invisible beet creatures that interact with us on a karmic level that we can't see? What if I cared?
Then last night I watched the first 20 minutes of Little Miss Sunshine. While those minutes didn't appropriate fantasy tropes in the traditional sense, the movie does focus on a family of faux Wes Anderson characters who could not exist in the real world. If my ugly teenager decided to stop speaking for several months...fine. Take away his paper, his pen, his computer, his text message allowance, his Scrabble tiles, and his food until he does. (This is probably why Mr. Bile tells me I'd make a good parent.) Unless you admit you're making a full-fledged fantasy or science fiction story, I refuse to take your kid who doesn't speak until dramatically appropriate seriously. Hodor!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Okay, clearly I am slow because I know you have explained this before. But humor me and put it down here and we will all have it for future reference.
Why is Edward Scissorhands not magical realism?
I also seem remember thinking that No Such Thing was not a bad way to spend two hours.
Over at allmovie.com No Such Thing is listed as being "Fantastic Reality." Is this the same as "Magical Realism?"
Edward Scissorhands is not magical realism because everyone can see Edward, everyone acknowledges his existence, and his presences makes an irrefutable impact in his environment. If only Kim could see Edward and his ability to effect the real world was ultimately unclear, that would probably make it magical realism.
It's also not really pretentious. The movie doesn't pretend to be anything other than fantasy.
Not sure about No Such Thing. From the previews it looked like the monster was real enough, but the pretense gave me an icky feeling in my stomach.
I know my definition is somewhat contradictory. What it boils down to is that fantasy that refuses to call itself fantasy is probably magical realism. And I normally know something's magical realism because it makes me gag.
Post a Comment