But I didn't mind, because I wanted to see how it was done, and I think it was done perfectly. It had a very classic fairy-tale feel to it, and I loved loved LOVED it.
Oh yes, it's done so perfectly that I would have been disappointed if I hadn't been able to see the ending coming -- it's a fairy tale, so it needed a fairy tale ending.
I loved that bit
with the fairy changing shape.
And I loved that the
monster in the final task was Vidal, bringing the two storylines together like that. Of course it had to be, but it was just so perfectly done.
And relatedly, I loved that
the evil stepparent was an evil stepfather, and that it didn't occur to me until afterward that that particular trope had been regendered.
I haven't seen the answer to that laid out, but my guess would be that
he was still reeling from the drugs, and just took a wrong turn. She went down a path with an exit, he didn't, and so he had to backtrack.
But Guillermo did tell E in his interview that
there's one moment in the film that can't be explained unless you believe in the fantasy, and I wonder if that's what he was talking about.
Oh yes, it's done so perfectly that I would have been disappointed if I hadn't been able to see the ending coming -- it's a fairy tale, so it needed a fairy tale ending.
I wonder if there are going to be some viewers who, not being as thoroughly grounded in fairy tales as some of us, are going to be
very upset by the ending. Okay, maybe upset isn't the right word, but who will not get it, and feel a little bit betrayed by the classical fairy-tale structure.
Y'know, I didn't even stop to think about how novel it was that
the wicked step-parent trope was changed from tradition. And it should have, because we recently watched Nanny McPhee (which was pretty cute, actually), and one of the kids in that movie actually mentions how step-mothers are a bad breed, that anyone who reads knows that.
I think that anyone who would make the argument that
she went down a path with an exit, and he made a wrong turn
just wasn't paying attention, but I'm a bit ... inflexible in my viewpoint about How The World Works in those types of stories.
But Guillermo did tell E in his interview that
there's one moment in the film that can't be explained unless you believe in the fantasy, and I wonder if that's what he was talking about.
Oooh, I wonder. Could you please give me a link to the interview again, now that I've seen the movie and it's safe for me to read it?
Yay! Thank you, Jess. And please tell E for me that it was a very good interview.
I'm peeved. You've got me all wanting to see PL and none of the theatres in Madison are showing it yet. Ratsogarvy.
Oh, this part of the interview (about a future project) had me squeeing mightily:
In addition, del Toro has signed on as executive producer of the long-in-the-works directorial debut of fellow fanboy favorite Neil Gaiman. (The film will be based on Gaiman's popular Death: The High Cost of Living graphic novel.)
It was a very good interview. He sounds like someone I'd love to meet. And Anne, I agree.
Ooh, Pan's Labyrinth is playing in Princeton! Maybe I'll see it tomorrow.
We watched Idiocracy this afternoon, which was just great in parts, but overall not as funny as a Mike Judge joint ought to be.
