MovieMail: James Rocchi and Kim Voynar Talk Ice Age 2 - Part Two
Filed under: 20th Century Fox, Family Films
Dear James,
You asked whether having kids makes me view kid flicks differently, and whether having kids makes reviewing a family film easier. To answer the first part of your question - to be honest, I'd have to say that my perspective on movies in general is inexorably affected by being a parent, especially when a film concerns parent-child relationships in any way. I remember bawling my eyes out when I took my then 2 1/2-year-old daughter to see Tarzan while I was pregnant with my older son; the whole "You'll Be in My Heart" sequence just tore me up. It's interesting that you used your niece's reaction to Finding Nemo as an example, because the opening of that film was upsetting to me as well. It's kind of a Disney thing to do in the mother within the first minutes of the film, though; I suspect it must be in the Disney Bible somewhere that the change that kicks off the movie should involve the death of a parent. That's a much scarier to most kids than the mythical boogie-man.
This experience is true for me with "grownup" films as well, though. In one of my favorite movies of all time, Douglas Sirk's Imitation of Life, the relationship between Annie and Sarah Jane - the normal separation of the mother-daughter bond amplified by racism and Sarah Jane's mortification that her mother is black - is really hard for me to watch. Innocent Voices was excruciating - watching Chava (Carlos Padilla) through the eyes of a mother, imagining living in that place, with the constant fear that with each passing year your son is a step closer to him being taken away no matter which way you turn - how could the mother in me not be affected by that? That's part of what makes movies matter to me, though - when done well, they give us windows to other perspectives, other cultures and ideas, and they help us see that some things, like a mother's love, are universal no matter what boundaries you live within.
So does all this make reviewing a film like Ice Age 2 harder or easier? When I review a family film, I try to compare apples to apples. You can't compare Ice Age 2 to, say, Hitchcock or Truffaut - how could you? You have to evaluate a film like Ice Age 2 against other family films targeting at the kid demographic, and yes, I think that having kids around makes it a bit easier to do this. My house is like a constant science lab, with children acting and reacting to what they see. I can watch my kids and observe how they respond to, say, March of the Penguins (my kids are still talking about the poor mother penguin being eaten by the sea lion and the fate of her baby and have integrated that into their play, I think as a way of working through it).
We own Ice Age, and my kids still like to watch it, so I was interested to see how Ice Age 2 would hold their interest. The youngest lasted about 2/3 of the way through., which either means he found it pretty interesting, or he'd slipped into a coma from the sugar content of the rare treat of a soft drink. The four-year-old was a bit scared of the "scary fish",and by about halfway through the film was requesting multiple potty breaks. The older two watched the whole thing, and they seemed entertained, but not as much as they were by Madagascar or Shrek 2. The nine-year-old is really more into films like Harry Potter, Aquamarine, and High School Musical these days, so her interest in films like Ice Age is waning, but she still laughed out loud at pretty much every scene involving the squirrel and his nut. Bottom line, I don't think parenthood makes it harder or easier to actually review a family film - I just have perhaps a different perspective on them than someone who doesn't have kids. Is this good or bad? Depends on the film, I guess.
So here's my volley back to you, Rocchi: how do you, as someone who doesn't have kids, review a family film? Do you draw on your own childhood to try to project how the film might have appealed to you at the film's target age? Or do you just review the film solely on its merits, weighing it mentally against all the films you've seen?












Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-30-2006 @ 10:06AM
Christine Chapman said...
Parenthood changed my film viewing in ways I could never have predicted. I knew I'd be subjected to the Disney pantheon ad nauseum; that I was prepared for. As a filmmaker and avid movie-goer, it was harder to give up my theater experience in favor of dvd releases, but you do what you have to do.
What I didn't count on was my sudden and violent reaction to films that place a child in peril. The first time I noticed the reaction was 'City Of Angels', where they kill off a child in the first five minutes. I turned the film off and didn't go back to it for several days. Ditto 'A.I.'- I caught the very end on cable and vowed never to watch the film. I cried every time I thought of it for two years.
More recent views include 'Crash' and 'Derailed'. I made it through 'Crash', barely, by leaving the room when the inevitable test of the invincible cloak came up.
'Derailed' lost me completely when Charles decided to spend his life savings on a blackmailer instead of his dying daughter. This is likely where the film lost most viewers. Most any parent of my acquaintance would have dealt with the fallout from the almost affair becoming public than sell out their child's life. I turned off the dvd shortly thereafter, knowing I would not buy any heroics from Charles later if he'd made such a bad choice so early in the film.
It is extremely rare that I don't watch a film from beginning to end. I love the process of watching the story unfold, and learn a great deal from the choices made by the cast and crew to mold the visual. However, I find that the mommy in me cannot abide hurting or killing children in film anymore. Certainly an unexpected parental side-effect.
Reply
3-30-2006 @ 2:34PM
Richard von Busack said...
At the press screening, I was interested to see how little sympathy there was for the baby-vendor in L'Enfant--and to see later that everyone from Anthony Lane to my colleague Jeanne Aufmuth said they didn't care about the protagonist once he took the unimaginable step of selling his own child. But one of the reasons I was mesmerized by L'Enfant is that the Dardennes made it clear how such a terrible thing could happen. And it is a plausible situation (in fact, such things happen every day). My problem may be that I'm not a parent--if, say, he'd sold his cat for medical experiments, that probably would have been a deal breaker.
As for kids movies...I still feel very much in touch with my inner child and do my best to spoil the little bugger at all times. You have to be fairly childish to be a popular cinema-goer in 2006. All my favorites are on screen nearly every day (Wolverine, Batman, Spider-Man, Superman and so forth) so my childish side gets a good glutting. But films like Ice Age and the wave of non-Pixar animation often seems made by desperate adults who load the work with TV commercial tag lines...they're referring to children not as children, but as consumers. So I think alienation is a perfectly honorable response. Plus I write for a paper that isn't aimed at families, so I never feel like I have to put in a phrase something like "you know, for the kids." Even when I was a kid, I recognized hackwork when I saw it.
Reply