Coraline reviewed

New animated film Coraline comes with an impressive creative pedigree. It’s based on the acclaimed children’s bestseller by author Neil Gaiman, who is probably still best known for his seminal Sandman comic series. Coraline the film is directed by animator Henry Selick, the man responsible for stop-motion classics Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach.

In terms of its storyline, Coraline is essentially a dark Stephen King-esque take on Alice in Wonderland. Coraline Jones (voiced by Dakota Fanning) is an imaginative and resourceful young girl who moves with her overworked, neglectful parents to a remote apartment block called The Pink Palace. The Pink Palace is in fact a sub-divided house over 150 years old, and during her explorations, Coraline finds a secret door that leads to a world where, well, everything is just too good to be true.


In this mirror universe, where everyone and everything has buttons for eyes, Coraline meets her Other Parents, who lavish her with attention and delicious meals. The neighbours stage fantastic theatrical productions for her entertainment, and even Wybie, the irritating local boy who keeps trying to frighten Coraline, has undergone a pleasing personality change. It isn’t long, however, before Coraline starts to see through the façade to the disturbing truth beneath, and she’s forced into a dangerous game to save herself and her loved ones.

Parents of very young children should bear in mind that Coraline is NOT a conventional “safe” animated film. The opening sequence in which a doll is pulled apart and re-sewn sets the eerie tone for the following 90 minutes. Throughout the film characters are removing their skin or distorting horribly to reveal their true nature. There are references to “rat crap”, Coraline calls Wybie a “jerkwad” and there is at least one exclamation of “Oh my God.” Ignoring the swearing, Coraline is an intense film, particularly in its second half. Eight to ten years olds should have a blast, but for children younger than that, parents will need to exercise caution in terms of what they think their little ones can cope with.

This said, Coraline is one of the most imaginative and magical-feeling animated film in years. In certain scenes it’s difficult not to succumb to a sense of childlike wonder at what you’re seeing. Much credit must go to director Selick as the film’s production designer and screenwriter. He’s taken Gaiman’s pithy prose and crafted a unique and thematically appropriate look for the film’s world.


For example, in the novel, the Other Mother’s hands are described as having long, bony fingers and red, claw-like nails. Standard villain stuff. Selick and his team of art directors have cleverly reimagined the hands as interlinking sewing needles, which are far more menacing.

And when you consider that what you are seeing is model work animated frame by frame, and not CGI, it becomes even more impressive. Make sure to stay in the cinema until after the credits have rolled for a brief sequence that reveals how stop-motion wizardry made one of the more baffling scenes possible – without resorting to the use of computer graphics.

On the topic of graphics, Coraline is the first stop-motion film to be released in 3D, as part of the current 3D animation craze. It’s actually worthwhile forking out the extra money to watch Coraline in 3D because the film is easily the most impressive utilisation of the format so far. 3D isn’t treated as a gimmick in Coraline. It’s integrated into the film’s world, enhancing visuals and creating a believable sense of depth in scenes that need it, such as Miss Spink and Miss Forcible’s old, multi-layered Victorian theatre.

Speaking of Miss Spink and Miss Forcible, these retired burlesque actresses are the character standouts of the film. Voiced by British comedy duo Jennifer Saunders and Dawn French respectively, these bloated old women live in the Pink Palace’s basement with their pack of yappy Yorkshire terriers, act as absent-minded advisors to Coraline, and provide most of the film’s laughs.


Coraline the film also include a haughty but mysterious talking cat. His movements are wonderfully feline, but he achieves nowhere near the amount of audience love as Spink and Forcible.

In terms of comparisons to Neil Gaiman’s book, Coraline the film is mostly a very faithful adaptation. Scenes and concepts are expanded on where appropriate, but always done so with intelligence and for good reason. For example, film viewers receive a far stronger sense of the “neglect” Coraline receives from her parents, and the reasons for it.

The only major change to the novel is the introduction of neighbourhood boy Wybie. No doubt the character was added to the film to give young boys in the audience someone to identify with in what would otherwise be a very oestrogen-rich film. This said, Wybie’s family history also helps to give the Pink Palace a social context that is absent from the book. In the film, the Pink Palace is not simply a dilapidated house isolated in the mist. It's become a feared place, associated with the mysterious disappearance of children.

Feminist critics would probably argue that Wybie’s presence deprives Coraline of some of her agency, as she is no longer defeating challenges by relying solely on her own courage, cunning and resourcefulness. There’s now a male to save her at moments that matter. This is a valid complaint, but in the grand scheme of things it does not hamper enjoyment of the film too greatly.

In the end Coraline is a striking tale about being grateful for what you have, and being careful about what you wish for. This dark, magical film is sure to develop a cult following in the coming years on DVD (it’s definitely more worthy of a fanbase than superficial Corpse Bride), but Coraline should be watched now on the big screen to experience this future classic the way it’s meant to be seen.

Comments

MJenks said…
I dunno. I think Gaiman is still known best for Neverwhere. I mean, that's how I first came to know him, so maybe I'm biased.
Anonymous said…
Don't worry, Pfangirl liked the sandman series, she is biased too.
Pfangirl said…
Consulting the great and infallible Wikipedia, font of all knowledge, this is how they introduce Gaiman:

"Neil Richard Gaiman (born 10 November 1960 is an English author of science fiction and fantasy short stories and novels, graphic novels, comics, and films. His notable works include The Sandman comic series, Stardust, American Gods and Coraline.So "waaaaagghhh" to you both! ;)

Actually, it would be interesting to know how most people came to know Gaiman.
MJenks said…
I'll be honest here, since you posed the thought.

I came to know Gaiman through the Tori Amos song "Tear in Your Hand."

I'm currently reading the entire Sandman series (should get the last three books tonight), but I still think of him as "Neverwhere".
Pfangirl said…
I've been trying to think where I first encountered Gaiman, and I think it was via an art teacher in high school, who was a Sandman fan. She saw I was interested in comic graphics and wanted to show me the "arty" potentials of the medium.

The first Gaiman I read wasn't Sandman; it was a collection of other individual comic stories he had written (Swamp Thing, Hellblazer etc.)

As for the first words-only Gaiman novel I read, it was either Good Omens (with Terry Pratchett)or Stardust. I just can't remember which came first...
MJenks said…
Come on. Can you really say Stardust was words only? :-P
Pfangirl said…
I know there's an illustrated version but I just read the budget words-only paperback, so to me, yeah, it was words only ;).
MJenks said…
Okay. I've only ever had my hands on the illustrated version (which is also very nice).

Popular posts from this blog

Is the rebooted Lara Croft gay? Evidence for and against...

Weekend report-back: beach, board games and books

Movies today, SA!