Scrat from Ice Age 2: The Meltdown. Twentieth Century Fox, ©2006.
When I was a child, back in the pre-Playstation dark ages, entertainment was rather a simple affair. TV meant network TV — no cable, no satellite, no dishes on the roof — and cartoons were what you watched on Saturday morning:
Underdog,
Huckleberry Hound,
Tom and Jerry,
Josie and the Pussycats. Of these, nothing was so rivetting as
Road Runner, the
Speedy Gonzales of the animal set, a creature whose superpower (supersonic speed) was comically offset by his interminable run of bad luck. My most enduring memory as a child is of sitting watching Road Runner while my mother gently (and constantly) reminded me that in real life, you don't actually bounce back to normal after a 10-ton anvil falls on your head.
Naturally, my children think this is ludicrous. They've grown up with
Jimmy Neutron and
Billy and Mandy, and, well, far be it from me to remind them that there's no proof that the Grim Reaper has a Jamaican accent. (Though I do, indeed, try.) As for warning them of real-life dangers, it seems that
Pixar and
Animal Logic have pretty much taken care of that. They've mastered a particularly persuasive (and as it turns out, rather literal) form of spin that makes Road Runner look about as scary as dryer lint.
It's the Hollwood half-pipe. And kids can't get enough of it.
We first saw it back in the
Ice Age movies, where the impish Scrat careens in snowy spirals hoping to hang onto a single acorn. We saw it underwater in
Finding Nemo, where sea creatures big and small engage in a bubbly ballet of loops and spins. And in the recent Animal Logic release,
Happy Feet, it's pretty much taken over the whole film. Here it's a slapstick move: the loop-de-loop of the classic half-pipe plays out on a slick surface of snow and ice, the dancers waddle and flip (I should mention that they're penguins) and as the perils increase, the dance numbers do, too. Critics have praised
Happy Feet's incongruous plotlines, a welcome deviation from the formulaic storylines of most cartoon movies and one which is amplified by an eclectic soundtrack clearly intended to keep parents awake. There are some inspired casting choices, like Robin Williams channeling his inner
Charo and a fat-cat evangelical penguin, also voiced by Williams in a pitch-perfect rendition of
Barry White. Ethnic diversity aside, the common language here is the half-pipe: they all do it, and they do it constantly, so that by the end of the film, the encroaching evil-doers seem somehow disabused of their menacing intent because the audience knows better. Ergo, the penguins slip-slide right on past the big, bad industrialists to their flap-happy, G-rated and triumphant end.
Animals have long been the protagonists of choice for children. Along the way, they've been crafted by assuming human qualities — and
not just in the Western canon: from
Anansi the Spider to
Peter Rabbit, children thrill to the notion of a seemingly implausible character solving a problem of some visible consequence. (Obviously it is far better for little people to see a bunny in danger than to see, for example, a five-year old child held hostage by Mr. Macgregor. That's no fairy tale:
that's a felony.) But in feature-length cartoons like
Happy Feet, the animals assume other, more subtle and crafty qualities, too. They flirt. They fret. They exhibit passive aggressive tendencies. There are political stalemates, generational divides, economic hardships, environmental perils. In the end, there's a kind of Disney-esque resolution, suggesting that dancing is the antidote to adversity. (I'm tempted to relate this to recent events in American politics, but suffice it to say that there's a kind of loosely political "walk the walk, talk the talk" shorthand at play in this movie that's mildly discomfitting.) There's a weird mash-up going on here, and it's not just the soundtrack. Imagine channel-switching between C-Span and
Dancing With the Stars. You get the idea.
Meanwhile, the film endlessly riffs on a cinematic sequence that adoringly and ineffably recalls the art of the half-pipe. Was it deliberate, this choice to recreate the graceful moves, the gravity-defying lift-off that summons images of the snow (or skate) boarder? Was it intentional, this extension of the sleek surface, from a manageable half-pipe to a menacing mountain range? (Wasn't it enough in
Nemo and
Ice Age? Or did somebody call market research and find out this is just — pardon the pun — the
tip of the iceberg?) It is likely that there's a bankable (and at times inverse) relationship between special effects and fear: in other words, the more fun it looks, the less dangerous it will seem to viewers. (And the more concerning it will be to parents.)
I promised myself that if I had children one day, I wouldn't admonish them, as my mother did me, about the real, live dangers inspired by cartoon derring-do. But faced with the lure of the Hollywood half-pipe, I'm not so sure any more. I thought I was using good judgment opting for G over
PG-13. And hey — they're cute, those penguins. But the more human they get, the less kids remember that they're birds. You don't need an anvil dropped on your head to see where this could lead. In the meantime, the animation is beautiful, if a bit vertigo-inducing. And isn't it time the cartoon-length feature veered away from water and ice, onto plain old solid ground?
Comments [31]
11.27.06
06:04
11.27.06
08:58
VR.
11.27.06
11:35
To this day, I distinctly remember attempting to reverse myself in midair and "run" back to the edge. I knew this maneuver was an option because I had seen it performed successfully by the Road Runner many times.
Needless to say, I fell the ten feet anyway. Hairline skull fracture, two weeks in the hospital. I didn't take my physics lessons from cartoons after that.
11.28.06
08:31
11.28.06
09:35
I think the arc that Charlie made with his body as he flailed from missinig the football that Lucy snatched away is the harbinger of all things half-pipe today.
:)
11.28.06
11:23
Zoinks!
VR/
11.28.06
01:18
Thank you Sid & Marty Krofft for all the memories.
11.28.06
08:10
11.29.06
05:07
11.29.06
06:34
If anything, G rated cartoons have gotten a lot more tame since the WB predecessors.
Do you honestly think one Pokémon blasting another in the face with a shotgun à la Elmer Fudd would be rated TV Y nowadays?
I personally think parenting is the issue not the cartoons. On a side note Happy Feet was a very good flick.
11.30.06
10:28
11.30.06
11:41
It gives the impression that the writer may have heard someone discuss these cartoons, acquiring some vague notion of the characters without ever having actually watched them.
It's like my college professor who wrote scholarly articles on film history, referencing obscure films she had never seen, thinking no one else ever would either.
Absolutely hysterical.
11.30.06
05:32
Are you people for real?
The real Joe Moran.
Really & Respectfully/
11.30.06
05:40
12.01.06
12:13
Respectfully, I believe the word you were searching for was discomforting, and not 'discomfitting'. Also, as noted by others before, Speedy Gonzales was a mouse, and therefore quite animal. Roadrunner never got the anvil on the head, but rather Wile E. Coyote.
Agreeably, the half-pipe and/or ski jump is often used in animation. It has been there since before the skate-board culture, as seen in the aforementioned Roadrunner cartoons, Disney's Goofy, and others.
Arguably, though weakly so, your article fits into the 'Culture' end of Design Observer's mission. Your commentary about parenting and the responsibilities of framing reality for your children are noted. I gather that you rely on your childrens' own intelligences to differentiate the fact and fiction of physics, and the rest will be covered by experience, as Mr. Beirut pointed out in his own anecdote.
These things aside, what unsettles me most about your feature is that in a world becoming increasingly diverse and adverse, Americans are becoming more insular in their belief that they are fjording the annals of culture by discussing its most trivial affectations. Intellectuals are waxing on about nothing, and Americans are eating it up, really believing that they are the heralds of culture in a brave new world.
More poignantly, this rubbish of babble is fueling ignorance of the absolutely malevolent concourse America has set upon the rest of the world. While I cannot attest to your affiliations, political or otherwise, I would like, for the record, to note that you are not contributing to discourse. To the contrary, you are helping to push the stone down the hill onto the village below.
My sincerest hope is that in the future, you and the other directors of Design Observer think twice about feeding the 'American Dream' engine, and rather address what real and tangible elements are behind its red, white and blue veneer.
Do you truly want this to be your legacy?
Sincerely,
Raymond Prucher
12.03.06
02:33
I must add I don't think writing about cartoons, parenting or skateboarding is out of character for this site, never mind "fjording the annals of culture by discussing its most trivial affectations." A quick scan of our archives shows articles on a lot of subjects that one might consider "trivial," but which the writers thought afforded some insights to the way design works, for good or ill, in large ways or very small.
12.03.06
11:16
I realise that for every big picture there are many small ones, that we all pay bills and the conseqences of lifetimes of actions and reactions. We feed our children, bury our parents, mow our lawns, and change fuses in dark basements. But this isn't design, and it isn't culture. It is too often mistaken for the latter in America, and I propose that we stop kidding ourselves.
The writers of Design Observer are amongst the most lauded in their field, having written many books, some of which I have on my own shelves. You are the voices of design to the world, a role which you accepted for yourselves by contributing to and publishing Design Observer.
Realising that, should there be so many observations about middle-class American ideals, or should the focus rather be outward and about design's role and function in the larger world? The inclusion of Mr. Shaughnessy in its annals leads me to believe that DO is not interested in homogeneity. Instead of the abundance of spit-takes and pratfalls in animation, why not discuss the social negligence of 'Grand Theft Auto', the political impasses of sustainable design, or the astuteness and propagandist abuses of poster art in promoting 'causes' worldwide?
Best,
Raymond Prucher
12.03.06
01:32
tr.v. dis·com·fit·ed, dis·com·fit·ing, dis·com·fits
1. To make uneasy or perplexed; disconcert.
Before you call someone on their word choice, take the time to look it up.
12.04.06
12:02
By whose definition? Aspects of design feed into all those activities, and they are most certainly manifestations of culture. Unless by "culture" you mean that set of activities -- such as opera, or fine art publishing -- traditionally defined as "high-culture". But that view of culture is, at the very least, anthropologically limiting, and insupportable as framework for understanding the broad range of human activity. DO has traditionally taken this kind of broad approach, as is appropriate for a blog concerned with the designed world.
Having said that, while an admirer of Ms. Helfand's writings, I share some of the misgivings of other commenters about this piece in particular.
N. Woolridge
12.04.06
12:59
careless errors and condescension about the animation industry aside, the article also tanks because it relies on the crutches of 1) "back in my day..." and 2) "my children..." it reads like those articles in the back of airline magazines. enough about your children already, please. there are plenty of other sites for that. nothing is more tedious than people needlessly working their children into things. *yawn* kids are great, but we're adults here for design discourse. come on.
12.04.06
01:04
And I extend an further apology to Ms. Helfand and Mr. Beirut for any seeming attacks to their characters. My intention was to address the perfunctory nature of the article in particular, and I overstepped my boundaries by mentioning child rearing and personal affiliations.
Mr. Woolridge, you are correct in stating that these activities fit into culture in an anthropological sense of the term. Duly noted.
12.04.06
01:36
12.05.06
12:03
We will occasionally write about Africa and sustainability and "propagandist abuses of poster art." But we write about things we know.
Since you care so deeply about other issues, we'd encourage you to start a blog and to start writing. We'd be happy to occasionally blog your posts. But please do not project your desire for your content and your subjects onto our forum. It's not leading to a dialogue about design, or what are appropriate design topics. It's simply a non sequitur on this particular post...
(And, I wish you'd joined in on David Stairs recent post about African furniture design. That post could have used your insights.)
12.05.06
01:22
12.05.06
04:01
What I find more interesting is the continuity here. New and impressive technologies allow animators to do pretty much anything their imaginations can embrace. So why do they still give us talking creatures? Could it just be that the animal fable responds to something deep in the human psyche? Something that crosses cultures and languages with impunity? Talking mice skipping between the prairies of Dakota and the forests of Norhern Europe is surely a much more impressive 'half-pipe' than anything John Lasseter can conjure up.
12.05.06
11:30
Questions of anthropomorphism in contemporary animation often lead us into the Uncanny Valley. Worth a detour.
12.06.06
01:03
12.06.06
11:03
Ms. Helfand: Do you see the half-pipe as a structure, in addition to being a theme? It could be an intriguing way of rereading the episodic nature of cartoons.
12.07.06
03:48
12.11.06
01:04
"(1) the social negligence of 'Grand Theft Auto', (2) the political impasses of sustainable design, or (3) the astuteness and propagandist abuses of poster art in promoting 'causes' worldwide?"
1. This would be based on the bogus premise that GTA and games like it had a social responsibility that, say, roller coasters or professional wrestling don't.
2. Important topic -- but aren't economic impasses more important?
3. Can you be more specific? You're not talking about those 'obey giant' posters, right? Whatever legitimate or illegitimate message it might have, its main effect is self-promotion, though you could say this about any poster.
I was not blown away by this article, but these suggestions are just as potentially frivolous (or important). Even if the author didn't successfully convey the dangers of half-piping, I wouldn't assume that her point wasn't a legitimate one, or that it wasn't worth making.
12.13.06
02:47