Wall-E, Part 1

Have you ever been haunted by loneliness and abandonment? Do you have the courage to take in the stress of being left behind and forgotten, and become the last human on Earth? Do you possess a sense of wonder, to see the world with an optimistic outlook no matter what kind of an absurd situation you find yourself in? Would you be surprised if all these serious issues are explored in an animated feature for kids? 10 years ago, the wonderful animation studio, Pixar, made a film so thoughtful and heartfelt that not only it attracted the attention of kids, it also managed to capture the hearts of adult viewers. That film is my favorite animated feature of all time – Wall-E (2008)!

Wall-E is a one-of-a-kind film. Because while the film appears to be a kiddy movie, the themes behind that are far more philosophical than an average cartoon. I have often doubted if Wall E is really a film intended for kids – because when you watch in a different stage of your life, you will have a different impression about that. When a kid watches that, he will certainly be fascinated by the cuteness of the robot and the slapstick moments. Yet, when an adult watches that, he will more likely be identified with the robot and feel sympathetic about Wall-E’s situation. While the film touches with more obvious film like technology and environmental issue, that is also heavily influenced by two of my idols’ ideas- that of Friedrich Nietzsche and Stanley Kubrick. To be honest, I find ‘Wall-E’ quite a dark film (the kind of movies I like), and there is certainly a Kubrickian feel to it – of course because it was clearly inspired by ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’. The first 40 minutes or so of the film, which almost contained no dialogues at all, would certainly become a textbook example of visual storytelling, and I am sure Kubrick would be impressed if he was still around in 2008. Indeed both films were about very similar issues and they could be considered as cinematic version of Nietzsche’s philosophy, and this aspect will be the main theme of the first part of the 2-part article.

When I first watched Wall-E back in 2008, I was almost brought to tears at the end of the film, which is very rare for me especially for an animated film (‘Grave of the Fireflies’ is another one). Not only the emotional impact from the film has moved me, I was also touched by the fact there were some people who were willing to take this risk and made a film that would inspire the viewers and led them to self-reflections. In an age full of films that we did not bear to watch, this Pixar film clearly stood out. The members in the audience will certainly agree, because many people believe that Wall-E is one of the best films from Pixar ever, and the film is currently the highest ranked Pixar film in the IMDB Top 250 List. I am proud of the fact that, when the later generations come to watch the film of our generations, they will still view films like ‘Wall E’ in awe.

A brief sketch on the plot. The story takes place in 2805. Not only it sounds absurd, it is even more so because Earth is basically uninhabitable, and the mega-corporation has already evacuated all human beings. What is left behind is loads of garbage and a type of trash compactor robot – known as Wall-E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter: Earth-Class). Soon, all the Wall-E robots have stopped functioning, except one – our protagonist in this story (Wall-E hereafter). Wall-E has developed sentience, and while confronted by loneliness and loads of mess to clean up, it still was able to enjoy itself by collecting nostalgic stuff through the garbage and listened to ‘Hello Dolly’. One day, a spaceship came and sent a female robot, EVE (Extra-terrestrial Vegetation Evaluator) to scan around the Earth, in order to locate vegetation and assess whether Earth is habitable. The two robots met and soon became friends (kind of similar to getting her number?) After some confusion, Wall-E found itself clinging onto EVE’s spaceship, which was part of the mothership known as AXIOM. There, their adventure began. They would not only have to protect a plant that could lead to human’s recolonization on Earth, they also had to deal with the intrigue on the mothership, including the computer AUTO (which was kind of like HAL in 2001, a clear inspiration from Kubrick’s film). Would Wall E and EVE pick up their courage and save humanity from the dead end?

Before we move onto the more contemplative issues of the film, it is noteworthy to see that the filmmakers have placed a lot of emphasis on the techniques to the film, more than just offering a great story. In fact, like another great animation, Akira (1988), which I will talk about soon, the creators of Wall E have taken a lot of inspirations from real live-action films, because they wanted to enhance the realism of this animated feature. Some of the scenes of the film are reminiscent of the widescreen composition of Panavision films, and the beauty of these scenes can rival any ‘real’ scenes in non-animated films. The lighting, composition, and sound effects possess a quality and seriousness comparable to any great live-action films.

That leads us to the more serious themes of the animated film. Many viewers are especially impressed by the first half of the film, because its execution is so original that it not only possesses a visual rigor comparable to Stanley Kubrick’s greatest work, it also possesses philosophical contemplations similar to Friedrich Nietzsche’s most iconic teachings. The beauty of this sequence is in the complete lack of any dialogues or sentimental scenes – that is pure cinema. No wonder some viewers even compared this film to some of Charlie Chaplin’s most wonderful silent films, such as ‘City Lights’, because Wall-E is literally the Chaplin or Buster Keaton of robots. The sequence is 100% about visual storytelling, and what the creators from Pixar are so wonderful about is that they can use such a minimalist style to establish the storyline and personality of Wall-E, and the imaginations behind that would even impress creative thinkers like Nietzsche. The magic behind the sequence also delivers an emotional impact to many viewers, because in that sequence Wall-E is isolated and alone (with a cockroach as a companion and a video of ‘Hello Dolly’), and that is a situation akin to the scenario found in Albert Camus’ absurdism. To me, Wall E is not merely a film about garbage problems and obesity – it is a film about existentialism, the meaning of one’s existence.

Why do I have to put in so many abstract thinkers’ ideas in my article, as it will certainly spoil the entertainment value of this great cartoon? Because if you wonder why Wall E is so popular among mature audience, the connection is exactly because they understand these underlying messages from this apparently simple cartoon. While we may not be in an absurd situation like Wall E, we are more than likely to deal with situations we do not want to get involved with, that ‘Oh, I have to clean up all the mess alone’ sentiment, and the bolts of loneliness and depression about our situation. Aren’t all these ideas covered in Nietzsche, and indeed many inspiring thinkers’ work?  Wall-E, though just looked like a cute and yellow robot, possessed many of the human characters that the audience could easily identify with. Wall-E could be compared to many iconic figures in philosophy. He could be like Nietzsche’s Zarathustra, because the robot was isolated and alone on Earth, and certainly nobody could listen to or appreciate whatever he did on Earth. The scenario for him was against him because all the other robots similar to him have stopped functioning, so he could no longer count on any type of herd effect (from Nietzsche), and he had to bear a cosmic form of indifference and loneliness, easily seen from Camus’ or Lovecraft’s work. Regarding Wall E’s duty – trash compaction day after day after day – viewers could also compare that to the Sisyphean struggle, from Camus’ ‘Myth Of Sisyphus’. Having to do senseless things no one would care about or place any importance on, one would question the reason why they had to do this shxt job (like Tyler Durden in ‘Fight Club’?!), and quite easily felt into a sense of depression, because the senseless work has to be repeated endlessly and one would have no self-actualization because they could not meet their potential. This is not a scenario merely from some one’s pipe dream – for example, many people indeed stranded in their career development, doing jobs that they had no interest in other than getting paid. They could just easily fall into an existential crisis because they did not feel they had met their potential and failed to find a meaning in their lives. Indeed, Wall-E is the last robot on Earth, yet, at the same time, an existential hero who inspired many viewers.

Here comes the turning point. One would be surprised that, given such a nasty and forceful situation, Wall E is not sad in anyway regarding his existence. In a nutshell, the reason is because Wall E possesses a character trait that Nietzsche could call that ‘strong’. Wall E was able to sustain the monumental loneliness, because he could find a different perspective from his situation and turn it into a positive and optimistic point of view. This little robot has always got a sense of wonder around his world, even if it was basically littered with all kinds of junk. To some mindless and oblivious people, there are undesirable trash that could be disposed of; but to Wall E, these items raised awe and nostalgia, and he treasured all these items. Because Wall E could assess his situation in a revolutionary angle, he has the ability to make a fundamental change to the ways people look at things around them – exactly an attribute of ‘Nietzschean strong’. Like Sisyphus, Wall E felt gratified even without any kind of connection, because he knew he has possessed an optimistic outlook and pursued his own passion and interest in such a lousy world. He did not fall into the trap of nihilism, and strived to find meanings for himself. Wall E is the kind of character who does not want to be categorized by others. Maybe in a corporate point of view, he is a type of robot with an expertise in trash crushing; yet for this particular Wall E, he is able to define himself – a curator of old stuff, a music lover, a bit of a romantic and so on. Anyone should be inspired by Wall E, because only you can define who you are, not your degree or salary sheets. All the so-called categorizations are nominal, and they bear not much meanings to know oneself – say you are an engineer, so what? You can just enjoy art as an amateur interest. If you understand what your true passions are, you will live a gratifying existence no matter what kind of situation you find yourself in.   

Wall E may be the last bot on Earth, but it certainly is not the ‘Last Man’ in the Nietzschean sense. To Nietzsche, the Last Man is the opposite of the Ubermensch (Over-Man’. While the Over-Man strives for a higher level of meaning in his life because he feels he has the passion and drive to; the Last Man is more than happy to say in form of stasis and OK with the current situation. While Wall E is assigned merely to deal with the trash on Earth, he has gone much further than that. He is getting more like a Ubermensch than a mere loner. That is the reason why Strauss’ ‘Also Sprach Zarathustra’ has been featured in the film. Not only is that a tribute to ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’, clearly Wall-E’s trajectory of existence is also very similar to that of Zarathustra. Wall E is sort of the Adam on this dystopian Earth, he needs an opportunity to prove himself, and show his potential. That is where our goddess enters the picture – EVE !

(1/2)

by Ed Law

Film Analysis







herzog

(Part 2)

The circle motif is something very evident in many of Werner Herzog’s films. In films like Aguirre and Stroszek, characters were often found travelling in a circular route, both metaphorically and physically. 

Critics have also pointed out that the base of the circle was analogized as an abyss - an impossible ideal where characters tried their utmost best to conquer. The fact that they travelled along the circumference of the circle meant that they would always keep a distance from the center of their concern - the goal they have strived so hard to achieve. Some of the men in Aguirre’s troop were trapped in a whirlpool along the river, and the raft turned in circles, until it disappeared the next day, signifying death. When everyone around Aguirre died, he could finally become the next thing as good as becoming God - the nemesis of God, which he called as ‘The Wrath of God’. With some monkeys on the raft, the camera tracked Aguirre who has descended into complete madness, and the circular path suggested as if he was locked inside his solipsism. The monkeys at the end of the film suggested that evolution, or our development of civilization, has lifted or led us to nowhere. The sad fact is, we have always been going in circles. Likewise in Fitzcarraldo, the haunting vision of a single umbrella travelling its way down the river served at a great premonition of the doomed failure of his wildest dreams.

In contrast, Stroszek is a film that dealt with the alienation of the individual of the modern world. Though it may appear the theme is directed against America, it was not an anti-American film, as the situations in the film were far more universal than that. Stroszek, due to his personality and more so the world that has shaped him, would meet a tragic end no matter where the filmmaker has placed the character in. That’s the reason why Stroszek would prefer going back to the correctional institution that has confined him, because he did not see any improvement in terms of his well-being even if he was set free to the outside world. It is clear that Herzog was not blaming Stroszek for his failure. He was blaming the problems of our world that have led Stroszek to these troubles in the first place. Stroszek represented the archetype of an underdog, the sort of characters the audience would more likely to meet in the real life. While landscape was also featured in Stroszek, it was a barren landscape, one that suggested emptiness or hopelessness rather than myth or mystery.

After a failed robbery attempt and a series of miscalculations, Stroszek found himself stranded and drove his car in circles, until the gas ran out and he pulled the trigger on himself. Wasn’t that a great analogy for his life? Or maybe anyone’s life? The scene was further satirized when police was called to deal with a dancing chicken automaton nearby, which for some unknown reasons could not be stopped. The metaphor here was provocative, yet both scenarios pointed to a similar conclusion. If no further coins were put into the machine, the dancing chicken would just move aimlessly until the power ran out… to the end of life.

The exuberant visual style from Werner Herzog will fascinate anyone who is passionate about cinema! 

(2/2) 

by Ed Law  

Film Analysis

HERZOG

Werner Herzog is one of the representatives for the German New Wave, along with Wenders and Fassbinder, and the movement was part of a trend in the European New Wave of the 1960s and the 1970s. Herzog’s approach to film is really like his memorable characters : he is daring, provocative, and is committed to deliver a vision which penetrates any possible limits set by cinema. He famously worked with Klaus Kinski, a volatile yet fantastic actor; and Bruno S., and these 2 great artists have collaborated with Herzog to make some of the most memorable films from West Germany, such as Aguirre: The Wrath of God, Stroszek, and Fitzcarraldo and so on.

While Herzog is brilliant to his approach to characters, he is also proud of the fact that he is a great director of landscape. Landscape in a Herzog film is an important element, and often a strong attribute of his mastery of cinema, because it represents the opponent to humanity’s struggle - Nature. Herzog’s portrayal of nature is indifferent, antipathic and unsentimental. It is the chessboard where his characters move and interact, with each other or address the call of challenge from nature itself. 

Much of the dramatic conflict in Herzog’s work stems from the individual versus the surroundings that often overwhelm these characters in question. These characters, no matter how bigger than life they are (as in the case of Aguirre, Fitzcarraldo, or basically any Herzogian characters portrayed by Klaus Kinski), are consumed by ambition, desire, dream, and obsession that drive their actions. Herzog may be implying that madness and obsession, two themes very frequently featured in many of his films, can just be two sides of the same coin. Often, the world in a Herzog film is limited in the sense it will not be able to fulfil the grand vision an individual may wish to perceive - most notably in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo. The antithesis of Aguirre, brilliantly portrayed by Klaus Kinski, is Stroszek, just as masterly portrayed by Bruno S. The two iconic characters are sort of like Yin and Yang of Herzog’s cinema. They represent a pair of personalities when one looks at the world they find themselves in.

Aguirre: The Wrath of God is Herzog’S most famous film. It is a tale of a doomed voyage. The style and theme of the film has influenced Francis Ford Coppola’s Apocalypse Now, Terrence Malick’s The Thin Red Line and Alejandro G. Inarritu’s The Revenant. The story detailed the struggle between Aguirre, an egomaniac who was at odds with both institutions and nature. Like Colonel Kurtz, Aguirre could not consider as an evil genius. As Herzog has also stated, there is no point to analyze whether Aguirre should be considered a hero or a villain, because he was both. What makes Aguirre fascinating is that how far he could go on both ends. He was a tremendously daring person, and yet it was totally reasonable to consider him as an egomaniac, even if such a psychiatric assessment might not exist in Aguirre’s era.

A similarity between Aguirre, Apocalypse Now, The Thin Red Line and The Revenant is that they all contain scenes of exploration through the river, as the difficulty of the mission escalates. Metaphorically, as the journey continues, the characters are descending into the darkness of humanity and madness one seldom wants to confront. While the characters claimed to be civilized and expressed their desire to help and civilize the local people, they were motivated by self-interest and irrational obsessions rather than any enlightened views. So in both Herzog’s and Coppola’s films, the colonizers were driven by greed and an intense thirst of power and control. Even institutional measures like organized religion was not free of scrutiny, as the priest in Aguirre went as far as stating the awful truth, ‘you know my child, the Church has always been on the side of the strong’.  When it came to the pursuit of wealth and resources, this religious personal was not much different from Aguirre himself.

(1/2) 

by Ed Law 

Film Analysis