ParaNorman Activity

Last year's animated film ParaNorman didn't make much of a splash at the box office. And if my own attitude toward it was typical, it's not hard to see why. Even though many critics had great things to say about the film, it just didn't seem worth going to the theater to catch. I did catch up with the movie on Blu-ray, though.

ParaNorman is the story of a young boy who can see the ghosts of the dead. His crazy uncle dies, revealing that the boy is the now only one who can perform a ritual that will keep a centuries-old witch from sending her zombie minions to devour the town. Heroism ensues.

Every now and then, I've noted that some movies seem to exist mainly to serve as a visual feast. The plot is lacking, the characters are nothing revolutionary, but you've never seen anything so gorgeous. I think that a large number of film critics out there respond to this film-as-visual-art vibe, and that explains the wide praise for ParaNorman. Truly, you've never seen anything so gorgeous.

The visual style of the film is thoroughly thought out, and well executed from top to bottom. The atmosphere is creepy. The use of occasional CG effects to supplement the stop-motion animation is inspired. And the characters themselves are quite the curiosity, too; I've read that the heads were created on a 3D printer, thus making even the stop-motion a revolutionary new blend of computer and traditional animation.

But the style goes too far for the intended audience. I am the last person to ever claim that animated films are "for kids," and I firmly believe that the good ones can entertain a viewer of any age. But when all the major characters of the story are children and teenagers, fighting to save the world and struggling against parents who don't believe them -- you're making a kids' movie. Sure, I suppose every now and then, along comes The Goonies. But the bottom line is, I think this movie is way too scary for most kids of the main character's age. Those breathtaking visuals I mentioned are often quite intense and sinister.

At the same time, the course of the plot is too predictable and not emotional enough to truly satisfy any adults in the audience. (And that's where this movie is no Goonies.) My attention waned as the story hit all the expected beats, and drifted further when the "it's all a big misunderstanding" moralistic message materialized in the final act.


In essence, great new ground was forged... in rebuilding a well-forged path to a familiar story. Your mileage may vary, depending on whether you're a "film-as-visual-art" type, but I found the whole to be an average C.

With the official review out of the way, I want to devote a couple of paragraphs to one aspect of the film that sparked commentary during the film's original run. ParaNorman is the first American animated film to include an openly gay character. In the final few minutes, the main sidekick's older brother, a dumb jock character who has been tagging along in the adventure, casually mentions that he has a boyfriend. It's a punchline that comes not at his expense, but at the expense of the amorous teenage girl who has been pursuing him for the whole movie. It's nice that the character's role in the plot doesn't revolve around his orientation, and that he's not a stereotype (not of gay men, anyway; he's as stock as all the other characters in every other way). But the bottom line is, the revelation is done in a way that's probably only going to serve to piss everyone off.

Many writers for the LGBT community criticized the technique of hiding the character's sexuality until the end of the film. They argued that it was disingenuous to try to "make you care about the character first," and only then reveal him as gay, as opposed to getting that out of the way first, and then showing him on the adventure. At the same time, intolerant parents lodged complaints anywhere that would print them, complaining that they'd brought their kids to see this movie, and weren't prepared at having to discuss sexual orientation on the car ride home. (Ignoring the fact that apparently no conversation about sex would have been necessary about the teen girl throwing herself at the guy all movie. And as if a kid would notice such a throwaway line while they're busy being petrified by the 90 minutes that came before.)

It's a no-win scenario. And for that, I suppose I ultimately applaud the inclusion. It isn't central to the plot in any way, there was nothing to be gained by putting it in there, and indeed only criticisms to be had for including it. And they did it anyway. So... yay? I guess?

My footnote thoughts on a footnote plot point.