Gandahar

I noticed this movie at a local rental place the other week and thought, 'What on Earth is THIS?'

My dad has a book with 17,000 movie reviews--just reviews ranging from a sentence to a couple of paragraphs--and they gave it 2 1/2 stars--3 being good--so it was almost good (to them). They chastised the almost non-existent characterizations, which I agree; we're given a character, we're given about half a minute background on them, and then this is what the character has to do. I was surprised that they didn't mention the almost non-existent voice "acting" (note the quotes), as everyone just pretty much mumbled their lines...even such a big talent as Glenn Close (playing the queen) didn't help.

However, please note these are VERY minor gripes. I would've given the movie three stars myself. It's not the typical sci-fi, with the stupidity of childhood geniuses and robots with feelings abound (and I don't think the stereotypes of "oh no, it's sci-fi AND a cartoon!" help either). It's very imaginative, but pretty dark and apocalyptic; probably not for kids under the age of 6, if not 8.

And on a side note, there was some pretty good music in it, too, and a lot of it.

GANDAHAR is an imaginative little science fiction feature from Rene Laloux, who directed the acclaimed FANTASTIC PLANET. I haven't seen that one but I did enjoy this one; I saw the version showing on Prime which had been dubbed into English with the voices of Christopher Plummer, Glenn Close et al. Intriguingly, the animation (which I like a lot) was handled by a North Korean studio. The story gathers together many familiar themes from 20th century science fiction including time travel, eugenics and technology, weaving them into a satisfying story involving rebel characters battling against a merciless robot army. Put it this way, it has far more heart, soul and insight than any film in the STAR WARS franchise made since the original trilogy.

Even though the story was not originally from Asimov, for those who have read most of Asimov's classic science fiction (as a friend says, Asimov's Science fiction written in the 40's will always be science fiction even in 2006), the world 'Gandahar' represents an Asimov' Utopia-not in our galaxy- just like in the books, "The Gods Themselves", and "Foundation's Edge" (Gaia). The movie is very surreal and artistic but compared to other contemporary science fiction animations, it is not that technically sound. Some of the ideas I liked in the movie are: Before the beginning credits, one sees a fisherwoman using music to catch flying fish, the illustration of banished deformed people, and the use of genetically modified creatures in transportation, war and reconnaissance (one- eyed "mirror birds"). I also really liked the idea of a society leaded by a matriarchal system. This movie receives a rating of 8 out of 10 from me.

This film was one of the first science fiction cartoons I had seen. Perhaps that is the reason for my high praise of the film. I was engrossed from the very beginning. The dialouge was masterful. What the animation lacked, the combination of the writing and my imagination more than made up for. This film has a PG rating for brief nudity, but I think that children ages 10 on will be very pleased. It treats the audience not as a child or an adult. If you are a fan of hardcore science fiction then this film is for you. If you have never seen a single sci-fi film before, then this is the perfect blend of action and thought provoking images to introduce you to the genre. I will not get into details about the story. You can read the synopsis. In short, I highly recommend this film.

It's not an outstanding movie by any means, but it gets the job done and entertains. One has to remember that when viewing sci-fi often the plot takes precedence over character. Most plot driven films and stories are like that: We're given the bare bones of our protagonist, and watch him or her weave their way through a story.

Such it is with "Light Years." The animation is certainly above the quality of your typical commercial studio, but is not as dazzling as say a Japanese Anime space opera, nor a Disney Production feature; but it does have a certain quality unto itself. Even so the movie could've used more shots (cutaways and general coverage) to help move the story and highlight the characters more. As it stands more the shots are rather static, and the animation in them shifts gears a little too often. In some scene the animation is very smooth, where other times is seems very long and drawn out, or just not well staged.

The film itself has action, but some of the it is stilted and painfully slow, where other times it moves quite well. The dubbing is adequate, though, like all dubbed films, one gets the sense that it doesn't quite catch the tones and inflections of the voices from the original French cast.

Technology and regimented existence are pitted against the organic and under-dogs of Ghandahar in a typical sci-fi theme. The film's worth a night's rental, and if you like collecting rare sci-fi this might be one to add to your collection. Otherwise it may only be worth a single viewing.

*EDIT* French Region 2 DVD review, Jan 3, 2010

Well, I finally saw the original French film in all its entirety. As an American I have to say that I appreciate the additional footage, and can nod at the more subtle pacing, but I do have to say that I think the Americanized version has some pluses going for, namely in the music. The original French score underlines the basic theme of what is being presented. There are no heroics on the battlefield nor purely desperate moments as would be conveyed by the American musical score. The other subtleties are apparent, and I think I better understand why the American producers did what they did by sexing up what they could. The French film is more prosaic and "European" (for lack of a better term) in its presentation of a world in crisis. There's an emotional malaise characteristic of European cinema as a whole that comes across in the original French version. There's a subtle (and not so subtle) nihilistic quality here. Perhaps there's a bit of Nazi occupation still resonating within this film.

All I can really say is that it's a different film from the American version. I'm not sure I prefer one too much over the other. There's a lack of celebration in the French film. There's a kind of fatalistic quality to that is twisted but still present in the American version. Whereas the French version of this film emphasizes weathering the storm and completing the objective, the American version emphasizes confronting the challenge in a way that we Americans have always done. There's a lack of ambient depression that seems to hang and mildly envelope European art, film included. A kind of ethereal drawn out emotionalism that you'd never see in an American film, but is fairly strong in Russian and Swedish cinema, and hits French and Italian films in a less powerful vein.

I would be interested in seeing a DVD of the American version to make a more thought out and proper comparison. But I guess that'll have to wait.