Paprika

Paprika isn't for the faint-hearted. Don't expect a story for children.

The story opens with a cop who's plagued by a recurring nightmare, so he seeks psychological help. If you've ever seen and enjoyed Alfred Hitchcock's Spellbound, it'll help you understanding what's going on in the film.

The cop forms a relationship with Paprika, a dream character who becomes his guide in helping him understand what happened in his past that makes him feel such shame in the present. Paprika assumes many forms in the everchanging dreamscape to relate to the other characters.

This seems all good at the beginning, but the device that enables dream analysis is stolen. This creates an even bigger problem than just nightmares; what happens when people can't control their dreams and has them hijacked by evil? Paprika isn't the easiest movie to sum up. On one level, it's like watching dreamy, fantastical animation, but there's also a deeper psychological question being asked: What is a dream exactly and to what extent does it affect your consciousness and waking life? How much fantasy is good for a person whether it be in dreams or spending time on the Internet? If you bury guilt and desire into your subconscious, how will it manifest in your dreams?

Paprika is definitely a visual spectacle. I don't recommend waiting to see it on video. I had the honor of catching it on the big screen, which I believe is necessary to capture the depth of the imagery. Parts of it really seemed like dreams I've had (times when I've tried to walk, but couldn't get anywhere and the harder I tried, the worse it got).

I put Paprika up there with Pan's Labyrinth. A lot of people will be turned off from it by the subtitles and another set of people will be lost by the mythology in it. If you don't have problems with these kinds of things, you will probably have a delightful viewing experience.

It takes a person with an analytical mind to put the plot together. If you follow the recurring images, the mythology will make sense. A lot happens on the screen. I didn't have a problem understanding what was going on and I enjoyed putting the puzzle together. I don't think most moviegoers are like that these days, so I can see them getting bored or annoyed because they can't figure out what's going on. If you prefer the Disney genre of animation, avoid Paprika, it will just frustrate you. If you're crave more than a simple plot, Paprika will satisfy that hunger.

The soundtrack is quite good too. It's a refreshing break from Elton John power ballads.

I had gone into Paprika not knowing much of what to expect, save for the fact that it was an anime with quite a buzz. An hour and a half later, this is one of the best films I've seen in 2007.

The plot, as best as I can describe it, concerns a group of scientists developing a device which allows one to interject your subconscious into and record another person's dreams. However, a thief is using the technology to terrorize and control others. As the scientists try to find their stolen property, reality begins to take on a different meaning...

Satoshi Kon is filmmaker I've never heard of before, but what he has created is truly visionary. Paprika continually amazes with imagery which transcends conscious understanding and coherence for what can only make sense on a subliminal level. Examples include a marching band of inanimate objects, dolls and animals, a giant aquatic leviathan with a man's face and humanoid toys that act as vessels for their dreamers bodies.

But what makes the film necessary viewing is not the visuals alone, it's the core of the story and varied themes that it poses. The subject matter deals with issues both contemporary and probable. The actual identities of ourselves are wrapped in an enigma. How science has its positive and negative aspects. That the advantages of the internet is better communication but also dehumanization. I'm sure others will find other symbolism and subtext.

Wheather you're familiar with Japanese animation or not, Paprika will expose any newcomer to something foreign and deeply personal as well.

Kon is renowned for his superb editing and wildly creative visuals in Paprika, but for what purpose? What remains when the visuals is eliminated from the equation? Paprika's tale had a painfully obvious twist near the conclusion, and its basic outline was rather shallow. Furthermore, an extraneous romantic element that was considerably less coherent than Kon's most bizarre vision. You're probably thinking, "It's all about the execution; as long as it's done well, who cares about a weak storyline?" Indeed, execution is more crucial than content, and a dull story can be made interesting by using bizarre images and inventive editing. Take Kon's earlier work, Millennium Actress, for instance.

I merely discussed the major plot; the detective's side story was, regrettably, far more intriguing. Here, the visual is used in a way that perfectly complements his tale and conflicts; it is executed similarly to Millennium Actress. When a side plot becomes more fascinating than the main narrative, though, something is off.

Characters are also pretty weak. The antagonist lacked depth and was terribly dull. I'm afraid I can't speak for the other actors in the cast. Furthermore, Atsuko's romantic evolution towards the end was so forced it was unreal. This baffled me more than any bizarre imagery Kon could conjure up, yet again. The only character in Paprika who came close to saving face was Konakawa, the investigator. He genuinely grew during the film and had a respectable amount of characterisation.

What happens when you see a wonderful film, a truly wonderful one, and you are disappointed because the very last one you saw was from the same filmmaker and was very much better? I should have watched some trash first.

The better film I'm alluding to is "Millennium Actress," a wonderful slippery glide through a shifting of life, movies and personal memory. Several things made that great: the drawings were in some places marvelous; the reason for the slips was never explained; and the "wrapping" story was incredibly thin, just barely enough. It was clearly a movie about movies and how life and film make each other.

This one conflates life, dreams and movies in much the same way, and goes further by merging individual lives and dreams. But it is burdened by two things. The first is that the wrapping story is large, heavy. The second is that we have a tedious explanation about why the slips occur: some invented device. And it adopts the Godzilla/Transformers model where two giants fight, towering over the city. Jees.

Two things are superior, however. One is that the dreamworlds give the artist freedom to depart from the constraints of the real. It isn't surreal: that's a very specific thing. But you do have dancing refrigerators leading a parade to hell. You may not appreciate the visuals here, in fact I suspect most won't think them special. But I did.

But the main thing is the title character, a lovely redheaded virtual soul who lives in the dreamworld. She's the pinnacle of girl fantasy: capable, not real, fairy-like but strong, desirable but forceful, following the rules of the world sometimes and writing the rules at other. She's woven from something deep in the psyche, our usually unfound soulmate who writes our dreams that spill into our lives.

But her appearance and character isn't what amazes here. Its how many different ways the filmmaker has her interact with the dream world. I stopped noting them because they were so varied and clever. She flies of course, she morphs. She shares a body in the real world of a woman scientist. (There's a truly remarkable dream scene when a vagina is "unzipped" to the forehead to reveal the true woman within.) She merges with shadows, reflections, light and shadow. She appears from dolls and billboards, clouds. From cracks and folds. Its as if there was a list of all possibilities that is being exhausted.

I will suggest that you see this before "Millennium Actress." Then both will blow you away.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

But then again, this isn't meant to be for children! Again Japan shows us, that animated movies, doesn't mean "child(ish) movies". Quite the contrary. With it's very complex story, this one will even leave some adults scratching their head after they see it. That's because there are many interpretations for this movie. Which make it a somewhat difficult experience.

Still a good one, but difficult to wrap your mind around it ... The story mind you, never get's out of hand or get's out of hand (in the sense, that it does make ... sense, in the end). If you're ready for a mind trip, this sure will be a great one to take/experience!