The Book of Life

WARNING: This review is hidden because it reveals the content of the film.
Click here to show this review. I found that “The Book of Life” didn’t really work when it came to the humour, but the art direction and the overall design of the film was so bold and so striking that I was easily able to get over it. I’m not at all familiar with Central American/Mexican traditions, but I assume this animated film is based on a traditional fairytale. First thing you need to know is that there are two places where humans go when they die. The first is the Land of the Remembered, where it’s a party all of the time and you go to find all of your loved ones. The second is the land of the forgotten, a place of misery where the people who are no longer remembered/mourned by their families slowly fade away into oblivion. The rulers of these two realms are La Muerte (voiced by Kate del Castillo), who reigns in good place and her husband Xibalba (voiced by Ron Perlman) who rules the gloomy place. They observe a trio of best friends: beautiful María (Zoe Saldana), brave Joaquín (Channing Tatum) and sensitive Manolo (Diego Luna) The two rulers of the dead each back up one of the guys and they place a bet on which one will win María’s heart, with the Land of the Remember as the prize to be won. I’m not sure if it’s the fact that the humour was just aimed at a significantly younger audience than say... 27-year-old amateur movie critics, but I felt that it felt really flat. It’s not that it was cringe-worthy with bad fart jokes or that kind of thing; it’s just that I didn’t laugh or even chuckle very much during the entire runtime. Maybe the writing is just kind of weak, or that I had the additional hindrance of being so distanced from Central American traditions that I don’t even know what a “churro” is, but it didn’t resonate with me at all. Normally that would have probably killed the film, but I actually found that I enjoyed it a lot overall despite this. The main reason is that this film feels totally fresh from a plot and visuals standpoint. One of the major reasons why I tend to lean towards hand-drawn animation more than CG animation is that at a certain point the films begin to kind of all look the same. There’s no need for the animators to get creative in their renditions of hair for example because the technology is so good they can simply create realistic-looking hair on their characters. There’s no need to come up with creative shortcuts for the backgrounds or costumes anymore because 3-dimensional objects can easily be manipulated to be seen from any angle or to flow across any surface. I’m not saying that computer-generated animation is easy, or even bad. I’m saying that sometimes the lack of limitations makes the films look too similar to each other. This is where BOL comes in. Just look at these characters, with their puppet-like designs, their exaggerated features (the hair for Maria, the torsos for the men) and their unmistakably Mexican look. Is there anyone out there who could ever mistake them for characters from any other film? I sincerely doubt it because the three main characters of this movie are the blandest ones! If you look at the side characters in this film, their designs are absolutely insane! We have people whose faces are 2-dimensional, a fat mariachi who would probably have an easier time rolling around than walking, characters with noses that look like pink, twisted pickles... and then there are the inhabitants of the land of the dead! I can’t give enough praise to the character designs in this film. Even the way they move is so unique. I mentioned how everyone is “sculpted” to look like puppets. That means the characters move in a way that is totally distinctive. Their bodies do not change shape because they’re treated as if they were really made out of wood. You would think, then, that the characters would move awkwardly, but they are fitted with just enough joints to make them very mobile and expressive. I hope they make these characters into real-life figurines because they would be absolutely beautiful to see. Once again, I have to mention that the film is breathtaking to see. It’s so colourful and so unique. I need to look up art director’s other works and see if any of them are half as good as this film’s. But, there’s more to a movie than just the visuals. What about the story? It’s totally original and filled with characters that are not just stock fairytale heroes and villains. My favourite was probably María. Yes, she’s the love interest that everyone pines for, but she is aware of that and unwilling to become a stereotypical damsel in distress or a prize to be won. She is a real character, as is everyone in this film. Best of all is that this is a story that to my knowledge has never appeared on-screen before; nothing like it has. There’s been surprisingly little of the Mexican culture brought to the big screen and it’s like I was craving to see this spectacle... but I didn’t even know it until now. Yeah, I kind of wish the writing had been better, but the freshness makes up for it. We have great music (including some original pieces), fantastic visuals, smart characters, an original story and breathtaking art direction. On the negative side, we have jokes that don’t really work. Oh well, you can’t win them all. Even though I wasn’t the target audience for “The Book of Life”, I was really impressed and I give it a high recommendation, particularly if you have an affinity for the culture on display here. It’s a real feast for the eyes. (3-D theatrical version on the big screen, October 21, 2014)