On My Shelf: Willow (1988)
So, around the time I was watching all those other 80's fantasy movies, I got an urge to watch Willow. However, our copy had mysteriously vanished! Then, when I went to buy a new copy, I discovered that it is apparently out of print and the only DVD copies on Amazon were ridiculously expensive! In the end, I wound up finding one on eBay that was a reasonable price, and bought that. (It did not mention in the listing that it was a foreign bootleg. It clearly is. I should put it on the shelf next to the copy of On Her Majesty's Secret Service that I bought for Mr. Hall a few years back which also did not mention in the listing it was a foreign bootleg -- but bears the legend on the cover, "Best Home Vedio Foever". Luckily, it's a nice clean copy in both cases, so no real harm done, I guess!)
Plot: Elora Danan is a baby who it is prophesied will bring about the end of the evil enchantress, Bavmorda. She is saved from death and winds up saved from floating down a river by Willow -- one of group of hobbit-like people, the Nelwyns. Willow wants, more than anything, to be a wizard, but keeps getting stymied in his goals. After an attack by wild dogs, their local head wizard tells Willow to take the baby to the crossroads and give it to the first human he meets -- but the first human he meets is a criminal in a cage, and things just get crazier from there. He encounters brownies (tiny, goblin-like people who also live in the woods), fairies, trolls and all the kinds of mystical, magic stuff you would expect in a 1980's fantasy film. There are battles, high-speed (cart) chases, fire-breathing dragons... etc.
Well, I think it's a dragon, anyway.Okay. Willow has something of a bad rap these days. I think it's mainly to do with the awkward timing of the release of this movie -- it used a lot of traditional animation right before CGI became the thing, and it was an 80's fantasy movie right at the end of the line for 80's fantasy movies. (Lucas claims he had the "idea" for Willow in the early 1970's, to which I would respond, "...Was it by any chance while you were reading Lord of the Rings?")
I went through a phase, myself, of thinking it was rather cheesy and out-dated. But after viewing the glut of truly heinous and rank films that Hollywood has been producing for the past twelve years or so, Willow actually looks pretty good! Especially compared to The Hobbit movies!
And here's why...
1. Acting: Everybody in this movie is playing their character at the correct level. The performances are good! (A little cheesy and over-the-top in some spots, but this isn't Dragonslayer -- I'm not looking for any existential angst in this movie.) The characters have clean and easy-to-understand goals. The plot makes clear demands on them. They respond accordingly. That's how things are supposed to work!
2. The Story: There is nothing wrong with the story. It's reminiscent of Lord of the Rings -- except that Frodo's carrying a baby instead of a ring, Aragorn is more of a scalawag, and both Gandalf and Sauron are girls. (And, for that matter, this movie is considerably shorter). It feels like a lived-in world with a real history. (Now, LotR has a lot of philosophical subtext that I do think is lacking in this story, outside of a general "good is good, while bad is definitely bad" kind of thing. That said, I'll take what little moral this movie had to offer over a ghastly, nihilistic mess like Dragonslayer!)
3. The Visuals: It's a Great Looking Movie. Wonderful fantasy settings! (Although a bit more like a 70's fantasy movie, in that respect -- most of the settings appear to be real, physical settings as opposed to 80's movies, which so desperately loved the extravagant matte-painting -- or modern movies, that are so desperately in love with CGI that it's hard to make a clean distinction between a modern movie and a modern cartoon movie...)
Here are the things that don't work as well:
1. The Special Effects: Okay. I was really on the fence about whether I actually ought to put this amongst the "good things" -- because there are some really good special effects in this movie. However, there are also some really bad special effects in this movie. (And it's hard to blame the 1980's for the lack of perfection when a movie like Darby O'Gill and the Little People was doing better special effects in 1959.) Honestly, the special effects are just kind of hit-and-miss -- going back and forth between really good stuff, groundbreaking stuff, even -- and just really sloppy stuff.
1959, folks. No computers - and yet, all the people pictured here are
real, full-sized people, all filmed at the same time by the same camera.2. The Score: The score is fine. But there were times, during the fight scenes, that I felt a similar theme just got repeated a few times too often.
3. The Length: I think the movie could have been tightened up and shaved down a little. We could have shaved a hair off the slapstick comedy and a few other things. All and all, it's not a MAJOR problem, but just something to consider.
4. Where's the Willow? Although this movie is called "Willow" -- the latter half of this film, the "swash-buckling adventure" part, is Val Kilmer's. Willow made a few appearances, but mostly just to scream the name of Val Kilmer's character. Oh, Willow had a few bits and pieces in the second part of the movie where he was "learning to use magic" -- but it's just not his movie anymore.
In SUMMARY...
Despite these few minor issues, I think Willow stands up well, doesn't come across as dated (except in those few odd, bad special effects) -- and it's basically an enjoyable viewing experience. Fine performances, fun scenario. Anybody who missed out on it the first time around (or only knows it based on its "this is a bad movie!" reputation) should give it a shot. And that's really all I have to say about that!
RECOMMENDED(with extremely minor reservations).
Plot: Elora Danan is a baby who it is prophesied will bring about the end of the evil enchantress, Bavmorda. She is saved from death and winds up saved from floating down a river by Willow -- one of group of hobbit-like people, the Nelwyns. Willow wants, more than anything, to be a wizard, but keeps getting stymied in his goals. After an attack by wild dogs, their local head wizard tells Willow to take the baby to the crossroads and give it to the first human he meets -- but the first human he meets is a criminal in a cage, and things just get crazier from there. He encounters brownies (tiny, goblin-like people who also live in the woods), fairies, trolls and all the kinds of mystical, magic stuff you would expect in a 1980's fantasy film. There are battles, high-speed (cart) chases, fire-breathing dragons... etc.
Well, I think it's a dragon, anyway.Okay. Willow has something of a bad rap these days. I think it's mainly to do with the awkward timing of the release of this movie -- it used a lot of traditional animation right before CGI became the thing, and it was an 80's fantasy movie right at the end of the line for 80's fantasy movies. (Lucas claims he had the "idea" for Willow in the early 1970's, to which I would respond, "...Was it by any chance while you were reading Lord of the Rings?")
I went through a phase, myself, of thinking it was rather cheesy and out-dated. But after viewing the glut of truly heinous and rank films that Hollywood has been producing for the past twelve years or so, Willow actually looks pretty good! Especially compared to The Hobbit movies!
And here's why...
1. Acting: Everybody in this movie is playing their character at the correct level. The performances are good! (A little cheesy and over-the-top in some spots, but this isn't Dragonslayer -- I'm not looking for any existential angst in this movie.) The characters have clean and easy-to-understand goals. The plot makes clear demands on them. They respond accordingly. That's how things are supposed to work!
2. The Story: There is nothing wrong with the story. It's reminiscent of Lord of the Rings -- except that Frodo's carrying a baby instead of a ring, Aragorn is more of a scalawag, and both Gandalf and Sauron are girls. (And, for that matter, this movie is considerably shorter). It feels like a lived-in world with a real history. (Now, LotR has a lot of philosophical subtext that I do think is lacking in this story, outside of a general "good is good, while bad is definitely bad" kind of thing. That said, I'll take what little moral this movie had to offer over a ghastly, nihilistic mess like Dragonslayer!)
3. The Visuals: It's a Great Looking Movie. Wonderful fantasy settings! (Although a bit more like a 70's fantasy movie, in that respect -- most of the settings appear to be real, physical settings as opposed to 80's movies, which so desperately loved the extravagant matte-painting -- or modern movies, that are so desperately in love with CGI that it's hard to make a clean distinction between a modern movie and a modern cartoon movie...)
Here are the things that don't work as well:
1. The Special Effects: Okay. I was really on the fence about whether I actually ought to put this amongst the "good things" -- because there are some really good special effects in this movie. However, there are also some really bad special effects in this movie. (And it's hard to blame the 1980's for the lack of perfection when a movie like Darby O'Gill and the Little People was doing better special effects in 1959.) Honestly, the special effects are just kind of hit-and-miss -- going back and forth between really good stuff, groundbreaking stuff, even -- and just really sloppy stuff.
1959, folks. No computers - and yet, all the people pictured here arereal, full-sized people, all filmed at the same time by the same camera.2. The Score: The score is fine. But there were times, during the fight scenes, that I felt a similar theme just got repeated a few times too often.
3. The Length: I think the movie could have been tightened up and shaved down a little. We could have shaved a hair off the slapstick comedy and a few other things. All and all, it's not a MAJOR problem, but just something to consider.
4. Where's the Willow? Although this movie is called "Willow" -- the latter half of this film, the "swash-buckling adventure" part, is Val Kilmer's. Willow made a few appearances, but mostly just to scream the name of Val Kilmer's character. Oh, Willow had a few bits and pieces in the second part of the movie where he was "learning to use magic" -- but it's just not his movie anymore.
In SUMMARY...
Despite these few minor issues, I think Willow stands up well, doesn't come across as dated (except in those few odd, bad special effects) -- and it's basically an enjoyable viewing experience. Fine performances, fun scenario. Anybody who missed out on it the first time around (or only knows it based on its "this is a bad movie!" reputation) should give it a shot. And that's really all I have to say about that!
RECOMMENDED(with extremely minor reservations).
No comments have been added yet.
