I left the theatre thinking, “Well, that was ok, not great.” The next day, I hated the movie (chiefly for the sunlit depictions of animal-on-animal violence), but now I feel differently. I actually think I like the ambiguity with which the film leaves its viewers.
And, no, I did not read the book…seems to be what everyone asks me when I am ambivalent about a cinematic adaptation of some contemporary literature. [See: any reaction any friend of mine has ever had to my utter distaste for the Twilight franchise.]
Life of Pi is a beautiful film. Director Ang Lee has done a sumptuous job creating the cinematic equivalent of a lushly illustrated children’s book – though I’m not entirely certain it serves the narrative well. In 3D, the sparkling visuals literally leap from the screen, but the ViewMaster quality of such stereoptic spectacle may mislead viewers into thinking the film is a fun holiday family jaunt. It ain’t.
The movie grapples with issues of faith, humanism, animal rights, gender and class politics in an allegorical melange that at times evokes Aesop’s Fables by way of Sigmund Freud. In short, Life of Pi details the adventure of a young Indian boy trapped at sea on a lifeboat with a ravenous tiger. Hijinks ensue.
The “did they/didn’t they” questions of whether the tiger (and a few other animals) are real or imagined and whether they are actually symbolic of man’s inhumanity to man are ultimately unresolved, leaving it to viewer discretion. That is no doubt what the book’s author Yann Martel intended. However, as a cinematic exercise, the movie somehow finds itself at the difficult crossroads of simplistic AND abstruse.
I find myself still pondering the questions raised about faith, the divine within us all, the power of nature, and the pure equality of all living creatures. In that sense, Life of Pi works a kind of big budget, “Hollywood blockbuster as art film” wonder. Yet, I haven’t made up my mind if Ang Lee has achieved an amazing hat trick in filming the supposedly unfilmable…or if he completely missed the mark with this CGI-filled epic.
I guess I will have to get back with you on that one.
Maybe this is one of those times when I should have heeded my friends’ query: “Did you read the book first?”
I saw the movie with my college grad son who’s travelled to India and studied the language and culture. We both loved the movie. Having been much on a spiritual journey myself, I loved the search for truth, wherein you will always find there is one God, many paths, one race, human. And with that are many stories of how one becomes who they are when they realize the creator if the universe knows us individually.
Thanks, Ann Marie – appreciate your input as it is helpful to my better understanding the film
well, you know what i think from sitting beside me as we both jumped out of our seats at many times even though the dear animals were digitalized (if not completely in his wonderful mind while at sea) you assured me? and my concept of god (gods) (Nature) remained intact. and you already know full well what my philiosophy is…perhaps i am an indian myself.
i really wish i had spelled “philosophy” correctly! ;D
I love it! I believe you have devised your own “philosophy”! Spelled PHILIOSOPHY. I dig it!
Pingback: “Oh, what a night!” Reel Roy Reviews book launch event at Ann Arbor’s Common Language « Reel Roy Reviews
Pingback: Don Draper redeemed: Disney’s Million Dollar Arm « Reel Roy Reviews
Pingback: Day I read a book … The Freak Foundation Operative’s Report « Reel Roy Reviews
Pingback: “They paved paradise.” The power of documentary film in pandemic: A Castle in Brooklyn, King Arthur and Marvel’s 616 « Reel Roy Reviews