I tried to watch The Spine Of Night before, but things conspired against me. I ended up busier than expected, had to stop the film, and then just never got back to it. I always thought I was missing out, and I figured that the film might be something I would love. A year or so later, I discover that I was completely wrong. The Spine Of Night is a boring waste of a great cast.
Described on IMDb as an "ultra-violent, epic fantasy set in a land of magic" that "follows heroes from different eras and cultures battling against a malevolent force", this is all about a powerful woman (Tzod, voiced by Lucy Lawless) who battles to retain possession of a mystical flower known as the Bloom. It, or something akin to it, has been guarded by others over many years (with one of those guardians voiced by Richard E. Grant), but it has fallen into the hands of a major baddie named Ghal-Sur (Jordan Douglas Smith).
Co-written and co-directed by Philip Gelatt and Morgan Galen King, this rotoscoped dark fantasy has a number of obvious influences feeding into it, and anyone who enjoys those influences should find something to like here, but they will struggle to maintain that enjoyment as the film makes one mis-step after another. Although the runtime is only 93 minutes, the pacing makes it feel much longer, and makes it feel like quite a slog at times. The characters are hard to care about, the environments shown onscreen feel like disconnected backgrounds, as opposed to a real world, and the central quest never becomes as interesting or involving as it should be.
The animation style also works against it slightly. I appreciate some good rotoscoping, but it works best when it feels like a vital component. This is a choice, and an ill-advised one. There's nothing here that couldn't have been improved by either a different style of animation or, perhaps, a live-action presentation of the unfolding events.
As for the cast, both Lawless and Grant are great picks for their roles, Smith does well as the villain, and there are roles for Patton Oswalt, Joe Manganiello, and Larry Fessenden, as well as quite a few others, but nobody is given good enough material to work with. I don't mind something that mixes in plenty of familiar elements, there's a comfort and fun in enjoying ingredients mixed into a new recipe, but this feels, perhaps as intended, like a tale that was written back in the 1970s and dusted off for modern audiences without any extra re-writing or polishing of the material.
I could recommend you plenty of animated movies to watch ahead of this, from the fantasy, sci-fi, and horror genres, and some of those show a much better way to make use of rotoscoping. I'm sure The Spine Of Night has some fans, but I'm never going to want to revisit it, and I'll probably forget it exists at all within the next few months.
3/10
If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do
consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A
subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share
No comments:
Post a Comment