This film has so little going for it, it's a wonder I'm even rating it. With each subsequent viewing, I am becoming more and more disillusioned with Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. It is an affront to nature.
The film is supposedly based on the video game series of the same title, but in truth I can see nothing which connects the two. A common thread throughout the game series (I think there are 11 games now) is that each one takes place in a completely different world with new characters, and I can therefore see no reason, apart from marketing purposes, to even call this film Final Fantasy.
I'm left cold be this movie. It has no heart whatsoever. Everything is formulaic and lifeless. To be honest, I'm actually left wondering why it was even made. Actually, no I'm not; I know exactly why it was made: it's a technology demo. Well then, way to go, Square Pictures! You managed to prove that you can create semi-convincing computer animation via motion capture that looks realistic. Remind me what the point of this was when you could just have shot it in live action anyway. Seriously, why animate something when you can get the same effect, and cheaper, by doing it in live action? I'll tell you why: because, if this were a live action film, it would be condemned as complete rubbish. Sadly, because it is completely CGI, many critics have been wowed by its impressive visuals... including Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper, who felt compelled to give it their "thumbs up".
When I first reviewed Final Fantasy, I gave it 6 out of 10. In retrospect, I most certainly regret that decision. As it is, I do feel that even 4 out of 10 may be a little over-generous, but there are a few moments within the film that rescue it from the depths of having no merit whatsoever. Despite the overall pedestrian nature of the film, I will admit that Sakaguchi and his cohorts managed to create some pretty atmospheric dream sequences. A nice effect is the way that, as Aki comes more and more under the control of the virus she is infected with, her dreams become more desaturated.
In many respects, Final Fantasy tries very hard to be a computer-generated Akira. Shame on them for even trying. This film doesn't even come close to Katsuhiro Ôtomo's 1987 masterpiece. Many of the same themes are present (well, you can't get much broader than "end of the world"), but none of the imagination or heart. Final Fantasy is cold and sterile, and for me it is adequate proof that if you use machines to make your movie, you'll end up with a very mechanical movie. Especially after listening to the commentaries and watching the documentary, I have become aware that this is obviously an assembly-line product, not a creative endeavor. To reiterate: Pixar can do it. They are able to use their computers as tools to project heart and emotion. In my opinion, Square Pictures cannot do it. They use their computers to hide their own incompetence.
The main character, Dr. Aki Ross, is voiced by the irritating Ming-Na. She gives the most bland, lifeless reading you could possibly imagine. The other voice actors are equally disappointing, projecting their lifeless voices on to lifeless CG models. Special mention must be given to Alec Baldwin, who gives a laughably poor and clichéd performance as Captain Gray (although, admittedly, he's reading a laughably poor and clichéd script).
If proving that they could do lifelike CG animation was the production team's only goal, then they have succeeded. However, that means that Final Fantasy was nothing more than an experiment: a test that was most certainly not ready to be released to the public. They should have spent more time on developing a story, finding better voice actors and actually animating something rather than motion-capturing it all. It's hardly surprising that Square Pictures folded shortly after the film was released.
The film is supposedly based on the video game series of the same title, but in truth I can see nothing which connects the two. A common thread throughout the game series (I think there are 11 games now) is that each one takes place in a completely different world with new characters, and I can therefore see no reason, apart from marketing purposes, to even call this film Final Fantasy.
I'm left cold be this movie. It has no heart whatsoever. Everything is formulaic and lifeless. To be honest, I'm actually left wondering why it was even made. Actually, no I'm not; I know exactly why it was made: it's a technology demo. Well then, way to go, Square Pictures! You managed to prove that you can create semi-convincing computer animation via motion capture that looks realistic. Remind me what the point of this was when you could just have shot it in live action anyway. Seriously, why animate something when you can get the same effect, and cheaper, by doing it in live action? I'll tell you why: because, if this were a live action film, it would be condemned as complete rubbish. Sadly, because it is completely CGI, many critics have been wowed by its impressive visuals... including Roger Ebert and Richard Roeper, who felt compelled to give it their "thumbs up".
When I first reviewed Final Fantasy, I gave it 6 out of 10. In retrospect, I most certainly regret that decision. As it is, I do feel that even 4 out of 10 may be a little over-generous, but there are a few moments within the film that rescue it from the depths of having no merit whatsoever. Despite the overall pedestrian nature of the film, I will admit that Sakaguchi and his cohorts managed to create some pretty atmospheric dream sequences. A nice effect is the way that, as Aki comes more and more under the control of the virus she is infected with, her dreams become more desaturated.
In many respects, Final Fantasy tries very hard to be a computer-generated Akira. Shame on them for even trying. This film doesn't even come close to Katsuhiro Ôtomo's 1987 masterpiece. Many of the same themes are present (well, you can't get much broader than "end of the world"), but none of the imagination or heart. Final Fantasy is cold and sterile, and for me it is adequate proof that if you use machines to make your movie, you'll end up with a very mechanical movie. Especially after listening to the commentaries and watching the documentary, I have become aware that this is obviously an assembly-line product, not a creative endeavor. To reiterate: Pixar can do it. They are able to use their computers as tools to project heart and emotion. In my opinion, Square Pictures cannot do it. They use their computers to hide their own incompetence.
The main character, Dr. Aki Ross, is voiced by the irritating Ming-Na. She gives the most bland, lifeless reading you could possibly imagine. The other voice actors are equally disappointing, projecting their lifeless voices on to lifeless CG models. Special mention must be given to Alec Baldwin, who gives a laughably poor and clichéd performance as Captain Gray (although, admittedly, he's reading a laughably poor and clichéd script).
If proving that they could do lifelike CG animation was the production team's only goal, then they have succeeded. However, that means that Final Fantasy was nothing more than an experiment: a test that was most certainly not ready to be released to the public. They should have spent more time on developing a story, finding better voice actors and actually animating something rather than motion-capturing it all. It's hardly surprising that Square Pictures folded shortly after the film was released.