Eric D. Snider
Arctic Tale (documentary)
Movie Review
"Arctic Tale (documentary)"
Review by Eric D. Snider
Grade: B-
Rating: G
Released: Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Directed by:
Cast:
When I reviewed "Happy Feet" last fall, a few readers expressed dismay that I had failed to warn them of the movie's environmental message. "Boo hoo!" they sobbed, like the big whiny babies they were. "I wanted to see a movie that didn't have any messages, and then I accidentally saw one that did! And even worse, I disagreed with the message! BOO HOO HOO!"
I was perplexed, and continue to be perplexed, by the mindset that follows this line of reasoning: "I don't believe in global warming. Therefore, anything that promotes conservation of the environment is nothing more than liberal propaganda, and I will ignore it, and I will not let myself enjoy any entertainment that mentions it." You can refuse to acknowledge global warming if you want to, but even if you think it's bunk, isn't it still a good idea to take care of the Earth? How could "be nice to animals and try not to ruin the places where they live" be an unacceptable message?
The words "global warming" do not appear in "Arctic Tale," and concerns about the human influence on the rapidly changing environment up north don't appear until very late in the film. But they are there, and yes, if you hate the liberal lie-mongers who spout "global warming" nonsense then yes, you will hate this movie. Al Gore's daughter co-wrote it, for crying out loud! AREN'T YOU ENRAGED JUST HEARING ABOUT IT?!!
If you take your kids to see it, there is a strong chance they will come out of it wanting to take better care of the Earth, to use less electricity, and to recycle. I can see why you wouldn't want your children exposed to ideas like those.
It's produced by National Geographic and has the look and feel of the National Geographic nature specials we used to love watching on TV. Through some truly amazing and beautiful photography, and aided (or hindered) by Queen Latifah's narration, we follow a young polar bear and walrus through the first several years of their lives. We call the bear Nanu, and the walrus Seela. Nobody else gets names, not even Nanu's twin brother. If you're not one of the two stars, you go nameless. These animals need better agents.
The plight our adorable pals face is a diminishing quantity of ice from one year to the next. (The film was shot over the course of 15 years.) The bears do their best hunting when the ice is solid and thick, and the walruses need ice floes to live on. Less ice means scarcer food for everyone.
But that doesn't mean Queen Latifah can't crack an awful lot of lame jokes! For example, did you know that walruses whiskers serve a purpose? It's true: "Those sweet 'staches aren't just for style!" Latifah declares. When Nanu's nameless brother tumbles backward into a small cave, she says, "Hole in one!" And the walruses? "When one gets hungry, the whole herd does. That's just how they roll!" PLEASE KILL ME NOW.
The animals are almost certainly anthropomorphized much more than is realistic, with emotions and feelings ascribed to them that they cannot possibly be having. I'm a little disturbed, too, that while the issue of walrus sex is handled very discreetly, the issue of walrus flatulence is put right out in the open for all the world to hear.
All that said, and regardless of your political ideology, the footage captured by directors Adam Ravetch and Sarah Robertson is spectacular. Animals are fascinating to watch in their natural habitats, and it's not often I find myself in the arctic to see them firsthand. I'm willing to overlook some lowest-common-denominator idiocy in favor of some well-produced nature photography.
Grade: B-
Rated G, with some discreet but unmistakable references to death
1 hr., 25 min.
Copyright © Eric D. Snider.
This work may not be transmitted via the Internet, nor reproduced in any other way, without written consent from Eric D. Snider.
This item has 14 comments
August 23, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Happy Feet wasn't about Global Warming, it was about the over-fishing of the Antarctic waters.
Did they watch the movie, or just assume polar ice caps=global warming?
To be fair, the trailers for 'Happy Feet' were almost as misleading as those for 'Bridge to Terabithia'.
August 24, 2007 at 12:30 pm
John Ellis, you just said what those who complained about Happy Feet said. Just look up the review. Welcome to the world of whiny babies (based on Eric's definition I guess).
August 24, 2007 at 1:21 pm
The anti-religion themes in Happy Feet were far more disturbing than the pro-environmental-extremism, but it gave me lots to talk about with my kids. :)
As for Nature films in general--why is it that the only two available narrators are:
1. BORING and
2. Annoying?
I guess I'd make an exception for Morgan Freeman in March of the Penguins...
Thanks for another great review! (I'm glad you don't skip the "kiddie" films)
August 24, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Reading their not unreasonable reactions to the misleading trailers in the comments Eric's review, his dismissive reply there and his over-the-top finger-shaking here...ick.
I'm sorry Eric I generally like your reviews, but your ugly remarks seem a tad out of proportion to what was actually said.
August 24, 2007 at 6:40 pm
It's sounding more and more like I would enjoy Happy Feet. I'll have to break down and watch it--even if it does feature Robin Williams' detestable zaniness. *shudders*
Also, it's too bad the trailers for An Arctic Tale feature so much of the cringe-worthy narration by Queen Latifah and not enough of the gorgeous nature photography Eric mentioned.
August 26, 2007 at 12:58 pm
I need to see Happy Feet too. I know Eric's sarcasm bothers some easily bother-able people, but hey...the truth can be hard to take. Thanks Eric!
August 27, 2007 at 6:39 am
Actually, what disturbed me most about Happy Feet was the notion that replacing the word "sex" with "ex" in a pop song makes it all kid-friendly. Because my kids are apparently so stupid that it will all go right over their heads if you make that little change. Either use the song or don't. If you're afraid to say "sex", then pick a song that doesn't have that word in it. And don't insult my kids like that.
August 27, 2007 at 11:40 am
I don't recall crying anywhere in my comments.
I still won't let my 3-year-old watch that film ever again though, and it's not for the presence or non-presence of "messages," but because it is way too sexual for kids. Kinda wish they hadn't picked a cartoon for that, knowing that the kiddies would be drawn to cartoons and all....
August 27, 2007 at 2:58 pm
I don't recall Eric mentioning your name, either.
August 27, 2007 at 3:54 pm
I don't recall him mentioning any names, either. Smart-alec.
August 27, 2007 at 4:00 pm
You seemed to think he was talking about you with the crying, so I just thought I'd point out that he didn't mention you specifically. Maybe his comments about the criers had nothing to do with you whatsoever! If your reasons for not liking the film were about its sexuality and not its environmental messages, then obviously he WASN'T talking about you. Case closed!
August 27, 2007 at 4:32 pm
There's no need to get snippy, Al Gore. I was merely distinguishing myself as a non-liker, but also non-boohooer, of the film.
September 2, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Come on now, kids... play nice.
September 4, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Kirsten Gore had nothing to do with anything other than writing the jokes in Arctic Tale. She is a comedy writer .
Also every thing in the movie is fact checked by three seperate sources, as is required by any National Geographic project. I would say that everything in the movie is very real and is an accurate depiction of how walruses and bears, ice and foxes really are.
We just don't think walrus are like us because they are so wrinkly and ummm funny looking. But what if walrus really are like us... or... what if we are more like walrus then we think we are.
I'm just happy that the big fat walrus got the girl!