Review: Igor
Set
in the kingdom of Malaria, the title character (voiced by John Cusack) is
servant to evil scientist Dr. Glickenstein (voiced by John Cleese). It’s Igor’s
dream, however, to be a scientist himself and submitting his own creation for
the annual Evil Science Fair. When the evil doctor finds himself permanently
void from this mortal coil, Igor sees this as his chance to prove himself.
Along with sidekicks Scamper (a terminally depressed rabbit voiced by Steve
Buscemi) and Brian (a brain in a jar voiced by Sean Hayes, so stupid that he
got the spelling on the label wrong), Igor sets about creating evil…or as it
turns out, Eva (voiced by Molly Shannon). However, the hulking female turns out
somewhat defective…she’s too nice and placid! Igor tries to rectify this with a
‘brainwash’ procedure that just makes Eva annoying, now. Meanwhile, rival evil
scientist Dr. Schadenfreude (voiced by Eddie Izzard) gets wind of what Igor is
doing, and hopes to pilfer his ideas (which one suspects is how he wins the
fair every year), with the aid of his assistant/girlfriend Jaclyn (voiced by
the inimitable Jennifer Coolidge). Christian Slater voices one of the other
‘Igors’ (all servants here are named Igor).
This
offbeat animated film from director Anthony Leondis (“Lilo & Stitch 2”)
and writer Chris McKenna (writer-producer of TV’s “American Dad” and “Community”)
is the kind of film you end up wanting to like more than you actually do like
it. It’s likeable, watchable, and all-round OK, but you keep waiting for it to
get really good, and it never does. Don’t get me wrong, there’s some fun here,
undoubtedly. The premise itself of an ‘Igor’ dreaming of being a mad scientist
himself is an excellent idea. The film’s funniest and most inspired sequence
involves a ‘brainwash’ that is kinda like the exact opposite of what happened
to Alex in “A Clockwork Orange”. Even funnier is when the brainwash
procedure is interrupted (via a channel change) by “Inside the Actors
Studio” so the ‘monster’ turns into a wannabe actress. Brilliant. The voice
casting is particularly excellent here. John Cleese provides the voice to mad
scientist Dr Glickenstein, and hearing Cleese yell at people never gets old in
my opinion. Eddie Izzard is also a standout (as surprising to you as it is to
me, believe me) as the voice of the megalomaniacal Dr. Schadenfreude, with
Steve Buscemi ideal as a suicidal rabbit who can’t seem to die, no matter how
hard he tries. Did I mention that this is a family movie? Amazingly the
character works, though I’m no expert on what kids reactions will be like. It’s
pretty morbid stuff. John Cusack proves an unusual but effective bit of casting
as the title character, who isn’t as comedic as the other characters in the
film. Although it’s not nearly as successful as the later “Frankenweenie”,
the film still has a nice Universal horror bent that I appreciated.
But
overall, the film just never quite makes the grade. Part of the problem is the
animation. The warped character designs themselves are fine in conception (almost,
but not quite Burton-esque), but the animation (by an animation studio called
Sparx, who you might know their work on the cheap-arse kids show “Rolie
Polie and Olie”, which I’m unfortunately all-too familiar with) is lacking
in quality. CGI animation is so incredible these days (just look at the almost
photo realistic “Rango”) that when you see a film with lesser quality
animation from around the same period or just a few years earlier, boy does it
show. Just look at the difference in animation quality throughout the “Toy
Story” trilogy, for instance. The first one (from 1995- feeling old now?)
is actually a bit hard to look at these days if you ask me. It’s not terrible
animation or anything here, just not quite up to snuff, and that small dip in
quality is enough to detract somewhat from one’s enjoyment.
The
other issue is that although the film has moments and a cute premise (that
could’ve and should’ve led to a genuinely good film), that’s all it really has.
It works in fits and starts and you won’t remember anything except that “Inside
the Actor’s Studio” gag in the days after you’ve watched it. Like I said,
it’s amiable enough and initially promising enough that you want it to be
better than it is. There are inspired moments here, but getting rid of the most
entertaining character early on was a big mistake and the animation just isn’t
quite up to the standard one expects over the last decade or so. It’s a
harmless enough film, but not entirely satisfying and you can see why audiences
were resistant to flock to it on release.
Rating:
C+
Comments
Post a Comment