Why "Tom and Jerry" won't appeal to kids or adults

2024 Author: Malcolm Clapton | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 03:44

Unreasonable cruelty, unpleasant heroes and a plot in which the cat and mouse are simply superfluous are waiting for you.

Tom and Jerry need no introduction. Eternally at war, but inseparable cat and mouse, who first appeared on screens back in 1940, returned to television with enviable regularity, and then began to storm the cinema.

There are already more than a dozen full-length cartoons about Tom and Jerry. Some are based on original scripts, while others retell famous stories like The Wizard of Oz or The Nutcracker.

But now they decided to launch cartoon characters into real cinema with live actors. A similar technique has already been used many times. "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?", Filmed along the same lines, once literally saved American animation. Yes, and "Space Jam" is known and loved by viewers of all ages.

But in the case of the new Tom and Jerry, something went wrong. To be more precise, absolutely everything failed. It seems that the authors have not yet decided for whom they are filming a new work and what they want to show in general. As a result, it turned out not just an unsuccessful, but an almost shameful movie, in which it is difficult to find at least something funny.

There are two stories on the screen at once, interfering with each other

Having lost her job, the girl Kayla (Chloe Grace Moretz) tricked into a posh hotel, where the wedding of the heiress of a wealthy family and her fiancé will soon take place. At the same time, Jerry the mouse sneaks into the hotel, makes a mess in the kitchen, and then tries to steal the wedding ring. Then Kayla hires Tom the cat, who is always chasing the little bully. But in the end, the problems only grow.

The strangeness is felt literally after the very first scenes. Despite the fact that the story seems to start with Tom and Jerry, it quickly becomes clear that they seem to be superfluous here.

In fact, a significant part of the picture is something like a naive romantic comedy: Kayla helps a couple in love find a common language and go through the difficulties of preparing for the wedding. It may even seem that the filmmakers just took a ready-made script and cut fragments from cartoons there.

Tom and Jerry move the plot, but at the same time they seem to exist in a separate world.

In addition, a significant part of their scenes are just copies of classic gags. In the first minutes of the action, this seems like a cute reference. But when this is repeated for the tenth time, there is a feeling of deception.

Examination! Everyone who watched the old cartoons, remember:

• Jerry pretends to hide something in his fist, and then punches Tom in the eye with it.
• Tom plays the piano and Jerry bothers him.
• Tom flies on artificial wings, but crashes into a window.
• Street cats "run over" Tom, and the smallest of them jumps up and provokes the leader.
• Tom hits Spike's dog in the head with a bat, and then presses the bump back from the blow.

If you know these moments, consider that a third of the scenes from the film have already been seen.

When authors try to come up with their own original jokes, they seem to get lost. The simplest children's humor is here side by side with completely inappropriate phrases and meaningless references. It was as if, while writing the script, we were simply checking popular queries on the Internet. Feminism? Let the heroine sometimes talk about the situation of women. Quadcopters? We need jokes about military drones, and at the end the heroes will use them.

But all this does not in any way stick together into one coherent story. Two plots with a different atmosphere and clearly aimed at different categories of viewers simply interfere with each other.

The world of the picture is completely not thought out

Part of the problem is that the film didn't bother to clarify the very idea of combining cartoons and live actors. To the aforementioned legends "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" and "Space Jam" or even the more mature "Parallel World", there are no such claims. They explain how and why ordinary people meet the drawn characters.

There are other good times when animated characters are added to the regular world: "Stuart Little" or "The Adventures of Paddington". In contrast, a significant part of the plot and humor is built there.

In Tom and Jerry, however, this combination looks as unfortunate as possible. They seem to show that all the animals in this world are cartoons. But how close they are to people is unclear. They are sometimes treated like animals, then talked as with rational beings.

In the same way, neither their ability to survive after all kinds of injuries, nor various cartoon jokes like moving a door along a wall are explained. And again we remember "Roger Rabbit", where it worked logically.

Of course, all this can be attributed to the nagging of adult viewers. Often, such problems are justified by targeting very young fans. Only here I would like to quote the words of the famous animator Harry Bardeen:

Don't underestimate kids.

The age of the target audience is not a reason not to refine the idea. Yes, and those who watched "Tom and Jerry" in childhood, and now have already started a family, will rather go to the picture.

Moreover, showing a cartoon to a younger audience can be simply dangerous.

Heroes cause only dislike or pity

Of course, many also had complaints about the classic Tom and Jerry cartoons because of grotesque violence. Some children felt more sorry for the cat, who was getting it all the time. But more often than not, there was at least logic in what was happening: Tom tried to catch a rodent, and he, in response, arranged nasty things for him. Jerry himself looked like a charming bully.

But in the full-length version, the mouse turned into a rather unpleasant character. No, he is still the same sweet and smiling. But he just behaves like a vandal and a thief. Not only does Jerry wreak havoc everywhere, he also steals the bride's ring. Just because he liked the gem.

Against his background, you want to feel sorry for Tom much more often than in short cartoons. In the full-length version, it seems, they decided to reveal the full potential of the painful sensations of this hero. They beat him constantly, and not always for the cause. Literally in the first scene of the film, Tom is simply hit by a car, then he is thrown, kicked, crushed by the gate. It is unlikely that baseless violence will seem ridiculous even to children.

A similar problem with human characters. Of course, the movies often show not the most honest, but charming characters, whom the viewer supports. But in the case of Kayla, the authors from the very first minutes expose her to be a dubious person: the girl sits down on another candidate and thanks to her resume gets to work.

They simply do not have time to explain why she is still a positive heroine. And it's hard to say that in the future, Kayla shows any special qualities. Unless she takes care of the bride.

Many minor characters also look unpleasant.

Kayla's boss, played by Michael Peña, must entertain with his stupidity. But in this hero there is not a drop of self-irony - all jokes are based only on the fact that he understands all words literally.

But the worst of all is the groom Ben (Colin Jost). This character embodies a combination of childish stupidity and arrogance. His love for the bride does not at all justify the unwillingness to listen to a loved one. Of course, at the end he is given the opportunity to justify himself. But for most of the action, his wife-to-be is simply sorry.

The visuals are rather weak

But the most surprising and disappointing thing about the new film is that the combination of animation and live scenery turned out to be completely unnatural. Here one can only sadly recall the examples listed above. Road chase in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? looks much more lively and natural than a similar action scene in "Tom and Jerry". But more than 30 years have passed!

It seems that the characters were drawn shadows and even reflections in the piano lid and other shiny surfaces. It seems that they even specifically focus on how the surface of the chair flexes under the cat's paws. But still, there is no feeling that the characters are in contact with people.

Part of the problem is the size of the characters. Half of the time, Tom and Jerry run against the background of Chloe Grace Moretz's feet. But even here they look exactly drawn on the screen, and not standing next to the actors. But back in 1996, Buggs Bunny played basketball very cheerfully with Michael Jordan.

The new film "Tom and Jerry" only causes bewilderment and disappointment. The plot consists of elements that interfere with each other. Heroes don't seem likeable. And most importantly, the picture is simply not too funny.

The new feature lasts approximately 1 hour and 40 minutes. During this time at home you can watch 4-5 episodes of the classic cartoon. And it will turn out to be a much more fun and enjoyable pastime.