Popular Culture Review Vol. 18, No. 2, Summer 2007 | Page 44

40 Popular Culture Review Lee Drummond writes, “The entire movie industry has geared itself to the SLipergrosser” (11), and Bloo certainly believes that only a special-effects laden “epic” will speak to Mac’s audience. Certainly, it would be unfair to equate the blockbuster with poor filmmaking. Indeed, films like the Lord of the Rings trilogy went on to gamer critical acclaim, as well as cashing in at the box office. However, a dearth of special effects often covers up the lack of an original plot, or any hint of character development. Worse still, the straight-tovideo market thrives, providing an outlet for countless knock-offs of big-budget movies which often prove worse then the ones being ripped off Furthermore, this market allows for endless sequels to movies which made even a hint of money at the box office, nearly always resulting in an increasing decline in quality. Although these movies do not enjoy a theatrical run, their prevalence suggests some level of profitability, and thus an audience. Bloo goes so far as to market his movie as a “prequel,” following in the footsteps of George Lucas’s method of revealing the Star Wars plotline. Unfortunately, Bloo selects the most derivative, over-used plotlines and effects in the creation of his movie. An early scene utilizes a special effect made famous by the Matrix movies: two characters appear frozen in time while the camera pans around them. Moviegoers experiencing this effect for the first time were floored by the originality and skill of the result. Since that time, countless movies employ the same technique, often just for the sake of including a bit of eye candy. The zombie movie House of the Dead from 2003 uses this special effect during what can only be described as its carnage-laden showpiece: a showdown between zombies and teenagers. Not only does director Uwe Boll, himself a constant target of critics who have christened him “Toilet Bowl” due to his movies’ dubious quality, use the effect over and over in this scene, he does so for no apparent reason. He focuses in on various characters, freezes them, spins around them, then repeats this with someone else. The use of the effect does not work well the first time, and by the fourth, the movie ends up unintentionally hilarious. The inclusion of a flashy effect appears to be Bloo’s motivation as well. He “freezes” two characters at the most inane of times, as one passes a tuna fish sandwich to the other. Bloo also latches on to the increasing use of computer-generated “characters” who appear side-by-side with human actors. Although moviegoers and critics alike hailed Gollum from The Lord of the Rings as an example of a computer-created character capable of expressing emotion, George Lucas came under fire for introducing the world to Jar Jar Binks. Bloo takes the Jar Jar Binks route for his movie. When one of his “actors,” those house members he collars into participating in his project, balks at the last minute, Bloo decrees he will be replaced by a computer-generated version. He comments that the audience will not even realize the difference. Unfortunately, the clearly fake character Bloo inserts into the chosen scene lacks any real expression, and comes across as patently unreal. Jar Jar perhaps became such a target of disdain due to his inability to blend in with the characters around him, even other computer-