Was that a ninja?

...More like a NONja...

I feel bad for the Wachowski brothers. They're one of the best things that has happened to film in the 21st century, and people seem almost intent on hiding that fact.

Dropping films like The Matrix, V for Vendetta, and now, the recently opened Speed Racer, they're pushing the boundaries of how a movie can feel, how it can look, and how it can tell a story. In twenty years, more filmmakers will be mentioning the Wachowski Brothers as an influence than Spielberg. There is no doubt in my mind.

Why is this? I could go on and on, but let me throw a few things up in the air: Self-parody-nostalgia, Loud colours, inventive cinematography, and most of all, picture-and-picture parallel on-screen events. All these things are integral elements of Speed Racer. These things are bridging the gaps between Film, Video Games, and Comic Books (that shit up there about picture-and-picture is referring to how there'll be a close up of someone's face, but in the background something totally unrelated is happening - a narrative trick commonly used in graphic novels). And there is nothing more important than that bridge when we thing about the future.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I'm tired of normal movies. They're all the goddamn same. The Wachowski Brothers are the diamond in the rough, and the inspiration for filmmakers like myself who want to do something different with the medium.

Now, we're talking this time, specifically about Speed Racer, and in this context, I don't think anyone disagrees with the statement that Speed Racer's visual style is inventive, so why, exactly, does everyone seem to hate it?

I'm not suggesting that there's a conspiracy, but I've noticed a stark, universal hatred for the Wachowski Brothers. I think part of it was people feeling burned (or was it just "confused"?) by the Matrix sequels, but I've noticed a seemingly unanimous desire that the two brothers just disappear. Maybe it was that whole gender thing a while back.

ANYWAY - reviewers of this film seem to agree that while the style was inventive, it was either a) too much, or b) a mask for true substance. Either arguments are wrong for different reasons. Let's find out why...

A) Too much eye candy gives moviegoers diabetes. This is PURELY an opinion of close-minded, probably too-old, fuss pots who complained they couldn't tell what was going on in Lord of the Rings battles. The times they are a changin' folks, time to get with 'em. The brothers were doing something different with the medium, the same as Cloverfield, recently, and Schindler's List in the 90's (selective color etc.) and there's NOTHING wrong with it. This argument pisses me off the most as it's essentially like someone saying that the cubist movement wasn't art because it didn't have accurate depictions of the human form.

HOWEVER, if you believed the film dragged on a little long, and the style exacerbates that, then your point is slightly legitimized. Only slightly.

B) Style over substance. A few things here. Firstly, HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE SOURCE MATERIAL? It's one of the first anime's to be ported to America with mainstream success. It is for kids. It is simple. It is about racing. It's cute. You want a story about the complex relationship between Speed and his girlfriend Trixie? Why?

Seriously. Why? This movie is for kids, why would you want that?

Now, after I've said that, people will argue that "it's clearly not for kids, it's for the people who grew up with this show, who are now adults." and reference moments that included sexual tension, and the use of the middle finger.

It's partially true, but largely inaccurate. To have a kid's anime get mature for it's audience is a ridiculous idea. To have it be a grown-up re-imagining of Speed Racer would cut out it's "popcicles are nice" innocence, and rape the entire meaning of the film. It is not a movie for kids. It is a movie for adults, who still have an inner kid.

Finally, what really frustrates me about the critics about this film is that they say the movie is devoid of meaning, the characters are one dimensional, and that the whole thing is as transparent as a celebrity's dress. Bearing in mind that this movie is for the adult's inner-child, we have to compare it to other children oriented films, like it or not. So let's compare it to another racing movie - Cars.

Cars by Pixar, is a formulaic race-to-the-message film about the exact same damn thing, with equally one-dimensional characters, obvious moral messages, and an even more predictable plot than the topic film. Moreover, Speed Racer had a more interesting style, and better action sequences.

Oh yeah, and Cars was about talking cars.

Yet everyone orgasms over that film, and stomps on this one. I straight up don't get it.

Please, someone show me what I'm missing.

tl;dr, Speed Racer was excerrent.