LMU Animation Blog

At the beginning “Harvie Krumpet” did not very much feel like a film that would interest me very much, or at all for that matter. A movie that centers around a main character afflicted by social illness does not seem like it would almost at all resonate with any type of audiences. Often times films that attract people and viewers it is because the main character is someone that we envy and would want to be, Harvie Krumpet’s life does not seem appealing enough to attract an audience as large as those movies. More often than not, Harvie Krumpet’s life is not one that most people would wish they had. With that being said, although Harvie Krumpet’s character or the plot of the film does not carry the same appeal of most movies that attract larger audiences and viewers it isnt to say that “Harvie Krumpet” is not at all a good film. I personally enjoyed “Harvie Krumpet” very much even with its very different style and direction from most films. The film looks at the life of a person with mental illness and how he was able to go on with his life without any great turmoil in it and a general enjoyment throughout it. Much of what made this unorthodox film enjoyable was how the plot really made the viewer feel like the movie was actually based on real life events. In no way did the movie exaggerate any events to the point that they seemed fantasy-like. This is what made the movie most memorable and appealing to me, the fact that Harvie’s life could really be real. He didn’t live an extravagant life, instead it was a normal life with a dead-end job and watching television when the job was over.

Autism is something that affects everyone who has it differently. Though I relate to some of the challenges Owen faces with autism, primarily regarding social interaction, having autism was never much of an obstacle for me. It really is unfair to call autism a disease like Owen’s father said at one point, as it really is just a different way of thinking and viewing the world that is different from the “norm.” Autism may have made Owen less talkative, but it makes me much more talkative, and the primary challenge I have had with autism is knowing what to say and what not to say in certain contexts, as people who think differently than I do might easily misinterpret what I say or become annoyed by my tangents.

In relation to animation, I find it much easier to understand the emotions and motives of animated characters that with the people I see around me. Because characters tend to be much different from each other, I can better differentiate between them as well, but since the people around me do not have exaggerated characteristics or differentiating features it can make it harder for my brain to keep track of who’s who. Especially with people who have similar hair cuts. It took me over a month longer to memorize the names of 4 girls in my high school art academy than everyone else, simply because their hair was the same shape, even though the hair was different colors. When I notice distinctive features in people around me, it starts to become easier for me to distinguish them as I start to notice and make a note of more specific details.

I really enjoyed James Parris’s talk today, and how a lot of our discussion stayed within the vein of social justice through animation. His film “Pink and Blue” was interesting to watch, as a lot of the message about relearning behavior is stuff and I’ve been relearning these past few years. Hearing James talk about it so openly and honestly made me excited and hopeful as the sigma is these ideas are only popular with the younger generation. When we opened it to discussion, I was expecting for us to talk more about the industry, and the challenges within it. However, we continued to talk about gender roles, and our own experiences growing up with those expectations. It was interesting to hear how so many of my peers have had similar experiences with gender roles, and how they felt at the time and now about those experiences. I liked how James was always excited to hear what we had to say, and engaged in the content we were talking about, as well as adding his own experiences to it. I feel like the overall talk went very well, and pleasantly surprised me. I feel that when we have people from the industry come in, we can feel pressured to only talk about animation. I’m happy that it wasn’t the case for this talk, and excited to hear this type of discussion taking place across generations.

Although I had heard much about Life Animated when it was first released, this was my first time actually getting around to watching the film. I don’t have much experience with autistic people, so getting a glimpse into Owen’s life was eye opening.

The film revolved around the theme of helping Owen to find his “voice”. We’re introduced to this concept when Mr. Suskind recalls a memory from his son’s childhood when, after watching, The Little Mermaid,  Owen repeats Ursula’s lines, “Just your voice.” Mr. Suskind felt he was trying to communicate with him. From that point on it seemed Owen was always trying to find his voice and express himself.

Of course Owen found he could identify with and express himself though Disney movies/characters, but what I found more interesting were his drawings and stories. They show that he has a passion to create! No wonder he loves the storytelling found in Disney films. Rather than featuring himself as a hero, like most of us would, he sees himself to be the sidekick. His drawings were also of Disney sidekick characters. Does Owen see his Autism as something that relegates him to “sidekick status”, that makes him less than others? Sidekicks are usually simple characters and often comic relief, yet, he describes himself as the “Protector of Sidekicks”, a role fit for a hero!

Owen has a need to speak and be heard, just like the rest of us. I’m glad he’s found healthy outlets to be able to meet those needs. Disney movies, like all things, will come and go, but at least they’re able to help help Owen make sense of the world, find joy, and find his voice. It may not be the voice his parents had hoped he’d have, or the one his brother wants him to have, but it’s uniquely his and greatly valued.

Our Skype call with VFX Flame artist Katrina Salicrup came shortly after I had viewed Life After Pi (2014), a documentary on the downfall of VFX house Rhythm and Hues after winning an Oscar for their work on Life of Pi (2013). This paradoxical situation was no anomaly in the VFX industry. The 30-minute film had highlighted the similar underpayment, under-recognition of many VFX houses, which lead to bankruptcy and unemployment of VFX artists, who work in almost nomadic conditions.

If we were to shift our focus to women in VFX industry, this takes the already disadvantaged circumstances of VFX artists it to the next level, as it is the intersection of a disadvantaged group (namingly, being a woman) within a profession that is disadvantaged in another sense. Even though I’m not looking to go in the direction of VFX in my future, the general animation (and even film) industry is littered with gender rooted issues. Therefore, I was particularly interested to hear what Katrina had to say about being a woman in the industry. I remember being surprised when Katrina said that there wasn’t actually an overwhelming amount of discrimination against her identity as female when on the job. Although it did occur at times—a client or worker may request for a male supervisor—it was not as common as I may have assumed. Rather, Katrina emphasized that what was most important in order to succeed in the field is a sense of persistence and diligence to practicing our respective craft.

This leads me to ponder about the frequently mentioned glass ceiling that female professionals face. Granted, this is not to discredit or deny the existence of it. But sometimes our over wariness of something may cause more harm than good. If we were to enter a room with a negative expectation, the likelihood of something negative actually happening is heightened. What I feel Katrina is pointing us in the direction of, is suggesting that if we work hard on our craft instead of worrying about what may or may not happen, there will be those who are willing to overlook initial stereotypes or views based on our phenotype.

To close off, our segment on the VFX industry has allowed me a newfound appreciation for VFX and CGI artists. As much as people want to downplay the use of computers in animation, we often fail to remember that people still operate these programs and machines using their time and diligence to create something magical. The phrase ‘we’ve been replaced by robots’ I feel, can often dismiss the hard work of animation artists who work with these ‘robots’. This respect for one another in the field (especially between 2D and 3D artists) is something that certainly cannot be lost in the sea of prevalent cynicism.

 Jordan Peele, from the famous comedy duo Key & Peele, has become one of America’s leading comedy voices on the subject of race issues in popular culture. And his new movie Get Out addresses these racial issues head on. What makes this movie stand out from the other Hollywood movies that address race is that this movie depicts the unconventional racist. Most racist depicted in Hollywood are the obvious racists like the cross burning KKK members, the swastika wearing Neo-Nazis, or the confederate flag waving white nationals. The racists depicted in the film are actually racist liberals. Now, most people probably are confused by seeing the words liberal and racist together, but it’s not as crazy as it may seem. In order to explain how this movie covers this unique type of racist a bit of the plot to the movie needs to be discussed so this is your SPOILER WARNING to anyone who hasn’t seen the film. The villains/racists in the movie are white liberals who unlike most racists actually admire Black culture, Black stars, the Black ex-President. But the extent that they know about black people is from anyone Black they know from television or the movies. On top of that, these racists are fine with both only their children dating Black people, they’d be proud to be married to a Black spouse themselves. You’re probably thinking that these people don’t sound like they’re racist at all, but this isn’t true because the main premise of the story is that these white liberals are kidnapping black people in order to become them by using illegal brain surgery and hypnosis to hijack the black person’s body.  

                               

These liberals are basically using these black people in order to become younger, cooler, and more athletically fit. The idea of black people and culture being a part of society is not the issue that these people have, the issue is that they don’t see black people as human beings. These racist liberals only see black people as a way to become better versions of themselves. The liberals feel that black people have all these cool features and advantages to them and they want to have these advantages themselves even if that means having no regard towards them as actual individuals and human beings. Also, all these racist liberals believe in all black racial stereotypes as actually being true.  Overall, it’s this unique perspective on racism that makes Get Out stand out from all the other movies that discuss race and racism. It’s this perspective that probably shocked some liberal audience members who were expecting the stereotypical racist, but instead, this movie might have made them question whether or not they themselves are racist. Pretty much what it all comes down to is whether or not you can relate to another race on the basic principle that even though we may look different and have a different skin color we are all human beings. Being able to relate to someone who is different skin color and/or is from a different cultural background and being able to understand that you are both human beings is crucial to avoid racism. This applies to all people of all races too, whether it is a white person watching a movie like Get Out and relating to the main character, Chris, even though he is a different skin color or whether it’s a Black, Asian, etc. relating to a movie with a white main character, it’s all the same. Everyone is an equal human being and everyone should be treated as such.

I was honestly very surprised by how much i enjoyed watching Harvie Krumpet. I went in expecting a story about a main character that is never able to be completely “happy” because of how different his mental illness made him from society. Instead, I got a story about a man who is trying to find happiness and fulfillment out of life just like everyone else. I was very happy to this type of portrayal because I feel that this doesn’t happen nearly enough in mainstream media. Mental illness is often wielded as an unspoken fear in media. It seems that a mentally ill character is always defined first most by their illness, and nothing else. It’s frustrating to see, as it doesn’t offer up any positive images for mental illness or help audience members understand what mental illness is. In Harvie Krumpet, there is a very conscious effort to not simply define Harvey by his illness, but not ignore it either. It’s only once in the beginning of the film that the narrator even acknowledges that Harvey has Tourette Syndrome. For the rest of the film, Harvey appears to be just like any other person, one who simply wants to find happiness and live a fulfilling life. This doesn’t mean Harvie is flawless, he still makes mistakes and get upset. However, the difference is Harvie’s behavior is treated a simply a part of who he is. I especially like how the filmmakers used his fact book as a way to show the audience how Harvie sees the world. It felt like the filmmakers respected Harvie as a character and wanted to show the audience how Harvie’s views of the world was different from what we typically see. I feel that having that type of respect for mental illness is what’s needed to better represent it in the media. A current example is the introduction of a autistic character to Sesame Street. The character, Julia, has been in the works for the last two years, and is now being revealed on the television series. The series worked with several different specialists to help bring the most genuine representation to the show. I feel that with this care and attention has helped create a more genuine character that will be able to be a positive role model to children with autism. Overall, I really enjoyed Harvie Krumpet and only wish that this type of representation for mental illness would be used more in mainstream media.

I’d have to admit. It is a lot easier to say, “I don’t think animation is should be limited to just linear, childrens’ shows or films”, than to see it actually being done, nor actively seek it out ourselves. It is inevitable, through the conditioning of having exposure to only children’s and linear narratives early  in our childhoods, that we form a comfort zone for what animation “should” or “should not” be.   This is speaking after reflection upon my own experience. Although I believe in that statement, I have little to no experience with watching experimental animation that is not only not for children, but also non-linear in its narrative form and visuals. This is what struck me when I first saw the many experimental films that came out of Russia to Canada; from Jan Svankmajer to Norman McLaren in History of Animation class in my first semester of Freshman year. Amongst the many short films that were screened was Ryan (2004), an animated documentary by Chris Landreth on revolutionary Canadian animator Ryan Larkin who has spiraled into drug and alcohol abuse. It is the audio transcript of the interview, which was then interpreted into animation.

 

I distinctly remember my initial reaction as a Freshman; shocked and slightly disturbed at the amalgamation of stark sound effects, and characters with bodies that were rotting away in masses and strings of color and ominous smiley faces. However, when I saw it for the second time in class with Danielle, I was able to get over the shock of seeing such crudely designed characters—with no intent to be pleasing to the eye—and really look at how mental conditions such as depression, insecurities and alcoholism was depicted in animation.

 

In my observation, Ryan is a perfect example of the far-reaching extent that is animation’s expressivity. Because animation has always been praised as a point on the scale where live-action has yet to reach; it makes a perfect medium to transcend normativity and to explore abnormal and even disturbing realms of imagery. In Ryan, the animated sequences and production design correlates strongly with psychorealism. As a reflection of mental illness, this style was able to truly bring the audience into both Ryan’s mind, and also into the Chris Landreth’s mind as he interviews Ryan. It is effective because in reality, “normal” minds usually cannot fathom the experience of a drug or alcohol addict. It is not as simple as say “yes” or “no” to substances, or simply being able to distinguish whether they are good or bad. Furthermore, mental illnesses are usually experienced far beyond what is expressed on the outside of an individual, so by having the audience just as disturbed and shocked by the juxtaposition of colors and its content, it almost pulls the viewers into of being just as confused, and disturbed as Ryan and Chris themselves. One sequence that particularly stands out to me is when Ryan becomes worked up over Chris’s questioning of his alcoholism. As his temper and frustration rises, so does the distortion of his face and body. Wirey fibers shoot out of his head, and the small patch of hair resting unstably upon the top of his head (that is shaped akin to an apple core) crudely falls off.

 

With regard to animation in documentary form too, Ryan also shows that just because it is fictional in its presented medium does not render the story fictional. It would be an interesting thing to look into, for documentaries are really more personal than we’d like to think as objective, and through the breaking of conventional animation stereotypes, can produce films that connect the audience to the subject’s mind in a visual and personal way.

Fakt: I kept waiting for “based on a true story” to show up, but it never did.

Harvie Krumpet is a truly unique story of events so random yet so engaging, it must have been straight out of someone’s autobiography. It is a sad yet humorous animation of a mediocre man with extraordinary experiences. Already, this short movie throws many conflicting themes at the viewer, but despite the character’s extremely misfortunate life, the constant dry humor makes the overall tone uplifting. The charming animation style immediately reminded me of Aardman Animation’s, and Harvie even resembled a Simpsons character after a certain point.

I really liked the simple theme of taking life for what it is and appreciating it. When it seemed like nothing good was ever coming his way, Harvie took the initiative to turn it around and go on his own wacky escapades. It also made me realize that of all his prior tragedies and near-death experiences, his bleakest moment was during his permanent stay at the retirement home. It’s a scary but sobering thought to think that one day, your whole life will be behind you, along with all the unfulfilled dreams. But it’s a necessary one. It reminds you to appreciate the small pleasant moments and acknowledge the times where, even to no applause, you overcame hardship.