Novajam reviews: Howl's Moving Castle (with pictures!)

Novajam

New member
Apr 26, 2008
965
0
0
Notes: Doobity-doo, here's a review! Comments and advice are greatly appreciated, as always.

This review contains spoilers, and thus is more aerodynamic and will handle better at high speeds.

Hot on the trail of success left in Spirited Away's wake, Howl's Moving Castle is Studio Ghibli's 2004 feature film, directed and written by acclaimed director Hayao Miyazaki. The film is on the whole very good thanks to excellent quality animation and detailed (but not exactly watertight) storyline and dialogue, but comes out a little flat when held against other titles that Miyazaki has worked on.

Howl's Moving Castle is set in a fictional Edwardian era kingdom, though there are some elements of fantasy thrown in, most notably magic and a good dose of steampunk. The main character, Sophie, works as a milliner and doesn?t regard herself as particularly beautiful, but when walking to see a friend one day after work, is quite literally swept off her feet by the mysterious sorcerer Howl who rescues her from a couple of shifty characters. However, Howl's action draws the attention of the jealous Witch of the Waste and is turned into a 90-year-old woman.

Meanwhile, the kingdom has gone to war with a non-specific enemy over the disappearance of a Prince, and all of the witches and wizards are being called up for military service. Sophie sets out into the wastes (a misleading name, as it's not entirely "wasteland-ish") in hopes of breaking the curse, and in the process is drawn in with Howl's "family" and the conflict surrounding the kingdom.

For most of the duration, the story is very nicely put together enjoyable to be a part of even if it did move at a fairly leisurely pace, but I do think it began to fall apart near the end. A brand new character is introduced without any explanation of how he got there and brings the movie to a convenient and slightly anticlimactic close. This may be a good thing depending on how you look at it, as the film was beginning to split at the cracks and grind to a halt before this point, and in this sort of situation it is better to stop when the tyre goes flat than keep going and drive off a cliff, but in either case a more tightly woven ending would have been appreciated.


Lettie, could you come out front before gravity acts on the crate above my head?


Howl's Moving Castle also gave me a rather preachy vibe. Inner beauty, the responsibility of government, learning to love yourself and questioning authority all get on their respective soapboxes a few times through the film, but the condemnation of war takes precedent over all of these, making it's presence known to all around. I'll accept that it's a Miyazaki film and there's bound to be a symbolism, but sometimes the metaphor becomes much too obvious, essentially spoon-feeding you the emotion you're intended to feel. An example of this would be the banter between Sophie and Howl when they see a battleship float over outstretched field of flowers, the entire scene dripping in melodrama:

Sophie: A Battleship?
Howl: -grizzled- Still looking for more cities to burn.
Sophie: Is it the enemy's or one of ours?
Howl: What difference does it make? -another battleship flies overhead- Those stupid murderers. -scowl-

Thankfully, every other aspect of the film is top notch. Studio Ghibli continues their tradition of spectacular animation, putting incredible detail is put into all of the film's environments, as well as imaginative and creative technologies. Gigantic flying battleships and ironclad warships to much smaller buggies and cars and of course Howl's Moving Castle itself (essentially a quadrupedal scrap-heap) adorn the movie, as do the lovable characters like the Madame Suliman's wheezy old dog, and Turnip-Head, an ever quizzical and resourceful scarecrow.

There's a beautiful orchestral soundtrack over the film that aids in conveying emotion which is never too invasive or needlessly overpowering, which made the film all that much better. Sound effects are all very nicely done, and the English voice track is solid, featuring the vocal talents of people like Christian Bale and Emily Mortimer. Special credit should be given to Billy Crystal, for some absolutely hilarious lines as the Fire Demon Calcifer.


Also available for those on tight budgets: Howl's Moving Platform.

Howl's Moving Castle is a bit raw compared to some of Miyazaki's other works, but is still a really good film. It's a really enjoyable story if you can bear some slight plot holes at the end, and if you were looking to get into anime films then Howl's Moving Castle would be a safe bet. Sadly, the die-hard Miyazaki fan will certainly feel it to be one of his weaker films, for much the same reasons. Rent it.
 

sneak_copter

New member
Nov 3, 2008
1,204
0
0
This is the first one of these "Novajam Reviews" i've read, and they are VERY good. I think i'm gonna read me some more.
 

Spyalt

New member
Apr 11, 2009
199
0
0
Well I wouldn't quite describe the film as preachy but other then that it was a very good review.
 

GloatingSwine

New member
Nov 10, 2007
4,544
0
0
I keep meaning to read the book of Howl's. It's certainly not my favourite Miyazaki film (that would be Kiki's Delivery Service), and the ending is messy and confused (and apparently the most major departure from the book).
 

pigeon_of_doom

Vice-Captain Hammer
Feb 9, 2008
1,171
0
0
Danzorz said:
"There's a beautiful orchestral soundtrack over the film that aids in conveying emotion which is never too invasive or needlessly overpowering, which made the film all that much better."
Should there be a comma between overpowering and which? Seems a bit hard to make a transition
You could argue that the sentence could be along the lines of "There's a beautiful orchestral soundtrack over the film that aids in conveying emotion, never too invasive or needlessly overpowering, making the film all the better." Slightly more direct that way. I agree that a comma there (and in a few other places) would be useful.

While I thought this was a good review, covering most of the points you'd expect except the use of CGI and any mention of the original novel, I didn't find the writing particularly concise (although it was still quite good). Theres quite a few unnecessary phrases that don't add anything, except at best a slight emphasis to the sentence. If you are aiming for a conversational tone then its acceptable, but otherwise verbal ticks are something to avoid.
 

ThaBenMan

Mandalorian Buddha
Mar 6, 2008
3,682
0
0
pigeon_of_doom said:
While I thought this was a good review, covering most of the points you'd expect except the use of CGI and any mention of the original novel, I didn't find the writing particularly concise (although it was still quite good). Theres quite a few unnecessary phrases that don't add anything, except at best a slight emphasis to the sentence. If you are aiming for a conversational tone then its acceptable, but otherwise verbal ticks are something to avoid.
Well, to be fair, there's practically no mention of the original book in the movie or even any of the "making of" special features - just that annoying Pixar dude singing Miyazaki's praises. This really annoyed me, actually - if I were the author, I would feel rather slighted. Since it's a pretty obscure book, most people probably don't even know this movie is an adaptation.

And since it is an adaptation and not an original story by Miyazaki, I believe it is weaker than his other films. It still has some very nice visuals and nice little whimsical events here and there.

Anyway, good review. I think you covered everything important quite well.
 

Novajam

New member
Apr 26, 2008
965
0
0
sneak_copter said:
This is the first one of these "Novajam Reviews" i've read, and they are VERY good. I think i'm gonna read me some more.
Thankyou! I've got a good back catalogue of these, so just search the forums if you're really interested.

Danzorz said:
He likes feeback you know.

Also, a great review however...

"There's a beautiful orchestral soundtrack over the film that aids in conveying emotion which is never too invasive or needlessly overpowering, which made the film all that much better."
Should there be a comma between overpowering and which? Seems a bit hard to make a transition, furthermore some more description of the music, like an example Or just a bit more depth to it.
Feedback is good, but not essential. Just a comment on whether you liked it or not, or a mention of the subject matter is fine. BUMP DAT THREAD!

Sound is a part I regularly trip up on, but continue to cover since I feel it's an important component to mention. I agree I could put it a little more eloquently, so hopefully I'll improve with time.

pigeon_of_doom said:
While I thought this was a good review, covering most of the points you'd expect except the use of CGI and any mention of the original novel, I didn't find the writing particularly concise (although it was still quite good). Theres quite a few unnecessary phrases that don't add anything, except at best a slight emphasis to the sentence. If you are aiming for a conversational tone then its acceptable, but otherwise verbal ticks are something to avoid.
I though that might happen. I can get a review of a game over 1000 words and keep going, but I get stumped on movies much to easily. So I tend to "stall" and waffle towards the end (or at least, I've always thought I have). I like to keep my writing slightly casual as well, since a professional tone wears flat fast in my experience. Regardless, I'm trying to become a little more formal, and your help is appreciated.

As for the novel...

ThaBenMan said:
Well, to be fair, there's practically no mention of the original book in the movie or even any of the "making of" special features - just that annoying Pixar dude singing Miyazaki's praises. This really annoyed me, actually - if I were the author, I would feel rather slighted. Since it's a pretty obscure book, most people probably don't even know this movie is an adaptation.

And since it is an adaptation and not an original story by Miyazaki, I believe it is weaker than his other films. It still has some very nice visuals and nice little whimsical events here and there.

Anyway, good review. I think you covered everything important quite well.
ThaBenMan has it right on the money. Nowhere on the DVD packaging, or the DVD itself is a mention of the author, let alone that it was based on a novel. I hadn't even heard of the novel myself until I searched Wikipedia and it came up as the first result.

Thankyou all for the compliments.
 

pigeon_of_doom

Vice-Captain Hammer
Feb 9, 2008
1,171
0
0
Novajam said:
ThaBenMan has it right on the money. Nowhere on the DVD packaging, or the DVD itself is a mention of the author, let alone that it was based on a novel. I hadn't even heard of the novel myself until I searched Wikipedia and it came up as the first result.
Really? When I tried buying the DVD from amazon, the site kept trying to make me buy the book as well, along with it being mentioned in the plot synopsis. As I live in the U.K, maybe those all knowing marketing gurus thought the fact that it was based on an obscure welsh author's novel might be relevant. I don't like the way you managed to watch the whole film without being told about what it was based on, did you watch the credits? I think Miyazaki may have done the same thing with Kiki's delivery service, as it wasn't till some time after I saw the film that I heard about the original novel. However, if Hayao ever got round to doing an Earthsea adaption I'm sure Ursula Le Guins name would have been mentioned several times.
 

Samurai Goomba

New member
Oct 7, 2008
3,679
0
0
I personally felt this was by far one of the weakest Miyazaki movies. Then again, I've never been one of his biggest fans. Laputa was just Raiders in the sky, Spirited Away had unlikable characters and a pretty stupid (or maybe just bland) story with the usual contrived flight sequence simply because Miyazaki has a flying fetish (seriously, almost every one of his movies has a flight scene where we just sit back and watch characters fly around. He's almost as bad as Tarantino and his "foot" scenes).

My favorite movies of Miyazaki's are easily Totoro and Kiki's Delivery Service. Kiki in particular I really liked. I felt it captured the spirit of the old Little Orphan Annie comic and just set that in an anime/victorian environment. Despite looking like it was "for kids," the message in Kiki was a real and heartfelt one that was a great deal more mature than one might expect.

Anyway, good review, but I can't say I agree with your opinion of Howl. I personally think Miyazaki as a filmmaker gets way too much leniency from professional film critics in general and not enough careful consideration of each of his individual films, rather than his body of work as a whole. Not speaking of you specifically, but of professional (paid) reviewers.

As for Howl? The flaws you mentioned were a much bigger deal to me. To each his/her own, but Howl is, in my opinion, one of the worst Miyazaki movies I've ever seen (at least as far as the storyline goes), and a downright mediocre film.
 

Novajam

New member
Apr 26, 2008
965
0
0
pigeon_of_doom said:
Really? When I tried buying the DVD from amazon, the site kept trying to make me buy the book as well, along with it being mentioned in the plot synopsis. As I live in the U.K, maybe those all knowing marketing gurus thought the fact that it was based on an obscure welsh author's novel might be relevant. I don't like the way you managed to watch the whole film without being told about what it was based on, did you watch the credits? I think Miyazaki may have done the same thing with Kiki's delivery service, as it wasn't till some time after I saw the film that I heard about the original novel. However, if Hayao ever got round to doing an Earthsea adaption I'm sure Ursula Le Guins name would have been mentioned several times.
Again, I couldn't find anything on the DVD or packaging about the book, and only found out about it after a Wikipedia search. Kind of crappy really; if I were the author I'd want my name in just as big letters and Hayao Miyazaki's. I haven't watched the credits all the way through, but I'll do so in a few minutes just to get the facts straight.

And they did make an Earthsea adaptation. [http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tales-Earthsea-DVD-Goro-Miyazaki/dp/B000UYBOTM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1240110118&sr=8-1]

Samurai Goomba said:
Anyway, good review, but I can't say I agree with your opinion of Howl. I personally think Miyazaki as a filmmaker gets way too much leniency from professional film critics in general and not enough careful consideration of each of his individual films, rather than his body of work as a whole. Not speaking of you specifically, but of professional (paid) reviewers.

As for Howl? The flaws you mentioned were a much bigger deal to me. To each his/her own, but Howl is, in my opinion, one of the worst Miyazaki movies I've ever seen (at least as far as the storyline goes), and a downright mediocre film.
It's a good film, but it came apart like a barrel of water at the end. Maybe we do let Miyazaki get away with it a bit, especially in the west where it's all very different and refreshing, but I still like the film in it's own right. Cheers.
 

Notashrimp09

New member
Apr 27, 2009
37
0
0
I think it's a rather accurate review.

With regards to the ending, perhaps if it kept closer to the book then it would have been easier to understand. Movie adaptations, however, seldom manage to preserve the essence of the book in such a way that pleases everyone. "Howl's Moving Castle" is not quite my favorite of the Miyazaki films (that'd be Mononoke) but it is still a beautiful interpretation.

It still follows the basics of the Miyazaki films. Artistic, metaphorical, and emotional.
 

Novajam

New member
Apr 26, 2008
965
0
0
Notashrimp09 said:
I think it's a rather accurate review.

With regards to the ending, perhaps if it kept closer to the book then it would have been easier to understand. Movie adaptations, however, seldom manage to preserve the essence of the book in such a way that pleases everyone. "Howl's Moving Castle" is not quite my favorite of the Miyazaki films (that'd be Mononoke) but it is still a beautiful interpretation.

It still follows the basics of the Miyazaki films. Artistic, metaphorical, and emotional.
Thankyou! Accuracy is something I try to go for, so it's good to know I'm hitting the mark.

As you say, yes, many films could do well to stick to the original text, but unfortunately do not. I still like Howl's Moving Castle, just not as much as others (which appears to be the general consensus).

Again, thanks :)
 

NeedAUserName

New member
Aug 7, 2008
3,803
0
0
It was a good review, and a decent film, although it didn't hold a candle to Spirited Away. I have only one problem, the first picture, the box could plausibly stay like that, as its being held in place by the ones on either side of it, and the ones on top stop it moving as do the two on the bottom.