Coraline

[MacGuffin]

Teaser for Henry Selick's Coraline
Source: ComingSoon.net

Cineplex has posted online a new teaser trailer for writer/director Henry Selick's Coraline, coming to theaters in 3D on February 6, 2009 and featuring the voices of Dakota Fanning, Teri Hatcher, Dawn French, Jennifer Saunders and Ian McShane.

Based on Neil Gaiman's international best-selling book, Coraline is the story of a young girl (voiced by Fanning) who unlocks a mysterious door in her new home, and enters into an adventure in a parallel reality. On the surface, this other world eerily mimics her own life - though much more fantastical. In it, Coraline encounters such off-kilter inhabitants as the morbidly funny Miss Forcible and Miss Spink (French and Saunders, respectively), and a counterfeit mother (Hatcher) - who attempts to keep her. Ultimately, Coraline must count on her resourcefulness, determination, and bravery to get back home.



Teaser Trailer here.

[MacGuffin]

Trailer here.

[modage]

INTERNET TRAILER HERE:

[for petes sake]

This looks fantastic 

[New Feeling]

has anybody seen this?  It's getting a lot of top marks from the critics. Surprised no one has commented yet.  I'm hoping to check it this weekend.

[Sleepless]

I saw it in 3D last weekend, was intending to write a decent review, but haven't gotten around to it yet. I really liked it. Since it was 3D stop motion it reminded me of my viewmaster toy when I was a kid. Obviously lots of cool visuals - bizarre and fun. The structure of the story was not quite what I expected: I thought she'd get trapped in the bizarro world then have to escape, but it's not as simple as that. Better. And the dogs... They're awesome.

[private witt]

I thought it was kind of strange how in the trailer there was almost no picture synch with the dialog, almost like I was watching a trailer for a foreign film.  The images seemed kind of blurry too, was either the case with the actual film?

[modage]

Guaranteed to give kids nightmares, Coraline is a dark fantasy from director Henry Selick (A Nightmare Before Christmas). Visually stunning, the film needs a bit more of a driving force to propel the plot forward. The beginning of the film is already dreamy and strange instead of setting you in the real world before pulling it away. It's hard to have so much admiration for the technical skill and heart that goes into the making of a film but so much hesitation in recommending it. But that's how it is.

Also: the 3D was indeed like a viewmaster looking into the picture instead of the picture coming out at you.  Which, for $15.50, was a bummer.

[polkablues]

I didn't get to see it in 3D, so I can't comment on that, but I thought the movie itself was beautiful.  The combination of Henry Selick's aesthetic and Neil Gaiman's voice turned out to be a perfect combination, perhaps even more so than the Selick/Burton combo.  The story was classic Gaiman, where the lines between reality and imagination are so blurred as to almost disappear, and Selick's decision to not create a simple visual distinction between the two worlds of the film goes a long way to further this blurring.  The closest thing I would compare this to is Pan's Labyrinth, in the sense that both are about the way that children use fantasy and imagination to make sense of the real world around them, and how both steadfastly refuse to sugarcoat their message to appease those who think that children are made of porcelain.

Of course, the animation was astonishing, and the voice work was uniformly good.  Keith David was, as always, a standout, and Jon Hodgman surprised me as the dad.  He has a very distinctive voice, but he also used it in a way I've never heard from him before: sort of airy and distracted, but almost a sing-song, like he's got a music box playing somewhere in his head.  Dakota Fanning was very good as Coraline, no surprise.  Teri Hatcher was the weak link, but she certainly wasn't bad, just expected.

Question for anyone who might know (or bother to look it up), was the voice of the Other Dad when he was making up a song for Coraline at the piano the guy from They Might Be Giants?

[Sleepless]

I didn't get to see it in 3D ... Selick's decision to not create a simple visual distinction between the two worlds of the film goes a long way to further this blurring.

Apparently Selick attempted to distinguish between the two world through the use of 3D. The reality world is a lot flatter, whereas in the other world the 3D effects are more exaggerated. To be honest though, even then it's not that distinct a separation.

Question for anyone who might know (or bother to look it up), was the voice of the Other Dad when he was making up a song for Coraline at the piano the guy from They Might Be Giants?

Don't know, but I think I had that thought in the theater too.

[diggler]

Question for anyone who might know (or bother to look it up), was the voice of the Other Dad when he was making up a song for Coraline at the piano the guy from They Might Be Giants?

it is:

[MacGuffin]

'Coraline' Returns to 3D Screens This Friday
Source: Cinematical

In a move that comes as little surprise to anyone who saw the opening weekend grosses for You Guys Are No Hannah Montana: The 3D Concert Experience, it appears that most 3D-equipped screens will be bringing back the critically acclaimed and fairly successful Coraline as a proper theatrical experience starting this Friday. (Make that one less excuse for the animation-savvy likes of Mr. Weinberg. Guy lurves the stuff.)

According to Box Office Mojo, seventy percent of Coraline's $17 million opening weekend was from 3D venues, and the film managed to gross nearly $54 million as a whole before the Jonas Brothers landed three weeks later. However, their $12.5 million opening weekend (compared to Miley Cyrus' twice-as-high opening on half as many screens) and subsequent 77% drop in attendance last weekend suggests that the remaining fortnight before Monsters vs. Aliens lands would be best suited to a film that might still draw a crowd, one of a significantly broader demographic appeal.

Okay, so all numbers aside, families who haven't seen it yet should find it considerably more inventive than the likes of Race to Witch Mountain (though I still wouldn't take the youngest tykes), and anyone else interested now has a chance to catch it proper before it's replaced by another 3D offering that I can only presently assure you will be equally worth your while and dollar.

[ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ]

Also: the 3D was indeed like a viewmaster looking into the picture instead of the picture coming out at you.  Which, for $15.50, was a bummer.

That's what I loved about it, though.  Like with Nightmare Before Christmas in 3D, it wasn't hokey and exciting to jump out at you, but it rather added depth and made everything appear to occur in its own space, as if the screen continued back for however long.  I thought that made it a lot more immersive and not just gimmicky.

[Reinhold]

Also: the 3D was indeed like a viewmaster looking into the picture instead of the picture coming out at you.  Which, for $15.50, was a bummer.

That's what I loved about it, though.  Like with Nightmare Before Christmas in 3D, it wasn't hokey and exciting to jump out at you, but it rather added depth and made everything appear to occur in its own space, as if the screen continued back for however long.  I thought that made it a lot more immersive and not just gimmicky.

5,000. woot.

i agree with this. it's my favorite 3d film that i've been to by far. i think that years from now it'll be viewed as a landmark film. also, post magazine did a nice piece on its production discussing the technique. apparently the trees were popcorn with lights. amazing.