BSA 206 W10 : Wallace and Gromit

We watched two episodes of Wallace and Gromit in class:

The first was the newest of all their shorts A Matter of Loaf and Death.



I remember seeing this when it came out in 2008 and being not all that impressed by it, especially following the feature-length treatment that Aardman just gave the duo, but upon reviewing now so many years later I was very impressed with the short.

It has the same technical proficiency as the feature length film, the scale being equally impressive, but it strips the narrative back to the simpler structures of the earlier shorts. What I found most impressive watching this and the rest of the Wallace and Gromit content was just how efficient the story-telling is without sacrificing pacing.

Wallace and Gromit is a comedy, and almost a parody, so by not taking the subject matter all that serious (just have a look at the bread and baking puns present in almost every line in Loaf and Death) the director can have full creative freedom when it comes to the way the content is presented. The style and shot choices reminds me heavily of older classic films, the directing a bit of Spielberg. I love this fact about the films because it makes them effortlessly entertaining to watch, there is an understanding of the cinematic language that isn't always present in children's entertainment.

Although I have to note that these films aren't exclusively for children, while targeted towards a younger demographic like those of Pixar and all great animated productions the films provide enough for both adults and children to derive entertainment from.  It's interesting seeing these again after so long, I watched them all the time as a kid, especially A Grand Day Out and The Wrong Trousers watching them now I appreciate the technical and wit much more but feel that the entertainment level is about the same as it ever was.



I think the fact that it is claymation, such an incredibly time consuming process (I think I read that in Chicken Run they could only animate a single minute of film every week) does help with the direction of the film. I imagine it requires much tighter storyboarding and a more thorough pre-production period to ensure that the final product comes out right - it's a bit of a miracle that these films come out as well as they do at all tbh. They say that about all films, that a good film is a miracle, but wtf does that mean for Aardman, because they're films are amazing imo.

I think there is a very British-ness to the studio and specifically this property, it reminds me of Sherlock Holmes, The Hobbit and 007 - all in that specific camp of embracing British culture and making the most of it. Sherlock in the types of cases that the human and the hound are forced to deal with, the movies are very much mysteries boiled down to their most basic elements, of course fused with that dynamic duo. The Hobbit in the sense that these characters are thrown from their ordinary, normal lives and into crazy adventures, with their primary goal being to return to the comfort of their cheese and crackers in front of the tele, Wallace especially is a great example of how to use this trope right, a lot of the humour coming from his desire to just go back home and chill, he oft doesn't even seem to see the craziness around him as nearly as important as the comforts awaiting him at home. This obliviousness is a great source of comedy as well and always enjoyable to watch, especially with Gromit's silent commentary. 007 in it's inherent British patriotism, the Wallace and Gromit stories explore problems and themes present in every day life within the United Kingdom - farming and pests playing essential roles in two of their adventures. It's British and proud of it and for that among many reason a pure joy to watch. I read that Aardman even goes as far as to try and hire exclusively British voice actors.



What really resonated with me about watching A Matter of Loaf and Death again, and something that stayed present in my mind for the rest of the films as well, was how well the films use their limited running times. They feel like productions that should be 40-50 minutes long but persistently comes in at just under half an hour. Considering its only 30 minutes its amazing to me how much ground the stories cover, going through the entirety of a three act structure.

This is very impressive to me because we have been taught to adhere to three act structure in our time at SIT, but I and my class mates have had a lot of trouble making those specific story beats fit to the length we are forced to work within. Wallace and Gromit shows that not only can a short explore the same ground as a feature, but it can do so just as effectively and hit the same emotional beats. This is something I have wondered about a lot, my own ideas often feel too long for a short and I often try to alter or postpone them to a later date. The comical nature and animated medium of Aardman's films obviously helps with this though, allowing the direction and pacing to be more dramatic without coming across as jarring.

Having said that I am taking this stuff to heart and since a lot of my ideas have an element of comedy I am going to try and execute at least one to the same style as the Wallace and Gromit shorts. It's like making a feature in a third of the time, and somehow they manage to make it have the same emotional impact.

The other pro about making them so short is that any predictability already present in the stories becomes a non-issue. Aardman tend to tell stories that are pre-existing tales or skeletons of stories oft told, with a comedic twist that places it apart. That's not really completely the case with the next one we watched though:



The Wrong Trousers is the one that I watched most in my youth and I remember every single frame so well, going back I was worried that it would feel too familiar and that I wouldn't enjoy it to the same degree. Luckily this fear was eliminated during our viewing in class, the story of The Wrong Trousers is very good. I like how the first two Wallace and Gromit stories explore everyday concepts like taking a trip somewhere (A Grand Day Out) and then in this it looks at what happens when a flatting situation changes because of financial strife. It's concepts that are very basic and relatable to the everyday British citizen, but Aardman takes that concept and looks at it through the lens of the fantasticle world that these characters inhabit. A day out isn't just to a park, it becomes a picnic on the moon - which everyone knows is made of cheese.

I love the way The Wrong Trousers advanced Aardman's cinematic skill, the scenes are so well made and dramatic, each resonating well and we sympathize much more with these characters than what was presented in their first outing. The story escalates brilliantly and the villain and plot is so entertaining and fun to watch. It's a step back from going to the moon but it introduces set pieces and scenes that far exceeds anything present in its predecessor. More grounded and but far more ambitious.



Something I really noticed about Aardman's films this time around is how well they use visual storytelling, having a good cast of character who never speak a word - primary example, of course, being Gromit. They do a wonderful job of communicating his emotions and what he's thinking, this goes for the other characters as well - like the evil penguin in The Wrong Trousers, and later Shaun the Sheep from A Close Shave.

If wrong trousers established the larger scale and more adventurous elements of the serious or at least cemented them more, then it's the next film that changed the type of stories forever.

I loved them so much that I went home and also watched A Close Shave and The Curse of the Were-Rabbit:



A Close Shave was actually my least favorite of the bunch and this is a weird thing because it seems to be the one that Aardman themselves felt was the best. Either that or they felt it needed work because every subsequent Wallace and Gromit story follows a very similar set-up and plot beats to A Close Shave. Wallace falling for a woman involved with something sinister was fresh here but now there are more Wallace and Gromit stories with that sort of arc than not.

 It works but it's definitely interesting to note when this change came about, it makes sense that going from shorts to a feature that they would incorporate the elements that worked before to ensure success with the larger market they'd be appealing to with their biggest outing, but it's strange to me that when they returned to the short format they once again decided to take this doomed romance approach.



I think to watch A Close Shave after A Matter of Loaf and Death makes it less enjoyable in comparison, maybe that's why Loaf and Death felt a bit limp upon first viewing it back in the day - the stories are extremely similar and lacks the sense of originality that usually comes with the Wallace and Gromit brand. Aardman feels like they are retreading old ground here. It's almost like they saw the success of A Close Shave and stopped taking chances with the property after that, not wanting to disappoint the people who grew up with these classics.

I hope there are many more of these shorts, although not sure if it could be done without director Nick Park, who is certainly getting up there in age, but if there are more I hope they return to the time when each story was completely unique, as it was in those first three installments.

Not to say anything negative about Curse of the Were-Rabbit though because it might just be my favourite alongside The Wrong Trousers.



Upon researching the franchise I found that some people felt a feature-length Wallace and Gromit was too much and that it hurt the pacing of the film but I disagree, I think Curse of the Were-Rabbit is perfectly paced and somehow manages to keep the quick wit of the shorts. It's never boring and is by far the most technically impressive of the lot. I never thought claymation could look so beautiful as it does in this film, which is dripping with atmosphere and humongous in scale.

The scale is an interesting thing to note, because the series started off pretty big (straight to the moon) but each installment has built in action and set-pieces, becoming more and more like the big blockbusters we see in cinemas. Reminds me a lot of Steven Spielberg type adventure films e.g. Indiana Jones.

It feels like Aardman were working towards something bigger the whole time, A Close Shave feeling like something they made as proof that they could handle the scope, intricacies and appeal of a feature-length film. This, of course, led to Chicken Run, which was a great success that showed their hard work and practice paid off.



Coming back to their dynamic duo with a feature under their belt must have helped because Were-Rabbit is an expertly handled film in my opinion, effortless to watch and quintessential Wallace and Gromit. It's a film that could have turned out very poorly, something with a lot of expectation behind it and which is an adaptation of a different format, but I think the studio pulled it off very well and I wish there were a couple more of these films. I love the story, the small-town setting and this one also had some of the best comedy in it, the "beware the moon" gag took me by surprise - brilliant.

















I used to watch this series a lot as a kid and some of the films are forever engrained in my brain, but coming back to it now was a great surprise. I didn't expect to love and respect these films as much as I find myself doing now, I have been converted to a Wallace and Gromit fan this week.

I love the way it uses it's camera and how dramamticed it can be, the comedy is witty and comes at a relentless pace, I love the aesthetic and handheld feel (I remember watching the documentary for Curse of the Were-Rabbit as a kid and they said they kept the fingerprints in the clay to give it that extra bit of texture and make it feel all the more real). The themes and way it chooses imagery is great as well, I like that each film has a certain set of unique elements to it, like this last one with it's rabbits and vegetable motifs. There is a large array of silent characters and pure visual storytelling, the adventurous nature and set-pieces make it exciting and I love the crazy situations the characters find themselves in. Highly recommended, would watch them all again right now, not quite anything else like it.