"Life of Pi" (2012)

“Life of Pi” (2012) Review:

“Stranded in the Ocean of Faith”

Perhaps it need be said this time but, story is integral to a film as a plot is integral to any novel and despite the language, despite the pretty colors, a film should be dedicated to telling it’s own story. When this is compromised and the film’s central purpose shifts to being about creating amazing visuals it’s time to recalibrate expectations. This is what happened with Ang Lee’s newest feature “Life of Pi,” an epic film about faith through adversity and finding god.


The film starts as a background of the actual life of Pi (Suraj Sharma), who starts the film as his older self (Irrfan Kahn) describing in clever snippets how he came to adopt Hinduism, Catholicism, and Islam; the backbone for the whole faith element of the film. The story really begins when Pi’s family who own a zoo decide to move to the west to sell the animals. While over the Marinas Trench, as the older Pi tells us, the deepest ocean in the world, the ship sinks during a storm leaving Pi, a monkey, a jackal, a zebra, and of course a tiger on a boat out in the middle of the Pacific. From there the story continues slowly as Pi surrenders himself to god and learns to live with the tiger. If from this description you’re beginning to see the tiger as a metaphor, than you’re on the right track.
This film’s true genius lies in the utilization of CGI and 3D, which if you’re going to see the film is a necessity as it may be the finest use of the medium in the history of the technology. That aside, the visuals are nothings short of stunning not only allowing Lee to create a life like tiger, yet also allowing for exquisite use of colors such as during a scene prominently featuring bioluminescent plankton. In addition to this, Lee creates shots virtually unimaginable even a few years ago such as a shot of Pi looking on from underwater as the ship sinks, making the experience on a large screen worth every penny. One sometimes even doubts if what they are watching is reality or computer generated as the integration of the two is flawless and the envy of many summer blockbusters.Yet it is important to remember that this is the frosting on the cake, and one must have cake to truly appreciate the frosting.
Now on to the cake. Where is the cake? No, truth be told, the story is fine, though at some points a bit drawn out (that’s where Lee’s use of technology is crucial to maintaining some brain activity) as keeping a character confined to a life boat for the better part of two hours is, needless to say, challenging. I found the best parts of the film were not the parts in which screen writer David Magee (writer of the significantly more interesting script for “Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day” (2008)) tries to convert the original novel’s themes of spirituality or god as a provider, but rather the scenes focusing on small interactions between Pi and the tiger, known to Pi as Richard Parker, which were, for the most part, wordless. The voice over narration seemed lazy, though, with a story set on a life boat it’s hard to do any better bringing me to the question, why bother with this film? This largely has to do with the ending which I found completely pointless and so denigrating to the integrity of the film’s story arch as to be considered atrocious beyond belief. Giving up the ending is tempting, though in the end fruitless as most people have read the novel and still anticipate the film. Needles to say, being on of those who was not so graced as to read the novel, this film certainly did not persuade me in the slightest to bother.
Some might as, what about the acting? Who’s acting, the tiger’s? Largely the desire for good acting is swept aside as the visual effects roll in, yet it should be noted that Suraj Sharma did a fine job in his film debut though seemed to be channeling Dev Patel from “Slumdog Millionaire” (2008).
Overall this film was, in retrospect, a huge glop of icing whereas this may not have been true had the last fifteen minutes or so of the film been cut. The visual effects were outstanding and the 3D even better, yet this film will undoubtedly not win best picture. In a sense it is tempting to compare this film to “Cloud Atlas” (2012) in that both films pushed the boundaries of technology and storytelling, yet “Cloud Atlas” ultimately did something this film failed to do in that “Cloud Atlas” required me to think through it a bit more closely, to look at the details under closer inspections and even question my own beliefs about the universe whereas this film destroyed all that in the last fifteen minutes and left me wondering why I should have cared. Yet this film is by no means a bad film, far from it. It is a technical achievement at it’s most basic and a storytelling feat difficult for any writer which, in this circumstance, unfortunately failed. But don’t be deterred, see the film, just leave before the end. 

Stars: 7.5/10