Howl's Moving Castle

Tasha Robinson started her review out by saying, “Twenty years before Harry Potter was a gleam in J.K. Rowling's eye, British author Diana Wynne Jones was already writing sparky, deft fantasy novels that were safe for kids and clever enough for adults. One of her most popular was 1986's Howl's Moving Castle, a giddy modern fairy tale packed with transformations, mysteries, and an almost screwball-comedy flavor. The bustling book seems like it would jibe poorly with the sweeter, more sentimental style of Japanese master animator Hayao Miyazaki (Spirited Away, My Neighbor Totoro), but the two work surprisingly well together, and Miyazaki's animated adaptation of Jones' book is a charming and thoroughly absorbing treat.”

“Howl’s Moving Castle,” released in 2004, has its pacing as its only real flaw. Robinson said, “It begins somewhat lumpily, as Sophie, a teenage milliner, sighs her way through a dull day in her hat shop in a vaguely Old World European village.” However, her boring life is overturned by a memorable meeting with a crazy, romantic wizard named Howl, voiced by Christian Bale. Shortly after that, an arrogant witch, voiced by Lauren Bacall, with her own images on Howl puts a spell on Sophie that turns her into an old woman and runs away. Trying to find shelter in a broken down castle that walks the local hills on mechanical legs, Sophie (Emily Mortimer as a teenager and Jean Simmons in her old lady spell) sees she’s in Howl’s home, along with his talented young apprentice (Josh Hutcherson) and, as Robinson describes, “kvetching fire-demon familiar,” voiced by Billy Crystal. The plot goes off in many directions from there, as Sophie tries to break the spell and help her new friends: Robinson said, “Miyazaki simplifies Jones' original story, but for every subplot he removes, he adds another, and the result is almost more story than a two-hour movie can support.”

Robinson continued, “Some of the added themes are too familiar from Miyazaki's other movies: His love of fanciful flying machines, his hatred of war, and his belief in the redemptive power of kindness are once again central, and they all feel a bit redundant. But his typical visual playfulness and absorption in fine detail both work wonderfully with Jones' protean conception of magic: Form is as fluid as mood in Howl's Moving Castle, and the constant visual shifts as the characters change shape, size, and species are stunning.” Miyazaki puts his nice designs and suggestive, quirky imagery to good use in adding spark to characters that might otherwise get written down in the complicated story.

“Howl’s Moving Castle” doesn’t feel completely like a Jones book, or a Miyazaki movie. The narrative is thicker and more story-driven than anything Miyazaki has tried before, while much of Jones’ sharp humor is lost. However, both makers get a lot from the collaboration. Robinson ended her review by saying, “Young kids may find the film hard to follow, but for older viewers, this is something like the Holy Grail of animation: A film with all the joy and wonder of a Miyazaki movie, plus a story as sophisticated as his phenomenal animation.”

Like I had stated yesterday, I understand that people probably didn’t get into this movie because of the fact that so much was crammed in here and Miyazaki didn’t really finish off every plot thread that he started. That is the one downside, but overall, this movie is not as bad as everyone says it is. I actually enjoyed this movie fully. Granted, this is the only other Ghibli movie I saw in the theaters, but I really liked the animation and visuals, which I was blown away by. I say check this film out and give it a chance, you might like it. It’s one of my friend’s absolute favorite Ghibli movie, and if it is anyone else’s favorite, then I completely understand.

Check in tomorrow where we look at a film that isn’t as good as this, but still isn’t bad and not the worse movie in this company’s history. See what I mean in tomorrow’s entry of “Studio Ghibli Month.”