This was a record-setting Thanksgiving weekend, and I’m not talking about Black Friday deals or turkey sales. With more than $290 million in ticket sales, it became the most successful Thanksgiving weekend in Hollywood history.
Most of the credit can be given to “Breaking Dawn Part 2,” “Skyfall” and “Lincoln,” which were the three most profitable, respectively and unsurprisingly.
But in the midst of vampires, secret agents, and past presidents were two key characters: an Indian boy stranded in the middle of the Pacific and a Bengal tiger, the stars of director Ang Lee’s newest film, “Life of Pi.”
The movie is a faithful adaptation of Yann Martel’s 2002 bestselling novel, telling the story of Piscine Molitor Patel, who gives himself the nickname “Pi” as a child. As an adult, Pi narrates his tale to a writer hoping to hear a story “that will make you believe in God.”
He recalls his unique childhood growing up in his father’s zoo and experimenting with multiple religions. These encounters with nature and faith foreshadow Pi’s epic battle for survival, when the ship taking Pi and his family from India to Canada tragically sinks, leaving Pi stranded in a lifeboat with a few of his father’s zoo animals. Hunger quickly gets the best of most of the animals, and soon the recent orphan is left alone with a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker.
It is difficult to encounter a more static movie setting than a solitary lifeboat in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Considering the ever more frequent use of intense action sequences, the setting in “Life of Pi” is abnormal and risky. Since 75 percent of the film takes place in a watery wasteland, there is a real potential for the movie to take a similar course to Pi’s boat and go nowhere fast. Fortunately, director Ang Lee keeps the audience captivated with the story and visual effects.
A good portion of the movie surrounds Pi attempting to keep himself occupied, lest he go mad from isolation. This in itself is a difficult feat, portrayed brilliantly by newcomer Suraj Sharma, and it is even harder to make compelling on film. Yet Pi’s conversations with himself and Richard Parker are easily enough to entertain audiences.
Immediately following the ship’s sinking, Pi’s primary concern is not becoming the tiger’s next meal. Still, even when the two begin to trust each other, it isn’t because of some magical change in one or the other. There is a certain quality that makes their relationship believable – that is, if anyone ever got stranded in the middle of the Pacific with a carnivorous cat.
The role of religion in the movie is a refreshing touch in a time of characteristically secular movies. There is no endorsement of a single religion, but rather a combination of Hindu, Christian and Muslim beliefs that give Pi hope when he has nothing left. At times, he is openly and understandably frustrated with God for his impossible situation, but his childlike faith and trust in God keep him fighting for a return to civilization.
Possibly the best part of the film is its incredible visual imagery. The 3-D effects are artistic and not overly exaggerated, the way 3-D should always be used, as opposed to a scheme to get a few extra bucks out of a movie ticket. While most shots are of the ocean, Lee adds variety with various sea creatures, dazzling sunsets and intense thunderstorms that show nature’s violence and beauty. His visual expertise gives otherworldly elements to the scenery, at times eliminating the horizon alltogether. By day, Pi’s lifeboat drifts through reflected clouds. By night, it floats in a sea of stars.
For a film focused on one person, “Life of Pi” has an incredible amount of emotion and potentially risky techniques. Yet Lee pulls it off in a heart-tugging tale of beauty, faith and survival. Does it make viewers believe in God? Possibly, but not probably. Will it make the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences believe in 3-D again? Much more likely.
