License:
Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike

by Blender Dumbass

Aka: J.Y. Amihud. A Jewish by blood, multifaceted artist with experience in film-making, visual effects, programming, game development, music and more. A philosopher at heart. An activist for freedom and privacy. Anti-Paternalist. A user of Libre Software. Speaking at least 3 human languages. The writer and director of the 2023 film "Moria's Race" and the lead developer of it's game sequel "Dani's Race".

It is funny that I was just watching Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets while drinking Valerian. I was pissed at Luc Besson because I just watched and reviewed The Fifth Element. That review was more of a ramble about my theory surrounding his personal life. Which ties in neatly into the message of the film "Love". But for some reason I completely forgot to talk about it's qualities. Which I suppose this review will fix. I will compare the two grand space-operas from Luc Besson. And hopefully we will learn something in the process.

When it comes to visual effects, Valerian beats The Fifth Element. But that is only because the two films came out in completely different eras of film-making. The Fifth Element came our when computer graphics were a new thing. And a lot of the visuals were still done the old way. With miniatures, prosthetics and matte-paintings. There is computer-graphics but it is rather primitive by today's standards. In one shot, in The Fifth Element you can even see a mask around a space-ship, because the black levels of the space itself were not properly aligned.

Valerian on the other hand was done in 2017 which is already after Avatar and it is even closer to Avatar 2 when it comes to the release date. So obviously Besson has a lot more new cool tech to play around with. And he uses a lot of new cool tech.

If "the perfect being" Leeloo in The Fifth Element was just a girl with weird eyebrows and a strongly colored hair. The sexy aliens in this film are computer-generated motherfuckers using the same tech as in Avatar, performance capture. Even the same people who did Avatar did the creatures in this film Weta Digital.

I even have a theory that James Cameron got somewhat inspired by the look of the sexy aliens in Valerian for the Met Kaina clan in Avatar 2. And based on the interviews with Luc Besson, Cameron apparently was somewhat involved. Even probably nudging Besson into making this picture in 3D.

Yes, while The Fifth Element has only a 2D version, Valerian has also a 3D one. But to be frank the 3D version is not very good. I saw the 3D version in the cinema back in 2017. First of all my brain hurt a lot after the film ended ( which didn't happen on Avatar 2 or Alita: Battle Angel ), but the 3D itself was strange.

First of all, they post converted the shots of actors. The CGI stuff was thankfully rendered in 3D, which makes it look fantastic for the most part. But the shots of actors looked strangely stupid. At one point the person doing the masking did such a terrible job, that it looked like a part of the background is stuck ( 3-dimentionally ) to one of the faces.

But the worst offender when it comes to 3D in this film, is that 3D in this film kills the scale completely. When you watch a space opera movie like Valerian you want to be completely overwhelmed by the scale of everything. If you watch it in 2D on a huge screen, the film delivers some amazing imagery. But as soon as you switch to 3D the film starts to look small. Something about the eye-separation values made everything look like a toy. I was starring at a huge screen ( technically speaking ) but the space-ships, instead of looking huge and imposing, looked like scaled down models. They were close to my face, but they were the size of a basketball.

I suspect Besson wanted to crank the 3D-ness of the film a bit harder in some of those shots. And that means separating the eyes more. Ah... wait... I just realized that some of the people reading this might not understand how 3D movies work.

You have 2 eyes. They are not in the exact same spot. They are something like 7 cm apart from one another. If you can shoot 2 images from 2 cameras, at about 7cm apart. And then project one image into one eye and another image into another eye, you can trick the brain into seeing the frame in 3D. The slight change between the two images provides enough data to your brain, so you could understand how far away something is.

Now, you could also shoot a shot with 2 cameras farther than 7 cm or closer than 7 cm. And that will also technically work. Just the scale of the image will be different and the perception of 3D will be weaker or stronger. Basically, if you want the 3D-ness to be stronger ( more depth ) you need to move the eyes further apart, creating more differences between the two images, which also makes the objects look smaller.

Besson probably wanted to increase 3D-ness in a lot of the shots until he felt that it was good enough for him. But due to not having any prior experience with 3D. And due to James Cameron being far away. Luc Besson over 3D'd the film. Making things look too small.

If you look at, say, Avatar 2 in 3D in cinema. You see that Cameron knows his eye-separation values. He's got the science dialed in just right. And the stuff looks properly huge on the screen. In Valerian you feel like you are watching toys.

Of course non of that concerns people who want to watch the movie on the flat TV screen at home. And the visuals of the movie are solid, when it comes to 2D experience.

When it comes to shot compositions and stuff, I believe it is one of the best directed Luc Besson movies. Being such an expensive project, a lot of the future of both Besson and his ( at the time ) company Europa Corp. was hanging on this movie. So he worked his ass off crafting some of the coolest shots of his career. He goes full on auteur film-maker in this movie, with long oners and complex staging and other cool little things that only other director will find interesting. His flow in this film is immaculate. There is even a whole sequence that happens in multiple realities in the same time and Besson directs the shit out of it. Using this opportunity for some interesting cinema.

Compared to this film, The Fifth Element is surprisingly boring when it comes to directing. There is a lot of awesome VFX work ( like the futuristic city ), but the film uses borderline uninspired shots. Especially compared to Valerian. A lot of The Fifth Element is shot in closeups. And a lot of those closeups never change the camera position. I'm not saying that The Fifth Element is badly directed. It has a lot of Besson's flare to it. And a lot of this kind of French comedy vibe. But we are asking if Valerian is better. And directing-wise it is.

Script-wise ( both scripts were written by Besson ) while Valerian technically has a more coherent story, The Fifth Element works better. On The Fifth Element Besson hired Jean-Claude Mézières as the concept artist for the film. And Jean-Claude is known for his French comics which he did with Pierre Christin back in 1967 called Valérian and Laureline. The film is technically a live action adaptation of the comics, while The Fifth Element used Besson's own stream of consciousness.

On one side, because Valerian is based on a pre-existing story, it can draw a lot of the characters and concepts from those comic-books. Creating a rich world full of interesting stuff. And Besson does that very thing. But on the other hand that richness impeding on the focus of the movie. The Fifth Element being much simpler ( plot-wise ) makes it much more emotionally satisfying. While Valerian almost feels like Star Wars prequels with all the inter-galactic politics involved. c:0

In a way both films have the same exact emotional core. Or at the very least they both strive for the same exact message. That message being "Love". The first film makes "Love" this great weapon that literally kills the "evil". In Valerian it is a bit more complicated.

Valerian ( Dane DeHaan ) and Laureline ( Cara Delevingne ) are sort of kind of space police partners that are also coincidentally dating each-other. And in the beginning of the film Valerian proposes to Laureline, which she doesn't even take seriously. Ultimately introducing a kernel from which the message of the movie supposedly will grow.

Here is what bothering me. Laureline is sort of a rule breaker type rebellious character, while Valerian supposed to be this kind of by the book soldier boy. And the emotional development Besson is going for, is that through love Valerian will be more rule-breaking and more rebellious. Because Laureline ( at the emotional climax ) tells him something along the lines of "love breaks all boundaries, legal and logical"... and stuff like that. Of course Besson would write that sort of thing ( look at my review of The Fifth Element ).

What bothers me is that the film isn't actually showing those characteristics a lot in the film. When they refuse to give the MacGuffin creature to the commander ( breaking rules ) both of them broke the rules equally. And the whole "playlist" thing suggests that Valerian is the playful rebellious type ( he sees a lot of women, which he puts into a "playlist" so to speak ) and Laureline being the "more by the book" lady, wants him to love just her alone.

And to be frank it could all be fine. Characters could be more complex and it is a good thing. But it is kind of weird the the film is trying to base its message then on something that is false about the characters. And even weirder, the point at which the speech by Laureline comes in, comes after Valerian shows a huge rebellious move. He literally hits the commander in charge ( a higher ranking officer ) on the face. And then suddenly snaps into "I'm a by the book soldier-boy" mode out of nowhere. What the fuck?

Like there is an attempt at building some sort of chemistry. Some of sort of intrigue. He gets in trouble and she saves him. But he is unable to say "thank you" so she is now pissed, which leads her into trouble and he needs to save her. And so on and so forth. It is good stuff. But all this stuff is wasted on some halfassed attempt at a message, which doesn't even relate to the plot of the film. The political plot is not about love. It's about genocide. What the fuck love ( between a girl and a boy ) has to do with stopping the genocide? I mean there is an attempt. Her argument in the film is something like: if you love me, you will break all the rules for the love. And I'm asking you to break the rules ( and the chain of command ) to stop genocide. But in order to make this message Besson needs to break the characters. At least he could have plotted the movie a bit more carefully to make it work.

By no means The Fifth Element's script is golden in comparison. There is also an attempt to build chemistry between Leeloo and Korben and there also almost nothing works. The film wastes too much of its runtime on clever funny gags and stuff, to build any meaningful chemistry between them. The best it comes to is him telling her that the mission is dangerous ( trying to explain that he is there to protect her ) and she says that he has nothing to worry about. She is there and she will protect him. Which is, in a way, also just a joke.

Like if you compare both attempts to Leon: The Professional ( which Besson also written and directed ) in Leon the chemistry is through the roof. You actually fucking care for them. You are actually scared for them. In The Fifth Element you just go on a ride of funny bullshit, which somehow arrives at some out-of-nowhere wannabe profound bullshit in the end. In Valerian there is a very good attempt at chemistry, but it is wasted on a out-of-nowhere wannabe profound bullshit.

Time and time again I see a Luc Besson film and I wander. What if he did hire a writer? A good writer. Like what other directors do. I'm not even asking him to give the writer full credit. Just keep an eye on small stupid inconsistencies like that. Because most of the stuff Besson writes is good stuff. It's just all of it seems a bit rough. A bit unfinished. As if one more rewrite would do the job to finish it off for good. One more person on the team ( to question certain bullshit ) would do the magic. You know what I mean? c:1

It almost seems like his best script ( Leon ) turned out good just because it involved a child actor, and certain things needed to be rewritten or outright deleted to please the parents. So maybe it forced Besson to streamline the hell out of it. At the very least Natalie Portman's mom was somewhat involved in pointing out the bullshit.

Happy Hacking!!!

0

Find this post on Mastodon

Find

  Troler c:0




Come to think of it, I seemed to have enjoyed Moria's race so much due to it having a simple plot. Also it was a short movie... not much room for complicated story beats.

  Troler c:1




What my sparse film-making experience has taught me, it is beneficial to have eyes on your work. Take the bomb plot I wrote. If not for your insight, I would not have seen the plot-holes.

Post