Movie Review: Madagascar 3

By Galya Dimitrova

The key word for describing Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted is ACTION!

If you have watched the first two episodes, you had probably notoced that the pace is not so fast, the story is well developed and the humour is guaranteed. I am a bit confused how to define those elements in the third part. Everything is happenning way too fast! There are are a number of credits I can give to the movie before I start pointing out the obvious disadvantages.

1) First of all, I can definitely congratulate the script writers about the choise of the villain. So far we have seen only animals in that role. In this movie the villain is not only a man, it is a woman. Captain Chantel DuBois from Monaco Animal Control’s office is a fascinating characted full of energy and determination to add Alex’s head as a trophy to her collection. This strange combination of a animals’protector and hunter at the same time makes her a really complicated character. What is more, her calm crueal voice gives her a certain creepyness we have not seen in Madagascar so far. She really stands out among the mindless fossa from the first movie and the evil but unpersistent Makunga from Escape to Africa. When DuBois sets a goal, she is ready to fulfil it at all costs. She is organised and obsessed. She is something entirely new for the movie. It is true that it doesn’t entirely lack evil female presence – Nana was a good antagonist. But she can hardly be called a main villain. Her role is more of a supposting one, though. While Captain Dubois is really what the movie needed. She is a villain who goes way further than the others. She is not content with minor achievements. In other words – she is approved.

2) Vitaly’s story – the story about the circus tiger rise and fall is told really movingly. It is not as tragic as Alex’s for example but it does refer to a great loss. It was touching to see such an apparently tough character pressed under the burden of his painful past. And besides, it was nice to witness the story of someone not connected in any way to the main heroes f0r a change.

3) Gia – finally a love obkect for Alex has been included. It was a logical development after his escape from the zoo and the meeting with his parents. They turn out to be a very successful couple because of their love for freedom and wilderness. They are both also very creative – Alex is a dancer and Gia – a circus acrobat. The next step should be Marty to find a girl, too, otherwise he might end up the only loner in the gang.

Now the weak point in the movie (according to my opinion only):

1) The moment when the gang got from Africa to Monaco just got me confused right away. How did that happen?? In the first moment Alex has a nightmare that they have been left forever by the chimpanzees and the penguins and in the next they are already in Monaco to find them! I mean this is with an acute disagreement with the previous two films. The adventure of Alex and his gang is first and foremost a travel, a journey during which they are supposed to discover their real self, namely that they are wild animals, theat they belong to the nature, not to the civilization. The second movie pictures it perfectly. After they have experienced a due to the change of the environment in the first movie they found out that in Africa they feel at home because this is where they come from. And what happenes in this movie – out of the blue they decide to give up everything they have there and get back to New York. Just like that – no real reason, no further explanations, no goodbye and they literally just appear in Monaco! Just how did that happen! They even skipped the travel part which is one of the milestones in the movie! That really surprised me but not in а nice way. They spared all the hilarious moments that journeys offered in the other 2 parts which I do not regard as a plus.

2) Sonya – the ferocious circus bear King Julien suddenly falls in love with. But what is that creature’s role apart from being revolting anyway? We are shouwn a number of moments where an obvious contrast between the beautiful and the ugly (Rome and Sonya) has been established. I simply cannot figure out why. They are hardly funny, have not much contribution to the storyline, not to mention that the part where we see Sonya eating can really make you sick. I have the feeling this character has not been developed in the way it should have. As we see it, it is merely a caricature in the middle of the movie; a non-talking grotesque whose role is supposed to be Julien’s love object but in the end, it is something the public just makes fun of. I almost feel sorry for her not because she is ugly, but because she has no specific role, there is almost no point in her appearance. The was a similar character like her in the second movie – Teetsi, the hideous-looking muscular lion. His and Sonya’s characters have much in common – they are presented as brainless but crual animals; they are mentally slow but physically very strong and merciless. The role of Teetsi was to expose Alex as a lion unworthy of the role of the pride leader. That was a turning point in the movie. Whereas Sonya just fools around and evokes our disgust. I, personally, could really do without her.

3) the penguins – their role has been limited. They are no longer the main sourses of witty jokes and hilarious punch lines. Why did they include them here at all? To reduce their role so much was like to delete half of the movie. I must say I really miss them because what they offer us in this movie is not the penguins any more. No black humour, no “brilliant” plans, hardly any explosions Face it: the penguins are GONE!

4) what strikes me the most is the strange almost random decisions the gang makes in this movie. They did not use to change their mind so fast. Before: at least half an hour from the fist movie shows their planning to escape from the zoo and preparations for it, there was a lot of hesitation and plenty of obstacles before it actually happened, then the whole rest of it they spent in Madagascar; in the second movie they land in Africa on their way to New York and after a while a while they firmly decide this is where they want to stay because African wilderness is where they belong to – they are here the whole movie long and the end does not suggest they will leave at all. What happenes in Madagascar 3: Africa is suddenly no longer a place for them to stay -> they just appear in Monaco to pick up the penguins and the monkeys -> next they are a part of a circus -> in Italy at some point -> somehow they get back to New York simply to realise they do not want to live in the zoo anymore ->  back to the circus. All this in one single movie. A bit too fast and random for Madagascar? At least for me – yes.

Overall, humour is sacrificed for the sake of more action and effects. I believe Madagascar is more about situations and experiences than about speed and chasing all the time. It is difficult for me to understand why Europe’s Most Wanted is a bigger success than the previous two movies. Maybe this is what the audiences wanted to see in the first place. Still, if there is going to be a fourth film, the directors might want to slow down the pace of the story just a little bit. Even only for the sake of those of us who prefer the slower but better told two movies beforehand.