I am so thankful for being a 90s kid and being able to own VHS copies of the Disney renaissance movies. That decade is still regarded as Disney’s best work and is looked back upon very fondly, and it was in this decade that one of my all-time favorite animated movies was released: Mulan. When the live-action remake was announced, I got excited and was thrilled to see one of my favorite characters come to life, and I finally got to watch my most anticipated Disney movie in years.
And it sucked. I don’t like it. I really, really, really don’t like this movie. After this, I have no more faith in these live-action remakes. I’ve tolerated them despite their problems, but this was the last straw for me. At least Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin pretty much stayed to the original movie’s script so it wouldn’t mess things up too bad, but this tried a different approach. Though I would have welcomed a different take on the story like Pete’s Dragon and The Jungle Book did, this new take brought dishonor on you, dishonor on your cow, and dishonor on your whole family! (Just to make you aware: there’s no Mushu in the remake. Yes, really.) Now that I got that off my chest, let’s go into why you should watch the 90s classic instead of this “de-make.” First off, if this really is a remake or a retelling, then the story completely missed the point of the original. I’ve been told that this new version is supposed to represent the original story, but I’m pretty sure there wasn't a Phoenix following Mulan around everywhere (and doing absolutely nothing...even the cricket from the original movie was more useful), and that all of China was threatened by a sorceress who could make her soldiers run up walls like anime warriors. Sorry, no, it’s not more “realistic” to the original story. In fact, the cartoon is more realistic than the “live-action” version. This more fantastical rendition takes away what made the original special to begin with: Mulan being a normal human being, taking on an army of China’s most feared villains, without the help of extraordinary abilities. Both movies centered around female empowerment, but both have completely different executions. In one version, Mulan could take the same amount of punishment as the guys, and she wasn’t any better than them physically. She was more cunning and clever, which enabled her to achieve her accomplishments. In the other version, she overcomes her challenges by using her "chi." Her chi enables her to basically become a Jedi knight, defying gravity and gaining superhuman strength at any given time. This results in a victory earned through sheer luck, since no one else in China’s army is even remotely close to her power level. It’s so frustrating to see one of my favorite childhood heroes, who showed that anyone can do amazing things when they pour their heart into their mission, not earn their accomplishments by pushing themselves to their limits. I really hate comparing two films from two different visionaries, but in this case, I find it necessary. I should be cheering on the protagonist of the movie to keep pushing themselves even against the odds, not sitting around for two hours waiting for them to have an inevitable victory. Obviously, most movies almost guarantee their protagonists will win at the end, but the audience should be wondering how they will win and not have the answer given to them literally in the first five minutes of the story. Ok, so the movie’s message falls flat when compared to the original. Is it still enjoyable? I certainly think it has its moments. I’ve always loved the Asian aesthetic, and this movie certainly has that, since parts of it were filmed in China. It’s a great looking film, with rich reds and fantastic set designs. The visual effects can be hit-or-miss which really surprised me, considering how much money was put into this motion picture. The aforementioned Phoenix can appear very fake in some shots, making the whole symbolism behind the mythological bird seem very cheesy and unnecessary. The battles and the CGI-effects in them are convincing enough, but honestly, I wish they had more practical kung-fu fighting. Heck, they cast Donnie Yen in this movie, whose martial arts skills are extremely impressive, and he only gets to swing a sword around, displaying his swordsmanship by slicing and dicing…the air. What was even the point of hiring him? They could’ve gotten someone a lot cheaper to swing a sword around in front of the camera. Due to Mulan’s "chi," the fights, though admittedly entertaining, are just not very memorable, as she utilizes her powers instead of her skills. At times, this movie can be very exciting, but there were a lot of missed opportunities to showcase the skill and intelligence of this legendary soldier. Speaking of Donnie Yen, the cast is quite good. Each actor gives a great performance, possibly thinking in the back of their minds how important this movie would be to the younger viewers. Liu Yifei does a great job of portraying this tough-as-nails rendition of the Disney “princess.” However, her seriousness made me laugh out loud in a key scene because of how over-the-top it was. This is by no means a criticism of the actress; I blame the cheesy acting on director Niki Caro, who instructed Yifei to do what she did. I believe the direction of this movie holds back Yifei, as I can see her talent for acting shine in other places of the movie. She isn’t the only one held back by the production of this film. Her co-stars also are hindered. As talented as these actors are, I feel like they weren’t given scenes to really showcase their acting ability. Sure, there were funny and even touching moments, but more often than not those moments were reflections (see what I did there?) of the original film. Because of those scenes’ similarities, it’s not as captivating because it invokes a sense of deja vu, which leads to “oh I’ve seen this before” moments. This resulted in boredom for me because I knew what to expect. The new scenes focus primarily on Mulan and her struggle to keep her femininity a secret, which doesn’t help us connect to the supporting characters since we’re not given time to fully understand them. Overall, you can definitely see the effort being put on display, but ultimately, the performances aren’t memorable due to the movie’s lack of opportunities for the characters to grow and become lovable. But thank goodness we have those new Phoenix shots scattered throughout the whole movie to make up for it! Forget character development. More CGI birds please! The latest remake from Disney falls flat for me. As the minutes rolled by, my mind kept racing back towards the original and how much better the scenes were played out, especially the ending. After failing to fully defeat the Huns and being abandoned by her peers, Mulan pushed herself harder than before, and due to her craftiness and training, she was able to overcome the impossible odds and save China. Her victory was earned, and when the nation bowed to her, they essentially bowed to someone who you and I probably pass by while shopping at a store or walking in a park. She was a mere woman, without any special abilities, yet she managed to triumph in what seemed a hopeless situation. Mulan’s story of overcoming expectations still resonates with me and so many others after all of these years. Thankfully, we still have the original version accessible, and I have no doubt it will continue to inspire new generations. I really wish the remake was as inspired by the original as I still am today.
0 Comments
It’s Halloween, and what does that mean for a movie-watching fella like me? Why, it means my family is actually willing to watch a scary movie with me! It seems like every year we find a new scary movie to check out, and for this year, we discovered a movie called Underwater. So, let’s “dive” right in and see if it’s any good.
Right off the bat, we are given little time to know what’s going on before things start exploding, and that, to me, is a great way to open up a scary, sci-fi monster feature. Here’s the lowdown: a corporation has built a massive drilling base at the bottom of the Mariana Trench (the deepest known part of the ocean), and lo and behold, there’s something scary swimming around the station. Some of the crew (which consists of the likes of Kristen Stewart and T.J. Miller) manage to find their way to each other, and they try to find a way out of the station and back to the surface as fast as they can before things explode even more. It’s a simple premise, and that’s the way I like my monster movie--skip the fluff and get to the scary stuff. And this movie does not waste time. With it being an hour and a half long, the constant intensity is not as exhausting as it might seem at first. There are a few moments sprinkled throughout the story where the characters stop and take a breather before continuing on their dangerous task. It’s like a roller coaster. There are intense moments, but then there are calm moments...that eventually lead to more intense moments. For those looking for an exciting and fast-paced movie for the holiday, I think this is a good one. It kept me entertained from start to finish, and I had a lot of fun watching the crew trying to survive the harsh, claustrophobic and watery environment. It’s a lot like Aliens now that I think about it, but ultimately, I think I will watch Underwater again before watching Aliens, because I feel as though the latter had more fluff. As I’ve established, I want the fluff skipped, and Underwater knows what it wants to do and doesn’t hesitate to do it. Although the execution is done very well for the most part with high production value and impressive visual effects, there are a couple of parts that may have benefitted with some more planning. For instance, there were two instances where the camera moved around so quickly that it was hard to tell who was getting hurt and where everybody was. This may have been the point, in order to convey a sense of confusion and distortion, but it seemed as though the camera was trying to focus on a subject, making it rather difficult to follow what the director wanted us to see and understand. I got so disoriented that I completely gave up on trying to follow along and waited until the scene was over to know who lived and who died. Additionally, some scenes could have used some clarity via lights or visual cues. I know the story takes place in the darkest depth of the ocean where visibility is impossible, but again, it seemed as though the camera wanted us to see something but couldn’t properly show what was on screen. Perhaps it was my TV and my settings, but I have never had a problem like this before with any other movie. Other than these few instances, I was really impressed with the production value. It seemed like a lot of money went into the visuals, and I can’t think of a single moment when I thought something looked fake. Obviously, the sea monsters are fake, but they looked strikingly real, probably due to the lack of lighting which masked the details on it. When the movie does show off its visuals with some wide shots, it’s impressive. It’s pretty refreshing to see a scary movie with an ocean-sized budget instead of another low-cost movie that takes place inside of a haunted house or in the woods. In this movie, the setting is unique, and the visuals are glorious, making it one of the most memorable films in the genre. The cast is pretty good and fit their roles well, though it is your typical horror movie group. There’s the brave hero that survives the longest, the smart one who comes up with a plan, the always frightened one, and the comic relief. There’s not a lot of character depth for these actors to explore, but never did I feel like they were cheesy or too over-the-top. T.J. Miller does have some out-of-place jokes here and there, especially one that seemed more appropriate for the inappropriate Deadpool movies, but for the most part, his humor does help balance the seriousness with the outlandishness of the story. There was one other humorous part that I felt was out-of-place as well. I am not a fan of slapstick comedy in a scary movie. It’s just a bit too cartoony for a movie focused on making the monsters and the scares feel real. Aside from these oddities, I thought the cast did great, though the story didn’t allow them to express much outside of being brave, determined, and scared. It’s very apparent that Underwater was heavily influenced by a certain other sci-fi horror movie that starred a strong female protagonist trapped in a station secluded by darkness, and honestly, despite the lack of originality, the movie worked for me. It was an enjoyable movie that kept me tense and startled me every now and then. It’s a movie that knows exactly what its point is and goes for it, leaving a big splash, and I highly recommend checking it out for Halloween, especially if you’re in the mood for something different. In the first novel to feature Sherlock Holmes, A Study in Scarlet, the famous detective said, “There is nothing new under the sun. It has all been done before.” This quote from 1887 (and even centuries before, since it originated from the book of Ecclesiastes) pretty much sums up every movie and TV show, and ironically enough, every retelling of the adventures of Sherlock Holmes. Netflix, though, has at least tried to shake things up a bit in the latest movie about the detective, and this time the story is about his sister, Enola.
The story is about Enola trying to find her missing mother but unraveling a conspiracy in the process. All the while, she’s being told to stop because she’s just a little girl, but being the sister of Sherlock means she probably has undying determination to solve whatever problem is in front of her. Sure enough, she does, and against the wishes of everyone around her including her brother, she sets off. Along the way, she meets a runaway boy, and the pair have to work together to solve the mystery and outrun anyone trying to get in their way, including some bad guys. To be honest, I found this story rather forgettable, but it was enjoyable. It has an old-school child adventure feel, akin to The Goonies, The Hardy Boys, and Nancy Drew. I remember reading The Hardy Boys, but I don’t remember the adventures. To me, that’s ok. It is perfectly fine for a film like Enola Holmes to be a cutesy mystery adventure with no lasting impact, because this could be some kid’s introduction to Sherlock Holmes, the mystery thriller genre, or the adventure genre, and they start to explore more stories like this one. Don’t get me wrong. It’s a well-made movie, with great costume designs, exciting sequences, and fantastic acting, especially from the lead actress Millie Bobby Brown, but the story, much like most adventures targeted to children, won’t be remembered for very long. Millie Bobby Brown isn’t the only highlight in this movie. With the likes of Henry Cavill, Helena Bonham Carter, and many others in supporting roles, expect some great performances throughout the film (and also the buffest Sherlock ever). Everyone does a good job of being serious as if they were in a classic Holmes tale, but when necessary, they can put on the charm and remind us that we’re watching a children’s film. I will say though that Cavill is a lot more serious than the other performers, and it seems hard for him to have a little more fun in the role and be a tad bit goofy like some of the other actors. I try not to compare actors who have played similar roles, but after seeing Robert Downey, Jr. and Benedict Cumberbatch balance the seriousness and dry humor of the character, Cavill doesn’t stand out to me. Thankfully, most of the screen time is on the ever-delightful Millie Brown. She clearly had a blast as the optimistic and mischievous Enola, playing out the character with a lot of wit and confidence. She helps sell every twist and turn, and she even made me laugh a time or two in very difficult situations that most actors would have a hard time making funny (even Will Ferrell struggled in making Sherlock Holmes funny). She is an incredibly talented actress, and I hope she continues to find roles that allow her to have as much fun as she does in this movie. The look of this movie also reminds me of The Hardy Boys and The Goonies. Not so much the time setting, but the nostalgic, old-timey feel is very much present in Enola Holmes. Unlike the Sherlock or Elementary shows, this story goes back to the roots of Sherlock and puts Enola in the late 1800s, a time when men wore dashing suits and women wore big, poofy dresses. The filmmakers did a great job recreating a late 19th century London, though it does help that a lot of monuments and buildings haven’t changed for over a century. For me, it’s always fun to try out different time periods for different genres. In this case, they took a child adventurer, which we’ve seen well over a dozen times by now, and puts her in a setting with no cell phones, no internet, and no jeans or t-shirts. It was refreshing to see this trope use the resources of that era. With beautiful landscape shots and great set designs, this movie is like looking into an old painting and seeing art represent a bygone time period. Enola Holmes is a fun filled yet forgettable adventure, much like its predecessors. It’s hard to recreate the iconic stories and writings of one of literature’s most beloved crime stoppers, but for what it’s worth, it’s a great introduction for younger viewers looking to get into mysteries, thrillers, and adventures. If she’s lucky, Enola may return again and perhaps step out from her big brother’s shadow, but for now, this is a nice little story for kids to experience what many generations have enjoyed for over a century--seeing another case get solved. It’s time for another Rapid Fire Review, and this one is brought to you by the love I have for my newly engaged fiancé who forced me to watch the High School Musical trilogy. Love truly does make one do questionable things...(sigh) let’s get this over with.
HSM: Hoo boy could I smell the cheesiness of this movie, and as it turns out, some people like cheesy (like my fiancé, apparently), which is why there are THREE of these movies (seriously?!). I will say the choreography was pretty good. It was very entertaining and quite impressive at times, especially with the basketballs incorporated into the dances (I don’t even want to know how many takes there were for those camera shots.). The story is about as fantastical as Disney’s fairy tales. I mean, the hottest girl in school is unpopular? And the best playing jock on the basketball team is bullied for his interest in theater? Oh please. Like that actually happens. At least Ashley Tisdale plays a realistic artsy girl (I can testify that girls like her exist, being in the entertainment industry and all.), and she does it quite comedically. Of course, her punchy wit and humorous delivery is probably the result from doing a stellar performance on The Suite Life of Zack and Cody, so I’ll give the movie props for allowing her to have moments to shine. However, Tisdale isn’t enough reason for me to watch this one again. If I want cheesy goodness, I’ll fix me a grilled cheese and not watch teens sing about their first-world country problems. HSM2: Out of this entire trilogy, this movie put a song in my head that refuses to leave. And it won’t. Stop. REPEATING. I want faaaabulOUS, that is my simple request. All things faaaabulOUS, bigger and better and beeest! Is it possible to remove memories? Because that would be a little faaaabulOUS. Is that so wrong? HSM3: I completely zoned out while watching this movie that, when I returned to Earth, two of the main characters turned into kids, and I turned to my fiancé and asked, “Wait, is this a time travel movie?” She said no, and I lost all interest again, so I returned to my zoning out state. I honestly remember nothing aside from that. Maybe it’s a masterpiece? Or maybe it’s not! I’ll let you take that risk and tell me your thoughts on it in the comments section. Well, I did it! I watched all three High School Musicals, and they are about what I expected and exactly why I wanted to avoid watching them. If this is what I had to endure as a fiancé, I’m scared of what lies in store for me after I’m married. Wish me luck. Does this even count as a movie review? Eh, I don’t know, but I don’t care. This “movie” is too much fun not to talk about!
Disney+ has dropped the hit Broadway hip-hop musical Hamiton on its streaming platform, just in time for the 4th of July. The story centers around Alexander Hamilton, one of the lesser-known Founding Fathers of the United States. We witness Hamilton’s rise to stature in the colonies to his career as a politician after signing the Declaration of Independence, as well as his family life. It’s not as boring as it sounds. This isn’t like your high school history class. This retelling of history is fast, frantic, exciting, and really quite an impressive production as a whole. Quite frankly, I’m impressed with how invested in the story I was, considering the premise sounds like another school lesson. Instead, the music explores the thoughts, dreams, and desires of not only Hamilton but the people around him as well. There’s a really amazing part where they show a scenario and then rewind it to show it from someone else’s point-of-view. That moment really stuck out to me because I haven’t seen a musical do that. It was very clever, and it’s moments like that that made the performances so memorable, giving each character some unique moment to flex their vocal talents and acting abilities. Because I wasn’t familiar with Hamilton or the people in his life, everything that was shown was fresh to me, and there were a couple of shocking moments that made me quite curious if it actually happened. Like Togo, this story encouraged me to research history and have fun while doing it. A musical is only as strong as its music, and wow, this soundtrack is addictive! That might be a weird way to describe it, but it’s true. I’ve listened to the soundtrack many times after watching the movie. One of my personal favorite songs is called Dear Theodosa. It’s almost a lullaby, and it is performed beautifully. The lyrics tugged on my heart and made me emotional because it presented the American Dream in such a unique and heartfelt way that, I think, most people can relate to. Of course, most of the songs are hip-hop and rap, and one song that stood out for me personally was Satisfied. I was mesmerized by not only the lyrics and composition, but also the vocal talents of the actress. She could seamlessly go from the traditional Broadway belting to rapping at a hundred miles an hour, and it was an amazing display of musical talent. Everyone is going to have their personal favorite song from this musical because of how different they are, but one thing that was really impressive was the incorporation of character themes throughout the musical, despite how much each song stands out on its own. For example, Hamilton will every now and then quote his signature song My Shot during other songs, conveying to the audience his important moments. It reminded me of Star Wars, how character themes will indicate important moments like how Darth Vader’s theme is loud and triumphant during his attacks but turns quiet and sad when he dies. It is a musical that demands your attention with its exemplary excellence, and you will be more than happy to give it. The cinematography is something I think will either be appreciated or shunned depending on the individual. On the one hand, the multiple cameras allow the viewers to see different angles of the show that they couldn’t before, and we even get close ups of the actors during pivotal moments. On the other hand, musical performances such as this are made for your peripheral vision, taking in all of the choreography, set designs, lighting, and the experience in one view, and it seems as though they did exactly that. I’m not 100% sure of this, but it seems like they performed the musical like it was originally intended, in front of a live audience. However, due to the close ups and different angles, viewers can only catch glimpses of what is happening on stage at any given time. I understand why they did it. Watching a single shot of a musical that is over two hours might be quite boring and uninteresting, but I think the show should have been adapted for those multiple cameras. Live performances, especially big and extravagant ones such as Hamilton, put a lot of meticulous thought and artistic flare into how to give the best viewing experience for the audience, and it’s hard to appreciate all of the show’s intricate details without actually being at the performance. Despite the camerawork that hampers the Broadway experience, Hamilton is an amazing work of art that captivates you as soon as it starts. You’ll experience a fun-filled emotional roller coaster ride through history that you will remember for quite a while. Oh, if only I had this musical when I was in history class, then the American Revolution exam would have probably been easier! Ever since I began subscribing to Disney+, I kept noticing a movie that looked intriguing, a movie called Togo. All I knew about it was that William Defoe co-stars with a dog, and there was going to be a lot of snow. With theaters closed, I turned to streaming services to curb my appetite for new movies, and so, I clicked on Togo, finally satisfying my curiosity about it.
The movie is based on the true story of the Great Race of Mercy in 1925. In Alaska that year, an epidemic swept across the town of Nome, and the antitoxin was...674 miles. Without the aid of planes or snowmobiles, the only way to get the medicine there was via sled dog teams. You may have heard of a dog named Balto. This was the event that made him famous. It was his team that made the final run and got the medicine to the town, but Togo’s team travelled the farthest, 260 miles to be exact. Knowing the true story already, I know how this story would end. The medicine would be delivered, and lives would be saved. What I wasn’t expecting was how much hope it gave me, especially during these times with a worldwide pandemic going on. The world awaits a cure as many people lie sick, overwhelming the hospitals, much like the town of Nome. Seeing the bravery and perseverance of the mushers as they traveled hundreds of miles across snowy fields and forests really moved me, and now knowing what exactly Togo and his team had to endure in order to deliver the medicine left me speechless. I wondered if Disney had exaggerated during a climactic scene, but after doing some research, I was amazed to find out that they didn’t exaggerate. That moment near the end of the film (that I won’t spoil) actually did happen. Togo really did do what the movie showed. That team of dogs did what seemed to me to be impossible, yet they did it. And I’m sure we’ll see something amazing like that happen soon with our pandemic. As for the rest of the film, it plays out like a feel-good dog movie. William Dafoe plays Leonhard Seppala, a supportive husband and sometimes moody musher, especially when his dogs misbehave. Togo is one such dog. We see Togo’s journey from uncontrollable pup to the dog Leonhard relies on most. As a dog lover, the movie throws me a bone by reminding me of my days of raising my dog, seeing him grow up from infancy to his old, gray days, and it also doesn’t have one of my biggest pet peeves when it comes to modern Hollywood: CGI dogs. I absolutely hate CGI dogs; they get under my skin and make me cringe every time I see it. Truthfully, there are CGI dogs in this movie, but they are used very rarely and for stunts that would be too dangerous for real dogs to do. So I’m happy. And because the dogs are living and breathing, it helps sell the emotional weight of the story. William can react accordingly to the dogs, and he certainly sells that he has a bond with the animals through his interactions with them. As heartwarming as a man with his dogs can be, the set-up for the plot can feel like it goes on for hours. At one point, I looked at the clock and was surprised it hadn’t been two hours. This movie has some fluff, and it will take some patience to get to the more exciting moments. However, I certainly think it's worth watching due to how relevant it is now. The cinematography has many moments of beauty. If you’re going to make a movie that takes place in the wilderness of Alaska, you might as well get some incredible shots to show off the gorgeous scenery. With so many movies that rely on green screens and CGI landscapes, it’s refreshing to see an old-school approach to making a big budget movie, utilizing the skills and care of the crew as they film around the environment and the dogs. It’s a beautifully made film, both in its storytelling and in its cinematography. I highly recommend watching this movie as soon as you can. The hope that it gave me was an incredible feeling and helped in making me a little more positive as we all try to get through this pandemic. Like dogs, this movie has a special place in my heart, and I will love it every time I see it. When you went to the theater this past December, did you wish you had gone to see something else other than The Rise Of Skywalker? Yeah, me too. Which is why I watched Spies In Disguise, the latest movie from Ice Age-studio Blue Sky, and oh how I wished I would have seen this instead.
The story pairs up superspy Lance Sterling--played with all of the charisma and confidence that Will Smith could muster--and timid tech geek Walter--played by Hollywood’s favorite new adult-who-looks-and-sounds-like-a-teen-so-lets-cast-him-in-every-teen-role Tom Holland--as they work together to uncover a diabolical scheme that has Agent Lance on the run and framed as a traitor. Right off the bat, this sounds like another Mission:Impossible plot, but this movie adds a twist: Agent Lance gets turned into a pigeon. And yes, there are bird poop jokes. However, this movie pleasantly surprised me. As childish and immature it can be sometimes, Spies In Disguise has quite a bit of violence and talks about the themes of war and hatred. It can be pretty grim, and I’m glad it does. A lot of the violence is played for laughs and is so outlandish that it isn’t taken seriously; it feels mostly like a Bugs Bunny cartoon but with the style of James Bond. But then we see the ramifications of violence and what it does to people, which results in more violence and creates a never-ending cycle of destruction...until someone says “Enough.” It’s a great message, even for adults. 2020 is not off to a great start, and it’s progressively getting worse. I see death on the news. I see friendships ruined on social media. I see so much hatred, bigotry, racism, slander, and cruelty. And I wonder what kind of a world we would live in if we took to heart this movie’s message about kindness and mercy. I’m not sure if this movie would have hit me the same way it did if I had seen it just a few months ago, but today, it made me think about what I could do to help people. If a movie made for kids can make an adult stop and think about what I should be doing with my life, I say this story is worth sharing with your friends and family. I remember the first time I saw the teaser for this movie. I was honestly impressed with the look of it, and I’m glad that it did not disappoint! The animation is enriched with a distinct art style, over-the-top yet well choreographed action scenes, and great use of dramatic lighting and explosive color. I have a problem with modern CG movies: they all look too similar. Disney, Pixar, and DreamWorks can sometimes be indistinguishable, and I would even say Blue Sky is guilty of this. However, Blue Sky allowed themselves to be creative with its character designs and visual flair, resulting in a movie standing out from the competition. The inventiveness of the gadgets also allow the animators to go nuts with their artistry as they try to outdo the outlandishness of each new invention. I was really glued to the screen when the action scenes kicked in. They had a nice balance of intensifying the danger while also incorporating physical humor. I can only imagine that the animators had free reign to do whatever they wanted in each shot while doing their best to stick to the script, and it seems like they had a ton of fun making those scenes. I think though the movie shines (literally) with its use of lighting and color, which is something that is overlooked in movies, but I have to mention it here because their use of flares, reflections, tone, saturation, and palette is really eye-catching and helps compliment the old-school style of spy films with the vibrancy of modern animated movies. It’s a treat for the eyes! With an all-star cast that it has, it’s little wonder why the voice acting is so good throughout the movie. As I already pointed out, Will Smith plays Lance Sterling with all of the charm and bravado that you would expect from him, and he does a great job, especially when Lance’s world changes when he transforms into a pigeon. That’s when we get a more sarcastic and humorous Smith, and he provides some great laughs. Tom Holland also does a great job playing, once again in his career, a nerdy, unconfident teen, but I did appreciate that he changed his voice in this movie, so he didn’t sound too much like his other animated role in Onward. Ben Mendelsohn’s voice is always a pleasure to listen to, even if he plays a villain. Like Scar in The Lion King, he gives us a smooth, evil voice that makes listening to exposition and monologues more tolerable. The supporting cast that consists of Rashida Jones, Karen Gillan, Reba McEntire, and many others also do a great job in their minor yet important roles. It’s a great, fun cast, and they do a fantastic job making these animated characters feel unique. Spies In Disguise is a delightful little film that has a great message and is surprisingly funny for both kids and adults. To be honest, I wasn’t sold on the whole pigeon premise, but after all was said and done, I had a fun time watching this crazy hybrid of spy movies with Saturday morning cartoon shenanigans. If you’re looking for something to make you smile during these bleak times, I suggest this movie, and who knows, maybe you’ll want to save the world after watching it. Did the latest Star Wars movie let you down? Have you come to a place where you can’t tolerate Disney toying with your nostalgia any longer? Well, I’ve got good news for you! There’s another space epic that you can check out: Star Trek! WAIT! Before you go, listen. I get it. Watching Star Trek almost feels like a traitorous act to your beloved space opera, but it’s time to let go. It’s time to embrace something new--something that can’t hurt you. It’s time to boldly go where no Star Wars fan has gone before...and let these quick reviews help you find a good starting point on your journey of becoming...dare I say it...a Trekkie.
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE--Don’t start with this one, unless you like background noise while you sleep. STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KAHN--Not as boring as the first, this movie does manage to have some tense moments, but the most tense I felt during my time watching it was when I was 50 points away from earning 3-stars on Candy Crush. STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK--Ok, time to face facts. This series isn’t anywhere near as exciting as Star Wars, but I do like the aesthetic of these movies. They have their own visual flair, and they really did try to make these as dramatic and grandiose as they could. STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME--This one was really good! The plot was incredibly stupid, but that’s kind of what made this more entertaining. It has more levity, a lot more humor, and I actually really like these characters now. Or maybe I’ve begun transforming into a Trekkie... STAR TREK V: THE FINAL FRONTIER--Apparently, Trekkie’s hate this one. I didn’t. I thought it had some very funny moments and high-stakes excitement. It certainly kept my attention from start to finish. Also, that opening scene was absolutely brilliant. I want an entire movie to be based on that scene alone. STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY--This is by far the best of the bunch. I liked pretty much everything about it--the writing, the cinematography, the pacing, the characters, etc. This was a great movie to end the original series on. It was certainly better than Star Wars’s latest finale. Overall, not half bad--literally! It’s nice to see what Trekkie’s have nostalgia for, and at times, it has some pretty cool moments. I may watch some more of these movies one day. Until then, live long and prosper during these crazy times. Taking place in a world that resembles ours, Onward tells the story of two elf brothers trying to bring back their deceased dad for one day, and so they go on a mystical quest to find a lost treasure that will help them.
One of the brothers has a fascination with board games and fantastical adventures, and he takes this opportunity to live out his fantasies of being a warrior on a harrowing journey. He clearly represents all of us nerds who have enjoyed playing games together and bonding over stories involving dragons, orcs, and great heroes. However, he has a hard time bonding with his brother, who is the polar opposite and doesn’t share the same enthusiasm for fantasy adventures as his sibling. He’s shy and has a hard time finding a place of belonging, but he tries to fit within the modern world, not caring about make-believe stories. So obviously, they get into some shenanigans, learn to love each other, make the audience cry, and end their journey with a lesson for everyone. You know, the Pixar shtick. The heart of the movie (or hearts in this case) is with Ian (Tom Holland) and Barley Lightfoot (Chris Pratt). Their journey together is an endearing one. Even though I couldn’t relate to their brotherly struggles, I understood wanting to see their dad one last time. If I was offered the chance to extend my time with my dad for one more day, I probably would go on a crazy, magical adventure too. I feel as though this movie is more for adults than kids, like Up. It’s themes of life, death, and the emotional bond that ties family members together is heavily explored here, and kids may not have the understanding to fully appreciate the story. That’s ok because we adults want good cartoon movies too! The animation is exemplary as usual, though it’s not as visually appealing as say Monsters, Inc., Finding Nemo, or Wall-E. Having fantasy creatures running around a suburb or a school just doesn’t feel as exciting as seeing what lurks beneath the ocean waves or the ruins of Earth. It feels almost bland. Whereas Cars and Monsters, Inc. had a similar concept, they gave the modern setting its own distinct look and feel, but here, it didn’t seem as creative. At times, it felt like I’ve seen this before. It still looks great though, and the characters all have their own distinct animation, making each one stand out from the others. Onward is a timeless romp through a fantasy world filled with excitement and laughter. It’s very much a reminder of why so many people love Dungeons And Dragons, The Lord Of The Rings, and other fantasy classics; there’s something about this particular genre that creates a bond between people. We imagine ourselves in the bootstraps of dashing knights and fanciful elf princesses, and we create special memories sharing our love for imagining the impossible, like going to conventions, playing a game together, or reading a bedtime story. But Onward reminds us that the most precious thing about this genre is not the magic and wizardry; it’s about the time we spend with the ones we love. You know, the Pixar shtick. Of course Sonic got a movie. Hollywood has been trying to make video game franchises into movies since Super Mario Bros, and each movie winds up being a disappointing mess. It’s actually quite impressive how many video game movies there are despite how bad they always wind up being, and it was only a matter of time before they got to Mario’s blue rival. So how bad is this one? How disappointing is it? How completely, insultingly unfaithful is it, and does Sonic still have those horrific chompers from the first trailer? Well actually…
...IT’S GOOD!!! I...I can’t actually believe I wrote those words! A video game movie ended up being good! And...it was a Sonic movie of all things! Isn’t Sonic known for having bad games? But hey, I’m not going to question how this miraculous feat was achieved. I’m just going to enjoy this warm and fuzzy feeling that I watched a good movie. Let me be clear: it’s not a GREAT movie, but it’s not bad! It reminds me of one of Disney or Pixar’s lesser works--good moviemaking but without a whole lot of originality, and that’s what this movie is. It’s a buddy comedy road trip movie. This type of scenario has been done better, but it was still an enjoyable ride. Much like one of Sonic’s classic games, this movie is more concerned about having fun and not so much on going on a soul-searching journey. The plot is fairly simple, and it should be familiar to fans of the games. Sonic has to collect rings and avoid being killed by an evil scientist. It’s literally that simple! No Chaos Emeralds, no alien invasions, no time travel, no humans kissing dead animals--it’s back-to-basics for the blue blur, and the movie definitely benefits from that. Keeping it simple makes it more accessible and helps the plot not get too convoluted. So many movies now are concerned with setting up a cinematic universe, but not this one. It just wants to take you on a fun ride that will make you chuckle at its corny jokes and smile when one of those classic tunes starts to play (I’m pretty sure I annoyed my girlfriend as I hummed along to them!). The lead actors did a fine job. Ben Schwartz as Sonic was a good choice. He had a nice balance of cockiness and impatience with childish wit and affection. This is a very young Sonic who hasn’t even met his lifelong pal Tails yet, so this embodiment of the character made a lot of sense. James Marsden (Why does his real name sound more like a cop name than the character he played?) did a great job as well. This role was probably more fun for him to do than some other characters he’s played over the years (*cough Cyclops *cough), and you can tell he is having fun. But the one who had the most fun in the movie was clearly Jim Carrey. I really enjoyed his interpretation of Robotnik. He’s crazy in the most Carrey way, and it’s a treat to see Jim acting like a real life cartoon character again. All in all, everyone seemed to have fun acting in this movie, and in turn, I had fun watching them. But now I want to address the big question: how does Sonic look? He looks great! The animators should be given praise for this achievement. In just a few months, they managed to reanimate Sonic with the updated design. I can’t even imagine how stressful the animation process was for this movie, since there’s quite a bit of special effects, and it all looks good. It’s not a spectacle like a Marvel movie, but it gets the job done. The character and robot designs help bring a fresh new look for the Sonic brand with familiar elements that fans know and love. When they initially announced this movie would be in live-action, I thought that was a bad idea just because of how cartoon-y Sonic is, but I am very happy with the final result. Much like the classic games, Sonic offers a couple of hours of fun for the whole family. With a simple story and an energetic Jim Carrey, there’s not much to complain about, and for a video game movie, that’s a good thing. Let’s just hope they don’t ruin the next installment like they did with games. Last year, Peter Jackson gave audiences the revolutionary WWI picture They Shall Not Grow Old. Its use of 100-year-old footage with today’s technology gave us the clearest picture of that time. I was awestruck by it. Now we have another WWI movie, and it too left me in awe.
1917 tells the simple story of two British soldiers traveling across the frontlines in order to deliver a message to a battalion that is being lured into a trap. It’s execution on the other hand is complicated. Instead of filming separate shots and editing them together, 1917 (for the most part) is just one, long continuous shot that follows the soldiers on their journey. Obviously, they didn’t actually shoot the entire movie in one take, but for the majority of the time, it’s pretty flawless. I even gave myself a challenge and tried to find the cuts, but aside from some pretty obvious ones, I missed several it turns out. The ingenuity and creativity involved in making this motion picture is a triumph. It does an exceptional job of capturing the horror and heartache of the war, and it does so with its simple yet effective story, with the audience being placed within the harrowing setting. The camerawork isn’t the only thing that is great about this movie. The sets, the landscapes, the costumes, the choreography--everything was extremely planned out and brilliantly crafted. I was overly impressed with No Man’s Land. The mud, ditches, holes, corpses, etc. all told an incredibly scary story without much context. Even if you had no knowledge of WWI, this scene alone can send shivers down your spine and give you the impression of how bad things were in the early 20th century. The props and costumes were very articulate and precise with their realism. Someone clearly did their homework in history class. In fact, you could probably learn something new just by watching this movie. They Shall Not Grow Old gave us the most accurate visual representation of this historical event, but 1917 gives us the best immersive experience of The Great War to date. The actors were astounding in this movie. It’s hard enough to act out scenes in the regular way, but remembering your lines, choreography, and even ad libbing in this movie must have taken a tremendous exertion on their part. Climbing around the trenches, fighting in the ruins of cities, and running across a battlefield is so breathtaking in this movie because of these actors. You sense the fear, the tension, the tremendous heavyweight that they experience, and it’s not because they tell you how they’re feeling or thinking. They are merely reacting to the world around them happening in (almost) real time. For instance, it’s so impressive to watch one of the actors escape Nazi pursuers, find solace in sitting in the woods, then getting up and frantically working his way through trenches and avoiding death in a major battle--all in one shot! This is such a unique way to extract emotion out of the audience, and without the actors’ ability to push themselves to their physical limit, this just wouldn’t be able to work as well as it did. 1917 is such an emotional, engaging, and bombastic way to start off the new year. If you were disappointed with December’s offerings, there’s no need to worry for this month. We have a truly unique and awesome movie that reminds us about the horrors of history, and hopefully by learning from it, we can make our century better for us and for our children. Here we are, folks. The end of Star Wars…again...for the third time. But this is THE big finale! I know you're here for one thing: to know if it's good or not. Well, is it? No. No, it's not.
You’re still here and not angrily commenting about how much of a Trekkie I am? Cool. Let me explain why this is not a good film. Don't worry! There are no spoilers in this review. I remember a very important lesson in college. I wrote a script with tons of world-building dialogue and epic battle scenes, and I thought it was the coolest story ever. My professor then handed me back my script after he reviewed it, and to my dismay, it was covered in red ink from his pen. "You have five stories going on at the same time," he said. "In doing so, you took away the quality of each story. Tell me one story, and tell it well." He was right. I had baked a delicious pie, but I had added too many, very different ingredients, that created a very odd and distorted concoction. What every writer needs to do is focus on one flavor of pie and hand it to the audience so they can experience all of the wonderful things inside of it. I wish my professor told the writers of this movie the same thing. This is one of the fastest movies I have ever seen. In almost two and half hours, the story retcons a lot of what The Last Jedi did by introducing a new talent for Finn, a backstory for Poe, new characters who share similar backstories that we don't see again, new powers for both Rey and Kylo, a new crisis for Rey, a rescue mission, a scavenger hunt, build up to emotional moments that never actually happen, oh yeah…and stopping the bad guy! Even with all of this, I felt like I missed some vital parts that would have made the story better. The plot got lost in the abundance of extra elements. This Star Wars pie had so many different flavors in it that I don't know what I tasted nor if I like it enough to want another slice. This was extremely disappointing to me because J.J. Abrams is a good filmmaker. He made some of the best spy movies when he took over the Mission:Impossible franchise; he made Star Trek fun again, and made my favorite Godzilla-like movie, Cloverfield, as well as some extremely good TV shows. It makes me wonder what happened behind-the-scenes. I love his style of cinematography and camerawork, but for some reason, the direction of the movie felt sloppy. There are many instances where he makes you feel emotion, and then he reverses it and says, "Just kidding! Ok, back to explosions." After this happened twice, I didn't let myself feel emotion, turned my brain off, and just watched the splashes of color light up the screen for the rest of the way. While there are some visually stunning moments, when you do things like this in a movie, it naturally produces frustration and then emotional resistance from the audience, and they no longer care what's happening anymore. I expect lazy filmmaking like this from Michael Bay, but I expect much better from Abrams. Is there anything redeemable from this movie? Yes, actually! The acting is quite good, and the actors make this as fun of a ride as possible. Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver, who do their very best to make the story as emotional as possible, offer great performances despite the lackluster story. I will have to give a shout out to the actor who played Chewbacca. There was one part where Chewie's mannerisms actually got me choked up a little, and Anthony Daniels gives the best C-3PO performance of his career and fully realizes the character's comical potential. John Boyega and Oscar Isaac try to have as much fun as they possibly can with what they have to work with. All in all, the actors do their very best and seem to have a blast. The original Star Wars trilogy inspired me to become a filmmaker. It's intricate levels of religion, mythology, morality, and heroism were rolled up into simple stories, easily understandable to everyone of all ages, and it's brilliant directing and writing helped make these films timeless and beloved for the past four decades. It's stories like these that are used as teaching tools for parents. It's stories like these that inspire people to be better and fight to make this world a better place. It's stories like these that ignite our imaginations and fuel our creativity. The Rise of Skywalker, sadly, is not one of those stories. By Hollywood law, if a movie makes $1 billion, the studio responsible for such a movie MUST make a franchise out of it. Disney, being one of those who signed this law into existence, has fulfilled this requirement by drowning us with Frozen merchandise and short films until we were too poor to pay for our child's 100th Olaf doll. And Frozen II is now a thing...and we shall suffer once again. Except when we watch the movie. It's actually pretty good.
Am I being a bit too dramatic and over-the-top? Yeah I probably am. After all, Disney has ingrained Let It Go into my psyche to the point, I suppose, I've started acting like Elsa (isolating herself because she can't get over how cool she is). Or maybe I'm like Anna, making a big deal about how awful the life of a privileged princess is. ...I've over analyzed the first movie, as you can see, by how much I've watched it. And you know who else over analyzed the first movie? Disney. If there's one thing that differentiates this movie from the first one, it's how much more complicated it is. It seems like the writers looked at the first movie and said, "You know, I wonder what the king and queen were like when they were kids? What were their favorite childhood songs? What were their parents were up to? What did the natives of the land look like? What did they fear? Are there more magical creatures than trolls? What can we do to set up 50 more movies?" That's not, necessarily, a bad move on their part. I love a good fantasy story, and Frozen II certainly delivers! It's bigger, and at times, more epic than its predecessor. This isn't about stopping a force of evil; it's a quest to right the wrongs of others and to create harmony in the world. More is at stake and the danger is greater. The heart of the story, of course, is the bond between Anna and Elsa. They both are challenged in their own unique ways. Elsa is finding her identity in the world, whereas Anna is discovering what kind of a legacy we carry on from our forefathers. It's really deep and will most likely resonate more so with the adults. In fact, there's a song in the third act that really resonated with me, because of what was occurring in my own life. The movie's multiple messages are great teaching tools for kids, though they may not fully understand exactly what those lessons are at where they are in their lives. However, it will certainly make some adults look back on their lives and contemplate their own journeys. The music in this film is not as memorable as its predecessor's. The original had a nostalgic charm to it as it tried to replicate the Broadway-style of the Disney movies from the 90s, but this one tries different styles and, in turn, doesn't pack near as much of a punch in the nostalgia gut. Olaf's song in particular isn't as clever as the one he had before, and sadly, the lyrics to Anna's solo are not memorable. This is disappointing because of how powerful its message is. They obviously saved the best numbers for Idina Menzel, who absolutely sings her lungs out in two big performances. It's certainly not a bad soundtrack, but I think, if given the choice, audiences will let it go in favor of the original. (Sorry, I'll stop now.) The animation, on the other hand, deserves praise! From character's hair to the dazzling, magical lights, every inch of this movie was painstakingly crafted to make this movie as stunning as it could be. At this point, the Walt Disney Animation department is competing with Pixar to see who can make the most visually stunning movie of all time. I think Disney just took the lead with this movie. It's quite impressive! Even if you could care less about this movie and are only seeing it because your kids wanted to watch it, you can certainly admire how gorgeous each shot is. Frozen II dares to try new things with its story, animation, and music, and most of it pays off, creating a movie that succeeds in its execution in more areas than it fails. Like the sisters' journey, this movie has some bumps, but in the end, it's a good experience. A third movie is inevitable, but you know what? I'll happily go into the unknown with these characters again. (Ok, now I'll stop.) As far as remakes go, Maleficent was one of my personal favorites. It didn't tell the story of Sleeping Beauty all over again. Instead, it chose to ask "What if Maleficent had found Aurora as a baby?" In doing so, it freed itself from the constraints of the original tale and told its own unique story. It wasn't a perfect film by any stretch of the means, but it stood out for its daring take on a classic story, even more so now with so many remakes being made. It was surprising to see a sequel to the film, but it wasn't surprising that it couldn't live up to the originality of the first film.
The story centers around the engagement of Prince Philip and Princess Aurora and ensuing bickering between Maleficent and Prince Philip's parents. Honestly, I would be so down for a comedy about these people fighting over who runs the show at the wedding, but alas, we didn't get a comedy. That's not a bad thing, but things tend to escalate when some magical mischief begins to take place and a war begins. Yeah, a war. This movie gets wild, but at the same time, it seems simple once you get to the root of the story. It's essentially another colonizing-is-bad-and-you-shouldn't-attack-people-you-don't-know type of story. There's nothing wrong with it, but it just seems cliche at this point. It doesn't try to do anything interesting with its premise, and its message is one we've heard before. It's a shame that it struggles to stand out from the crowd, whereas its predecessor easily remains one of the more unique adaptations of classic literature. What this movie lacks in originality it tries to make up for in its cinematography. There are some shots in this movie that should be made as a wallpaper. One particular shot of the titular character is absolutely stunning with its contrasting colors. The CGI on the other hand is hit or miss. It's pretty obvious what is or isn't made by a computer animation software, but some of the creatures featured are not visually stunning. I didn't like how the Good Fairies looked in the first movie, and I still don't like them now. Some creatures that are a mix between practical effects and visual effects look great. For the most part, this will delight fantasy fans with its monster designs and some beautiful, fantastical imagery. The actors do a decent job with what they have to work with. Angelina Jolie and Michelle Pfeiffer are great actresses, but I was more impressed with Elle Fanning. She is not afraid to really put her emotions out there, and she offers a chilling performance during the third act. Everyone else isn't as noteworthy, but they can't be blamed for that. They just don't have enough to do to make them stand out or memorable. I just watched the movie, and I can't remember Maleficent's new friends' names. They look cool and sound cool, but we just don't get to know them all that well. We do get to know Maleficent better, and Jolie naturally shines in the role. However, she seems to struggle to balance the dark and light of Maleficent. The character is suppose to still be menacing but a good person too. It's a hard role to be sure, and I have the upmost respect for Jolie for taking on such a challenge. I've been pretty hard on the movie, but the truth is I did enjoy my time with it. As a fantasy fan, it's always a joy to see new creatures and worlds on the silver screen, but I just wish the writers had come up with something more unique for this story. Admittedly, it still stands out from most Disney remakes as being, you know, different. At least it has that little element of surprise, so maybe there's still some magic left at Disney. If there's one thing about the Batman franchise that is as iconic as the hero himself is his villains. Whether you grew up in the 60s, 90s, or 2000s, you've seen Batman's foes on TV and in the movies. You can probably name quite a few of them, but there's one that seems to stand out in every iteration of Batman, no matter the generation--the clown prince of crime, the Joker. Due to his incredible popularity, he's got his very own movie, and it's no laughing matter.
The movie is centered around Arthur Fleck, a mentally challenged clown actor who is trying his best to take care of himself and his mother in the grime of Gotham City. As the title implies, this is an origin story for the iconic comic book character, and we see the tragic downfall of this man in desperate need for help. Through this tragedy, we see political commentary on the powers above the downtrodden and the abuse that society can bring to those in need of help. It's a thought-provoking piece, and hopefully it encourages someone to help a stranger. It doesn't seem to justify the actions of the Joker. I believe the point is to make him better understood. After all, criminals don't just wake up one day and think, "You know, I think I'm going to be a crime lord." It starts somewhere, and it usually starts in a dark place, much like we see in movies like The Godfather, Scareface, and the like. Sometimes to understand how to fix societal problems, we need to look at the stories of criminals and see what causes them to do what they do. Joker does this marvelously and is a remarkably well-made film. Outside of the artful and carefully crafted shots, this movie would not be near as good as it is with Joaquin Phoenix. Everything from his body movements to his laugh was played out disturbingly well. He made the laugh so uncomfortable to watch sometimes, and that is something no other actor had been able to do before in the role. The way he danced, smiled, and looked at people seemed so random yet finely tuned, so intricate yet complicated. Watching him on screen was fascinating. His decisions on how to act out the character were artistic, like one of those splattered paintings in a museum. It seems so random and distorted, but at the same time, it seeps into your soul and speaks to you in a unique way. I commend, Phoenix, and his performance in this movie. I can't even imagine to physically and mental toll it took to do what he did. The Joker is a movie not for the faint of heart, but it is one with something to say. It's well crafted, well acted, and asks some questions about society. This is a comic book movie that doesn't want you to enjoy the ride. It wants you to see reality through its dark filter, and maybe, just maybe, bring about a small flicker of light through us. |