|
Post by Trey_Vore on Jan 1, 2023 5:43:23 GMT -5
Sing 2 (2021)
Distributor: Universal Pictures/Illumination Entertainment Director: Garth Jennings Cast: Matthew McConaughey (Buster Moon), Reese Witherspoon (Rosita), Scarlett Johansson (Ash), Taron Egerton (Johnny), Bobby Cannavale (Jimmy Crystal), Tori Kelly (Meena), Nick Kroll (Gunter), Halsey (Porsha Crystal), Pharell Williams (Alfonso), Nick Offerman (Norman), Letitia Wright (Nooshy), Eric Andre (Darius), Chelsea Peretti (Suki Lane), Adam Buxton (Klaus Kickenklober), Garth Jennings (Ms. Crawly), Peter Serafinowicz (Big Daddy), Bono (Clay Calloway), Spike Jonze (Jerry) Runtime: 110 min. MPAA rating: PG (mild peril/violence, some rude humor)
Set some time after the events of the first movie, Buster Moon’s theater has been newly rebuilt and is thriving in Calatonia. His original singers had been reworked into an ensemble theater group, now consisting of Johnny, Rosita, Gunther, Meena and Ms. Crawly while Ash performs as a soloist. Failing to impress Crystal Entertainment talent scout Suki Lane, Nana Noodleman encourages Buster to take his crew out to Redshore City to make an impression. Sneaking into the Crystal Entertainment building, media mogul Jimmy Crystal is about to bounce them from the building when Gunter pitches his idea for a sci-fi musical show featuring songs from legendary rocker Clay Calloway who has not been seen in person since his wife’s passing. After Jimmy Crystal gives it the green light, Buster has a lot of talent to juggle. He sends Ms. Crawly to find Clay Calloway, Johnny develops a rivalry with his dance instructor Klaus and a friendship with street dancer Nooshy, Meena is assigned a romantic act with the egocentric Darius but develops a crush on ice cream vendor Alfonso, and after Rosita develops a fear of heights, Jimmy Crystal insists that Buster give the leading role to his materialistic daughter Porsha. As all this is going on, Buster finds himself on the run after he insists on giving the lead role back to Rosita leading Porsha to reading that as she’s fired and tells her father. Will this show ever get off the ground?
After spending 2020 forced to stay home due to a global pandemic and the world essentially had to shut down, 2021 began to see our lives getting back on track. Thankfully, we saw some entertaining movies during that year. Disney had two movies in the forms of Raya and the Last Dragon and Encanto, together with Pixar they gave us another good animated film in Luca, and Sony Pictures Animation had another great entry in The Mitchells vs. the Machines and a good one in Vivo.
However, it felt like 2021 was not the year of the sequel. I did like Rock Dog 2: Rock Around the Park, but no other part 2s seemed to be all that great. For one, we had another Spirit that was more than a decade late, another Boss Baby that I wasn’t anticipating, and another Addams Family that was coming only 2 years after the original bored me to sleep (no joke)!
This being the last major animated film of the year gave me some hope though. I did enjoy the first Sing and felt it was one of the better animated films of 2016. Maybe it wasn’t enough to crack my Top 5 Best (it had some steep competition to be fair) but I did like it and would give it a recommendation. With Despicable Me having pretty much run its course and I admit that I wasn’t clamoring for another Secret Life of Pets, I just have to say Illumination would need to do something new or try another continuation. Since I did enjoy Sing, I had no complaints about it getting an encore.
Now that this movie has a second go, it’s time for me to go and give my input on Buster Moon and his troupe for their new show.
I’ll start by saying under Buster Moon’s new theater, his team is performing their spin on Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland. This is most definitely appropriate as for all the out-of-whack life in Wonderland, they would have no idea of all the technical issues one would have of putting on a live show. It would make Wonderland seem tame by contrast!
Now, for the story, you have something a little different this time. The first movie was built around a singing competition with a deceptive prize being offered, while the sequel has a theater group getting a stage show off the ground under a little white lie spun by the main character. Same, yet different. What I liked was the fact that while they don’t completely rehash the first movie and since the characters were so well-defined in the original, here they could work on the story. And boy is there a lot! You have more than enough characters to flesh out in addition to having some new ones, and I like how this movie could give kids some insight on how show business is supposed to work. We all want to be famous stars, but there is a lot of crazy stuff that goes on behind the scenes! In fact Redshore City reminds me a lot of what Las Vegas would be like and you know what often has to go down in Sin City. The downside might be you have Buster Moon again trying to get by on an act of deception and the trouble he could find himself in. It is true that some sketchiness is necessary to be a star, but for reasons you’ll learn, I did find it a bit… unscrupulous to say the least. All the movie’s threads for a make for the big machine being metaphorically built, and it’s well worth the wait.
The movie’s animation? Well being that this is Illumination we are talking about, they don’t have the best type of animation—don’t get me wrong, the animation is nice and well done, it’s just when not used right a distinctive animation style can feel intrusive, like what they did on their prior Dr. Seuss adaptations. Here though, it feels natural. We have plenty of inventive sets to see, being a theater, a major metropolis, a quiet countryside, fancy hotels, the 1%-er’s mansion, even the stage show set in outer space. The movie gives a lot to look at and it’s very much a treat for your personal viewing experience.
Now do you remember how I said the original movie’s characters were the best part of the original? Well, they don’t try to duplicate that here, as some don’t have the very deep and elaborate feel from the original. That doesn’t mean it’s bad, just that they were going for the story this time so while they don’t bombard you with the best-told backstories like in the first Sing, it’s seemingly balanced with the story this time. For the movie’s returning characters, everyone returns, with the only non-returning characters being Eddie Noodleman and Mike the mouse. Now, as you would expect, Buster Moon is the lead of leads and he’s still the same. He does his little white lie thing and that would snowball into a bigger conflict. I do tend to think that Buster Moon should still be seen as a questionable role model, but parents can tell their kids that his actions aren’t the best. Rosita the married pig mother now has a more expanded role where she gets the starring role she wants but her sudden fear of heights causes her to doubt herself. In order to get the fame she wants she needs to get over her fear and do the right thing. Johnny the former criminal gorilla now has a role where he’s to play a warrior on the Planet of War and he doesn’t come off well in his dance instructor’s lessons. I did like his role as not only is it seeming to tell kids to believe in yourself, there is also the idea that sometimes you just need to make your own choices rather than rely on explicit instructions. Ash also returns with some possible light shed on why she decided to get into being a guitar player as she claims to be a major fan of Clay Calloway. Meena does get the more romantic angle here as her role is on the Planet of Love, however due to here lack of a prior love life she needs to come to terms with the idea as it would be a crucial role in her act. Gunter returns and is essentially the one who comes up with their stage show. The other returning characters—Nana Noodleman, Ms. Crawly, Norman, Big Daddy—all return and are largely unchanged.
For the characters introduced in the sequel, well as stated they don’t get the exact same character depth that the first set did, but again, they tried to work more on the story so I felt that was a fair trade. Which one should I start with? Maybe with Suki, the Crystal Entertainment talent scout, since she appears first. Her role is to be the one Doubting Thomas who doesn’t think Buster and his troop have what it takes to make it in Redshore City, though it turns out to be just nothing more than her giving him a hard time as he would need to prove himself worthy. Darius and Alfonso are both just meant to be dueling suitors for Meena’s side of the story, with Darius being the egotistical actor who thinks he’s meant to be for her while Alfonso is the one who wins her over. They don’t have the best roles in the movie and they are only there just to support Meena. On Johnny’s side of the story, his support characters fare a lot better—his dance instructor Klaus Kickenklober is supposed to be a rigid teacher who thinks his way is the correct way and does everything by the book while Nooshy is a talented and visceral street dancer who is more patient and wants to help Johnny with his confidence. Clay Calloway is the aged rock legend who does not wish to be publicly seen and has been that way ever since his wife died. Through Buster Moon’s lies he does say he knows him and hopefully Ash can pull through for him. His story may come closest to what you make remember from the original movie. Now unlike the first movie, how you probably remember Mike was not a truly evil character but just probably the one character with the worst personality? Here they go for a more full-blown villain in Crystal Entertainment media mogul Jimmy Crystal. Being a stinking rich businessman he cares solely about his image placing that above anything else. Many times he does feel like he’s meant to be one big Hate Sink, however I do see this as truth in Television as chances are he probably got to where he is by being cutthroat; he didn’t succeed in his venture by being nice. His immediate associate Jerry is his loyal yes-man who obeys him without question. Not each and every single character is truly mind-blowing, but they are more hit than miss.
Now for the character I think I may have liked best? This may or may not surprise you, but I’m just going to say Porsha Crystal, Jimmy Crystal’s naïve, materialistic daughter. I’ll start by saying I was happy she wasn’t just another clone of Veruca Salt; being that she was born into this elaborate lifestyle she was raised into thinking achievements can be bought and paid for rather than something you would have to endure hardships and pain to attain. This is something you may see in how Jimmy treats her more often than not as he cares about his image and thinks he’ll look good if his offspring is in this show. When Buster tells her he thinks he needs to give the leading role to Rosita, Porsha reads this as she’s being cut from the show and this could very well have been the first time something did not go the way she wanted. When she ends up being punished for supposedly tarnishing her dad’s image, she ends up likely confused and sad as ultimately Dad was buying her love the whole time. When the true intention does come up, she finds herself in a better suited role and loves it; when I saw this movie in theaters I was honestly smiling and grooving as Porsha is telling her dad off—she’s literally on a Planet of Joy. The reason I did like Porsha’s aspect best is fitting for a Christmas release family movie, it’s not simply about how many presents kids get but whether they can understand the productive nature of life experiences, all the money in the world can’t afford each and every single critic. I give the team at Illumination props for Porsha, she’s not simply their furry bait trophy but a role model for all the kids watching the movie.
Being that I was happy with the first movie, I can say Sing 2 easily exceeded what I expected; I would even go so far as to say I enjoyed this movie more than the original Sing! I’d even say it would deserve a reputation as being one of Illumination’s best; they certainly grew their beard with this sequel! Even if Illumination-animated films are made more for the public than for critical accolades, Sing 2 left me with a happy feeling and proves once more the healing power of music. I was happy to place this movie in my Top 5 Best of 2021 List and now would like to ask: if this encore succeeded in being bigger and better, when is Sing 3 due for release?
Sing 2 (2021) TreyVore rates it: B+
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Jan 29, 2023 1:18:47 GMT -5
The Tigger Movie (2000)
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures Director: Jun Falkenstein Cast: Jim Cummings (Tigger, Winnie the Pooh), Nikita Hopkins (Roo), Ken Sansom (Rabbit), John Fiedler (Piglet), Peter Cullen (Eeyore), Andre Stojka (Owl), Kath Soucie (Kanga), Tom Attenborough (Christopher Robin), John Hurt (Narrator) Runtime: 87 min. MPAA rating: G (all ages admitted)
This movie, based on Disney’s adaptation of the Winnie the Pooh stories, is about Pooh’s friend Tigger, who being fed up with these stories always being about Winnie the Pooh, decided to take center stage. Tigger wants one of his friends in the Hundred Acre Wood to go bouncing with him, but they all decline. After he inadvertently destroys Eeyore’s house, and makes things worse when they try to fix things, Tigger is faced with a sense of loneliness and isolation thinking maybe there are drawbacks to the thing about Tiggers being that he’s the only one. As he and Roo search for other Tiggers, the other residents of the Hundred Acre Wood decide to write a letter addressing it “from his family” with friendly advice. Misreading this as his family is coming to live with him, Tigger starts building onto his house as everyone else now thinks they’ve just made things worse. Can Tigger come to terms with who his family might actually be?
I’m very positive that if you’ve ever had a childhood, you grew up with Winnie the Pooh. Life in the Hundred Acre Wood, being some of the most consistent as far as quality goes, is one of Disney’s most viable properties. This movie, being the first Winnie the Pooh feature to be released theatrically since the original Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh in 1977, was released to mixed reviews and was the highest grossing Winnie the Pooh movie until Christopher Robin was released in 2018.
I myself did grow up with Pooh just like everyone else, so we are all in the same boat. My first exposure though, was not just the original Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh film but I even remember watching Disney Channel back in the 1980s and was a viewer of Welcome to Pooh Corner. You know, that one show that had live actors in puppet suits?
Anyway, here we go with my review on the Tigger-centric Pooh film.
As I outlined, the movie’s story is about Tigger wanting to know more about his family tree and thinks it’d be nice if he wasn’t the only one. This sets everything in motion as Tigger sets about thinking he should start to try to find his family so he can have his own kin, but his friends in the Hundred Acre Wood—that being the usual ensemble of Pooh, Piglet, Eeyore, Owl, Kanga and Roo—try to make him feel better but only make things worse. At the same time Rabbit is his usual prissy self. This movie, clearly meant for very little kids, doesn’t try to be Shakespeare as it just goes about setting up a very simple story with a very clear message. It doesn’t need to be super complex, although it does feel a little longer than it ought to be.
I will say, they do at least have some fun with this outing though. There are various plays on recognizable works of art which I did like. The movie’s songs are also very good and quite pleasant to listen to and manage to evoke a hint of that energy you probably remember from the movies in the Disney Renaissance. The only one that bordered on questionable was when they did a jab at talk shows where what they have set up is clearly related to The Jerry Springer Show, but even that is handled tastefully.
The other thing I will add is the voice cast is very good too. One of the movie’s press kits said Paul Winchell was still around and could have returned to re-voice Tigger being the only remaining original Pooh VA, but they just thought was too old for the part and instead had Jim Cummings do the voice and he’s a dead ringer for the voice. He also nails Sterling Holloway’s original voice for Pooh and the other voice actors really sound very much alike their original voices. The animation looks very much like the earlier stories and the characters are all identical to their past selves.
I will say though, that I do question the message a bit. What seems to be the theme they are shooting for—friends can substitute for a family—well, it’s a bit odd especially in this time when we would like to keep our kids knowledgeable about family and there’s a difference between family loyalty and friendship loyalty. I doubt kids will really care that much, but parents probably need to explain that family is where your heart is, rather than just hoping they can leave and take up residence at a friend’s house.
However, I will say that because this is Winnie the Pooh we are talking about, this is a movie that shoots for modest entertainment value and in that regard it works. This movie is not going to blow your mind but it will work.
The Tigger Movie (2000) TreyVore rates it: B-
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Mar 5, 2023 1:26:22 GMT -5
Doug’s 1st Movie (1999)
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures/Walt Disney Television Animation/Jumbo Pictures/Plus One Animation Director: Maurice Joyce Cast: Thomas McHugh (Doug Funnie, Lincoln), Fred Newman (Skeeter Valentine, Mr. Dink, Porkchop, Ned), Chris Phillips (Roger Klotz, Boomer, Larry, Mr. Chiminy), Constance Shulman (Patti Mayonnaise), Frank Welker (Herman Melville), Alice Playten (Beebe Bluff, Elmo), Guy Hadley (Guy Graham), Doug Preis (Mr. Funnie, Mr. Bluff, Willie, Chalky, Bluff Agent), Eddie Korbich (Al and Moo Sleech, Robocrusher), Doris Belack (Mayor Tippi Dink), Becca Lish (Mrs. Funnie, Judy Funnie, Connie), Greg Lee (Principal White), David O’Brian (Quailman Announcer) Runtime: 83 min. MPAA rating: G (all ages admitted)
This movie, based on the cartoon series Disney’s Doug, is about the near-adolescent Doug Funnie and his friend Skeeter Valentine who, while out at Lucky Duck Lake, are hunting for a rumored monster while they have to deal with harassment from Roger Klotz and his gang of goons. When they discover the monster is real, Doug and Skeeter try to protect the friendly beast while Roger contacts some school nerds to protect him, thinking it’s hostile. At the same time, Doug knows the school’s Valentine’s Day Dance is coming up and he wants to ask Patti Mayonnaise to it, while upperclassman Guy Graham is also putting the moves on her. Naming the monster “Herman Melville” after he tries to eat a copy of Moby d**k, Doug and Skeeter learn that the lake is being polluted by the powerful tycoon Mr. Bluff, who wants to capture and kill the monster to save face. So with his work cut out for him, and the aid of Mayor Tippi Dink, can Doug and Skeeter save Herman Melville, expose Mr. Bluff for his corrupt deeds and win Patti’s heart in time for the Valentine’s Day dance?
I’m very sure if you remember growing in the early 1990s, specifically 1991, you probably remember being introduced to Nickelodeon’s original programming they called the “Nicktoons”. The first three shows they had were Doug, Rugrats, and The Ren and Stimpy Show. This would be huge for Nick as they would now have some cartoons you wouldn’t be seeing anywhere else.
Plans for movies about all three shows dated all the way back to the beginning. Things started at 20th Century Fox but nothing materialized; all three shows came and went and never got movies. In the end only The Rugrats Movie was released after the series was revived in the late 90s.
You may recall, back when I was reviewing The Rugrats Movie, that I did seemingly allude to, but did not elaborate on, Doug. This show, created by Jim Jinkins in a fictionalization of his childhood in Virginia, was the first but least memorable. There are a bunch of reasons for this; for one, while The Ren and Stimpy Show became a cult favorite overnight and Rugrats would evolve into the media juggernaut Nickelodeon wanted, Doug was easily the odd one out in that it was the least successful despite high hopes. Don’t get me wrong, it was a modest hit, and got decent ratings. Like that one friend you had in grade school that disappeared before you started junior high, Doug felt like a safer, kid-friendlier answer to edgier fare like The Simpsons or Beavis and Butt-head. Indeed, Nickelodeon was supposed to give Doug a full 65-episode package but stopped at 52 citing budget reasons.
So now you probably know my thoughts on the first three Nicktoons. The Ren and Stimpy Show started great but faded fast, Rugrats became pop culture osmosis but I never truly flipped for it, and Doug?
…Doug just… doesn’t hold up all that well for me.
Yeah, that’s right—compared to some other shows you probably remember watching, not only does Doug feel like one of those “oh yeah, I remember watching that” shows you personally thought you wouldn’t wax very much nostalgia for, but… it doesn’t even hold up all that well! This is because in retrospect, not only was Doug never terribly… well, funny and the animation feels very vanilla but it was never even very well-written.
Ultimately, ownership did transfer after Disney bought out Jumbo Pictures, and now called Disney’s Doug, it would become part of Disney’s new “One Saturday Morning” block that started the year after they bought ABC alongside shows like Recess, Pepper Ann and 101 Dalmatians: the Series. It became much more popular under Disney, spawning books, a stage show and even a video game. That doesn’t mean, however, that it was a better show, as everyone from viewers to the series’ staff thought Nickelodeon Doug was superior to Disney’s Doug. There may have been a change in viewership when this occurred, as the kids who liked Disney’s Doug grew up while the Web was still in its infancy and probably thought it was always under the House of Mouse. These were the kids that grew up playing Nintendo 64 and Sony PlayStation and just got introduced to Pokémon, not the kids that grew up playing SNES and Sega Genesis and loved Ninja Turtles/Power Rangers.
This movie, meant to be the series finale, was planned to be a direct-to-video release (I believe the movie’s original title was “The First Doug Movie… Ever!”). However, once the execs at Disney saw how well The Rugrats Movie did in theaters (after all, Doug was originally a Nicktoon), they changed gears and now, in a prime example of an oxymoron, this series-ending movie was given a theatrical release under the moniker Doug’s 1st Movie.
Even weirder? Unlike how Pokemon: the First Movie had the animation in the can and was extremely popular to the point of having sequels, Doug’s 1st Movie was not successful enough to warrant sequels and as of this writing, Disney has no plans to do anything else with Doug. So, being this is the first time I saw this movie since its release on home video all the way back at the end of the 90s when VHS was still a thing, let’s go ahead and dive into Doug’s 1st–and only—Movie.
Maybe I should start with the story. Being that this is a film adaptation of a then-popular show, you would think that they would step up the ante so that we would think it was just too big for the small screen. But being that this is about Doug, and in terms of danger 4-5 out of 10 is as high as it will go, you don’t get something bigger and more grandiose than what you would expect from the series. What you get is a story where the hero has to juggle two issues he’s dealing with, first being finding a lake monster and exposing the business tycoon responsible for its mutation, and the second being working up the courage to ask his crush to the school Valentine’s Day dance.
However, it does neither of which terribly well. Don’t get me wrong, I love a good 1980s-styled movie about a hero coming to terms with growing up and responsibilities, dealing with pressure, having a crush, that sort of thing. But not only does Doug’s 1st Movie depend on your already-existing fondness for the show, it feels like it’s lost its charm and personality as age set in. The characters now seem weird rather than lovable and I suppose that Doug may be your gateway into the movie’s world, but for reasons you’ll hear about, just doesn’t seem possible.
For the movie’s two paths it takes… well I’ll start with the former, that being about the lake monster. An analogy I can make is there is a short sequence where Doug’s neighbor Mr. Dink pulls Doug and Skeeter into his house and has them try out his virtual reality simulation device. He tells them while they feel like they are standing in his living room he states that they are doing just that, but in what I imagine was a joke he states it’s just a lot more expensive. Doug and Skeeter don’t necessarily do anything out of the ordinary from what you would expect normal kids to be doing but the writing isn’t clever enough to have them be anything more than ordinary kids. The other story about Doug wanting to win over Patti to be his date for the Valentine’s Day dance just doesn’t get the screentime necessary to be worth very much, and for reasons I’ll explain, feels like a waste and further evidence of bad writing. They go and add a few aspects from the series that you would expect Doug to be doing, an example of which being how he imagines himself as Quailman as an analogy to an issue that he’s facing, but they add nothing to the narrative and just feel like fanservice for the sake of fanservice. Then there is also some odd decision making on the characters’ parts, the most egregious of which being the cliché of having the monster pose as a foreign exchange student and everyone falling for it and the fact it just feels like a movie that clearly was made in the 90s with some corrupt polluters and a seeming attempt to care for the environment. In addition, this movie doesn’t contain much unless you are under the age of 10, unless you consider a police car with a license plate that says “DONUT1” as highly witty. They say time makes things better, but it clearly wasn’t on this movie’s side!
Now, the animation. This movie was originally meant to be a direct-to-video release and you can tell just from the way it looks! This animation doesn’t look any better than what you would probably expect to see on TV, with flat colors and lack of anything you would consider depth. I wasn’t expecting the type of animation you would expect from a more recent CGI feature with 3D rendering and textures but this just looks like the type of product you’d think should have stayed on TV. Then there is some other factors like how due to the characters’ minimalist designs they aren’t expressive enough when they would need to be. I understand that the characters have a different set of skin colors as it’s supposed to be indictive of their personalities, but something seems to have been lost in the interim as I don’t understand why Doug has a white flesh tone looking like a colored-in version of Fido Dido but everyone else seems to have their weird, non-normal skin colors. Why is Skeeter green? Why is Patti tan? Why is Beebe purple? Why is Guy light purple? Why is Roger lime-green? But what has to be the ultimate sin is for the design of the monster Herman Melville. I’m aware he’s supposed to be a lake monster who means no harm but his design just reminds me of Denver the Last Dinosaur. I’d be cool with this having been a DTV movie, but no it was a theatrical release!
The characters? Well okay. Being that this is a movie about a popular show, there are a lot of characters they can and did cram into the movie. And the result? It’s not… pleasant. Maybe I should start with Doug Funnie, the movie’s hero. Doug is supposed to be your gateway into this movie’s world and that feels far too much like it! For starters, Doug is just… too virtuous to be a hero; he always wants to do the right thing but probably the worst factor is when he suffers a BSoD moment after he thinks he’s permanently lost Patti; the writing isn’t strong enough to make you feel the weight of his plight. Not to mention he is supposed to be the hero but he sure does nothing to get you rooting for him; he should be lucky that he has the hand of God on his side to get him out of a jam! Skeeter Valentine is his best friend who’s only real personality trait is that he’s a kook. Patti Mayonnaise is Doug’s crush, as while true of the series, she’s still just a very bland one. Not helping matters? Well, Guy Graham, Doug’s rival for her affections, is an upperclassman who tries to undermine Doug’s efforts and win Patti over. Major problem this movie has is well, does it feel like there might be better chemistry between Guy and Patti? You know, instead of her and the character you’d probably want to see her paired up with? They even seem to get more screentime! Mr. Bluff, Beebe’s father who is responsible for the lake monster’s genesis, is trying to kill the monster to save his image but he feels like he was adapted into villainy. Worse? For what he’s done to Lucky Duck Lake he never faces any type of punishment! The monster Herman Melville is a harmless monster but that’s the extent of his character. Then you have the other characters that are in the movie for what feels like, well, they appear on the show so they gotta be here too! You have Beebe Bluff, Mr. Bluff’s daughter who literally has their school molded after her, the school nerds and bullies who don’t have names, Mr. Dink and his wife Mayor Tippi Dink who are respectively the nut and the voice of reason, Doug’s parents and his sister Judy who just are there to let you know Doug isn’t living in that house alone, Porkchop who just reminds me a little too much of Snoopy… oh yeah, and then there is Roger Klotz, who while being a bully and the typical thorn in Doug’s side, here he’s suffered the most as now he’s nothing more than a dumb comedy relief. After he and his pals antagonize Doug and Skeeter in the beginning he de-evolves into a joke that suffers at the clamps of the robot that he makes the nerds build. Keep your day job Doug!
I guess it’s true… just because you can make a movie about a popular IP doesn’t mean you should. Doug’s 1st Movie has got no real entertainment value for adults, and while yes, it is a movie meant for kids, chances are they won’t have any interest in watching this movie nowadays as it just feels too passé and antiquated for them. Its only audience now would be hardcore Doug fans, and I can only recommend this movie to them, provided they still exist! Adding insult to injury is the fact Doug’s 1st Movie, being originally meant to be a direct-to-video release, again was only given a theatrical release for no reason other than the execs at Disney saw how well The Rugrats Movie did and they just thought this would be easy money! For shame. And like the show, it doesn’t even hold up all that well, so with this review, I think I can say I will be checking out of Bluffington for good. This may be Doug’s 1st Movie, but with a product like this, let's hope "Doug's 2nd Movie" never occurs.
Doug's 1st Movie (1999) TreyVore rates it: F
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Apr 9, 2023 23:57:13 GMT -5
Minions: The Rise of Gru (2022)
Distributor: Universal Pictures/Illumination Entertainment Director: Kyle Balda Cast: Steve Carell (Felonius Gru), Pierre Coffin (Kevin, Stuart, Bob, Otto, the Minions), Alan Arkin (Wild Knuckles), Taraji P. Henson (Belle Bottom), Michelle Yeoh (Master Chow), Julie Andrews (Marlena Gru), Russell Brand (Dr. Nefario), Jean-Claude Van Damme (Jean-Clawed), Dolph Lundgren (Svengeance), Danny Trejo (Stronghold), Lucy Lawless (Nun-Chuck) Runtime: 87 min. MPAA rating: PG (some action/violence, rude humor)
Long before he became the supervillain we know him for, Gru was an 11-year old boy growing up in 1976 masterminding evil plans in his mom’s basement. Having hired the Minions to work under him, he learns that he has an interview to become the newest member of the Vicious 6, a supervillain team hoping to find a new member. The reason is because they had betrayed their original founder Wild Knuckles after he stole the Zodiac Stone from a secluded temple in Asia. The interview goes bad but Gru soon finds himself on the run after he steals the Zodiac Stone from them and escapes with Kevin, Stuart and Bob. However, Gru then fires the Minions after Otto winds up trading the Zodiac Stone for a pet rock at another kid’s birthday party. Setting out alone to recover the Zodiac Stone, Gru finds himself kidnapped by Wild Knuckles, who is his favorite villain and it’s now up to Kevin, Stuart and Bob to save their boss with the help of acupuncturist Master Chow. Can the Minions save Gru and prove that even bad guys need a little help from their friends?
If you remember back in 2020, we were supposed to have gotten another Despicable Me movie to help commemorate the 10th anniversary of the original movie from 2010. However, that was not to be, as the rise of an accursed COVID-19 pandemic led the world effectively shut down; the only thing you could have counted on being open was grocery stores. This movie’s release date was pushed back to 2021, and again to 2022. That whole time, I do remember seeing Minions: Rise of Gru toys lining store shelves. When the pandemic was declared over in 2022, our lives would finally start to return to normal and cinemas would open once more. Now that we finally got to see this movie after such a long wait, was it worth it?
A lot of people seemed to think so, as the reviews were generally good and over the movie’s Fourth of July weekend release, it became the highest grossing movie from that weekend, even besting the original record held by Transformers: Dark of the Moon since 2011. Can’t keep a good (er, bad) Minion down.
At the same time, I did feel just a bit nervous. After all, I did say that Despicable Me 3 was probably where this series started to wane. Where my fears warranted? I guess it’s time for me to go and give my thoughts on the prequel-sequel to the Despicable Me movies.
For the movie’s story, we took a return to Gru’s childhood back during the bicentennial. We see plenty of love given to the 70s which I appreciated as well as several leads into the series such as how Gru originally hired the Minions and how he first came to meet Dr. Nefario. The Minions maintain their charm and humor and they do seem a bit more restrained here than they did in the last movie, that being the 2015 Minions.
That said, the story can and does feel a little bonkers at times. It still manages to keep a level of consistency despite feeling like it’s leaping from one scenario to the next with a sugar-high mentality. It does fit this franchise’s over-the-top tone utilizing wackiness and goofy slapstick while keeping its light tone and sweetness. The movie’s ideologies of how even bad guys need to turn to their friends for help still rings true.
However, despite all that I’m listing, this is not a flawless story. Some elements like the Minions’ training montage with Master Chow feel a bit obsolete in this day and age (the type of martial arts training parody isn’t funny now) and I still couldn’t help but get the feeling this movie just feels like it’s running on fumes. You know, like this franchise is practically out of gas by this point. I know this is movie #5 in the series and it is hard to keep a franchise going for that long. For reasons I will go into, I just feel like the team at Illumination can go further with their animated movies and all. The movie’s story isn’t perfect, but I do feel as though it was a return to form after what I remember seeing in Minions and Despicable Me 3.
The movie’s animation? Not much else to add; this is the fifth movie and we know how things are supposed to look by this point. I do like and admire the 1970s aesthetic they shoot for as this does give parents something to appreciate if they had started to suffer franchise fatigue by this point. The Chinese zodiac fight sequence at the end is also very cool and well-animated; a lot of consultation was called into play
Now the movie’s characters… well we sure do have an awful lot to take in. As an 11-year old boy, Gru is still just a child and very naïve about his place in the world. He goes through plenty of emotions that you would think a preteen would experience. He’s still like a straight character to the Minions’ wild and crazy antics and the fact he’s supposed to be a kid might help make him a little more identifiable than before. I’ll even add that despite the fact Steve Carell was now supposed to be voicing a preteen his voice still naturally fits, and that is no easy task for someone not exactly within their new role. The three lead Minions, that being Kevin, Stuart and Bob are all virtually unchanged since the last movie. This isn’t a bad thing being that by nature, the Minions can’t go through a whole lot of changes and still be recognizable but they do maintain their charm. Their “fourth wheel” you could say, Otto? Well, do you remember how I originally made the analogy about how Kevin, Stuart and Bob could be like variants on Alvin and the Chipmunks? Well Otto is like this franchise’s answer to Doofus Drake, Huey, Dewey and Louie’s friend they didn’t like on the classic 1980s DuckTales series. You know, the one that’s supposed to be a real geek and only seems to have friends out of pity. Now, the first of two ‘mentor figures’, that being Wild Knuckles, is the original founder turned ousted member of the Vicious 6 who now wants to take revenge on his former comrades but ends up being a mentor figure to Gru. This aspect of his character is very warm for a character you would see as an antagonist. The Minions’ mentor figure, Master Chow, is an acupuncturist/martial artist who tends to go through a lot of martial arts tropes you would expect to see. Dr. Nefario does return here, now a lot younger as you would expect and shows signs of the genius inventor you remember.
Now, the movie’s villains—that being the Vicious 6, and the supervillain team Gru aspires to emulate—the way I see it, might be the least compelling aspect of the movie. This might be because, well, this movie already has a, well “Villain Protagonist” for one. The other sides are that I know the team at Illumination can tell complex backgrounds for characters—after all, this was their first movie we got from them after Sing 2!—but we don’t get to explore their backgrounds; usually the villains are the ones that tend to get greater development but here we learn so little about them despite they are just screaming for some strong character arcs! I do tend to think Belle Bottom and Jean-Clawed might have the most compelling characters, with the rest getting whatever is left over. The road not taken…
I did enjoy Minions: The Rise of Gru and felt it was a good addition to the Despicable Me franchise. Thankfully, it doesn't feel too outdated despite having been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, however I do feel it might be for the best that they chose to move on from Despicable Me. If they want this series to continue, I would say just give us some short cartoons starring the Minions before the main feature as I feel there is nothing left to explore with Gru. It was a fun ride and the Minions always maintained their humor but…
…wait, we are getting a Despicable Me 4? What’s next, "Revenge of Chicken Minion"?
…yeah they’re going to drag this through the mud aren’t they…
Minions: The Rise of Gru (2022) TreyVore rates it: B
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Apr 10, 2023 17:56:20 GMT -5
I thought you were going to review the Super Mario Bros. movie. Oh well. Could you review that next, please? I’d like to see how your thoughts compare to mine. I assume you ready my review already.
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Apr 15, 2023 22:10:24 GMT -5
I thought you were going to review the Super Mario Bros. movie. Oh well. Could you review that next, please? I’d like to see how your thoughts compare to mine. I assume you ready my review already. I still had Minions: Rise of Gru in the tank Belchic. Besides, you can't hurry art. Now, *clears throat* Here we goooooo! The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023) Distributor: Universal Pictures/Illumination Entertainment Director: Aaron Horvath, Michael Jelenic Cast: Chris Pratt (Mario), Charlie Day (Luigi), Anya Taylor-Joy (Princess Peach), Keegan-Michael Key (Toad), Jack Black (Bowser), Seth Rogen (Donkey Kong), Fred Armisen (King Cranky Kong), Sebastian Maniscalco (Spike), Kevin Michael Richardson (Kamek) Runtime: 92 min. MPAA rating: PG (action, some violence) This movie, based on Nintendo’s highly successful Super Mario Bros. franchise, is about Mario and Luigi who, having stated a plumbing service in Brooklyn, are still trying to get off the ground. Seeing a news report about a manhole leak, they go to make the repair but are sucked in and get separated. Mario lands in the whimsical Mushroom Kingdom and while in the company of a Mushroom Retainer named Toad, he goes to meet his benevolent ruler Princess Peach. There he learns that Luigi has landed in Dark Land and is being held hostage by the Koopa King Bowser, used for the purpose of martial blackmail. Having the power of a Super Star at his beck and call, Bowser might be indestructible. Seeking the aid of the Kongs, can Mario, Toad and Peach rescue Luigi, save the Mushroom Kingdom and defeat Bowser? I’m 100% sure if you have ever touched a video game console ever since the 1980s, you have heard of Nintendo’s flagship franchise Super Mario Bros. Even if you are not a gamer, chances are you can probably answer that it is Nintendo’s most profitable franchise. It pulls in so much money year after year with a heavy focus on the concept of fun. Another major reason for this is because artistically, Mario could be seen as being a boys’ answer to Barbie. He’s pretty much whatever you want him to be; whether it’s a plumber, a doctor, a pro athlete, an Olympiad contender, a racer, a brawler… that’s probably why he is so successful, because he could be anything. Being a gamer myself, I still found myself going into self-defense mode when I heard about this movie. I did have my reasons. Mario may be able to appeal to your sense of fun, but being a character is another issue altogether. I never actually saw the original anime film from 1986, but I remember growing up watching the original DIC cartoons from the late 80s/early 90s (the earliest one being The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! which starred Captain Lou Albano and Danny Wells in live-action segments). They were certainly entertaining but the quality probably depended on your definition; they don’t hold up so well now. My biggest case of self-defense came from the fact that the last time we saw a movie about Super Mario Bros. was the original live-action film from 1993 that starred Bob Hoskins, John Leguizamo, Samantha Mathis and Dennis Hopper. Opening so close to Jurassic Park, it was an abysmal critical and commercial failure for Nintendo and had since put the kibosh on their franchises being adapted into movies. And yes, that was before what happened when we had the first American adaptation of Godzilla; Toho bought the rights to the character so they could kill him! Time heals wounds, I guess, as I remember back in 2019 we got the live-action adaptation of Pokemon: Detective Pikachu and it went over very well. Later Mario’s rival Sonic the Hedgehog would get at least two movies when the pandemic was active and were very successful despite the odds. On the other hand, we had a new Mortal Kombat movie in 2021 that honestly felt like half a movie, and same year release Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City just plain sucked. Surely this could not be worse than that 1993 atrocity, right? Well there was hope. Accomplished Nintendo game designer/director Shigeru Miyamoto was on hand as an Executive Producer, so he would be with the team at Illumination to answer questions about how these characters are supposed to work; after all, if you are making a movie about a big license like this one surely they would have a rigid bible you would have to follow. And hey, 2023 was the year that Universal opened Super Nintendo World at Universal Studios, so why not have a big screen movie to promote it? And hey, I’m the guy who wrote a very comprehensive article on Street Fighter: the Movie (1994), so with that in mind, let’s have my thoughts on the new Super Mario Bros. Movie. Let’s begin with the story. Now the games don’t exactly have the deepest, most intricate plots to adapt into a movie. You have a story in the game, where it serves a straightforward rescue mission about how Mario is trying to save Princess Peach from Bowser. However that would make for a very blah movie. There is a bunch of other things from the game that movie throws in being that it’s something you would do if you were playing a Mario game, like touching a Super Mushroom makes you grow in size, a Fire Flower gives you firepowers, etc. The movie doesn’t really explain much in regards to how some of these aspects are supposed to work. Then you have the moments of fanservicing that fans want to see. Again, this acknowledgement of the franchise’s history is nice and appreciated but in terms of story it does feel pretty thin. However… I suppose the story didn’t need to make sense because they were trying to emulate the joy you typically have playing the game. I… suppose it’s a fair compromise? Some of the themes they go for ring true as well, like how you can’t force someone to love you and having family by your side makes you invincible. The movie’s animation provides a plethora of eye candy; a gamer will notice a lot of small Easter eggs to the franchise’s past which I found to be a welcome addition. There is plenty of details that go into making Brooklyn, the Mushroom Kingdom, Bowser’s Keep, etc. look authentic to what you are expecting from the games. Thankfully the Illumination aesthetic is kept to a minimum here; unlike what you might expect the characters to look, they maintain their more modern game aesthetics rather than make it look what you might from Illumination. I won’t deny the animation is the strongest feature in the movie. Now, do you remember the characters from the Mario games? Well, you’ll see them here, no question. Maybe I should begin with our hero, Mario. He is the older of the two Mario Brothers and of course his dad doubts his dragging Luigi into his business with him is a smart idea. If you remember in the game series, Mario seemed to be trying to save the day just to be good, however for the movie that wouldn’t have made for the most compelling story. Here to give some dramatic weight to the story Mario is out to save Luigi as Bowser is holding him captive. Luigi is the younger brother of the two and thus is helping push the earlier theme that I listed. The thing I did not like regarding either of them is as while I give the team at Illumination props for going anti-woke with not casting Latin voice actors, as the Mario Bros. Chris Pratt and Charlie Day don’t have the best time with their roles. They both sound rather blah. There was some level of controversy as Charles Martinet could still have done Mario’s voice and would have sounded all the more authentic, I imagine they were cast to give the movie some marquee appeal. Princess Peach is likely the most different in adaptation; in the games she is practically the damsel in distress but here she’s more of a Warrior Princess. Anya Taylor-Joy thankfully does a better job with her role. Toad, the bravest Mushroom Retainer, is likely a comedy relief and Keegan-Michael Key delivers his comic timing with the same enthusiasm you would expect. Donkey Kong appears in the movie as Mario’s immediate rival that following his defeat and some bonding, has more of a reason to side with Mario. Bowser, the movie’s main villain, doesn’t have a truly strong reason for his evil nature; he really does this for the lulz. He does make up for it with a personality, and Jack Black was clearly enjoying himself in this role. There are probably some other characters you’d probably want me to tell you about, but they don’t appear and you have to save something for the sequel. After all, the Marvel Cinematic Universe wasn’t built in a day! The original movie from 1993 may have a status as being an abomination, but this movie… I guess I can say it has earned the right to live. Despite The Super Mario Bros. Movie many times feeling like a plug for the IP, it makes up for it with a sense of fun, and it delivers on that promise. Nobody will mistake this movie for high art, but sometimes… you have to remember that these movies are supposed to be fun, not a big lecture on rights or equality. I enjoyed myself and seeing all the money this film is pulling in, we will no doubt see a sequel, and we may end up seeing a Nintendo Cinematic Universe if they are allowed to do other franchises as well. The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023) TreyVore rates it: B
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Apr 16, 2023 0:21:00 GMT -5
See, Trey? That wasn’t so bad, was it? Despite all your doubts, you gave the movie a fair chance, and gave it a solid grade. Though I’m sure you’re probably still saving your A rating for Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse.
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Apr 30, 2023 0:21:30 GMT -5
This review was a request from Belchic, being one he recently reviewed. Thanks to it being available to watch on FreeVee and Tubi, I was able to take in the whole movie and now I give you:
The Last Unicorn (1982)
Distributor: Jensen Farley Pictures/Rankin-Bass Productions/ITC Films/Topcraft Director: Arthur Rankin, Jr., Jules Bass Cast: Mia Farrow (the Unicorn/Lady Almalthea), Alan Arkin (Schmendrick), Jeff Bridges (Prince Lir), Tammy Grimes (Molly Grue), Robert Klein (the Butterfly), Angela Lansbury (Mommy Fortuna), Christopher Lee (King Haggard), Keenan Wynn (Captain Cully), Paul Frees (Mabruk) Runtime: 93 min. MPAA rating: G (all ages admitted)
This movie, set in a world of fantasy, is about an all-white female unicorn who learns from a pair of hunters and a butterfly that she is the only unicorn left in the world. The reason for this is that a malevolent creature named the Red Bull has captured them all. Knowing the peril at hand, and her own mortality at risk if she leaves her forest, the last unicorn goes off to rescue her kin.
Chances are, if you have had some sort of childhood, you probably have a history with Rankin/Bass. Name not ringing a bell? They are well associated with the Christmas season, so you probably are familiar with their work; they have what you could judge as a monopoly on seasonal specials from the 1960s/1970s that still play every holiday season. With Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, The Little Drummer Boy, Frosty the Snowman, Santa Claus is Coming to Town, The Year Without a Santa Claus… the only OG Christmas specials they didn’t give us were A Charlie Brown Christmas and Dr. Seuss’s How the Grinch Stole Christmas!
That’s only what they may be best known for. They were also notable for making the original cartoon about The Jackson 5ive and doing their spin on The Hobbit and The Return of the King long before we had the live film series, and children of the 1980s also remember them for giving us memorable 1980s cartoon series like ThunderCats and SilverHawks.
During the late 1970s/early 1980s, they would do this movie. Based on Peter S. Beagle’s novel which shares the name, this movie would be the first animated film they made after those aforementioned adaptations of J. R. R. Tolkien’s books. It did fall into obscurity especially when you take into account that Don Bluth was the man for 1980s animated feature films, but this movie would go on to develop a cult following. But is it worth watching right now? So here we go with my thoughts on Rankin/Bass’s early 80s animated film about an equine not related to My Little Pony.
The movie’s story is clearly fantasy-based, as we have a very out there story about a female unicorn who learns that she may be the last of her kind unless she can free her kin from some monstrous red bull. However, this movie is not as straightforward as it might appear. It has plenty of hard choices and emotions the characters would have to play with. It goes through some paths where there are no easy answers and they are handled with much greater nuance than some other animated films would. No one ever said the path you go down in life is easy no matter what you do, and chances are you will end up making a lot of mistakes and questioning yourself as you go on. This movie does have a bit of humor to brighten the mood but for the most part it’s a very serious film.
I will add though, that you should not judge this movie on account of the fact it’s animated that it’s automatically strictly for kids. It does contain a few brief moments of nudity, occasional uses of mild profanity and a truly awkward sequence where a character is essentially forced into motorboating an anthropomorphized tree. What is this movie rated?? G!? Just exactly how did they dodge the PG?!
Now, for the animation, Rankin/Bass always had some offbeat animation that is identifiable, but here there is plenty for you to take in. The movie does have some Japanese artists that lent their talents to this film and one might be excused for thinking this movie was meant to be Japanese anime. In truth, some of its artists would effectively be what led us into Studio Ghibli!
For a lot of the animation, we have several mood-reflecting scenes like how the Unicorn’s forest is meant to be full of life, while King Haggard’s castle is completely decrepit and lifeless. A lot of thought went into the emotions one is supposed to be feeling and the musical score, oddly enough, seems to fit the atmosphere without sounding like a parody of the stereotypical bard. Some of the character animation looks very much like they have two different animation teams on hand, an example of which being how Schmendrick looks very much like a typical Rankin/Bass character with his small eyes and big nose while other characters like Molly, King Haggard and the Unicorn all seem to have more of a Japanese influence. Oddly enough, they still look like they belong in the same movie, likely because of its fantasy themes!
The movie’s characters are certainly a complex bunch. Who do I start with… maybe I should start with Schmendrick, the amateur magician. He originally was working for a manipulative witch but believed in more than seeing with his eyes and wants to aid the Unicorn in her quest. Molly Grue is a bandit’s lover who insists on helping them due to her long-standing childhood fascination with unicorns. Prince Lir is the villain’s son who falls for Lady Amalthea and he would do anything to make her his woman, not fully aware she is not human. King Haggard, the villain of the movie, is the dreary king who finds no joy in anything barring the unicorns, he’s clearly standing in for why depression is a serious problem.
Then of course, we have the leading unicorn. As a mythical creature she is unnamed but upon arriving at King Haggard’s castle she is named Lady Amalthea. She is probably the most complex character in the movie. At first, you have a unicorn that is on a simple rescue mission but it’s a lot more complex as the movie goes. When she is about to be captured by the Red Bull (not THAT Red Bull!) Schmendrick uses his magic to transform her into a mortal woman. At first she is disgusted with her new form, wondering why she is suddenly stripped of her immortality for a body than can die. As it goes, she soon starts questioning herself as she loses sight of her original mission now that she is in a human body; she can feel human emotions such as regret and falling in love. The characters are all very fleshed out and very complex and that’s most certainly good!
Rankin/Bass had most definitely done Peter S. Beagle’s book a lot of justice here, he even approved it himself! The Last Unicorn might not be as obscure as work such as The Comic Strip, but it’s a movie that deserves a lot more love than it gets. They were on their A game with this film and it still works amazingly well. The Last Unicorn is a thought-provoking movie with a story that gets more complex as it goes with strong animation and truly memorable characters. I still may have preferred The Secret of NIMH but losing to Don Bluth is nothing to spit at. If a unicorn is truly a sight to behold, then this movie is truly solid and well-defines the aesthetic of the 1980s. Arthur Rankin and Jules Bass may not be with us anymore but this is a lasting movie that will define their legacy!
The Last Unicorn (1982) TreyVore rates it: A
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Apr 30, 2023 18:23:46 GMT -5
Wow! I’m surprised you loved it so much! Guess I’m glad I recommended it then!
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on May 31, 2023 23:56:20 GMT -5
Thank you Belchic. Now how about we get some more 1980s goodness in?
The Little Mermaid (1989)
Distributor: Walt Disney Pictures Director: Ron Clements, John Musker Cast: Jodi Benson (Ariel), Christopher Daniel Barnes (Prince Eric), Pat Caroll (Ursula), Kenneth Mars (King Triton), Samuel E. Wright (Sebastian), Jason Marin (Flounder), Buddy Hackett (Scuttle), Paddi Edwards (Flotsam, Jetsam), Ben Wright (Sir Grimsby), Edie McClurg (Carlotta), Will Ryan (Seahorse), Rene Auberjonois (Louis the Chef) Runtime: 83 min. MPAA rating: G (all ages admitted)
This movie is about a fun-loving and adventurous mermaid named Ariel who is fascinated with all things human. Having filled up a whole grotto with her finds on human life, she longs for something more, regardless of the wishes of her father, the powerful King Triton, who thinks there is nothing good coming from the human world. One day, Ariel swims to the surface and in the middle of a hurricane, saves the life of the handsome Prince Eric. Determined to be with him, she seeks out the aid of the treacherous sea witch Ursula, who agrees to trade her human legs in exchange for her beautiful singing voice. Together with her friends, the introverted Flounder, the reggae-singing court composer crab Sebastian and the featherbrained seagull Scuttle, can Ariel win Prince Eric over and save her father’s kingdom before it falls into Ursula’s tentacles?
I’m sure you have had some sort of history with this movie. The Little Mermaid began life as one of Disney’s earliest projects, originally starting off as what would have been part of an anthology film about the stories by Hans Christian Andersen. Resurfacing in the 1980s by Ron Clements during work on The Great Mouse Detective, it is often cited as the movie that started the Disney Renaissance. During this time, it was widely known that Disney had not been in the best shape since Walt himself died. After spending the 1970s and a good part of the 1980s without much success, this movie would bring Disney back to the forefront of the animation industry; it earned rave reviews and won several awards for its music.
Being that this was their first fairy tale since Sleeping Beauty in 1959, it became a highly popular film; Ariel is one of the most popular Disney Princesses, standing even toe-to-toe with Elsa and Anna on Frozen. But does it deserve its status? I guess it’s time for me to give my thoughts on this 1989 classic.
I should start with the movie’s story. Based on the story originally written by Hans Christian Andersen, you have a story set in what we could describe as a late-1700s setting about a beautiful mermaid that falls for a human prince and wants to give up her fins to be a human lady. She goes through some questionable means to get what she wants in hopes of it working out. The movie’s story does follow a very familiar path without a lot of reworkings, but the execution and personality more than make up for it as you have a vibrant and joyous story being told. The movie’s atmosphere is very deep almost like you are looking back into the original setting and it felt so lively and creative which was missing during the lull that occurred after the Disney corporation lost its founder. Even today it still enjoys a very loyal fanbase; not everything needs to be overly complicated. The movie does have some themes that some may find iffy, like how Ariel is willing to sacrifice everything to be with a prince. However, the concept of romance is very much a heavy theme and people can overlook that to embrace the sweet side of it, as well as some other themes that can be translated to more modern times, like not trusting a loan shark or people that commit shady business deals.
If there are any negative things about the story, there are a few stereotypes that were fair for their day, like how Ariel is supposed to be a heroine and has a supermodel’s body and King Triton has raging pectoral muscles while Ursula is the villain and is clearly a fat woman. Louis is a bloodthirsty French chef and his sequences where he wants to kill Sebastian to make stuffed crab is meant to be for humor. Oh yeah, and the snarfblatt? You know, the pipe? People would never get away with suggesting what that is used for in a kids’ film right now! Getting past some of these issues is not a problem though and to hate these issues is distracting viewers from a very entertaining story; many people even prefer this movie's happy end to the book's tragic end.
The movie’s animation is another strong aspect; it is all in cel-animation and indeed, this is would be the final major Disney animated film to not utilize any CGI whatsoever. There is plenty of visual spectacle to take in, like some of the water effects while the characters are underwater or the bubbles that result after a fast motion. The movie does make good use of color too, like how Ariel and Flounder are swimming about in a sunken galleon and it’s completely dark or the happier moments like when Prince Eric takes Ariel on a tour of his kingdom. The movie does make some very solid sound effects like how when the shark that menaces Ariel and Flounder you get the feeling like you might be walking through an aquarium. The climax does present a feeling of real danger as well as the light blue effects on normal flesh tones suggest Ursula now has power over the ocean and now can bend it to her will.
Indeed, the only thing that might throw someone off is how many times the humans and mer-people (there are merboys alongside mermaids, after all) are animated very much like human characters, whereas the animal characters (ie. Sebastian, Flounder, Scuttle, Flotsam, Jetsam, all the fish in general) seem to be more like toons. Flounder does seem like he’s supposed to be big and fat while Sebastian has plenty of ‘animated’ moments (such as how his eyes can pop out from their sockets). Eric’s sheepdog Max seems like he is meant to be as animated as possible! Regardless, there is enough of a balance between the realism and the toony side to provide a very strong sense of coherency and to nitpick too much would be distracting from all the undersea beauty!
Now, for the characters. You do have a good number of them here and they will leave a big impression. Ariel is the gateway into the movie’s world being that she is smart, adventurous and brave. If you want any indication that this movie is meant to be seen from a woman’s viewpoint she is a strong example. This can be misread, as probably the biggest contribution that she makes during the climax is when Ursula tries to kill Eric she intervenes and Ursula winds up killing Flotsam and Jetsam on accident. Oops. However, I don’t tend to think of this as bad, as clearly Ariel wants to be submissive while Eric is her strong, manly protector. These characterizations don’t tend to make her any less popular though! Voice actress Tara Strong even went on to say she is her favorite Disney Princess! Her father, King Triton, is the just and noble ruler of Atlantica who is overprotective of his youngest daughter; he does not wish to see her get nabbed by some surface-dwellers and has stereotypes that they are nothing but savages that just take from his ocean. He is supposed to be a roadblock that Ariel would have to convince that Eric is worthy of his daughter’s hand in marriage. Sebastian the crab is the court composer who gets tasked with supervising Ariel, he has scores of personality and his highly animated moments make him entertaining. I even will confess that due to his swing and musical influence, I happen to have a thing for Caribbean beats. Flounder is Ariel’s best friend and meant to be her closest confidant; compared to Ariel he’s timid and much meeker. Clearly nothing is meant to be between him and Ariel. Scuttle the seagull is a little more limited compared to the other two; clearly he can’t be underwater with them at all times but his role is to be Ariel’s link to the human world being that he shares her fascination with humans. He doesn’t always get his facts right but he’s also a very entertaining character. The movie’s villain is Ursula the sea witch, a woman who was exiled from King Triton’s palace presumably because he did not agree with how she was making use of her magical talents. As a character, Ursula is very feminine but her only lust is for power; she does claim to have mended her past but everyone knows that a leopard never changes its spots. Her eel henchmen, Flotsam and Jetsam, are a pair of symbiotic pets who are always together; their job is to help make Ursula seem all the viler.
If you don’t look at some of the minor characters, the weakest of the leading characters might be Prince Eric. He does have some hints of a character like how he doesn’t have much drive to settle down with a princess and get married but he doesn’t have much of a personality. Not saying he was bad, just he didn’t get much to go on. Probably the only other character of note would be Grimsby, Eric’s loyal steward. The movie’s clearly loaded with a very memorable cast!
Now I have to tell you about the songs. This collaboration between Howard Ashman and Alan Menken produced some highly memorable songs that you would be singing for a great long time; it technically brought Broadway into animation! It starts with “Fathoms Below” which I think would be appropriate for an introduction to how there is a vast and colorful assortment of life under the sea. “Daughters of Triton” is more or less our lead into Ariel’s introduction. “Part of Your World” is Ariel’s “I Want” song that details her fascination with human culture and is important to her goal and character. It gives us insight on her desires to be more than a simple mermaid and see the world beyond her grotto; in fact this is likely what inspired a lot more animated films to do a similar song! It is highly memorable and makes people empathetic with her; she wants to grow and learn. It is no wonder it is one of their most memorable songs. “Under the Sea” is Sebastian’s showstopper song where Sebastian tells Ariel about why she should forego land life to remain in the ocean; you have no worries under the sea as opposed to the drudgery of life on land. Indeed, this Caribbean-influenced song would go on to win multiple awards and is a staple of Disney’s greatest tunes. “Poor Unfortunate Souls” is Ursula’s “Villain Song” that details her past and what she can do for Ariel, while simultaneously masking her malevolent intentions. “Les Poissons” is more of a “Comical Situation song” where Louis the French chef is preparing Eric’s meal not knowing Sebastian is utterly engrossed by what he’s seeing. “Kiss the Girl” is the "Love Song” where Sebastian, Flounder and Scuttle try to get Eric to kiss Ariel, thereby breaking the spell Ursula put on her. This is another highly notable song in that it tells Eric he needs to be the assertive one in his romance with Ariel, giving some adherence to gender roles. This song was also nominated for multiple awards but did not win; in all fairness though it would lose to “Under the Sea”. The soundtrack is one of the best parts of the movie!
The Little Mermaid is a classic Disney film and for good reason; with it’s simple yet compelling story, classic cel-animation that still looks great, highly memorable characters and rockin’ soundtrack, this is a movie that will never go away! Cementing that fact is that in 2022, this movie was selected for preservation by the Library of Congress for being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant”. That means it can now sit together with some all-time greats that includes Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King! Time will tell if Aladdin can join them but I’m very happy to say The Little Mermaid is a gem and one you should make, pardon the expression, “Part of Your World”!
The Little Mermaid (1989) TreyVore rates it: A
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Jun 30, 2023 21:23:28 GMT -5
Just in time for the Fourth of July, I now give you:
An American Tail (1986)
Distributor: Universal Pictures/Amblin Entertainment/Sullivan Bluth Studios Director: Don Bluth Cast: Phillip Glasser (Fievel Mousekewitz), John Finnegan (Warren T. Rat), Amy Green (Tanya Mousekewitz), Nehemiah Persoff (Papa Mouskewitz), Erica Yohn (Mama Mousekewitz), Pat Musick (Tony Toponi), Dom DeLuise (Tiger), Christopher Plummer (Henri le Pigeon), Cathianne Blore (Bridget), Neil Ross (Honest John), Madeline Kahn (Gussie Mausheimer), Will Ryan (Digit), Hal Smith (Moe) Runtime: 81 min. MPAA rating: G (all ages admitted)
This movie is about a spirited yet naïve mouse named Fievel, son of the Mousekewitz family. In the year 1885, he and his family are disillusioned with the anti-Semitism against Jewish faith in their hometown of Shostka, Russia. Believing there are no cats in America, the Mousekewitz family boards a boat to make the long trip to the New World but Fievel falls off the boat and is separated from his family. Making it to the New England colonies, the Mousekewitz family now must cope with the loss of their son while Fievel drifts to New York and now must make the harrowing task of surviving without the care of his loving family. Is there any hope that Fievel may see his family again?
After having the success that he achieved with The Secret of NIMH, Don Bluth was the man for animation in the 1980s. So much so that when Steven Spielberg started working with him this would actually lead him into animation; later movies like The Land Before Time and Who Framed Roger Rabbit would actually prompt Spielberg to start his own animation studio Amblimation.
This movie originally started life as a short film, but Spielberg felt it had the potential to work as a big-screen feature film. It was going to be a movie featuring an all-animal cast, but Don Bluth suggested that it feature a mouse society that was hidden from the human world, similar to his earlier movie The Secret of NIMH and Disney’s The Rescuers. When it was released in theaters in the holiday season of 1986, it was very successful, outgrossing even Disney’s own The Great Mouse Detective, another cel-animated movie about mice.
From a personal standpoint? This was one of the first movies I actually did get to see in its original theatrical release! True story! So now, to cap off the animated films that Don Bluth had done while he was the don of animation in the 80s, I will now give you my input on An American Tail just in time for the Fourth of July.
For the sake of avoiding trouble, I will not make any disparaging remarks on Fievel’s home country. It’s for the best that you don’t kick a country while it’s down.
The movie’s story is about a Russian-Jewish mouse family in 1885 who want to leave their home due to the dangers of cat invasion so their plan is to immigrate to the United States, which is full of freedom and opportunity. This is a reason why despite the recycled theme, I do think it would have been for the best that the movie was about a secret mouse society rather than an all-animal cast. Being an immigrant would of course carry a lot of baggage (figuratively and literally) and there are cultural revolutions you would have to adapt to, meaning you would of course now be living in a free country, but that doesn’t mean problems would not exist. After Fievel falls off the boat and washes on Liberty Island, he and his family would have to endure plenty of hardships in their quest to not only survive but be reunited.
One thing this movie did seem to do is I do think it may have opened my eyes to the idea of culture. The main family is of course Russian, alongside nods to other cultures such as British, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Irish… I may have been a kindergartener at the time, but this may have helped start my fascination with foreign cultures and customs. Very nice to have and will help encourage children to acknowledge there is a world beyond the one they know.
The story is written well, but it may not be the movie you’d want to take in at any time. Being that the theme is about immigration, and it’s supposed to be set during the 1880s when the United States had only recently seen it’s centennial, the technology was clearly much different then so it wasn’t all sunshine and rainbows. Very much so, as one issue I do take with the movie is the fact its tone is so dreary. There are very long stretches where we get the tone is establishing life in a new world is going to be much different than you knew along with some distressing ideas of possibly never seeing your family again. This movie does have lighthearted moments and fun moments to help brighten the mood, but there aren’t enough to provide balance to the rest of the movie which tends to be very bleak. This was a major reason why Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert did not respond well. I understand the tone they were going for, but I just felt that The Secret of NIMH and later The Land Before Time would maintain a better balance. Regardless, it never loses sight of heart and hope always lives.
The movie’s animation? Being that this movie was animated by Don Bluth and Sullivan Bluth Studios, it has Don Bluth’s master draftsmanship which you see everywhere. Being that this is a movie about a secret mouse society, you tend to see a lot of unclean parts of the new world which does help immerse you in feeling of what you’re meant to be seeing. Some of what I did like as well was some of its use of light like how in one sequence Tanya is brightly colored to suggest she thinks her brother is still alive while her parents are more washed out in color to suggest they feel he may be gone for good.
The downside to some of its environments are because even the environments are supposed to be dirty in appearance, this does tend to add to the dispiriting tone. It just seems like to go along with the feeling of being down in the dumps, you have a mouse character that… seems to be walking through many dumps as well as not pleasant weather conditions such as rain or fog. I do get that the movie knew its theme but again, it just might not be the movie you’d want to take in at any time. Warts and all, the animation is very much Don Bluth and it’s on fully here.
Now for the movie’s characters. You do have a good number of characters here. The movie’s hero, Fievel Mousekewitz, is the gateway into the movie’s world and they did a good job maintaining a lot of his childlike innocence and naivety along being too immature to understand romantic love. The journey he takes is one people would never want to make, but he does learn some important life factors like self-confidence and the necessity of making friends. His parents are polar opposites to each other, with Mama being the level-headed disciplinarian and Papa being the passionate starry-eyed dreamer. After they lose hope of seeing Fievel again, his older sister Tanya is the one to maintain the hope that Fievel is still alive. For Fievel’s friends that he makes during the story, Tony is an Italian-American mouse who maintains some loyalty to Fievel after he helps him escape a sweatshop, and Bridget is Tony’s love interest who had lost her parents to the cats and wants to aid Fievel due to her kind nature. There is also Henri le Pigeon, a French-descent pigeon who encourages Fievel to never lose hope and Tiger, the big orange tabby who is supposed to be an enforcer of the Mott Street Maulers, but is too much of a kitten to want to harm Fievel in addition to being a lovable comic relief. Gussie and Honest John are respectively a wealthy lady and a politician who have some authority over the new environment and are necessary for the story as they lead the mice to eradicate the cat gang from New York. The movie’s villain is Warren T. Rat, who is actually a con artist leader of the Mott Street Maulers whose only interests are terrorizing the mice and lining his pockets with cash. His accountant, Digit the cockroach, is a prone-to-nervous tic character who inexplicably can generate electricity through his antennae. We again have another very memorable cast of characters that Don Bluth and his team knew how to create.
For the songs? This movie does contain the musical numbers you would expect from a Don Bluth movie and together with composer James Horner they are a real spectacle. “No Cats in America” is a Broadway-esque number about the past hardships and the potential new land of freedom and opportunity that awaits, I very much appreciated different cultures and moods described through this number. “Never Say Never” is the song meant to provide hope and does contain a solid message. “A Duo” is the buddy song to solidify the bond Fievel now has with Tiger which is meant to provide fun. Finally, the one that received the most accolades, “Somewhere Out There”, is the song that on a deeper level means that despite being so far away from the ones you care about are not as far away as you may think.
I do have to admit that some of the execution on that song could have been better. Mainly because while I didn’t have so much of a problem with Tanya’s verses, Fievel’s have a tendency to be rather Narm-y as he goes through different tones that seem to undermine how seriously he’s taking it. I understand he’s only a small child and kids don’t have great acting chops, but that was an issue I had. Thankfully, the end title version sung by Linda Ronstadt and James Ingram is much better.
Critics may have preferred The Great Mouse Detective initially, but An American Tail won plenty more people over for good reason; it’s one of the best animated films of the 1980s. With a more satisfying mixture of elements with only the tone being a recurring issue, it’s still a solid movie and one that merits your attention. I do prefer The Secret of NIMH and The Land Before Time personally, but don’t take that as a knock against it, An American Tail is still a great movie and one that Don Bluth should be very proud to have done.
An American Tail (1986) TreyVore rates it: A-
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Sept 9, 2023 23:52:10 GMT -5
Hey guys! I know it's been a bit, but I had some issues that I was grappling with. Now that I'm cool, I thought it is time to go give you my thoughts on:
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (2023)
Distributor: Paramount Pictures/Nickelodeon Movies/Point Grey Pictures Director: Jeff Rowe Cast: Nicolas Cantu (Leonardo), Brady Noon (Raphael), Micah Abbey (Donatello), Shamon Brown Jr. (Michelangelo), Ayo Edebiri (April O’Neil), Maya Rudolph (Cynthia Utrom), Seth Rogen (Bebop), John Cena (Rocksteady), Rose Byrne (Leatherhead), Natasia Demetriou (Wingnut), Giancarlo Esposito (Baxter Stockman), Hannibal Buress (Genghis Frog), Post Malone (Ray Fillet), Jackie Chan (Splinter), Ice Cube (Superfly), Paul Rudd (Mondo Gecko) Runtime: 100 min. MPAA rating: PG (violence, mild profanity, rude humor)
This movie, based on the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles franchise, is about the 4 Turtle brothers—Leonardo, Raphael, Donatello and Michelangelo—all having been trained in the art of ninjutsu and living as sewer rats under their father figure Splinter, who does not trust humans after an incident 15 years ago. Longing to live like human teenagers, they get their chance to prove themselves after some thieves steal a moped from a human teenage girl named April O’Neil. April herself is an aspiring journalist who wants to get past a viral video that was posed of her getting her chance only to barf on camera. The Turtles in turn, get their link to human robberies as April has been following a series of robberies led by a criminal called “Superfly”. When they get the chance, the Turtles meet their target only to find out he is a mutant fly, and has a gang of mutants that serve him! His plan is to use stolen technology to begin a wide series of mutations where they will assert dominance over the humans. What can the Turtles do to stop him?
Before I start this review, I will recount a prior time in my past. There was a time when I once asked my mom about what a kiddie matinee movie was. She told me that it’s the type of critic-proof movie meant to appeal to kids. It doesn’t matter if it feels like it has no direction, no acting, no script, the story makes no sense, the characters are not developed, the sets look fake, the animation is crude, the mature references feel like pandering, the messages are easily broken, it feels like a long toy commercial, if it will be forgotten in a few months… it doesn’t matter because kids don’t care about that kind of thing, it’s something that will appeal to them, they will beg their parents to see it, they may meet their friends there and they’ll treat it like it is the best thing ever. Her example was “That’s like those Ninja Turtle movies…”, other examples would be the Power Ranger movies, the Pokémon movies… and yeah, those movies based on My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic and PAW Patrol? Those are kiddie matinee movies.
Having said that, I do have a long history with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Having grown up with the classic 80s cartoon and the extensive toyline from Playmates which children of the late 80s/early 90s could not get enough of, I did learn a lot about what you may have to do if you were to take a graphic novel and you were to try to make it appeal to kiddie culture. For one, in the classic 80s cartoon, they were supposed to actually be heroes, it was different from their original description where they felt more like assassins that go around committing murders.
Cementing my history with the Ninja Turtles was the fact that the first set of movies all seemed to come within close proximity of my birthday. The original movie from 1990 was a mindful adaptation of their original story and while it did feel dark and moody many times, and while it most certainly was not a good movie it was one of the biggest hits of the year especially considering its budget and was the first movie about anthropomorphized animal superhero characters that was a hit! With costumes courtesy of Jim Henson’s Creature Shop, it was a massive risk they took, especially when you take into account the last movie of that type was the 1986 movie Howard the Duck, and that was a gargantuan critical and commercial bomb!
With a major hit having been scored, they immediately got to work on a sequel. 8 days short of a full year later, we got Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2: the Secret of the Ooze in 1991. This movie was much goofier likely in response to the dark nature of the original and felt very much like a lot of inspiration was being drawn from the 80s cartoon that was such a hit on CBS. Much more of a guilty pleasure by contrast, it appears on many peoples’ lists for worst superhero movies.
But why that movie? Why not Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 3 from 1993? The one where they went back in time to feudal Japan? No… that should not be judged as one of the worst because that’s giving it too much credit!
By that time though, the third movie did make money, but it was still seen as a Franchise Killer for a wide number of reasons. At the same time, it was just coming in when the Turtle craze was starting to wane. In 1993, it was going on for 6 years, and during that time if the original fans were in kindergarten/1st grade in 1987, they would have been in 6th/7th grade in 1993 and would have to start adding some new interests. Adding to this was the fact that in 1993 we were introduced to the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, and they suddenly took the world by storm.
We would not see another Ninja Turtle movie until 2007, when we got the CGI-animated movie TMNT. I was not sure what to make of this movie when I first saw it, but I understand that it is meant to be seen as the fourth film. It got mixed reviews, but still turned a profit. However, any plans for future movies were scrapped after Peter Laird sold the rights to the franchise to Viacom, and it would go to Nickelodeon.
From there, we would get the 2014 remake which was produced by Michael Bay. This movie got largely negative reviews from critics and audience reception was much more divided. It was the most financially successful film in the franchise and that would of course mean sequel. We would get Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows in 2016, and while critics generally thought it was a slight improvement, it wasn’t enough to turn a profit financially and was regarded as a bomb—audiences thought it was an improvement as well, but not enough to want this version of the Ninja Turtles to continue.
With the third movie in the Michael Bay-produced Ninja Turtles film series having been scrapped, they would go in a different direction with CGI animation spearheaded by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg. But what could they bring to them? We saw Pokémon escape the kiddie matinee label when we got Pokémon: Detective Pikachu, so the question is can the Ninja Turtles do the same? Let’s find out.
The story for this movie is going in a different direction than you would expect. I suppose these characters are iconic enough to not need an elaborate re-telling of their backstory, but they do that with some slight differences. For one, due to his distrust of humanity, Splinter has the Turtles use their ninja training for scavenger purposes—he has them only go for supplies and they would live forever in the sewers away from potential harm. Obviously playing up the teenager aspects of these characters, it makes them relatable in that kids don’t want to feel as though they are permanently grounded and they want to get out and experience the world for themselves. It plays up the sweet side that the Turtles are known for and gives it the needed heart.
This does not mean they forgot about the ninja aspects; the movie does give plenty of opportunities for the Turtles to kick some butts using their ninja skills to go with their moments of teenage wackiness you expect; it does give a nice balance as they only use their ninja training to stop bad guys and not just random people. What I did feel was a refreshing change of pace was the fact that this movie does not simply fall back on nostalgia for the 80s cartoon; this I do feel helps as they are not just relying on what kids would already know and allows them to progress as a franchise. Another factor is while they do feel isolated from the rest of the world, the gang of mutants they encounter is an interesting factor. The reason for this is because rather than just another Turtles vs. evil ninja clan story, you have the Turtles make a human friend in April and then have them meet some of their own kin in Superfly’s gang. I will get more into this as I go.
I don’t feel the story is completely perfect, as while I can suspend disbelief on their ninja training, because there are so many mutant characters that are introduced not everyone is going to feel fully developed, but this could change in future movies. The scheme the Turtles are going up against does sound a bit like the original X-Men movie and maybe the first Amazing Spider-Man in that Superfly and his gang are plotting to mutate everyone and while it doesn’t feel too out-of-whack, I just couldn’t help but feel like I heard that story once before. Another thing I did not truly like is the idea of one of the Turtles having a crush on April. This idea was introduced in the 2012 cartoon as in this movie Leonardo has a crush on her and this just would lead to some questions from the kids. Regardless, the movie does give you plenty of great qualities and the sense of heart and fun cannot be understated.
Now, the animation is something else too. For the most part it is in CGI, looking a bit like Claymation with hints of markers and pen sketching. Seeming to take its cues from Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, the movie uses this to make it feel like you are seeing it all from a teenager’s viewpoint together with a street graffiti look. This does work for the movie in that rather than try to look realistic, they go for more of an angsty street culture vibe and it gives the idea that the team behind the movie would understand kids and feels appropriate for the fact this movie did begin life as an underground comic book and it is a change from trying to do yet another live-action movie. I understand that the animation was one of the most difficult aspects of the movie but it was well worth it!
Now I get to discuss the characters. You probably know the Ninja Turtles; Leonardo is the responsible leader, Donatello is the tech dork, Raphael is the brawn and Michelangelo is the party-loving heart. They don’t have only these traits as they all have a raging urge to fit in despite having to obey their father figure, never shying away from dunking on each other and dropping pop culture nods. They are an easy gateway into the movie’s world and never lost sight of their relatability. Their father figure, Splinter the rat, is in a way their jailer in that while he wants his sons to be safe and never see them come to harm, he unintentionally makes them feel isolated because he’s cutting them off from the world. We have heard this type of character having been done several times before, but the strong performance by Jackie Chan helps elevate Splinter above feeling cookie cutter. April O’Neil is their kin spirit in that she also feels like an outcast because in her chance to be a reporter, she barfed on camera and now feels embarrassed. She is able to relate to the Turtles because they also want to be excepted by society and the string of robberies have caused her school’s prom to be cancelled. While I’m not sure exactly how I feel about her being an urban teenager (the idea was introduced on the 2018 series Rise of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) but… I suppose it helps add to the idea of prejudice that she is supposed to feel?
On the other side of things, we have Superfly and his gang. Superfly, being the film’s villain, is supposed to be the eldest of his ‘siblings’ in that they were all once Baxter Stockman’s ‘children’ before he was taken into custody. With his father figure gone, he essentially had to take the reins and raise his family on his own. This does give the Turtles someone they feel they can relate to being they found another family of mutants longing for acceptance; however, they are taking a more extreme measure in that they are stealing materials to build a piece of technology to mutate people so they will be forced to accept mutants. In a way, they are like the Turtles but have darker motives. Ice Cube does lend his voice well to the character, making him seem level-headed but simultaneously menacing. His gang, consisting of Bebop, Rocksteady, Leatherhead, Wingnut, Ray Fillet, Genghis Frog, Mondo Gecko and Scumbug—all tend to get beats but don’t get a ton of development; while this could change in future movies it doesn’t bother me that much because it does have the feeling like what it is like when you would take your action figures and have them all bounce off each other. It does leave something to your imagination and I like that. The other character that comes to mind is Cynthia Utrom, the TCRI agent who wants to drain the Turtles’ mutagen for her own sinister purposes. The characters all lend a big sense of fun and it’s very welcome!
I have to say, these Turtle boys have come a long way from their kiddie matinee days! I’ve always loved how the Turtles had a wide range of versatility and never lost sight of heart, and it shines through here! The fact it goes full-animation is a plus as it goes back to their roots and never loses its sense of fun. We all remember our histories with the Turtles and this movie works very well as a love letter to the fans and the franchise. I would mostly definitely recommend Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem and would even say, best Turtles film! I guess all that’s left to say is, “Turtle Power!”
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (2023) TreyVore rates it: A-
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Sept 18, 2023 0:26:09 GMT -5
Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank (2022)
Distributor: Paramount Pictures/Nickelodeon Movies Director: Rob Minkoff, Mark Koetsier, Chris Bailey Cast: Michael Cera (Hank), Samuel L. Jackson (Jimbo), Ricky Gervais (Ika Chu), Mel Brooks (Shogun Toshi), George Takei (Ohga), Aasif Mandvi (Ichiro), Gabriel Iglesias (Chuck), Djimon Hounsou (Sumo), Michelle Yeoh (Yuki), Kylie Kuioka (Emiko) Rumtime: 98 min. MPAA rating: PG (violence, rude humor, some language)
This movie, set in a feudal Japan-esque land of anthropomorphized pets, stars a beagle prisoner named Hank who is to executed for his past crimes but he is spared when Ika Chu, a high-ranking official of the Shogun, decides to appoint him the samurai to defend the impoverished town of Kakamucho. This is all an elaborate plot, for Hank is appointed this role to offend the cat-inhabited town and demoralize everyone; Ika Chu plots to wipe Kakamucho off the map to expand his palace. After an initial hostile introduction, Hank seeks out the tutorage of Jimbo, a former samurai warrior now addled by catnip. With the whole town of Kakamucho in need of a hero, can Hank save the residents and stop Ika Chu from decimating it?
Are you familiar with Mel Brooks? Sure you are, he is a very notable director who was best known for making comedies. He did make some movies like The Producers, Twelve Chairs and Silent Movie, but he’s best known for making parodies. He did movies like Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein, Spaceballs and the TV series When Things Were Rotten. At least three of his movies were included on the NFI’s Top 100 Comedies of the past 100 years. While he seemed to peter out after a while (his last movie was the 1995 dud Dracula: Dead and Loving It), no one can deny what he did for comedy.
That brings me to Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank. This movie did have a long history of being trapped in Development Hell. It dated all the way back to 2010 when it was made as a response to taking Asian movies and Westernizing them. Back then, it was called “Blazing Samurai” and was coming through Sony Pictures Animation. This movie was planned to finally be released in 2017, but got delayed several times, the production process was long and complicated and at one point, people thought it may have been canceled. That changed in 2019 when it seemed it was coming back, however due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many of the animators and voice actors had to do their jobs from their homes. We would finally get this movie in 2022 when the COVID-19 pandemic was on its way out in the summer of that year. Being a loose remake of Blazing Saddles with a Kung Fu Panda slant, the movie got mixed reviews from critics and did okay with audiences. Financially, it was written off as a dud.
When I saw this movie during the summer of that year, I did not think it was that great. I felt it was watchable but one of the weaker animated films of 2022. Forces seemed to have conspired to get me to do this review though, as I found it as an option on Prime Video and then, I happened to have found it again, rotting away in the bargain bin over at Wal-Mart.
Ironically, it was right next to a 2002 DVD copy of Blazing Saddles.
But in any case, I will now give my thoughts on Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank.
For the movie’s story, again you have a loose remake of Blazing Saddles, this time meant for kids with an anthropomorphized pets angle. Now, because the movie is being told from a more modern viewpoint and Westerns have long since been written off as dead, a fresher aspect was taken by well, rather than going West, they went East—and by that they went Oriental. In a commentary about how Asian movies wind up Westernized, and because kids are always going to be fascinated with ninjas and Samurai. Not to mention the furry side as kids like seeing talking animals. This should be a great movie!
…so, what happened? Why didn’t this movie seem to resonate with me? Well, I can think of a few things.
If you are familiar with the story of Blazing Saddles, you would know that it is a movie about a greedy attorney general Hedley Lamarr who wants to get the people of Rock Ridge to leave their hometown due to the fact it will be worth millions and a railroad being built to cross through. He persuades the Governor to hire Bart, a black railroad worker, to be the sheriff so he can offend the townspeople and drive them from their homes.
To make this a little more PC in these very sanitary times, we have a beagle who is hired to be a samurai in a town full of cats so that the villainous landlord can expand his palace. This does lead to a few issues. For one, because this is a kiddie-fied answer to Blazing Saddles, it feels much safer than before and as a result, feels toothless. The theme they go for about overcoming prejudice is a theme at first, but unlike Zootopia where that theme was consistent, they lose that in favor of a “finding a hero within” angle. What’s not helping is the seeming contentedness to mix Western and Oriental themes in a movie that’s supposed to be drawing a lot of inspiration from Japan. Then you have some other factors like how the writing isn’t all that great, like how they never have Hank acknowledge how he truthfully won his first fight.
But is it at least funny? Well… kinda. Some of the humor does get through, whether it would be some occasional fourth-wall breaking or some meta-humor. Then of course, there is some of the other sort of humor that kids do find funny which tends to be of things like fart jokes and other lowbrow comedy. Still, the humor level does feel low.
So yeah. It’s not terribly inspired. It just doesn’t feel like the story has a lot of weight, especially considering the movie it’s supposed to be remaking is just a better made, and much more comical, movie.
The movie’s animation? That does fare a bit better. They go and have plenty of Japanese influence in movie’s backdrops and the way the characters look in their attire, but again, there is the prospect of Westernized 1940s-era animation in the way the characters look and act. It is smooth enough, and there tends to be a good amount of textures, an example being the characters’ fur. Another clever aspect is like how they go for a more stylized form of animation in the beginning, where they use a black-and-white scroll like motif to describe the heroism that a samurai warrior would have to perform. However, most of the animation for the backgrounds tends to be repetitive—Kakamucho tends to have somewhat bland wood buildings on a stretch of sand that makes up most of the picture. The only other piece we get to see is the inside of Ika Chu’s palace, but you will have to wait until we are nearing the climax to see it for how awesome it is. I understand that this movie was only made on about $45 million, which is a low budget but still reasonable.
Again, I’m trying not to be too hard especially when you take into account the fact that so many animators had to work at home in order to finish this movie thanks to the pandemic. I just feel that you don’t get to see very much that will truly inspire you as a moviegoer, and it has to say something if the live actors feel more like toons than the actual toons. Still, I guess it looks okay.
The movie’s characters were supposed to be expies of their original characters. If you have seen Blazing Saddles, you will spot some of the original characters now in animation. For the movie’s hero, Hank the Beagle is an aspiring samurai who wants to be like the hero who saved him. However, his fumbling and clueless nature interfere and he just isn’t the best at his job. He may be the hero and clearly the answer to Bart, the original railroad worker turned sheriff in the original movie. This doesn’t mean he’s likely the gateway into the movie’s world, however. As I said, he doesn’t have much to allow you to think he’s the identifiable character; he was just picked on a lot and now wants to be a samurai. He’s not the most likable either, as he wants to celebrate after winning just once and it wasn’t even because of him. Michael Cera also tends to make him seem rather whiny as well and that doesn’t bode well for a character that you would want to root for. His mentor figure, Jimbo, clearly the movie’s answer to Jim the Waco Kid from the original, is the sage samurai who had felt he lost his code of honor due to a mistake and now he has fallen into quote-unquote alcoholism. He might be the best character and Samuel L. Jackson does his recognizable self with a good level of humor. Another character of note is the Shogun, the movie’s answer to the Governor with Mel Brooks reprising the role. He does not appear much but I did like the fact that he does this and it shows commitment to his work. The movie’s villain, Ika Chu, is the greedy landlord who wants to take Kakamucho and flatten it to expand his palace. He doesn’t have much of a motivation for his goal other than his own greed. I’ll also say Ricky Gervais has a tendency to always deliver his lines in a monotone voice and it makes him sound like Ika Chu just doesn’t have a lot of range. For the most part, that would end up making most of the characters; there are a few exceptions no one else truly stands out. The only ones that do would have to be Sumo, the spin on Mongo’s character, and Emiko, the girl kitten. For the former, he is the muscle-turned-ally with a twist being that instead of being a dumb brute he is a philosophical sumo fighter, I will admit I liked him. Emiko the girl kitten is the movie’s original character. She takes a part of Bart’s character in that she is the most sensible character, in all honesty I can’t help but think she probably would have been a better hero than Hank. As you can see, the characters don’t perform as well as they originally did; and the good ones aren’t enough to make up for the surplus of weak and lazily-written characters.
I’ve seen movies like Arctic Dogs and Rock Dog go on to become franchises despite not having been immediately successful, but for Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank… all I can truthfully say is it’s going to be kids’ entertainment on a budget for the forseeable future. For all the crap this movie had to undergo plus a global pandemic it had to ride out, the biggest kick in the nads had to have been the fact that once it was finally released in July 2022, you had very little reason to go see it! Even if you wanted to go see a fun summer movie that took you back to the 1970s to joke about Kung Fu Fighting, just two weeks earlier we got Minions: the Rise of Gru and that movie was a lot funnier than this! That is honestly hard to say especially taking how long it took to get here and I imagine a lot of blood and sweat went into the movie. It is most certainly better than the short cartoon that proceeds it, a Big Nate cartoon called "Big Hamster". That cartoon was just weird and I didn’t miss not seeing it when I got to revisit the movie. I won’t say the movie was truly terrible because it is watchable and contains some laughs, but the movie wound up being less than the sum of its parts; truly less than meets the eye.
This may not have been intentional, but if you wait for the end credits scene, Ika Chu does lament about how he won’t have to partake in a sequel. Cruel irony, indeed.
Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank (2022) TreyVore rates it: D+
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Sept 18, 2023 0:53:24 GMT -5
I'll need to think up some other films I'd like to see you do reviews on, Trey. I'm still curious to see your thoughts on "101 Dalmatians" and why you tend to give it a C- rather than an A+.
|
|