Showing posts with label 6-4. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 6-4. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 15, 2020

TOP 12 FAVORITE FILMS OF 2019: #6-4

Welcome back to Rhode Island Movie Corner’s annual end-of-the-year list in which I’m counting down my Top 12 Favorite Films of 2019. This is Part 3 of 4, and at this point, we’re now halfway through the list. Thus, today we’ll be delving into films #6-4, but if you haven’t checked out the last two parts of this list, just head to the links that will be provided directly below to check out the 6 films that I listed as my Honorable Mentions and films #12-7. And so, without further ado, let us return to the list…

Well, since Part 2 began with a Disney remake, it’s only fitting that Part 3 starts with another Disney remake, and while the original Lion King may be my favorite Disney animated film of all-time, you may be surprised to find that its new CGI adaptation wasn’t my favorite Disney remake from this past year. Instead, that honor goes to the remake of my #4 favorite Disney animated film which, just like the Lion King remake, endured some controversy upon its release. But unlike The Lion King remake, the controversies surrounding this film were much more than just the simple debate over its necessity.

6. ALADDIN

Will Smith, Alan Tudyk, Navid Negahban, Numan Acar, Marwan Kenzari, Naomi Scott, Mena Massoud, Adam Alzoubi, and Nathaniel Ellul in Aladdin (2019)

While all these recent Disney live-action remakes have endured tons of controversy from those who question the decision to remake classic animated films, the live-action remake of Aladdin has probably been the most controversial of the bunch to date as it was dealt with a lot of backlash prior to its release for various reasons. First, there was some controversy over a few of its casting choices, namely Naomi Scott as Princess Jasmine and Billy Magnussen as one of her potential suitors, Prince Anders. While Scott does arguably look a lot like her animated counterpart, she technically isn’t of Middle Eastern descent (in reality, she’s primarily of Indian descent). However, Magnussen was easily the most controversial casting of the whole film because while he only appears in a few scenes… he’s still the ‘token white guy’ in a film that revolves around a cast of Arab characters. Another big controversy emerged during the film’s production when it was reported that several Caucasian extras were being made-up to look Middle Eastern. For obvious reasons, this attracted quite a lot of negative press, though Disney would later comment on the matter by saying that this was only for safety precautions and wasn’t a dominant aspect of production. But then, of course, the biggest controversy that this film faced was when a ‘Special Look’ trailer for the film was released in February 2019. The teaser trailer had already come out in October 2018, and yet, it didn’t really attract any negative reactions since it was one of those trailers that didn’t really show anything major. But as for this ‘Special Look’ trailer, it gave us our first look of Will Smith as the Genie in his traditional blue form after previous promo materials showed him in the human disguise that he adopts for much of the film. And to put it simply, this first look did not go over well with the internet who, like the initial design of Sonic the Hedgehog in his feature film, turned it into the butt of many jokes.

In other words, for about a whole month, Aladdin was sporting one hell of a negative reputation online, with many predicting that it would be a straight-up disaster. However, the film’s luck did begin to change, for the most part, when its theatrical trailer was released in March. As theatrical trailers often do when compared to teaser trailers, this one gave us our best look yet at the film. It notably served as the first instance where both Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott had any spoken lines in the marketing, it didn’t rely as much on Genie’s blue form in favor of his human disguise, and it was also a solid showcase of what Will Smith was bringing to the role of Genie. And while a promo clip of Smith’s version of ‘Prince Ali’ proved to be yet another source of online controversy due to how a lot of people negatively compared it to the version from the original, the film ultimately fared okay with critics upon its release. While critical reception wasn’t great, per se, a lot of critics did feel that the film turned out to be much better than they thought it would be going in. But perhaps the most impressive aspect of this film’s overall performance was how it managed to maintain a consistent run at the box-office, which ultimately resulted in it joining the billion-dollar club. Some have attributed this to the fact that several of the films that came out over the next few weeks after Aladdin’s release ended up being rather notorious flops at the box-office. At the same time, though, one could also say that Aladdin managed to maintain its solid run thanks to positive word-of-mouth which, may I remind you, was something that it didn’t exactly have up until the release of its theatrical trailer. With all this in mind, I do genuinely think that it was very impressive that Aladdin managed to pull this off given all the hurdles that it had to overcome. It also must’ve been good for director Guy Ritchie who, despite having a considerably long career in the industry, had just come off a huge box-office flop in 2017 with the failed franchise starter that was King Arthur: Legend of the Sword.

But with that said, some did find the hiring of Ritchie as the film’s director rather odd given that he’s primarily known for gritty crime dramas. However, Ritchie’s also known for having a flashy directorial style, which does contribute nicely to the film’s action set-pieces (e.g. any instance where Aladdin traverses through Agrabah to escape from the guards). Overall, Ritchie does a solid job translating this Disney classic into a live-action context. Like the Beauty and the Beast remake, it doesn’t make any major deviations from the original’s plot but many of the new story elements that it does incorporate are solidly handled, such as giving Jasmine a new best friend in her handmaiden Dalia. And while I know that a lot of people dinged the film for its CGI (as I undoubtedly alluded to earlier with all the jokes about Genie’s blue look), the rest of the film’s production design still feels very much on point with the original’s visual aesthetic. But, of course, we can’t forget about Aladdin’s classic soundtrack courtesy of Alan Menken, the late Howard Ashman, and Tim Rice, which gets an excellent update courtesy of this remake. All the classic songs from the original return, with some of them receiving updated lyrics thanks to La La Land and Greatest Showman songwriters Benj Pasek and Justin Paul. Pasek and Paul also developed two new songs for the remake; sadly, though, one of them ended up getting cut. The song in question is ‘Desert Moon’, a duet for Aladdin and Jasmine that was meant to occur during the sequence where Aladdin is captured by Jafar and escorted to the Cave of Wonders to collect the lamp. And while it was ultimately cut for time, traces of it can still be heard throughout the film (where it’s established as being a melody that Aladdin and Jasmine remember from their childhood) and this lovely little duet was ultimately released to the public when the film hit the home video market. Thus, the final film only has one new song, a solo for Jasmine titled ‘Speechless’. That said, this new song is phenomenal as it perfectly encapsulates Jasmine’s new character arc in this film (which I’ll be delving into more in just a little bit).

However, it goes without saying that the most talked-about aspect of this film was the daunting task of finding someone to play the Genie. Let’s face it, folks, when people talk about Aladdin, the first thing that usually comes to mind is Robin Williams’ iconic turn as the pop-culture spewing magical being with ‘phenomenal cosmic power’. Williams’ performance is so revered that anyone who stood in for him in TV shows and video games basically just mirrored his take on the character. Thus, I can only imagine the pressure that Will Smith must’ve been under as the first ‘truly new’ cinematic interpretation of the character. But as I’ve said before, I feel that the key to this role is finding someone who has an unmistakable screen presence, and Will Smith is one of those actors. Because of this, Smith does, indeed, kill it in the role and thoroughly succeeds at making this version of the Genie his own. For starters, Smith makes the wise decision to not utilize Robin Williams’ penchant for impressions, which obviously set the groundwork for much of Genie’s humor. Instead, Smith relies on his classic ‘Fresh Prince’ persona, effectively making his Genie arguably more of a wisecracker than Williams’ Genie was while still maintaining an excellent friendship with Aladdin. One key aspect to that is how this Genie consistently emphasizes the dangers of falling victim to the greed that can stem from all the potential that comes from the idea of three wishes. This then ties in nicely to the dilemma of Aladdin believing that he needs to maintain the lie of him being Prince Ali, which means that, just like the original film, he tells Genie that he can’t use his third wish to free him as promised. And while the original film just had Genie mad at Aladdin for going back on his promise, Smith’s Genie takes this in a different direction by reminding Aladdin of everything that he stands to lose if the truth ever comes out. And if that wasn’t enough, Genie also points out that Aladdin is the first master he’s had in 10,000 years that he truly considers as ‘a friend’ and even states that he no longer cares about Aladdin using his last wish to set him free. In other words, Genie isn’t mad about all this; he’s disappointed that Aladdin is heading down the wrong road. Thankfully, though, Aladdin does manage to come to his senses by the end and, true to his word, sets Genie free so that he can live a human life married to Jasmine’s handmaiden Dalia.

Because of all this, Smith’s take on the Genie is easily the best part of this film. However, he is then backed by equally terrific turns by Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott as Aladdin and Jasmine. Massoud is appropriately charismatic as Aladdin and the greater emphasis on him nearly succumbing to the selfish mindset of his new princely status pairs well with the character’s classic arc of having to learn that the way to win over Jasmine is by being himself rather than trying to be someone he’s not. But when it comes to the biggest standout of the film (arguably even more so than Smith, even), that honor goes to Naomi Scott since Jasmine really benefits from a new characterization in this remake. Instead of just being stuck in the process of having to marry a prince by law, this version of the character yearns to become the first Sultana in her kingdom’s history because of her immense devotion to the people of Agrabah. However, this idea is rejected by both her father and Jafar, the latter of whom suggests that’s it better for her to “be seen and not heard”. This, of course, then paves the way for her new solo, ‘Speechless’, where she thoroughly rejects this notion, which mainly comes into play when Jafar appoints himself as the new Sultan after gaining control of the Genie’s lamp. As she’s being forced out of the palace, she fights back and convinces Hakim, the head of the palace guards, to maintain his loyalty to her family instead of Jafar. And while this is ultimately followed by Jafar using his second wish to become a powerful sorcerer and regain control of the situation, it is still an empowering moment nevertheless and Jasmine also gets to have a bit more involvement in the final confrontation with Jafar when she and Aladdin try to escape with the lamp. By the end of it all, her father relents on his initial aversion to her desires (which was primarily fueled by how he had been trying to protect her after the death of her mother) and tells her that she will become the next Sultan, which also allows her to change the law so that she can marry Aladdin. Now, to be clear, everything that I just said isn’t meant to be a dig against Jasmine’s portrayal in the original film because I still consider her as one of my favorite Disney princesses thanks to everything that Linda Larkin brought to the role. However, I would argue that this is one of those rare cases where a Disney remake manages to improve on something from its source material.

In contrast, the one weak link of this film is, sadly, the new interpretation of Jafar. Going off my review from last May, I don’t necessarily ‘dislike’ the live-action incarnation of Agrabah’s devious vizier since Marwan Kenzari does a fine enough job with what he’s given and I do genuinely like some of the ways in which this version of the story expands upon his character. Namely, he’s established as someone who used to be a thief like Aladdin but conned his way into becoming the sultan’s most trusted advisor. However, he doesn’t take kindly to the idea of ‘being second’, hence his scheme to take over Agrabah. That’s fine and all, but because the film goes for a more grounded approach to the character, he doesn’t get the chance to be as memorably over-the-top as his animated counterpart. Part of this can be attributed to how his loyal parrot Iago is also heavily subdued in his new characterization; instead of being a fully talking parrot, this Iago is just a regular parrot who primarily just repeats what other people say. That said, though, he still manages to get in some highly effective sarcastic quips here and there, like when he tricks Prince Anders into trying to pet Rajah, which obviously doesn’t end well for him. Ultimately, though, this is just a minor setback for what is primarily a solidly entertaining new spin on this classic installment of the Disney Renaissance. Just like the remake of The Lion King, this doesn’t mean that I think it’s better than the original, but like I’ve said before, the fact that we can still access the original films via services like Disney+ means that there’s no need to fear of the idea that these remakes are replacing them. Plus, as I mentioned earlier, I’m genuinely glad that this film managed to do so well because… again, let’s face it, it was THIS close to being a disaster. With that in mind, I’m curious to see what they’re going to do with the sequel that was recently announced since it was confirmed that it wouldn’t be adapting either of the original film’s follow-ups. Sure, this means that we sadly won’t be getting a remake of Aladdin and the King of Thieves (which I think most would agree is one of the best (if not the best) of the infamous direct-to-video Disney sequels), but it’s nice to know that this sequel is genuinely making the effort to take things in a new direction when it comes to continuing this story.

2019 was easily one of the best years in the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s run. Not only did this year see the fitting conclusion of the franchise’s current arc, but all three of Marvel Studios’ 2019 theatrical releases managed to gross at least $1 billion worldwide. This, of course, includes our #5 film, which delivers one of the most thrilling adventures yet for its iconic title character… and considering what film it was immediately following in the footsteps of, that’s saying a lot!

Calling Spider-Man’s debut in the MCU one of the most anticipated moments in the history of the superhero film genre would be a massive understatement. After years of being absent from the franchise due to Sony’s ownership of the character’s film rights, a deal was made between Marvel Studios and Sony that would let the latter retain the rights but give the former creative control over future Spider-Man films, thus allowing Spidey to officially join the MCU. And so, Tom Holland’s incarnation of everyone’s favorite web-slinger officially made his debut in 2016’s Captain America: Civil War, which established him as an enthusiastic protégé of Tony Stark. Now with that said, I’m fully aware that a lot of people aren’t a fan of this new interpretation of the character given how closely tied he is to Iron Man… however, it is also worth noting that this was the second cinematic reboot of the character in less than a decade. Thus, I’d argue that Marvel Studios made the right decision to not rehash the character’s origin story that we’ve seen dozens of times at this point. Instead, they set a unique new path for the character while still acknowledging where he came from without having to show us him getting bit by a radioactive spider or Uncle Ben’s tragic death. It also helped that Tom Holland proved to be a fantastic fit in the role as he perfectly nailed both Spider-Man’s knack for wise-cracks and Peter Parker’s innocently nerdy persona. This effectively set the stage for his first solo film, 2017’s Spider-Man: Homecoming, which proved to be yet another exceptional outing for the MCU in which Peter desperately tried to prove himself worthy of joining the Avengers before having to learn the hard way that he’s just a kid in a much larger world of superheroes. Upon its release, Homecoming managed to be the highest-grossing superhero film of the year (which is saying something given that it came out the same year as Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 and Wonder Woman) and it ended up taking the #10 spot in my Top 12 list that year.

Holland, of course, would then return to reprise his role in the two-parter that was Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame which, simply put, put him through quite the emotional wringer. In Infinity War, he was finally made an Avenger… before he became one of the many victims of Thanos’ snap. He was thankfully brought back in Endgame… but then had to witness the death of his father figure, Tony Stark, up close and personal. Thus, this sets up the main premise of Far From Home, in which Peter heads off on a vacation to Europe with his classmates, hopeful that this will give him a chance to take a break from his superhero responsibilities. Unfortunately for him, that doesn’t turn out to be the case as he’s forced to help Nick Fury and Maria Hill deal with a group of beings known as the Elementals that came from another dimension due to the cosmic implications of the Snap. Sure, Fury and Hill are shown to have a new ally in Quentin Beck AKA Mysterio, a superhero from the same dimension that the Elementals came from, but as Peter soon learns, he’s the only superhero affiliated with the Avengers who can help at the moment since practically everyone else is unavailable. This perfectly exemplifies the state of the MCU after the immediate events of Infinity War and Endgame while also setting up Peter’s big arc in this film in which he must grapple with the one question that everyone wants to know. Given his considerable connection to Tony Stark, is he going to be the next Iron Man? It’s a question that haunts Peter throughout the entire film, especially since tributes to Tony can be seen in almost every country he visits, which really stresses the fact that the man who made the MCU what it is today is truly gone.

All the emotional stress that Peter’s under ultimately comes to a head when Happy Hogan comes to rescue him after enduring one of the worst beatdowns that he’s ever gotten as Spider-Man. After momentarily lashing out at Happy about how much he’s screwed up, Peter then relents and, for the first time in the entire film, truly mourns Tony’s death and how he doesn’t know if he can be the next Iron Man. It is here where Happy tells him the one thing that he desperately needed to hear… that he isn’t going to be the next Iron Man and that no one could live up to Tony Stark’s legacy… not even Tony. Happy then points out that, despite all the times that his best friend second-guessed himself, the one thing that Tony never doubted was putting his faith in Peter. And the way Happy sees it, Tony wouldn’t have made his final sacrifice if Peter wasn’t around to be there after he was gone. As you might have guessed, this is easily the most emotional moment in the film and it also helps to illustrate why it’s perfectly okay to have this version of Peter be closely connected to Iron Man. Going into Homecoming, there was some concern that since Tony was going to be in that film, there was a possibility that he would steal the spotlight from Peter. Thankfully, that was not the case as Tony’s role in that film was more of an extended cameo while still giving us just enough of our favorite ‘genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist’. In doing so, it let Peter’s arc of trying to prove to everyone that he was more than just Iron Man’s apprentice properly play out. The same situation applies to Far From Home, albeit without an appearance by Tony for obvious reasons. And to top off this terrific scene, we have an utterly heartwarming moment where Peter begins to develop a new suit as Happy watches on with a look of approval. He then proceeds to put on some music, AC/DC’s ‘Back in Black’, which eagle-eyed fans will recognize as the first bit of music we ever heard in an MCU film back in the first Iron Man which, of course, was directed by Happy himself, Jon Favreau. It’s so satisfying that we can forgive Peter for thinking that it’s a Led Zeppelin song.

As for the rest of the film, Far From Home very much continues what I’d argue is a recent tradition of the MCU by being a superior sequel to what was already a fantastic first film. We’ve seen this before with the likes of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and Ant-Man and the Wasp, just to name a few. Sure enough, Far From Home is another prime example of this as it takes everything that was great about Spider-Man: Homecoming and polishes it up even further with sharper action sequences (thanks in large part to its international setting, which is used to great effect from a visual standpoint) and a tighter script. As some of you might recall, my only real issue with Homecoming was that it felt a little overlong in places to the point where some of its action sequences felt like they could’ve easily been the finales for other superhero films. By comparison, Far From Home flows a lot better narratively and is also quite arguably up there with Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 2 as one of the best interpretations of Peter having to balance his superhero work with his normal life which, in this film, primarily stems from the blossoming romance between him and MJ. The chemistry between Tom Holland and Zendaya is excellent, and while MJ doesn’t exactly get as involved in the action as Gwen Stacy did in the Amazing Spider-Man films, she still benefits nicely from how her role gets expanded upon here compared to Homecoming. Plus, when Peter tries to tell her that he’s Spider-Man, she immediately figures it out before he even says it since it’s “kind of obvious”.

But now let’s delve into one of the best elements of the film, Jake Gyllenhaal as Quentin Beck AKA Mysterio. Now, despite what I mentioned earlier about how he’s introduced as a hero from another dimension who’s helping Peter and company deal with the Elementals… let’s face it, anyone who has read any Spider-Man comics knows that he’s full of crap. Sure enough, Beck’s ruse is eventually revealed, effectively establishing him as the main antagonist. And yet, despite the obviousness of this reveal, the film does manage to work around this by giving Beck a new characterization that feels very appropriate in the context of the MCU. Instead of just being a failed actor turned special effects artist, this version of Beck is revealed to be a former employee of Stark Industries who developed the revolutionary holographic system that Tony had shown off in Captain America: Civil War. And to put it simply, Beck didn’t take too kindly to Tony giving it the unfortunate acronym of ‘B.A.R.F.’. Thus, after being fired for being too mentally unstable, he’s now assembled a group of other former Stark employees (including, of all people, William Riva (Peter Billingsley), that one scientist who got yelled at by Obadiah Stane back in the first Iron Man) to fool the world into thinking he’s the next great superhero. He made up both his ‘hero from another dimension’ backstory and the Elementals and his plans are strengthened further when Peter entrusts him with glasses given to him by Tony that are linked to a powerful A.I. system named E.D.I.T.H. (AKA Even Dead I’m The Hero) that commands a line of drones. Now with all this in mind, I’m aware that many have questioned why Tony decided to give this unparalleled source of weaponry to a teenager who clearly doesn’t know how to use it properly, as evident from the sequence where he nearly unleashes a drone strike on his classmate/romantic rival Brad Davis. And yes, I’m also aware that this is now the fifth or so MCU villain whose entire motivations stem from them being wronged by Tony, as was the case with the likes of Aldrich Killian, Obadiah Stane, and even Peter’s previous cinematic foe Adrian Toomes.

However, the key thing to take from all this is how brilliantly handled this incarnation of Mysterio is even if it’s not exactly a completely comic-accurate version of the character, and of course, a lot of this is thanks to Jake Gyllenhaal’s outstanding performance in the role. Gyllenhaal’s strong charisma is on full display throughout, which certainly makes the moments where Beck is pulling off his elaborate ruse feel genuinely convincing to the unassuming. And as for the sequences where we see Beck’s naturally unhinged mental state… well, Gyllenhaal has also proven himself to be one of the best in the business when it comes to playing characters who aren’t all there mentally. Because of this, he’s easily one of the most pitch-perfect casting choices in the history of the superhero film genre, and if you want to talk about one of the best sequences in the genre’s history, look no further than the scene where he unleashes a massive illusion-based trap upon Peter. This is up there with any magic-based sequence from Doctor Strange as one of the most visually stunning set pieces in the history of the MCU, from the army of Spider-Men that spawn from glass shards and attack Peter to him standing on top of fallen statues depicting the other Avengers. But if you want to talk about the biggest gut-punch of this sequence, how about putting Peter right in front of Tony’s grave, Beck suggesting that he’d still be alive if Peter was “good enough”, and then unleashing an undead Iron Man on him? I mean… damn! Oh, and to conclude this little nightmare trip, Beck puts Peter right in front of an oncoming train… the train wins. But then to contrast that, another excellent sequence is when Peter is facing down a bunch of drones to get to Beck and utilizes his Spider-Sense (which is humorously referred to by both Aunt May and Happy as his ‘Peter Tingle’) to defeat them. This is just another phenomenal sequence when it comes to the visuals, editing, sound design, etc.

And if that wasn’t enough, this film also sports two of the franchise’s best post-credits scenes. Now admittedly, many of the recent MCU post-credits scenes have opted to be humorous codas (e.g. Captain America’s ‘patience’ monologue from Homecoming) instead of teasing future installments of the franchise as much as they did back in the day. But with Far From Home, both of its post-credit scenes opt for the latter approach and deliver two of the most jaw-dropping twists in recent MCU history. First, we have the mid-credits scene, where a doctored video that Beck made prior to his supposed death (I say ‘supposed’ because while E.D.I.T.H. tells Peter that it’s not an illusion, I’m sure I’m not the only one who believes that this doesn’t necessarily mean that it can’t still be one) is released to the public. In the video, Beck pins his entire plan on Spider-Man before revealing that Spider-Man’s real name… is Peter Parker. Cue an appropriate ‘WTF!’ reaction from Peter (which, might I add, perfectly mirrors Aunt May’s reaction to seeing Peter in the Spider-Man suit right at the end of Homecoming) and we have a brilliant bit of set-up for the next film. Spider-Man’s real identity is now out in the open and he’s about to be in a whole lot of trouble. Plus, this sequence even gives us one of the best bits of fanservice in recent memory by having the video be made public by none other than everyone’s favorite irate media personality, J. Jonah Jameson, played once again by J.K. Simmons for the first time in a live-action film since Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 3. The Daily Bugle may be a website this time around in accordance with our current times, but it still very much fits the character, especially if you’re like me and played the recent Spider-Man game on PS4 where he’s a loud-mouthed radio host.

But then, if that wasn’t enough, we also have the film’s post-credits scene, which starts out simple enough with Nick Fury and Maria Hill driving through a city… that is, until they shapeshift and are revealed to be the Skrulls Talos and his wife Soren from Captain Marvel. They then proceed to contact the real Nick Fury, inform him of everything that’s recently gone down, and suggest that it’s time for him to come back. We then cut to Fury getting up from a beach chair on a simulated beach and walking through a giant Skrull ship. What does this mean? Well, we don’t know just yet, and given Marvel’s tendency for complete secrecy when it comes to these films, they’re probably not going to tell us anything anytime soon. One popular theory is that this is setting up an adaptation of the comic storyline known as Secret Invasion, where Skrulls are revealed to have taken the places of numerous Marvel superheroes. If so, it’ll be interesting to see how the MCU handles this, especially since most of the Skrulls that we’ve seen so far from the MCU are nobler in nature compared to what we usually see from their race in the comics. Whatever the case may be, though, one thing’s for certain; Spider-Man: Far From Home is a premier installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and a terrific epilogue to the Infinity Saga. In fact, I can safely say that it’s managed to break my Top 5 when it comes to the franchise while also becoming my new favorite Spider-Man film. Going off of what I said in my lead-in to this section, the fact that it managed to pull all this off despite being the first MCU film after Endgame (and, for that matter, the first Spider-Man film after the universally-acclaimed Into the Spider-Verse) is a testament to the fact that it’s a sharply-written and all-around well-made film.

My pick for Number 4 is a film that admittedly had to overcome a few hurdles prior to its release, namely all the skepticism that the internet had towards it given the immense legacy of the films that came before it. And yet, I’d say that it was because of that very legacy that the film managed to be another smash hit that proved why the franchise that it’s a part of is one of the all-time greats.

I still remember when this film was first announced all the way back in 2014. To put it simply, the internet wasn’t exactly thrilled about this development. In fact, I’d dare say that a lot of people were quite angry about this. The reasoning behind all their frustrations was quite simple, really; why even do a fourth Toy Story film when the last one was quite arguably the perfect conclusion to the adventures of Andy Davis’ toys? And while I’m sure I’ve established by now that I’m not someone who harps on a film for being ‘unnecessary’ since I feel that this term has become grossly overused nowadays, even I have to admit that I totally understand why because… yeah, 2010’s Toy Story 3 genuinely was the end of an era. It provided a wholly satisfying conclusion to our favorite toys’ relationship with their original owner, Andy, who gives them away to a young girl named Bonnie so that they can be given the love and attention that they deserve while he heads off to college. For those who grew up with the original trilogy, there couldn’t have been a better ending for these beloved characters, which effectively made Toy Story one of the rare trilogies where every installment was outstanding and the third one wasn’t a victim of the dreaded ‘threequel curse’. And that, folks, was the biggest hurdle that Toy Story 4 had to overcome; the fact that most people felt that, aside from the shorts and TV specials that Pixar produced between 2011 and 2014, the franchise had reached its logical conclusion. However, Pixar soldiered on as they legitimately felt that they had managed to find another story that was worth telling… and yet, there were still a few road-bumps that they encountered on the way. Namely, there was a point where they had to rewrite about 75% of the script, with many of the contributions that had come from the writing duo of Rashida Jones and Will McCormack being scrapped due to creative differences. Ultimately, though, Toy Story 4 managed to prove quite a lot of its critics wrong upon its release as it maintained the same critical acclaim as its predecessors and was the franchise’s second entry to reach $1 billion worldwide. It also became the studio’s tenth film to win the Oscar for Best Animated Feature… even if some Oscar voters wanted to see a non-Pixar film win the award for once.

Easily the most talked-about aspect of the film going into it was the return of one of the series’ most iconic supporting characters, Bo Peep. Prior to this film, Annie Potts’ sweet-natured shepherdess hadn’t had a major role in a Toy Story film since Toy Story 2 two full decades ago. In Toy Story 3, it’s established that Bo was one of the various members of the gang who was given away as the years went on (sure enough, this new film opens with that very moment). But in Toy Story 4, Woody reunites with Bo for the first time in several years, and as we soon find out, she’s not the same porcelain figurine that she used to be. In the years since she left the Davis home, she’s become an adventurous lost toy who now works to ensure that other lost toys are taken in by new owners. And while her being written out of Toy Story 3 was due to concerns over her fragile nature as the porcelain figurine of a baby lamp (which also explained why she didn’t get too involved in the plots of the first two films), this has not stopped her from becoming a fully capable action heroine. Whenever a part of her breaks off, she just laughs it off like it’s nothing and promptly tapes it back together. Because of all this, Bo has now been upgraded into being the film’s female lead, and it’s a wonderful new development for her. And yet, arguably the best part about Bo’s new characterization is that for all the great things that it does for her, it also doesn’t betray what came before. In other words, while it’s firmly established that Bo’s adventures have led to her adopting a new philosophy on what it means to be a toy, she’s still very much the good-natured gal that we know and love from the first two films.

Now if there’s one caveat to this new adventure, it’s that, because of the way that the story is structured, it primarily focuses on Woody, Bo, Buzz, and the new characters that they meet along the way. As such, fans of the franchise may be incredibly disappointed to know that this film doesn’t spend too much time with the rest of the gang. While Woody and company are off on their adventure, the others are stuck with Bonnie’s family in their RV. This may have had something to do with the unfortunate passing of Don Rickles, Mr. Potato Head’s voice actor, in 2017 even though they were able to keep Rickles in the role via archival recordings. However, regardless if this had any sort of impact on the production, many of the franchise’s most iconic characters are still basically relegated to cameos. But at the very least, they’re not completely ignored and several of them do get to have their own standout moments here and there. Case in point, they’re responsible for one of the best running gags in the film when Bonnie’s stuffed unicorn Buttercup suggests that they get her dad arrested so that the family doesn’t leave town before Woody’s group comes back. And while this idea is immediately shot down by everyone else, the plan that they ultimately go with does result in Bonnie’s dad getting into trouble with the cops (“Dad’s totally going to jail!”). It also helps that the new characters that they introduce in this film are genuinely excellent. I mean, let’s face it, folks, the Toy Story franchise has always done a wonderful job when it comes to the new characters that they introduce in each film even if they’re just a one-off character who doesn’t return for the next installment (e.g. Stinky Pete, Ken, Lotso, etc.). Sure enough, Toy Story 4 valiantly continues this grand tradition.

It all starts with Forky, a hand-made spork figure that Bonnie makes on her first day of kindergarten who questions why he’s alive and consistently tries to get thrown into the trash. Yes, the basis behind much of Toy Story 4’s plot is a living spork’s existential crisis and its totally brilliant, but through it all, Tony Hale does a wonderful job making Forky a fully endearing character thanks in large part to his adorably innocent nature. Then there’s the duo of Ducky and Bunny, a pair of carnival plushies who get involved when Buzz unintentionally takes their spot as the top prize at a shooting gallery game. The camaraderie between these two is outstanding (which makes perfect sense given that they’re voiced by Key and Peele) and the plans that they come up with to solve a situation are priceless (e.g. two wordsPlush Rush). Bo also gets a fun new sidekick in Pet Patrol officer Giggle McDimples (voiced by Ally Maki); she may be the smallest character in the history of the franchise, but that doesn’t stop her from being a delightfully chipper and all-around badass confidante for our favorite shepherdess. And, of course, we can’t forget about Canada’s greatest stuntman, Duke Caboom, voiced by the breathtaking star that is Keanu Reeves. Duke’s backstory is both tragic and hilarious in that he was abandoned by his owner Rejean just because he couldn’t do the stunt jumps seen in his own toy commercial. Nevertheless, this is a perfect role for Reeves, and I won’t lie, Duke is indeed my favorite of the new characters. But perhaps the most fascinating of these new characters is the one who is initially implied to be the main antagonist, Christina Hendricks’ Gabby Gabby.

We first meet Gabby Gabby when Woody and Forky end up in an antique store that Bo’s lamp happens to be in. She is revealed to have a talking pull-string feature like Woody, but unfortunately, her voice box is damaged. Thus, she immediately attempts to acquire Woody’s voice box, and when he escapes from her ventriloquist minions, the Bensons, they proceed to capture Forky, which puts Woody in quite the pickle since he’s fully committed to getting Forky back to Bonnie. However, it is through conversations between Gabby and Forky that we start to understand her motivations. Namely, she’s eager to have a properly working voice box so that she can be adopted by Harmony, the granddaughter of the antique store’s owner. And because of Forky’s innocuous nature, he reveals to her what he knows about Woody since he’s known him his whole life (“Two days!”), especially his connection to his past owner Andy since Woody accidentally name-dropped him instead of Bonnie during one of their conversations. Gabby then uses this information to convince Woody to give her a chance so that she can experience the same joy that Woody experienced with Andy. But while he does ultimately agree to help her out and give her his voice box, her dreams are utterly shattered when Harmony flat-out rejects her. Luckily for her, Woody manages to convince her that she can find a different kid, and while the initial plan is to have her get taken in by Bonnie, Gabby ultimately decides to go to a kid at the nearby carnival who’s gotten lost. And so, with all that in mind, Gabby Gabby is ultimately not a villain in the same vein of Sid, Stinky Pete, and Lotso. Instead, she’s just a misunderstood doll who just wants to experience what almost every toy wants; the joy of being loved by a kid.

This correlates perfectly to the key theme of Toy Story 4, which is finding one’s purpose in life. For Woody, his purpose has always been the simple idea of being there for his owner, but as the film begins, we see that he must now grapple with the fact that he’s no longer ‘the favorite’. And yet, when Forky comes into the picture, Woody immediately takes on the responsibility of ensuring that nothing happens to him since he recognizes how much Forky means to Bonnie. Thus, it goes without saying that Toy Story 4 hits just as hard as its predecessors when it comes to its emotional moments. Heck, this film hits you with the feels right out the gate by showing the exact moment when Bo was given away, and while Woody does offer to help her stick around, she resists because she understands that it’s time for her to move on. After all, she technically wasn’t Andy’s toy; she belonged to his sister Molly, who had simply outgrown her at that point. And while Bo even offers Woody the chance to join her, he declines because, as we all know, he was deeply loyal to Andy. It’s why he accidentally name-drops him instead of Bonnie when talking to Forky; even after all this time, it’s clear that Woody’s still having trouble moving on. Aside from that, there’s the previously mentioned character arc for Gabby Gabby, which triumphantly overcomes the low point of her being rejected by Harmony by ending on an uplifting note when she decides to go and comfort the lost kid. Even smaller moments like Bonnie’s uneasiness over starting Kindergarten or Woody reminding Bo of how her lamp was a great source of comfort to Molly when she was younger are just as effectively poignant.

But, of course, nothing tops the film’s finale, which was so devastating that both Tom Hanks and Tim Allen went on record stating how difficult it was for them to record it. After he and the gang manage to get Forky back to Bonnie, Woody’s forced to bid farewell to Bo once again. But as he begins to head back to the RV, Buzz re-assures him that she’ll be okay… except in this instance, he was talking about Bonnie. And so, Woody decides to stay with Bo and promptly bids an emotional farewell to the rest of the gang, who also get to have their moment to reunite with Bo for the first time in years. As the gang heads off with Bonnie and her family, Rex asks if this means that Woody is now a ‘lost toy’, to which Buzz responds that he isn’t… not anymore. Really, there’s not much more that I can add here other than that I feel this is one of those emotionally cathartic endings that may be bittersweet in many ways but also quite touching in others. In conclusion, let’s rewind back to what I noted in the intro to this section where the initial response to a fourth Toy Story film was based primarily around one question. Was there truly anything left to say with these characters when the previous film ended the way that it did? This is something that can honestly be debated until the cows come home, but for my money, Toy Story 4 managed to deliver in every possible way. Just like any great Pixar film, it is full of gorgeous animation, fully endearing characters, and a strong story that’s steeped in emotional poignancy. Because of all this, it’s safe to say that Toy Story is easily one of the best animated franchises in the medium’s history. Pixar’s attempts at doing sequels to their other films may have been hit-or-miss, depending on who you ask, but they’ve never faltered with Toy Story.

And that concludes Part 3 of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s Top 12 Favorite Films of 2019. Thanks for following along and be sure to check back in tomorrow for the Grand Finale, where I honor my Top 3 favorite films from this past year.

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

TOP 12 FAVORITE FILMS OF 2018: #6-4

Welcome back to Rhode Island Movie Corner’s annual end-of-the-year list where I’m counting down my Top 12 Favorite Films of 2018. We are now halfway through the list, and today in Part 3 of this 4-part series, we’ll be delving into films 6-4. If you missed my 6 Honorable Mentions and films 12-7, just click the links below to be directed back to Parts 1 and 2. Thus, with all that out of the way, it’s time to once again get back to the list…



To start off the second half of this list, we have an admittedly controversial pick at #6 because it’s a film that’s based on a rather polarizing bit of source material. In the case of the film, though, I’d argue that it did manage to alleviate some of the issues that audiences have had with its original incarnation.


Ben Mendelsohn, Simon Pegg, Mark Rylance, Lena Waithe, Win Morisaki, Tye Sheridan, Olivia Cooke, and Philip Zhao in Ready Player One (2018)

Ready Player One was the first film of 2018 that I saw twice in theaters. After the second time, I then proceeded to download the audiobook of author Ernest Cline’s original novel off Audible, and in doing so, I began to understand why it’s been rather controversial. While Ready Player One did do well with critics and audiences when it was first published in 2011, it’s since attracted a more polarizing response from those who feel that it’s nothing more than a hodge-podge of pop cultural references. And to be fair, it’s easy to see how it could’ve been just that given that the story revolves around an advanced VR system that allows its users to live through all their various pop cultural related fantasies, whether it’s climbing Mount Everest with Batman or driving a DeLorean from Back to the Future. As such, while I tend not to get into discussions about the long-standing debate of ‘book vs. film’, there are various reasons why I find that this is one of the cases of book-to-film adaptations where the film is indeed better than the book. For starters, it helps that the film was directed by someone as revered as Steven Spielberg who, along with co-writer Zak Penn, managed to streamline some of the more aggressively nerdy aspects of Cline’s story. Most specifically, they managed to tone down a lot of the ‘leetspeak’ that dominated much of the novel and has arguably dated it. Sure, there are still some very cheesy one-liners here and there (e.g. “a fanboy knows a hater”), but at the same time, we probably should be thankful that we didn’t have to watch a Spielberg film that featured phrases like ‘Suxorz’, a derogatory term used to describe the main antagonist’s army of indentured servants.

But easily the biggest improvement over the novel is how the film portrays its characters. Even with that said, though, several critics have noted that one of the biggest shortcomings of the film is that it’s quite lacking in terms of character development… and they’re not entirely wrong about this. Aside from main protagonist Wade Watts/Parzival, his ally/love interest Samantha/Art3mis, main antagonist Nolan Sorrento, and Wade’s best friend Helen/Aech (albeit to a lesser extent due to the film not delving into the full reveal of Aech’s identity as a young lesbian woman), every other character in the film has a very limited role in the plot. But if there’s one upside to this, it’s that the film manages to make these characters a lot more likable when compared to the novel. Because of the novel’s heavy use of ‘leetspeak’, the main characters frequently came off as being rather unpleasant, with a lot of their interactions consisting of them just lobbying geek-related insults at each other. Wade Watts, especially, was quite obnoxious when it came to some of his narration. Thankfully, this isn’t as big of an issue in the film as Tye Sheridan does a very nice job of making this version of Wade a lot more down-to-earth. And while the book does spend a lot more time focusing on the formation of Wade and his friends’ clan, the High Five, their camaraderie feels a lot more natural in the film. Sheridan has solid chemistry with Olivia Cooke as Samantha/Art3mis and I do appreciate that the film has them meeting in person a lot earlier than in the book, which didn’t see them interact outside of the OASIS until the very end. And while the other members of the High Five obviously don’t get as much to work with by comparison, Lena Waithe (Aech/Helen), Win Morisaki (Daito/Toshiro), and Philip Zhao (Zhou/Sho) all get to have their own unique standout moments in the film, like when Daito enters the final battle manning one of the mechs from Mobile Suit Gundam.

In conclusion, despite all that I’ve said about this film, I do still recognize why Ready Player One has been such a controversial bit of media. At their core, both the book and film rely heavily on their various references to pop culture, and because of this, they can also serve as a representation of some of the more unpleasant aspects of fandom that, as I’ve noted before, have sadly become a lot more prominent this past year. But when it comes to the film, it thankfully manages to tone down some of the more extreme elements of its source material. Simply put, Steven Spielberg turned this full-blown tribute to 80’s pop culture (something that he himself had a prominent hand in creating) into the kind of film that he was known for making at the time like E.T. and the Indiana Jones series. And while I’m not saying that this is necessarily ‘as good’ as those films, I have the feeling that it would’ve been a lot more like the book (which, to reiterate, wouldn’t have been a good thing) had a different filmmaker been involved. Heck, Spielberg even went as far as to limit references to his own filmography save for one moment with a T-Rex and a few nods to Back to the Future (which he only produced). And because of all this, that trademark Spielbergian magic is on solid display here in a visually stunning sci-fi adventure that boasts some fantastic visual effects that help bring the world of the OASIS to life. Highlights of this film’s impressive visuals include an incredibly thrilling race through the streets of a virtual Manhattan that sees racers deal with everything from wrecking balls to King Kong and an almost pitch-perfect recreation of Stanley Kubrick’s 1980 horror classic The Shining. In short, while I don’t ‘hate’ Ready Player One the novel the same way that a lot of people on the internet do, I ultimately prefer the film adaptation because, if anything, it proves that you really shouldn’t underestimate one of the most prolific filmmakers in the industry.

My Number 5 pick is a lot like Solo as it’s another film that truly deserved to do better than it ultimately did at the box-office. Thus, it’s quite sad that both ended up being undone by some incredibly moronic bits of controversy.


Ryan Gosling in First Man (2018)

As you might have guessed from the title, First Man tells the story of the iconic Apollo 11 mission where Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first people to walk on the moon. More specifically, the film focuses on Armstrong (it is, after all, an adaptation of his 2005 biography of the same name) and the emotional state that he was in prior to launch. Thus, for most of the film, Armstrong may come off as a blank slate to most people as he spends a lot more time preparing for the mission than he does interacting with people, whether it’s his NASA co-workers or even his wife Janet and their two sons. However, the film ultimately reveals why this is the case during the final moments of the film after Armstrong and Aldrin manage to land on the moon’s surface. While Aldrin heads off to jump around on the surface, Armstrong, in a moment of solitude, stands before the Little West Crater and proceeds to drop a bracelet into it that belonged to his daughter Karen, who tragically died at a young age from a brain tumor. Now to be clear, there hasn’t been any official confirmation that this moment ever happened, but as the filmmakers have pointed out, it’s still a reasonable conclusion to come to as it’s been said that it wasn’t uncommon for astronauts to leave family mementos on the moon. But in the context of the film, it does work to explain what Armstrong was going through at the time and why he ultimately decided to focus more on his work than his friends and family. In doing so, it provided him an outlet where he wouldn’t be distracted by his grief, and the eventual success of the Apollo 11 mission allowed him to have that final moment of emotional catharsis and officially move on from the loss of his daughter. It’s a beautifully executed emotional moment thanks in large part to an excellent performance by Ryan Gosling as Neil Armstrong.

Aside from the film’s emotional poignancy, director Damien Chazelle also manages to craft some genuinely tense sequences whenever a spaceflight is involved. Whereas most films of this nature tend to rely on grand exterior shots of spacecraft traveling through space, most of this film’s spaceflight sequences stick within the cramped confines of the ships themselves. In doing so, it helps to illustrate the fact that what these astronauts are trying to accomplish is incredibly dangerous, and the film certainly doesn’t gloss over this little factoid. Whether it’s the near-disastrous Gemini 8 mission that Neil Armstrong was involved in or the devastating fire that killed the crew of Apollo 1, it’s clear that many risks were taken to get a man on the moon. But once the film finally gets to the grand finale that is the Apollo 11 mission, that’s where things start to change. Compared to previous spaceflight sequences, more exterior shots are used (while still primarily focusing on interior shots) and said shots are generally held for longer periods of time whereas previous sequences featured more rapid cuts. And, of course, once Armstrong and Aldrin step out onto the moon’s surface, all lunar sequences were filmed with IMAX cameras, and while we weren’t granted the chance to see this film in true 70 mm like some of Christopher Nolan’s recent films, this is still one of the best uses of the format. Simply put, this was the very definition of a film that was a must-see in IMAX… a shame, then, that not many people went to go see it in IMAX because the film didn’t do so hot at the box-office. While it wasn’t an outright flop, it just barely managed to gross over $100 million worldwide… and if you follow film-related news, then you’re probably aware of one of the reasons behind this.

It all started when the film premiered at the Venice Film Festival this past August, where it was reported that it did not include a scene where Armstrong and Aldrin plant the American flag on the moon’s surface. Chazelle and Gosling (with further support from Armstrong’s sons Rick and Mark) noted that this was because they wanted to focus more on Armstrong’s story, but nevertheless, this attracted tons of controversy that mainly came from the conservative side of the political spectrum. And while I know that some will argue that there was a bit more to it than just that, it’s clear that this debacle played a considerable factor in the film’s commercial underperformance. Because of this, I must ask the following… was the planting of the American flag really the most important aspect of the Apollo 11 mission? Yes, it’s true that a lot of what led to Apollo 11 was due to the Space Race that was going on at the time between the U.S. and Russia, something that the film does properly address. And yet, this whole controversy seems to imply that simply one-upping Russia was the only thing that mattered during this moment in history, thus ignoring all the achievements in human engineering that helped make it possible. Plus, if there’s one thing that was overlooked during this debacle… it’s that the flag does appear in the damn film… granted, it’s only seen from afar, but the point still stands. This is nothing but a completely fabricated bit of controversy, and if you ask me, it’s way more offensive to the legacy of the Apollo 11 mission than what it was trying to implicate. Thus, I do hope that First Man becomes one of those films that gains a greater audience in the years to come, as it’s another excellent outing from Damien Chazelle that shows that there was much more to Neil Armstrong than just the fact that he was the first man to walk on the moon.

And now we return to the controversial claim that I made back in Part 2 where I noted that this year’s Best Animated Feature winner, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, was not my #1 animated film of the year. Instead, it’s my Number 4 pick, which I’d argue was a worthy follow-up to its beloved predecessor even with all the expectations that it had to overcome.


Samuel L. Jackson, Holly Hunter, Craig T. Nelson, Brad Bird, Sarah Vowell, Eli Fucile, and Huck Milner in Incredibles 2 (2018)

Calling Incredibles 2 one of the most anticipated films of the past year would be a massive understatement. Pixar’s 2004 classic The Incredibles is easily one of the studio’s most beloved outings. Plus, it’s quite arguably the only Pixar film not named Toy Story that fans legitimately demanded a sequel to given that it ended on a cliffhanger that teased a new villain. And while it may have taken 14 years for it to happen, the continuing adventures of the Parr family have finally seen the light of day. Now, obviously, the superhero film genre has changed quite a bit since the original Incredibles, namely thanks to the introduction of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And if anything, it’s clear that writer/director Brad Bird was well-aware of this as this film continues to focus more on its characters than its superhero-related hi-jinx. Sure, this film does feature some more excellent superhero action sequences, but at the end of the day, it’s all about the Parr family and their strong dynamic. With that in mind, though, some felt that this film heavily rehashed the plot of the first film by having one of the parents go off to fight crime while the other stays behind. And while it’s true that the plot of this film sees Helen Parr AKA Elastigirl head out to fight crime while Bob Parr AKA Mr. Incredible becomes the stay-at-home dad, there’s a bit more to it than that. The first film was mainly about Mr. Incredible overcoming a severe mid-life crisis, which ultimately ends up helping him reaffirm his devotion to his family.

As for the sequel, it sees Bob and Helen undergo a switcheroo regarding their parental roles. Helen, who had become a homemaker since the outlawing of superheroes, finds herself having to leave her family during a crucial time in their lives even though what she’s doing will help ensure their future. Bob, meanwhile, must swallow his pride and let his wife do all the superhero stuff while he tries to understand the ins and outs of being a stay-at-home dad, which includes everything from him trying (and failing) to fix his daughter’s dating woes to asking the age-old question when it comes to helping his son with his homework, “Why would they change math?”. In other words, this does a nice job of tying into what is arguably Bob and Helen’s greatest character arcs in these films, with Bob having to learn that even someone as strong as him isn’t invincible and Helen rediscovering her identity as a superhero after spending several years trying to move on from such a lifestyle. Meanwhile, their kids (i.e. Dash and Violet) continue to play vital roles in the plot, and yes, for those who were eager to see how this film would follow up on the previous film’s finale, it doesn’t disappoint when it comes to showcasing the full extent of infant Jack-Jack’s various powers (e.g. the scene where he fights off a raccoon). Thus, as I noted before, the strong dynamic from this family of supers is easily the best aspect of the film, but they are matched by a solid villain in the form of the mind-controlling Screenslaver, who’s revealed to be tech-savvy Evelyn Deavor. However, this also happens to be one of the more contentious aspects of the film for many people for various reasons that range from the rather obvious reveal that she is the villain to the argument that she’s just not as good of a villain as Syndrome was in the last film. Once again, though, I’d argue otherwise as both Incredibles films do a good job in giving us villains who serve as a critique on the concept of superheroes.

In the first film, we had Syndrome AKA Buddy Pine, Mr. Incredible’s highly enthusiastic #1 fan who turns to the dark side when his idol rejects him (in other words, toxic fandom in a nutshell). His plan is to use the various inventions that he has created to grant those without superpowers the chance to be superheroes themselves. As he puts it, “when everyone’s super… no one will be”. In the case of the sequel and Evelyn Deavor, we have a villain whose motivations are based on the public’s dependence on superheroes. As revealed by her brother Winston in a flashback, their father was such a big fan of superheroes that he even had direct landlines to two of the Supers, Gazerbeam and Fironic. And yet, unfortunately, this ends up costing him his life as he couldn’t get into contact with them while he was dealing with burglars because of the Supers being outlawed. Thus, while Winston works to “bring supers back into the sunlight”, Evelyn secretly aspires to get rid of them for good. In short, both Incredibles villains work excellently within the context of their respective film’s plots. And thanks to its strong emotional depth and phenomenal animation that, dare I say, is often on par with Into the Spider-Verse when it comes to replicating the comic book style, Incredibles 2 is an excellent follow-up to its iconic predecessor. However, I’m not going to compare these two films to determine ‘which is better’ because I feel that this would be a bit unfair to the sequel as I obviously have a lot more experience with the original Incredibles. It was one of my favorites as a kid (and yes, it still stands as one of my all-time favorite Pixar films to this day) and I even still remember going to see it in theaters back in 2004. But because the sequel is just as well-made by comparison, I’m happy to say that those who didn’t ‘grow up’ with the original now get the chance to witness everything that made The Incredibles an undisputed classic of my generation.


And that concludes Part 3 of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s list of my Top 12 Favorite Films from 2018. Thanks for following along and be sure to check back in tomorrow for the big finale where I delve into my Top 3 Favorite Films from the past year.

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

TOP 12 FAVORITE FILMS OF 2016: #6-4

Welcome back to Rhode Island Movie Corner’s big end-of-the-year list, in which I’m counting down my Top 12 Favorite Films from 2016. This is Part 3 of 4 and today, we begin to get into the second half of the list. Today, I’ll be covering the films that landed in the #6-4 spots. For my previous 6 picks, as well as my multiple Honorable Mentions, be sure to click the following links to be directed over to Part 1 and Part 2 of this series. But, for now, it’s time to get back to the list…

There were plenty of great films that I saw at SXSW this past March. Only one, though, made it onto this list…


Image result for demolition poster

Now, I’ll be the first to admit that this is kind of a hard sell because it is a rather unique take on a ‘dramedy’. It tells the story of an investment banker named Davis (Jake Gyllenhaal) whose life is turned upside down when he tragically loses his wife in a car accident. Now, I know what some of you may be thinking; how can there possibly be any sort of humor that comes out of a story about a guy who loses his wife? Well, thankfully, the part about him losing his wife is not where this film’s humor comes in. If it did, then I assure you that this film wouldn’t have been on this list at all. Instead, it stems from the strange methods in which Davis copes with his loss. Literally, a lot of what happens in this film occurs as the result of an incident in which Davis gets angry at a vending machine for not working properly. He then writes multiple letters to the manufacturers of the vending machines in which he ends up venting over various things in life, which do end up getting read by the company’s customer service representative, Karen, whom Davis befriends. He also befriends her delinquent son Chris and the two get into a whole bunch of crazy shenanigans, from going out into the woods to fire a gun (even having Davis be a ‘target board’ at one point) to what is easily one of the biggest scenes in the film in which Chris helps Davis demolish his house. For the record, it’s not like the film is implying that Davis’ methods are a good way of coping with the loss of a loved one. It does very well establish that everyone else in this film generally views his actions as being totally weird. However, that’s kind of what makes the humor in this film work so well; the humor comes from the absurdity of Davis’ shenanigans. There’s a bit of a ‘black comedy’ edge to it all and Jake Gyllenhaal does a fantastic job in the role of Davis thanks to his strong charisma and excellent comic-timing.

Thankfully, though, this film is not just all comedy. Once the third act rolls around, the film wisely goes back into dramatic territory as the main plot reaches its pinnacle and Davis’ recent actions truly start to affect his life and those around him. And it is in this moment where Davis finally finds closure in regards to how his wife’s death affected him. At first, when the accident happened, he admitted that he wasn’t exactly sure how to feel about it because he felt that he didn’t really know his wife. But, after making amends with the driver who caused the accident, Davis finally realizes that he did love his wife. And while most of the film prior to this point was more humorous in tone by showing us all the strange ways in which he coped with it all, by this point Davis has earned our full sympathy, making his epiphany particularly cathartic. Once again, a lot of it comes from Gyllenhaal’s excellent performance and he’s backed by an excellent supporting cast that includes Naomi Watts as Davis’ new friend Karen and Chris Cooper, who gives one of the most emotionally-charged performances in the film as Davis’ boss/father-in-law Phil. I’ll admit that when it comes to ‘dramedies’, I find that it’s hard for a film to achieve a true balance between drama and comedy. Sometimes, a film like this can be more of a drama than a comedy (e.g. American Hustle) and vice-versa. But this film does manage to find that balance and that’s why it ended up being my favorite film out of SXSW. Though, to be honest, I almost didn’t end up seeing this film while I was down there. But, after going to a panel where Gyllenhaal talked about the film, I decided to go see it and I’m glad that I did because I ended up loving it. And, clearly, the same can be said for a lot of other people at the event because it ended up winning the Audience Award for Best Headliner. However, outside of SXSW, critical reception was a bit more mixed. It currently stands at a 52% on Rotten Tomatoes, which I’m surprised at but, like I said before, admittedly this film isn’t for everyone. But as for me, Demolition was one of my favorite films from 2016, hence why it takes the Number 6 spot on this list. (*proceeds to put on ‘Crazy on You’ by Heart*)

While Moana is a terrific entry in the Disney animated canon, the studio’s first release of the year ended up landing just a bit higher on this list. Specifically, it kicks off the Top 5 at the Number 5 spot…


Image result for zootopia poster

Zootopia truly is one of the best films that Disney Animation has ever produced. Seriously, it’s up there with the classics. I mean, it’s great enough that, on its own merits, the film has almost everything that you want from a great Disney animated film. The story is a fun buddy cop adventure set within a world fully inhabited by animals. This world is a greatly detailed environment highlighted by the titular city of Zootopia, which itself is separated into different zones for each major species of animal. This includes a town full of mice, Little Rodentia (where the mice are appropriately scaled compared to every other animal in the city), the frozen ‘Tundratown’, and so on. The buddy cop story is based around a lovable lead duo in the form of Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde. Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin) is the optimistic rabbit police officer while Nick (Jason Bateman) is the charismatic con-man fox. And while Nick does start out as an antagonistic character to Judy, he gradually becomes a more sympathetic character as time goes on. This is especially thanks to the big scene in which he reveals why he turned to the con-man lifestyle. When he was younger, he was subjected to ridicule by the members of the Junior Ranger Scout troop that he was trying to join for being a fox, who are generally seen as untrustworthy. They even put a muzzle on him. Because of this, he decided that if the world wouldn’t see him as anything more than a deceitful fox, why bother to try and be anything else? I won’t lie, this is the most emotional moment in the entire film. And, of course, the animation is terrific; it’s bright, colorful, and, as noted earlier, creates a vast world full of unique environments and characters. With all this in mind, Zootopia would already be considered a great entry in the Disney animated canon on those merits alone.

But then this film takes one further step that truly establishes it as one of Disney Animation’s all-time greatest efforts. Amidst all the fun animal antics, including the slow-moving DMV’s run by sloths (I think many of us can agree that this will go down as one of the most iconic moments in the film) and the parody of The Godfather in the form of arctic shrew crime boss Mr. Big, this ‘buddy cop’ story also takes on big themes like racism and prejudice. All throughout the film, we see signs of the symbolic conflict between predators and prey, despite the implication that Zootopia is a city where both sides live together in harmony. This conflict is heightened once the main plot begins to unfold, as we learn that some animals have gone missing and, on an even more concerning note, are found to have become savage creatures. At first, it’s assumed that because predators are generally seen as being ‘savage’ by nature, they’re beginning to revert to their primitive ways. However, this idea was only established because Judy was overwhelmed by paparazzi while at her first press conference and all it does is make the growing tensions between prey and predators in the city even worse. It even affects Judy’s relationship with Nick, due in large part to the general mistrust that rabbits like Judy have towards foxes. This is something that’s been effectively built up the entire film, ever since Judy was bullied as a kid by another fox named Gideon Grey. It shows that even someone like Judy can have their own bigoted beliefs. Thus, it’s quite impressive how her parents, who sort of played a major part in developing her distrust of foxes, end up being the first rabbits shown to truly befriend a supposedly ‘untrustworthy’ fox.

But, as it turns out, this whole ‘disappearing animals gone savage’ scandal was all a plot orchestrated by Assistant Mayor Dawn Bellwether, the often-undervalued assistant to Zootopia mayor Leodore Lionheart. Instead of it being a case of predatorial animals reverting to their primitive nature, she’s been using a serum made from toxic flowers known as ‘night howlers’ to turn the animals savage. Just like the ‘rabbit-fox’ conflict between Judy and Nick, Bellwether was excellently built up as the antagonist, being the undervalued assistant who is constantly being bossed around by Lionheart, who was initially assumed to be the main villain when it was found that he had the animals who were turning savage locked up in a facility outside the city limits so that doctors could figure out a cure. All throughout the film, she is constantly being shown to be someone who sticks up ‘for the little guys’. But, as it turns out, while she really was looking out ‘for the little guys’, it’s just that, to accomplish that, she was trying to make the entire community of Zootopia shun all predatorial creatures. Simply put, it’s just another one of the many excellent facets of this well-written plot. And thus, this charming buddy cop adventure ends up becoming a powerful form of social commentary; one that, simply put, society can really take note from given the rough 2016 that many of us had and, let’s be honest, potentially rough 2017 that we might have. That is why Zootopia ends up being one of Walt Disney Animation’s greatest efforts. It’s so effective in appealing to both kids and adults that it almost feels like a story that Walt Disney himself would do back in his day.    

You take the director of Whiplash, add in a dynamic and charismatic lead duo, and what do you get? My Number 4 pick…


Image result for la la land poster

La La Land is something that you don’t see very often in the world of film; an original musical. But, that’s exactly what director Damien Chazelle, fresh off his 2014 critically-acclaimed effort Whiplash, did with this film and the results are quite astounding. At its core, La La Land is a love letter to old Hollywood. There are plenty of references and Easter eggs to old films peppered throughout the entire film. Now, I’ll admit that being someone who admittedly isn’t an expert when it comes to classic films, I’m sure that I missed quite a few of these references the first time around but I bet that I’ll notice them upon re-watch. But, what I can say about this film is that it is an incredibly charming story about an aspiring actress named Mia (Emma Stone) and a jazz musician named Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) who fall in love against the backdrop of the Hollywood scene. Stone and Gosling are both fantastic in their respective roles and, as evident from the fact that this is their third film together in which they play a couple, have fantastic chemistry. The film itself is also a technical masterpiece. It’s well-shot, well-edited, and the musical numbers are excellently choreographed. One of the major things that makes this film stand out is its frequent use of long takes. Case in point, the whole opening number, ‘Another Day of Sun’, is a six-minute long take set on a crowded LA highway. There are plenty other long takes throughout the film as well, showcasing the finely tuned editing job by Tom Cross, who previously worked with Chazelle on Whiplash. But of course, it wouldn’t be a musical without the music and, simply put, the music in this film is excellent with its collection of jazz-based songs. Yep, this is a jazz musical and even if you’re not a fan of jazz, I think it’s safe to say that you’ll love this soundtrack. Right now, the track that’s getting the most attention during this year’s award circuit is ‘City of Stars’, first sung by Sebastian and then later done as a duet between him and Mia. It is a good song but I’ll admit that it isn’t my favorite. If I had to pick a favorite, it’d probably Mia’s big solo ‘(Audition) The Fools Who Dream’, which played over the film’s second trailer.

But what really makes this film is the ending. All throughout this film, we’ve seen Mia and Sebastian fall in love while both try to achieve their dreams. In Mia’s case, it’s to become an actress while Sebastian looks to open his own jazz club so that he can play ‘real jazz’. However, as they find out, it proves to be a challenge for both to achieve their dreams while they’re together. Sebastian joins a band led by an old classmate, Keith (John Legend), but is forced to play jazz music that’s more pop-oriented. Meanwhile, Mia writes a one-woman play but it ends up being a major flop. Eventually, Mia does end up having her most successful audition yet and afterwards, Sebastian encourages her to commit fully to the role if she’s cast, even though it means that he won’t be coming with her to Paris where it’s being filmed. We then cut to five years later and see that Mia is now a successful actress… but married to someone else. She and her husband end up going to a jazz club which is revealed to be Sebastian’s, and after he recognizes her, we cut to a montage recapping the entire film but changed around so that the two of them truly end up together. But, it’s only a dream and as Mia leaves with her husband, she looks back and shares one final heartfelt scene with Sebastian from afar. With this ending, Chazelle achieved his goal of doing a musical that feels ‘real’; one where the fabled ‘happy ending’ doesn’t necessarily happen. And yet, at the same time, Chazelle did give us a happy ending for Mia and Sebastian. It’s just that this was in regards to them achieving their dreams and not in terms of their relationship. And while the montage in which they do end up together was only a fantasy and not reality, it results in an ending that satisfies both those who wanted to see these two together and those who wished to see something different. Thus, it could be argued that La La Land is one of the most universally-appealing films to come out in recent years. Even if you don’t like musicals, you’re sure to be charmed by this original story and the excellent lead performances.  

And that’s the end of Part 3. Thanks for following along and be sure to check back tomorrow for the final part of this list, in which I’ll be naming my Top 3 favorite films from this past year.

Friday, January 8, 2016

TOP 12 FAVORITE FILMS OF 2015: #6-4

Welcome back to Rhode Island Movie Corner’s end-of-the-year countdown of my Top 12 favorite films from 2015. This is Part 3 of 4 and we are now halfway through this year’s list. Today I’ll be listing Films #6-4 and I must say that starting with today’s post, we are really starting to get into my absolute favorite films from this past year. If you’ve missed Parts 1 and 2 of this list, links to those posts will be provided below. But for now it’s time to get back to the list…



At #6, we have the first of two films on this list that sadly underperformed at the box-office this past year despite having positive/optimistic themes and stories about following one’s dreams, which I feel are becoming more and more important in regards to combating the increasingly cynical nature of society these days. This film in particular tells the tale of one of the most amazing feats in human history.

6. THE WALK


I have two primary theories as to why this film didn’t attract much attention when it was released back in October. The first reason was that there were a few incidents where the titular ‘Walk’ sequence was such a jaw-dropping sequence, primarily due to director Robert Zemeckis’ decision to shoot the sequence from the top of the high-wire instead of below it (in other words, the usual ‘audience view’ of a high-wire performance), that it actually caused some people to vomit at the film’s New York premiere. With that said, yes the ‘Walk’ can be a very hard sequence to watch for those prone to altitude sickness. But that shouldn’t take away from the fact that this sequence truly is an exhilarating cinematic moment. As noted earlier, the fact that Zemeckis did shoot from the perspective of the high-wire artist gives audiences a different perspective of the performance that is rarely ever seen. I did see the film in its intended format, IMAX 3-D, and it was truly one of the greatest sequences that I’ve ever seen on the big IMAX screen. But perhaps another reason why this film may not have done so well at the B.O. is because it was primarily set around the World Trade Center and obviously we are now living in the world that is post-9/11. But like how I said that I hope that the sickness incidents wouldn’t take away from the cinematic merits of the ‘Walk’ itself, I hope that the post 9/11 stigma doesn’t keep people from watching this truly beautiful film. Because it’s not a Twin Towers story that ends in tragedy. Instead, it’s one that pays tribute to these iconic buildings by recalling a fantastic moment of humanity of which it was directly involved around.

This is the story of French high-wire walker Philippe Petit’s famous high-wire walk between the Towers on August 7th, 1974. This was right around the time that the Towers were nearing completion and one of the reasons why this was such a big deal was because, at first, the people of New York weren’t too big on the Towers. Many felt that they were ‘ugly’ and ‘utilitarian’ in design. It wasn’t until Petit’s legendary moment when the Towers finally became a beloved icon of the city. At the same time, the film really has a great message that encourages viewers to follow their dreams no matter what life may throw at them. I mean sure, Petit and his team had to do a few illegal things in order to accomplish this but Petit’s spirit is on full display throughout the entire film. And given that the majority of the film revolves around the set-up of the walk, it’s pretty fun to see Phillipe and his team enact his plan and the film benefits from an excellent ensemble cast highlighted by Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s terrific turn as Petit. In short, ‘The Walk’ is a very fun old-fashioned adventure that serves as a touching tribute to the Twin Towers, especially as a result of the film’s extremely poignant ending. After he completes the Walk, Petit (who’s been narrating the entire film) reflects that the building manager gave him a free pass to the observation deck and, with a solemn look, notes that the ‘expiration date’ was changed to ‘forever’. He leaves the frame, the camera pans over to the Towers, and the film fades out on them. 9/11 is never mentioned once but we all get why the smile fades from Petit’s face at the end. It’s a subtle yet extremely powerful and dignified way to pay tribute to the Towers and the victims of 9/11. Combined with all of the things I talked about before, ‘The Walk’ ended up being one of my favorite cinematic experiences of the year; one that hopefully many others will experience in the years to come.

A classic group of friends came back in a big way this year and despite the initial skepticism over their jump to computer animation, their new film was one of the most heartwarming films of the year, hence why it takes the #5 spot on this list.

5. THE PEANUTS MOVIE


Who doesn’t love ‘The Peanuts’? They’re one of the most famous franchises in the history of pop culture. Of course it all started with Charles Schulz’s iconic comic book series which ran for nearly 50 years with 18,000 comic strips being produced over that span. And then the franchise became an even greater cornerstone in the lives of audiences both young and old once Schultz and the duo of Bill Melendez and Lee Mendelson started to produce numerous TV specials starring Charlie Brown and his friends. These specials, many of which were based around major holidays, became a staple of the TV landscape with nearly 50 produced over the course of six decades. And this year, a year that commemorated the 65th anniversary of the comic strip and the 50th anniversary of the first Peanuts special, ‘A Charlie Brown Christmas’, the Peanuts gang made their grand return to the big-screen, after a series of films that were produced during the Schulz-Melendez-Mendelson era, in Blue Sky Studios’ newest film, ‘The Peanuts Movie’. With no disrespect towards the previous four Charlie Brown films, this new film was easily the biggest Peanuts film to date, primarily due to who was involved in its production. Not only was it being produced by a major animation company like Blue Sky, but it was also produced by major comedic director Paul Feig and had a screenplay written by Schulz’s son Craig and his son Bryan. However, there was some trepidation towards this film amongst film fans, namely due to the fact that the film would bring the characters into the world of 3-D computer animation even though they’ve always been traditionally animated in the past.

However, all of that skepticism was proven wrong once the film came out. And that is because this film is very much a heartfelt tribute to this classic franchise. It’s clear that the filmmakers spent a lot of time not only perfecting the animation (which I’ll get to momentarily) but also keeping the characters and world in its original old-school setting. In other words, this wasn’t a case where the characters were modernized for today’s audiences as is the case with some other old-school franchises. This is a film where the characters are still using landlines and typewriters, two things that you definitely don’t see much of nowadays. And as for the animation, it’s some of the best animation that I’ve seen this year. The characters may be in 3-D now but the overall style actually does manage to give the film the 2-D-esque look that has always defined the series since the beginning. The best way I can describe it is that it’s sort of like 2.5-D, where the characters are in a 3-D world but are almost always shown from a 2-D perspective (other examples of this include the ‘New Super Mario Bros.’ games). There are even a few instances where the film utilizes a bit of 2-D animation, like when the characters’ eyes turn into big cartoony eyeballs or when a character is daydreaming and the thought bubble shows some of the classic hand-drawn animation. The final result is simply one of the most unique animation styles to come out of an animated film in recent years.

But the animation is only the icing on the cake in terms of what makes this film so great. There has been some criticism towards the film for its story not really being that ‘groundbreaking’ and being more of a simple story. But even if that were true, which I guess you can say that it sort of is given the fact that it’s mainly about Charlie Brown trying to woo the Little-Red-Haired Girl, I didn’t mind that at all because this film’s strong messages really shined through its simplistic plot. Of course we all know that Charlie Brown has always been the lovable loser who always has bad luck no matter what he tries. But the thing that makes ‘Chuck’ such an endearing character is that he never gives up and it is his kindness that always leaves the most lasting impression on others. And that is very much the case in this film in how he’s able to really attract the attention of the Little Red-Haired Girl. At first he tries to impress her by participating in the school talent show but when his sister Sally’s act starts to bomb, he selflessly gives up his own time in order to help her out. Then it seems like he finally succeeds for once in his life when he learns that he got the highest score on the standardized tests, which results in his friends and classmates treating him like a big celebrity. But then, at a big award ceremony for him, he realizes that Peppermint Patty actually had the highest score and willingly sacrifices his popularity in order to maintain his integrity. Finally, he and the Little Red-Haired Girl are partnered up for a book report but when she is forced to take a week off from school due to a personal matter, he does the entire book report for them on ‘War and Peace’, a nod to when he had to read the book for school in ‘Happy New Year Charlie Brown!’  

(P.S. I’ve always wondered why Charlie Brown was forced to read that gigantic book despite the fact that he’s clearly too young to read it.)


These noble acts are what truly gets him noticed by the Little Red-Haired Girl at the end of the film. I have to admit that I was hoping that this film would allow Charlie Brown to succeed for once in his life and it did, and I can tell you that there was quite a huge smile on my face during the finale when the Little Red-Haired Girl chooses Charlie Brown to be her pen-pal over the summer and she tells him that she admires his honesty, selflessness, courage, and kindness right before she leaves for Summer Camp. In fact, that perfectly correlates to what I feel about the film overall. It’s one of the most heartwarming films that I’ve seen in a long time and will probably leave you grinning from ear to ear by the end. Because not only is the story sweet and the messages strong, but the film is also clearly a labor of love from all involved. This isn’t a case of a popular franchise getting ruined by people who don’t care about it whatsoever. The filmmakers really made an effort to get everything perfect from the animation to the characters themselves, with the film’s young cast of general newcomers (save for ‘Dog with a Blog’ star Francesca Capaldi as both the Little Red-Haired Girl and Frieda) perfectly capturing the personalities of these beloved characters. This is easily Blue Sky’s best film to date and a film that Charles Schulz would have been extremely proud of.

I’ve never been in the camp who felt that Pixar went downhill after ‘Toy Story 3’. But thankfully the studio managed to redeem themselves in the eyes of those people with this, my #4 favorite film of the year.

4. INSIDE OUT


At this point in Pixar’s prestigious run, I’d argue that Pete Docter is the studio’s best director. Having been involved with Pixar pretty much since the beginning, he’s been responsible for some of their absolute best films. His first directorial effort with Pixar was 2001’s ‘Monsters Inc.’, a film that I realized was one of my absolute all-time favorite Pixar films in the months leading up to its prequel, ‘Monsters University’, which Docter did not direct, for the record, but was still pretty darn good. Then in 2009, he directed ‘Up’, the studio’s first film to be nominated for Best Picture as well as Best Animated Feature at that year’s Oscars and one that I can assure you is most certainly in many Pixar fans’ Top 5. And this year it seems like Docter has delivered another one of Pixar’s best efforts to date in the form of ‘Inside Out’, a film which focuses on the personified emotions that control the mind of their human ‘avatar’. In the case of this film, we follow the emotions of a young girl named Riley who is forced to move from her hometown of Minnesota to San Francisco when her dad gets a new job. As if that couldn’t be bad enough for her already, her main emotion Joy ends up getting sucked out of the headquarters where she and the other emotions control Riley’s actions as a result of fellow emotion Sadness, who gets sucked out of HQ as well, trying to be more involved with Riley’s life, resulting in Riley becoming emotionally distant towards everyone around her. The journey that they and the other emotions go on in this film is one that is both beautifully animated and arguably features the studio’s most mature storytelling to date.    

The animation is definitely one of Pixar’s best efforts to date. It produces what are arguably the studio’s most cartoonish visuals but that is in no way a bad thing because the imagery in this film is incredibly colorful and imaginative, especially within Riley’s mind. My favorite parts of the film were when Joy, Sadness, and their new friend, Riley’s former imaginary friend Bing Bong, who by the way is easily the film’s standout character, travel through the various parts of Riley’s mind. These areas include her ‘Abstract Thought’, an area where their bodies get changed into different shapes from non-objective fragments to 2-D drawings and run the risk of being forgotten about forever, and her Imagination, represented in this film as a theme park-like area complete with a forest full of French fries, an area full of trophies where everyone wins an award (even Sadness, who comically only gets a Participation Award), and even an Imaginary Boyfriend Generator that produces a whole bunch of imaginary punk rocker-esque boyfriends from Canada who constantly exclaim that they ‘would die for Riley’. These imaginative visuals also contribute to one of the other great things about the film; its great humor. There’s the annoyingly catchy ‘Triple-Dent Gum’ commercial jingle, the classic scene from the trailer in which Riley and her dad get into an argument instigated by their emotions (another great thing about the film is that we get to see the emotions of other characters and not just Riley’s), and the ending in which we see the emotions of various side characters, including a potential future love interest for Riley whose emotions lose it when he is approached by a girl, an angry bus driver who has nothing but Anger emotions, and Riley’s teacher whose emotions are just waiting for summer vacation. We even get to see the emotions of a dog and a cat.  

But ‘Inside Out’ is more than just a funny animated film about a bunch of emotions. It may be an ironic statement to make seeing how this film is about emotions, but the film truly has a terrific emotional depth to it. The filmmakers are tackling the idea of our emotions in a creative way and cover events that many of us have experienced at one point in our lives, like moving to a new town and having to go to a new school. There’s also a nice arc for the characters of Joy and Sadness. As the film begins, Joy narrates that she’s unsure about Sadness’s importance in Riley’s life and constantly works to keep her away from the emotions’ control console but Sadness ends up making a mess of things anyway which leads to the two of them getting sucked out of Headquarters. But despite all of this, the film never paints Sadness in a negative light as Joy learns that Sadness’s true purpose is to alert others when Riley is sad so that they can come and comfort, making a sad memory a happy one in the end and showing that it’s okay to be sad sometimes. And yes, you will get extremely emotional during a few particularly sad scenes in this film. These moments include a scene where Joy and Bing Bong get trapped in the ‘Memory Dump’, where memories are disposed of and forgotten, and the always happy Joy finally starts to break down in tears and a moment just a while later when Bing Bong sacrifices himself to help Joy get out of the Memory Dump and fades away from Riley’s memory forever (“Take her to the moon for me, okay?”).

Like I said before, I am not one of those people on the internet who feel that Pixar started to ‘suck’ following ‘Toy Story 3’. I’ve already gone over my thoughts on the post-2010 Pixar films and while I never want to repeat myself too much in these posts, I have to reiterate the argument that I made earlier in this list with ‘The Good Dinosaur’. There is nothing wrong with Pixar making a film that’s not a 15/10 masterpiece. But of course because Pixar is held to such a high standard, their ‘failures’ are treated by the internet as if they were a crime against humanity and a betrayal from the studio. How dare they not make an absolute masterpiece? FOR SHAME!! So for those who are always expecting that ‘15/10 masterpiece’ from them (to which I argue that you should really cool it on those expectations because you’re the ones responsible for creating the anti-post-2010 Pixar attitude… just saying), ‘Inside Out’ is that film. It has it all; great animation, lovable characters, and a screenplay that handles the concept of emotions with maturity and grace. Pete Docter may have only three directorial efforts to his name right now but it’s quite an accomplishment to have all three of those films be animated masterpieces. First there was ‘Monsters Inc.’, then there was ‘Up’, and now there’s ‘Inside Out’. Some will say that with this film ‘Pixar is back’… and some of those people will then probably retract that statement when they do a negative review of ‘The Good Dinosaur’ that negatively compares it to this film and claim that ‘Pixar is Dead!’. But if you ask me, Pixar never left.


And that’s the end of Part 3 of my Top 12 Favorite Films of 2015 list. Check back tomorrow for the finale in which I’ll be listing my Top 3 favorite films from this past year.