The Man Who Invented Christmas (2017) review

From time to time, there have been instances where we end up getting two different films that have identical premises released over the course of a single year. For example, in 1998, we got two films that were focused on asteroid-based doomsdays, Michael Bay’s Armageddon and Mimi Leder’s Deep Impact. That same year, Pixar and DreamWorks got into a huge feud over their closely similar insect-oriented films, with DreamWorks Animation’s Antz being released just one month prior to the release of Pixar’s A Bug’s Life. This year it seems like this trend has been applied to a pair of films that focus on the genesis of classic literary works. A few months back, there was the historical biopic Goodbye Christopher Robin, which focused on author A.A. Milne and the creation of his iconic book series, Winnie the Pooh. And now, just in time for the holiday season, we have The Man Who Invented Christmas, which delves into the backstory behind arguably the most famous Christmas story of all-time, Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol. Ever since its initial release in 1843, the story of the mean old miser Scrooge and his journey of self-transformation has become a staple of the holiday season; for one thing, it’s been adapted to both the big and small screen numerous times over the years. So with that in mind, what’s so different about this film then? Well, as noted earlier, it mainly delves into the events that led to author Charles Dickens creating this timeless tale, with the film itself being based off a 2008 novel of the same name by author Les Standiford. And under the solid direction of British director Bharat Nalluri, the film ends up being an enjoyable, albeit imperfect, take on this fascinating true story.

In 1843 London, England, author Charles Dickens (Dan Stevens) finds himself struggling with a severe case of writer’s block. To make matters worse, his last three books have been critical/commercial flops, thus making his publishers extremely wary about doing further business with him. This begins to put Charles in a serious case of financial debt right around the time when he learns that his wife Kate (Morfydd Clark) is pregnant with their fifth child. Eventually, though, he begins to come up with an idea for a new novel; upon witnessing his new maid Tara (Anna Murphy) recount a tale of ghostly spirits to his children, he begins to craft a story about a miserable miser who’s visited by three spirits on Christmas Eve. And, soon enough, he comes up with the name for his story’s cold-hearted main character, Ebenezer Scrooge. It even gets to the point where Scrooge (Christopher Plummer) and the other characters of the novel begin to come to life in Charles’ mind, as he proceeds to interact with them during the writing process. However, Charles soon finds himself under an immense amount of pressure to have the book independently published in just six weeks so that it’ll be out in time for Christmas. The stress of finishing the book even starts to have a negative impact on his relationships with his friends and family, especially when he struggles to figure out the perfect ending for it.

Admittedly, this review is going to be a short one because there’s not really that much to talk about when it comes to this film. Simply put, The Man Who Invented Christmas is a decently entertaining spin on the story of how Charles Dickens wrote A Christmas Carol. Instead of just being a standard retelling of how Dickens wrote what is arguably his most famous story, we also get to see how his personal life (namely his often troubled relationship with his father John (Jonathan Pryce)) served as a direct influence on Scrooge’s journey of redemption. In the process, the film even ends up doing its own take on A Christmas Carol; sure, we’ve already gotten plenty of takes on this story in the past, but the pairing of it with all the reveals that surround Dickens’ troubled past does, at least, give this version of the story a unique spin to it. Plus, the film is bolstered by a solid pair of performances from leads Dan Stevens and Christopher Plummer. As Dickens, Stevens elicits solid charisma that is effectively paired with the author’s more eccentric qualities, while Plummer excels at handling Scrooge’s classic redemption arc even though he technically isn’t the main character this time around. In short, while it’s far from perfect, The Man Who Invented Christmas is an interesting look into the making of an iconic holiday staple. And while the numerous adaptations of A Christmas Carol that have come before it may ultimately overshadow it in the long run, it’s still worth checking out just to see where it all began.

Rating: 3.5/5

Beauty and the Beast (2017) review

Disney’s been on a roll as of late with their live-action reimaginings of their classic animated films. Granted, this current trend of theirs isn't going over well with ‘everybody’, as I pointed out last time, but, for the most part, films like Cinderella and The Jungle Book have been major successes on both a critical and commercial level instead of just on a commercial one as was initially the case with these films. And for their latest endeavor on this front, Disney revives one of its most beloved stories for a new generation; Beauty and the Beast. The studio’s original animated take on the classic fairytale of the same name from 1756 was the second smash hit of the ‘Disney Renaissance’ era when it was released in 1991. In fact, it was so universally adored that it ended up being the first animated film ever to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, a feat that has only been accomplished 2 other times since then by, fittingly enough, a pair of Pixar films; 2009’s Up and 2010’s Toy Story 3, which, of course, were released under the Disney banner. So, yeah, one could say that there was a lot of pressure on this new take on the ‘Tale as Old as Time’, directed by Bill Condon, who's no stranger to musicals having written the screenplay for 2002’s Best Picture winner, Chicago (not to mention directing 2006’s Dreamgirls, which won 2 Oscars), and features an all-star ensemble cast. After all, we’re talking about one of the most famous Disney stories of all time, meaning that this new film has a hell of a lot to live up to. Thankfully, Condon does do justice to this beloved masterpiece of a story with a highly enjoyable new take on Beauty and the Beast that respects its predecessor without being a direct carbon copy of it.

In a quaint little town in France, a young woman named Belle (Emma Watson) is a complete mystery to the rest of the people living there. Never once conforming to the expectations that life tries to set upon her, Belle spends most of her days reading, inventing things, and ignoring the advances of the town’s popular but egotistical local hunter, Gaston (Luke Evans), while also hoping to someday leave the confines of her ‘poor, provincial’ town. That day ends up coming sooner than anticipated when she goes to rescue her father Maurice (Kevin Kline), who had been taken prisoner by a monstrous Beast (Dan Stevens) that resides within a forgotten castle not far from town. To save her father, Belle ends up taking his place as the Beast’s prisoner. But, soon after, she begins to learn the big secret behind the castle and, more importantly, its mysterious owner. As it turns out, years ago, the Beast was a selfish and vain human prince who was cursed by an Enchantress after he had rejected her pleas for shelter. Turning him into a Beast, as well as turning his servants into enchanted household objects, she puts the Prince under the pressure of having to find true love in time before the last petal of the red rose that she initially offered him falls. And, thus, as Belle begins to become more and more accepted by the Beast and his servants, she does begin to fall in love with him, which soon causes problems once Gaston learns of the situation.

Now, admittedly, as far as Disney’s remakes go, this is more like Cinderella than The Jungle Book. By that, I mean that you shouldn't go into this expecting a lot of differences between this new version and the original. It's the same exact story with the same primary plot points. So, with that said, I know what some of you will inevitably say; “Why the hell remake a masterpiece then?” But I'm going to ignore that debate for now because, to me, it all comes down to execution, and I'm pleased to say that this film is very well-made in every possible way. Sure, it's still the same story as the original but I'd say that there are just enough new elements in here, as minor as some may be, that help differentiate it from the original (e.g. a new plotline that reveals why Maurice and Belle stayed in their provincial town for all these years). Visually, this film is a top contender for next year’s Oscar for Best Visual Effects, Production Design, and basically every other major technical award at that ceremony. Yes, a lot of the visuals in this are CG but they are done excellently. And as for the songs, well, what more needs to be said about them? They're the classic songs written by Alan Menken, Howard Ashman, and Tim Rice and are all handled brilliantly in live-action. You'll be tapping your foot along to the beat of ‘Gaston’, marvel at the grandeur of ‘Be Our Guest’, and awe at the beauty (no pun intended) of the title song, ‘Beauty and the Beast’. There's also some great new songs as well, including the sweet recurring melody ‘How Does a Moment Last Forever’, which is sung three times in the film (this includes the end-credits version sung by Celine Dion who, of course, sung the title song during the end credits of the animated film) and the Beast’s new big solo, ‘Evermore’.

One of the best things about the film, though, is its ensemble cast. Because, damn, does this film have one of the most impressive ensembles in recent history. Of course, it's all led by Emma Watson, who does a phenomenal job in the role of Belle. Simply put, she does justice to one of Disney’s most beloved heroines while also doing just enough to provide some nice little updates to the character here and there without ever going against everything that made her great in the first place. And I know that she’s gotten some flak for her vocal performance during the musical numbers but I thought she was fine in that department. Dan Stevens is also fantastic as the Beast, perfectly conveying everything that goes into the character's great redemption arc. As for the villains of the film, both Luke Evans and Josh Gad are clearly having a lot of fun in the roles of Gaston and LeFou, respectively. They ham it up in the best way possible, as Evans perfectly encapsulates our favorite manly but shallow villain while Gad brings new depth to the role of Gaston’s loyal lackey. Kevin Kline is great as well in the role of Maurice, as he portrays the character in a much more toned down manner compared to the original that fits very well with the new plotline that shows why he’s been so protective of Belle all this time. And of course, we can't forget about the Beast’s servants and man did they get a great cast for these iconic supporting roles; Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs. Potts, Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Plumette (Fifi in the original film), Audra McDonald as Madame de Garderobe the Wardrobe, and Stanley Tucci as new character Maestro Cadenza the Harpsichord.

And thus, Disney is now 4 for 4 with their recent live-action remakes. I mean, admittedly I don't think I can go as far as to say that it's the ‘best’ of these remakes but I can tell you one thing; it's a hell of a lot better than its current 71% score on Rotten Tomatoes suggests. Thankfully, that's still considered a ‘fresh’ rating but I have the feeling that some of the more negative reviews that the film has been getting have been a lot more stringent on comparisons between the two versions of this story. Like I said before, I can see why this is happening. Because this one is arguably the closest to its animated counterpart out of all the Disney remakes released to date, the word ‘unnecessary’ has undeniably been thrown around a lot. Maybe it is… but I don't care. I love the original (it is, after all, my 3^rd favorite Disney animated film of all-time) but I also love this new take on it, as its heart is very much in the right place. Plus, it is a genuinely well-made film in terms of its production design and visuals, not to mention having a fantastic ensemble cast to portray this story’s collection of iconic roles. Simply put, it's just an incredibly satisfying ‘feel good’ film and in this current time, this is exactly the kind of film that we need right now. Just ignore all the negativity in the world for a few hours (especially the negativity directed towards a certain element of this film; more on that in a bit) and enjoy a charming new take on a classic that we all know and love. On that note, to those who aren't big on these Disney remakes, don't worry, for the original animated film is still as perfect as it ever was. This new version is ultimately just like the remakes of Cinderella, The Jungle Book, and Pete’s Dragon; it's a nice complement to the original source.

Rating: 5/5!

(P.S. Well, I should probably address the big controversy surrounding this film because… oh boy. So, as many of you are aware, the film has been getting some flak recently from some audiences after an announcement that stated that it would have Disney’s first ‘exclusively gay’ moment involving the character of LeFou. Because of this, there's been quite a bit of heavy blowback from various parties; some countries banned the film unless cuts were made, a theater in Alabama refused to show it, and in Russia, it was given an adult rating. Yes, in Russia, this film is considered nearly as mature as, say, Logan. To all this, I say… this is one of the stupidest and most overblown controversies in recent memory. This moment that everyone keeps talking about is just one SMALL moment at the end of the film. Heck, if it hadn't been pointed out beforehand, I bet most of us wouldn't have even noticed it because the film’s quite subtle about it. Bottom line, Disney isn't trying to force an LGBT agenda down our throats; they're just trying to represent a wider audience. What the hell is wrong with that? Also, this backlash totally goes against the great positive messages of this film, namely, you know, accepting people for who they really are on the inside. So, yeah… this backlash is frigging stupid.)

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb (2014) review

I’ll admit that overall I’ve been a fairly big fan of the ‘Night at the Museum’ movies, consisting of both the original 2006 film ‘Night at the Museum’, which was actually based off of a children’s book of the same name by Milan Trenc, and its 2009 sequel, ‘Battle of the Smithsonian’. Do I think that they’re perfect films? No not really, but at the same time I don’t think that they’re ‘that bad’ as some have probably put them out to be given these films’ mixed critical reception. That’s because at their heart they’re just fun light-hearted comedy-adventure films that the whole family can enjoy. Really, I just love the overall premise of this series in which museum exhibits come to life and both films are full of fun and colorful visuals and likable lead characters. And that is once again true when talking about the final film in this trilogy, ‘Secret of the Tomb’, once again directed by Shawn Levy serving as his second film of this past year following the more adult comedy ‘This is Where I Leave You’ back in September (which I also liked). Like the two films that came before it, ‘Secret of the Tomb’ may not be the most smartly written or well-made film out there but it’s still loads of fun with a lighthearted atmosphere, likable characters portrayed by a excellent ensemble cast, and zany visuals. And ultimately, this film does a great job at sending this series off on a high note.

For those who are unfamiliar with the franchise, it centers on Larry Daley (Ben Stiller), an average Joe from New York who, desperately looking for a job, is hired as the night guard at the Museum of Natural History. But on his first night on the job, he immediately learns the fascinating secret behind the museum in that due to the magical powers of an ancient Egyptian artifact, the tablet of pharaoh Akhmenrah (Rami Malek), all of the exhibits within the museum come to life at night and that he must keep everything in order because if one of the exhibits is outside when the sun comes up, they turn to dust. However, in this film, Larry learns that the power of the tablet has begun to fade, which has also resulted in the exhibits beginning to behave erratically. He learns from his old nemesis Cecil Fredericks (Dick Van Dyke), who had tried to steal the tablet in the first film, that this is due to the fact that, as a young boy in 1938, he, his father, and a group of archaeologists took the tablet from its original resting place and that as a result, the locals warned them that ‘the end will come’, which Larry realizes is referring to the magic of the tablet. Not wanting his friends to go back to their original state as lifeless museum displays, Larry and a bunch of the other exhibits, including President Theodore Roosevelt (Robin Williams) and miniature cowboy and Roman Soldier Jedediah and Octavius (Owen Wilson and Steve Coogan, respectively) travel to London with the tablet in order to find Akhmenrah’s parents, who are located in the British Museum, to try and get them to help restore the tablet’s power before it’s too late.

As I noted before, this film may not necessarily be the most well-written or funniest film ever made but to its credit, it’s not trying to be something that it isn’t. It knows exactly what it is; a fun little family film that offers viewers a light-hearted adventure full of wacky visuals that really capitalize on this series’ entertaining premise. The idea of museum exhibits coming to life offers quite a lot of potential when it comes to visuals and these films have definitely delivered on that regard. Not only that, but each film has also taken the premise one step further with some of the things that happen in them, like in these last two films the characters learn that they can enter paintings, with this film in particular featuring a really cool sequence that takes place in a M.C. Escher painting. The film doesn’t try and take things too seriously and as a result, allows you to be swept into the adventure with these characters. And as the final film in this trilogy, I feel that this film ends the story on a solid note and I have to admit that I even got a little emotional at the end of this film in regards to how it all comes to a close. Now I won’t spoil what happens but I assure you that you’ll probably get a little emotional over the ending as well, especially if you’re a fan of this franchise like me having been following these characters since the very beginning.

One of the biggest strengths of these movies has been Ben Stiller in the lead role of Larry Daley. He does a great job at making Larry such a likable lead character; he’s an everyman who has ended up in some amazing situations but through it all he maintains a relatable/down-to-earth personality. In this film, Stiller also plays another character, a caveman named Laa who was made in Larry’s image as a joke who believes that Larry is his ‘father’ and this results in some hilarious bits of banter between the two. All in all, the ensemble cast is as solid as they’ve been in the last two films while also adding in some notable new additions as well, with Dan Stevens from ‘Downtown Abbey’ in particular really standing out in the role of Sir Lancelot. Their great camaraderie with each other also helps make the ending as emotional as I noted earlier, especially in the final scene between Larry and Teddy, this being the final on-screen appearance of Robin Williams following his tragic death last August. I’ve heard some people express some disappointment that this had to be his last major on-screen performance but I assure you that this film is a fitting send-off to the comedic great, perhaps best exemplified by his final line (‘Smile, my boy… it’s sunrise’). Seriously, I dare you not to cry during this scene.

All in all, ‘Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb’ is a fun adventure that may not be the absolute best film in its genre but still manages to be extremely entertaining thanks to the things that made the series so great in the first place. Zany visuals that have gotten more elaborate with each new film, a light-hearted atmosphere that engrosses you into the adventure without trying to take things seriously, which isn’t really possible in a film like this given its fantastical premise, and featuring a great ensemble cast portraying a group of incredibly likable characters. And seriously, at the end of this, it will be hard not to get emotional over how it all comes to an end, especially in regards to how this film properly sends off the late Robin Williams in his final on-screen role. I love this trilogy and while I do need to see this film again to see if it ends up being the best of the three, one thing’s for certain and that is that families will no doubt have loads of fun with this film and quite frankly this is one of the best ‘third films’ of any franchise which may not exactly be saying a lot given the usual quality of ‘threequels’ but in this case I say it doesn’t disappoint in the slightest. And on that note, it’s good that this is the final film of this series and in short, it ended at the right place and time.

Rating: 4/5