Ranking the Live-Action Disney Remakes

I’m going to start this post off with a quick disclaimer. If you’re someone who is by no means a fan of Disney’s recent trend of producing live-action remakes of their animated classics, you’re not going to get much out of this post since it will be a generally positive take on these films. Yes, since 2010, Disney’s live-action output has primarily been focused on live-action re-imaginings of some of their most iconic animated films. However, while these films have been quite successful at the box-office, they’ve been far more polarizing in terms of their overall reception. While general audiences seem to be fairly receptive towards these new spins on Disney classics, there are a sizable number of folks who have been highly critical of this trend for the exact same reason that folks would take issue with any remake in general. Why would anyone even bother remaking something that’s been regarded by many as an undisputed classic? And yet, as someone who recognizes that the original animated films will always be there regardless of how these new films turn out (which is why I’m thankful for the advent of Disney+, which prominently features both incarnations of the films that have recently gotten the live-action treatment), these recent remakes have never bothered me in the slightest. In fact, I’ve recently started to detest the use of the adjective ‘unnecessary’ when it comes to reviews because I feel that it’s become one of the most overused words in critical vernacular, especially since you could easily apply it to any film that comes out and not just the ones that are remakes/sequels/reboots. In other words, while many of these films are re-imagining some of my favorite Disney films of all-time, I try not to let my affinity for the originals overly cloud my judgment towards the remakes because I personally feel that doing so would be largely unfair to them. And so, with that in mind and in honor of the latest Disney remake Mulan’s impending ‘Premier Access’ release on Disney+, today I’m ranking these live-action remakes from ‘least favorite’ to ‘favorite’. While their placement on this list will primarily stem from overall preference, I will also factor in their efforts to present a new spin on their classic stories.

Before we begin, though, I just need to lay out the ground rules for this list. For starters, I won’t be including the two sequels that were spawned from these recent remakes, 2016’s Alice Through the Looking Glass and 2019’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. The reason for this is quite simple; from a subjective standpoint, they’re not ‘remakes’ anymore. Instead, they’re just ‘sequels’ to the remakes. However, I will briefly address them when I go over their predecessors. Also, for this list, I’m only going to be focusing on the remakes that have been released since 2010 since this is when this current trend first began to take shape. Because of this, there are two films from the ’90s that won’t be appearing on this list even though they are technically the first big Disney remakes. The first is the original live-action remake of The Jungle Book (that’s right, Jon Favreau’s version wasn’t the first time that a live-action adaptation of Disney’s Jungle Book was made) which was directed by Stephen Sommers and released in 1994. Admittedly, I haven’t seen it at the time that I’m writing this, but I’ll probably do some kind of post on both it and a different Disney-produced Jungle Book film from the ’90s, 1998’s The Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Story, in the future, perhaps when the sequel to Favreau’s Jungle Book comes out. The other big remake that won’t be included here is the 1996 adaptation of 101 Dalmatians, but again, that’s because I’m saving my thoughts on that film and its 2000 sequel, 102 Dalmatians, for a different occasion; in this case, the upcoming spin-off Cruella that will hit theaters next May. Lastly, while it does technically count as a ‘live-action remake’ and can genuinely be considered as a part of this recent subgenre, I’m also not going to include the 2016 remake of Pete’s Dragon since it’s a remake of a live-action film rather than an animated one. Yes, for this list, I’m mainly focusing on the live-action remakes of animated Disney films, and while two of them are technically more like ‘sequels’ than ‘remakes’, I believe that they still count here given that they are primarily based on their animated counterparts. And so, without further ado, I present my current rankings of the live-action Disney remakes that have been released since 2010.   

10. ALICE IN WONDERLAND

We start things off with the first big live-action reimagining of a Disney classic from this modern era, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland. This is the first of the two films that I mentioned earlier that are more like ‘sequels’ rather than ‘remakes’ as it follows a teenaged Alice returning to the world of Wonderland (referred to in-universe as ‘Underland’). Like the original animated film, Burton ultimately went with a combination of elements from both the original Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland novel and its sequel, Through the Looking Glass, rather than just being a direct adaptation of the source material. And right off the bat, the best thing that I can say about this film is that it’s another prime example of why Burton is one of the greatest visual directors in the industry. While the film’s visuals do feel a bit excessive at times due to the scenes in Underland being almost entirely green-screen based, they’re still very much the best part of the film as they wonderfully capture the eccentric nature of the Wonderland setting through the equally eccentric style of Tim Burton. Because of this, it’s easy to see why this film won Oscars for both its production and costume design and how its production designer would go on to direct his own live-action Disney remake a few years later. That said, though, there are a few instances where Burton’s style arguably goes a bit too far for a film that’s primarily geared towards younger audiences. In other words, moments where creatures get their eyes poked out and a scene where Alice crosses a moat filled with the heads of the Queen of Hearts’ victims do make you wonder how the film was able to get away with its PG rating. But despite this and an often-uneven plot (which, yes, is saying something for an Alice in Wonderland film), the film still manages to be another solid outing from Burton, especially thanks to its cast. Helena Bonham Carter is an absolute standout as the figuratively and literally big-headed tyrant the Red Queen and the film sports an impressively stacked voice cast with big names like Stephen Fry and Alan Rickman.

Thus, while it wasn’t exactly a runaway hit with critics, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland was a smash hit financially as it managed to gross over $1 billion worldwide. This has mainly been attributed to the general lack of competition that it faced upon its release in the Spring of 2010 and the boost that came from 3-D ticket sales since this was right when the 3-D format was experiencing its peak resurgence. Because of this, a sequel was eventually made in 2016, Alice Through the Looking Glass, under the direction of James Bobin, who was fresh off the 2011 Muppets film and its 2014 sequel, Muppets Most Wanted (Burton was still heavily involved as a producer). Like its predecessor, though, it didn’t do too well with critics, and unlike its predecessor, it was a rather notorious underperformer at the box-office. But while we’re not going to spend too much time comparing these two films, I will say that there are two things that the sequel does better than the original. First off, it boasts a brighter visual style that is still a lot of CGI overload, to be fair, but is all-around more pleasant to look at. It also means that there aren’t really any moments that push its PG rating like Burton’s film did. The other key advantage is that since the first film was primarily focused on Alice finding the confidence to help her Underland friends stop the Red Queen, she is a far more confident lead in Through the Looking Glass, which is well-reflected by Mia Wasikowska’s excellent performance in the role. And so, with all this in mind, while the live-action Alice in Wonderland films are far from being my favorites when it comes to Disney’s recent live-action output, I don’t necessarily ‘dislike’ them, either. They may be far from perfect, but as much as they do have their incredibly vocal critics (especially those who love taking these films to task for not being the most faithful adaptations of their source material), there’s no denying that they also have their fair share of fans.    

9. LADY AND THE TRAMP

The most recent film on our list, Lady and the Tramp was one of the many exclusive titles that debuted on Disney+ the day of its launch, and I won’t lie, it was, in fact, the first ‘Disney+ Original’ that I watched. While most of the attention that day was directed towards the pilot episode of The Mandalorian, I was genuinely looking forward to the live-action remake of one of Disney Animation’s most underrated projects. To be clear, I’m not saying that the original Lady and the Tramp is a forgotten entry in the Disney canon, but you could also argue that it often gets overshadowed by the other Disney films of the decade such as Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, and Peter Pan. Nevertheless, it’s a charming love story that was nicely translated into a live-action film by director Charlie Bean. Now admittedly, there aren’t many deviations from the original film, with the biggest changes consisting of minor things such as giving the dog-catcher a more prominent villain role and changing the song sung by Aunt Sarah’s pair of troublemaking cats in light of the original’s often-accused case of racist stereotyping. But even though this does make this version of Lady and the Tramp one of the more straight-forward installments of the recent Disney remakes, that’s not such a bad thing in this instance. Whereas almost all the other remakes are big-budget, CGI-heavy flicks, the Lady and the Tramp remake is refreshingly simple in its approach since the original film was more of a light-hearted romp with the period setting of a classic 1900’s Midwestern town. It also helps that the filmmakers utilized actual dogs to help bring the characters to life even though it goes without saying that CGI was used for the process of making them talk. All in all, this is just an incredibly cute and harmless film that does a nice job in recapturing the charm of its source material’s timeless romance.   

8. DUMBO

In 2019, Tim Burton took on his second major live-action Disney remake with Dumbo. Admittedly, the story of a lovable circus elephant who uses his big ears to fly may have seemed like an odd choice for Burton to direct, but at the same time, it did fit his usual M.O. of stories about misfit characters. Thus, while Burton’s Dumbo doesn’t feature his traditional gothic style, its visuals are still very much on point throughout as they do a wonderful job of capturing the bright and majestic visual aesthetic of the circuses of yesteryear. The film also has the benefit of having greater opportunities for new material when compared to some of the other remakes on this list since the original Dumbo is one of Disney’s more simpler-plotted affairs, especially due to its short 64-minute runtime. As such, all the key moments from the original such as Dumbo’s mother being put into captivity after causing a ruckus and the moment where Dumbo first publicly showcases his flying ability during a clown act are covered in just the first forty minutes. After that, a new subplot occurs when a greedy theme park entrepreneur purchases Dumbo for use in his circus while the members of Dumbo’s original circus troupe work to free his mom from her captivity at the entrepreneur’s amusement park. The remake also focuses more on the story’s human characters, namely WWI veteran Holt Farrier and his two kids Milly and Joe, who take the place of Timothy Q. Mouse from the original as Dumbo’s primary allies since this film doesn’t feature any talking animals. However, the new material that’s added in ends up feeling just as simplistic as the original film’s plot which, to be fair, was reportedly the point according to screenwriter Ehren Kruger. Ultimately, though, Dumbo still works quite well as a good-natured family film with a solid cast headlined by Burton regulars such as Michael Keaton and Danny DeVito and some fun nods to the original, including the infamous pink elephants.

7. MALEFICENT

Since Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland is technically more of a sequel than a remake, one could argue that 2014’s Maleficent is where this current crop of live-action Disney remakes truly got started. Under the direction of Alice in Wonderland’s production designer Robert Stromberg, the film serves as a live-action reimagining of Disney Animation’s 1959 outing Sleeping Beauty that, as the title suggests, mainly focuses on the story’s iconic villainess, Maleficent. However, instead of just having her be the main antagonist, the film turns her into more of an anti-hero whose actions against Princess Aurora and her family were the result of her getting revenge against Aurora’s father, her former love interest, for stealing her fairy wings. And while she does curse Aurora to fall into an eternal slumber on her 16^th birthday, she ends up developing a motherly connection to her to the point where she’s ultimately the one who saves her from the curse. As you might have guessed, those who prefer Maleficent’s traditionally villainous persona weren’t too pleased with this interpretation of the character, but overall, I think that it’s a uniquely fascinating take on Maleficent and the mother-daughter relationship that forms between her and Aurora is genuinely sweet. But, of course, the biggest highlight of the film is Angelina Jolie in the title role as she perfectly encapsulates the look and persona of the ‘Mistress of All Evil’… even if that designation doesn’t necessarily apply to this version of the character. Thus, Maleficent turned out to be a big hit with audiences upon its release in the summer of 2014, ultimately grossing over $758 million worldwide. This effectively paved the way for a sequel in 2019, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, which was generally on par with its predecessor in terms of quality while also expanding upon its fantasy world, namely by introducing more members of Maleficent’s race, the Dark Feys. Really, the only major disappointment with the sequel was that there were fewer scenes between Maleficent and Aurora. Nevertheless, the Maleficent films are a solid duology of fantasy flicks that pride themselves on being female-driven stories.

6. THE LION KING

Now I’ll be the first to admit that Jon Favreau’s CGI-based remake of The Lion King (which admittedly makes this one a bit questionable to include on this list since it’s not really live-action but arguably still counts based on its status as a remake) is quite arguably the most straight-forward remake of this bunch when it comes to retelling the original film’s story. Apart from some minor additions like an earlier introduction for adult Nala and a rivalry between her and Shenzi the hyena, this is the exact same story as the 1994 film with the exact same story beats. In other words, the biggest difference between the two films is that Favreau’s version is CGI whereas the original was traditionally animated. But while this has made the new Lion King one of the most controversial installments yet of the recent Disney remakes, I’d argue that it still manages to be a solid enough film. Like Favreau’s other big remake, The Jungle Book, much of this is due to the utterly impressive visual effects that do such an incredible job in maintaining their photorealistic nature. And while this does mean that the film lacks the more extravagant moments of the original (i.e. there’s no scene of Timon distracting hyenas by donning a grass skirt and dancing the hula (although there is a brilliant substitute bit for that part)), the attention to detail is truly spot on. Plus, I’d argue that the film still manages to hit the right emotional beats from Mufasa’s death to the moment where Simba speaks with the spirit of his father. And so, if anything, I’d say that at the very least, the new Lion King succeeds as a demonstration of how far CGI has truly come in the past few years. Obviously, I’m not saying that it’s ‘better’ than the 1994 film, but with phenomenal visuals and a great voice cast that includes the likes of Donald Glover, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Billy Eichner, Seth Rogen, and the Queen Bey herself, Beyonce, it’s also quite far from being completely worthless. And yes, this is all coming from someone who lists the original Lion King as his favorite Disney animated film of all-time, but as I’ve made it clear already, just because it’s my favorite doesn’t mean that I was going to hold that against this new film. Still, I will admit that the fact that it is largely note-for-note the same as its traditionally animated counterpart does keep me from putting it any higher on this list.

5. CHRISTOPHER ROBIN

Christopher Robin is the other film on this list that’s more of a sequel rather than a remake as it revolves around a grown-up Christopher Robin being reunited with Winnie the Pooh and the rest of the Hundred Acre Wood gang. But, of course, it still counts on this list since it utilizes much of the iconography from Disney’s interpretation of Winnie the Pooh, and since Winnie the Pooh was such a significant part of my childhood, this was easily one of my most anticipated films of 2018. At the end of the day, I’m happy to report that it did not disappoint. Christopher Robin is an incredibly poignant story about the tragedy that is the loss of childhood innocence through the harsh but sadly natural process of growing up. But while this ordeal ends up being an incredibly rough one for Christopher Robin (e.g. losing his father at a young age, enduring the horrors of World War II, etc.), it is what also makes his eventual reconciliation with his friends and family incredibly cathartic. Ewan McGregor does a fantastic job in the title role and when it comes to his Hundred Acre Wood friends, it was only appropriate that they bring back Jim Cummings, the voice of Pooh and Tigger for many a generation (mine included), for his iconic roles. Now admittedly, many have noted that Christopher Robin sports a rather bleak tone, which is true if focusing solely on the first half of the film before Christopher Robin regains his childhood innocence. After that, the film takes on a more light-hearted tone and the scenes where Pooh and company get into all sorts of adventures in London are purely delightful. And really, that perfectly sums up the film in general. It’s a truly delightful family flick that’s fully bolstered by the ever-enduring charm of its timeless characters to be another great Winnie the Pooh story.  

4. ALADDIN

As I’ve mentioned plenty of times before, director Guy Ritchie’s live-action remake of Aladdin ended up being quite a noteworthy success story even though, before its release, it was quite possibly the most scrutinized installment yet of these equally scrutinized remakes. Simply put, it was almost as if this film could never catch a break as it caught flak for various reasons ranging from certain casting choices to the infamous first reveal of Will Smith’s Genie in his traditional blue form. But when it finally came out, it managed to earn over $1 billion worldwide while also doing decently enough with critics, many of whom felt that it turned out to be much better than they initially anticipated. And if you ask me, that means that this film deserves a lot of credit for managing to avoid being the disaster that many predicted it would be. Now as far as being a remake of its animated counterpart, Aladdin is in the same boat as Lady and the Tramp and The Lion King by not making a lot of radical changes to the original story of a good-natured thief who tries to woo the Princess of Agrabah with the help of a wisecracking Genie. Despite this, however, one great change that it does make is letting Princess Jasmine play a far more proactive role in the story. With no disrespect to her animated counterpart, this is the best incarnation of the character to date, especially thanks to Naomi Scott doing a phenomenal job in the role. Meanwhile, Mena Massoud shines in what is surely going to be his breakout role as Aladdin while Will Smith, despite all the pressure that stemmed from having to follow in the footsteps of Robin Williams’ iconic rendition of the Genie in the original animated film, successfully delivers his own, unique take on the character. Ultimately, the only thing that holds this film back is its mediocre interpretation of Jafar, which is primarily due to this version’s more grounded take on the character. But at the end of the day, the live-action Aladdin ends up being a lot of fun, and while it may have seemed like a weird choice to have it done by a director who’s known more for making gritty crime dramas, Guy Ritchie does a highly respectable job when it comes to maintaining the original’s great atmosphere and unforgettable musical numbers.  

3. THE JUNGLE BOOK

Out of all these films, Jon Favreau’s The Jungle Book is arguably the best example of a live-action Disney remake that isn’t fully tied to its animated counterpart. While it’s still very much the story of a young boy named Mowgli who is raised by wolves in the jungles of India and pursued by the sinister tiger Shere Kahn, it’s ultimately a combination of the 1967 animated film and Rudyard Kipling’s original novel. In other words, it only features three of the songs from the animated film (“Bare Necessities”, “I Wanna Be Like You”, and “Trust in Me”) and places greater emphasis on the dramatic parts of the story such as Mowgli’s history with Shere Kahn, who killed his human father, and the dangerous power of ‘Man’s Red Flower’, fire. Favreau does an excellent job of balancing these two aspects of the story, resulting in some excellent emotional moments (e.g. when Mowgli first leaves for the man-village and says goodbye to his adoptive wolf mother Raksha) while also featuring plenty of great homages to the original. But, of course, the most notable aspect of this film is its extensive use of CGI to bring both its animals and its jungle landscapes to life. And because Favreau’s VFX team did such an outstanding job with the visuals (which ended up netting them the Oscar that year for Best Visual Effects), sometimes it’s easy to forget that Neel Sethi, who plays Mowgli, is literally the only ‘real’ thing on-screen 95% of the time. All this and a top-notch voice cast that includes big names like Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley, Idris Elba, and Lupita Nyong’o helps make this adaptation of Rudyard Kipling’s classic story a full-blown visual masterpiece. And as I noted back in the intro, Favreau and screenwriter Justin Marks are currently prepping a sequel that, according to Marks, could potentially incorporate some of the unused elements from the animated film’s original screenplay by Bill Peet that was ultimately rejected by Walt Disney himself for being too dark.

2. CINDERELLA

No matter how much these live-action Disney remakes get ragged on by their biggest critics, there will always be the select few that were genuinely well-received, and the one that started it all for this group was Kenneth Branagh’s 2015 remake of Cinderella. Unlike both Alice in Wonderland and Maleficent, which received mixed reviews upon their release, Cinderella fared quite well with critics and became the first of these remakes to secure a ‘Fresh’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes. And just like Christopher Robin, this was another one of my most anticipated films back when it was coming out due to the original Cinderella being one of my all-time favorite Disney films growing up. All in all, Branagh’s remake does a wonderful job of bringing this classic story to life. Sure, it’s another case where the remake is predominately faithful to its animated counterpart without many significant changes, but in this instance, the changes that it does make are some of the best to come from any of these recent remakes. Easily the best example of this is how it expands upon the relationship between Cinderella and Prince Charming, namely by having them meet before the ball, which also allows the latter to be a more fleshed-out character compared to his animated counterpart. And while Cinderella continues to get a lot of flak nowadays for allegedly being ‘too passive’ of a protagonist, I still stand by what I’ve been saying these past few years in that her unshakably optimistic nature in the face of all the crap she’s put through makes her a far better heroine than she’s often given credit for. Sure enough, this is well-reflected in the live-action remake, especially thanks to Lily James’ outstanding turn in the role. The same goes for Richard Madden as the superior version of Prince Charming, Cate Blanchett as the unforgettably sinister Lady Tremaine, and Helena Bonham Carter in a scene-stealing turn as Cinderella’s Fairy Godmother. And so, with a phenomenal cast, gorgeous production design, and all-around excellent direction from Kenneth Branagh, the live-action Cinderella is one of the most uplifting films to have come out in recent years.

1. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

To be perfectly blunt, folks, I have the feeling that this film’s placement at the top spot on this list is going to garner some controversy given its usual reception. Let me put it this way; when it first came out, it did relatively well with critics. It currently boasts a 71% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which is a decently solid score for a film to have on that site, and it also grossed over $1 billion worldwide, effectively making it the second-highest-grossing film of 2017 behind only Star Wars: The Last Jedi. In other words, it was, at the very least, clearly a big hit with audiences. However, I think it’s safe to say that this was the film that fully intensified the utter contempt that the ‘Disney remake’ critics have towards this trend, especially due to the legendary reputation of the film that this remake was adapted from. Before 2017, all the live-action Disney remakes were based on older animated films such as Alice in Wonderland and Cinderella. As such, one could argue that the overall expectations for them weren’t as intense given how long it has been since their releases. Beauty and the Beast, on the other hand, was the most recent Disney animated feature to get the live-action treatment at that point and it also happens to be one of the studio’s most beloved outings. It is, after all, the first animated film that was ever nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, a distinction that only two other films have achieved since then. As such, this remake clearly faced stricter expectations because of how much the original has meant to my generation, and the same can also be said for the remakes of Aladdin and The Lion King that would come out later and would end up garnering far more polarizing reactions from critics. Thus, despite what I just said about the film maintaining a solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, I wouldn’t be surprised if many of those who gave it a ‘Fresh’ review aren’t as positive about it nowadays. And yet, I’m not afraid to admit that I still love this film.

Yes, this is yet another instance of a remake that doesn’t make a lot of changes to the original’s story, but overall, I was genuinely fine with the updates that they did make. This includes, among other things, Belle being an inventor just like her father (played excellently by Kevin Kline in a uniquely more subdued take on ‘crazy old Maurice’) and her discovery as to why he has been overly protective of her all these years after her mom died from the Plague. I also loved all the new songs that were made for this remake, especially the Beast’s new solo, ‘Evermore’. And while I’m well aware that much of the criticisms towards this film have been directed towards Emma Watson in the lead role of Belle, namely due to her singing, I still think that she does a fantastic job in the role if we’re talking about all the other things that have made Belle one of the most popular Disney princesses. She’s then backed by a phenomenal supporting cast that includes Dan Stevens as the Beast, Luke Evans and Josh Gad as the scene-stealing duo of Gaston and LeFou (so much so that they’re going to get their own Disney+ series) and the likes of Ewan McGregor, Emma Thompson, and Ian McKellen as the Beast’s servants. In short, I will fully admit that there’s probably quite a bit of bias behind my decision to place this film at the #1 spot on this list. I saw it twice in theaters, with the first time being in IMAX at the film’s ‘Fan Event’ screening on my birthday. I also bought the soundtrack on iTunes not long afterward and loved the film so much that my mom asked one of her co-workers to pick it up on Blu-Ray and ship it to us so we could get the special Best Buy Steelbook*. In other words, I know that I’m probably in the minority when it comes to liking this film, which has certainly faced tons of scrutiny over the ‘necessity’ of its existence and has often been negatively compared to its animated counterpart. And yet, as this entire list has hopefully established by now, I don’t really care about any of that stuff, even if this is another case like The Lion King since the original Beauty and the Beast is one of my Top 5 favorite Disney films. Ultimately, though, that doesn’t prevent the live-action Beauty and the Beast from legitimately being one of my favorite films of the 2010s.

*(By the time that I was fully intent on getting the Steelbook, it wasn’t available at any of the Best Buy stores that were near our home in Rhode Island, hence why we needed to have my mom’s co-worker pick it up for us in Wisconsin where he’s from. As our way of saying thanks, we then proceeded to get him his own Steelbook copy of the film. In other words, as a friendly piece of advice for all you Blu-Ray enthusiasts out there, if you’re ever interested in getting a film’s Steelbook release, be sure to pre-order it in advance because it could very well go out of stock as soon as it hits the shelves, especially if it’s for a highly popular film like one of the MCU films or, say, a billion-dollar grossing remake of a Disney classic…)

And that concludes my rankings list of all the major live-action Disney remakes that have been released since 2010. Thanks for following along and be sure to be on the lookout for my review of the next big live-action Disney remake, Mulan, not too long after the film makes its Disney+ debut on September 4^th.

In Defense of Disney's Live-Action Remakes

(Disclaimer: As some of you will recognize, this is not the first time that this specific post has been published. A few weeks ago, I submitted a different form of this post to the animation website Rotoscopers. I knew that it would spark some controversy there due to those who aren’t big on Disney’s remake run, but I wanted to point out some positives about the company’s current live-action film strategy and try to reason that it’s not the worst thing in the world. I would like to thank the team at Rotoscopers for publishing my post and will be dedicating this new version of it to them. I will also be providing a link to the Rotoscopers post for you folks to check out if you haven’t already. The major difference between the two versions of this post is simple; with Rotoscopers, I had to keep it to a specific word limit. Here, expect a much longer post that’s much more in line with the usual content that I post here.)

This weekend sees the release of one of the year’s most highly anticipated films; Disney’s Beauty and the Beast. The film is a live-action adaptation of the studio’s beloved animated masterpiece of the same name from 1991 and is the latest in a growing line of new adaptations of classic Disney stories. For you see, Disney’s current live-action film slate is primarily based around one thing; live-action remakes/re-imaginings of their animated classics. This trend first got started in 2010 with Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, a pseudo-follow-up to the studio’s animated take on the Lewis Carroll story of the same name from 1951. While the film received mixed reviews from both critics and audiences, it was a smash hit at the box office, as it managed to gross over $1 billion worldwide. Four years later, that commercial success continued with Maleficent, a ‘re-imagining’ of Disney’s 1959 effort, Sleeping Beauty. It was the same situation; the film attracted a polarizing reception but was a major box-office hit. One year later, Disney then released a remake of Cinderella but unlike the previous two films, this one not only did well at the box office but it was also the first to be generally well-received by critics. Because of this, Disney then proceeded to announce a wide slew of remakes/re-imaginings over the next few months for films like Mulan, Winnie the Pooh, Dumbo, and so on and so forth. It’s honestly gotten to the point where almost every single Disney animated classic has a remake that has either come out, is slated to come out, or is currently in the works.

But, as some of you might have guessed, this slew of ‘remake announcements’ hasn’t gone over entirely well with everybody. Namely, there are quite a few people on the internet who are not a fan of Disney’s current live-action film strategy for various reasons, including the obvious argument of ‘why remake a classic’ and the fact that these remakes are now the primary projects on the studio’s schedule instead of original films. In fact, some of my good friends in the blogger community are in this exact crowd. As for me, though, I’m eagerly looking forward to a lot of these new remakes because of the great potential that they have. Now, for the record, I’m well-aware of an old quote from Walt Disney himself in which he remarked that ‘you can’t top pigs with pigs’, which basically asserted his own theory on the idea of sequels after he produced several sequels to the studio’s 1933 classic short, Three Little Pigs, that weren’t as successful as the original. But that was a different time; nowadays, nothing is ‘truly original’ anymore, meaning that stuff like this is bound to happen. Now, let me be clear, I love seeing an original film as much as the next person. Heck, my #8 favorite film from last year was Swiss Army Man. However, I’m not one of those people who outright condemns sequels, reboots, and remakes just because they exist. Thus, today on Rhode Island Movie Corner, I’ll be listing three reasons as to why I’m enthusiastic towards the upcoming line of Disney’s ‘live-action remakes’. Again, let me be clear; I understand where those who are against the remakes are coming from but, please, hear me out on this for a moment.

REASON #1: MANY OF THE RECENT REMAKES HAVE BEEN GOOD

Now, of course, this is an argument that can be quite subjective, just like film itself, hence why I decided to start this post with this argument right out the gate. There is no such thing as a ‘universally beloved’ film; every film has its critic and the recent Disney remakes are no exception to this. However, some of the most recent remakes in this lineup have genuinely been a success with BOTH critics and audiences. And again, as I noted earlier, this wasn’t initially the case. Both Alice in Wonderland and Maleficent were polarizing, to say the least, and believe me when I say that I have come across opinions on both sides of the spectrum. I have seen plenty of people who have expressed absolute contempt for these remakes. But, at the same time, I’ve also come across quite a few people that absolutely love these films. Therefore, it makes a lot more sense to me now why Alice in Wonderland managed to gross over a billion back in 2010; there were some people out there who did really like it. Same situation with Maleficent, which overcame its mixed reception to gross over $750 million worldwide and end up as the 4^th highest-grossing film of 2014. So, in short, while the films may not have done well with critics, they were doing well with audiences and, if you ask me, that usually matters more; knowing that audiences were enjoying it. Clearly, most audiences aren’t bothered by these remakes coming out and, if you ask me, why rain on their parade?   

But then when Cinderella came out, things were a little different as the critical reception was far more positive compared to Alice and Maleficent. Maintaining a solid 83% on Rotten Tomatoes and with over $500 million worldwide, it was very much the first in this line of Disney remakes that was a true bona fide success from a critical standpoint and not just a commercial one. Again, it did have its critics (believe me, I’ve gotten some flak from some people online for liking this film) but it ultimately proved that, if anything, these remakes could be fantastic. And then, in 2016, audiences were treated to not one but two highly successful adaptations of classic Disney films (note: before any of you bring up the critically-bashed sequel to Alice in Wonderland, Alice Through the Looking Glass, that doesn’t really count in this instance because it’s primarily a sequel). Director Jon Favreau’s adaptation of The Jungle Book was one of the best-reviewed films of 2016 and it grossed nearly $1 billion worldwide. And then, near the tail-end of the summer, there was Pete’s Dragon. It didn’t reach the same commercial heights of the other remakes, which is understandable considering that it’s based on a Disney film that isn’t as well-known compared to something like The Jungle Book, but it too was well-received by most critics and it did manage to break even with around $140 million worldwide on a modest $65 million budget. Now, let me be clear, I’m not saying that all the upcoming Disney remakes are going to be successful with both critics and audiences. There probably will be some critical duds here and there. However, no matter how well or how bad these upcoming remakes fare with critics, the previous three Disney remakes will stand as genuine success stories and proof that not only can they be done, but done well.

REASON #2: THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR NEW TAKES ON THESE STORIES

To me, the best thing that a ‘remake’ can do is offer a new take on a classic story. And that’s one of the key reasons as to why I am genuinely looking forward to most of these Disney remakes. While some will no doubt share many similarities with their animated predecessors, it’s not like they’re going to be ‘note-for-note’ copies or anything. The only real instance in which I’ve seen this happen is director Gus Van Sant’s 1998 remake of Psycho and the critical bashing that film got is a good reason, I’d say, as to why you don’t see a lot of ‘note-for-note’ remakes. Alice in Wonderland, for example, was a ‘continuation’ of the original story while Maleficent was the story of Sleeping Beauty told from the perspective of the titular villain, Maleficent. Say what you will about the films themselves but the decision to tell these stories from a different angle was, at the very least, ‘something different’. The other big Disney remake of this nature, which ultimately ended up being the most different from its predecessor, was Pete’s Dragon. Instead of being a musical like the original 1977 film was, the new adaptation was more of a drama. And while this may have ticked off some fans of the original, to the point where some even referred to the new film as ‘Pete’s Dragon in name only’, again, it was ‘something different’. Jon Favreau took a similar approach with The Jungle Book. While there were some elements of the original animated film that were featured in the new version (e.g. its most popular songs), Favreau also utilized elements from Rudyard Kipling’s original story to create something along the lines of a hybrid between the film’s two primary source materials.

Now, admittedly, the 2015 remake of Cinderella was basically just the same general story as its predecessor; a young girl is subjected to relentless cruelty from her wicked stepmother and stepsisters but her life then changes once she meets a charming prince. So, of course, some of you may ask “Well, why the heck did they remake it, then?” But, you see, they did throw in a few new things here and there to differentiate itself from the original, like having scenes with young Ella and her parents (whereas in the original, these scenes were just part of the opening narration, sans her mother) and additional scenes between her and the Prince prior to the Ball instead of just having them first meet at said Ball. Stuff like this, especially the latter, did help the film expand upon the story of the original which, as great as it is, is admittedly a product of its time. And, overall, it’s clear that a similar method is going on with the new Beauty and the Beast. While still the same story of a young woman who slowly falls in love with the monstrous-looking prince of an enchanted castle, there are a few changes that have been made here and there to make it its own thing; most notably, Belle is now an inventor just like her father. Now, for the record, I’m not saying that these changes are going to automatically improve upon the original, nor am I expecting the new film to be ‘better’ than the original. Instead, I view it in the same way that I do the other Disney remakes; as a nice complement to the original that can stand on its own merit alongside the original. On that note…

REASON #3: NOTHING. IS. GETTING. REPLACED!

This is the one point that I feel should be stressed ad nauseam… because, clearly, this is the one thing that those who are against the Disney remakes fear the most when it comes to them. They fear that these remakes are the studio’s way of ‘erasing’ the original animated films from existence, implying that animation is inferior to live-action/CG. Trust me when I say that this is not the case whatsoever. This isn’t like the original Star Wars trilogy, where George Lucas has continually made changes to the films without ever giving us any chance of viewing them in their original format. No matter what happens with these remakes, the originals will still be there at the end of the day. Case in point, the original Beauty and the Beast was just given a fancy new 25^th-anniversary Blu-Ray right in time for the release of the new film. They also released the original Jungle Book on Blu-Ray a few years ago; sure, it may have been two whole years before Jon Favreau’s live-action version and it’s since gone back into the Disney Vault but, again, it shows that Disney still cares about the original versions. Yes, there have been a few behind-the-scenes videos in which those working on the new BATB (namely, director Bill Condon) say stuff along the lines of ‘technology allows us to do things we couldn’t do in 1991’ but that’s just the marketing material talking. Not once have they ever said ‘we’re trying to replace the original film’. In fact, most of those who’ve worked on these Disney remakes have made it clear in interviews that they adore the original films and were doing their best to try and live up to their reputation.   

And at the end of the day, if any of these upcoming remakes don’t turn out so good, so what? It’s not like they’re ‘metaphorical murder’ or anything (note: that phrase ‘metaphorical murder’ was an actual comment made by a critic of the Disney remakes). The reputation of their original sources won’t be tarnished by them; heck, if anything, they’d just end up making the originals even better by comparison. This is a mentality that’s been around for pretty much every other remake, reboot, and so on and so forth that’s come out in the past few years, not just the ones from Disney. Whenever one’s announced, the internet reacts to it like it caused the plague or something. But, really, that’s all that it is; a mentality, not a reality. Sure, some remakes are more questionable than others but it’s not like there’s some law out there that states that a certain film can’t be remade. The worst possible outcome would be that it’s just a lame remake, nothing else. Heck, this backlash towards the Disney remakes is honestly not too far off from what happened with the new Ghostbusters film. As we all know by now, when that film was first announced, it was absolutely savaged by the internet, particularly from angry fanboys who just couldn’t handle the fact that their favorite franchise was being brought back (and don’t get me started about when they found out that women were starring in it). But, it came out, and it did ok with critics. More important, though, is the fact that all copies of the original Ghostbusters films did not spontaneously combust into flames as was feared. And guess what? Neither did any of the Disney animated films when their live-action remakes were released.

In fact, some of the most beloved films of all time just so happen to be remakes. John Carpenter’s The Thing? Remake. The Departed? It’s a remake of a Hong Kong film from 2002 named Infernal Affairs. And the classic Wizard of Oz that we all know and love from 1939? That was the 11^th film adaptation of L. Frank Baum’s books (and it sure as hell wasn’t the last either)! Bottom line, just because Disney’s releasing a bunch of remakes doesn’t mean that they consider animation to be inferior. In fact, I think it’s safe to say that films like Frozen, Zootopia, and Moana are more than enough proof that animation is still Disney’s primary source of film output. Now, I’ll admit that I do think that Disney probably should’ve been a bit more conservative when it came to announcing all these remakes. It probably would’ve been better if they had announced like one or two a year instead of, you know, a new one every other week. Still, I think it’s exciting that we’re getting new takes on the classic stories of our childhoods that will help introduce them to a new generation. Just remember that the original films still exist, okay guys? Because if there’s any real sign of these films being overshadowed by their new live-action counterparts, it’s more the internet’s fault and not Disney’s (Remember when all those videos bashing The Jungle Book came out before the remake's release? Well the same thing just happened again with Beauty and the Beast.). And to those who aren’t big on these upcoming remakes, that’s fine; no one’s forcing you to watch them. Just let those who are excited for them have their fun, okay?

Click here for the original version of this post that was submitted to Rotoscopers.com

TOP 12 FAVORITE FILMS OF 2016: #9-7

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 2 of 4 and today I’ll be covering the films that landed in the #9-7 spots. For my #12-10 picks, as well as my 7 Honorable Mentions, be sure to click the following link to be directed over to Part 1 of this series. But, for now, it’s time to get back to the list…

An animated classic saw new life this year with an excellent new adaptation that’s easily one of the most visually beautiful films of the year…

9. THE JUNGLE BOOK

Disney’s new trend of live-action remakes, as I’ve noted numerous times in the past few months, has been a controversial one, to say the least. Those against it question the necessity for Disney to do live-action remakes of their animated classics. However, the most recent efforts in this ‘line’ have done well with both critics AND audiences instead of just with the latter as was initially the case. In 2015, we got the excellent re-imagining of Cinderella. And this year, we got not one but two great live-action remakes in the form of the previously mentioned Pete’s Dragon and this, director Jon Favreau’s take on Rudyard Kipling’s classic novel The Jungle Book. This story was previously adapted by Walt Disney Animation in 1967 and was the last major Disney animated film that Walt Disney himself ever produced. The original Jungle Book is an undeniable classic. Despite what channels like Screen Junkies and Cinemasins may claim (seriously, their videos on it were so negative that I had to fast-track my ‘60’s/70’s Disney Retrospective’ just to give it a positive review. They were that harsh!), it’s a terrific entry in the Disney animated canon thanks to its classic characters and memorable songs. With his version, Jon Favreau both respects the original film while also doing his own unique spin on the story. Part of this stems from the fact that he utilized elements from both the original animated film as well as Kipling’s original story. Some of the classic songs from the original film appear, namely ‘The Bare Necessities’ (obviously) and ‘I Wanna Be Like You’, but only in snippets. In other words, this is not an outright musical. It’s just a well-handled take on the classic story of the man-cub Mowgli and his adventures in the jungle, from his encounter with the infamous King Louie to the fun, care-free times that he had with Baloo and, of course, his run-in with the intimidating Shere Kahn.

One of the most talked-about aspects of the film has been its visual effects. And for those not yet in the know, at least 95% of this film is CG. They shot all of this on a sound-stage with Neel Sethi (Mowgli) being the only major human character in the entire film and most of the backgrounds created digitally. So, technically, it could be argued that this is more of a CG remake. But I’m not going to get into that argument right now. Instead, let’s continue to marvel at this film’s fantastic visuals. The animals look incredibly photo-realistic and it’s also impressive how real the environments look for being almost completely CG. As for the cast of animal characters, Favreau did a nice job in terms of selecting a voice cast to portray these classic characters. Each voice actor is perfectly cast in their respective roles. This includes Ben Kingsley as the dignified panther Bagheera, Idris Elba as the imposing Shere Kahn, Bill Murray as the laid-back Baloo, and Scarlett Johansson as the seductive Kaa. And for being the only major human actor in the entire film, Neel Sethi does an excellent job when it comes to working off these CG characters. Thus, The Jungle Book proved to be another excellent remake of a Disney classic. And, like Cinderella the year before, it’s not meant to ‘replace’ the original in any way. That’s basically the main fear of those who oppose these remakes. They believe that, with these remakes, Disney is implying that animation is inferior by comparison. Trust me when I say that this is not true. These remakes are just meant to be a neat complement to the original film which, quite frankly, is something that I feel the best remakes are supposed to do. Instead of replacing the original, they instead should just be an interesting new take on a classic story. And considering that this film is basically only one-half of Kipling’s original story, I’m excited to see how the upcoming sequel is going to turn out.

Boy, are things going to get weird with my Number 8 pick…

8. SWISS ARMY MAN

Like I said in my original review, Swiss Army Man is one of the weirdest films that I have ever seen in the 7-plus years that I have been doing film reviews. It tells the tale of a man named Hank who ends up stranded on a deserted island. Driven despondent to the point of suicide, he notices a dead body wash up on shore that is farting uncontrollably (just go with it…). Hank manages to get back to the mainland with the help of the corpse, whom he names Manny (who is somehow still able to speak), and the two embark on a journey to get back home. Along the way, Hank learns that Manny is capable of being used like a ‘swiss army knife’, hence the title Swiss Army Man, for various purposes, whether it’s for chopping wood or hunting for food. Yes, that plot may sound weird to some of you, and I wouldn’t blame you for that because I agree, but amidst all the farting, talk of masturbation, and magical wangs that act as a compass (don’t ask…), this film is… strangely beautiful. Obviously, a lot of weird stuff happens in this film but, at the same time, it’s a simple and charming story of friendship, lost love, and regaining one’s humanity. Hank and Manny prove to be a likable duo together and Paul Dano and Daniel Radcliffe, respectively, do excellent jobs in the roles. The soundtrack is fantastic, featuring a lot of great acapella tunes, including a hilarious rendition of the theme from Jurassic Park (“If you don’t know Jurassic Park, you don’t know s***!”) and an epic montage song that’s literally called ‘Montage’. And, ultimately, this was one of the funniest films of the year. I mean, sure, given this film’s wacky premise, that was probably to be expected going in. But, to put it simply, this was just a strange yet highly entertaining little adventure.

Everyone’s favorite absent-minded fish returned in what was either a highly-anticipated sequel… or one that some people were hesitant about given the studio’s track record with sequels…

7. FINDING DORY

The character of Dory, as voiced by Ellen DeGeneres, is widely regarded as one of the best parts of Pixar’s beloved 2003 effort, Finding Nemo. And after many years in which fans were kept eagerly waiting for a follow-up (including Ellen herself as evident from all the times that she mentioned it on her show), Pixar finally gave us a sequel to Finding Nemo in the form of Finding Dory. Andrew Stanton once again returns to direct and, as the title suggests, the film sees the optimistic and lovable Pacific regal blue tang take on the lead role. However, at the same time, this film also had to prove itself to those who were hesitant about it given Pixar’s general track record with sequels. While the Toy Story sequels were undeniable critical and commercial hits, Cars 2 was the studio’s first poorly-received effort. And while the prequel Monsters University did perform better with critics, by comparison, it still wasn’t one of the studio’s best-received efforts… even though I’d argue that film is totally underrated but I’m starting to get off track here. Yes, the internet has been putting a lot of pressure on Pixar these past few years to do more original stories. After all, this is the same internet that now regularly expects ‘15/10 masterpieces’ from the company and views any film that doesn’t reach that status as the equivalent of a criminal offense (seriously, I wish I was joking about that but, per my good friend Kyle Ostrum (kylesanimatedworld.blogspot.com), this connection was, in fact, made once on an online forum). Thankfully, Finding Dory manages to prove a lot of its critics wrong by being just as charming, beautifully animated, and most importantly heartfelt as its predecessor.

First off, the film smartly avoids the common mistake that a sequel can potentially make; rehashing the same plot of the previous film. Instead of just having the plot consist of Dory being captured and taken away by divers to P. Sherman, 42 Wallaby Way, Sydney, it instead sees her traveling to ‘the Jewel of Morro Bay’, AKA Morro Bay, California’s Marine Life Institute, to find her long-lost parents, whom she had been separated from ever since she was little. This is what gives the film its heart and, thus, the scene where she finally reunites with them at the end is a guaranteed tearjerker. At the same time, the film maintains a lot of the same great qualities of Finding Nemo. The main characters are all very likable. This includes both the returning cast (Dory, Marlin, Nemo, etc.) and the new cast of characters, including a grouchy but lovable octopus named Hank (Ed O’Neill), Dory’s childhood friend Destiny (Kaitlin Olson), a near-sighted whale shark, and Bailey (Ty Burrell), a beluga whale who mistakenly believes he is unable to use echolocation after suffering a concussion. The animation is outstanding as usual; seriously, I’d argue these Finding Nemo films feature some of Pixar’s absolute greatest animation. Finally, another great thing about this film is how it embraces those with disabilities. Of course, the film is primarily about Dory who, as we all know, suffers from short-term memory loss. And while that does make her journey to find her parents difficult at times, she manages to overcome it by the end. In other words, instead of shunning those who suffer from any sort of disability, this film assures them that their disabilities don’t define who they are which, if you ask me, makes the whole experience even more special. So, in conclusion, to quote the title of the end credits song performed by Sia, which is a cover of a classic song, Finding Dory truly is ‘unforgettable’.

That’s the end of Part 2. Thanks for following along and be sure to check back in tomorrow for Part 3, in which I’ll be listing Films #6-4.

2016 Midyear Recap

Well here we are at the halfway point of 2016. And for those who have following this blog for the past few years, you know what that means. As is tradition this time of the year, today I will be going through all of the films that I’ve seen so far over these past six months. And this year actually gave me a few more films to talk about than usual as a result of me getting the opportunity to go to this year’s SXSW Film Festival in Austin, Texas this past March. There I got to see quite a few new films before they were released in theaters. Some of them have already seen a theatrical release and others are still on the way. But for now, it’s time to go through the good and the bad of what has been a pretty solid year for film so far. Of course there have been a few ‘stinkers’ here and there but, as always, there have been plenty of great films to balance all of that out. Now usually when I do these ‘Recap’ posts, I simply go from my least favorite films of the year to my Top 5 favorites so far. Admittedly though, in past years it was never really in a 100% ‘exact’ order. So to help keep things in check this time around, I’ve been maintaining a rankings list of every new film that I see this year (note: anything that can be credited as a ‘2016’ theatrical release) on my Letterboxd account (click here for the link). Now this isn’t the first time that I’ve done this. I did something similar in 2011 back before I started this blog, when I was writing reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. However, things got a little complicated by year’s end due to me not keeping much track of the ratings that I was giving to the films that I saw that year, as well as sometimes even forgetting to update the list from time to time. So this year, thankfully, things have gone much smoother in terms of me keeping a general record of what I’ve seen. So with all of that out of the way, let’s look back upon my 2016 ‘year in film’ so far. 

Before I begin, I’ll briefly go over the one film that I’ve seen this year that I haven’t given a rating to yet but will do so once it comes out. This is due to the fact that I initially saw it when it was in its ‘rough cut’ status.

SAUSAGE PARTY

When I saw this at SXSW, I only saw its Rough Cut. The film wasn’t completed yet (something that Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg made very much clear when they were introducing the film) so there were quite a few frames of animation that weren’t completed at that time. So because of it, I decided not to give it a rating when I did my SXSW Recap but I promise that I will once the film comes out in its completed form. So with that said, what I can say about the film based on what I saw? Well, it’s very much a Seth Rogen/Evan Goldberg comedy. The film is full of their style of humor so if you’re not a fan of that kind of humor (e.g. expect plenty of pot jokes) you might not get very much out of this film. However, it’s certainly shaping up to be one of the most unique animated films in recent memory. It very much is an R-rated animated film even though the style seemingly evokes a Disney-esque atmosphere. But while the film may be about a bunch of talking food items a la something like Toy Story, it doesn’t end up being a light-hearted romp once the groceries learn of what really happens when they are bought by humans…. They get eaten. What follows is a very unique adventure full of food puns and outrageous moments that have to be seen to be believed. Case in point, the finale of the film, which I won’t spoil here but needless to say… it’s something. Despite the fact that I only saw its ‘Rough Cut’, if I had to give the film a rating right then and there I would probably give it somewhere around a 3.5/5. But for now, you’re just going to have to wait and see what my rating will officially be for it when Sausage Party is unleashed upon the world on August 12^th.  

WORST FILM OF THE YEAR (SO FAR)

LONDON HAS FALLEN

2013 saw the release of not one but two different Die Hard-esque action films set in the White House. Of those two, the bigger hit was director Antoine Fuqua’s Olympus Has Fallen and the success of that film has now led to a sequel. But without Fuqua behind the camera this time around, London Has Fallen proves to be one heck of a disastrous sequel to a film that, to be perfectly frank, I actually thought was the lesser of the two 2013 White House-set action films. I mean it’s bad enough that the film has fairly lousy action sequences (as well as some pretty weak CGI) and a stupid plot. However, as many have pointed out, the biggest problem with the film is that it ends up one of the most culturally offensive films in recent memory. And the big reason for that is because it portrays the city of London as basically being totally inept when it comes to dealing with terrorist attacks. It’s even more of a problem considering that this was released only a few months after the Paris attacks this past November. The film very much has a ‘America! F*** Yeah!’ attitude to it but that’s not a good thing in this case (unless you’re a Donald Trump supporter... I wish I was kidding but this film seriously feels like it represents Trump’s vision of the world). Like I said before, while I didn’t ‘dislike’ Olympus Has Fallen, I actually preferred Roland Emmerich’s White House Down because I felt that Olympus tried to be way too serious at times for a film that was basically ‘Die Hard in the White House’. And while London doesn’t try to be as serious as its predecessor for the most part, it ends up being worse primarily due to how insultingly xenophobic it is.

OTHER DISAPPOINTING/MEDIOCRE RELEASES

GODS OF EGYPT

The latest film from director Alex Proyas, most known for cult hits like 1994’s The Crow and 1998’s Dark City, experienced quite a bit of controversy in the weeks leading up to its release due to the fact that the film, despite being set in Egypt (as well as being directed by an Egypt-born director), starred a pre-dominantly white cast. But as someone who doesn’t like to get into a lot of race-related discussion when it comes to film, that lack of diversity wasn’t the only problem that this film had to deal with. To put it simply, Gods of Egypt is an undercooked, and in some cases even a bit ‘overdone’, fantasy epic that I think it’s safe to say has nothing in common with actual Egyptian history with all of the crazy visuals that this film creates, including the metallic-looking Iron Man esque armor that the Egyptian gods wear in battle. Most of the action sequences are just nothing but CGI overload and the cast is generally wasted; some of them are legitimately trying (e.g. Game of Thrones’ Nikolaj Coster-Waldau as Horus) while others over-act like crazy (e.g. Gerard Butler as the main villain, Set). The film tries to be a fun action-adventure flick but ultimately it ends up being extremely corny with all of its attempts at humorous banter. And because the film does focus more on its visuals, there’s little to no character development. While I personally hate to see films ‘bomb’ at the box-office, even if it’s a film I don’t like, as soon as I saw the trailer for this film I pretty much knew that it was going to do poorly at the box-office… and it did. It barely managed to earn back its $140 million budget.

HARDCORE HENRY

At the very least, I will give Hardcore Henry credit for having a genuinely original concept for an action film. All of the action in this film was filmed in the first-person perspective, putting the audience in the shoes of its titular character, a cybernetically enhanced man named Henry, as he tore through Moscow in order to rescue his wife Estelle from the villainous telepathic warlord Akan. However, as unique as its method of shooting is, this film is absolutely dumb as hell. The film’s ‘avatar’, Henry, is just that... an empty shell. And despite the fact that Danila Kozlovsky does manage to be a pretty charismatic ‘love to hate him’ villain, Akan is given no backstory whatsoever, including how he somehow manages to have Jedi-like telekinetic powers. The only one who gets any shred of character development, if any, is Sharlto Copley as Henry’s main ally Jimmy, who keeps dying but manages to keep coming back somehow in different personas. As for the action, while it does give the film a unique ‘style’, it does get tiring after a while due to it hitting the same general note over and over again. And while the film does live up to its title of being ‘hardcore’ given how brutal the action can be, it also comes off as being quite immature at times. I’m going to be totally honest with you folks… when I saw this at SXSW, I left before the Q&A after the film because I was feeling so winded as a result of what I just saw. I even got ‘interviewed’ by a few people working for the distributor who asked me my thoughts on the film. Simply put, it’s probably a good thing that I didn’t give my ‘full thoughts’ on the film in that moment. I mean I think it’ll be cool if someone tries to do another ‘first-person’ action film in the future but hopefully that person remembers to actually give that film a well-written story with characters whom we actually give a crap about. 

NEIGHBORS 2: SORORITY RISING

I hate to have to put Neighbors 2 in my ‘Worst of the Year’ list at this point because I was generally looking forward to the film having been a fan of the original Neighbors. It was a well-balanced comedy that benefitted heavily from not outright demonizing the fraternity that served as ‘antagonists’ to Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne’s characters. Not only that, but the solid representation of the brotherhood of fraternities (which I can at least verify due to one of my best friends being a Sigma Chi alumnus) will no doubt help in regards to making it a new essential college flick. And for the record, the sequel is very much capable of becoming that kind of film as well. This time around, the focus is on a sorority and once again director Nicholas Stoller does do a solid job in not outright vilifying the sorority and establishing a clearly solid sisterhood amongst its members. And like the first film, there are definitely some very funny moments in this film, namely through the pranks that the two sides commit against each other just like in the previous film. However, this time around I found that the jokes were much more hit and miss. For one thing, the climax is much more anti-climactic than the epically hilarious fight between Mac and Teddy in the first film, even though the message that this film’s climax conveys is genuinely appreciated. And while the pro-feminism vibe that the film creates is well-handled for the most part, sometimes the film rather annoyingly hits you over the head with it even after getting its point across earlier. In short, Neighbors 2 is by no means a ‘bad’ film but unfortunately I was rather disappointed by this lackluster sequel.    

NOTEWORTHY RECOMMENDATIONS

INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE

This film has been subjected to some particularly harsh reviews these past few days, with some calling it ‘boring’ and others just calling it ‘one of the worst films of the year’. However, is the long-awaited sequel to 1996’s smash hit Independence Day really as bad as those recent reviews suggest? Not really. I mean sure, at the end of the day this film is just as silly and cheesy as its predecessor. In fact, it’s so cheesy that save for the modern-era visual effects, it sometimes feels like it was made in the 90’s when the original came out. And yet, even with all of that said and the fact that the film does start off on a rather slow note, I’ll admit that I was totally engrossed by it by the end. Yeah it’s silly and there’s not much in terms of plot and character development but the action sequences are pretty solid and the visual effects up the ante of the previous film when it comes to epic alien vs. humanity action. It certainly isn’t ‘boring’, that’s for sure. There may not be any Will Smith this time around but Jeff Goldblum and Bill Pullman are back and are just as enjoyable as they were in the first film. So in short, it could be argued that perhaps this sequel came out way too late. It’s been 20 years since the original Independence Day and blockbusters have come quite a long way since then so maybe a film like this doesn’t really cut it anymore for most people. However, this is far from being an outright ‘terrible’ film; it’s just a fun, mindless popcorn flick and there’s nothing really wrong with that, if you ask me. And even though the film does end on a quite blatant ‘sequel-baiting’ note, I won’t lie in saying that I’m genuinely interested in seeing how Emmerich and co-writer Dean Devlin plan on finishing this so-called trilogy. Though hopefully if a sequel does get made it won’t take 20 years this time.

MONEY MONSTER

George Clooney and Julia Roberts star in Jodie Foster’s newest directorial effort, Money Monster, in which they play the host and producer of a popular finance TV show that gets hijacked during a live broadcast by a gunman. As I noted in my review for the film, it’s very much reminiscent of Sidney Lumet’s 1975 classic Dog Day Afternoon, namely due to the fact that it’s a story of a televised standoff between a gunman and the police in which it’s revealed that the gunman isn’t such a bad guy and is only doing what he’s doing because he was wronged by ‘the establishment’. Foster establishes a solid amount of tension during the scenes in which Clooney’s character, as aided by Roberts’ character, attempts to negotiate with the gunman (Jack O’Connell) and the three leads all do a phenomenal job, particularly Jack O’Connell as the young gunman who we do come to sympathize with as the plot unfolds. Admittedly the film does kind of lose a bit of steam by the end of it as a result of the characters leaving the confines of the TV studio and heading out into the streets of New York. This is namely due to the fact that the conspiracy plot that the film tries to uncover regarding the company that O’Connell’s character foolishly invested in before it was hit by a major stock market crash is rather underdeveloped. Still, the aforementioned stand-off scenes in the TV studio are very well-directed and thanks to that and a terrific trio of leads, Money Monster proves to be a very solid thriller. It’s by no means one of the best films in its genre but it still does its job in being an entertaining popcorn flick.   

TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES: OUT OF THE SHADOWS

Despite receiving the same level of critical thrashing as producer Michael Bay’s Transformers films, 2014’s Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, a flawed but enjoyable film that at the very least didn’t pull the controversial ‘alien’ origin story retcon that had been brought up in pre-production, was a solid commercial hit, resulting in a sequel that thankfully feels more like a proper TMNT film. For one thing, the film introduces some of the franchise’s classic characters including the mutant duo of Bebop and Rocksteady, who are definitely a major highlight of the film, and the vigilante Casey Jones, enthusiastically played by Arrow’s Stephen Amell. But ultimately the best thing about this film, at least when compared to the previous film, is that it feels much more like a proper TMNT film, placing more focus on the Turtles instead of April O’Neil, as was the case in the first film. This time around, the Turtles are the stars (and are once again one of the best parts of the film thanks to their excellent camaraderie with each other) while the human characters are relegated to supporting roles. And sure, at the end of the day, this film is just as mindless and silly as its predecessor. But of course, that’s always been this franchise in a nutshell and at the very least this film has a much more fitting/light-hearted ‘we know that this is totally silly’ vibe. By comparison, the first film tried to be way too serious at times for a film called Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Thankfully that’s not the case this time around. It’s still not perfect by any means but at the very least I’m confident that fans of TMNT who weren’t too big on the previous film will be much more satisfied with this new film.

DON’T BREATHE

A film I got to see early at SXSW before it’s released this August, Don’t Breathe is the latest film from director Fede Alvarez, who Sam Raimi selected to helm the remake of Evil Dead back in 2013. The two team up again for this new film, which also sees the return of the new Evil Dead’s leading lady, Jane Levy. The film centers on a group of delinquent burglars (played by Levy, Dylan Minnette, and Daniel Zovatto) who attempt to rob a blind old army vet (Stephen Lang). However, they soon learn that this old man isn’t as helpless as he may seem and now find themselves stuck inside his house while he’s in the middle of hunting them down. Now despite the fact that the film is being labeled as a horror film, I’ll admit that it’s more of a thriller-type story in its overall execution and on that note, it does have some legitimately tense moments, particularly a scene in which Levy and Minnette’s characters find themselves stuck in the Old Man’s basement in pitch-black darkness, effectively putting them at his level seeing only what he can ‘see’. Jane Levy and Dylan Minnette both do solid jobs but Stephen Lang is the big standout in what was quite a physically demanding performance. Sure it’s not really much of a horror film and character development is rather lackluster, as can be common with horror films, but overall Don’t Breathe is a pretty solid and intimidating thriller. In short, it should end up as a pretty decent commercial hit when it’s released on August 26^th.

THE FINEST HOURS

Disney’s The Finest Hours is the true story of ‘the most daring rescue in U.S. Coast Guard history’, when crewman Bernard Webber and his four-man team rescued the 32 survivors of the SS Pendleton, an oil tanker that was split in half during a particularly brutal winter storm off the coast of Cape Cod. And while some have argued that the film doesn’t really do enough to honor Webber and his crew’s accomplishments, I think that the film does a fine enough job in portraying their heroism. Scenes in which Webber and co. traverse through the rough waters of the Atlantic, particularly the infamous ‘Chatham Bar’ that is capable of running ships aground even in the best of conditions, are suitably thrilling as are scenes in which the crew of the Pendleton work together in order to keep the half of the tanker that they’re stuck on afloat for as long as possible. Sure the film’s plot may be a bit straight-forward at times (e.g. Webber’s fiancé Miriam is reduced to a ‘50’s era housewife’ role, though Chris Pine and Holliday Grainger do have a solid romantic chemistry that results in some very sweet moments) but the courage and indomitable will of those caught up in this whole situation is very much clear throughout. With some solid visual effects work for the sequences set at sea and excellent performances from the two leads, Chris Pine as Webber and Casey Affleck as Ray Sybert, the Pendleton’s engineer who ended up becoming the leader of the crew due to the captain being lost on the other half of the ship, The Finest Hours is a solid, old-fashioned historical thriller. Like I said in my review, I’m always interested in real-life stories like this that took place in my home region of New England.

MIDNIGHT SPECIAL

Another film I got to see at SXSW prior to its theatrical release, director Jeff Nichols’ Midnight Special is a quite unique entry in the sci-fi genre. But at its core, the film tells a very human story of a father, Roy (Michael Shannon), going on the run in order to protect his son, Alton (Jaeden Lieberher), who’s shown to have a very unique power, from the government. The best way to go into this film is to know little about it beforehand because it does hold your interest throughout and you’re curious as to where the plot is going to go in regards to the truth behind this young boy’s powers. Admittedly the film doesn’t answer all of the mysteries that it sets up but even with that in mind, it’s still a very fascinating film regardless. Plus, it’s very much an actors’ showcase. Michael Shannon, Joel Edgerton (who plays Roy’s friend/accomplice Lucas), Kirsten Dunst (who plays Alton’s mother Sarah), Adam Driver (who plays an FBI agent, Paul Sevier, who investigates into the matter and quite frankly has a lot of funny moments due to his occasional awkwardness), and Jaeden Lieberher all do fantastic jobs in their respective roles. In short, for what was director Jeff Nichols’ first big ‘studio’ picture, following his previous efforts which include 2011’s Take Shelter and 2012’s Mud, Midnight Special is definitely one of the most original films of the year and one that fans of the sci-fi genre are sure to love.   

ALICE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS

Believe it or not, I actually saw this film twice in theaters. The first time was during its opening weekend because even though this film was subjected to the same level of critical mauling as its 2010 predecessor, I was generally interested in seeing it and I did end up liking it. And then, I ended up seeing it a second time as part of a doubleheader with a certain animated film that’s going to appear much later on in this list at the only drive-in theater still operating in Rhode Island. And yes… I still liked it. Now like I said in my review of the film, I very much recognize that these live-action Alice in Wonderland films have their extremely vocal critics and to be perfectly frank, this new film won’t do much to change the minds of the uninitiated. However, at the same time, these films undeniably also have their fans and I’m not afraid to admit that I’m one of them. Sure, like its predecessor, this film’s plot is very loopy and the extensive use of CGI can be a bit of an eyesore at times. However, also like its predecessor, the film does benefit from a solid visual style and even with its shortcomings in terms of the writing, I’d dare argue that there were even a few legitimate heartfelt moments in this film. But ultimately there are two primary reasons why this film actually manages to outdo its predecessor. For one thing, director James Bobin gives the film a much more family-friendly vibe, as evident not only in the brighter color scheme but also in regards to not pulling any of the punches that the previous film did that made you question why it was rated PG (e.g. Alice walking on the heads of the Red Queen’s victims to cross her moat). But another great thing is that, while in the first film she was a rather unsure protagonist due to her constantly doubting her destiny of defeating the Jabberwocky, Alice is a much more confident protagonist this time around, something that’s very much reflected in Mia Wasikowska’s equally more confident performance. In short, this film may not be perfect but I did enjoy it enough that I will buy it on Blu-Ray when it comes out. That’s usually the case when I see a film twice in theaters.    

(Note: My second viewing of the film resulted in my original 3.5/5 rating going up to a 4/5)

10 CLOVERFIELD LANE

For years there was much talk about a potential sequel to 2008’s J.J. Abrams-produced found footage monster film Cloverfield. However, due to Abrams, director Matt Reeves, and screenwriter Drew Goddard having other commitments, it seemed as if that wasn’t going to happen anytime soon. Then, just this past January, J.J. pulled a fast one on us by unveiling that a ‘sequel’ was indeed coming… in just two months in the form of 10 Cloverfield Lane. However, this was not a direct sequel to Cloverfield because while it does share a similar premise of characters reacting to a ‘major incident’, this film does not feature the monster seen in the original film and instead focuses on a young woman who finds herself trapped inside a bunker with a mysterious stranger in the wake of a supposed nuclear attack. What follows is an extremely tense and claustrophobic thriller and features excellent performances from Mary Elizabeth Winstead, whose character is a smart and strong-willed female lead, and John Goodman, who absolutely steals the show as the aforementioned ‘mysterious stranger’ that Winstead’s character ends up being stuck with. Admittedly, though, the film does kind of lose a bit of steam at the end when it introduces the main threat; aliens. Now for the record I’m not saying that this twist came out of nowhere or anything but the film really doesn’t do much to explain anything about them to the point where they kind of seemed like an afterthought. But despite that, 10 Cloverfield Lane is still a very well-made, arguably Hitchcockian, thriller and I’m very much interested in how this, in following the original Cloverfield, could lead into a very unique anthology series focusing on different kinds of ‘monster threats’. Because after all, as the film’s tagline states, ‘Monsters come in Many Forms’.

DEADPOOL

Kicking off 2016’s spread of Marvel/DC superhero films was Deadpool and boy was it one heck of a start for the genre this year. Released in February right around Valentine’s Day weekend, the film went onto become the highest-grossing R-rated film of all-time. And while it’s technically a ‘spin-off’ of the X-Men franchise, it ended up becoming the franchise’s highest-grossing entry to date and you can definitely see why it was such a huge hit with audiences. After the fan favorite ‘Merc with a Mouth’ was handled poorly in his live-action debut, 2009’s X-Men Origins: Wolverine in which the filmmakers did away with all of the character’s trademark elements/quirks (namely his ‘mouth’), Ryan Reynolds was finally given the chance to do the character justice on the big-screen after the highly enthusiastic response to leaked test footage made by director Tim Miller convinced Fox to go ahead with an unapologetically R-rated superhero flick starring Deadpool. And yes folks, this film very much lives up to its status as an R-rated superhero flick as it is full of bloody violence and crude/sexual humor. Because after all, that is very much representative of the character in the comics. You should’ve seen how angry fans got when a petition was launched for a toned-down PG-13 rated cut for younger audiences, even though it wasn’t intended to ‘replace’ the R-rated version and would have at least been a noble effort from the filmmakers (who respectfully admitted that a PG-13 cut wasn’t really ‘possible’ by that point) to give younger fans of the character (and yes, they are out there) something they could enjoy. Regardless, this film very much did justice to everybody’s favorite fourth-wall breaking, chimichanga-loving, bigmouth mercenary, with Ryan Reynolds finally getting the chance to shine in a superhero film after previous attempts like Green Lantern failed to attract much positive attention from critics and audiences.

However, I don’t really see this film as being much of a total ‘game-changer’ for the superhero genre as a lot of critics/fans have argued since its release. Now don’t get me wrong, Deadpool is a very, very entertaining entry in the superhero genre and thanks to the character’s trademark meta humor, it’s up there with Guardians of the Galaxy as one of the funniest superhero films to date. However, the only real ‘game-changing’ thing about this film… is that it’s rated R. Because while it definitely delivers on an accurate representation of its titular character, the plot is very basic, Ed Skrein’s Ajax is a rather weak villain whose only real memorable quirk is that his real name is ‘Francis’ (“He got Ajax from the dish soap!”), and Morena Baccarin is unfortunately wasted in the role of Deadpool’s girlfriend Vanessa, who is a mutant shape-shifter in the comics but ends up being just a straight-up damsel in distress. Sure the film pokes fun at the superhero genre but a lot of times it also ends up pulling the same conventions that it’s mocking. While I do recognize that having a complex plot isn’t really the point for a film like this, hopefully the sequel does do more to truly go all the way with its attempts to subvert the genre. But again, let me be clear, this film is still a very fun ride and if this means that there will be more R-rated superhero films because of how successful it was at the box-office then by all means. But to reiterate the point that I made in my review, that shouldn’t mean that every future superhero film from here on out should be rated R just because the fanboys want that more. Because at the end of the day, at least when talking about this year’s slate of superhero films, I’m going to be remembering the so-called ‘toothless’ PG-13 rated superhero films more. Speaking of which…  

BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE

First off, yes, I liked this film better than Deadpool. And second, yes I did like the highly controversial DC Comics superhero epic, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Like its immediate predecessor, 2013’s Man of Steel, this film has been quite the polarizing flick amongst both critics and audiences. Though this time around, critical reception has been much more negative by comparison. The film does have its loyal fans but it also has a substantially large amount of extremely vocal dissenters. And while it’s certainly not a box-office failure, grossing nearly $900 million worldwide, Warner Bros. was expecting it to do much better than that (i.e. $1 billion worldwide, as was the case with the last two Dark Knight films). However, at the very least, this film certainly isn’t as bad as its incredibly low RT score of 27% implicates. And sure, it definitely has some major flaws, namely due to issues that come from the film’s rather messy screenplay and occasionally erratic editing. As a result of both of these problems, some elements to the plot aren’t really delved into that much, namely how Lex Luthor (And for the record, I was fine with Jesse Eisenberg as Lex. He may be a bit too goofy for some but he does have his moments, including an epically savage bit of trolling that is directed towards a senator) orchestrates his whole villainous plot against Superman. And just like with Man of Steel, some will take issue with the film’s generally serious tone. It’s not completely ‘dour’ as some critics are saying, primarily thanks to some funny quips here and there from characters like Perry White and Alfred, but it certainly ain’t no MCU film either when it comes to ‘light-hearted’ moments.

However, even with all of this said, there’s no denying that director Zack Snyder gives the film such an awesome visual style that’s straight out of the comics. And despite the film’s script issues, the finale is pretty darn epic and I’d argue that the film had plenty of solid emotional moments, even that controversial ‘Martha’ scene that, like the equally infamous neck-snapping scene in Man of Steel, isn’t as bad as some put it out to be. Ben Affleck and Gal Gadot manage to prove their critics wrong by absolutely stealing the show as the new Batman and Wonder Woman, respectively. In short, despite its faults, Batman v Superman was still a pretty solid effort in the superhero genre and I’m at least confident that the upcoming Extended Cut that will debut with the film’s home media release will be a superior version, as was the case with another Snyder film’s Extended Cut, Watchmen (Disclaimer: It was officially released online right around the time that I was writing this and from what I hear, it IS a superior cut that still may not win over ‘everybody’ but at least fixes plenty of the narrative problems that people had with the film. Good to hear!) And as for the future of DC’s developing ‘Cinematic Universe’, while this film may not have fared well with critics it’s not the end of the world just yet. We still have Suicide Squad later this summer and then Wonder Woman next year. And as for the upcoming Justice League film, which will once again be directed by Snyder, current reports suggest that the filmmakers are at least aware of the issues people had with BvS and with the promotion of DC’s Chief Creative Officer Geoff Johns to basically become the company’s ‘Kevin Feige’, I’m confident that things will be much smoother for DC’s films here on out.  

IN A VALLEY OF VIOLENCE

Director Ti West, who’s mostly been known for horror films including 2011’s The Innkeepers and a segment in 2012’s horror anthology V/H/S, takes on the western genre with In a Valley of Violence. Ethan Hawke stars as a drifter who enacts revenge upon the deputies of a run-down western town after they commit a horrible deed against him. But while the film very much has the usual Western feel to it, one of the most interesting parts about it is that it actually has a pretty decent sense of humor. This humor primarily comes from the fact that once Hawke’s character starts to enact his revenge upon the town’s deputies, it becomes very much apparent that the latter party clearly wasn’t prepared for something like this so a lot of the humor is the result of them frantically scrambling around the town trying to stay alive. Ethan Hawke is great as the drifter as is John Travolta as the town’s Marshal. The same can be said the rest of the cast, including James Ransome as the Marshal’s son (and the film’s main antagonist) Gilly and Karen Gillan and Taissa Farmiga as a pair of sisters who operate the town’s hotel; Gillan’s character being Gilly’s fiancé and Farmiga’s character becoming Hawke’s character’s primary ally during all of this. Pair that with an excellent score by Jeff Grace that’s very reminiscent of Ennio Morricone’s Oscar-winning score from The Hateful Eight and you have a very unique and original entry in the Western genre. In a Valley of Violence will be released in theaters on September 16^th. Hopefully when it’s released there won’t be any theater issues like the one I witnessed when I saw the film at SXSW in which a distracting patron was tossed out for using his phone during most of the screening.

EVERYBODY WANTS SOME!!

Director Richard Linklater’s newest film is a spiritual sequel to his 1993 classic Dazed and Confused. While not featuring the same characters from that film (e.g. there’s no Matthew McConaughey going “Alright alright alright!” or Ben Affleck ready to paddle young incoming freshmen), Everybody Wants Some does follow the same general story structure as its ‘spiritual predecessor’. There’s not much of an actual plot and it’s more like a series of events involving a bunch of various characters; in this case the members of a college baseball team during the last weekend of the summer before the semester starts. But like Dazed and Confused, the film very much succeeds through how it establishes a fun and light-hearted atmosphere throughout. While the main characters in this film are ‘jocks’ and occasionally act as such (e.g. sometimes they can be jerks), they do manage to be a fun group to hang out with. Plus, the main cast of leads, which mostly consists of unknowns with the biggest name being Glee’s Blake Jenner as the film’s main character Jake, do have excellent camaraderie with each other. Admittedly I wouldn’t say that this film isn’t really ‘thought provoking’ or anything but it’s still a genuinely fun ride throughout with plenty of memorable moments, including a ‘rap number’ performed by the cast during the credits that I’d argue is guaranteed to put a smile on your face. Simply put, as he did with Dazed and Confused, Richard Linklater gives us a very nostalgic-fueled ride complete with an awesome 80’s rock soundtrack. In short, this very much is the 80’s equivalent of Dazed and Confused. 

NOW YOU SEE ME 2

I quite enjoyed 2013’s magic caper thriller Now You See Me. Despite some flaws, namely in regards to a lack of focus on what should’ve been the film’s primary group of protagonists, the Four Horsemen, the film was full of really cool magic-based visuals and was an all-around solid and entertaining thriller. I guess you could say that as someone who grew up with the Harry Potter franchise, I’ve always been interested in magic-based stories. As for the sequel, it actually does manage to be the superior film. As noted earlier, one of the issues with the original film was that it tried to balance out the screen-time between the Four Horsemen and the FBI agents pursuing them and admittedly the film spent more time with the FBI agents, which definitely came as a detriment to the Horsemen. Now that lead FBI agent Dylan Rhodes is revealed to be the de facto leader of the Horsemen, this film is allowed to spend much more time focusing on them, allowing for better character development, and the cool magic-assisted heists that they pull off. But director Jon Chu then takes it one step further by giving the film a much more energetic tone compared to the first film that helps keep things running smoothly at all times. Like its predecessor, Now You See Me 2’s plot is full of twists and turns. And while your results may vary in regards to how well you think they were all pulled off, Now You See Me 2 succeeds in not only being another entertaining magic-based thriller but one that actually manages to outdo its already solid predecessor by improving on some of the previous film’s flaws. 

EDDIE THE EAGLE

Now on the surface, Eddie the Eagle is very much what you’d expect from a film in the sports genre. Story-wise it does carry quite a few of the traditional sports film conventions, from the gruff coach that warms up to the main character by the end to a moment where it looks like the main character’s ‘Cinderella story’ is over but then by some miracle it is able to continue after all. But despite the fact that it is a generally straight-forward sports flick, Eddie the Eagle is a really entertaining film that very much wears its heart on its sleeve. It very much represents what made its protagonist, Eddie ‘the Eagle’ Edwards’, such a popular figure in the media. Because while Edwards was never a really successful athlete, coming in last in both of the events he participated in at the 1988 Winter Olympics, he very much won over the audience with his unabashed optimism and ‘never say die’ spirit, two things that athletes of any sport can no doubt learn from. Sure the film isn’t necessarily ‘historically accurate’ in regards to telling Edwards’ story but it still maintains a solid light-hearted atmosphere throughout with a solid sense of humor (e.g. when Eddie decides to immediately do a jump from a higher ski hill after successfully pulling off a single jump from a smaller ski hill). Pair that with excellent performances from Taron Egerton as Eddie and Hugh Jackman as Eddie’s coach (albeit a fictional one but that’s beside the point) and you have one very entertaining sports flick. Sure at times it becomes your traditional underdog sports flick but it’s still a very well-made and all-around feel-good story regardless.

X-MEN: APOCALYPSE

Well you’ve heard me talk about this film quite a lot these past few weeks. It all began when I did a post on the primary reasons why I was extremely frustrated with the internet for basically giving this film the complete shaft when it came to hype, at least when compared to the other superhero film releases of the year. From all of the idiotic/premature backlash at the film’s main villain’s design to the aggravating argument that the film wasn’t doing enough to stand out in the increasingly scrutinized superhero film genre, I’ve slowly realized that these X-Men films have been subjected to much, much scrutiny despite all of the good things that have come out of them, especially in recent years. And poor Bryan Singer, despite everything that he’s done for this franchise and the genre in general, has never gotten the credit that he truly deserves as one of the genre’s most important pioneers. Ultimately all of that undermining very much affected the film upon the release, as it was subjected to mediocre reviews… and suffice it to say I don’t really get some of these ‘issues’. Overloaded with action? The film’s called X-Men: Apocalypse, not X-Men: Minor Incident. There’s no emotional drive? Well the scenes where Magneto loses his family and Cyclops learns of his brother’s death pretty much negate that whole argument. Was that Wolverine scene just ‘fan-service’? Maybe, but who cares? It was awesome! In short, this is yet another super entertaining Bryan Singer directed X-Men film full of great characters, epic moments, and hilarious bits of dialogue. And sure, maybe Apocalypse wasn’t as big of a villain as fans were hoping but he’s far from being an ‘mediocre’ villain. In short, I’m quite frankly pissed that this film has been so criminally undervalued both prior to and after its release. No this didn’t set the franchise back a decade as some have stated. Instead, it’s just an extremely underrated entry in both the X-Men franchise and the superhero genre in general. I can’t say it’s ‘better’ than Days of Future Past but hey, that’s a tough act to follow.

13 HOURS: THE SECRET SOLDIERS OF BENGHAZI

Quite frankly one of the best films that I’ve ever seen released in January, a time where new releases are generally rather mediocre in quality, 13 Hours is proof that director Michael Bay is very much capable of directing a film that isn’t just explosions galore with little to no plot. 13 Hours is easily Bay’s most mature film to date, telling the true story of what happened on the night of September 11, 2012 when a military security team were forced to combat waves of Islamist militants that were attacking the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. This incident has become a major point of political controversy here in the U.S. but the film wisely doesn’t go into too much detail over that kind of stuff. Instead, it focuses on the six men who put their lives on the line to protect their fellow Americans. Of course, like with any Michael Bay film, this film is non-stop action but it also allows for some breaks between the action to establish the camaraderie between the six men. That camaraderie is legitimately strong and the six leads are all great, especially John Krasinski in a very much ‘against type’ role and James Badge Dale, who finally gets to take on a lead role after having established himself as an excellent character actor in films like Iron Man 3 and The Walk. So while the politics behind this incident are arguable until the cows come home, 13 Hours decides to focus more on the humanity of its real-life story and I’ll admit, there was even a scene in here that made me rather teary-eyed… and yes, this occurred in a Michael Bay film of all places. As a result, it’s easily one of Bay’s best films… and I know that for many, that won’t be saying much.

MY TOP 5 OF THE YEAR (SO FAR)

(SPOILERS- 4 out of these next 5 were released by Disney... and for the record, no I was not ‘paid’ by them. They’ve just had a really good year so far.)

5. THE JUNGLE BOOK

Following in the footsteps of the first well-reviewed Disney live-action remake, last year’s Cinderella, The Jungle Book once again proves that the slew of upcoming Disney live-action remakes aren’t, in any way, a completely lost cause. Director Jon Favreau brings us a new spin on Rudyard Kipling’s classic novel that both respects the original animated Disney classic that came before it as well as well as being its own thing, namely by implementing more of the story elements from Kipling’s novel. It’s not a musical like the animated film but still has familiar beats like some of the film’s classic songs (e.g. ‘Bare Necessities’ and ‘I Wanna Be Like You’). Visually, the film is one of the absolute best-looking films of the year. And that’s saying a lot considering that the entire film was shot on a soundstage in L.A. with Mowgli being the only major human character (and, technically speaking, ‘real’ element) in the entire film. But everything does look excellent, especially the photo-realistic animals. These animals are portrayed by an excellent ensemble cast, with every major player being a perfect fit for the role, from Bill Murray as Baloo to Christopher Walken as King Louie. And despite the aforementioned fact that he’s the only human in the film and he’s basically interacting with characters who aren’t really there until post-production, Neel Sethi manages to make it all convincing as Mowgli. In short, like Cinderella, the new Jungle Book proves to be a solid compliment to the animated classic that it’s inspired from without over-shadowing it, which is the fear that some animation buffs have had in regards to all of these upcoming Disney remakes… that they’re going to ‘replace’ the original films. But like with most remakes, that’s not the case at all.

4. FINDING DORY

2003’s Finding Nemo is easily one of Pixar’s most beloved films and for many fans, one of the absolute best parts of the film was the forgetful but cheerfully optimistic Dory, voiced by Ellen DeGeneres. 13 years later, Ellen’s iconic character took center stage in her own sequel, Finding Dory, a film that proves that Pixar can do high-quality sequels to their films outside of the Toy Story franchise. Instead of just rehashing the same plot from Finding Nemo, this film instead focuses on a new story in which Dory travels the ocean in order to find her long-lost parents. And this story ends up being just as charming and heartfelt as the previous film, placing great emphasis on themes such as the strength of family and teamwork and the idea of embracing one’s faults instead of being ashamed of them, which of course in Dory’s case has always been her short-term memory. Ellen is once again phenomenal as Dory and the film also introduces plenty of great new characters who are just as lovable as the original protagonists, including Modern Family’s Ed O’Neill as a curmudgeonly octopus named Hank and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia’s Kaitlin Olson as Dory’s childhood friend Destiny, a near-sighted whale shark. Pair all of this with Pixar’s always great animation (in fact, I’d say the Finding films have been some of the studio’s most gorgeous looking films animation wise) and you have an excellent animated flick that is full of heart and once again proves that Dory is easily the franchise’s most beloved character.

3. DEMOLITION

I will openly admit that Demolition is a rather odd film to talk about because it’s a dramedy centered around an investment banker who has to come to terms with the recent loss of his wife. And I know what some of you may be thinking… how the heck is a film about a guy whose wife had just died supposed to be funny? Well, simply put, the humor in this film never comes from that part of the plot. Instead it comes from all of the odd ways in which the main protagonist, Davis (Jake Gyllenhaal), copes with his loss, from writing a complaint letter to a vending machine company solely because of one of their machines failed to work for him at the most inopportune moment to taking apart the bathroom stalls at his workplace. Obviously his methods of coping are in no way ‘normal’ and when other characters get angry at him for it, namely his father-in-law Phil (played brilliantly by Chris Cooper, who gives arguably the most emotional performance in the entire film), you do understand where those people are coming from. But even with this in mind, Davis still proves to be a very likable lead and Jake Gyllenhaal is excellent in the role, especially due to his great comedic timing. But don’t worry because the film is not all about the comedy. Once the film’s third act kicks in, the humor is downplayed and the film finally starts to really focus in on the dramatic elements of the story. And it actually does manage to not be jarring because we’ve had so much fun following Davis’ crazy antics that by the time he finally starts to really cope with the loss of his wife, we fully sympathize with him and the emotional catharsis that he comes to is very effective. Somehow, someway, this film manages to pull off one of the most daunting balancing acts of all-time as far as being a ‘dramedy’ is concerned. That is why it was my favorite film at this year’s SXSW Festival. 

2. ZOOTOPIA

Disney Animation’s modern age revival continues with yet another fantastic animated feature in the form of directors Rich Moore and Byron Howard’s Zootopia. I mean, it’s already great enough that the film was well-animated, featured an excellent cast of characters voiced by an equally excellent ensemble voice cast, and was, at its core, an entertaining ‘buddy cop’ story. That alone would be more than enough to make it an excellent entry in the Disney animated canon. But then there’s more to Disney’s 55^th animated feature that truly makes it stand out and that is the fact that this film also succeeds in terms of its strong themes. The idea of combatting racism and prejudice is very much present in this film, from the ‘predator-prey’ esque relationships between certain animals to the conflict that emerges between main characters Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde as a result of rabbits like Judy being generally distrusting of foxes like Nick by nature. And let’s be honest… in a time where a certain racist bigot is one of the primary nominees in this year’s presidential election, this film’s messages are something that a lot of people should really take note from. These messages come together along with all of the film’s aforementioned strengths and the end result is a fantastic animated feature that very much appeals to both kids and adults, something that has always been one of the main reasons as to why Disney’s animated films so iconic. And now Zootopia stands alongside Frozen as the two Disney ‘Revival Era’ animated features that have joined the billion-dollar club and rightfully so. Not only is it one of the best Disney animated films of the past few years, it’s also one of the studio’s best period.  

1. CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR

I know, I know… I’m quite predictable at times, aren’t I? Actually, I’ve only been able to see Civil War once since it’s been in theaters, which is the first time that this happened to me with an MCU film since Thor: The Dark World. The reason why? Well, it’s just simply because I was rather busy dealing with school and the slew of new releases since then actually didn’t give me much time to see it again. Still, as you can probably guess, I absolutely loved the latest installment of the MCU, the first of Phase 3. After doing a phenomenal job with The Winter Soldier, the Russo brothers once again deliver an exciting as well as effectively dramatic superhero flick in which the Avengers find themselves on opposite sides of an impending act that looks to regulate superhero activity in the wake of all of the incidents that they’ve been involved in. While the film is very much inspired by the Civil War storyline from the comics, the film wisely doesn’t try to be a very faithful adaptation, which I think many will agree is a good thing considering the comics’ generally polarizing reception. Instead of being a direct adaptation, this film keeps the same idea but implements it into the canon of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, reflecting everything that’s happened in the past 12 films. And while it seems as if the comics portrayed Iron Man in a much more villainous role in this story, the film thankfully doesn’t go that route and actually manages to give both ‘Team Cap’ and ‘Team Iron Man’ legit points to stand on instead of just favoring one over the other. And amidst all of the excellent action in this film, in fact I’d argue this is one of the best MCU films to date in terms of action, there are plenty of effective and emotional character moments which very much benefit from how well all of these characters have been developed over the course of the previous 12 films. The finale in particular where a certain bombshell of a reveal is brought up is particularly emotionally powerful.

There was a lot of talk about why the film was called Captain America: Civil War even though it was practically another Avengers-level film given how many characters were in it. Somehow the Russo brothers actually managed to keep it focused mainly on Cap while still giving solid screen-time to everyone else. It certainly shows that they’re very much capable of handling a massive ensemble cast like this one, which is good considering that they’re going to be doing the next Avengers film. The cast is of course as excellent as they’ve always been and new additions like Chadwick Boseman as Black Panther and Tom Holland as the new Spider-Man (who’s arguably the best Spidey to date, which for me is actually saying a lot considering how big a fan I was of Andrew Garfield’s version of the character) are excellent additions. The only major downside of the film to me was its ‘main villain’, Zemo. Ironically, it seems as if Zemo is actually one of the best-received MCU villains to date but as someone who defends many of the other MCU villains as being way better than the internet constantly puts them out to be, I didn’t really think Zemo was ‘one of the best’. I mean I get why people feel he’s one of the best considering that he’s technically the most successful MCU villain to date due to the fact that his plan of turning the Avengers against each other technically did work. However, he’s barely in the film to make much of an impact outside of the plot. Thankfully, like Winter Soldier, this film manages to get by without really focusing much on a villain as the film instead focuses more on the protagonists and the conflict that emerges between them. I’ll admit I may be looking into this too much and as noted earlier I’ve only seen the film once so far. Still, thanks to this film, Phase 3 of the MCU is off to an excellent start and if anyone dares to pull that damn ‘superhero fatigue’ argument that refuses to go away, just remind them of how successful Civil War, the 13^th (!!) MCU film, has done both critically (it’s the best reviewed superhero film of the year so far) and commercially (it’s the fourth MCU film to join the billion-dollar club).

And that has been 2016 for me so far in terms of film. There have been plenty of great films so far this year and there will no doubt be plenty more on the way, from the 1920’s set American spin-off of Harry Potter, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, to the next installment of the Star Trek franchise, Star Trek Beyond, to Disney’s next big animated feature, Moana. And of course there’s also the first big spin-off of the Star Wars franchise, Rogue One. So what have been some of your favorite films of the year up to this point? Be sure to sound off in the comments below.