Sunday, December 1, 2013

2013 Preview: December

It’s been quite a year for movies, from the summer blockbusters to the Oscar contenders, and now we have finally reached the last month of 2013. Welcome back to Rhode Island Movie Corner’s year-long preview of the films set to come out during 2013. This is the final part of this 12-part preview of the year and today we’ll be looking at the films that are set to come out during the month of Christmas, December.

DECEMBER 6- One major release this weekend.

*After debuting in New York and LA markets on December 4th, the first major release of the month, ‘Out of the Furnace’ will get a nationwide release two days later. Directed by Scott Cooper (2009’s ‘Crazy Heart’), the film stars Christian Bale as a man who suddenly finds himself in prison as his brother (Casey Affleck) gets involved with a dangerous crime ring. The film also stars Zoe Saldana, Woody Harrelson, Forest Whitaker, and Willem Dafoe.

DECEMBER 13- It’s a rather interesting competition this weekend at the movies. On one side, we have the next Hobbit film and on the other, a Tyler Perry movie.

*Last December, the first entry in ‘The Hobbit’ trilogy, ‘An Unexpected Journey’, hit theaters, eventually ending up with over $1 Billion at the box office. Its sequel, ‘The Desolation of Smaug’, will continue the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, Gandalf the Grey, and Thorin Oakenshield’s company of dwarves. In this film, the group begins their attempt to take back the dwarves’ homeland of Erebor from the dragon Smaug (portrayed through motion capture by Benedict Cumberbatch). The returning cast from the first film is joined in this one by Orlando Bloom (reprising the role of Legolas from the ‘LOTR’ trilogy), Evangeline Lilly (who’s portraying an original character, Tauriel), and Luke Evans.

*On the other side of the spectrum is the next film in Tyler Perry’s ‘Madea’ franchise, which stars Perry as the titular elderly Madea, ‘A Madea Christmas’. As the title suggests, this one is set during Christmas.

DECEMBER 20- It’s a pretty stacked weekend with five new movies coming out, two of them immediately being released nationwide while the other three expand from earlier releases.

(Note: The following film will hit theaters two days earlier on December 18th)

*Great Odin’s Raven! 9 years after 2004’s hit comedy ‘Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy’ hit theaters, everyone’s favorite news team returns for ‘Anchorman: The Legend Continues’. In this film, confident but egotistical news reporter Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell) and the Channel 4 News team (Paul Rudd, Steve Carell, and David Koechner) reunite after disbanding after the 70’s when they are recruited to join a 24-hour news channel. Christina Applegate, Fred Willard, and others from the previous film return and are joined in this one by Kristen Wiig, Greg Kinnear, and a whole bunch of cameos (Harrison Ford, Jim Carrey, Nicole Kidman, Sacha Baron Cohen, the list goes on and on).

*In 1999, BBC aired a six-part series ‘Walking with Dinosaurs’, recreating what it was like on Earth during the Mesozoic Era. This month, a film adaptation of the series will be released in 3-D. It will focus on a group of Pachyrhinosauruses as they migrate.

*The first ‘expanding’ release of the week is ‘Inside Llewyn Davis’, the latest film from the Coen brothers. Although Joel Coen has stated that the film has ‘no plot’, it will be following the titular Llewyn Davis (Oscar Issac), a singer-songwriter who navigates the folk music scene of New York in the 60’s. The film also stars Carey Mulligan, John Goodman, and Justin Timberlake.

*Disney’s ‘Saving Mr. Banks’ is the first Disney film to star the company’s creator, Walt Disney. The story, however, is more about the production of Disney’s 1964 classic, ‘Mary Poppins’, and Walt’s (Tom Hanks) efforts to work with the author of the novel, ‘P.L.’ Travers (Emma Thompson). The film also stars Jason Schwartzman and B.J. Novak as the Sherman Brothers along with Paul Giamatti and Colin Farrell.

*A year after ‘Silver Linings Playbook’ was both a critical and commercial success, director David O. Russell’s next film, ‘American Hustle’, will hit theaters after opening in limited release earlier this month. The film is based off of the ABSCAM operation that took place during the 70’s and 80’s. Christian Bale stars as a con man that, along with his partner/mistress (Amy Adams), is recruited by an FBI agent (Bradley Cooper) to work for him. The film also stars Jeremy Renner as the corrupt mayor of New Jersey and Jennifer Lawrence as the unpredictable wife of Bale’s character (will also be opening on Wednesday, December 18th).

DECEMBER 25- In what is probably the most packed weekend of the year (ironic seeing how it is the last weekend of 2013 for new releases), there are five new releases along with 1 nationwide expansion as the year ends with a total of 6 films coming out nationwide in a single weekend.

*Keanu Reeves headlines ’47 Ronin’, a fantasy samurai movie based on the titular fictional group of the same name. Reeves stars as an outcast who joins a group of ronin who are looking to get their revenge against the evil Lord Kira (Tadanobu Asano) after he killed their master.

*After his 2011 concert film ‘Never Say Never’, Justin Bieber’s new concert film, ‘Believe’ will hit theaters.

*Sylvester Stallone’s most famous role is that of boxer Rocky Balboa in the franchise of the same name and one of Robert De Niro’s most famous roles is that of boxer Jake LaMotta in Martin Scorcese’s ‘Raging Bull’ . The two headline ‘Grudge Match’, albeit while playing different characters. They star as a pair of retired boxers who decide to step back into the ring in order to settle the score after their title match 30 years ago was canceled when Stallone’s character retired from boxing. The film, directed by Peter Segal (‘50 First Dates’, ‘Get Smart’), also stars Alan Arkin, Kevin Hart, and Kim Basinger.

*‘The Secret Life of Walter Mitty’ is a remake of the 1947 film of the same name, which itself was based on the 1939 short story, also of the same name, by James Thurber. Ben Stiller (who also directs the film), stars as the titular Walter Mitty, a worker at Life Magazine who usually retreats into his fantasy worlds but then sets off on a journey to find a picture that is needed for the magazine when his and his co-worker/love interest’s (Kristen Wiig) jobs are on the line.

*Martin Scorcese reunites with Leonardo DiCaprio for their fifth film together since 2002’s ‘Gangs of New York’ with ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’, a film that was originally supposed to be released on November 15th, but was pushed back a month so that Scorcese could finish the movie in time (thankfully the film wasn’t pushed back even further to next year). Based off of the memoir of the same name by former New York stockbroker Jordan Belfort, the film stars DiCaprio as Belfort, who refuses to be involved in a security fraud case revolving around corruption on Wall Street. The film’s large ensemble cast also includes Jonah Hill, Matthew McConaughey, Jean Dujardin, and Kyle Chandler among others.

*Finally, we have ‘Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom’, a biographical film about former South Africa President Nelson Mandela (portrayed by Idris Elba), which details the 27 years he spent in prison before he became president of South Africa.

With that, 2013 will officially come to an end. Thanks for reading these posts and I’m expecting to start this up again next year. Stay tuned…

Saturday, November 30, 2013

Frozen (2013) review


Disney… I don’t need to explain any more than that because I don’t need to. This company needs no introduction. It’s only the company responsible for many of the finest animated films of all time; The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, The Little Mermaid; the list goes on and on. Disney’s been making films ever since the 30’s and even though they have hit some rough spots from time to time, like in the 80’s or the early 2000’s (in the case of the latter decade, that’s mainly because of the rise of computer animation), they’ve managed to maintain a good level of quality over the years. Recently, the company’s been getting back into form with films like ‘Princess and the Frog’, ‘Tangled’, and ‘Wreck it Ralph’. While technically the latter two films were computer animated films, in certain ways (e.g. design, story) they felt like the traditional animated films that put the company on the map in the first place. The same can be said for their latest film, ‘Frozen’, loosely based off of Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale, ‘The Snow Queen’.

In the kingdom of Arendelle reside two sisters/princesses of the Royal Family, Anna (Kristen Bell) and Elsa (Idina Menzel). For years, the two have been separated from each other for one main reason. Elsa was born with magical ice powers and one day when the two sisters were younger, an incident between them as a result of Elsa’s magic resulted in her being locked away from the world and Anna losing any memory of her sister’s powers (but not the memory of her). On the day of Elsa’s coronation ceremony, her powers end up getting revealed to the people of Arendelle, leading Elsa to flee into the mountains. This then results in a massive snowstorm that covers the entire kingdom in endless winter. Hoping to set things right, Anna sets off with a mountain-man named Kristoff (Jonathan Groff), his reindeer Sven, and a living snowman named Olaf (Josh Gad) on a quest to find Elsa and hopefully bring an end to the endless winter, before it’s too late.

As you might expect from Disney, the animation is just top-notch in almost every aspect, from the landscape to the overall art design. As far as the characters are concerned, the movie has its fair share of memorable characters. Both Anna and Elsa were engaging characters and I really liked the sister dynamic between the two, which is where a lot of the film’s heart comes from. If I’m right, this is the first Disney film to actually have two female leads and on that note, it’s executed really well. Kristoff and Sven are also really memorable, mainly in part due to their interesting relationship, with Kristoff frequently translating Sven’s ‘thoughts’ through his facial expressions. However, the standout character would easily have to be Olaf the snowman. He has many of the most memorable and hilarious moments in the film. There are two characters that are really bland, though. The first is the prince Hans (Santino Fontana), who’s just your generic nice guy who Anna falls for at the beginning of the film. The other character is the Duke of Weselton (Alan Tudyk, who’s quite underused here). At first, it seems like they’re playing him off to be the main villain, but in the end they do nothing with him.

So how about the music, which was done by Robert and Kristen-Anderson Lopez (most known for their work on Broadway on shows like ‘Avenue Q’ and ‘Book of Mormon’)? All in all, it’s quite good. The Lopez’ experience in Broadway certainly translates to this film. Your mileage may vary on the idea of characters randomly going into musical numbers but overall, the songs are still really good. My favorite song would have to be 'Let it Go', which is Elsa's big solo after her powers are revealed to the people of Arendelle, as she no longer has to worry about keeping her powers hidden; she's now free. It does help quite a lot when most of the cast has had plenty of experience on Broadway (Menzel, Groff, Fontana, and Gad), and main star Kristen Bell especially holds her own in the musical numbers alongside the Broadway stars. All in all, the film has a great voice cast, even though some don’t have much to work with (e.g. Fontana and Tudyk, as I went over earlier).

‘Frozen’ is another excellent outing for Disney in almost every way. The animation is terrific, a lot of the characters are really memorable, and the film has a really nice soundtrack. However, the film did have two rather lackluster characters in Hans and the Duke of Weselton. If the writers gave more character development to them, I’d say this was arguably one of Disney’s finest films up there with classics like ‘Lion King’ or ‘Beauty and the Beast’. Still, this is one of their best films in the last few years or so (at least since 2000). Disney may be moving away from traditionally animated films but this isn’t necessarily a bad thing because their recent computer animated films (since 2010) still feel like the old-school animated films in many ways. All in all, this is just another fun and entertaining family film. What more should you expect from Disney?

Rating: 4/5

(I also want to give much praise to the terrific short, ‘Get a Horse’, which runs before this film. It’s a very creative blend of the old-school Disney animation from the 30’s and the modern computer animation of today. I’d say Disney should do something like this again. This would be a great idea for a 3-D show at Disney theme parks. Best Animated Short Film at the Oscars, maybe?)

 

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Disney Retrospective: The 90's

Image result for walt disney animation studios

If this post looks a little different to you, that’s because I decided to update it. Back in November 2013, I covered all of the films that made up Disney Animation’s ‘Renaissance’ period in preparation for the release of the then-newest Disney animated film, Frozen. As a result, this became the first of Rhode Island Movie Corner’s ‘Disney Retrospective’ series, though obviously it wouldn’t be until this year when I finally continued to make them. Well, actually, when it comes to that first Retrospective, it wasn’t really a complete look at the ‘Renaissance’ era because I didn’t include the one film that’s considered to be the one that started the whole era to begin with, 1989’s The Little Mermaid. Simply put, this is because I didn’t have the means to watch it at the time. This is before I had purchased the film on Blu-Ray that year, which was actually a Christmas Gift for my mom as it’s one of her favorites. So even though I did initially title the post as a ‘Disney Renaissance’ retrospective, recently I retitled it so that it would have a much more fitting title as it was only covering the films of the 90’s. However, I decided to work on this old post a little more as, looking back, I wasn’t exactly satisfied with how it turned out. Heck, some of the ‘reviews’ weren’t even a paragraph long. So as a result, I wanted to give these films much more proper reviews that are more in line with the reviews that I’ve done for the other Disney animated films. So today, join me as I review the Disney animated films of the 90’s, a decade which saw the studio rebound after the rather tumultuous decade for them that was the 80’s to produce some of their most beloved efforts in recent years, effectively re-establishing them as one of the best animation studios working today.

THE RESCUERS DOWN UNDER (1990)

Image result for the rescuers down under poster

Interestingly enough, in between two of the Renaissance’s biggest hits, The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast, there was a first for Disney Animation; a theatrically-released sequel. Specifically, the film in question was The Rescuers Down Under, the sequel to 1977’s The Rescuers. As part of my original preparation for this post back when I first made it in 2013, I had watched the original Rescuers first before watching Down Under and as previously stated in my 60’s/70’s Disney Retrospective, I felt that the original Rescuers was an ‘okay’ entry in the Disney canon that benefitted from likable leads but was a bit too sluggishly paced. That’s definitely not the case with Down Under, a film that trades in the gloomy Bayou setting of the original film for the bright and gorgeous landscapes of Australia. This film is much better paced compared to its predecessor and features some incredible animation for the time, which is especially showcased during the scenes that involve a rare giant eagle. Bob Newhart and Eva Gabor reprise their roles of Bernard and Miss Bianca, respectively, and they are both excellent once again in regards to making them an incredibly likable duo. The film also has its fair share of memorable side characters, including Wilbur, the albatross brother of the character Orville from Rescuers and voiced by the late John Candy, and the main villain McLeach voiced by George C. Scott. With all of this in mind, The Rescuers Down Under is not only one of the best animated sequels ever made, it’s also one of the studio’s most underrated efforts. As the result of a lackluster opening weekend, the film’s marketing was pulled, resulting in this becoming a Renaissance film that completely went under the radar, which is a shame because it’s a really good animated film.

Rating: 4.5/5

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (1991)

Image result for beauty and the beast poster

This is one Disney Renaissance film that needs little to no introduction. It was so well-received upon its initial release in 1991 that it ended up becoming the first animated film to ever be nominated for Best Picture, an accomplishment that, since then, has only been accomplished by 2009’s Up and 2010’s Toy Story 3, both made by Pixar and released under the Disney banner. And rightfully so as Beauty and the Beast really is one of Disney Animation’s finest efforts. To quote the classic Disney film Mary Poppins, it’s ‘practically perfect in every way’. It has great animation and great music courtesy of Disney’s go-to songwriter Alan Menken, from ‘Be Our Guest’ to ‘Gaston’ to the title song. Belle is easily one of the best Disney princesses and the romance that forms between her and the Beast is really well-handled. The film takes its time to establish a connection between them instead of just immediately having them fall in love, as was admittedly the case with some previous Disney romances. There’s also plenty of memorable side characters as well, including the Beast’s servants, all of whom have been turned into household appliances due to the curse that an enchantress put on the castle that turned the Beast into the creature he is today, and the film’s main villain Gaston. As many other people have pointed out, Gaston is a character who, in any other film, would’ve easily been the hero of it all. And yet that’s not where this film goes with his character, instead portraying him more as a selfish and egotistical ‘town hero’ who tries to woo Belle. All of this makes him a really entertaining baddie. And as a result, the film as a whole is pretty much an animated masterpiece. It’s easy to see why this film ended up becoming the first animated film to be nominated for the highest honor at the Academy Awards.

Rating: 5/5!

ALADDIN (1992)

Image result for aladdin disney poster

Me and my friend Matt Goudreau (writer for ‘The Young Folks’ and ‘Nerd Stash’) have always described this film as ‘a Disney film for boys’. With its emphasis on adventure, swordplay, and fantasy, Aladdin is yet another classic from Disney Animation. In fact, I can safely say that it’s pretty much one of my personal favorites. Those aforementioned elements of adventure stories are handled perfectly here and are backed by terrific animation, a great story, and a terrific cast of characters. Aladdin is a very likable protagonist as is his romantic other, Princess Jasmine. The two of them form a really sweet romance and have terrific chemistry with each other. Of course there’s also the film’s terrific villain in the form of the devious Royal Vizier Jafar, the sinister sorcerer who has many tricks up his sleeves which he uses in his attempt to take over the city of Agrabah. Speaking of genies, however, obviously the most notable character in the whole film is the Genie. Simply put, Robin Williams gave us not only one of Disney’s best characters but one of the best characters in film period with the lovable and pop-culture referencing Genie, who has ‘phenomenal cosmic power’ but ‘itty-bitty living space’. Obviously his pop-culture references are very much anachronistic but they still provide us with plenty of great humor. It was most certainly one of Williams’ greatest performances. And thanks to him, as well as everything else I’ve gone over here, Aladdin is a terrific entry in the Disney canon. It’s easily in my Top 10 when it comes to Disney’s animated films. As for my personal favorite, though…

Rating: 5/5!

THE LION KING (1994)

Image result for the lion king poster

When it comes to my personal favorite Disney animated film, that honor currently goes to 1994’s The Lion King. This is a Disney film that I legitimately watch at least once every year. I love pretty much every single aspect of this film. I love the epic scale and scope of the story and the animation very much matches that, capturing the majestic plains of Africa perfectly. I love the film’s soundtrack. This includes both the film’s collection of songs courtesy of Elton John and Tim Rice and the film’s epic score by Hans Zimmer. The latter is quite arguably the most famous musical score of any Disney film and is very much capable of giving one goosebumps. Elton John and Tim Rice’s songs are also great as well. In fact, this may be my favorite Disney soundtrack as I do love all of the songs, from the epic opening tune that is ‘Circle of Life’ to the laid-back anthem that is ‘Hakuna Matata’. I love this film’s cast of characters. Simba, voiced excellently by Jonathan Taylor Thomas as a youth and Matthew Broderick as an adult, is a terrific lead, he has a terrific foil in the film’s main villain, his uncle Scar, voiced phenomenally by Jeremy Irons, and James Earl Jones’ Mufasa is just a total badass. Simple as that. And the big scene involving him? Man, talk about an emotional gut-punch. Of course there’s also the film’s great cast of side characters, including the unforgettable duo that is Timon and Pumbaa. I could go on and on but I think you folks understand where I’m getting at here. Now do I think it’s the absolute ‘best’ Disney film? Eh… I’m not really sure if I can go that far but it’s most certainly my personal favorite. It’s just an epic masterpiece from beginning to end.

Rating: 5/5!

POCAHONTAS (1995)

Image result for pocahontas poster

Interestingly enough, apparently Pocahontas was intended to be Disney Animation’s ‘bigger’ film compared to The Lion King, which was apparently being handled by their ‘B-Team’. Well at the end of the day that ‘lesser’ film ended up becoming one of the biggest animated films of all-time whereas Pocahontas… Eh. This may or may not be a controversial opinion depending on who you ask but unfortunately I feel that Pocahontas is the weakest of the ‘Renaissance’ era. The main reason for this is simple; the film as a whole is rather dull. And I’m not just saying this as a result of my most recent re-watch of it. If I recall, I even found this film to be rather boring as a kid. Both the main characters, Pocahontas and John Smith, are rather bland, even when the latter is voiced by Mel Gibson. The same can be said for the film’s main villain, Governor Ratcliffe. Basically, he’s just a ‘greed’ villain and nothing else. The best characters in the film are the cast of animal characters, who initially were to be able to talk but that changed when John Candy, who was set to voice a turkey character named Redfeather that ended up getting cut from the film, passed away. Aside from the animals, at the very least there are some redeeming qualities to this film. For one thing, the animation is, as expected, quite nice. Not only that but the film’s soundtrack, once again done by Alan Menken, is pretty solid, which includes ‘Just Around the Riverbend’ and the film’s Oscar-winning song ‘Colors of the Wind’. Unfortunately, though, that’s not really enough to save this film from being one of the weaker installments in the Disney canon. I’m not going to go in any detail about how much this film reflects actual Native American history, which quite frankly based on what I’ve heard it doesn’t, but at the very least it’s not Disney’s worst. But at the same time, it’s not really one that I can easily recommend either.

Rating: 2.5/5

THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME (1996)

Image result for the hunchback of notre dame 1996 poster

The Hunchback of Notre Dame is easily one of Disney’s darkest outings. In fact, it’s kind of amazing that this film managed to squeak by with a G rating despite its dark imagery, frequent mentions of hell and eternal damnation, and the lustful nature of the main villain towards the female lead. And that’s even after all of the changes that had to be made from the source material to even get that rating in the first place. But this actually kind of ends up being the reason why Hunchback is a very entertaining entry in the Disney canon. It’s quite cool to see a Disney film that has the guts to tackle some darker material and it does result in some nice atmosphere through the animation. Though with that said, the film does try and make an effort to maintain the usual family-friendly tone of a Disney film. In this case, it’s done through Quasimodo’s gargoyle friends; Victor, Hugo, and Laverne. I don’t dislike this trio but admittedly they do kind of give the film a rather uneven tone at times. But the film does make up for its tonal shifts with the usual great animation, a likable cast of main characters, and an enjoyable array of songs courtesy of, you guessed it, Alan Menken. But easily the best part of the film is its villain; Judge Claude Frollo. Frollo is simply one of the most enjoyably vile villains that Disney’s ever created and also a very fascinating one. For all of the terrible things that he does in this film, from murdering Quasimodo’s mother to lusting after the beautiful gypsy Esmerelda, he always keeps asserting that it’s the right thing to do as a man of the Christian faith. Simply put, Frollo’s a terrific villain and as a result, Hunchback of Notre Dame is most certainly a highly memorable Disney flick. Admittedly this is obviously a rather hard one to recommend to younger audiences due to its darker material but it’s still a very unique entry in the Disney canon regardless.

Rating: 4/5

HERCULES (1997)

Image result for hercules disney poster

While Disney’s Hercules obviously takes its inspiration from Greek mythology, suffice it to say this film doesn’t really adhere much to the actual legend of the divine hero of whom the film is named after. Plus, the film admittedly could prove to be a bit much for people as a result of its style. Said style is basically a very flashy Broadway/Vegas look, with the animation being directly inspired by the work of famous English cartoonist Gerald Scarfe. However, even with all of that said, this is actually another personal favorite of mine when it comes to Disney films. I like the film’s cast of characters, from Hercules to his love interest Megara to his trainer Phil, voiced by Danny DeVito. Obviously though the big standout of the bunch is the villain, Hades. Voiced excellently by James Woods, Hades is definitely one of Disney’s funniest villains, acting very much like a fast-talking sports agent. As for the film’s soundtrack… I love it. ‘Zero to Hero’ is always a pretty darn fun tune but for me the best song of the soundtrack is Hercules’ solo ‘Go the Distance’. Simply put, it’s one of the most inspiring Disney songs of all-time and it perfectly encapsulates Hercules’ journey in this film to realize who he’s really meant to be. So yes, while it’s certainly not perfect, Hercules is still a really fun entry in the Disney canon. Just don’t go into it expecting a completely accurate adaptation of the story of Hercules.

Rating: 4/5

MULAN (1998)

Image result for mulan disney poster

Mulan is definitely one of the more underrated films of the Disney Renaissance. For one thing, it features a badass female lead in the form of Mulan. Excellently voiced by Ming-Na Wen, Mulan serves as an excellent role model for young girls, nobly taking her father’s place in the Chinese army in order to protect him when it becomes clear that his warring days are over. It’s also really fun to watch her try and fit in with the rest of the soldiers while posing as a man, resulting in plenty of great humorous moments. The film also has its fair share of memorable side characters, from Mulan’s loyal dragon sidekick Mushu (voiced by Eddie Murphy) to some of her fellow soldiers, namely the trio of Yao, Ling, and Chien-Po. Admittedly, though, the main villain, Hun leader Shan-Yu, is the weak link of the film. Simply put, he’s basically just a straight-forward ‘silent warrior’. But even with the weak villain, the film really does shine, which of course is primarily thanks to its main heroine. It has a really great soundtrack highlighted by Mulan’s beautiful solo ‘Reflection’ and the fun training montage song ‘I’ll Make a Man Out of You’. The animation is quite nice as well, with perhaps the best scene in the film being the scene where the Huns attack the Chinese Army on the snowy mountainside. Said scene required the creation of new animation software in order to create the massive Hun army and the result really is quite spectacular. I also feel that the animation does a nice job in capturing the beauty of China. In short, like I said before, I think this film is pretty underrated. I say that because when it comes to the Disney Renaissance, admittedly you do hear more about the first few films of the 90’s than you do the ones that came out during the second half of the decade. But when it comes to those latter films, Mulan is definitely the best of the bunch.

Rating: 4.5/5

TARZAN (1999)

Image result for tarzan disney poster

Controversial opinion in three, two, one… I really love Phil Collins’ soundtrack for this film. I say ‘controversial’ because in recent years I’ve found that not many people are fans of the soundtrack. From what I can gather, the main reason why is that instead of having the film’s characters sing the songs, they’re almost entirely sung by Collins save for a few exceptions. But I’m actually not too bothered by that because I think his songs are quite excellent. I love pretty much all of them; ‘Two Worlds’, ‘Son of Man’, and of course the film’s Oscar-winning tune ‘You’ll Be in My Heart’. I think they work fine in the film but I understand if people don’t exactly agree. However, I do think they’re phenomenal songs on their own. Anyway, as for the film itself, it’s another really entertaining entry in the Disney canon. The animation is excellent, especially when it comes to scenes in which Tarzan swings through the jungle like a skateboarder. Tarzan himself is a likable lead as is Jane, who manages to overcome her character’s usual status as the ‘damsel in distress’. Admittedly, though, the main villain, Clayton, is probably the weakest part of the film. He’s another one of those villains who’s only really motivated by greed. However, at the very least, out of all of the Disney villains who were basically just ‘greedy’ villains, I will say that Clayton’s probably my favorite of the bunch. And sure that’s not exactly saying much in the long run but hey, at least it’s something. All in all, Tarzan is a very enjoyable entry in the Disney canon. It served as the final film of the ‘Renaissance’ era and in that regard, I think it ended the era on a pretty darn solid note.

Rating: 4/5


And that’s the end of this Disney Retrospective on the Disney animated films released during the 90’s, the era known as ‘the Disney Renaissance’. Thanks for following along with me on this updated series of reviews. As always, what are your thoughts on the Disney films discussed here? Be sure to sound off in the comments below. And be sure to also check out the other Disney Retrospectives that I’ve done since this post was first published all the way back in November 2013. The links to them will be provided below.

Monday, November 25, 2013

Thoughts on last night's episode of 'Family Guy'


(Warning: MAJOR SPOILERS!!)


For a very long time, one of my favorite cartoons was ‘Family Guy’. I consider the first six-seven seasons of the show as ‘classic’; the writing may not have always hit well, but it had plenty of memorable characters and moments, the latter thanks in part to the random cutaway gags that occurred in each episode. However, in recent seasons, the show has declined in terms of its overall quality. The cutaway gags were getting stale and only a few characters were working while some were getting really annoying. I stopped watching the show precisely after a line in the episode ‘Friends Without Benefits’ where Lois mentions that she’s put Stewie ‘in the oven’ before and I haven’t watched a single new episode since… until last night. This newest episode caught my attention when it was announced that one of the main characters would be permanently killed off. I wasn’t really supportive of the idea of killing off one of the characters who we’ve come to know over the many years of the show’s existence, but I was intrigued nevertheless. However, this ended up being one of the worst half-hours of television I have ever seen.

The episode starts off harmless enough, with Brian and Stewie immediately getting into trouble, like they normally do. Right away, they’re being chased by a bunch of Native Americans because Stewie used his time machine to go back in time to Jamestown, where he gave weapons to the Natives. After the two get things back to normal, Stewie then destroys his time machine, knowing that it’s caused way too much trouble before. All seems to go well until Brian and Stewie start to play street hockey outside of the Griffin house after they find a street hockey net in the junkyard where they have the time machine destroyed. Stewie heads back inside for a quick moment before Brian is… run over by a car. Yes folks, it turns out that Brian is the family member that ends up dead.

…Where do I begin? I wasn’t really supportive of the idea to kill off one of the Griffin family in the first place, but of all of those characters, why the hell does it have to be Brian? When Family Guy was beginning to go into decline, Brian and Stewie were the only good characters left on the show. They had such a good camaraderie, making any episode where they were not the main focus duller by comparison. Why not kill off Meg or Chris? In the case of the former, considering the character’s status on the show, it would have been a little obvious but she wasn’t really contributing much to the show anyway. Even then, that just proves my point in that the death of a Griffin was just the wrong idea. But you know, it could have worked had they handled the event properly.

And that’s my biggest problem with this episode… they don’t. The death happens just five minutes into the episode, leaving a lot more things to happen. The writers tastelessly try to add in a few gags during Brian’s funeral, a scene that should have never had them to begin with. There is a glimmer of hope that this isn’t permanent when Stewie tries to rebuild his time machine. However, he learns that his supplier can no longer provide him the materials he needs… so he just gives up on it. After that, there is not a single mention of the time machine and even worse, the writers try to make us forget that Brian ever existed by having the family adopt a new dog. I’m sorry, writers, but you won’t make us forget one of the best characters on the show. The new dog, Vinny, sucks by the way. I know this is only the first episode he’s in, but I don’t care. No matter what happens in future episodes (which I won’t be watching, for the record, not even the crossover with ‘The Simpsons’ which sounds interesting), you cannot replace Brian.

This has to be one of the biggest ‘f*** you’ moments in the history of television. Of all of the things that Family Guy has done, why did they have to kill off one of their best characters and what’s even more insulting is how the writers try to make us forget about him when there’s no chance of hell of that ever happening. I am officially done with ‘Family Guy’. I was going to give this episode a chance, despite the fact that they were going to kill off a main character (I’m especially against it now considering which one they got rid of), but this was just a tasteless episode. The reason why I stopped watching the show in the first place was because of a tasteless line, but this is way worse. (Sigh) Well, at least we have re-runs of the older episodes.

R.I.P. Brian Griffin for you will be forever missed.



(UPDATE: Since posting this, I read about how a future episode apparently still revolves around Brian. Will this mean that he's not going to stay dead? I kind of hope he'll be back, but even if that happens, that just makes this episode even more insulting.)

Sunday, November 24, 2013

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013) review


The first ‘Hunger Games’ film was a huge success both critically and commercially when it came out back in March 2012. However, while the film was very good thanks in part to the writing and Jennifer Lawrence’s outstanding performance in the lead role, there was room for improvement, namely in regards to the shaky camera work and fast editing during the actual Hunger Games. That’s not to say the film wasn’t bad. It’s always been the case with most book-to-film franchises in that most of them get better as their series go on (e.g. Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings). It’s the responsibility of the first film to set up the universe and characters, and the first did a great job as far as that was concerned. So now all eyes are on the first sequel ‘Catching Fire’ to continue the story. In the director’s chair this time around instead of Gary Ross is Francis Lawrence (no relation to the leading lady), director of ‘Constantine’ and ‘I Am Legend’, who impressed Lionsgate enough to be chosen as the director for the final two Hunger Games films, parts 1 and 2 of ‘Mockingjay’. He’s certainly the right man for the job, because while I do really love the first ‘Hunger Games’, ‘Catching Fire’ is far superior to it in almost every way.

After their victory in the 74th Annual Hunger Games, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) return home to District 12 before heading off on their ‘Victory Tour’ through the other districts of Panem. However, while both of them are looking to get on with their lives, they soon learn that their defiant actions in the Arena, where they became the first dual winners in the history of the Games, have inspired rebellions all over Panem. This now makes Katniss not only the symbol of hope for the rebellion, but also a target of the Capitol and she is warned by President Snow (Donald Sutherland) to make it look like her actions were done out of her supposed love for Peeta and not as an act of defiance; otherwise her loved ones will be killed. But soon, Katniss and Peeta are forced back into the arena for the 75th Annual Hunger Games due to the 3rd Quarter Quell, an event that takes places every 25 years where the Games are affected by a unique rule. In this case, all of the Tributes are past Hunger Games winners, making things even more challenging for Katniss and Peeta this time around.

The biggest advantage that this film has over its predecessor is perhaps the fact that, with a bigger budget, F. Lawrence is able to expand on the world of Panem in ways Gary Ross couldn’t necessarily do with the first one. We get a greater sense of this world and, more importantly, the rebellion that is now happening in it. We don’t necessarily see a full-out rebellion as it’s more focused around Katniss and her reluctance to be the symbol of hope for the districts, but we clearly see that it’s beginning to take shape. Obviously, this rebellion will become much more important in the next two films. Once the film gets into the arena for the 75th Hunger Games, you folks will be pleased to know that the shaky cam and fast editing of the first film is no longer a problem. It’s all terrifically shot and, while I’ll be spoiler-free about what happens during these Games, the whole arena is very unique, which makes it a little more interesting this time around.

Once again, Jennifer Lawrence shines in the role of Katniss Everdeen, the reluctant symbol of the rebellion who is also sort of traumatized by her experiences in the previous Hunger Games, which we see early on when Katniss suddenly has a vision of one of the tributes from the last film while hunting with Gale (Liam Hemsworth). The relationship between Katniss and Peeta is far more developed in this film, mainly because the writers actually did remember to use the plot-point of how Katniss was playing up their relationship in the arena to win over the audience; the previous film omitted a key scene at the end where Peeta learns about this. Because they have far more substantial roles to work with in this film, Hutcherson and Hemsworth are able to get into their roles more. The idea of a ‘love triangle’ is there, but it’s not overplayed. Like the last film, this one has a great supporting cast with great performances all around from both returning characters (Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, Donald Sutherland as President Snow, etc.) and new ones (Sam Claflin as Finnick Odair, Jena Malone as Johanna Mason, etc.).

While I do love the original ‘Hunger Games’ film, despite its flaws, ‘Catching Fire’ is superior to the original in almost every way. Now with the whole idea of ‘establishing’ the universe out of the way, thanks to the first film, this sequel allows us to explore this world even more and with that, we’re able to see the growing rebellion that is beginning amongst the Districts of Panem, making things quite suspenseful at times for the main characters. The cast once again brings their all to it and once the film moves into the Arena this time, the shaky camera work and fast-editing from the first film is non-existent which leads to a much more exciting Hunger Games. Francis Lawrence certainly proves that he’s the right man for taking over this franchise, more specifically the two-part finale, ‘Mockingjay’. I’m a little hesitant on the idea of splitting the final book into two films. It’s not because of who’s involved behind the camera, or the quality of the material; it’s just if there's enough material to work with like ‘Harry Potter’. We’ll just have to wait and see when ‘Part 1’ comes out next November.

Rating: 5/5!