Onward

Spoiler-free!

In a fantasy realm where magic had faded from popular existence, two elf brothers, Barley and Ian, get a present from their father, who died before Ian was born. In the package, a wizard staff, a Phoenix Gem, and instructions for a spell -- a spell that will bring their dad back for 24 hours. Barley is a history buff and obsessed with magic, but it's Ian who makes the spell work... well, halfway. The gem explodes and their dad is just a pair of khakis, so the boys set out on a quest to find another Phoenix Gem and finish the spell before their time is up.

DID SOMEONE SAY "QUEST"??? SIGN ME UP.

I've been tired of Disney Pixar for about ten years, so it's about time for a revival! I knew the moment I saw the poster -- where high fantasy is blended with urban fantasy -- that I had a great chance of loving it, and I was right. Even if the story wasn't great I would have still enjoyed the distinctly fantasy world building, down to things like small dragons kept as pets instead of dogs, Valor being a van model, and angry fairies in motorcycle gangs eating Pixy Stix by the straw-full. That stuff was creative and fun, and the exact kind of attention to detail that I love to see in Pixar, but this is, in my opinion, the best Pixar fare since 2008, and has more working for it than an exciting and fleshed-out world.

Tom Holland plays Ian, and Barley is Chris Pratt. Two charming and talented actors, and their characters are the main reason this film works as well as it does. The way they're written and played. Pratt has first-rate hilarious line-delivery, and if anyone can make awkwardness likable, it's Tom Holland. The way the two characters' personalities clash and complement each other is heavenly, and you get lost in their easy conversations, whether they're arguing, having fun, in the middle of action, or anything in between. Ian is the main protagonist, and he makes a check list of things he wants to improve about himself.  Then, each stop along their quest pushes him unaware toward his goal.

I found it pleasantly predictable in many ways, but it had some wonderfully unexpected moments too, when it needed them.

And Barley could have easily fallen into the comic relief character trap (considering how effortlessly hilarious he is) but instead the character is fleshed out in some unexpectedly mature ways. He seems like the kind of guy that doesn't take anything seriously, but then there's the bridge scene -- or the hilariously epic "Rise to Valhalla" moment -- where his seriousness is truly serious, but still funny. Humor isn't something you turn on when it's comedy time and off when it's serious time. He's just genuine, and therefore can be both. And that's how the whole film is. It never announces it's time to switch gears; it's a constant flow of adventure, with all the ups and downs it needs present, but not showcased or ballooned to unnatural proportions.

Pixar has finally come up with an original story that appeals to me as an adult. Sure, it's still a kiddie film, not intellectually complex, and follows a basic and straightforward story structure, but every beat it hits is earned. It got a toe in the door with the fantasy world, then swept me up for the ride in a way I haven't allowed myself to go on with Pixar since Toy Story 3 introduced me to the gross feel of emotional manipulation. But Onward feels right in every way: The quest-style structure of little adventure vignettes built on top of each other... the way every detail is set up for later but not in an obvious way... a conflict that comes naturally from the core of the characters -- and a resolution that hits home because the story speaks for itself and doesn't need to be forced.

I see people dismiss it as "B-tier Pixar" and wonder when they forgot to value stories for the joy they bring.

I'm happy to know Pixar is still capable of winning storytelling along with its usual features of unique premises and beautiful animation. Onward is everything a great and worthy adventure should be -- full of Heart's Fire, you might say; and light, charming humor; and warm characters; and sweeping glorious fun; and inspired world building. And no, perhaps it won't appeal to everyone as strongly as it does me. But that, I think, is the great thing about Pixar. At their best, they send risky, niche stories out into the wild, and every once in a while, we wind up with something magical.

Incredibles 2

Spoilers!

The Pixar films that defined my childhood were Toy Story 1 and 2, Monsters Inc., and Finding Nemo. (I never got into A Bug's Life.) The Incredibles missed the cut-off by an inch. I liked it, but I never re and re and rewatched it on a cycle like those four. So, news of this long-awaited sequel wasn't so long-awaited for me. Instead it threatened to be like other sequels, marketing off previous success because the idea well has run dry. There were two promising aspects: the 14-years to work on it; and Brad Bird's return. And color me slightly less cynical than I was yesterday, because they pulled it off!

Pixar's best sequel since Toy Story 2.

Incredibles 2 matches its predecessor. It picks up right where it left off, (and gets the extra advantage that I haven't seen the original in a while) and has the same tone, purpose, structure, and ideas driving it as the original. Another long-await sequel, Toy Story 3 was fine, but felt disconnected from the other two, being more a nostalgia trip that veered into melodrama too many times. Not to hate on it, but the point is, Incredibles 2 feels as valid a sequel today as it might've felt in 2006. If they purposefully added nostalgia, it doesn't get in the way, and feels totally organic.

It started off on shaky ground, forced to revert a bit of the happy ending of the last film because the sequel starts up immediately with fighting The Underminer. They fail of course, not working as a family. Their interference actually causes more destruction than if they'd left Underminer to himself, reestablishing why supers are illegal in this story. The politics are like Civil War, but simplified, and both sides are clear and understandable, though we know the right thing is for them to be made legal again. Much better than the convoluted illogical mess of Civil War in a fraction of the time!

I love her bike and the way they have her use it!

After that things plod along, gaining momentum as the movie finds its feet. By the time Bob encourages Helen to take the secret Super job even though he's jealous of her, the feet are found and steady, and the rest of the movie falls into place. My favorite part was the whole middle section before the end game began. The train chase sequence knocked my socks off with originality and reminded me of what animation can do. And the home life was all wonderful, especially because of how hard Bob tries, keeping his head and putting in extra effort like staying up to learn Dash's homework.

Everyone said Jack-Jack was the highlight. Usually that kind of talk means a 50% chance I'll think the opposite because I despise pointless distractions, but Jack-Jack really was a highlight, and he was meant to be. The fight between him and the raccoon was hilarious, and the discovery and testing of all his powers is the kind of behind-the-scenes thing that made the first film so special too. Unfortunately, they had to start all over with Violet and Tony, so Violet's drama felt like retracing old steps. She's my favorite, so I would've liked to see much more progression there.

I love that at home they have a natural up and down instead of full chaos which would've been easier. Bob's a great dad.

The villain twist wasn't a total surprise; I was just glad that it wasn't as projected as I was worried it was. I did wonder at Elastigirl though, when she thought she caught the ScreenSlaver and the guy was clearly just another of his victims. The real villain's motivations worked well. Another classic case of a sympathetic idea taken way too far until it reaches villainy. She was nothing special, but got the plot where it needed to go. The sequence on the ship was where the film starts to stumble, though it never outright falls. Once no one's under mind-control anymore, everything picks back up and finishes in spectacular fashion.

Random details I really enjoyed: Dash's powers. I love how he fights, by machine-gunning people with his punches. The comedy. It fell in so naturally with the story and had me hooting many times. Jack-Jack was a laugh a second, and there were many subtle jokes and perfectly timed looks that were an absolute pleasure. Mr. Incredible has some delivery well worthy of his name. I also like how Elastigirl is the most marketable super, because she really is the most marketable. There's a reason that train chase worked so well. Her powers were used so creatively.

Never forget: The mundane is fascinating when Supers do it! 

So, here's hoping that in the next film we can see the whole family working together for a good, solid block of time; that they won't forget about the novelty of Super home life; that Violet will get back to her date before the movie starts; and that they'll take as much time as they need regarding Incredibles 3. If they give as much devotion and effort as they did here, it'll be worth whatever the wait-time might be.

The Lego Batman Movie

Spoiler-free.

After the explosive success of the bright, hilarious and unexpectedly deep The Lego Movie, it's no surprise that the series was continued. This spin-off flick was given to Will Arnett for his brilliantly rendered serious goof of a Batman. No other character deserves the solo spotlight more, and it couldn't have been handled any better -- leaving me wondering whether it might have actually surpassed its mother film in hilarity and excellence.

Because... he's Lego Batman.

Right off the bat (Get it? It's a bat pun!) there's around twenty minutes of non-stop gut-busting comedy. Really smart stuff too. Jokes flew over the heads of the crumb-crunching, popcorn-barfing target audience at the same impressive speeds at which the plot moved along to keep them interested. I think I laughed more than they did. Will Arnett was already the comedy highlight of the last Lego Movie; here, the entire script was catered to that wonky, surprisingly highbrow style of comedy that works so well for the humorously serious, satirized character of Lego Batman and leaves me in stitches embarrassingly often... some might say.

The humor does tone down eventually, just enough so that the plot can be developed with the proper amount of importance. There's not much to the plot -- the threat of the movie being directly connected with Batman's character development, with just a few unusual elements, so everything fits together neatly and simply. Just as it should be. It leaves more time for the delightful wise-cracks and overly-dramatic parody, and you gotta pack it in with the kiddie run time.

The wit is strong with this one.

The theme is similarly connected and similarly simple. Granted, it didn't move me nearly as much as the theme of The Lego Movie, but it did have some nice things to say about unity and love that mean a lot it the world today -- but was presented more tactfully than most movies with a purposeful message these days, without placing blame or pointing fingers or encouraging the creation of bad guys at all. With help from a Michael Jackson song, it says to take a look at yourself first when there's a problem, and suggests that the people you're fighting against may actually be important in the big picture and not as evil as you might think.

The movie made me very happy with the amount of movie references it made, including many references to other Batman films, and also films outside of the universe. The supporting cast, made up of Michael Cera as Robin, Ralph Fiennes as Alfred, and Rosario Dawson as Batgirl in the core group, to Zach Galifianakis and Jenny Slate, and spreading out into cameo after cameo including many returning cameos from The Lego Movie, Jemaine Clement as the Eye of Sauron and Siri as... a... computer... -- they were all great. I'm bad at the game of "Guess the Actor without Seeing Their Face" but I enjoyed playing nonetheless.

You might think the Joker is played as the main villain by now... which is perfect for this.

In direct comparison to The Lego Movie there are some wins and some losses. It's at least just as funny. I would argue funnier. The plot isn't as creative or original, but it's a Batman movie, and in spite of being Lego is somehow is relevant when held up against even the best live action portrayals of the character, which cannot be a small feat. The theme wasn't as personally effective and moving as the last Lego film, but I enjoyed it plenty, and (for whatever it's worth) approved of it equally.

One random comment: the medium of this film allows for something to be done with Batman that no other film has done -- make the Wayne mansion huge. It was really, truly, mindbogglingly, depressingly, no-way-even-James-Cameron-could-get-the-budget-for-live-action-scale-like-this massive. Almost as cool as that was how it was used not only for comedy, but for effortless dramatic effect too. For some reason all that impressed me.

But, mostly, it's just a whole bunch of goofy fun.

It was almost exactly what I expected, so color me a satisfied consumer. The biggest worry I had concerning this spin-off was that it might just ride the coattails of the original flick, but that apparently wasn't even a potential issue that was worked around. Hardly even worth being called a spin-off at all -- it is after all, Batman. Comedy or drama, fighting or dancing, saving the day or beat-boxing, Batman -- and especially Lego Batman -- flies on the merit of his own wings.

GET IT?

Inside Out

This review is Spoiler-free.

Pixar's back-to-form movie Inside Out gets creative with what goes on inside you head, hands out hearty laughter for free, and tugs gently on heartstrings -- but it's not all perfect. The story centers around an 11-year-old girl named Riley who moves with her parents to a new, far away home, and struggles to begin her new life there. Most of the time is spent literally inside her head as her emotions (Joy (Amy Poehler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Anger (Lewis Black), Fear (Bill Hader), and Disgust (Mindy Kaling)) take turns at the console, responding to situations in Riley's life, and creating memories that define Riley's personality. Joy spends most of the time in control, but when things start to change and she begins to lose control she panics, and her every attempt to keep things happy and the way it used to be only makes things worse.

Everybody panic now!!

This film's super creative premise is its high point. From it comes all the neatest insights, funniest jokes, and most involving drama. And that is the order of what I was most impressed with. The Insights -- showing an explaining how the mind, personality and emotions work in a simplified, fantasy way -- worked really well, and felt very true to life. So much so, that I often found myself wishing that they'd gone even deeper with the idea. It stayed very basic during the movie, at a level that is understandable for the younger audience, but was too basic for my grown-up understanding. I grasped the concepts very quickly and immediately wanted more, but it is a kid's movie, so I didn't get it.

But, I was appeased by comedy. There were many great laugh-out-loud moments that I thoroughly enjoyed, but there was also plenty of great subtle comedy. The movie's default setting was funny, so though laugh-out-loud moments only came occasionally, I was almost always aware of, and amused by the underlying foundation of humor. I loved the dynamic between Joy and Sadness. They were the only two true standouts of the cast, and their conversations were naturally funny because of their clashing and extreme personalities. The rest of the cast and characters had their moments of course, but those two were consistently great under the pressure of being heavily featured.

Sadness' inexplicable need to touch all the memories though... brilliant.

The drama was a mixed bag. Half came across sincerely and I didn't mind being taken in to it, and half pushed too hard, was too unnecessary, and too contrived. The former took place mainly at the end of the movie, and the latter in mostly in the middle. Also the end-drama was directly related to the movie's premise and the middle-drama wasn't. That is not a coincidence -- the movie's most successful moments were always the moments that were close to that winning base idea.

The movie's main flaw was, basically, its entire second act -- the whole, entire plot of Joy and Sadness looking for, and finding a way back to the console room. I know, that makes it seem huge, but it was more of a missed or misused opportunity than anything else. (Or the film should have been about thirty minutes shorter.) It had a few, fleeting humorous moments, but was mostly just a sad excuse for filler. It wound up being down right boring as they tried different ideas but ended up exactly where they started several times, and then had some unnecessary rabbit trails, before eventually throwing together a lazy solution because all the good ideas had been used already. The only truly worthwhile things that happened in that section was the events in the control room, and a little of the character development between Joy and Sadness -- but only some.

The creative way of portraying the mind was the only thing that kept that section going.

Fortunately, the boring and unnecessary filler of the middle section did not at all bleed into the awesomeness of the beginning or end, both of which were full of the classic, meaningful, Pixar fun and creativity, and that helped leave the movie's impression in my memory as... a mostly joyful one.

Big Hero 6

Spoilers are marked.

The Academy's pick for Best Animated Movie of 2014 has finally been seen by me, and maybe it was all the hype, or the unrealistically high expectations that were set by its being a Disney animation and Marvel superhero movie, but it underwhelmed me. The pop and sparks of brightly animated colors and dazzling action sequences do not alone a great movie make.

They can only make it visually good, and that it was.

Our hero's name is Hiro. (Ryan Potter) He is a smart little whippersnapper, with a hot head but a good heart. He's a genius, but, as is common with geniuses, he can also be super dense, and hardly has two common sense to rub together. He's also an underachiever, something his older brother Tadashi (Daniel Henney) helps remedy. Tadashi is also smart -- maybe not a genius like Hiro, but he makes up for it heaps and heaps of common sense, which he turns into advice and encouragement and gives generously to his flighty little bro.

The four sidekicks are pretty much just there to fill the number requirement. And in Fred's case, to provide some gnarly comedy, dude! Actually, Fred's pretty cool, and we get to know him very well. Not to say that we understand him; he's super rich, but acts like a beach bum, and is obsessed with superheroes and monsters. The rest are so boring that I will not even devote individual space to them here. As a whole they're there for backup and to look cool, and that exactly what they do. They don't feel like wasted potential, nor do they seem like failed attempt and being more than they are.

Jamie Chung, Damon Wayans Jr., Genesis Rodriguez, and T.J. Miller make up the four that make up the six. Alan Tudyk gets another side character to master, and Maya Rudolph is present.

It's a kiddie movie, so I understand why it turned out this way, but the initial super cool creepiness of the baddie when he first shows up in the kabuki mask and the black cape with the dramatic lighting and the army of mini robots is seriously diminished once we learn who he is, and what his motivations are.

But most importantly, there's Baymax. (Scott Adsit) He alone holds this film up on his big puffy shoulders, and my only regret is that I watched the trailer too many times (which housed most of his best stuff) so it wasn't as new fresh and funny as it could have been. But I definitely still enjoyed all that was new to me. As a robot Baymax has a singular character that is impossible to twist around to suit the plot. He has his one goal of seeing to Hiro's medical needs, and he pursues that goal with a tenacity that only can be described as "robotic" but in surprisingly sweet, surprisingly heartfelt way. And also funny -- even if he's not actively doing something that's funny he still is, and never stops being funny.

Or squishy.

Not so much problematic as it was average, the plot was a nice blend of classic Disney animation and classic Marvel superhero-ing. Good, classic structure, healthy doses of excitement and drama; but safe. As interesting as the safeness would allow, but safe none the less. A result, I imagine, of the very premise being something of a risk (although after Guardians of the Galaxy was it really?) what with almost no one having ever heard of these heroes before. And I should be more lenient anyway, and give these guys a chance to have their origin story before expecting anything bold from them, but then again the best origin stories are bold too.

So the plot itself wasn't fantastically or memorably bold, but one thing in this movie was, and that was simply the way it looked. What with the setting of San Fransokyo, and Disney feeding off the ever-popular superhero pizzazz, everything, and I mean everything in this movie was striking; beautiful scenery, cool, sharp action and general immaculate, artistic animation, so full of color. I wanted to see this in theaters, 3D and everything, and maybe if I had it would have immersed and overwhelmed me and my senses enough so that I wouldn't have seen the flaws I saw, but I didn't, so I did.
 

Yep. That's a view.

Individually none of the gaps and holes in this story were too bothersome, but collectively they add up to a good deal, especially once you add the big one:

(Kinda big Spoilers in this section)
It's not totally unimaginable that in a moment of anger Hiro might ask Baymax to kill the villain, or even think to remove Baymax's "good" chip, not realizing both what the results would be and Tadashi's would-be disapproval. It is far-fetched, not making any sense with his established character, but can be overlooked in a pinch. Sure. Okay, but after, at home, Hiro still hasn't cooled down any, or realized what happened? He just tried to murder someone, and nearly killed his friends in the process, (and let the bad guy escape) and that doesn't make him second guess his rash decision of murderous revenge? All so that there can be a emotional scene where he finally comes to his senses? That's just way too much. Because Baymax is so great, the part where he prevents Hiro from removing the "good" chip again is good -- great really, possibly the best dramatic moment of the whole film -- but I'm not sure if it was worth the unexplainable and dramatic character change in Hiro.
(End Spoilers)

"I'll MAKE IT fit!!"

The problem manifested itself mostly in that event, but its origin was more fundamental. When a film's main enjoyability rides on the "wow, 3D" or "ooo, shiny" factor, and overshadows the rest of the features, no matter how nice they are, there's something wrong in my book. And even worse is when the need for visually cool, attention-grabbing things becomes a compulsion, and causes the really important things (like characters) to not only be ignored, but twisted into a shape they don't fit into.

The Big Hero 6 team had some soaring ups, that were all leveled out by drooping lows to the same averagely good place it all would have been without either extreme. So the question is, are the lazily drooping lows worth the occasional fun and fantastic heights? The answer is, like the movie, neither an extreme high or low, but the more middling positive, "I suppose so." There isn't much substance, and half of it is sadly miss-aimed, but it's a literally high-flying, laser-shooting, funny and diverting spectacle.

Mr. Peabody & Sherman

Spoilers are labeled, and confined to the end of the post.

Mr. Peabody and Sherman. They were a semi-classic duo who had a spot on the Rocky and Bulwinkle Show. A dog and his adopted son who go time-traveling to the past where they learn about history, usually get involved in it somehow, come back home, and wrap everything up with a nice pun.

"Can I push the pun button now, Mr Peabody?" "No, Sherman, we save the puns until the end of the trip."

Now, the basics are the same, but they've been modernized and updated to be relevant in today's times. But no matter how hard you try, there's no way to squeeze depth out of a premise so one-dimensional. Maybe if they had just concentrated on fun, history and punning, it wouldn't have fallen so flat, and maybe if they'd winked back to the good ol' days, it wouldn't have felt so terribly, modernly empty. Or, maybe, bringing back this odd duo was just a bad idea, and they did the best they could with them.

So my opinion is that this little animation's existence is pretty much unnecessary, but I also probably made it sound worse than it really was in the preceding paragraph. When the plot was concentrating on what it should have been (you know, time-traveling, general adventuring, etc.) it was amusing and on the border of smart.

"On the border," mind.

The cast of voices was flawless without being at all outstanding either. Still, with an eleven-year-old kid (Max Charles, aka little Peter Parker) playing Sherman that's not bad. Ty Burrell as Peabody sounds very like the original too. And then there's cameo performances, including Allison Janney, Stanley Tucci, Stephen Colbert, and, Patrick Warburton, whose name you may not recognize, but whose voice you almost certainly would -- Kronk! Puddy! Hymie! The Tick! Buzz Lightyear of Star Command! You know -- the guy who can make anything sound funny.

Okay, let's see, what else... oh, the animation. The animation was... mediocre -- nothing special, nothing terrible. Really, the only outstanding thing about this movie was the jokes. That is, of course, after you filter out the potty humor. And then half of the remaining were used in the trailer, but you know what? When they hit the mark, they REALLY hit the mark -- therefore, the rest of this post will be dedicated to my favorite punchlines and puns; The Best Jokes of Mr. Peabody and Sherman!

Warning: Spoiled jokes from here on out!

Mr. Peabody: Sherman, don't you remember why I told you to stay close to me during the French Revolution?
Sherman: Because after the French Revolution, it was gonna rain?
Mr. Peabody: Close, I said after the French Revolution comes the Reign of Terror!

Paul Peterson (Stephen Colbert): When it comes to the safety of my daughter, nothing is more important than-- [cell rings] Sh-ello? Sure, I'll take a survey.

[inside the Trojan Horse]
Odysseus: [Holds a mini figure of the Trojan Horse] Someone left this for us!
Agamemnon (Patrick Warburton): A present? Nice! It looks just like our horse.
Odysseus: Should I bring it inside?
Agamemnon: It'd be rude not to.

Mr. Peabody: Thank you for taking care of my son, Agamemnon, but it is time for him to come home.
Sherman: Sorry, Mr. Peabody. I've joined the Greek Army.
Agamemnon: Shermanus is one of us, now. He's a brother.
Sherman: I'm his brother.
Mr. Peabody: He is my son.
Agamemnon: He took an oath!
Sherman: I took an oath.
Mr. Peabody: He's SEVEN!
Agamemnon: [Sherman whispers into his ear] AND A HALF!

Mr. Peabody: Sherman, I absolutely forbid you to fight in the Trojan war!
Sherman: That's not fair! All of my friends are fighting in the Trojan war!
Mr. Peabody: Sherman, it's dangerous.
Sherman: I'm wearing a helmet!

We are now at the end, so, PUNS!!

Mr. Peabody: [When a mummy arm falls to the floor] That's disarming.

Penny Peterson: I'm not Penny, anymore. Now, I'm Princess Hatshepsut, precious flower of the Nile.
Mr. Peabody: Precious, perhaps, but if you think we're going to leave you here, you are most definitely in de-Nile!

Mr. Peabody: And to think, Marie Antoinette could have avoided the whole revolution if she had just issued an edict to distribute bread among the poor. But then she couldn't have finished her desert. After all, you can't have your cake and edict too.

Mr. Peabody: You know what they say: If at first you don't succeed, Troy Troy again...

But, for the record, please don't Troy Troy again and make a sequel to this movie! -- Me

The Lego Movie

Spoilers free!

I think this is going to be a rather short review. Why? Well, because the only way I can think to describe anything in this movie is, "awesome."

Cue the music.

...Everything is awesome!...

Acting -- awesome. Chris Pratt makes the perfect unassuming-normal-Lego-figurine-who-turns-out-to-be-the-hero-and-really-awesome as Emmett. Not that that's something for which we see lots of failed attempts. But he is funny and charming and silly, and while not often serious, good on that side as well. The supporting cast in the form of Elizabeth Banks, Morgan Freeman, Will Ferrell, Will Arnett and Liam Neeson were also... well, you know... with names like those, how could they possibly be anything else? And all the cameos (of actors and characters) were brilliant. I liked Billy Dee Williams' cameo... as Lando Calrissian.

...Everything is cool when you're part of a team!...

Plot -- awesome. The beginning was absolutely packed to the brim with laugh-out-loud moments and one-liners, and once the plot got going it just kept slowly adding on a surprising amount of substance and heart -- more than I was expecting even after hearing there was more than you'd expect, but of course it never got too complicated for the crumb-crunching target audience. It also had an adorable ADHD kind of flow -- chasing random rabbit trails until satisfied, and then remembering the main pathway. It all made me feel as if I were the one controlling the direction and didn't know it; it was very often reminiscent of the way I played with Legos. And it's probably the same case with anyone else who has ever laid hands on a single brick.

...Everything is awesome!...

Animation -- you guessed it -- awesome. It looked seriously like there were real, tangible Legos up there on the screen, and it helped with the illusion of mixed reality and imagination to give the animation a stop-motion feel. They also gave the Legos realistic details like dirt, scratches, dints, and even breaks, like on Benny the spaceman's helmet. At times everything moved so fast though, the "stop-motion" made it a bit difficult to tell what was going on, but still, very much worth it for the perfect playful atmosphere it gave the movie.

...When we're livin' our dream!...

So yeah, I thought it was pretty awesome, (the word insinuated itself into my head effortlessly) but it's an interesting case, because I currently have no desire to see it again, and usually if I give a movie 4 stars, I would by now. It was clever and intricate enough to hold my adult attention, but simple enough so that I didn't miss anything, and that requires no future viewings (for now anyway -- never say never) and that's perfectly fine with me. In fact, it's awesome.

The End.

Good luck getting that song out of your head.

You're welcome.

Bye.

Frozen

Beware -- MAJOR SPOILERS!

I'll admit it: I cried during this movie.

Of course it's not what you may think -- I didn't cry during the opening sequence, even though it was pretty moving. Nor at the end, even though it was a satisfying sweet and magical, and a surprisingly deep ending fitting to the rest of the film. Nor during any of the sweetly melancholy and thoughtful moments in the middle.

No, I cried...

Because I was laughing too hard.

I guess there's just something totally original and brilliant and hilarious about having a snowman come alive, and naively dream about spending a nice summer day at the beach. Add a cynical listener who stoutly resolves, "I'm going to tell him" and an unfailing optimist who shoots back, "Don't you dare!" and suddenly I'm trying desperately to regain composure so I can hear what was going on during the following two minutes.

And that's more or less how the whole movie went. Introducing the cynic, and the optimist.

Just like I suspected all those months ago, Frozen is another example of Disney being very weird and releasing a trailer that makes their latest soon-to-be-smash hit animation princess flick look like the first-ever awful Disney Princess movie. Okay, the trailer maybe wasn't that bad, but a sigh and an eye-roll is a big difference from not being able to breathe from all the laughing, and then being nearly floored by the maturity of the message. The trend started with Tangled, so, the next Disney movie whose title is an adjective is the first movie whose trailer I boycott. I don't need all those good jokes spoiled anyway.

I might as well admit this too: I (and the rest of the universe) adored the music.

"Reindeers are better than people. Sven, don't you think that's true?" No, wait a minute...

"Let it go, let it go... can't hold it back anymore!"-- That's the one.

I can't get it out of my head and it's very distracting. Although some of the lyrics gave me a kinda odd new-age-y impression once or twice, the tunes are undeniably catchy, and just pure fun, and of course, very often hilarious. 

All the voice work was top-notch. Kristen Bell as Anna was quirky and chipper and cute, Jonathan Groff as Kristoff was funny and charmingly grumpy (I loved the way he spoke for Sven -- too good). Santino Fontana as Hans was, well, perfect... and perfectly sinister... and perfectly annoying when he reveals himself! Why oh why must you be evil? Then Josh Gad as Olaf was a laugh a minute, so consistently hilarious. And I must mention Alan Tudyk, (in a small role but still) who was totally wacko as the Duke of Weaseltown, er, Weselton... whatever.

But Idina Menzel as Queen Elsa blew the rest of them away. She effortlessly outshone everyone, even Bell in their every scene together (though not too much so as to make anyone seem actually bad) but most impressively, she occasionally out-shined the gorgeous animation work; sometimes her vocal inflection was more expressive than the animator's expressions. (And no, that's not a flaw; it's too impressive to be called a flaw.)

Especially since the animation was so gorgeous, as I mentioned. But that's no surprise; in fact I knew that it would be since they released the first picture -- of concept art.

Who needs a trailer anyway? All you really need is a similar picture to this, and the name "Disney."

The theme about true love being sacrificial love was awesome, and I was pleasantly surprised at how matter-of-fact they were about it. And that the only way Elsa can control her powers is by embracing it, and wielding it through love, not through her own effort of trying to force it -- that's some powerful stuff. I was impressed, pleased and practically even proud at these things.

However, I thought the theme rebuking the idea of "love at first sight" came off a bit heavy-handed. They were probably only trying to say "Don't rush into what you may think is love but is really only skin-deep," but what I heard was more like, "If you meet your dream fellow, and he appears to be everything you wanted and a perfect match for you, dump him, because he's probably a fake and will try to kill you." Of course, Hans being a bad guy just confuses everything -- the point would have been better made if Anna had chosen Kristoff over Hans because Kristoff was the better man, not because Hans was a bad one.

Gosh, look at me -- I'm hyper-analyzing a Disney movie! But seriously, if Hans was good, and had saved Anna with selfless love, would he still be the wrong guy for her? Just because he seemed perfect?

The Hans twist was definitely unexpected, and halfway sensible, but I can't help wondering how the story would have gone if Hans was just being shallow like Anna. Maybe, like Anna, as the story progressed and he grew in character (like he appeared to be) he'd find a more difficult, but ultimately more rewarding match in someone else...a. (Get it? Get it?) Yes, my ideal ending for this movie was a double wedding.

It didn't happen, (there wasn't even a single wedding) but that's okay, that's what I get for deciding how the story should go. And I did have a bit of a bone to pick, but honestly, I liked Frozen -- a lot. I liked the humor, the look, the sound, the characters and the heart. It was all wonderful. In fact I may even love Frozen. I can't say positively yet because I've only seen it once and I wouldn't want to rush into anything, but there was definitely an element of... immediate... attraction.

Epic

"Epic" is the perfect, ironic title for this movie, because everything is tiny... but just because something's small doesn't mean it's not epic. Course, it doesn't mean it is either...

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand either... On to the review!

Mary Katherine, or M.K., (Amanda Seyfried) is a troubled teenager who just lost her mother. She goes to live in the middle of nowhere with her estranged dad, who's a bit wacko. See, he has this crazy theory that the woods are inhabited with a race of tiny advanced people, and, well, he's right. Tiny human-ish versions of leaves, flowers, sticks and insects live in the forest. The leaf men are the warriors, riding on birds, and protecting their home and Queen from the evil rot. Amongst them, is a seasoned captain, Ronin (Colin Farrell) and a young wayward warrior he tries to keep in line, Nod. (Josh Hutcherson) When M.K. is magically shrunk down to their size, she discovers not only that her father is right about the tiny people, but they also need her help. With the assistance of Ronin, Nod, and two snails-- er, excuse me -- a snail and a slug, she sets out for an important mission to save the forest from the literally-rotten-to-the-core villain. (Christoph Waltz)

And she thought he was crazy!

The first thing you'll notice about this movie is that it's pretty predictable. Okay, it's downright predictable. Disappointing, especially considering the potential of the premise, which in spite of its promising originality, can't make up for a plot taken straight from the mold. There's so much room for creating with the tiny imaginative world, and what do the writers do with it? Doubtlessly inspired by their title, they go big, and environmental, with the fate of the forest at stake, only brushing the surface of creative possibilities. And that's pretty much how the whole film goes -- anything that turned out good is directly counter-weighted by something else that falls short.

"...can you imagine the possibilities of this!?" Who said that quote? (Hint: it's from a movie I wish this one was more like.)

For an example (and to move along) if they'd concentrated more on characters, and made them root-able and loveable, the entire story could have been about M.K. trying to get home, (or something even more creative than what I can think of) and it could have been great. Sure, not exactly "epic," but involving -- I find it easier to connect with actual characters than the things those characters care about, so make the characters relatable. This is a no-brainer. Now, M.K. is a very well-balanced heroine; smart, goofy, sweet, not too girly and not too tomboyish, but even with all the development she gets as the main character, she still feels under-developed. Same goes double that for Ronin and Nod. Ronin fares better thanks to Farrell's more seasoned talents, and his character being cooler and more understated, but apparently no one was on the same page with Nod. Every so often, Hutcherson's vocal inflection doesn't match how his character was animated. (At one point the voice sounds mad, but the character looks sad.) I've never seen this happen before, and the confused result is very distracting, and disappointing to me (who was hoping for a Swashbuckling, funny Flynn Rider type character, and got let down.)
 

They're fine when they're not talking though!

The problem is with the animators. I don't understand it, but for some reason the human (and humanoid) faces are blandly animated in general; "surprise" is the only emotion done with any real success. It's weird, because otherwise the animation is top-notch. The tiny world, and the forest, and even all the normal things like the house are lovely, and characters like the snail and slug are very expressive, with almost nothing to work with! (Or maybe that's why they were better.) I suppose it also helps that they were solely comic characters. In fact, anything that has to do with comedy in the movie is done well, with only a few miss-fires, and that may be this movie's redeeming quality (even though most of the best jokes are in the trailer.)

I want to be tiny so I can be epic while riding a hummingbird...

And now that I've picked the whole movie apart, I hope it won't be too much of a surprise when I say, I enjoyed it. Well, mostly. After all, how could I hate something that made me laugh? It had its moments of being cute as well, and when there weren't faces being weird, it was stylish, and pleasant to look at. And I can still enjoy predictable plots, as long as they're executed well, as this one was -- paced evenly, and with no holes... as far as I can remember. And that is as positive a note as I can manage for my not-so-epic Epic review ending.

Wreck-it Ralph

Wreck-it Ralph

Being the "bad guy" has never been so popular. You can hardly go wrong as a baddie -- if you're a totally evil psychopath, people love to hate you, and love to see you defeated. If you're misunderstood, or have a sympathetic back-story, people fall in love with you, and wish you over to the good side. Everyone knows who their favorite villain is. Very often they get more attention than the hero. Sometimes they are the hero.

Too bad Ralph (John C. Reilly) doesn't know that. Of course for him, "bad guy" is just his job description. He works inside the video game Fix-it Felix Jr. dutifully wrecking a building so that title character Felix (Jack McBrayer) can fix it again. The other characters in the game, however, don't see it like that. To them, he is the bad guy his job says he is, and that's how they treat him. Ralph is tired of being the bad guy, and wants to fit in with the rest of the characters of his game. Thinking they'll accept him if he had a medal (something Felix is rewarded with at the end of every game) he leaves his game in search of one.

"Ralph raises the roof at a party" or, "Ralph crashes a party." I can't decide...

Such is the premise for this Disney animation, and it holds up well as the plot unfolds. It's a classic plot, so while you might find it a bit familiar, it's tried and true. Safe, but I didn't mind that. The mere fact that it's a movie about video game characters was unique enough for me. But being classic/typical Disney as it is, I can see how its safety (high-quality as it is) could easily land Wreck-it Ralph squarely into that category of movies for some viewers. "'It's great', but it eventually fades from memory." Of course, by the time this movie begins to fade, the sequel will be coming out... oh... smart move there. Anyway, I want to remember it. It made me laugh. In fact, Wreck-it Ralph wins the medal for being the very first movie to make me laugh during a potty humor sequence. Granted, I didn't exactly laugh at the actual potty humor, but still...

The point is, the humor was good, and when it wasn't making me laugh, it was still keeping me amused. And when I wasn't amused I was interested by turning plot points; never ground-breaking, but still thoughtful. And when I wasn't interested in thoughtful plot development, I was being moved by some top-notch character development... for an animated flick at any rate. Ralph's character arc was satisfying, and his relationship with Vanellope - (Sarah Silverman) of the racing game Sugar Rush - was sweet. Pun... unintended, but appropriate.

"Why are your hands so freakishly big?" "I don't know, why are you so freakishly annoying?"

Actors are usually what draws me to a particular movie, but for this movie that wasn't the case, there wasn't anyone I was especially interested in seeing, er, hearing. So when I praise the cast, I do it without bias... Though, after I decided I wanted to see this, I discovered that Alan Tudyk was in it, (playing King Candy) and got pretty excited. Ironically, I then forgot he was in it until after I watched the thing. Still, with my not remembering, he had my favorite line; after someone notes that he must like pink: "Salmon! Sal-- that's obviously salmon."... So, not much bias. With help from a clever and truly funny script, the actors delivered - on more than just punch lines too, though the punch-lines were the best. I also particularly liked Jane Lynch as Sergeant Calhoun, a tough girl from a serious sci-fi shoot-em-up game; she belts out snarky one-liners in her usual style with every breath. And it's epic.

"This is it, ladies! The kitten whispers and tickle fights end now!"

I must mention the animation, because it was pretty wonderful. With the varying arcade characters, the style of animation changed as well, according to the quality and style of the game that character is from - definitely one of my favorite of the tons of little details in the movie. But shiny bells and whistles aside, at game over, Wreck-it Ralph has what it needs; the hallmark message and feel of classic Disney animation, a little bit of retro, a little originality, and a memorable, funny script. All these elements put together, it actually lived up to its potential and turned out to be what it was meant to be; a good movie. And that is not bad. Not bad at all.

-- 3.5/5 stars.

And I must add one more thing; a Owl City/Wreck-it Ralph music video! "When Can I See You Again?" The song plays during the movie credits. It's also very catchy.

Rise of the Guardians

A while ago, I published a short anticipation post, Upcoming Movie: Rise of the Guardians, where I explained my interest in this DreamWorks animation. Short short version: it was because of the actors lending their voices to the characters. I was hoping the rest of the animated flick would... rise to the level of the talented, uniquely voiced actors starring.

Sadly, when it released and medium reviews came in, my hopes fell a little ways - not all the way - just enough to keep me away from the theater and 3D glasses. I finally got around to watching it yesterday.

Cheers!

Like any movie that involves Santa Claus, Rise of the Guardians is pretty much all about keeping kiddies believing in its fantasy characters. If the kids don't believe in the Guardians, they lose their power, so the bad guy - the Boogeyman - Pitch, has an evil plan to cause all the kids of the world to stop believing in them, so he can take over their dreams, replacing them with nightmares, and (therefore?) take over the world. To prevent this, the Man on the Moon chooses a new Guardian; Jack Frost.

If this sounds confusing, it's because it is. And too complicated for me to bother explaining any more - the first thirty minutes was almost totally spent in set-up. But essentially, Jack (Chris Pine) teams up with the existing Guardians, Santa (Alec Baldwin), the Easter Bunny (Hugh Jackman and his Aussie accent), the Tooth Fairy (Isla Fisher), and the voiceless Sandman, to defeat Jude Law's Pitch, doing his very best Loki impression.

One of my favorite things about animated movies: actor/character promo shots! Baldwin totally ruined the pattern though...

My instinct was right; the actors - or the actor's voices rather - where the best part of the film, but they still weren't as great as I was hoping. Hugh Jackman delivering practically nothing but punch lines was probably the best, and Isla Fisher, rambling and murmuring, the worst. The others had good moments and bad moments, easily defined; the serious moments were really forced (possibly due to having no one to play off of when recording lines alone?) I have to give Chris Pine credit though; he handled his lot of serious moments fairly well. And Alec Baldwin's Russian accent was funny addition. Jude Law had to be my favorite though - the whole movie was worth watching simply to hear him say "Oh, I thought I heard the clippity-clop of a unicorn." I also liked a neat effect as he would monologue while disappearing and re-appearing at varying distances, his voice would fade in and out, and the echo would change. Then he would suddenly be loud again, and our hero would wheel around to find him standing behind him in traditional creepy-baddie fashion.

So, I just made the connection that his black horses are nightmares. Duhh...

But that brings me to a few things that went wrong. Pitch is not the only character able to fly around and move inexplicably fast. They all can. And of course it made for a lot of location changes. Really fast ones. They're in the sky one moment, then in an alley, then a park, then suddenly somewhere where it's daytime. It got dizzying, and obviously was all only to show off the animation and 3D, and while I don't know about the 3D, the animation was nothing special compared to Disney and Pixar these days. There was one striking moment I can recall when Pitch and Jack have a Jedi-like standoff, but otherwise, Jack's hair was pretty much the only thing worth a good look.

Behold. The hair.

So I suppose this was done make use of some 3D gloss, and draw in little kids to the theater, and trick parents into bringing them by casting big-name actors. I don't know if the story was capable of being a truly great film by my taste (I never did that "Santa Claus" thing, so it holds very little charm for me) but it certainly could have been much better. Another mediocre attempt results in failed potential. Fortunately, it didn't disappoint me much; after all I never had anything much invested in it's quality, just a hankering to hear something new from a few actors I like. And that's what I got, along with a bonus of a mini Avengers-like adventure that is sometimes funny, has a few cute moments, and some interesting details.

-- 3/5 stars.