 Whether it's your cup of tea or not, 'Fantasia' has gone down in cinematic history as one of Disney's big gems. Despite all of the controversial issues that lie within, it does still do a fine job of combining its animation with a great selection of classical music from classical artists. I personally loved it, so I looked forward to giving its sequel my first watch for this review; nice and fresh. This launches the "Post-Renaissance" era; the 6th, and last before the present "Revival" era.
Typically, a Disney animated sequel would be sent straight to video at this point in time. It's still pretty untypical, as (correct me if I'm wrong) I think 'Frozen II' is the only one that managed to pull it off besides this. But truth be told, a sequel was in the works for quite some time, but there was some doubt about audience interest. That is until the 1991 home video release of the original 'Fantasia' started setting things back into motion for the development of this great sequel. Eventually, this would finally come along, approximately 60 years after the original. Symphony No. 5 by Ludwig van Beethoven: A similar sort of opening act to the original is introduced by Deems Taylor (musical advisor for the original) through some archived audio recordings. This one uses geometric shapes of both vibrant colours to represent butterflies, and black to represent bats, telling a basic story of light conquering the darkness. It was interesting, and I appreciated the artistic style. But it's soon overshadowed by a bunch of whales, and ends up almost being forgettable. 3/5 Pines of Rome by Ottorino Respighi: Introduced by Steve Martin and Itzhak Perlman., this one was probably my favourite of this collection. It features a family of humpback whales with the ability to fly and tells the short story of a mother's love for her calf. This is just an all-around beautiful piece and makes me think of something from a dream. I'm an absolute sucker for this kind of wondrous atmosphere, and it sort of reminds you of what Disney magic is supposed to look like. 5/5 Rhapsody in Blue by George Gershwin: Introduced by Quincy Jones and pianist Ralph Grierson, this one takes inspiration from 30's caricaturist Al Hirschfeld. The segment is also set in the 30s, in New York City. It follows four separate characters whose stories coincide, as they all wish for something "more" than what they have. I really liked the jazzy concept of this whole segment in both the music and the animation style. It's almost like a love letter to 1930s urban culture, and provides a feel-good atmosphere by its conclusion. 4/5 Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro, Opus 102 by Dmitri Shostakovich: Introduced by Bette Midler featuring pianist Yefim Bronfman, this one features the music playing overtop of an animated rendition of Hans Christian Andersen's "The Steadfast Tin Soldier". It's fun, and the animation really sticks out, providing a neat little adventure with an ending much happier than the original story. 4/5 The Carnival of the Animals (Le Carnival des Animaux), Finale by Camille Saint-Saëns: This is far from my favourite segment, but it definitely has my favourite intro of the film by James Earl Jones. The segment portrays a flock of flamingos and the "odd duck" among them. His interest in a yo-yo distracts him from proper flock activities. It's cute, but nothing really stands out about it. 3/5 The Sorcerer's Apprentice by Paul Dukas: Introduced by Penn & Teller, this classic and most popular segment is brought back for another go. This one depicts Mickey Mouse as Sorcerer Yen Sid's apprentice. He attempts to use magic to make a clean-up job easier, but it gets completely out of hand. This is and will forever be a total classic. I gave it 5 once, and I'll give it 5 again. 5/5 Pomp and Circumstance – Marches 1, 2, 3 and 4 by Edward Elgar: Composer James Levine along with Mickey Mouse introduces this one. Donald and Daisy Duck are featured in a rendition of the 'Noah's Ark' story from the 'Book of Genesis'. Donald is tasked with gathering the animals and loading them two by two, begging the question of why Donald and Daisy don't count as the two ducks on the ark. Anyway, between the song that everyone hears at graduation, and the story about Noah's Ark, I kind of just felt like I was in class. 3/5 Firebird Suite—1919 Version by Igor Stravinsky: Angela Lansbury introduces the final and certainly one of the best segments of the film. It features an elk and a sprite who accidentally awakens a fire spirit. The segment is about the cycle of life, death and renewal, and is a pretty solid closer to this when compared to the original's 'Night on Bald Mountain', which was very similar. 5/5 The only thing I found truly a bit odd about this experience was its length. While the original clocks in at just over two hours, this is just 1 hour and 15 minutes. When Lansbury said that it was time for the final segment, I had wondered if I was watching some edited version. It doesn't really take away from the experience, but it does make it feel like more of a Disney Sunday Night Special as opposed to a full-fledged 'Fantasia' sequel. Still though, I'm very glad I watched it, because a few segments really stuck out for me, providing a pretty grand experience despite its length. , 4/5
0 Comments
 Okay, so it's time for me to finally put all my cards on the table when it comes to 'Beauty and the Beast'. I've been sort of back and forth on this one, but I think I've finally decided that this is another case of a solid flick that ultimately has my respect for what it is, but it has never really been one for me. It's enjoyable, sure, but of my "Renaissance Bubble" I grew up with and really paid attention to ('Little Mermaid' to 'Lion King') this was probably the one I got the least out of. To be blunt, it's simply the whole romance aspect of things. This is just the type of movie that isn't necessarily up my alley.
With that said, I don't deny its history-making success. It was some of the first real use of CG in animation, we hit a mild milestone with Belle being the fifth official Disney Princess, the songs are admittedly pretty great, and the live-action version still remains a high-ranking title for box office success largely due to peoples' fondness of this original. I would probably even argue that nowadays this particular title marks the quintessential 'Beauty and the Beast' story as opposed to anything classically written or filmed - grown to have a more child-friendly tone like so many of Grimm's fairy tales. This is not to say the classic story is no good, it's just that when I say the title 'Beauty and the Beast' to you, chances are, this is the one that pops into your head first, even if it's the version you don't necessarily like. In this version, we begin with some backstory where an enchantress disguised as a beggar seeks shelter from a storm. She offers a cruel prince a rose in exchange for this, but he snubs her. This is where she reveals her true self, and puts a curse on the prince for his arrogance, transforming him into the Beast (Robby Benson) and his servants into different objects. The enchantress then casts a spell on the rose, warning the prince that the curse can only be lifted if he stops being a jerk. If he can love and be loved in return before the last petal of the rose falls, everything goes back to normal. If not, the curse remains permanent. Fast-forward several years, and in a nearby village we are introduced to the beautiful Belle (Paige O'Hara) - the book-obsessed daughter of an inventor named Maurice (Rex Everhart), who has dreams of adventure. She's ever on the avoidance of a brute named Gaston (Richard White) who is all about marrying Belle for her good looks and not a whole lot more. One day, Maurice heads into the woods towards a fair in order to show off his latest invention, but gets himself lost, and imprisoned in the Beast's castle for trespassing. This of course eventually leads to Belle seeking out her father, and eventually crossing paths with the Beast, trading herself as prisoner for her father. As a result, some might say Belle gets a mad case of Stockholm Syndrom. But the idea is that she shows the Beast what it is to love someone beyond their beauty, making Beast and Gaston contrast really quite well. Of course, Belle isn't quite about the Beast from the get-go either. She gets a little nudge from the aforementioned cursed household items; namely a teapot and a teacup respectively named Mrs. Potts (Angela Lansbury), and her son, Chip (Bradley Pierce), a clock named Cogsworth (David Ogden Stiers), and of course everyone's favourite host, the candle, Lumiere (Jerry Orbach) who performs 'Be Our Guest'; the sequence I enjoy the most on a personal level between both this and the live-action film. It does make you wanna pull up a chair and dig in - but then, maybe that's just me. Anyway, the movie is ultimately about finding the beauty within, it's a romance, and for the most part not completely for yours truly. But once again, I can't deny its success, and it has my respect. It was history-making in a few ways. Other than the use of CG (namely for the dancefloor sequence), it was also the first animated film ever to be nominated for a Best Picture Oscar, and wouldn't be followed up until 'Up' in 2009'. It didn't win, but to have the nomination was quite a shocker to most. This ends up being a movie I meet very much in the middle. While it's not really for me, I still have no problem watchin it if someone else really wants to. It's not without its charm, but for me, it would be the next two titles that I'd really take away from my childhood. That, however, will have to wait until my next Disney Catch-Up series. 3/5  Let me start this one off by appropriately catching my audience up on things. This is a suitable place to do it, as 'The Little Mermaid' marks the beginning of the Disney Renaissance era. One could also refer to it as the "5th Age" or, the span of films where Disney animation really became musical. Sure, there has been plenty of music up until this point. But there's something about this era that lends itself to something like Broadway - and in some cases, quite literally. For me, watching these are reminiscent of watching a stage musical a bit more than most of the films up until this point.
Just to cover it all, my reviews have so far covered Disney animation through their Golden Age ('Snow White' to 'Bambi'; 1937-1942), Wartime Era ('Saludos Amigos' to 'The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad'; 1943-1949), Silver Age ('Cinderella' to 'Jungle Book'; 1950-1959), Bronze Age ('Arstocats' to 'Oliver & Company'; 1970-1988). And even though I saw 'Oliver' in theaters, it's interesting to note that even with a somewhat universally defined division between 'Oliver' and 'Mermaid', I have my own little nook of films I've always considered, shall we say, my personal peek of Disney viewing. It started here, when I was 7 years old, and I eventually grew out of the theater-going experience after 'The Lion King', when I was 11 going on 12, and it was all becoming a bit "childish". Of course, I'd eventually rekindle my appreciation for it as a grown-ass man, but that's besides the point. Our main focus is the young Ariel (Jodi Benson)- youngest of King Triton's (Kenneth Mars) daughters, and ever-eager to sneak away and plunder sunken ships with her friend, Flounder (Jason Marin). She brings items she finds to a seagull named Scuttle (Buddy Hackett) who "identifies" them, and I have to admit it's pretty funny to see what he comes up with. The most famous perhaps is the "dinglehopper", or as we know it, a fork - not for eating, but for grooming. Anyway, her curiosity gets her into trouble one day when it leads her to an exploding ship, rescuing of a man named Eric (Christopher Daniel Barnes), who Ariel falls gills over fins for. When her father disapproves of her interests (once he finds out), she is soon led to Ursula (Pat Carroll), the sea witch. Most know what happens at this point, but just in case, Ariel makes a deal to substitute her voice for some legs so she can have a chance with Eric, but has to experience the whole "kiss of true love" thing before her three days are up. This all ends up being a part of a bigger plan Ursula has to knock Triton off his throne and turn him into a sort of creepy lost soul thingy to live in her garden as a sort of slave. Quite honestly, I hadn't seen this in quite a while and forgot how dark it gets in points. I suddenly remembered the garden creatures in this freaking me out a bit when I was a kid. Of course, as a kid, you also had the catchy island rhythms of Sebastian (Samuel E. Wright) to keep the mood light, and I swear, 'Under the Sea' is actually still a pretty catchy tune. I know there's a fair share of people out there who have their problems with the film, be it the story sending the wrong message of "change to get what you want", or some pretty on-the-nose French racism. But for your truly, I must confess that this was a viewing that genuinely hit me in the nostalgias. I can certainly see that the film isn't quite as awesome as I thought it was back in the day (I honestly did), but I did consider it a fun stroll down memory lane. Of course, being the sucker for nostalgia that I am, I may have been a little more into this that I care to admit. But it did take me right back to a carefree time when my biggest problem was getting a few basic math questions right for homework. I've woken up to a few things since then, but I'd still consider it a fun flick. 3/5  This one comes to me as not so much a high recommendation as a title in which Simon Pegg and Nick Frost coexist. I am a fan, especially when they team up with Edgar Wright, but that is not the case here. Still, I did check out the trailer, and to me, it looked like a fun time, if nothing else. Much like I appreciate in so many other films, it seemed to be a bit of a horror flick with plenty of comedy, and looked as though it would be right up my alley. However, sadly, sometimes things don't turn out quite how we would like.
Following the tragic death of his father, Donald Wallace (Finn Cole) enrolls in an exclusive school known as Slaughterhouse. There, he attempts to fit in among his peers, meeting (among others) the odd but friendly roommate, Willoughby Blake (Asa Butterfield), a hardened prefect named Clegg (Tom Rhys Harries), Head of their Sparta House, Meredith Houseman (Simon Pegg) and the school's Headmaster, they call "The Bat" (Michael Sheen). The school is home to a fair share of secrets, one of which involves the Headmaster's scheme of fracking ("the process of injecting liquid at high pressure into subterranean rocks, boreholes, etc. so as to force open existing fissures and extract oil or gas"), Despite warnings from the local harbinger, Woody Chapman (Nick Frost), the fracking continues to the point where it eventually creates a sinkhole, unleashing horrible subterranean half-worm, half-dog creatures with an appetite for human flesh. Unfortunately, to get to this point takes a good long while, and the film really doesn't do anything special until that point. A lot of it is getting to know the characters, but no one really sticks out to me here; not even Pegg or Frost. Meredith spends his time pining for his far away girlfriend, Audrey (Margot Robbie) and Woody is just plain off his rocker, and not in the typically charming Nick Frost way so much as being all drugged up and serious. While it was easy enough to tell not to take a film like this seriously, I can't say I had as much fun as I wish I did. On paper, this sounds great - it's almost like 'Harry Potter' meets 'Attack the Block', except there's no magic and the aliens come from the underground. I can't deny that the gross-out creature effects were good and effective, utilizing a lot of practical over CG, but again, it just takes too long for anything to really happen. For almost the first hour, it's exposition and a sinkhole and then we finally get into the action. 'Attack the Block' is very similar in some ways, but it hits the ground running and you don't stop running until it's over. This was more like waiting for the timer to go off, and nothing particularly special happens in that time. I think this could have been a lot of fun, if it was only cut down a bit. I'm not sure I'd say the film was bad, exactly, but I would suggest that it's pretty forgettable, and that there are other films like it that are much better. As a British creature feature, I would still highly recommend 'Attack the Block' over this any day. This isn't something I feel like I need to go back and watch again, or show off to my friends, and there are several other better Pegg/Frost movies out there much more worth your time. However, if you don't mind waiting for the horror aspect of this to pop up, it does get fun within the last half of it regardless of how you might feel about the first half. It could be a fun thing to throw on absent-mindedly, but nothing very special. It's readily available on Netflix (Canada) if you want to check it out for yourself. 2/5  This was one of those titles I missed because, to be perfectly frank, I got a touch lazy. But in my defense, I was just coming back the week of its release from a three-week trip to the UK. I did, however, promise myself that it would make it into my reviews some time down the line because it seemed like something up my alley as far as it being a fun, dark, family flick as well as something I've been told makes a pretty good Halloween movie (which we probably know by now I'm a sucker for)
Upon finally viewing it, I got pretty much what I expected from it, although I might say it got a bit darker than I thought it might. Take a movie like 'Goosebumps', make it touch scarier, and this is pretty much what you get. For some, this movie will be a fun, albeit creepy family flick they enjoy every October for the spooky season. However, for others, I can just as easily see it being somewhat dismissible as, admittedly, there are several better films of its type out there. Once again, this is something I think is kind of just "fine". It didn't suck, but there wasn't much about it that truly stood out either. Taking place in 1955, New Zebedee, Michigan, our story involves 10-year-old Lewis Barnavelt (Owen Vaccaro) who moves in with his Uncle Jonathan (Jack Black) after his parents were killed in a car crash. The house is less than inviting to the fearful Lewis to begin with, but on his first night he hears a mysterious ticking coming from the walls. This leads to him finding out, perhaps the hard way, that his Uncle and a neighbor named Florence Zimmerman (Cate Blanchett) are respectively a warlock and a witch. Meanwhile, at school, Lewis lives a live of overall unpopularity as the new kid in town. He makes a friend named Tarby Corrigan (Sunny Suljic), who's running for class president. Upon his win, he then abandons Lewis like a jerk. However, Lewis convinces Jonathan to teach him magic, which he intends to use to impress Tarby and regain his friendship. This unfortunately leads to magic-gone-wrong, with the resurrection of a sinister warlock and former friend named Isaac Izard (Kyle MacLachlan). The man had a personal vendetta against Jonathan before his passing, which is a whole backstory explanation, but the clock in the walls is seemingly meant to drive Jonathan mad and now Jonathan wants to find the clock and figure out its purpose. I'd say for the most part this is a movie that gives us the old 'Spider-Man' chestnut of "with great power comes great responsibility". It certainly borrows from a few different things to create its magical world within the house (I still haven't mentioned the enchanted furniture). If I had to describe it, I'd say it's something along the lines of 'Harry Potter' meets 'Goosebumps' with perhaps a dose of 'Casper'. All in all, I enjoyed it for what it was, but I can't deny that there was an awful lot of familiarity to it. I'd aim it towards an audience of preteens, where it's family friendly, but just dark enough to have some real atmosphere to it. By far, the most interesting factor to me is the fact that this came from, director Eli Roth (one who may be considered the king of "torture porn" with his 'Hostel' movies) and writer Eric Kripke (known for the dark and suggestive superhero comedy, 'The Boys'). One might see shades of them through some of the darker parts of this, but I'm not sure it's quite dark enough to be considered "scary" for kids. Heck, it may even be a decent toe-dip into darker material for kids. It's definitely darker than 'Goosebumps', but much lighter than something like 'The Haunting'. I find the humor kind of falls flat sometimes, but again, for a younger audience, this could still be a lot of fun. 3/5  Once again, we begin a month of Disney animation recapping, starting with 'Sleeping Beauty' - one of the Disney Animated films I tend to have in the back of my head somewhere, as the idea has never appealed to me much. I remember renting this a very long time ago, when Disney Vault Limited Edition VHS tapes were all the rage. I pretty well just shrugged it off as something neat, but not really my thing. I gotta say, my opinion hasn't changed a whole bunch.
Princess Aurora is born to King Stefan and Queen Leah. A holiday is proclaimed to pay homage to her, where she is betrothed to Prince Phillip at her christening in an effort to unite kingdoms with King Hubert, and is given gifts from the good fairies, Flora, Fauna and Merryweather. The fairies all come bearing gifts; Flora gifts her with beauty, Fauna with song, but Merryweather's gift is interrupted by the evil fairly, Maleficent, who's all pissed off about not being invited to the party. Maleficent curses Aurora by proclaiming that on her 16th birthday, Aurora would prick her finger on the spindle of a spinning wheel and drop dead before sunset. This causes Merryweather to rethink her gift, and she uses her magic to make it so that instead of dying, Aurora will just fall into a deep sleep, until "true love's kiss" breaks the spell. The fairies soon take Aurora under their protection, knowing that Maleficent will not rest until Aurora is killed. The child grows up with them in a hidden forest cottage, awaiting the day she turns 16. So, the main plot of this story is a pretty weird one, considering that it's a 16-year event that all stems back from not being invited to a party. That said, it's pretty damn incredible how much of a love/hate relationship I have with this movie. For a good chunk of it, i see it pretty much the same way I see 'Cinderella' - it's not really my cup of tea, but there's nothing really wrong with it, per se. However, this does have a lot that stands out about it, starting with Maleficent. Her motivation for revenge is absolutely ridiculous, but that's kind of what makes her such a great villain. Imagine not inviting someone to a house party, and just because of that, that person plots a 16-year revenge that will lead to your first-born's eventual death. Thus far, I'd consider her the single most evil Disney villain, at least as far as I've recapped - the Queen from 'Snow White', a close second, with her motivation being jealousy over beauty. Speaking of 'Snow White', there are quite a few similarities here. This is almost like they took the very basics of 'Snow White' (as in curse causes deep sleep that can only be broken by a kiss, and the villain's motivation is just jealousy) and made it better. Among other things I really like about it include the interaction between the three fairies, the beautifully painted backgrounds, artwork and animation, and about the last half hour or so of the movie which includes a pretty awesome chase/fight between Prince Phillip and a dragon version of Maleficent where she even tells Phillip he's about to face "all the power of Hell" - pretty badass for a Disney villain, and again, she's one of the best parts about this movie, even if her motivation is laughable. Of course, I have to go back to what I said about comparing it to 'Cinderella' as far as personal taste goes. There's a lot I didn't like about this movie, and the biggest beef i have about it is that Aurora just plain doesn't allow you to give a damn. She is there to look pretty, sing with her lovely voice, and befriend woodland critters. She is the cardboard cutout version of a Disney Princess, and I can't really wrap my head around why we care about what happens to her, other than Maleficent's plan being extremely cruel. While I put the villain here up high on the villain list, Aurora's pretty damn low on the Princess list - maybe one step above Snow White, because at least Aurora wasn't dishing out terrible female stereotypes at the time... well, other than helplessness. This is pretty well balanced between what's good about it and what's bad about it, but I'd probably go out on a limb to say that the good somewhat outweighs the bad. I'd probably say there's more to like here than dislike, and if nothing else, it's sort of a perfect example of what "Disney Magic" is all about. It's very "fairy tale", takes you to a beautiful fantasy land, and uses literal magic throughout its entirety. It's my understanding that the original 'Sleeping Beauty' was a ballet production, so a lot of the music, though I find it very bland, does fit quite well. This is another Disney movie I can't help but meet in the middle. It's good for what it is, but I don't see a whole lot of repeat viewings in the future. 3/5  This month's Kevin Smith catch-up wraps up with one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen. I tend to cut Kevin a lot of slack, as he's an incredibly likable, inspiring, and does better on catering to his fans than critics. The dude's not out there to win an Oscar, he's out there to make his fans happy, and push potential filmmakers to just go for it. All that said, however, I really can't give this one to him, and to perhaps no one's real surprise, I'm on the negative side of it. Indeed, this was one of those movies I very nearly walked away from in the middle of it.
We follow the two clerks from 'Tusk', Colleen Collette (Lily-Rose Depp) and Colleen McKenzie (Harley Quinn Smith); two teenage girls who study yoga with their teacher, Yogi Bayer (Justin Long), work for the Eh-2-Zed convenience store, and spend a lot of their spare time rocking out in their band, Glamthrax. They are invited to a senior party by Colleen M's crush, Hunter (Austin Butler) and his friend, Gordon (Tyler Posey). Eventually this leads to a would-be ritual Satan-worshipping sacrifice, but all is disrupted by a bunch of (and I'm not making this up) stereotypically German Nazi bratwursts dressed in Canadian Mounty garb. These things kill the guys in a most grotesquely odd manner, and the Colleens escape, but are immediately arrested for their murders. At school, the Colleens learned that the Nazi Party once influenced Winnipeg, and a branch of Canadian Nazis emerged from it, led by self-proclaimed Canadian Führer, Adrien Arcand (Haley Joel Osment) and his partner in crime, Andronicus Arcane (Ralph Garman). Arcand was eventually arrested, but Arcane disappeared. Of course this all leads to a weird explanation as to why the Bratzis are even a thing, and the girls are helped by Guy LaPointe (Johnny Depp) who believes they are innocent, and upon acquiring Bratzi evidence, himself, helps them get to the bottom of things. And even that was almost too much explanation for a plot so strangely put together. It's abundantly clear that this movie is a bit of a middle finger towards critics - especially when you learn what the big villainous plan is near the end. It's something Smith seems to have made special for his daughter, and his die hard fans who all have the same reason for liking it; it's stupid, goofy fun. While that may be true, speaking as a Canadian, I can honestly say they went a little too overboard with the stereotypes here. Bearing in mind that's coming from someone who can freely admit that he eats Canadian stereotypes up, that's saying something. The whole "Aboot" thing is used to an absolute fault, and knowledge of Canadian music seems a bit lost here as "Oh Canada" seems to be the front-running song throughout the film. I further just have personal beef here, as it seemed to really be trying to be 'Scott Pilgrim vs The World' with the way it introduces characters, and a lot of visuals accompanied by quick humor. The difference is 'Scott Pilgrim' is actually much closer to what some Canadians are like. Taking place in Toronto, it seemed they clearly did their homework. This is really much more of a stereotype thing, which again is great a lot of the time, but here it felt so forced. Then I realize this is Part 2 of a trilogy ('Moose Jaws' is next) and I've gotta say, Kevin's directorial skills are fast-waning; although as a Jay & Silent Bob fan, I did still like 'Reboot', which was a great way to cater to his fans after this one. I think it's pretty safe to say that 'Yoga Hosers' is where Smith hits his rock bottom. I didn't like 'Tusk' a whole lot either, but at least I laughed in certain spots. This just didn't really give me anything, and I'd consider Guy LaPointe the only real saving grace. But I'm not about to rip apart Harley or Lily, as they are still a couple of fresh face to the industry and we all need to start somewhere. Harley has already been put in a Tarantino film ('Once Upon a Time in Hollywood') and Lily-Rose seems to be doing okay in the Indie film circuit. I hope to see them both make it, but as far as this particular film goes, it's a bit of a blotch on their resumes. I still love Kevin Smith, consider this a simple weak point in his career. Every director has something like that, eventually. His biggest fans know and love him best for his Jersey movies, so as long as we still have those, we're in good shape. 1/5  This is another title that goes all the way back to my early childhood, as we rented it a few times over from whatever local video stores existed at the time. Speaking for myself, I always loved this movie in my childhood. I saw it as a fun, fantasy adventure, full of imagination and frankly dream-like. Much like 'Alice in Wonderland', it helped contribute to my love of imagination in film.
Now, allow me to address the elephant in the room briefly. We all know that there are certain depictions in this film that are stereotypical and simply do not hold up. Watching this as a kid, certain things just kind of were what they were, and the internet just wasn't a thing. If we wanted any information on things, we'd have to either know someone who was personally effected by things, or have to find a book to read on the subject, which we probably wouldn't think to go out of our way to do. Since that time, however, we have been well-educated, and a lot of Disney's not-so-proud moments stand out a little bit more, somewhat tainting our childhood perception of these films, perhaps for the better. The film opens in London England in the early 1900s, where we meet the imaginative Darling children, John (Paul Collins), Michael (Tommy Luske) and their storytelling older sister, Wendy (Kathryn Beaumont). The stories Wendy tells are about Peter Pan (Bobby Driscoll), and the power behind the stories is so strong that all of the kids believe in him. Meanwhile, parents George and Mary (Hans Conried and Heather Angel, respectively) pass it all off as nonsense, and the kids imagination even sets Mr. Darling off, who seems to want these kids to be a bit more ordinary and grow up. One night, Peter Pan himself comes to the Darling household to hear stories from Wendy to bring back to his friends, the Lost Boys. However, when Wendy tells him about their need to grow up, Peter brings Wendy and the others to Neverland, where they'll never have to grow up, and Wendy can stay and tell stories to the Lost Boys. Little do the kids know that they will soon have to deal with all aspects of Neverland, including the dastardly Captain Hook (also Hans Conried) and his goofy sidekick, Smee (Bill Thompson). What unfolds is a fun, animated adventure, unfortunately now highlighted by racial overtones that just kind of make one uncomfortable nowadays. It's sadly one of the worst examples of a movie that has aged horribly by today's standards. That said, I can't really deny that most of the film does have a nostalgic tie to it, and the non-controversial parts of it are still entertaining nonetheless. For me, pretty much any scene that features Captain Hook and Smee, especially when blended with a clock-eating crocodile, are funny and still hold up. He's one of the first comedic villains I can really think of in one of these, and that's a bit of a rarity for Disney animation. I'm hard pressed to think of many examples, except perhaps Yzma from 'The Emperor's New Groove', or any number of bumbling sidekicks. And speaking of that, Smee really does have this odd charm to him. It's unfortunate how the film has a fairly strong focus on all of the things that date it, namely the Native American stereotypes. It boils right down to full on songs which, watching them play out nowadays, just have me cringing as they're basically just mockery. So the film is this crazy balance of extremes, between the fun villainous portrayal of Captain Hook and the... well, you know. It picks up, and it drops off, all the way throughout. and although part of me still enjoys it, and embraces the nostalgia it provides, the other part of me see it as a once classic throw-away at the same time. At the end of the day, it's something you just plain have to use your judgment on. For me, it's the lowest end of a pass, based on the aspects of it I enjoyed. 3/5  This is one among the Disney animation collection that I have seen, but it was long enough ago that seeing it now may as well be a first time. I actually forgot just how enjoyable this movie was for me as a kid. When certain characters in this tale of wonder popped up, I was hit with waves of nostalgia, and I concluded after seeing it again this time around that it must have been a part of where I got my imagination from. Much like Alice, I found things like schooling rather dull and had "my own little world", while in the meantime I took reality for granted.
The film opens with Alice (Kathryn Beaumont) in the middle of a history lesson from her older sister, expressing her desire for adventure to her cat, Dinah. She suddenly spots a white rabbit in a waistcoat, seemingly running late for something important. When Alice gives chase, the rabbit leads her down a large rabbit hole, which leads to a room with a tiny door that leads to Wonderland. Once she drinks a shrinking potion, she finds her way into Wonderland where she meets the likes of several strange characters like Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the Cheshire Cat, the Mad Hatter, the March Hare, the smoking Caterpillar, and of course the dreaded Queen of Hearts who doesn't even make an appearance until about 20 minutes before the film ends - admittedly a tense 20 minutes though. Personally, I found that there's a lot of similarity between this and 'The Wizard of Oz'. Both Dorothy and Alice end up in magical lands, meet some very interesting characters on a journey, and are (at least eventually) just trying to get home. Both characters also seem to realize how much they take reality for granted when they're basically overwhelmed with too much strange. This is a valuable lesson for the kids watching, but both films make sure there's plenty of fun to be had along the way. To top it all off, both are based on classic books, but the thing to note is that 'Alice's Adventures in Wonderland' came first. Although nowadays it's often seen as one of Disney's many masterpieces, it's funny to think that it was actually critically panned upon its release. The year was 1951, so a part of me wonders if things like having a day-dreamy imagination were a little more frowned upon; accepted, but considered a "waste of time" or something along those lines. It even bombed at the box office for its initial release, forcing Disney to write-off over a million dollars. It wouldn't take long, however, until this became a cult classic of sorts, and Disney's everlasting wish of making money would once again come true, when it was re-released in 1974. Nowadays, it's a little less about daydreaming and a little more about Alice potentially experiencing some sort of drug trip. Honestly though, either way works just fine, as long as that lesson is there at the end. Going back to the 'Wizard of Oz' comparison, I will say that final lesson is really where they differ. In "Oz', Dorothy is on a constant journey to try to get home, and in the end, it's very much a lesson about taking what you have for granted. In 'Alice', it touches on that slightly, but at the end life just kinda goes on. No twists, no turns, Alice wakes up and the movie just ends. However, in the book, upon waking up, she convinces her older sister to sit by the riverbank and experience the fantasy for herself. So that leads me to believe that while a similar lesson is in place, a part of the takeaway from 'Alice' is also to not be afraid to daydream and let your imagination run wild. I'd be curious to actually read the book for myself and see what similarities/differences there are, as this is still seen by many as the best film adaptation of the book. The follow-up story, 'Through the Looking-Glass' never saw the light of day with Disney animation, but I often wonder if that may be for the best. What I really like about this movie in particular is that any way you look at it, it's the perfect example of a film that allows you to escape; perhaps my favorite thing about movies in general. For me, this is like the film equivalent to whatever dream you experience during a light nap; when you just drift off for an hour and a half to two hours, wake up and suddenly remember where you are. It's one of those films that's actually a bit of an experience because it's so fantastical, and it's definitely a personal fave among the Disney classics. It's the very definition of a film you can freely lose your mind to. But don't mind us fans - we're all a little mad here. 5/5  As I take my journey through each and every Walt Disney Animation Studios title, I'm bound to come across a few that weren't particularly made for me. 'Cinderella' is one of these titles. While there's plenty to like about it, the overall concept isn't something that I really think about, and the character just isn't relatable to me in any real way. As a result, I have a hard time getting on board. But make no mistake, none of it has to do with it being too "girly".
For the record, I think Cinderella is a perfectly relatable character for anyone who has ever felt trapped under their parents strict, watchful eye, forbidden to do certain things, or even caught up in the wrong family. The fact of the matter is, however, this was made for an audience that doesn't involve me. However, I can respect the title for its position on the long list of Disney classics, and it IS kinda cool to see that she has to go through some crap to get to become a princess. She's not just a princess from the get-go, and that's always a good thing; to show a certain amount of struggle in order to reach such a high-class position. Cinderella (Ilene Woods) once had a loving family with her real parents. Once the mother dies, the father remarries to Lady Tremaine (Eleanor Audley) who brings her two bratty daughters along, Drizella and Anastasia (Rhoda Williams and Lucille Bliss, respectively). Eventually, Cinderella's father passes as well, and she's stuck with her Step Mother and Step Sisters who make her do everything while they live their lives. Her only real friends are the mice and birds who visit her, headed by our comic relief characters, Jaq and Gus (James MacDonald). Meanwhile, Prince Charming (William Phipps/Mike Douglas) of the nearby kingdom is all iffy about getting married and starting a family while his father (Luis Van Rooten) longs to hear the pitter-patter of little feet before his time is gone. The King issues a decree that all maidens on the village attend a Royal Ball. The step sisters and stepmother sabotage Cinderella's attempts at attending, wanting her to have nothing, and she is left alone that night. But then her Fairy Godmother (Verna Felton) shows up and grants her wish to go to the Ball, but only until midnight. Then we all know the rest with the glass slipper, and if you don't know how this ends by now, you may have been living under a rock for quite some time. Although it's not particularly for yours truly, the film still has plenty of merits to speak of. The animation is pretty solid for the time, the singing is a little more subtle than some other Disney movies, and flows rather organically, and I can't deny that one feels the tension behind Lady Tremaine. She's actually a very good villain in that she comes off as a potentially real character. Although it's a fairy tale, the villain is someone who could easily be based in reality. I'll further add that the mice are fun characters, and although she's only in it for a few moments, the Fairy Godmother is very likable. She comes in to give Cinderella a boost, but she doesn't spoil her rotten entirely, given the midnight curfew. For the kind of movie it is, it's not bad, I just have a taste that goes in another direction. 3/5  Yet another one of Disney's package films of the 40's; second to last of them, and leans a little more towards 'Make Mine Music' in style. Once again, we're spread out with a total of seven segments, so the review will be a touch long-winded, but I'll do my best to keep it short and sweet.
Much with 'Make Mine Music', it features segments that are punctuated with musical tones and poetry, and you get to guess how much of it may have been originally intended for the almighty 'Fantasia'. The whole thing is narrated by Buddy Clark - a man known more for his soundtrack performances than acting. He is also the man who sings the title song with his delightful, crooning voice. One by one, as usual, the segments are introduced, each offering a somewhat different artistic perspective. 'Once Upon a Wintertime': Frances Langford sings the title song, and we follow two young lovers named Jenny and Joe (neither with dialogue) while a couple of rabbits imitate most of their same moves. It's bright, chipper and cute, and would probably make for a nice addition to any Christmas soundtrack. Not my favorite kinda thing, but good for what it is. 3/5 'Bumble Boogie': This one WAS my favorite; Freddy Martin and His Orchestra, along with Jack Fina on the piano crank out a very jazzy, fast and upbeat version of Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov's 'Flight of the Bumblebee'. All the while, it follows this poor bumblebee as it keeps seemingly getting attacked and chased by surreal-looking instruments and musical notes. It's very artistic-looking and fun, and yes, it was originally considered for 'Fantasia'. 5/5 'The Legend of Johnny Appleseed': Dennis Day narrates a Disney retelling of American folk hero, John Chapman, otherwise, of course, known as 'Johnny Appleseed'. His nicknamed was earned after he spends most of his life planting apple trees across Mi-Western America while spreading Christianity. I'm not a fan, but that doesn't mean it's not fine for its target audience. I have this really weird bias against pioneer day stuff. I have a very hard time enjoying any of it, and find it a bit boring. We do all have our thing we'll never go out of our way to watch though. With that said, it pretty much mirrors how I feel about 'Once Upon a Wintertime'. 3/5 'Little Toot': I'm fairly certain I had this in the form of a read-along book on tape when I was a kid. One way or another, this was something I remembered from my childhood, so there was a bit of nostalgia that popped up. I pretty well forgot all about it until now. It tells of a small tugboat named 'Little Toot' who wanted to be just like his father, 'Big Toot', but couldn't stay out of trouble, and never seems to learn. It did trigger some nostalgia, but not quite enough. Once again, passable, but nothing too special. 3/5 'Trees': Joyce Kilmer's 1913 poem, 'Trees', is here performed by Fred Waring and the Pennsylvanians. For yours truly, I found the song slow, dull, boring, like... watching trees grow? The artistic style of the segment, however, is gorgeous. Each scene is essentially a nature painting brought to life, as it cycles through the seasons and the changing of the trees. All in all, it's actually a great segment if you can just get past the slow drone of the recitation. 3/5 'Blame It on the Samba': A down and out Donald Duck and José Carioca (the Brazillian parrot) meet the Aracuan Bird (who we first met in 'The Three Caballeros'), who introduces them to the Samba, whisking their sadness away with the playful, fun dance. The song is an English-dubbed version of Apanhei-te, Cavaquinho by Ernesto Nazareth, performed by the Dinning Sisters, and featuring organist Ethel Smith in a short, live-action performance. I actually find the song quite catchy, the Aracuan Bird is funny, and it was good enough to make me ignore the fact that José already introduced Donald to the Samba back in 'The Three Caballeros'. 4/5 'Pecos Bill': In the final segment, Roy Rogers (along with his horse, Trigger), Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers tell the story of Pecos Bill to Bobby Driscoll and Luana Patten (who we just saw talking to a bunch of creepy dummies in 'Fun and Fancy Free). The story tells of a child who was raised by Coyotes, later to become the world's greatest "buckaroo" (which I definitely did not hear right the first time around). Once again, due to smoking content, it was later strongly censored, but revived once it landed on Disney+. Once again, this is just okay, but I probably got a bit more out of it that 'Once Upon a Wintertime' or 'Johnny Appleseed'. It's a little more on par with 'Little Toot'. 3/5 Aside from a couple of the more surreal segments, this movie just works out to be another perfectly average film of its kind. I'm really looking forward to getting through all of these, as I find them a little more challenging to review. I can break down each segment, and work out an average rating, which makes things a touch easier. But when you get segments like this, unless it really speaks to me, it can be hard to say that anything is either terrible or awesome. These will almost always work out to be a 3 or, at best, 4, just due to how average it all works out to be. Like most of these (and it's starting to get frustrating because I want to give more), it works out to be a perfectly passable film, harmless, decent for the kids as well as the cultured (being a bit of Disney history), and something that makes for good background entertainment. It doesn't have the scope of 'Fantasia', or is particularly memorable, but there's really nothing wrong with it either. Here's thanking my lucky stars that the next and final package film, just in time for October, will be 'The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad', featuring what I can already say is my all-time favorite segment, 'The Legend of Sleepy Hollow'... so gimme a couple more months, and these will be much less boring! 3/5  Originally released when I was 12, going on 13, 'Casper' actually ended up being a sort of landmark film for yours truly. At the time of its release, I wasn't exactly popular, so there was a big part of me that related to Casper's loneliness. I also developed my first celeb crush on Christina Ricci with this, at the time, so it fit pretty well 12-year-old me. Watching it nowadays though, interestingly enough, I actually found it to be a bit deeper than I remember.
'Casper' is, of course, based on those old Harvey Entertainment cartoons (funnily enough the name of the father and daughter in this), and it more or less plays out the same way. Casper (Malachi Pearson) is just a lonely ghost looking for a friend. The problem is that his uncles, Stretch (Joe Nipote), Fatso (Brad Garrett) and Stinky (Joe Alaskey) constantly scare and drive off any potential candidates. That is until one day, while watching TV, Casper stumbles on a news report that tells of a paranormal psychologist, Dr. James Harvey (Bill Pullman) and his daughter, Kat (Ricci). Harvey reveals that all he wants to do is help ghosts in need; seeing their unfinished business through so they can cross over. Combining that with a little instant crush of his own on Kat, Casper works his magic to bring it to the attention of the latest inheritor of Whipstaff Manor (the house the ghosts haunt), Carrigan Crittenden (Cathy Moriarty), who, along with her assistant, Dibbs (Eric Idle), has recently discovered that the manor is haunted, and she want the ghosts out of the house in order to find a mysterious treasure that was revealed in her late Father's will - the same will that left her the property. Casper's plan works, and eventually he gets to meet and befriend Kat while Dr. Harvey makes the effort to counsel the three uncles - though pretty much none of that is ever seen, as these ghosts take great enjoyment in messing around with him. Will the ghosts leave, an give Carrigan access to this treasure? Or will Dr. Harvey and Kat discover that they have enough in common with these ghosts to let the stick around? Before I get into it all, let me get some of the negative out of the way. Opinions on this one are very 50/50, and it's not exactly regarded as a good movie. I managed to pick out a lot of what people might see bad about it, like some of the humor (a lot of it can get pretty crude), or often the writing not making a whole lot of sense (Why does Carrigan inherit the manor from her father when it's clearly revealed that Casper's father lived there? Why do Casper and Kat run upstairs to keep the Lazarus potion from falling into the wrong hands only to answer a door and just go right back down to where they were?) But the truth is, even as an adult, this one isn't lost on me. And not even in that "guilty pleasure" context, like 'Space Jam'. A lot of the good in this comes from learning a little something about Casper, and developing his character much more than he was ever developed in the cartoons. The film takes a few moments to have some good conversation between Casper and Kat, and we learn things like how Casper originally died, but without having to do a whole flashback scene. I also still really enjoy the whole scene between the two involving the lighthouse, and later in Kat's room. The whole idea that Casper can't remember his life is interesting, and it's subtle, but when he remembers he doesn't have a reflection you can kinda see this realization on his face that he hasn't seen his own face in who knows how long. Then of course there's the famous line "can I keep you?" which I always used to think was a bit corny. Now, I'm seeing this as not so much a romantic notion, but illustrating the fact that all of these people have come into his... afterlife?... only to be scared off by very his presence. It's kinda his way of saying "can you stay with me, and not run away?" Admittedly, that tugs on my heartstrings, as I DO know what it's like to be looked at with the "ew, get away from me" gaze. It has even been vocalized, which is nasty, but that's more 12-year-old me than now... exactly the same age as Casper and Kat, and the age I was when I first saw the film. I do have this one on my Halloween 2017 list of Family Friendly Halloween Classics, and the perspective I had on it a few years ago was pretty much the same as now. It might be kinda silly, sloppy and even kinda stupid in parts, but there's really nothing incredibly wrong with it - save for maybe a few prime time curses like "for Christ's sake" and using the word "bitch" a coupe of times. The overall reality is that one can still gather the family around to watch it, and it actually holds up fairly well. You may even get a bit more from it, like I did this time around. While it's not exactly a gem to a lot of people out there, it's perfectly passable for what it is, and I feel like despite its flaws, it gets a bad rap. Don't take it too seriously - its target audience is preteens, after all. 3/5  This review might take a little while, as this isn't just your average, old school Disney animated film. What we have here instead is a classical musical that lasts just over two hours, and it speaks to our inner artists in a way that allows us to really appreciate what it is to be a little cultured... even if there are racist moments within it.
The idea is to have a bunch of pieces of classical music blend together with animated, visual interpretations of what the music was trying to say (to a degree). It's hosted by Mast of Ceremonies, American composer, Deems Taylor, and he takes us through the film, introducing each piece as we go. However, I do find that he introduces each piece by telling us a little too much about what we're about to see. There's not much left to the imagination because of this, but it doesn't make the pieces any less enjoyable either. Really, this is pretty timeless stuff - all save for one piece in particular, but we'll get to that. For this review, I'm breaking it into pieces, as I see it being the only really fair way to tackle it. Toccata and Fugue in D Minor by Johann Sebastian Bach: An enjoyable, abstract piece of work that combines silhouettes of the orchestra with animation reflecting the instruments and the music they play. It's simple, and it sets the mood for everything we're about to see. 4/5 The Nutcracker Suite by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky: Very little to do with the Christmas classic tune, this piece covers songs 'Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy', 'Chinese Dance', 'Arabian Dance', 'Russian Dance', 'Dance of the Flutes' and 'Waltz of the Flowers', each featuring a variety of animated dances, depicting the changing of the seasons. 3/5 The Sorcerer's Apprentice by Paul Dukas: When people think of 'Fantasia', their minds will automatically leap to one of tow pieces. This one is the first, which depicts Mickey Mouse as Sorcerer Yen Sid's apprentice. He attempts to use magic to make a clean-up job easier, but it gets completely out of hand. I still find this one to be the most entertaining of the pieces, personally. 5/5 Rite of Spring by Igor Stravinsky: Through selected pieces of the ballet score, this one depicts Earth's beginnings. Another one I find very entertaining, it goes from Earth's formation through to the extinction of the dinosaurs. This one might be considered to be a little controversial for people with a creationism history, but seeing as I personally lean towards science, it really does it for me, as this stuff fascinates me. 4/5 Intermission/Soundtrack: 'Fantasia' is very much represented as a concert show, as opposed to an actual movie. As such, it is complete with a slight intermission, a fun jam session, and a humorous introduction to the film's soundtrack, in which we see a line imitating various instruments with waves. Much like a real intermission, I can take or leave this part, and it won't be included in my ratings. It's sole purpose is to be filler. The Pastoral Symphony by Ludwig van Beethoven: This is the big one that really stirred up the controversy. The piece portrays tidbits of Greek/Roman culture, giving us a variety of mythological figures which include one particular racially insensitive centaur named Sunflower. Just Google it, and you'll see how it's an unfortunate fly in the ointment of an otherwise beautiful film, let alone the piece itself. 2/5 Dance of the Hours by Amilcare Ponchielli: A fun piece that depicts the stages of the 24 hour day. Morning is represented by Madame Upanova and her ostriches; afternoon is represented by Hyacinth Hippo and her servants; evening is represented by Elephanchine and her bubble-blowing elephant troupe; night is represented by Ben Ali Gator and his troop of alligators. 3/5 Night on Bald Mountain by Modest Mussorgsky / Ave Maria by Franz Schubert: Going back to that I said about 'The Sorcerer's Apprentice', this is the other piece that tends to pop into people's heads when 'Fantasia' is brought up. also, much like 'The Sorcerer's Apprentice', this is a personal favorite bit of the film. 'Night on Bald Mountain' shows us midnight where a demon named Chernabog (or for all intents and purposes, Satan). he summons evil, restless spirits from their graves to essentially party for a while until 'Ave Maria' comes along, vanquishing the darkness, and showing us the dawn of a new day. 5/5 To close it off, it can be said with all honesty that this isn't just something I'd be able to throw on whenever I felt like it. It's very much something one needs to be in the mood for, especially as a full 2 hours plus. That may be fairly average movie running time, but not for Disney animation. With that said, however, this does add a touch of culture and class to Disney's library (again, taking Sunflower out of the equation). Pieces like 'The Sorcerer's Apprentice' and 'Night on Bald Mountain' have since become far better known due to this film, and are both great instrumental tunes to listen to around Halloween. For the most part, it has aged nicely, despite its glaring problems. 4/5  This one comes from a children's novel called 'The Adventures of Pinocchio', written by Italian author, Carlo Collodi, and released in 1883. Through the years in between the book and the film, Pinocchio had already become a pretty famous hero of sorts, with his story having largely to do with being a jerk, going through a sort of "Hell", and finalizing it with a rebirth. And honestly, it's pretty spot on with the subject matter.
One nice thing about this title is that it's pretty well timeless, as opposed to something like 'Snow White', which hasn't aged all that well. This one has all the right ingredients for kids to take a few valuable life lessons from it. To this day, it remains one of my top picks for classic Disney, even if it does reach points of being truly disturbing. We open things up with Jiminy Cricket (Cliff Edwards) who tells the story, which begins with him stumbling on an old inventor's home named Gepetto (Christian Rub). He lives among a variety of knickknacks, clocks, toys, etc. But what really catches Jiminy's eye is a marionette puppet, who Gepetto has named Pinocchio (Dickie Jones). Being a lonely old man, that night, Gepetto makes a "wish upon a star" (Oscar winner for Best Original Song) that his puppet comes to life, and gives him a son to take care of. Enter the Blue Fairy (Evelyn Venable), who brings Pinocchio to life. She tells him that he can become a real boy if he follows his conscience in the right direction. In one aspect of the movie I really enjoy, she ends up making Jiminy Cricket his official conscience. He's to guide Pinocchio in the right direction, leading him away from the path of temptation. The thing is, much like with any real human being, sometimes that little voice just isn't there, and sometimes we even ignore it with our curiosity. As things unfold, Pinocchio does, indeed, find himself heading down that wrong path, largely guided by a fox named Foulfellow, or "Honest John" (Walter Catlett) and a cat named Gidean (Mel Blanc) who for whatever reason live among humans without being noticed. My take is that they're characters represented by these animals, especially the fox being known for being so sly. This also ties into all the disturbing stuff that happens later on involving bad little boys transforming into donkeys - a scene that may very well just scare your kids into being good. Even watching it now, I kinda wondered how I sat through those scenes in my youth. Of course, as the adventure continues, Pinocchio learns a lot about what it means to be selfless, brave, and honest, especially when he discovers that lying makes his nose grow... which happens far less than I remember. The whole climax of the movie is very impressive with its animation as well as tension, as it tosses us into the ocean where we come face to face with a whale. The film has a happy ending, of course, but for a little while there it gets pretty crazy - a far cry from the black and white simplicity of 'Snow White'. So here's one I might recommend for the whole family. There are some pretty freaky sequences here, but the lessons embedded within the film are nothing to ignore, and it does a good job of getting them through. It's pretty basic stuff, but it's done fairly subtly, and it doesn't preach the issue. It might just make your kids think twice before they invite that bad influence of a friend over, and I can honestly say that I wish I sat down to watch it more throughout my childhood because of that. 4/5  Ever since I got Disney Plus, I thought it would be a good idea to take a time-travelling journey through Disney's vault. But instead of making it another tedious project that I can't keep up with, I figured I'd try to squeeze it into any month that has 5 Thursdays, meaning the next set of these will be set for July, October, December, and so on, until I go through all of Disney's animated features. So yeah, this is just gonna be a thing now. Today, we start with 1937's 'Snow White and the Seven Dwarves'.
A couple of things to cover first and foremost - for one, I find this to be a product of its time, and it simply hasn't aged well when it comes to certain aspects. At the time, this was the world's first full-length animated feature, and it was unprecedented technology done without the handiness of a computer. I won't go into full detail, but the process of animation in the late 1930's was something to be admired. It was hard work, and animation has come a very long way since then, but one can't really deny that animation as a whole has its roots in this film. Getting into the story, it's the classic fairy tale, brought to us from the Brothers Grimm back in 1812, but tidied up just a bit. A vane and evil queen (Lucille La Verne) is all pissed off about apparently not being the "fairest in the land", according to her magic mirror (Moroni Olsen). As it turns out, the mirror sees the princess, Snow White (Adriana Caselotti) as "the fairest one of all", which prompts the queen to send out a huntsman (Stuart Buchanan) to assassinate her. When the huntsman manages to catch up to Snow White, he can't go through with it, and sends her running into the woods where she has a nervous breakdown, and is then comforted by a bunch of woodland critters. The critters lead her to a little cottage in the woods where she can rest up, but not before *cringe* cleaning up the house with the help of all these woodland critters. The little cottage ends up being home to seven dwarves; Doc (Roy Atwell), Dopey (Eddie Collins), Sleepy, Grumpy (both Pinto Colvig), Sneezy (Billy Gilbert), Happy (Otis Harlan) and Bashful (Scotty Mattraw). They all hit it off as soon as the dwarves find out she can *cringe* cook. She then plays a bit of a mother figure to them, and finds them ultimately cute, which brings me to her character - yeah, she kinda sucks. Aside from the abilities to cook, clean, sing and pick wildflowers, she's pretty much helpless, and far too cutesy. It's pretty cringe-worthy stuff, for the most part. Going back to the story, however, we ALL know what happens. At this point, it really shouldn't be a spoiler, but the queen disguises herself, gives Snow White a poisoned apple, and she accepts and takes a bite like an idiot. To me, this has always been a lesson for kids simply not to accept things that strangers offer, or they'll put you in a potential coma that only "love's first kiss" can get you out of (you thought of 'Shrek' just now, right? Not 'Snow White'?) This kinda turns the film on its head, because now here's a girl who's been drugged, and only someone who wants to kiss her passed out body can revive her - so yeah, I get why this maybe isn't the best thing to show your kids nowadays in order to send a message. In closing, I'm not here to start a whole thing with this movie. We all have an opinion, and at the end of the day, if you don't wanna watch it, just don't watch it. However, I think that despite how its viewed nowadays, I can still admire the film for what it managed to do, technically. Most people my age, or a bit younger, remember when 'Toy Story' came out in 1995, changing the face of animated cinema forever. Well, this was essentially that for 1937, and it's pretty well the title that sparked it all. To my amazement, it still looks really good by today's standards, right down to character expression, and beautiful backgrounds. So, I definitely see it as a solid technical achievement. As far as the film itself goes, however, it's a little difficult for me to brush it off as a simple, harmless, fairy tale. But I can say that what the problems boil down to is just that it's extremely dated. We're much more woke now in today's society, so if you wanna show your kids, go ahead and show them - just do it with caution, is all. On the other hand, if you'd rather not expose your kids to dated gender roles, just skip it 'cause nowadays there's better out there. For me, it has a place in history, and does still get some of my respect. 3/5  Last February, I took a look at some of the many Shyamalan films that I missed along the way. This year, I decided to do more of the same, because let's face it, M. Night Shyamalan is, if nothing else, fascinating in the way he chooses to film things. He has some great titles under his belt ('The Sixth Sense', 'Unbreakable', 'The Visit'), but he's also got those titles that make you wonder what in the hell you just watched ('Signs', 'Devil', 'The Happening'). This title most definitely falls under the latter.
Here, an apartment complex superintendent named Cleveland Heep (Paul Giamatti) discovers a "Narf" (yeah, that word Pinky was saying about 13 years prior) named Story (again, yeah) in the complex's swimming pool. She ends up rescuing him from drowning, and the two establish an understanding of what she is - a sea nymph who has come to help mankind. Narfs like her are assigned to one particular human to tell him or her that they're meant to do great things or something, and they have to meet so that an eagle can come and take the Narf back home. Meanwhile, there are creatures called "Scrunts" that are out and about to stop hr from succeeding or something, and there are also monkey-like creatures called "Tartutic" that are peacekeepers of Story's world, and yeah, it's just about as messy as it sounds. There's more too. Like, after Story succeeds in her mission, she can't go home because there's a whole bunch of other people she needs to find in order to do so because she unknowingly is destined for great things... man, I know how much sense this sounds like it's making, and trust me, the movie holds just about as much water (pun absolutely intended) This, at least speaking for myself, was among the hardest Shyamalan films to get through without facepalming a bunch of times. 'The Happening' is pretty brutal, but this almost falls under the category of "So Bad It's Good". Some of the decisions made simply draw things out unnecessarily, or shine a spotlight Shyamalan's ego. I mean, spoiler alert, but he's the guy (playing a guy named Vick Ran) Story has to find. He's an author who discovers that his writing will one day inspire the American President to change the world for the better. And then there's the weird shit that I haven't even gotten to yet, like a kid being able to decipher some kind of hidden message by looking at cereal boxes. Or the fact that no one ever questions why Cleveland has a naked, cut up, young lady in his shower. Oh yeah, people find out about her like she's no big deal and just kinda go with things here. It's kinda brutal. Imagine if Elliot's Mom found him tossing a ball back and forth with E.T. and just smiled, nodded and said "You too have fun, now." So, it's really just my opinion, but I have to say that I put this one even lower than 'The Happening' on my list of Shyamalan films. Indeed, I'd claim this one to be pretty much rock bottom for the guy. At the very least, 'The Happening' wasn't a giant stroke of his ego. Still though, the pair would go pretty well together if you wanna do a night of good-bad movie watching. 1/5  I would generally consider myself to be somewhat of a Tim Burton fan, overall. He has his hits, he has his misses, but when all said and done, we'd be hard pressed to find a director with a more unique imagination and style. This film, at least to me, represents his attempt at straying away from his usual. It's still there, but this one focuses far more on the intriguing story of it all. Or should I say, stories?
When Will Bloom (Billy Crudup) heads to his hometown of Ashton, Alibama, with his pregnant wife, Josephine (Marion Cotillard), they receive the news that Will's father, Ed (Albert Finney) has taken ill. Will has a frustration with his father, though, as he tends to tell tall tales of his past, seemingly in the form of adventurous children's stories. Being grown up, he wants to know the truth about his father's past before he dies - even though Ed suggests that he knows how he's going to die, and it's not from the Cancer he's burdened with. As the movie unfolds, we get a sort of 'Forrest Gump' style movie, as we see the stories from his past in the flesh. Young Ed is played by Ewan McGregor. As we follow his adventure, we meet the likes of several interesting characters, including a giant (Matthew McGrory), a circus ring leader (Danny DeVito), a witch (Helena Bonham Carter), conjointed twins (Ada and Arlene Tai), and the object of his heart's affection, Sandra (Alison Lohman/Jessica Lange). It's a crying shame I left this one until so late in the game. For some reason, it just never really interested me, but I can't really explain why. But upon looking for decent father/son movies for this month, this one made a lot of lists. And so far, this was about as close as things got to my own relationship with my father. To put it plainly, we really just didn't quite get each other. Therefore, the way this ends, which I won't spoil for you, punched me right square in the feels. No matter what your relationship with your father though, it's a very touching and charming way to wrap it all up. But that's all I'll say. Otherwise, as usual, I commend Burton on his imagination and vision, both with his style and storytelling. Sometimes he knocks it out of the park, and this movie, at least for me, was one of those. I'd almost go so far as to say this could be my new favourite Burton movie. It's got all the right ingredients for a good story, albeit, the romantic side of things might be a little heavy-handed. But it does have a sense of humor, and a lot of heart, and proves to be a nice, light movie for a Burton flick. It's a stray away from his usual, sure, but that's not necessarily a bad thing either. At the end of the day, I'm so happy I watched this one. It's certainly something I'll be revisiting some time in the future. This, to me, isn't what I'd call "full Burton" but it's certainly Burton at his full potential - namely as a storyteller. I loved it, personally. 5/5  So, here we have a title where I'm surprised that so many people were surprised that I just kinda bypassed this movie. Well, to tell you the truth, I bypassed Roald Dahl stories pretty much entirely as a kid. As you might recall, I began this section with 'Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory', and guess who STILL hasn't seen 'James and the Giant Peach' either! The only one I did manage to see on-time was 'BFG'. Anyway, this was no exception.
It came out in August of '96 as well. I had just turned 14. So you've gotta understand that a young man just about to go into high school might have felt a little weird about watching a movie about a little girl with telekinetic abilities, where I could turn to my 'X-Men' comics and get Jean Grey doing the same thing, plus way more. And yet, the people continue to be shocked that somehow I've never managed to sit down and watch 'Matilda'. Well, for March, I'm gonna be focused on some family favorites that I've missed out on over the years, and I figured this was a good place to start. For anyone else who hasn't seen it yet, we've basically got a story about a 6-year-old girl named Matilda (Mara Wilson). Her parents (Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman), along with her brother, Michael (Brian Levinson) mistreat her, ignoring her rapid development. She finds a friend in the books that she reads to escape from her harsh, everyday life, and blossoms into a genius, also acquiring telekinetic abilities she has yet to tap into. The parents drop her at a school, ran by an over-the-top cruel principal named Trunchbull (Pam Ferris) who just kinda throws kids around, locks them into chambers, dangles them upside-down for pocket change, and admittedly despises children altogether. However, Matilda also befriends her sweet-as-apple-pie teacher, Miss. Honey (Embeth Davidtz) who encourages and nurtures the children's development. I have to admit that I kinda sorta enjoyed this movie as a film for kids. Despite so much mean-spirited dialogue and, let's face it, straight up child abuse (what else would you call swinging a girl around by the pigtails?), this movie has a certain type of heart to it that I can't help but admire. Dahl is no stranger to over-the-top WTF moments, and I think that's how he best gets his messages across. In a way, these things are scary for kids. For example, if you're a kid watching 'Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory', tunnel scene aside, you've gotta wonder what ever happens to the kids who disappear - presumed dead. To a lesser extent, 'BFG' has the whole idea of giants eating children. Here, it's the authority figures, which is something we've pretty much all taken issue with some way or another, so it works. The thing I like about it is that Miss Honey kinda plays that ray of hope for Matilda, who clearly has one hell of a special gift, super powers aside. Her parents treat her like nothing, her brother's a bully, and Trunchbull is pretty much female Hitler, but Honey and Matilda's friendship is admirable. These were the teachers I loved in elementary school when I, myself, was struggling a lot through various subjects. Some teachers wanted to give me pills, but some were very sweet, patient, and encouraging. Honey reminded me of the teachers from my past who encouraged me and pushed me while I felt ignored or even useless in so many other aspects. I got where Matilda was coming from here, and I think that's really the full charm of the movie. It's over the top, sure, but the right message is there. If this was just released a few years earlier, when I was still well into kid's movies, it probably would have done me some good. I can recognize that and see that I may have had a certain rapport with this as a kid, and I don't think I'd necessarily shield my own children from it either. Matilda has to overcome some pretty nasty stuff here, and it manages to make the good of the film shine a bit brighter for the kids who are watching. 4/5  After seeing the first 'Creepshow' and enjoying it so much, the next logical step for my "Catching Up" reviews was 'Creepshow 2'. While it remains a fun, creepy anthology for the Halloween season, it's not quite as good as the first one. That said, it still has plenty working for it, including the once-again team up of Stephen King and George A. Romero. However, this time they are doing the writing while original 'Creepshow' cinematographer Michael Gornick is directing.
This time around, there are three stories overall. They are each buffered with animation segments, depicting a boy reading and enjoying his 'Creepshow' comic. It was given to him by a Creepshow Creep, played by practical effect master Tom Savini (who also played a garbage man at the end of the first one). Story one involves an elderly couple who get robbed, and a native statue coming to life to take vengeance. Story two involves a terrifying black, oozing mass in a lake that melts human flesh once it takes hold. Story three is about a woman who just can't seem to shake a hitchhiker no matter how many times she kills him. Sadly though, that's it. It kinda just leaves you wanting more, especially when comparing it to the first. The animation sequences are okay, but they seemingly get a little more in the way here. They tell a sort of side story about the kid getting harassed by Stephen King bullies (watch 'It' or 'Stand by Me', you'll know what I mean). Of course this all leads to the kid taking his revenge on them, but I won't spoil how it's done 'cause admittedly it's pretty cool. Not believable in the slightest, but still, cool. The story that stuck out here to me was 'The Raft' (the second story about the oozing mass). It gets pretty damn traumatic once this thing takes hold. The flesh burns as they're happening seem incredibly believable, and it doesn't help that the first victim keeps moaning "It hurts! It hurts!" as it's consuming her. It ends with a nice little twist in things too, and is probably my favorite of the three, simply in that the imagery stuck with me as seeming very real and terrifying. The first and third are well done, but they aren't quite as scary as they are just unsettling, which does work in it's own way. While it's no where near as good as it's predecessor, which was kind of a landmark on the history of horror cinema, it still holds it's own quite well as a sequel. It manages to meet the expectations I had, but there's more of a lack of celebrity cameos and it's just shorter. While this one isn't based around Halloween, it's still a fun watch as a sequel to get you into the holiday spirit. 4/5  Immediately following the events of the first film, 'Superman II' sees the returns of both Gene Hackman as Luthor and Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent/Superman and is regarded by some as the last really good 'Superman' movie.
After Superman saves the California coastline from absolute destruction, he returns to his job as mild-mannered reporter, Clark Kent. When his boss sends Lois (Margot Kidder) on an assignment involving a bomb in Paris, France at the Eiffel Tower, Superman suits up, heads over, and throws the bomb into outer space. By doing this, he unwittingly releases prisoners Zod (Terence Stamp), Ursa (Sarah Douglas) and Non (Jack O'Halloran) from the Phantom Zone, referring back to the events at the beginning of the first film. When the three Kryptonians reach the Moon, they discover that the yellow sun increases their abilities by kicking around a couple of astronauts. They then head to Earth to conquor it. Meanwhile, Luthor escapes prison and seeks out Superman's Fortress of Solitude, where he soon learns of the escaped Kryptonian prisoners. Eventually, they meet, and Luthor offers up Superman for their revenge, as he's also the only thing that could possibly stand in their way from taking over the world. The rest of the story has everything to do with the blossoming love between Clark Kent and Lois Lane in which we see Superman make the ultimate sacrifice. I have to say, the whole thing was very enjoyable. 'Superman II' runs alongside a series of sequels that are often referred to as "better than the original". They are few and far between, but they exist, and this is definitely one of them. 'Superman' was also very good, but it kinda suffers from running too long, and even getting a little boring in some areas. 'Superman II' really feels more like I'm watching a comic book adventure come to life. The Canuck in me also has to take a little bit of delight in the fact that the Niagara Falls scenes were shot on the Canadian side of the landmark when he's largely an American hero. But that's kinda just having the cherry on top of my sundae. Otherwise, aside from a few dated effects (that were still great for 1980) it ends up being a great story altogether, and maintains that sense of humour we got to enjoy in the first film. Now, with these two movies out of the way, it should also be known that I'm not altogether a big fan of Superman. I always found him to be way too cheap. He's essentially indestructible unless kryptonite is nearby. But that said, I also have a certain respect for the hero. He was pretty much the first mainstream comic book superhero (that I know of), and he definitely has staying power. All that said though, these original movies kinda gave me this new perspective. I definitely enjoyed both of them, even if they were campy to watch. After all, the campiness of an older superhero movie like this is part of the fun! 4/5 |
RSS Feed