 It's probably plain to most people after my 'Lion King' ('19) review that the original '94 film, for yours truly, cannot be touched as far as quality goes, even if the new animation is admittedly breathtakingly beautiful. So, when I saw the trailer for this film, I was indifferent. On the one hand, it's digging up known and beloved characters for what seems to be an easy money grab. On the other hand, despite said beloved characters and familiarity, this IS an original story. While everyone else was wondering, "Who's asking for this?" I was in the minority saying, "Me?"
The film opens with a dedication to the memory of the late great James Earl Jones, who famously lent his voice to Mufasa in both the '94 and '19 versions of 'The Lion King. With that in mind, it moves on to some pretty familiar territory, as the animals of the African savanna all gather around Pride Rock, as Simba (Donald Glover) has an announcement to make; he and Nala (Beyoncé) are about to have their second cub, which means Simba has to take off to meet Nala at the birthing ground. This event leaves their first cub, Kiara (Blue Ivy Carter), whom some may remember from 'Simba's Pride,' in the babysitting hands of Timon (Billy Eichner) and Pumbaa (Seth Rogen), who are sadly irritating in this film whenever they're on screen. There's a laugh or two, but most of that is after Rafiki (John Kani) comes in to join them to tell the story, reacting to their stupidity. But hey, what can you do? Some of this annoyance is bound to happen, being a film aimed at kids. Moving on, Rafiki tells Kiara the story of her grandfather, Mufasa, and how he came to be King. Mufasa (Braelyn Rankins /Aaron Pierre) and his parents, Masego (Keith David) and Afia (Anika Noni Rose) live in a pretty barren African savanna in the middle of a drought. Mufasa's parents tell him of a lush land called Milele and that they will find it one day. Think of the Great Valley from 'The Land Before Time.' One day, a disastrous flood strikes at the watering hole, whisking Mufasa away from his parents, home, and everything he knows. Lost and floating down a river, he eventually meets up with another cub named Taka (Theo Somolu/Kelvin Harrison Jr.). As Mufasa and Taka grow up together, they become brothers, but Mufasa gets shunned by their King, Obasi (Lennie James), who sends Simba off with the females, where, guess what? He learns many valuable techniques from Queen Eshe (Thandiwe Newton) about tracking, hunting, etc. Meanwhile, Taka wants to join them, but Obasi tells him it's a waste, as one day he'll be King, and all he'll have to do is laze around all day. This negative attitude continues until, one day, the pride is met with some white lions, forcing Mufasa and Taka into exile. From here, the story turns into Mufasa and Taka searching for Milele (which translates to "forever"), eventually stumbling on the familiar characters of Sarabi (Tiffany Boone) and Zazu (Preston Nyman - voiced by John Oliver last time, which I failed to mention). Ultimately, a love triangle occurs between the three lions, leading Taka to become Scar (not a spoiler, as evident from the get-go). Not much about the story ends up surprising, as Sarabi choosing Mufasa over Scar is mentioned in the 2019 'Lion King,' in one of the very few additional bits to the film. With so much "copy + paste" technique given to Disney's live-action remakes, I found this movie kinda refreshing. It reminds me of how I felt about 'Last Jedi' when it came out. It may not have been the best movie, but I have to give the filmmakers credit for attempting to step outside that comfort zone and try out some unfamiliarity for once. That said, I met this one with about the same reception I did the 2019 remake - it's beautiful to look at, but the effects aren't enough to make it great. I'll still stick to the 1994 classic, but kudos to this film for the attempt. 3/5
2 Comments
 Although I can admit that this was a title that didn't entirely live up to its predecessor, I do think that as a sequel, it's perfectly fine. This is another one I feel gets a bit worse of a rap that it truly deserves, but it's not without its faults, either. The original 'Moana,' much like with 'Frozen 2' and its predecessor, is a lot to live up to, so one has to try to give it a bit of slack. That said, much like it is with many other Disney fans, I would really like to see some more new, new material from the studio, and not just another live-action remake, or sequel.
The timing here is kinda brutal too, as this is also followed closely by the Disney prequel that is 'Mufasa: The Lion King.' In both cases, new ideas, sure, but still a part of something that already exists. And I'm mostly looking at Disney here, about this gripe, not so much Pixar, who released 'Inside Out 2' earlier this year, which I felt actually outdid the original. But I digress; the bottom line is that even though this was fine, it was something I felt didn't need to exist, because 'Moana' was such an instant classic as a stand-alone. The story here picks up three years after the events of the first film. Moana (Auli'i Cravalho) has since put her lessons about way-finding from Maui (Dwayne Johnson) to work, setting sail with animal companions Heihei (Alan Tudyk) and Pua, the adorable little piggy. She travels in search of other civilizations, connected to the ocean. One day, she manages to find a broken piece of pottery with a symbol of a couple of mountains on it, proving that somewhere out there, other civilizations exist. Her ancestor, Tautai Vasa (Gerald Faitala Ramsey) comes to her one day in a vision, during a brutal lightning storm, revealing why there's a lack of connection to other people of the ocean. This time, it's the fault of a storm God named Nalo, who sunk an island called Motufetu in an attempt to gain power over the mortals. Motufetu, itself, was once an island that connected the people of the ocean, and their islands, and since its sinking things have been stressful for those living the seaside life. If Moana can't travel to Motufetu's location and raise it, life on her home island of Motunui will slowly die out. Evidently, the whole first movie was just Moana's first step towards greatness. To accomplish this, she'll need a crew, consisting of a smart, if pretty annoying craftswoman named Loto (Rose Matafeo), a historian named Moni (Hualalai Chung), who's also obsessed with Maui, and a grouchy farmer and elder named Kele (David Fane). And yeah, as one can easily predict, Maui eventually joins the crew as well, because... how else are they gonna raise the island? Along the way, the encounter several obstacles, including another, rather different experience with the Kakamora tribe (a tribe of anthropomorphic coconuts), a vampire bat type being named Matangi (Awhimai Fraser), and a whole realm that takes place within a giant clam, where Gramma Tala (Rachel House) can't use the ocean to help Moana anymore. All in all, once the crew reaches the giant clam and has their encounter with the Kakamora, things get a little bit confusing, or perhaps even convenient for the crew to keep moving. My one real gripe with it is just that. It seemed that whenever the chips were down here, some kind of miraculous moment would happen that spares them. It all just feels too damn easy. After a while, there's no sense of dread or potential failure from this like you had with the first. It's still bright, flashy, beautifully animated, and the songs are mostly kinda catchy. But if you go into this thinking its gonna be the same, or better quality than the first, it's not. This one could have done the "straight-to-D+" thing, really. But still, it's decent for what it is, and I do think the youthful fans of the original will enjoy it just fine. 3/5  For those who don't know, the Joker character is who I consider my favourite villain of all time. I say "character" because part of what makes him my favourite is how flexible he can be as far as portrayal goes. While there are so many similarities between so many different versions, they're all really quite unique in their own ways. I won't go through each and every one, but my personal favourites include Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger, and Mark Hamill. I will admit, however, that Joaquin Phoenix could be added to that list... if it wasn't for this movie.
In the first 'Joker,' I truly appreciated the more dramatic take on it, bringing the mental health situation into play. Essentially, the origin story had a lot to say about the stigmas still attached to mental health problems, and the Joker, himself, ends up being a product of untreated mental health thanks to poor government funding. It was really well done, I appreciated to new take on things, and I enjoyed how they managed to combine his genuine creepiness with a bit of sympathy. It's no fun 'Batman' flick, but it was well executed. A little time unfolded, discussions were had, word of mouth spread, and a lot of people even ended up making Phoenix their new favourite portrayal of the Joker. Then we all received that odd bit of news saying that the sequel would be a musical starring Lady Gaga as Harley Quinn. That was a lot to digest. I was lukewarm to the idea of Gaga being Quinn, and the musical aspect felt odd. But even with all of that, I was still willing to give it a chance, recognizing that he musical aspect of things would tie into the mental health aspect of things, and play out as fantasy. Joker, a.k.a. Arthur Fleck (Phoenix) awaits his trial for his crimes at Arkham State Hospital. His lawyer, Maryanne Stewart (Catherine Keener) plans to use dissociative identity disorder as their defence, hoping to convince the judge that the Joker did the crimes of the previous movie, and not Arthur Fleck. This is pretty much the whole movie - awaiting the trial, and then the trial itself. All in all, at least in my humble opinion, it's kinda boring, and it drags. The only real saving grace could possibly be the arrival of Harleen Quinzel (Gaga), who calls herself "Lee" through the movie. These two meet, not in therapy sessions conducted by Lee as a professional, but in the same hospital. It is mentioned that she has degrees in her field of psychology, but otherwise, here, she's just another patient. She comes to admire the way Arthur pulled off his crimes, and is in love with his destructive and chaotic personality. Real fans of Harley Quinn need not apply,. however, because this is about as far away from Harley as I can imagine, aside from a couple of very basic personality traits, which have already pretty much been mentioned. While the whole trial portion of the film is a bore on its own, the rest of it is just Arthur and Lee putting on some kind of half-assed Broadway show about how much they love each other, and whether or not Lee can be trusted. If you're looking for a dark, violent movie with a dash of dark comedy, you are SOL here. There's a bit of violence, but it's completely crowbarred in, and any supposed jokes fall pretty flat here. And then there's the ending, which seems evidently controversial for fans, but even as a fan, I just plain didn't care either way. I am going to be slightly controversial here, myself, and give the film credit for just one thing. Unfortunately, that one thing happens to be the risks they took with things here in trying something new and different. It flopped on its ass, but at least they were ballsy enough to go for it. In the end, this really ends up being a bit more of an artsy-fartsy film starring the Joker. But the rest of us fans remember Nicholson's art gallery scene from '89, and prefer that more chaotic version of the Joker being artistic. This didn't ruin the character for me or anything, but I can say with full conviction now that Phoenix is NOT my Joker. 1/5  I'll just come out and say it, the original 'Mean Girls' is a pretty great movie. While on the surface it seems like a movie that only speaks to high school girls who are struggling with popularity, the truth of the matter is that it's a movie that further reaches out to anyone who has ever fallen under the "unpopular" category in their school years, complete with being bullied, manipulated, outcast, whatever the case may be. So, yeah, it's something that speaks to pretty much everyone - even the popular kids who went too far at some point or another.
The film has since been deemed a comedy classic by many, and it's well known for bringing a few young stars into the spotlight like Rachel McAdams, Amanda Seyfried, Lizzy Caplan, and to a lesser extent, Lacey Chabert (already pretty well-known from 'Party of Five' at the time). And while this is basically the exact same story, but covered in some pretty solid musical numbers, I might suggest this could do the same thing with a whole new crew of actors I'm altogether unfamiliar with. It's a very faithful remake, but I have to say, it's also a bit of a carbon copy, and they don't do a whole lot of "new" here apart from the musical numbers. For those who may be a little unfamiliar with the story, we meet Cady Heron (Angourie Rice), who moves to America from Kenya with her Mother (Jenna Fischer), and changes from being homeschooled to attending high school. Her first day is a bit rough, but she befriends a girl named Janis (Auli'i Cravalho) and her gay best friend, Damian (Jaquel Spivey), replacing Ian; my favourite character in both the original AND this one, so not much change in characters here aside from making them more diverse, which I have to credit the film for. As it was before, the pair show Cady around and introduce her to the different cliques to see where she might fit in. The most popular clique, dubbed the "Plastics", consists of three of the most popular girls in school; Karen Shetty (Avantika) who replaces the airhead, Karen Smith of the original, a new version of Gretchen Wieners (Bebe Wood) and a new version of the queen bee, herself, Regina George (Reneé Rapp), who probably carries the most impressive musical numbers throughout the film, although everyone is still quite good. One day the Plastics have Cady sit with them, and "allow" her into their group essentially based on the fact that she's pretty and "could" be a part of their clique. Janis and Damian then put their heads together with Cady to use her as a sort of mole to spy on the Plastics, essentially for a laugh and to maybe get some info on these "perfect" girls to knock them down a peg. In the meantime, Cady falls for a young man in her class named Aaron (Christopher Briney), Regina's ex, which also becomes the start of Cady's real problems. Eventually, just like the original, the whole thing becomes a message about a combination of bullying, scheming, and just being an asshole and how in the end, it's never really worth it. You don't want to become something you don't like. At least that's my main takeaway. Truth be told, if you've seen the original, you've basically seen this already, so it's not something I can just immediately recommend to anyone who likes the original and may be stuck on it being the "only" 'Mean Girls'. Having said that, one should also at least see that this version is a little more diverse, some of the musical numbers are rather good, and I'd probably say that it's a solid watch for a new generation of high-schoolers whose parents grew up with the original. There's even a few solid cameos here from old stars like Tina Fey, Tim Meadows, Busy Phillips of 'Freaks & Geeks' fame (who fits in here very well as Regina's mother) and even Lindsay Lohan, herself, who originally played cady. I suppose at the end of the day it all boils down to which one you'd prefer. I might suggest that the original places a better focus on the overall story and characters, and less on the sex appeal which, if I'm honest, runs pretty rampant throughout the film, especially with Karen's character who may feel a bit more insulting here than Seyfried's Karen in the original, who was far funnier. This is one of thsoe cases where the film is perfectly fine for what it is, and newcomers to the story may prefer it. But it's my humble opinion that the original is actually quite a bit better. To each their own, though. 3/5 |
RSS Feed