Foodfight!

Review #1766: Foodfight!

Cast: 

Charlie Sheen (Dex Dogtective), Wayne Brady (Daredevil Dan), Hilary Duff (Sunshine Goodness), Eva Longoria (Lady X / Priscilla), Larry Miller (Vlad Chocool), Christopher Lloyd (Mr. Clipboard), Robert Costanzo (Maximillus Moose), Chris Kattan (Polar Penguin), Ed Asner (Mr. Leonard), Jerry Stiller (General X), Christine Baranski (Hedda Shopper), Lawrence Kasanoff (Cheasel T. Weasel), Harvey Fierstein (Fat Cat Burglar), Cloris Leachman (Brand X Lunch Lady), Haylie Duff (Sweetcakes), Shelley Morrison (Lola Fruitola), and Edie McClurg (Mrs. Butterworth) Directed by Lawrence Kasanoff.

Review:

“We’ve got the movie, we’ve got the property, the place, the equipment, the talent, we’re there. Do we believe our next movie, Foodfight! is going to be a huge hit? Of course we do!”

Why don't we just do a whole review of short sentences that will sum up this film's sad history? I'll start: In development for a decade. Managed to lose the hard drive of assets that resulted in a restart. Directed by a guy who produced movies like Mortal Kombat while responsible for a Live Tour edition...with no other directing projects since. Managed to be sold off by debt collectors for at least $2.5 million after being made for roughly $45-60 million. Released in a theater for exactly one week in the United Kingdom, while everyone else "received" it on DVD or video-on-demand. Meant to aim for a cartoonish animation like the Looney Tunes shorts but ended up requiring motion capture animation (you thought The Polar Express was odd? Try this for ten minutes). A hodgepodge attempt at making a studio like Pixar with a cross between Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988) and Toy Story (1995). Kasanoff planned a variety of media to tie-in with the film, including an ice show. Made by a director who was described by his crew as "idiosyncratic" that thought animation is the only part of film production where quality is on the rise while costs are going down. Filled with an assortment of brand names for supporting characters. Manages to have worse (unfinished) animation than Hoodwinked! (2005). Made by Threshold Entertainment, whose next animation venture was Bobbleheads: The Movie (2020). Written by Sean Catherine Derek, Lawrence Kasanoff, Brent Friedman, Rebecca Swanson with a story by Joshua Wexler & Kasanoff (who also co-produced the movie).

Inept. Irritating. Incoherent. Inconceivable. Trainwreck. Embarrassment. Need I go on with one-word sentences? How much can one really say about this movie? The very idea of brand names as lead characters for a film is cynically embarrassing on its own, but the very fact that this is the most embarrassing animated film I have ever seen is the saddest thing about the whole experience. 91 minutes of pain, pure and simple. You can laugh at the animation, true. To an extent, you can also laugh at the inexplicable innuendo and crass attempts at humor presented here. But one just seems downright sad at recognizing the various voices present to be in such a travesty. Sheen being here isn't exactly a surprise, because I can equally believe he would stoop to something for a paycheck regardless if it was the mid 2000s or 2012, mostly because one has to breeze a middling collection of cliches and not clap their hands in anticipation. Brady is obviously better to view on television, as I think anybody who is familiar with the medium will tell you, because heaven help the next person to say that cartoon sidekicks are the best thing ever. Duff doesn't even have to try when she spends half of her time off screen, so there is that. There are no winners in the cast, but at least Longoria seems to have a go at playing sultry and adversary in the same length. The less said about Miller, the better. Lloyd obviously likes to keep busy with roles (because this was the same year as The Oogieloves movie), and since he only has a handful of lines to go with a character that is jerkily animated, it sure makes an amusing sight more than a performance. Pairing Kattan and Sheen for a gag is probably better than eating year-old brand cereal. Asner (rest in peace) has less lines than one would expect, because clearly more time needed to be on the market and not the bare attempts at whatever "Brand X" is supposed to do with "Marketopolis". Kasanoff playing a weasel is a sentence that writes itself. As a whole, you don't need 1,000 words to say that the movie has no fundamental story worth investing in, because you can also look at the movie and hear its crass jokes and puns that confirm what a colossal waste one could have here. This is one of the worst films made with a substantial budget and likely one of the all-time worst animated films ever made. Might be good if you take certain substances or if you want to know what not finishing all of your work looks like.

Overall, I give it 0 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Once more, because everyone deserves an eighth piece of awfulness. Fateful Findings.

Incidentally, if you ever find this review, check out this video someone made about the making of Foodfight! that provides more insight: ROTTEN: Behind the Foodfight

My Neighbor Totoro.

Review #1758: My Neighbor Totoro.

Cast: 

Noriko Hidaka (Satsuki Kusakabe), Chika Sakamoto (Mei Kusakabe), Shigesato Itoi (Tatsuo Kusakabe), Sumi Shimamoto (Yasuko Kusakabe), Hitoshi Takagi (Totoro), Toshiyuki Amagasa (Kanta Ōgaki), Tanie Kitabayashi (Granny), Naoki Tatsuta (Catbus), and Chie Kōjiro (Michiko) Written and Directed by Hayao Miyazaki (#1111 - Spirited Away, #1233 - Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind, and #1480 - Castle in the Sky)

Review: 

"We need a new method and sense of discovery to be up to the task. Rather than be sentimental, the film must be a joyful, entertaining film. The forgotten. The ignored. Those that are considered lost. Yet I made My Neighbor Totoro with the firm belief that these things still exist."

Sometimes one just has to step back and look at the landscape, whether to touch the grass or to look upon just what lies beneath the seen elements of the things around us. Or hell, sometimes one just wants to look upon the tranquility that comes from a place where the only thing worth worrying about is in the imagination in one's heart. In other words, breathtaking animation and mood can go a long way towards an engaging experience, even when it is a movie that is built on capturing the serenity of what it means to watch a movie that doesn't have to build great conflict to make one of the most curious animated features to come out of Japan. Of course, one would not be surprised to hear that it came from Hayao Miyazaki, who set out to make a heartwarming feature film that would not only stay with its viewers but would also encourage both parents and children. Over the course of a decade, he turned an initial idea of doing a picture book into a film, one that would show ordinary scenery of Japan; he rediscovered the beauty of the country in the time spent working on those ideas (as he moved to Tokorozawa in 1970), and he wanted to make a movie that got kids outside (of course, now a picture book of the movie actually exists, so I suppose if one really wants to they could also sift through that as well). At any rate, it should be noted that this was actually one of two features that Studio Ghibli would release in the year of 1988 in a most unique double feature, since Grave of the Fireflies was released on the same day (the films were funded by different publishers while having stark differences in tone); both features would receive attention for their qualities in later years, although this film only became more successful when it went to television the year after its release, while merchandise for the film (such as a toy of Totoro) later became quite popular.

Admittedly, a movie about two kids living in 1950s Japan that happen to encounter a furry monster could lend itself to a few interested eyes but not exactly the way you think, considering the fact that Miyazaki aimed for a film that looked as normal and as enchanting as one could make in tranquility (i.e. not about guns, action, or speed, as Miyazaki put it). As cliché as it might sound, sometimes one really does need a film kids and adults can like equally as well. The art of making a good film is to make a film worth looking into for the targeted audience, but a great film just tries to entertain everyone at hand without any sense of talking down to folks. In short, animated films obviously can be suited for everyone, and the Studio Ghibli films managed to do quite well with telling a worthy story with fluid animation that makes for a worthy follow up to the company's prior effort (Castle in the Sky, 1986). It manages to do well with its 86 minute run-time in capturing the beauty of its landscapes that balances nostalgia with modern sensibility for a refreshing result (i.e. it is a pretty movie but not merely just a pretty movie to doze by), one that is always alive no matter what happens to be on the screen. Of course, it takes its time for the title character to show itself, but the build-up to that is worth the time, no matter how much one hears about it (i.e. not just looking at the cover) because it manages to be a playful type of patience, much in the same way that one is if they simply walked across some grass to play in the park and wondered if something was on a big tree (or some other scenic view, take your pick). The voices are ideal for the characters present on screen with no distraction, with Hidaka and Sakamoto being a worthy pair to play off each other as a worthy film sibling tandem, while Itoi chimes in with warm charm from bit to bit. The parts spent with the actual creature are sweet and interesting without turning curiosities on one's head, and it helps make the closing sequences all the more worth where it needs to go. As a whole, the best that can be said for the film is that it cultivates a curious world of tranquility with magical charm that bucks the expectation one might see in other animated features as a feature for all ages. Without a dull moment in sight, Miyazaki proves to be one of the masters in crafting a useful story worth checking out with landscapes and rhythm to spare. 

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Surf's Up.

Review #1691: Surf's Up.

Cast: 

Shia LaBeouf (Cody Maverick), Jeff Bridges (Zeke "Big Z/Geek" Topanga), Zooey Deschanel (Lani Aliikai), Jon Heder (Chicken Joe), Mario Cantone (Mikey Abromowitz), James Woods (Reggie Belafonte), Diedrich Bader (Tank "The Shredder" Evans), Dana Belben (Edna Maverick), Brian Posehn (Glen Maverick), with Kelly Slater and Rob Machado (themselves) Directed by Ash Brannon and Chris Buck (#579 - Frozen)

Review: 

Truthfully, I don't know anything about surfing. I have spent more combined time at a water park than at the beach, and I say this as someone who barely travels to begin with, but I imagine that there is quite the interesting time one could have spending a summer with waves and time to ride (If I had viewed something like The Endless Summer (1966), the originator of the travelling surf craze, I probably would have said the exact same thing). Naturally, we have a surf movie involving penguins. Welp, there were quite a few penguin-themed movies to come out in such a short span with each other, whether as a nature-documentary in March of the Penguins (2005) or with Happy Feet (2006, which started development after this one had started). The last one is interesting to note, because that film and this one include motion capture within its animation; Surf's Up has a look of a hand-held documentary because of motion capture that was done of the movement of a camera operator, and it is probably interesting to note that the voices of the "film crew" chronicling said adventures are of the two directors in Ash Brannon and Chris Buck. Each had studied in character animation at California Institute of the Arts (Buck, eleven years older, was first), and both eventually did teaching there (Brannon was Buck's student for a time). Buck worked for Disney in the animation department on a few films (ranging from animator to character design to supervisor) before he directed his first film with Tarzan (1999). Brannon did work for both Disney and Pixar, which included serving as a co-director with Toy Story 2 (1999). At any rate, this is the second feature to come from Sony Pictures Animation, which had announced this film as being in development when the studio was established in 2002.

The screenplay was written by Don Rhymer, Ash Brannon, Chris Buck, and Chris Jenkins, while the story was written by Jenkins and Christian Darren. Look at it this way: at least the cast was recorded together, so this isn't just a brand movie with talking animals that reeks of complete corporate product. The film wasn't quite a great success with audiences, but one can only imagine how when you make a film for $100 million, although a direct-to-video sequel would be made with Surf's Up 2: WaveMania (guess what that is about) a decade later. The attempts at a laidback atmosphere within a "camera crew" really can't sustain itself fully for an 85 minute movie, but it proves to be an okay movie when it comes to casual amusement in doing the fundamentals in engaging the audience without ringing their heads with anything obnoxious or any blatant clichés. In other words, it may be by-the-numbers, but it does these things just fine for a movie with surfing penguins (if you can watch one where they sing, surfing isn't too off). LaBeouf proves worthy in making a readily generic lead story come around with a little bit of charm, talking to the audience with enough reach that we don't keep our eyes on something else (namely some nice looking waves) for too long. Truthfully, the most casually interesting presence is probably Bridges, abiding with calm composition that only comes from an offbeat mentor. Deschanel comes and goes in attempts at zippy charm to act with LaBeouf, which doesn't really go very far, really. Heder, apparently picked when the producers saw him in Napoleon Dynamite (I'll take a rain check on that), strolls along with a hint of amusement when it comes to trying to be more casual than the film, which I guess proves okay for brief moments. Woods gets to have his best impression of "speaking to the manager" for moments that I chuckle at pretty well. Bader gets to channel some insecure bravado for a few interesting moments to chuckle at, which I find just fine to cap a movie with some resemblance of enjoyment when it comes to learning "lessons" about enjoying the wave and the folks around oneself. Yes, it's a movie about surfing and penguins, and it is exactly as average as you could expect, which means that at least it didn't have a chance to be a complete grab in cynicism, which I guess means that this could prove a decent time for a night in the summer.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Adventures of Tintin.

Review #1560: The Adventures of Tintin.

Cast: 

Jamie Bell (Tintin), Andy Serkis (Captain Archibald Haddock / Sir Francis Haddock), Daniel Craig (Ivan Ivanovitch Sakharine / Red Rackham), Nick Frost and Simon Pegg (Thomson and Thompson), Toby Jones (Aristides Silk), Daniel Mays (Allan), Mackenzie Crook (Tom), Gad Elmaleh (Omar ben Salaad), and Enn Reitel (Nestor) Directed by Steven Spielberg (#126 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind, #168 - Raiders of the Lost Ark, #169 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, #170 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, #302 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, #351 - Schindler's List, #480 - Jaws, #563 - The Sugarland Express, #573 - E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, #642 - Jurassic Park, #958 - Always, #1068 - Ready Player One, #1305 - Catch Me If You Can, #1478 - The Color Purple, #1520 - Saving Private Ryan, and #1528 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence)

Review: 
Every aspect of Hergé's great talent are part of my approach: Hergé's humour of course, and the body language, which is so important. There's no plan to change that. We religiously respect his art, even for the supporting characters."

The only person that Hergé, author of the comic book series The Adventures of Tintin, felt could do his series justice was Steven Spielberg. The Belgian writer was commissioned to write a story for Le Petit Vingtième, a youth supplement to the newspaper Le Vingtième Siècle, with the first installment of what became known as Tintin in the Land of the Soviets being published on January 10, 1929, and it continued its serialization for several months alongside further serialization in countries such as France. It moved to the newspaper Le Soir in 1940 due to occupation of the country in World War II before eventually having its own magazine (published by Le Lombard), which went from 1946 to 1993. He would ultimately write 23 volumes of The Adventures of Tintin before his death in 1983, with his stories characterized by the author's extensive research done involving the locale where the stories would be set alongside the main character's well-rounded Boy Scout type of character. The way that Spielberg ties into all of this is because of (what else) a review someone did on Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), in which it was compared to Tintin in its story (which led to him tasking himself to finding a bunch of the books, where he was dazzled by the art). Although he did not have the chance to formally meet the author in person (as he died the week a meeting was planned), there was an arrangement made between Spielberg and Hergé's widow made after a meeting to make a film on Tintin. There had been quite a few adaptations of Tintin on screen, such as three animated features (1947, 1969, 1972) and live-action films (1961, 1964) alongside a pair of television series and even documentaries and stage-shows. The development for a satisfactory script would take considerable time to develop, and it was only the entrance of the 21st century that he considered the idea of doing it with computer animation. It was approaching Peter Jackson and Weta Digital about trying to make a CGI Snowy that led to suggesting the use of motion capture to adapt the series to film. Ultimately, Spielberg would direct and co-produce the film with Peter Jackson and Kathleen Kennedy, while Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright, and Joe Cornish would write the screenplay, which drew upon a few of the works (such as The Secret of the Unicorn, which is used as a subtitle for the film in some places) with a few distinct differences (such as the villain, for example).

It would seem it was worth the wait to make an adventure come to life in dazzling animation. It achieves a picturesque style of animation well-suited for adventure with warm atmosphere and capable enough leads to follow through with great finish for a bright and vibrant time for 107 minutes. It generates just enough interest and charm in its subject matter that makes one asking for more that works for numerous audiences without verging into anything too fanciful or too strange with its range of animation. One could probably imagine an adventure like this in live action, sure, but there is just something different about the detail that comes through here with what is shown (perhaps particularly if one saw it in 3D on release), and the humor generally does a fine job in reflecting that. Bell works well in what is needed in persistent curiosity and good nature needed without seeming inauthentic in do-gooder weirdness. In other words, he fits right in a story of a young man, his (CGI-created) dog, and a beleaguered sea captain going on adventures you could see again and again. Serkis pulls himself well with charm and coarse dryness that when around with Bell makes for a worthy double act that rides along with growing confidence. Craig proves a worthy adversary to finish out the main trio, making an eloquent presence in what is needed for what is required in terms of caper adventure with a stuffy presence for the past and present. Frost and Pegg do just as well in parts with a bumbling duo that contributes a key hearty laugh involving a bit of slapstick with Jones that make useful comic relief suited for this particular duo. It should prove worthy enough for a look because of what it achieves in enjoyment for adventure with the source material that makes for useful caper entertainment that leaves one interested in the imagination for what could go from there or for one to look upon the pages it borrowed from in the first place. As a first venture into animation, I would say Steven Spielberg did a pretty good achievement in that regard.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Fantastic Mr. Fox.

Review #1553: Fantastic Mr. Fox.

Cast: 
George Clooney (Mr. Fox), Meryl Streep (Felicity Fox), Jason Schwartzman (Ash Fox), Bill Murray (Clive Badger), Willem Dafoe (Rat), Michael Gambon (Franklin Bean), Owen Wilson (Coach Skip), Wallace Wolodarsky (Kylie), Eric Anderson (Kristofferson Silverfox), Jarvis Cocker (Petey), Wes Anderson (Stan Weasel), Robin Hurlstone (Walter Boggis), and Hugo Guinness (Nathan Bunce) Directed by Wes Anderson.

Review: 
"I like to do things that are a little surrealistic but with characters who are real. So that, even if things are a little unusual, the emotions will come through anyway.”

The auteur filmmaker is one that knows and controls his style to create a distinct film of his own merit. Wes Anderson certainly has proven himself worthy of the label alongside a variety of others with his level of filmmaking. The native Texan made films from a young age - making his first films with a Super-8 camera. He liked films such as Star Wars and directors like Alfred Hitchcock, even working as a projectionist when studying philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. In 1992, he directed a short film with friend Owen Wilson called Bottle Rocket (which he wrote with Wilson that was inspired by films like Mean Streets). A submission to the Sundance Film Festival (which James L. Brooks, upon viewing it was "dazzled" by) resulted in an opportunity to direct a feature film based on the short (with time spent re-working the script and filming) - released in 1996, it received notice but was not an audience hit. His next film in Rushmore (1998) proved more successful; after these two films, he already had one significant fan in Martin Scorsese (who called both films "very funny, but also very moving"). His subsequent films have received a good deal of notice that have made for nine released features in nearly 25 films of filmmaking. Anderson is noted for his distinct style of films, which he described as "very personal movies in a way", built with quirks in his characters and with the choices of music and look of each film, while also featuring a variety of recurring actors (such as Schwartzman, Murray, Dafoe, Wolodarsky, and Wilson). For this film (which he co-wrote with Noah Baumbach along with serving as co-producer), it would be done in stop-motion animation with figurines that were made out of fur (with tailored clothing of fabric that he designed himself).

Sometimes a film can be just a bit more than just a fine adaptation of another work. This was based off the 1970 children's novel of the same name by Roald Dahl (who many will recognize as writer of works such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Matilda, and The BFG, each of which I read as a child) - it was apparently the first book Anderson remembers owning. The film is mostly faithful to the novel, aside from having a focus on the relation of Mr. Fox to his family (which cut the four children to one) that expands upon the narrative (in other words, more than just a fox stealing chickens from a bunch of weirdos), in addition to a tweaking of the ending and a few added scenes. Sure, one could have the voices done in the booth, or they could have them done at a farmhouse as is the case here with such a marvelous film like this proves to be. It never wavers from delivering an interesting story with plenty of whimsy and skill with performances to go along with entertaining voices and design that make a wonderful classic worth 88 minutes. It all falls first to Clooney, who does quite well in brimming confidence that weaves interest and curiosity that generate subtle amusement fitting for that particular timing and character. Streep goes along with reserved grace that makes a well-tuned chemistry with Clooney in their scenes shared together. Schwartzman does well in generating interesting angst and smart remarks for when it is necessary that drives the film in those careful moments handled with his counterpart in E. Anderson (illustrator and author, who had made cameo appearances in his brother's films). Murray makes a few funny moments count without needing to hear too much of him badger on, while Dafoe equally makes his dandy moments count well in amusement. The film hits its stride early and never lets go in examining the nature of longing, alienation, and ultimately togetherness within a worthwhile adventure. I am dazzled by the animation of the film, as it looks quite intricate and rightly executed in creating a world of dazzling charm and palate (with a distinct lack of blues or greens) that never looks excessively gaudy or too much for enjoyment. I like the entertainment it brought to a charming work that honors the original book with its own flourish of humor and narrative for a resplendent achievement for animation alongside its era and director.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

The Secret of NIMH.

Review #1466: The Secret of NIMH.

Cast: 
Elizabeth Hartman (Mrs. Brisby), Derek Jacobi (Nicodemus), Hermione Baddeley (Auntie Shrew), John Carradine (The Great Owl), Dom DeLuise (Jeremy the Crow), Arthur Malet (Mr. Ages), Peter Strauss (Justin), Paul Shenar (Jenner), Aldo Ray (Sullivan), Shannen Doherty (Teresa Brisby), Wil Wheaton (Martin Brisby), Ian Fried (Timothy "Timmy" Brisby), Jodi Hicks (Cynthia Brisby), Edie McClurg (Miss Right), and Tom Hatten (Farmer Fitzgibbon) Directed by Don Bluth.

Review: 
"I prefer that animation reach into places where live action doesn't go, and it seems like all of animation nowadays is trying to go where live action is."

It takes some sort of courage to set forth and make your own film, particularly when it comes to one you could be proud to say could rival the pros of the day. In this case, this is one that came from defectors of Walt Disney Productions that tried to keep the spirit of traditional animation films alive with a meaningful story and values that they believed had decreased from the company in recent years. The group, headed by animators such as Don Bluth, John Pomeroy, and Gary Goldman, had spent over four years animating a prior short in the 27-minute Banjo the Woodpile Cat (1979), which was looked upon with apathy when they asked Disney about their interest in buying the film. Bluth had developed an interest in Disney from a young age, which led to two separate stints with the company (starting with Sleeping Beauty (1955) as an assistant and closing with his abrupt exit during The Fox and the Hound (1981) with the others), with notable work including The Rescuers and Pete's Dragon (1977). It was artist Ken Anderson who sparked interest in doing a film of the Robert C. O'Brien book Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH (rejected by Disney when offered the book because they had "already got a mouse...and we've done a mouse movie."), who gave the book for Bluth to read that was later given to others to read that led to interest in doing a film. It would become a reality with another ex-Disney group in James L. Stewart's Aurora Productions, under the terms of a $5.7 million budget and 30 months to make the film, with long hours for the animators and staff (with 110 hour weeks near the end of production). The film made just around $15 million upon release, but it eventually developed a following of its own that gave it a tremendous reputation among animation films, and Bluth would go on to do nine further films as a director in the next two decades (with varying success and failure).

The film had four credited writers in Bluth, Goldman, Pomeroy, and Will Finn while Steven Barnes was a creative consultant for his initial draft (which had focused more on the rats of NIMH like the book that was revised later to focus on Brisby). What a marvelous little film, one might say when it comes to an experience like this. It can't be denied that there is plenty of striking color and technique to achieve a wonderful mythic tale with plenty of craftsmanship that springs from utilizing ideas such as rotoscoping (live action footage traced over into animation) or backlit animation (in an attempt to recreate artificial light/fire). It is the kind of film that you show to others as an example of what one might want from "mature" animated films for everyone, where it doesn't talk down to either the young or older audience that looks upon the experience - they will find a bunch to adore with its ambitious animation and attempts at a dark story with a suitable path for a fantasy experience and a game cast. This is an interesting cast to highlight, since the voices and abilities of those actors were deemed crucial to matching who they were going to play, finding people to cast based on previous work that they liked, such as Hartman (a troubled but talented actress who had made her debut with A Patch of Blue seventeen years prior), DeLuise (for his work in The End (1978) of all things) or Jacobi and Strauss from their work in miniseries (I, Claudius and Rich Man, Poor Man, respectively). It obviously paid off well, since everyone seems to fit well with who they are meant to be playing, which springs to life with our focus in Hartman (in her last role before her suicide five years later), a sensitive but soothing presence that we appreciate in seeing her courage play out to us. Jacobi serves the film well with a mystical and alluring presence that makes every little sentence count, starting with the opening. Others such as Baddeley (in her final role before her death in 1986) and DeLuise do well with a light hand to connect with Hartman and give the film space to breathe in its initial moments and further. Carradine (in his fourth and last animated role), appearing in one sequence with his distinct voice is recognizably capable for what is needed. Shenar makes his time count as the main threat behind things, while Malet and Strauss fill out the rest with fine spirit. In the long run, the films works out for 82 minutes with quick pacing and a reliable foundation to go with diverting animation to make a worthwhile adventure worth checking out for all ages as a great achievement for Bluth and his animators in a decade that could offer plenty of entertainment for audiences that needed a right touch for everyone to enjoy meaningfully.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Original image:

Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind.

Review #1233: Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind.

Cast: 
Sumi Shimamoto (Nausicaä), Gorô Naya (Yupa), Yôji Matsuda (Asbel), Yoshiko Sakakibara (Kushana), Iemasa Kayumi (Kurotowa), Ichirō Nagai (Mito), Hisako Kyōda (Obaba), Minoru Yada (Niga), Mahito Tsujimura (Muzu), Kōhei Miyauchi (Gol), Jōji Yanami (Gikkuri), Mahito Tsujimura (King Jihl), Miina Tominaga (Lastelle), Makoto Terada (Mayor of Pejite), Akiko Tsuboi (Lastelle's Mother), Rihoko Yoshida (Teto / Girl C) Directed by Hayao Miyazaki (#1111 - Spirited Away)

Review: 
Hayao Miyazaki had a great interest in animation ever since viewing a film named Panda and the Magic Serpent (1958); although he soon graduated from university in 1963 with degrees in political science and economics, he found work at Toei Animation. Over the next few years, he worked on a variety of projects such as chief animator for The Great Adventure of Horus, Prince of the Sun (1968), writing and illustrating numerous mangas before leaving Toei in 1971; he continued work with animation, contributing to anime series and shorts before moving to Tokyo Movie Shinsha, where he directed his first feature in The Castle of Cagliostro (1979). In the following five years, he kept busy, with one of his works being a manga named Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind that began in February of 1982. It proved to be a fair success, leading to him going an adaptation to film, writing the screenplay for a movie that had only sixteen chapters of manga to work with (with the manga running until 1994). Topcraft was the anime studio that helped in making the film; they went bankrupt the following year, with the buyers of the studio (Miyazaki, Toshio Suzuki and Isao Takahata) becoming founders of a new animation studio - Studio Ghibli.

With all of that in mind, it should prove no surprise that this is a wonderful entertaining film, worthy of viewing by anyone looking for a sensibly well-crafted tale that stands tall as a pillar of animation. It is a film that shines on its animation and story, having plenty of depth and moments to view and be entranced by, challenging the viewer and not letting them wander for any sort of time through its 117 minute run-time. The film's main focus is nature itself and how it flows throughout life - whether it is through clean air or toxic ones, as is the case with the latter, owing to Miyazaki and being inspired by mercury poisoning of Minamata Bay in Japan that had occurred in the late 1950s. It travels on story-types of the past when dealing with its nature and focus on life, but it never attempts to boil itself in cliche good-and-evil traps - it keeps itself in check with a focus on environment and maintaining oneself without having to resort to basic fear and greed and fighting over what one does not know or understand. The cast does not break with holding up such lofty ambition in storytelling, particularly with Shimamoto, wonderfully earthly and captivating to be around throughout this adventure, with a climax that helps seal her fate as a memorable heroine for film. The others made their moments on screen count, such as Naya and Sakakibara, with no true weak-link present here. On the whole, the movie cultivates a vision for itself that never seems blurred while playing its hand with the right kind of patience, letting its story play out with a sense of balance and subtlety that makes one appreciate how animation can let creativity play out on such a grand scale. The following year, New World Pictures released an edited version of the film in America named Warriors of the Wind - an English dub lasting 95 minutes that Miyazaki was not pleased with (there of course exists a 2003 English dub that makes no cuts to the original film). In the past 35 years since this film's release, Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli have thrived with showcasing numerous stories into film, with him directing nine features and the studio having released 21 features into theaters - and it isn't hard to see why that it is the case with this one, an adventure for the ages that captivates with its animation and an entertaining story that proves perfect for inquisitive viewers of all ages.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Missing Link.

Review #1209: Missing Link.

Cast:
Zach Galifianakis (Mr. Link/Susan), Hugh Jackman (Sir Lionel Frost), Zoe Saldaña (Adelina Fortnight), Stephen Fry (Lord Piggot-Dunceby), Timothy Olyphant (Willard Stenk), Emma Thompson (The Yeti Elder), Amrita Acharia (Ama Lahuma), Matt Lucas (Mr. Collick), David Walliams (Lemuel Lint), and Ching Valdez-Aran (Gamu) Directed by Chris Butler (#240 - ParaNorman)

Review: 
This is certainly a first in movie theater experiences: one without a single other audience member present besides me. As much as audiences can be weird at times, it sure is a shame to not have anybody else watching something that actually was pretty good, even if it was a 2 o'clock showing.

Admittedly, watching a stop-motion film made from Laika doesn't have too many objections from me, particularly since they have managed to craft a solid winner each time I viewed them, whether it was their first venture with Coraline (2009) or their last one with Kubo and the Two Strings (2016). They manage to make interesting movies with plenty of visual flair that works well for the eyes without reaching to bombard them too much. With this film, their attempt at adventure (done by writer/director Butler) works itself out just fine, having tinges of humor and heart and a fairly solid cast to go along with some well-done visuals. It isn't the strongest feature that Laika has made, but it fits just fine with their other works in providing some entertainment, regardless of age. Not many films can be a buddy flick with a creature like Bigfoot, that is for sure. Galifianakis is charming, making this gentle yet unwavering creature come alive with energy, helping to make for a few laughs sprinkled throughout, such as when he decides to come up with his name or such. Jackman pulls his part well enough, self-assured in a pursuit for a creature but also well enough to play a pursuit for more without too much trouble. Saldana is fine as the last part of the main trio. Fry and Olyphant make for decent adversaries, each having their own set of brashness that rolls just fine. The story holds okay for its 94 minute run-time, feeling a bit closed-in with its adventure trappings (such as when it actually reaches the Himalayas), but there isn't a sense of boredom even if it sometimes feel a bit familiar with some of its characterizations, with its beginning and climax feeling a bit more better in pace than its middle. It has a few nice designs to the places it wants to get to (such as sequences in the Himalayas or involving a fight on a ship), even if some of its landings probably don't land as hard as they could have. It at least has a decent message regarding friendship and belonging that will serve its audience well without seeming completely out of the blue or overly sentimental. It is a film that probably needs more in terms of its pursuit for its characters, but it at least serves itself well with style and some charm to make up a fair winner.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Ralph Breaks the Internet.

Review #1167: Ralph Breaks the Internet.

Cast: 
John C. Reilly (Wreck-It Ralph), Sarah Silverman (Vanellope von Schweetz), Gal Gadot (Shank), Taraji P. Henson (Yesss), Jack McBrayer (Fix-It Felix Jr.), Jane Lynch (Sergeant Calhoun), Alan Tudyk (KnowsMore), Alfred Molina (Double Dan), Ed O'Neill (Mr. Litwak), and Bill Hader (J.P. Spamley) Directed by Rich Moore (#386 - Wreck-It Ralph and #782 - Zootopia) and Phil Johnston

Review: 
Wreck-It Ralph (2012) was a fine film for entertainment, certainly seeming different from other Disney films, and it is not too surprising that a sequel would occur, although I imagine it wasn't supposed to take six years for said sequel to happen. I will admit that the idea of bringing these characters up to date with the Internet seemed like an interesting idea, particularly since Reilly and Silverman made for a fine duo to play off each other in the first film. The fact that the film focuses on their reactions to their encounter of the Internet and how their friendship changes accordingly is a fine centerpiece for a movie that tries to balance that with a mashup of gags and an overload of product placement that nearly collapse the experience into a big mess. It sure is strange how the film reminded me of Ready Player One (2018) with its collection of references and flashy colors, although I will say that at least this film actually aims to be funny on purpose, and it works more often than not with making jokes, along with a few songs to go with it. The animation is nice to look at, bright and colorful without overloading the senses too much, having numerous set-pieces that certainly stand out well from one another.

Reilly shines once again with big-hearted charm and some interesting moments that manage to make him feel fresh and not tired. Silverman shines again with a fun sense of humor and a curiosity that drives the film well enough, and the song she sings alongside Gadot (called "A Place Called Slaughter Race", of course) is fine to hear. Gadot is a welcome addition to the cast, showing some charm in her gritty world she occupies. Henson, playing an algorithm, plays the role with a bit of pomp and flash that makes for occasionally amusing points. It's a shame that McBrayer and Lynch don't have much time on screen, although I suppose the focus on Reilly and Silverman and their characters' story meant that anyone not on the Internet wouldn't have too many moments. Or perhaps having a B-plot would've made the film (with a run-time of 112 minutes) felt longer. Tudyk and Hader give off amusing moments whenever each is on screen, representing their parts of the Internet (for better or worse) just fine. On the whole, the movie works best when it tries to just have fun with casual gags about the Internet, or more specifically when the film isn't trying to make so many references within Disney itself. The part with the Disney Princesses are okay, but the movie as a whole feels like it nearly collapses into self-parody near the second half, where it almost falls into the trap of pandering without substance. Honestly, the fact that the film doesn't have a villain is a bit surprising, but at least the movie has a climax and a message that makes the experience worth it without becoming too ham-fisted or over indulgent. The film has enough charm and fine moments to make up for the occasional slip-up, and I'm sure kids will do just fine with it and the adults will tolerate it alright. The film isn't anything great by any means, particularly if compared to recent Disney films or the original film, but it is at the very least fine entertainment that will work just alright for its audience.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Mr. Peabody & Sherman.

Review #1125: Mr. Peabody & Sherman.

Cast: 
Ty Burrell (Mr. Peabody), Max Charles (Sherman), Ariel Winter (Penny Peterson), Stephen Colbert (Paul Peterson), Leslie Mann (Patty Peterson), Allison Janney (Edwina Grunion), Stephen Tobolowsky (Principal Purdy), Stanley Tucci (Leonardo da Vinci), Patrick Warburton (King Agamemnon), Zach Callison (King Tut), Dennis Haysbert (Judge), and Leila Birch (WABAC) Directed by Rob Minkoff (#073 - The Lion King and #746 - The Haunted Mansion)

Review: 
In a world where any kind of show or segment can be adapted into a show, I suppose it only makes sense that this exists. This is an adaptation of "Peabody's Improbable History", created by Ted Key that appeared as a segment on The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends from 1959 to 1960. It is also the 28th film from Dreamworks Animation, which seems to want to churn out as many products of entertainment as it pleases, which can certainly lead to some interesting things - for better or for worse. The best thing I can say about this film is that it will get the job done in terms of entertainment for its target audience, for better or worse. There is a certain charm that the movie has with its jokes, having an eccentric nature that combines with some engaging animation to carry the movie more often than not. Burrell does a fine job, being fairly clever and interesting to watch while generating a fair share of amusement. Charles does fine, having a spunky boyish nature that plays well with Burrell in the history segments, with the family segments playing off okay. Winter does okay with what she's given, but her character generally comes off as annoying and self-serving, and her chemistry with the other two is more irritating than dynamic; with her first scene (involving her calling Sherman a dog), you'd think she was actually playing an adversary. She lightens up slightly, but not entirely to make a winning trio. The only other person with significant screen-time is Janney, playing a bureaucrat that is an unwanted presence each time she pops up, not generating any sort of laughs, representing the time when the movie slows itself down to try and create conflict. There are three main timelines covered in the film, with a varying consistency that don't plod too much, with the Troy marginally being the best one with its energy, with Warburton helping out in that regard. Nothing says "history lesson" like puns and goofy portrayals of history, reminding me a bit of History of the World, Part I (1981), albeit with attempts to connect the plot together. The story, written by Craig Wright (writer for shows such Six Feet Under) is usually up to task. The time travel story does weave itself a bit complex, but it proves workable without being too cliched. However, the film's problem is its elements besides time travel. Perhaps there wasn't a way to make a film without introducing a third to go with the main duo, but then I remember that Back to the Future (1985) and the Bill and Ted films worked out just fine with weaving its time travel and humor with its duo. The whimsicalness can only go so far when the emotional arc tries to wedge itself in, for better or worse. The climax is okay, but its shoehorned parts about the nature of the duo's relationship (in an attempt to establish "heart", I suppose) border on cringing the audience. When the movie wants to have zany fun and not try to go through the motions of predictability, it is engaging and worth a fine time, making for a solidly average but serviceable movie. At 92 minutes, it won't torture its audience, working as decent fare for families and anybody looking for a decent time to travel with.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Spirited Away.

Review #1111: Spirited Away.

Cast: 
Rumi Hiiragi (Chihiro Ogino / Sen), Miyu Irino (Haku), Mari Natsuki (Yubaba / Zeniba), Bunta Sugawara (Kamajî), Takashi Naitô (Akio Ogino), Yasuko Sawaguchi (Yûko Ogino), Akio Nakamura (No-Face), Tatsuya Gashûin (Aogaeru), Ryûnosuke Kamiki (Bô), Yumi Tamai (Rin), Yô Ôizumi (Bandai-gaeru), Koba Hayashi (Kawa no Kami), Tsunehiko Kamijô (Chichiyaku), and Takehiko Ono (Aniyaku) Directed by Hayao Miyazaki.

Review: 
It is amazing to note that this film was released only seventeen years ago - July 20, 2001, in fact. There is a certain pride that one can have when watching something as entertaining as this - especially when this is the first Japanese animated film you've seen, made by famed director Hayao Miyazaki, who had done seven other films prior to this such as Princess Mononoke (1997). There is a certain depth and magic one can see in each scene, a certain beauty to how things are drawn but also to how things are played out in its tone and movement. With world cinema, there can be a great enjoyment in seeing how a movie plays itself out through the eyes of people in countries different from one's own, with animation being an outlet for great imagination that anyone can enjoy when done with the right hands, as is the case here. It may interest you to know that the film was made without a finished script; Miyazaki described his process in an interview in 2002 in that the story develops when he starts drawing storyboards (with production starting soon after), adding that "We never know where the story will go but we just keep working on the film as it develops", which certainly makes for an interesting manner to showcase the vision of a creator on screen - which I can respect, obviously. There are numerous scenes I could highlight, but one that I particularly appreciate is the one involving a stink spirit, which has a few laughs but it also resonates well due to where it ultimately plays out - where it actually is a river spirit filled with a bunch of junk. Another interesting scene that I like is the one involving Hiiragi and Nakamura's characters are traveling by train near the end of the film, and there is just something the silent nature of how it plays out that makes it more absorbing than if it had been shown as frentic or with unnecessary noise. There is a Japansese word for such negative space depicted by Miyazaki that applies for this scene - ma, where the emptiness is done intentionally that this film uses to take a moment to absorb itself and the figures that encompass the vessel that the character inhabit to their respective destinations.

A movie as striking to watch play out on screen must have a good cast of voices to carry it through, and this one is successful with its row of actors, particularly from Hiiragi. She plays the main role with the kind of grace and care that you would expect from a young hero that is always watchable and always one to root for. Irino does a fine job as well, using his time on screen to make someone worth following without detracting from the experience the film wants to show with its main character. Natsuki stands out well in her role as twin sisters, conveying noticeable differences and quirks that make for a riveting showcase whenever either role is on screen. Other highlights include Sugawara and Nakamura, both of which being interesting people to follow with their time on screen in a film that basks in fantasy such as this. One year later, an North America release came out, under the supervision of John Lasseter for an English language translation, featuring voice actors such as Daveigh Chase in the lead role and others such as Suzanne Pleshette (in her last film appearance). Subsequently, the movie won an Academy Award (among several other awards) for Best Animated Feature. Whichever version you see, it is evident that Spirited Away is a great piece of cinema that I highly recommend for everyone. There really isn't anything like it, and the vision showcased on screen is one that proves to be great entertainment - whether for kids or adults. I'll end with a quote from Miyazaki about his intent for the film, and let you ponder if he succeeded with that goal: "I wanted to make a movie especially for the daughters of my friends. I opened all the drawers in my head they were all empty. So I realized I had to make a movie just for 10 year olds, and 'Spirited Away' is my answer."

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Incredibles 2.

Review #1097: Incredibles 2.

Cast: 
Craig T. Nelson (Bob Parr / Mr. Incredible), Holly Hunter (Helen Parr / Elastigirl), Sarah Vowell (Violet Parr), Huck Milner (Dashiell "Dash" Parr), Eli Fucile (Jack-Jack), Samuel L. Jackson (Lucius Best / Frozone), Bob Odenkirk (Winston Deavor), Catherine Keener (Evelyn Deavor), Brad Bird (Edna Mode), Jonathan Banks (Rick Dicker), Sophia Bush (Karen / Voyd), Phil LaMarr (Krushauer and Helectrix), Isabella Rossellini (The Ambassador), John Ratzenberger (The Underminer), and Bill Wise (Screenslaver / Pizza Guy) Directed by Brad Bird (#083 - The Iron Giant, #128 - Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, #153 - The Incredibles, and #158 - Ratatouille)

Review: 
I figured that the best way to get myself prepared for a sequel after 14 years of waiting was to re-watch the original Incredibles film, and it was a refreshing choice to do so since I have fond memories of how entertaining it was. Naturally, it still held up well as as entertaining superhero film that doubled as a family movie with the styling of a retro age in terms of its heroes and spy elements that is best suited for its cast and makers that I find myself adoring each time I watch it. With the decision to follow up directly from the first movie (complete with a sequence teased at the end of the other one, drawn out to its conclusion here), this is a sequel that undoubtedly relies on nostalgia in more ways than one, but it also has enough heart and care in making a quality piece of entertainment that ultimately succeeds. It isn't as exceptional as the original, but there are enough pieces in its 118 minute run-time that fit correctly.

The family dynamic isn't lost here with the main group of five (baby included, naturally), with the group of Nelson-Hunter-Vowell-Milner-Fucile proving to be adept at having their own moments to shine, the first two especially. The structure is flipped a bit on its head from the previous one, but Nelson handles it fairly well, having some amusing moments while also still having the strong spirit that made him easily watchable all those years ago without resorting to cliches. Hunter also does a fine job in elevating her role and making her character feel fresh and interesting to follow throughout most stretches of the film. Vowell and Milner aren't as prominent, but they do manage to contribute with making their plot-lines resonate well enough to what the film wants, for the most part. The parts involving Fucile and the baby are pretty amusing and interesting to watch play out without being typical fare resorting to playing down to the audience. Make no mistake, this is a movie for any type of audience, and it is nice to see that it is a film that doesn't pander to anyone - whether to kids or adults, which the original also shone well at. It manages to rise above being just a "greatest hits" kind of sequel to something different nature.

Other returning members such as Jackson and Bird are nice to see again for their time on screen, having a few laughs that work out fine. Odenkirk and Keener round out as the most important of the new additions to the cast. With Odenkirk, he does a fine job with his character, capturing an earnest yet endearing spirit that is charming if not amusing at times. It reminds me of how the first film also had its own variation of the fanboy with regard to superheroes, and while they certainly have key differences, it is nice to see where the films have their divergences. Keener is okay, showing her differences in her style of her interaction with the plot and the heroes (in contrast to her brother), even if she sometimes feels like she falls into the background at times (which you could say about others, too however). There are a few heroes introduced here that share some time on screen, particularly around the climax, with Bush coming out the best in being pretty interesting in sticking out. Admittedly, the weakest part of the movie is the villain, although it isn't for lack of trying. The Screenslaver is sometimes interesting to see on screen (although some will likely have trouble with the flashing lights that encompass the movie at times), and there are some relevant points that come along with dealing with the nature of society and its role with what superheroes mean to that world. However, I feel that it falls a bit short (and for some a bit predictable) with where it ultimately goes, and while the basic nature of the villain can work, I just don't think it really worked as well as it probably could have. It's hard to say how that it could've worked better without spoiling the fun, but I'll just say that it is a bit hard to follow up a threat as interesting as the original film's villain was without falling prey to comparisons, as one would probably expect. While I can't say that the adversary is great, I can see why the choice was made to do so and at least see some of the motivations for said villain.

The animation and style is beautiful to look at once again, and there are enough jokes and riveting action sequences to make this good entertainment. It never gets to a point where things are too bright or dark or glossy, and there a few touches that will certainly check well with people. What we have here is a movie that manages to deliver in the right places in its characters, action, and story to be a welcome piece of entertainment for audiences in any kind of year beyond summer. In a sea of sequels over the past few years, this one manages to stick itself just fine, especially for animation standards. Maybe there will be another one, maybe not, but at the very least it is nice to say that there is more than one movie involving this interesting family of heroes. It may not be purely incredible, but it is purely worth it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Coco (2017).

Review #1016: Coco.

Cast: 
Anthony Gonzalez (Miguel Rivera), Gael García Bernal (Héctor), Benjamin Bratt (Ernesto de la Cruz), Alanna Ubach (Mamá Imelda Rivera), Renée Victor (Abuelita Elena Rivera), Ana Ofelia Murguía (Mamá Coco Rivera), Edward James Olmos (Chicharrón), Alfonso Arau (Papá Julio Rivera), Selene Luna (Tía Rosita Rivera), Dyana Ortellí (Tía Victoria Rivera), Herbert Siguenza (Tío Felipe Rivera and Tío Oscar Rivera), Jaime Camil (Papá Enrique Rivera), Sofía Espinosa (Mamá Luisa Rivera), and Luis Valdez (Tío Berto Rivera) Directed by Lee Unkrich (#074 - Monsters, Inc, #155 - Finding Nemo, #382 - Toy Story 3, and #441 - Toy Story 2) and Adrian Molina.

Review: 
You are likely wondering if there was anything before or after the film. In this case, Olaf's Frozen Adventure, a 21-minute "short" played before the main feature. Long story short, it is a finely animated piece, but I don't see the point of playing this before Coco. Sure, it is a Disney production for a film released by Walt Disney Pictures, but this is something you would see as a television special, not on a big screen. Long story short, it doesn't detract from Coco, but it isn't really anything you absolutely need to see, unless of course you're a huge fan of Frozen. Hopefully you enjoy the following review.

I will admit that I had a fair amount of expectations from this film, likely because Pixar does have a fair (but not perfect) record with their movies, but also because it seemed particularly interesting. Admittedly, there are likely some comparisons that could be made to The Book of Life (2014), but there isn't much point in doing so in my view seeing as I hadn't seen the other film before this (one can likely search the web all they want for the comparisons they desire). In any case, Coco is a wonderful movie, achieving a great look with tremendous animation and a riveting story and cast of characters that surely makes for great entertainment for all audiences. Gonzalez does a fine job as the lead, never approaching the lines of annoyance or unlikeability, while also making his character fairly interesting to follow for the film, and he also does a fairly decent jobs for times when he sings as well. Bernal does a pretty commendable job, having some fine moments of amusements, but he also proves to be an interesting character to follow as well, with him and Gonzalez having pretty good chemistry together. Bratt is enjoyable to watch as well, having a fine amount of charisma that certainly seems believable. The rest of the cast is also fairly pretty good at their roles, each having at least one good moment throughout the film, most of the time having a pretty good effect. The animation is wonderful to watch, having a dazzling colorful effect at times that shows a good deal of creativity and imagination while not distracting one from the story itself. The movie has a fairly cohesive narrative that sticks well enough while also making sure to cover its bases splendidly. Although it has its amusing moments, the movie does manage to create some emotion without feeling fabricated nor overly sentimental. At 110 minutes, it feels like the right kind of run-time for a film like this, although some could find it to be a bit dragged in the beginning, but I'd say that the film is never boring on any level, whether on the eyes or for what the film wants to be about, saying some fairly interesting things about culture and family along with other things that should be watched and not spoiled in a review. This is an easy film for me to recommend because of the elements that make this a clear winner, from its animation to its heart.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Fantastic Planet.

Review #1006: Fantastic Planet.

Cast: 
Jean Valmont (Terr), Eric Baugin (young Terr), Jennifer Drake (Tiwa), Jean Topart (Master Sinh), and Gérard Hernandez (Master Taj) Directed by René Laloux.

Review: 
Sorry for the wait for the past few reviews. It has been a while since I touched upon a film that falls under the world cinema label, particularly since this is the first review of a film from the Czech Republic (Czechoslovakia split into the Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1993), with this being a co-production with France, which I haven't covered since the Three Colors trilogy (#601, #602, #603) back in 2014. In any case, enjoy the review.

The film (known in France as La Planète sauvage and Divoká planeta in Czech) is certainly an interesting piece of cinema, seeing as it was a co-production between companies from France and Czechoslovakia that was in production for roughly six years, with it being based off the novel Oms en série by Stefan Wul. It was the winner of the Grand Prix special jury prize at the 1973 Cannes Film Festival. In terms of animation and science fiction, this is certainly a film that stands out among others in its genre, being a unique and strange experience that certainly has more to say than it may first let on. It won't exactly fall as one of my favorite films in either genre, but it will definitely fall as one of those films that certainly deserve a curious look. It's a surreal piece of work, but it is a curious fantastical piece that certainly sticks out with its animation, which was hand-drawn while having stop motion cutouts that gives the movie an alien feel, with a rigid but focused sense of space and medium that contrasts with something that you might see in a Disney film. There is just something alive about how this alien world comes off that just makes the film shine, whether one is watching the film intently or not. There isn't much to the voice acting, though Valmont is certainly acceptable as the narrator, with the other voices fitting the alien nature fine enough. There isn't too much to the character themselves, but the story that it tells (and however one interprets it) make it worthwhile to sit through. At 71 minutes, the film isn't too hard of a sit-through, though it will certainly play better for others depending on what they are looking for in an animated film or in science fiction. It isn't exactly anything too great for me, but I can definitely find why someone else would really enjoy the film's vision, or in contrast find the film to be muddled in itself. I myself found it to be pretty good, mainly because of it having a fairly good grasp of what it aims for and having the visuals to back it up, for the most part.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.

Review #940: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.

Cast: 
Bill Hader (Flint Lockwood), Anna Faris (Sam Sparks), James Caan (Tim Lockwood), Neil Patrick Harris (Steve the Monkey), Bruce Campbell (Mayor Shelbourne), Andy Samberg (Brent McHale), Mr. T (Officer Earl Devereaux), Bobb'e J. Thompson (Calvin "Cal" Devereaux), Benjamin Bratt (Manny), and Al Roker (Patrick Patrickson) Directed by Phil Lord and Christopher Miller (#540 - The Lego Movie and #568 - 21 Jump Street)

Review: 
The last time that I had reviewed an animated movie was back in December (with Beauty and the Beast - #891), so it is welcome to review a film that is from a different animation studio - Sony Pictures Animation. This is based off the children's book of the same name, which I remember reading quite fondly when I was a child; obviously the movie takes liberties with the source material (with the food falling from the sky being from a machine being one example), but can it manage to pull off delicious entertainment (pardon the pun)? To put it lightly, it works just fine. Hader and Faris shine just fine as leads, having a fair amount of chemistry while also being fairly interesting in their own ways; Hader's character treads on familiar grounds, but he manages to give the character enough likability and charm, especially when on screen with Faris' character, who is equally engaging to watch. The father-son dynamic between Hader and Caan goes around the same lines that you'd expect from these kind of movies, though at least it isn't broadly annoying. Campbell does a fine job at showing the gluttony of the de facto antagonist of the movie (unless you count an abundance of food as an adversary); the supporting cast is pretty likable, with Harris, Samberg and Mr. T being capable highlights. The highlight of the film is the animation, which is bright and colorful but it fits for the movie; seeing burgers come out of the sky while the sky becomes a shade of purple is quite nice to look at (alongside other shots of fun foods, like ice cream). It isn't a movie without much emotional punch, but there is enough entertainment and moments of charm and food (so much food) within its 90 minute run-time to make a capable movie. Is it something to the caliber up something like Up (#288, released months before this film)? Not quite, but not everything needs to be that kind of gem; sometimes the best thing to watch (or eat) is a nice tasty digestible burger (or movie). Bottom line, this is a capable little film worth at least checking out.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Beauty and the Beast (1991).

Review #891: Beauty and the Beast.

Cast:
Paige O'Hara (Belle), Robby Benson (The Prince/Beast), Richard White (Gaston), Jerry Orbach (Lumière), David Ogden Stiers (Cogsworth), Angela Lansbury (Mrs. Potts), Bradley Pierce (Chip), Rex Everhart (Maurice), Jesse Corti (LeFou), Hal Smith (Philippe), and Jo Anne Worley (the Wardrobe) Directed by Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise.

Review:
What is there to say about Beauty and the Beast that countless others haven't said over the past 25 years since it was released? Especially from someone who had never seen it before? I'll try to keep my words around the usual level of babbling for a movie like this. In any case, it's easy to like Beauty and the Beast. It's also easy to love it. Why is it so easy? Maybe it's the gorgeous animation, or maybe it's the wonderful songs, or maybe it's the characters that give the movie its depth. There is a certain kind of grace the film has, from the opening scene narrating the tale of the Prince's turn into the Beast, to a climax that is executed neatly. The ballroom dance sequence is a particular scene that stands out, from the waltz to the animation (with the background animated in CGI mixing with the traditional animated characters) to just how delicate everything is handled, which makes for a fantastic scene. There is never a dull moment in the movie, and it certainly looks like great care was taken in terms of how everything flows from scene to scene. The characters are enjoyable as well, exuding their own fair kinds of charm and depth. O'Hara does a fine job at portraying this main character with a good deal of wit and grace, and her scenes with Benson are as entertaining as one would expect, with the latter giving the character the right amount of conflict and presence. White is a fun villain (with his look certainly helping), conveying the right amount of arrogance and some form of charm within an enemy as delightfully evil as this. Orbach and Stiers certainly go well together, and they (along with Lansbury) contribute to making these songs so catchy and so enjoyable, especially "Be Our Guest", with the rest of the cast also doing a fine job. On the whole, this is a great film, complete with everything anyone of any age could enjoy, from animation to characters. At 84 minutes, it's an easy film to recommend to anyone, especially if you're in the Disney mood.

Countdown to 900 Reviews: 10, 9...

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Kubo and the Two Strings.

Review #836: Kubo and the Two Strings.

Cast
Art Parkinson (Kubo), Charlize Theron (Monkey/Kubo's mother), Matthew McConaughey (Beetle), Ralph Fiennes (Raiden the Moon King), Rooney Mara (the Sisters), George Takei (Hosato), Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (Hashi), and Brenda Vaccaro (Kameyo) Directed by Travis Knight.

Review
In the two films I've reviewed done by the studio Laika (#189 - Coraline and #240 - Paranorman), they were both enjoyable and wonderfully made animated movies. Fortunately, this film continues that trend. This is an exquisite piece of work that manages to establish (and maintain) a dark sense of adventure and fantasy, with a fair cast of characters and gorgeous imagination and animation. Parkinson does a fine job in the lead role, giving this character the needed weight and depth to make him more than just a typical fantasy kid lead. Theron and McConaughey are also exceptional, managing to keep the movie on its heels, with a few moments of laughs between the trio as a whole. It's a fun movie, complete with enough of everything for everyone; mot to spoil anything, but this is also a movie that pulls enough strings and twists correctly as well. The stop-motion animation is wonderful to watch, managing to help make the world the movie builds to life perfectly, such as when the movie utilizes origami paper (a miniature warrior created by the paper is with the group for most of the film) to great advantage. Fiennes isn't in the movie until the last half of the film (with Mara being seen more often, playing the two sisters wickedly well), but he makes for a fine enough villain, with a climax that is pretty spectacular to watch as well. At 102 minutes, this is a fine film to watch, with exceptional marks in almost every subject. It's clear that there was a lot of labor and love put into this film, and I applaud them for making a movie as fun as this. Despite the limited amount of people at the theater for the film, this was still a good time.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Sausage Party.

Review #830: Sausage Party.

Cast
Seth Rogen (Frank), Kristen Wiig (Brenda Bunson), Jonah Hill (Carl), Bill Hader (Firewater), Michael Cera (Barry), James Franco (the Druggie), Danny McBride (Honey Mustard), Craig Robinson (Mr. Grits), Paul Rudd (Darren), Nick Kroll (Douche), David Krumholtz (Kareem Abdul Lavash), Edward Norton (Sammy Bagel Jr), and Salma Hayek (Teresa del Taco) Directed by Greg Tiernan and Conrad Vernon (#162 - Shrek 2 and #651 - Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted)

Review
Not to understate this too much, but this isn't a movie for everyone (hence the R rating, a first for a CGI animated film - by the MPAA, anyway), especially not for kids, obviously. It's definitely a different kind of animated movie, and I'm sure there's even plans (or new inspiration) to do more of these kind of films. As ridiculous as this movie was, it at least was an adequate in terms of quality and length (88 minutes). There is a semblance of plot in this movie, with regards to the food and a "Great Beyond" outside the store, amidst a bunch of easy jokes that are either funny for some, or just stupid. For me, it was a bit of both, but it works on such an absurd level of ridiculousness that fit fine enough. The opening minutes feature a song, no less, with about as much absurdities as one would expect (let's not forget about the song by a meat loaf). Here's how I would put this movie: I laughed numerous times, with barely an ounce of shame to that laugh.

The ending to the movie is certainly a strange one, and to explain it would sound downright weird. But it works on an absurd level of lunacy for me, even if it's not really exceptional at animation, but it certainly works better that if it had been in live action. Rogen is a well enough lead, and anybody who's seen him in a film before will know what they think about the movie. Wiig is also decent, and the supporting cast is pretty quirky enough, with Krumholtz and Norton having some interesting chemistry with each other, and Kroll being a fair enough villain. Hader is also a fine highlight. Animated movies are somewhat thought of as a kid's market, so the idea of one for adults isn't too terrible, considering the amount of ones made for the lowest common denominator. They both pander, but this one has some sort of goal in its potty mouth. It has its moments of entertainment, It's exactly what you expect, so take it for what it's worth. It also might be better with a friend or two, so you can comprehend the weird crudeness for yourself. I can't recommend it for everyone, but anybody looking for a quick time of something a bit different might like it. They might also look at their food a bit differently afterwards, however.
Okay, if you scroll over this text, here's the climax: The food murder people in the store and have sex.
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

The Simpsons Movie.

Review #814: The Simpsons Movie.

Cast
Dan Castellaneta (Homer Simpson, Abe Simpson, Groundskeeper Willie, Krusty the Clown, Mr. Teeny, Sideshow Mel, Mayor Quimby, EPA Officer, Itchy, Barney Gumble, Hans Moleman, Plopper, Burns's Lawyer, Rich Texan), Julie Kavner (Marge Simpson, Patty and Selma), Nancy Cartwright (Bart Simpson, Nelson Muntz, Ralph Wiggum, Todd Flanders, TV daughter), Yeardley Smith (Lisa Simpson), Pam Hayden (Maggie Simpson, Milhouse Van Houten, Rod Flanders), Hank Azaria (Moe Szyslak, Apu Nahasapeemapetilon, Comic Book Guy, Cletus Spuckler, Carl, Bumblebee Man, Dr. Nick, Chief Wiggum, Gabbo, Officer Lou), Harry Shearer (Mr. Burns, Smithers, Ned Flanders, Rainer Wolfcastle, Reverend Lovejoy, Lenny, Dr. Hibbert, Kent Brockman, Scratchy, Seymour Skinner, Otto Mann), Tress MacNeille (Medicine Woman, Colin, Cookie Kwan, Lindsey Neagle, Agnes Skinner, TV son, Mrs. Muntz, Elly), Albert Brooks (Russ Cargill), Marcia Wallace (Edna Krabappel), Russi Taylor (Martin Prince), and Maggie Roswell (Helen Lovejoy, Miss Hoover) Directed by David Silverman (#074 - Monsters, Inc.)

Review
I suppose this is a hard one to review in part because The Simpsons has been a culture phenomenon before and after I was even born, with no end in sight even after 25 years, and it was only fitting that a movie was made. The discussion of the series and its impact (and apparent decline) is one that will last even longer than this review, if not the next bunch. For me, I remember watching reruns of the show on local TV when I was growing up, but I haven't really watched that many episodes in the past few years, old or new. It's nothing personal, it's just I haven't had as much time for it. But I decided to watch the movie, in part because I wanted to end the month off with a review, and what better than the Simpsons?

While The Simpsons Movie could not possibly live up to any conceivable hype, it is at least an entertaining movie that succeeds enough to work. There is enough gags and enough of the family dynamic that helps it shine, even if it may be a bit short under 90 minutes. The animation is good, showing some excellent depth, such as the mob scene, or even when showing Alaska. The characters are faithfully brought to the screen, and there is some good scenes with them, such as when they are trying to escape the mob, or when Bart helps them escape from a convenience store by "drawing". I wish the movie had been longer, but I almost wish more that it was about something else. Granted, it does try to be more than just an extended episode of the show, but there's just something about it that feels missing. Sure, the environmental plot is fine and all, but it doesn't really seem to come off as meaty enough to leave much of an impact. The villain (played by Brooks) isn't terrible, but he isn't really anything that special either. The movie didn't need a cartoon-ish over-the-top villain, but I think it needed something a bit more defined. The scenes with Bart and Flanders are well-handled, and it is at least nice to see some sort of variation of Homer that actually seems to learn some sort of lesson, in a strange quirky scene no less. On the whole, The Simpsons Movie is passable enough, with the characters we all know and love in their own movie, and it pushes itself just over the edge to work.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Finding Dory.

Review #813: Finding Dory.

Cast
Ellen DeGeneres (Dory), Albert Brooks (Marlin), Hayden Rolence (Nemo), Ed O'Neill (Hank), Kaitlin Olson (Destiny), Ty Burrell (Bailey), Diane Keaton (Jenny), Eugene Levy (Charlie), Idris Elba (Fluke), Dominic West (Rudder), and Sigourney Weaver (Herself) Directed by Andrew Stanton (#155 - Finding Nemo, #222 - WALL-E, and #539 - A Bug's Life) and Angus MacLane.

Review
Once again, another trip to the local movie theater, this time with friends, which makes the 24th edition of the so-called (by me) Theater Saga a tad more fun. 

The easiest bright side to detect is that it doesn't hinder nor ruin the first film, even if it is easy to admit that this really isn't an very necessary sequel. For me, I'm not one of those people who lets nostalgia of the first film get to me, I just wanted to see if it would be a good animated film from Pixar. While it is not a perfect movie, I did at least have a good time with it. If you enjoyed Dory from the first film, you will be in for a treat (as evidenced by the title); I was surprised that it decided to follow up the first film and not simply just be one of those "X years later", where everything had changed (save for Nemo's voice, which makes sense). The cast is enjoyable, all having good chemistry with each other (one of my favorites is Ed O'Neill, whose ill-tempered nature contrasts well with DeGeneres' bright quirkiness), with the new characters being well suited for the movie. The animation is pretty good, as is the standard for Pixar, with enough diverse fish and colors to pop just enough. The movie did a good enough job to make me not think about exactly how long Dory was separated from her parents (or how a fish gets diagnosed with short-term memory loss as a baby) entirely too much. It's a bittersweet kind of movie that manages to be a fairly good continuation while also not being too much of a re-tread. It might not get you to cry, but it will most likely inspire some sort of emotion. Was it entirely needed? Perhaps not, but it is at least a sequel that does its job nicely.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.