JTurner82 Reviews

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023)

"I miss waking up every morning wondering what wonderful adventure the new day will bring to us."

[8/10 · 3 July 2023]

If INDIANA JONES AND THE DIAL OF DESTINY is to be the last time we see this beloved archaeologist on the big screen, well, then it couldn't have been a better finale. The original trilogy did come to a satisfying close with THE LAST CRUSADE, but still audiences were craving for more. They got their wish back in 2008 when Indy and company graced the screen again in KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL, but that film divided viewers. (Myself: It's not my favorite of the movies, but I still enjoyed it despite occasional quibbles.) I wasn't quite so sure if this newest adventure was necessary, because the previous film did provide a fitting conclusion, as far as Indy and Marion's relationship is concerned. All the more so because Steven Spielberg isn't in the director's chair this time.

I needn't have worried. This newest film, while still not quite every bit the instant classic the original trilogy was, is nonetheless great fun. Harrison Ford simply IS Indiana Jones, and each film has seen him give one hundred percent to the role. This one is no different. Although in the first half hour, you only hear his voice, for the actor you see isn't the man himself. For an opening flashback in 1944, in which Indy escapes capture from the Nazis, culminating with a thrilling train chase, Ford is somehow "de-aged" via computer technology. A lot of viewers are split on this, for if done the wrong way, it can look uncanny. But ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY proved that such a technique is possible if done right when it comes to bringing Peter Cushing back from the dead. Here it's not even noticeable.

Director James Mangold shows that he understands what makes an INDIANA JONES movie work. The film is beautifully shot, with exciting action scenes, mystery, and of course, just the right amount of humor. In this newest adventure, Jones, retiring from his job as professor in 1969 New York City (the same date when Apollo 11 landed on the moon, incidentally), finds himself swept on yet another adventure. This time, it's with his goddaughter, Helena (Phoebe Walter-Bridge), to prevent the titular MacGuffin, a compass-shaped structure that can supposedly cause time travel (shades of BACK TO THE FUTURE here) from falling into the hands of former Nazi stooge Jurgen Voller (Mads Mikkelsen). Accompanying them is Teddy (Ethann Isidore), a Moroccan youth who serves as a sort of Short Round replacement in this tale, if not quite as endearing. (Flawed as TEMPLE OF DOOM was, Short Round was my favorite part of that film, and he's sorely missed here.) I will avoid saying anything else about the movie at this point to avoid spoilers, but I do want to address some of the criticisms of this movie, notably on its wildly off the walls climax which mixes supernatural elements. I will confess that the first time I saw KINGDOM OF CRYSTAL SKULL I was slightly put off by the alien spaceship twist toward the end, although I have since come to accept it. Taking into consideration that similarly fantastical elements have somehow found their way into the finale of each of Indy's adventures (the angels of death from the Ark of the Covenant, the Sankra Stones burning villain's hands, the false Holy Grail causes badguys to age, and the aforementioned alien revelation), such carping seems silly. These movies are, after all, not meant to be based in plausibility, but are fantasies. I think some degree of flexibility regarding how likely such situations could ever happen (and let's face it, Indy somehow manages to survive every situation, no matter how bleak it is), especially in a film like this. It's a pulp adventure story, not a historical epic. So I was ultimately fine with this one's finale.

Arguably the best part of this movie is the ending, after all the badguys have been defeated and things settle down. Again I'll refrain from giving any spoilers, but of the INDIANA JONES movies, I think this one has the most touching finale. I personally felt it was a beautiful send-off to one of cinema's greatest heroes.

Like THE RISE OF SKYWALKER for the STAR WARS sequel trilogy (yes, I still like that movie, deal with it), INDIANA JONES AND THE DIAL OF DESTINY is the end of an era, the last goodbye to a hero we have come to know and love over the years. That same feeling applies to John Williams' terrific music; how bittersweet will it be in the coming years to remember that this will be the final time we ever hear the iconic Raiders March over the closing credits? As split as critics and viewers have been over this one, for me, DIAL OF DESTINY hits all its targets. I had a great time viewing this movie on the big screen, arguably the best way to view a movie of this type. In terms of where this one ranks, I'd roughly say it's among my third favorite of Dr. Jones' escapades. Perhaps a second view might be required for me to fully decide. But the joy of being on that thrill ride of cliffhanging excitement and intriguing mystery, plus Ford's ever infectious swagger charm hasn't left me even after seeing this terrific adventure. Again, I don't think it was mandatory, but the film is enjoyable all the same, which is what ultimately counts.

The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023)

"Mushroom Kingdom, here we come!"

[7/10 · 10 April 2023]

Thirty years ago, SUPER MARIO BROS. Was brought to the screen in a bizarre live-action version starring Bob Hoskins, John Leguizamo, and Dennis Hopper. That film, which bore absolutely nothing to the game in question, was and still is a total embarrassment all around, and understandably disappointed many longtime fans of the game. Despite developing a cult following, its failure was still impactful enough to discourage the Japanese game company from engaging with future film productions.

Now, Nintendo has teamed up with Universal's Illumination Studios of all companies to provide an all-new adaptation - this time computer animated, and much more in line with what everyone would expect from SUPER MARIO. The plot is pretty much what you would expect from the likes of these games: Mario (voiced by Chris Pratt), and Luigi (Charlie Day), are struggling to make a reputation for themselves and open a thriving business. When a water main bursts in Brooklyn, the brothers head down to the sewers to repair it, only to be sucked into a warp pipe. During transmission, the two are separated. Mario ends up in the colorful, Oz-like Mushroom Kingdom ruled by resourceful Princess Peach (Anna Taylor-Joy) and inhabited by cuddly mushroom-shaped inhabitants called Toads. Luigi, meanwhile, is captured by the megalomaniacal Koopa King, Bowser (Jack Black), who has recently stolen the power star from a kingdom of penguins. His goal: to conquer the Mushroom Kingdom and take the princess as his bride. Peach is already plotting a resistance against Bowser, planning to enlist the aid of the Kongo Tribe in order to have any chance. Aided by a chatty but loyal Toad (Keegan-Michael Key), Mario teams up with Peach, hoping to rescue his brother. But in order to win the respect of the Tribe, he must first contend with Donkey Kong (Seth Rogen).

If the above sounds simplistic, it is. Yet SUPER MARIO's lasting appeal doesn't thrive on storytelling; it thrives on engrossing, fun gameplay in colorful, lively worlds. All things considered, the story it tells, predictable (and Paper Mario thin -- pun intended) though it may be, works in favor of this feature.

Which is not to say that THE SUPER MARIO BROS. MOVIE is a perfect film. It has its faults, chief among them the decision to feature occasional pop songs on the soundtrack at various points. Although the songs in question are from the 80's, I still find this incredibly distracting, as it clearly reeks of marketing tactics. It's all the more unfortunate that so many animated films in the west today suffer from this problem. Worse still, it interrupts the momentum from the far superior musical score. I can't help but wonder if the movie would be better off without those songs. Excluded from this is are the admittedly cheesy but iconic "Mario Brothers Rap" from SUPER MARIO BROS. SUPER SHOW and a brief 30-second musical number by Bowser who (badly) belts out, rock-style (read, screeches) about his unrequited love for Peach. Those two moments are complimentary to the mood of the film and totally fine.

The world of SUPER MARIO is full of colorful, eccentric characters and for the most part script writer Matthew Fogel (THE LEGO MOVIE) does an admirable job of infusing Mario, Luigi, and company with distinctive personalities. Particularly commendable is the decision to upgrade Peach from a damsel in distress to a competent, strong, capable woman not afraid to stand up to the bullying Bowser. Not only is this an improvement over the original material, it is also refreshing to see this character being more of an active participant rather than having to be rescued all the time. That she serves primarily as Mario's mentor and friend instead of a love interest is refreshing.

On the other hand, the film's rapid pace causes for a lot of character arcs to be rushed, and so we get to see little progress of character development. This is especially problematic for the adversarial relationship between Donkey Kong and Mario, who start off as enemies and then become allies. It happens much too suddenly without much buildup. An extra half hour of additional scenes wouldn't have hurt to provide the appropriate impact. (Even at 92 minutes, the film feels too short.)

This same problem also extends to several brief flashbacks involving Mario, Luigi and Peach as toddlers. Getting to know Mario and Luigi's family is a solid idea, but because they're only in a few scenes, we barely get to know them well. Likewise, it is hinted that Princess Peach comes from the real world, but the plot only hints at it instead of building on it, which is a bit disappointing for viewers expecting a fully-fleshed out plot.

All this said, the overall difference between the infamous 93 version and this one is night and day. Unlike the dreary, dark, dystopian city in the former, the atmosphere, characters, and worlds are all identical to their video game counterparts. Reportedly, Nintendo and creator Shigeru Minamoto were much more hands-on about the project and it shows. The warp pipes, question blocks with power-ups, Peach's castle, and even Bowser's rocky flying fortress are all rendered in meticulous detail. As much as I've grown to resent computer animation these days, I have to give credit to the animation staff at Illumination Studios for their work on this film. And considering that most of the MARIO games resemble 3D CG movies, the aesthetic is appropriate for this movie.

What's really fun about this movie are the numerous shout-outs to classic Nintendo games sprinkled throughout the film. This is done seamlessly and cleverly, including a glorious Mario Kart style race across a glittering rainbow, arguably the most spectacular scene in the movie. There are also numerous occasions where we see various shots which ingeniously look like they could come out of NEW SUPER MARIO BROS., including one at the beginning of the movie as well as an "obstacle course" complete with mechanical Pirahna Plants, and various platforms. Other such "easter eggs" only last for several seconds and are easily missed. If anything, this movie merits repeat viewings to spot them all.

The same feeling is evoked in Brian Tyler's terrific score, which seamlessly includes classic melodies from the games. The composer behind these legendary tunes, Koji Kondo, reportedly worked with Tyler. Anyone who is a fan of video game music will have a field day listening to this score; as with the visuals, the real joy comes from recognition.

The vocal performances (supplied by big name stars; a common practice for western animated films, love it or hate it) fare well for the most part. Chris Pratt was a rather curious choice to play Mario in the eyes of many, especially since the character's Italian-accented falsetto supplied by Charles Martinet has been heard in every Mario game to date. But previous incarnations of this plumber have cast him with a Brooklyn accent (notably the late Lou Albano in THE SUPER MARIO BROS SUPER SHOW). Pratt supplies a toned down accent for Mario, but despite that, he still manages to make the role his own, providing a surprisingly good turn. (Martinet does provide a nice cameo in the film.) Charlie Day's Luigi, a more ideal choice, is terrific from the start, and the chemistry between him and Pratt sells the relationship between the two brothers. Anna Taylor-Joy gives a somewhat husky but still cool and confident voice to Peach; Seth Rogan, while primarily using his own voice for Donkey Kong, nonetheless injects a lot of boastful swagger to the role. Jack Taylor is a real hoot as Bowser, effortlessly stealing all his scenes with imposing vigor. The other voices fare well with the possible exception of Fred Armisen as Cranky Kong. He's not bad by any means, but his Cranky voice doesn't quite fit the character at least in my opinion.

As mentioned earlier, THE SUPER MARIO BROS MOVIE won't rank on anyone's list of greatest animated features, but it's not even trying to. What it aspires to be is harmless, clean fun, and a faithful adaptation of a classic video game franchise. Aside from occasionally dodgy song choices and rushed character arcs, this film still succeeds at being both. Kids will easily enjoy this movie, but the real target audience are the millions of gamers who have grown up playing these games over the years. That this film manages to be enjoyable at all is a real credit to the team and especially to directors Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic. The absence of scatalogical humor (an unfortunate trademark in many family-friendly CG movies nowadays) is also a plus. All in all, THE SUPER MARIO BROS. MOVIE succeeds at what it aspires to be, even if it doesn't rank on the list of all time greatest animated films. Whether it's the best videogame movie of all time is up for debate, but warts and all, I had a blast both times I saw it.

Space Jam: A New Legacy (2021)

Mediocre stuff buoyed by great animation sequences.

[6/10 · 17 July 2021]

SPACE JAM: A NEW LEGACY is pretty much what you'd expect for a film of this kind: it's little more than a commercial for Warner Bros. Property. At the very least it's still superior to the awful RALPH WRECKS THE INTERNET, although that isn't saying much. Still, this film does have its assets. The concept of being trapped in some kind of virtual service world gives the film some vibes of the likes of TRON and even SWORD ART ONLINE. But of course the real highlight are the 2D animated sequences. Bugs Bunny and his co-stars are always a pleasure, and while the animation here lacks some of the 3D shading in places, these scenes are still a delight, particularly in sequences like a chase through DC City and a MATRIX scene. That said the film did lose me a bit in its last hour when the Looney Tunes turn into CG characters (in all fairness, though, at least there is context to it). Going in with low expectations I liked the movie more than I expected to, but it can't be elevated to anything other than mediocre at best. Even so, the audience in the theater seemed to really enjoy it, and you could do a lot worse.

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

"This will be the final word in the story of Skywalker."

[8/10 · 20 December 2019]

As the final chapter of both the sequel trilogy of STAR WARS and the Skywalker saga in general, THE RISE OF SKYWALKER comes with quite a burden. It is a burden that is inevitable with any final chapter in a trilogy, but George Lucas' space saga which began over 40 years ago especially has it tough, particularly when it comes to both the original and prequel trilogies. For the latter, REVENGE OF THE SITH was the best of of an otherwise underwhelming set of prequels, and even then that can sound somewhat backhanded, as it did still contain a lot of the faults of its predecessors. Still, it was at the very essence, the least flawed of the prequels and certainly servicable, which is more than could be said about the likes of THE PHANTOM MENACE and ATTACK OF THE CLONES. RETURN OF THE JEDI meanwhile, was something of a (minor) step down from the fantastic duo of A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, respectively. That said, RETURN OF THE JEDI was no slouch, and only marginally inferior. It still delivered lots of memorable sequences and was a fitting closure to the original trilogy.

Which brings us to THE RISE OF SKYWALKER, where J.J. Abrams once again returns to the director's chair, having helmed the fantastic THE FORCE AWAKENS. (Actually, the final chapter was supposed to be directed by Colin Trevorrow, but honestly, I don't mind Abrams taking the reins for this last one.) There are oodles of questions to be answered in the film to be sure, but to this viewer, the major question is, where does this latest finale rank? Critics were rather mixed on the film, with many finding it "uninspired" and less daring than Rian Johnson's THE LAST JEDI, which, while critically lauded, divided audiences bitterly. But opinions are always going to be subjective no matter what, but as far as I am concerned, THE RISE OF SKYWALKER, for me, ranks somewhere in-between RETURN OF THE JEDI and REVENGE OF THE SITH. Admittingly, I did like THE FORCE AWAKENS and THE LAST JEDI a tad more, but while THE RISE OF SKYWALKER is probably among the lower end of the spectrum, that isn't to say that it isn't any good, much less entertaining. On the contrary.

However, I do have some quibbles. The film gets off to a rather frantic start, filled with action scene after action scene and random jumping to different planets. Although it's not by any means bad, the first act is the least compelling part of THE RISE OF SKYWALKER, coming across as overstuffed, with little time to breathe. New characters portrayed by Keri Russell and Naomi Ackie are, at best, underdeveloped. One moment around the 30-minute mark or so struck me as very odd and off-putting. Viewers who may have appreciated some of the more ambiguous edge that THE LAST JEDI provided will probably be disappointed to discover that this film disregards much of it in favor of a "faster, more intense" (to borrow a phrase from Lucas) adventure. In that aspect, THE RISE OF SKYWALKER is probably a bit guilty of playing it safe. Rose is also criminally underused, perhaps on account of the hideous backlash her character undeservedly received, and some might see her smaller role as a way of catering to those people who disliked her so much.

Despite all this, THE RISE OF SKYWALKER still manages to offer a lot of positives. The film settles into groove after this hectic first half and offers a second half full of emotion, action, suspense, and genuine heart. The final 30 minutes in particular will evoke tears. Throughout, the film maintains the same standards as the previous entries. The performances from everyone involved are absolutely fantastic, especially Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver as Rey and Kylo Ren, respectively. Again, the dynamic between these two characters remains the most compelling part of the film, and it is the commitment both give to their roles that sells it. Oscar Isaac and John Boyega are also in fine form as Poe Dameron and Finn, and Anthony Daniels' C-3PO, who finally gets a lot more to do in this film than in the previous entries, is, as always, a delight. Even better, Billy Dee Williams gets to return as Lando Calrissian, and while his screentime is limited, he nonetheless shows he's still got it.

Carrie Fisher died before work on THE RISE OF SKYWALKER could be completed, and so any footage involving her are actually deleted scenes from THE LAST JEDI. One can only wonder what could have been had she lived. As it is, Adrams still manages to do an excellent job of making use of her. It's bittersweet seeing her in this movie knowing that she's no longer with us, but Fisher still provides enough warmth with every minute of her screentime.

At the risk of providing a spoiler, I was at first a bit uncertain of having Emperor Palpatine brought back as the villain for this movie, as he was meant to have been killed off for good in RETURN OF THE JEDI. Having said that, though, watching Ian McDiarmid exude gleeful nastiness and chewing the scenery as this ruthless character is always a delight, and this is no exception here.

The special effects and production design are no less great; the cinematography, while perhaps not as rich as in THE LAST JEDI, is no slouch in this film. Each set is rich with detail and exudes a sense of realism. It helps that the film achieves a nice balance between practical effects and digital ones. John Williams, as usual, contributes another fantastic score; easily one of the best for the whole saga. Considering that his music has consistently been the strongest asset of each STAR WARS saga, good or bad, that's saying a lot.

As mentioned earlier, THE RISE OF SKYWALKER is tasked with answering oodles of questions that viewers might have from the previous two entries. There are plenty of answers to be given, sometimes to the detriment of the pacing, and not everyone will be satisfied with them. However, whatever faults lie with this picture are not on account of lack of trying. Abrams and company clearly gave their all. (The director admits that endings aren't his specialty, but to be fair, he does a fairly good job with what he has to do here.) However you respond to this final chapter will depend on whether you've been on board with the whole sequel trilogy or not.

Personally speaking, though, in spite of my quibbles, I found THE RISE OF SKYWALKER to be a uproariously entertaining work. It IS a bit of a step down from its predecessors, to be sure, but it's still good fun overall. And that's exactly as it should be.

In the end, we can argue again and again over the merits or deficits of each of these movies, and whether it was a necessity or not. For me, however, the sequel trilogy comes very, very close to capturing the magic of the original trilogy, which was something that the prequels never could. While Episodes I-III had some reason to exist and offered what we may call "different" experiences from this one, all three were very problematic on account of lackluster execution. This new trilogy has faults of its own; occasionally underdeveloped new characters and at times delving into nostalgia. However, the direction, visual effects, performances, character dynamics have all been consistently excellent across the board. For all that, I would gladly visit this sequel trilogy again any time. It ranks just a notch below the original trilogy and above the prequels. Only time will tell if it ages well, but at present, these three movies are great fun, overall.

THE RISE OF SKYWALKER is the final goodbye for the legendary heroes we've all come to love from a saga that began way back in 1977. While there have been some occasional missteps on the way, we are very fortunate to have endured such a long journey with these movies at all.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

"I don't like sand."

[4/10 · 18 December 2019]

George Lucas' long-awaited STAR WARS prequel THE PHANTOM MENACE divided critics and disappointed many fans, but the film still earned enough money to justify continuing the new trilogy. Still, it was clear that fans were shocked by EPISODE I's uneven mix of childish goofiness and stoic sluggishness, and many hoped Lucas would make amends with the subsequent entries. Unfortunately, the second prequel, ATTACK OF THE CLONES, is no improvement; in fact it comes across as the nadir of both the prequel trilogy and the whole STAR WARS franchise. While some might argue that THE PHANTOM MENACE is more deserving of that title, in reality, it was EPISODE II that truly brought a once respected series to a new low. Carrying over many of the same faults as its predecessor (stale acting and dialogue, overuse of CGI), and introducing two major new ones, it was almost enough to make many wonder what had become of Lucas' talents in the years since the original trilogy. Even with the argument that its primary purpose is to function as a transition between Episodes I and the far superior III, it still comes up short, the occasional decent moment notwithstanding.

Lucas chose to shoot the film digitally, which unfortunately results with a cold, artificial look. It's especially noticable with the visual effects; although some pieces are stunning, such as a car chase above the streets of Coruscant, too many others come across as too distractingly obvious. The scenes involving the plastic glass spaceships especially look distractingly fake.

The real problem with ATTACK OF THE CLONES is that it is much too slow going, with an abundance of weak, unsatisfying scenes which last too long. A good majority of this comes from a love subplot between Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) and Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman). Christensen and Portman never really come to life in their roles. Neither is there any genuine chemistry and the scenes where they're together suffer tremendously because of that. The less said about the laughably inept dialogue they are slapped with, the better.

On the flipside, Ewan MacGregor does a fine job as Obi-Wan and Christopher Lee adds some gravitas in an otherwise negligible villainous role, but Yoda walks away with the show in this episode. In the past episodes, this memorable Jedi master was seen as a rubber puppet as operated by Frank Oz. Oz still speaks for the character, but here he becomes more fully animated and expressive, thanks to computer technology. His lightsaber duel with Lee at the end of the film, in particular, is a knock-out (if sometimes too goofy).

As mentioned, however, there are too many long, dull scenes with the protagonists, not enough action, an overabundance of unconvincing visual effects, and a love story that falls flat on its face.

The Price for Silence (2018)

Slow-moving but effective thriller.

[9/10 · 13 October 2019]

I was an extra in this movie (I appear about an hour in for one scene), so maybe my review will seem somewhat biased. However, despite a somewhat slow pace, Tony Germinario's thriller tale about a woman who returns to her home years after being abused at a party succeeds at making a strong statement against sexual harassment. Given that we have been seeing plenty of crimes like this happening in today's society, it's healthy to make a stand. Lynn Mancinelli gives a powerful turn as the woman in question, and similarly great performances are delivered by the rest of the cast. However, it's the tense, edge-of-your-seat finale that really makes THE PRICE FOR SILENCE worth a look.

There. I warned you I wouldn't be so critical.

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

"There's always a bigger fish."

[6/10 · 6 October 2019]

In 1999, George Lucas' STAR WARS: EPISODE I--THE PHANTOM MENACE was arguably the most widely anticipated movie of its year. Hot on the heels of the massively successful STAR WARS trilogy which began back in 1977 and wrapped up in 1983, the public was hungry for more adventures in that "galaxy far, far away" audiences fell in love with. So much so, that expectations were high - perhaps TOO high with some people. To the point that when the film finally debuted on May 19, audiences and critics were sharply divided with the results. Although there were audiences who were thrilled to have another STAR WARS adventure, many, many others were crushed with disappointment, to the point that THE PHANTOM MENACE, despite being a massive box office success, became not only one of the most widely maligned movies in the franchise, but one of the most hated films ever. Indeed, it was hard to encounter a genuine fan of the first entry in Lucas' prequel trilogy, if at all. Stripped of all the brouhaha that surrounded the movie and its reputation in a revered legacy, is THE PHANTOM MENACE really as wretched as made out to be? No. But neither does it live up to the famous trilogy that so many people gravitated towards. The faults many have found with it are a lot more glaringly obvious, especially in the light of the newer, arguably better produced STAR WARS movies in recent years.

Rather than serving as a proper introduction to the saga, THE PHANTOM MENACE plunges us into a conflict with characters rapidly introduced that we barely have time to connect with them. That they don't evolve into characters as compelling as the likes of Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, or Leia is also problematic. Of them, only Obi-Wan Kenobi (played here by Ewan McGregor), Yoda (Frank Oz), and the man who will eventually become the Emperor, Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid) are the ones who resonate the most with the viewers, but that is primarily because we know how they are going to tie into the original trilogy. More controversially, the prequels aims to tell the tale of the origins of Darth Vader, when he was first known as Anakin Skywalker. Conceptually, the idea is interesting and Lucas, to his credit, does make some effort in world-building in his prequels, but THE PHANTOM MENACE unfortunately falters in some of the more important areas.

For one thing, we are never really clear on who we are supposed to identify with as the main protagonist. Ideally, it should be Anakin, but he doesn't appear until a good 30 minutes into the picture. And when we meet him, he isn't at all who we would expect. Anakin, here, is portrayed as a surprisingly cherubic, baby-faced, high-pitched little boy, enslaved by a greedy alien. It's difficult to imagine seeing this boy growing up to become one of cinema's most iconic villains, least of all one who ends up saving the day by accident. In-between, we zigzag back and forth between the likes of Obi-Wan's counterpoint (master) Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson), the regal and rather deadpan-sounding Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) as well as her servant Padme (Portman again). Neither come across as compelling or interesting.

Which brings us to Jar Jar Binks, an amphibian-like alien who has gone on to be one of the biggest turn-offs of the picture. Lucas conceived this character as the first to be created entirely by CG, and as a major role. In some ways Jar Jar is more interesting than his human counterparts; at the very least he has a personality and Ahmed Best does what he can to make inject life into this role. Unfortunately the character's primary function is comic relief more than anything else, and he's greatly overused, to the point where a lot of his clumsiness gets old fast.

In fact, this character's presence also contributes to one of the major drawbacks of THE PHANTOM MENACE. As opposed to the more gritty, all-ages appeal of the original trilogy, this episode suffers from an overdose of cartoonish goofiness which even the original trilogy's last entry Return of the Jedi just managed to avoid, even with its similarly controversial Ewoks. That there are two moments of scatological humor for no specific purpose is also a problem. Even the original STAR WARS trilogy's humorous bits weren't this childish.

The real issue with THE PHANTOM MENACE is the abundance of overlong, dull scenes and not enough momentum to the story. Most of these consist of characters delivering exposition and no major action. The most sluggish scenes involve the ones at the Supreme Council, which are mostly just political debates: nothing at all what viewers would come to expect from STAR WARS. The bits involving humor attempt to liven up the picture, but ultimately causes Episode I to be a rather schizophrenic and inconsistent entry to the franchise. Fans have also taken issue with the introduction of "midi-chlorians" which are supposedly intended to be the cause for the Force. This is also at odds with what the first STAR WARS movie lays out that concept as. Then there's the issue of the villainous Trade Federation aliens speaking with obvious Asian accents. It would have been preferable for Lucas to give these characters their own language, ala Jabba the Hutt (who incidentally makes a brief but very welcome cameo appearance during one scene).

Lucas has never considered himself a particularly great director, and some taken issue with his lack of communication to actors. He lucked out in the first STAR WARS movie because the ensemble had genuine enthusiasm with their roles, and made their characters into the iconic household names still remembered after all these years. Sadly, the same cannot be said of the prequels, least of all THE PHANTOM MENACE (or successor ATTACK OF THE CLONES). Neeson does what he can, but his role as Qui-Gon is underwritten and as such his performance is only adequate at best. McGregor, looking, at least at this point, nothing at all like what his character will eventually become in A NEW HOPE, at least deserves points for emulating the late Alec Guinness. Like Neeson, he only comes across as only decent, with the occasional genuinely believable moment.

Pernilla August, as Anakin's foster mother, provides a warm, vulnerable quality appropriate to her character, and Anthony Daniels continues to do a decent job as the bronze droid C-3PO (who bizarrely is revealed to be made by Anakin, and has only a cameo where he appears "skinless"). In addition to Daniels, everybody else in the cast is upstaged by both Ian McDiarmid as Palpatine and Oz's Yoda. Both are very charismatic characters, and it is gratifying to see these two continue to command the screen during each moment they're on.

As for the rest of the cast, young Lloyd is a rather odd choice for the role of young Skywalker, yet whatever shortcomings of his turn are not his fault at all, but with iffy direction and dialogue, (both of which Lucas takes a lot of flak for). The same is true with Portman, who comes across as negligible in both of her roles (particularly the deadpan-sounding Amidala), and Samuel Jackson doesn't get a whole lot to do as Jedi Master Mace Windu, who, like everyone else, is underdeveloped. Unfortunately, the rest of the performances are non-existent at best.

Lucas' major strengths have never been in dialogue or directing actors, but rather in fashioning worlds and bizarre creatures, and here THE PHANTOM MENACE at least delivers on several of these premises. The different planets in the galaxy exude with imagination and detail, and much of the credit goes to Lucas' Industrial Light & Magic. Even 20 years later, the sets still look quite impressive, even if some of them were obviously down through green-screen and computer technology. The visual effects, while in some ways the major attraction to THE PHANTOM MENACE, are also a bit of a double-edged sword. Stunning though they are at many places, there are moments where it seems as though Lucas was getting a bit carried away with pushing CG visuals, to the point where some of them look too obvious. It's particularly noticeable on some exaggerated looking characters. On the flipside, there are other characters, mostly the ones wearing masks, who do display the kind of quirky out-of-this-world quality that can be expected.

That said, THE PHANTOM MENACE still offers two major highlights that prevent it from being an altogether waste: an extensive Pod Race sequence straight out of Ben-Hur, and the climactic deal between Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, and the film's other solely compelling character, the evil Darth Maul. Maul, although underused, is a scary-looking character and while he doesn't say much, he's no less menacing for it. True, he does get bumped off rather fast (spoiler alert), but there is a reason why he has remained a fan favorite over the years. At any rate, that showdown, underscored to yet another powerful score from maestro John Williams, is the film's real tour de force.

If all the other elements in STAR WARS: EPISODE I--THE PHANTOM MENACE matched those moments, it could have at the very least been a decent enough new adventure. Unfortunately, its weaknesses do drag it down. In all fairness, though, this is by no means the worst STAR WARS movie (successor ATTACK OF THE CLONES qualifies), but nonetheless is toward the short end of the stick. Once the novelty and premise wears off, it's only mediocre.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

A pleasant surprise.

[9/10 · 4 October 2019]

What's this? Can it be? A STAR WARS prequel that's actually -- GASP! -- great? Believe it or not, yes. Although technically not a prequel -- it's more of a spin-off "anthology" movie -- ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY could very well qualify. It's easily superior to the prequel trilogy (even REVENGE OF THE SITH, good as it was, was held back by flaws, none of which exist here, thankfully). While not necessarily a better made film than THE FORCE AWAKENS, I actually enjoyed ROGUE ONE a lot more than I thought I would. Which was not something I was expecting to say.

But ROGUE ONE works as both a movie and a bridge to the opening moments of the first STAR WARS movie (rebranded as EPISODE IV: A NEW HOPE). It's also one of the few STAR WARS movies to actually show the tragedies of going into war -- something that we have not seen from entries in this galactic saga. A new cast of characters propels this tale, of which K-2SO is easily the most successful. Voiced by Alan Tudyk, this droid is very much in the vein of C-3PO, what with his deadpan, dry humor and prissy personality. He's also very badass -- can you name a scene in which C-3PO wielded a blaster to save his colleagues? No. The fact that this robot does makes him a very memorable newcomer.

The most surprising moment of the movie is the return of Death Star Governor Grand Moff Tarkin, as portrayed by Peter Cushing in A New Hope. Apparently CGI was used to make this possible, but honestly, I'd be hard-pressed to know if it were, because the onscreen results are convincingly real. Since the actor has now passed, Stephen Stanton supplies the motion capture work for him. His voice is supplied by Guy Henry, who does a dead-on job of impersonating the character's chilling mannerisms. (The same is true of a surprise cameo at the very end of the film -- you'll have to see for yourself to find out.)

The real jewel is the return of Darth Vader, complete with James Earl Jones' unmistakable baritone. Unlike the prequels, we get to see this iconic villain as his usual nasty self, berating an Empire leader one moment, and at the climax, slashing at rebels with his familiar crimson lighter. Although his appearance is brief, he is still the highlight of ROGUE ONE. In fact, the last thirty minutes are where this movie really dazzles.

Fault-wise, ROGUE ONE has very little to speak of, other than the fact that it starts off somewhat slowly and occasionally dips into lulls. However, performances across the board are very well done all around (a commendable feature of these Disney-produced STAR WARS movies), and while their characters don't register with us in the same emotional way as Luke Skywalker and company did, they are at the very least soulful and believable characters as opposed to anyone in the prequels. And of course, as usual, the visual effects are of the same standard we've come to expect from the STAR WARS trilogy. It's refreshing to have this movie refrain from overusing computer graphics except for necessary purposes.

One could easily ditch one of the STAR WARS prequels and replace ROGUE ONE with the one in question. This movie really is that good.

The Plague Dogs (1982)

Gritty, dark, yet compelling adult dog animated feature.

[10/10 · 23 April 2019]

Martin Rosen's second -- and last -- animated feature adapts another grim, harrowing novel by author Richard Adams -- THE PLAGUE DOGS. For anyone familiar with predecessor WATERSHIP DOWN, that movie achieved the impossible: placing cuddly rabbits in a gritty yet compelling story while somehow managing to appeal as a successful work of art on its own. THE PLAGUE DOGS is every bit as dark -- perhaps even more so.

This time the subject is about animal experiments the human cruelty that goes along with it (think THE SECRET OF N.I.M.H., and you get the idea). Two dogs who undergo such torture, Snitter and Rowf, daringly choose to escape the scientists' lab and struggle to survive in the wilderness. But it proves to be a challenge, especially since neither canine has learned how to live in a harsh, brutal world, especially one where humans turn their noses up at them and the only way to live is by mauling sheep. Only a skillful fox, known as the Tod (no, this is not in any way another FOX AND THE HOUND) might be able to help them.

It is to director Rosen's credit that the film wisely refrains from any sugarcoating whatsoever: the struggle of these two canines is plagued with very real danger and dread. It is also ripe with brief but still quite horrifying moments of graphic violence: the most scary of which is when one of the dogs accidentally sets off a hunter's gun, shooting said human in the face. Luckily such scenes are not presented for the sake of violence, but as a means of telling its unflinchingly brutal tale.

Aesthetically, the film's animation can seem a bit rough -- it obviously lacks the lavish budget of, say, a Disney animated feature. Having said that, though, the actual artwork is more than adequate and fitting for this atmosphere. This is no doubt due to how Rosen chooses to stage the film like a live action feature, as evidenced with his dramatic camera angles. Further contributing to that atmosphere are the very fine vocal performances from its cast, which include John Hurt, Nigel Hawthorne, and in a surprise cameo toward the end, a then unknown Patrick Stewart.

Animated movies targeted purely toward adults are very rare to come by, especially from Western animation studios these days. That THE PLAGUE DOGS dares to do so makes it stand out among today's competition. But it also proved to be a tough sell in its initial release date in 1984 -- so intense was the subject matter that many audiences avoided the film like the plague (no pun intended), making it a box office failure. Over the years, however, the film has acquired a loyal cult following, and deservedly so.

The film is available in two different versions: the theatrical cut is 82 minutes long, and a longer, extended version clocks in at 105 minutes. This latter version has been very hard to find and rather rare. Recently, however, Shout Factory has brought both versions to Blu-Ray with stunning results. Both cuts look absolutely fantastic in high-definition, although there are some obvious places where some shots look as though they still have dirt and scratches on them. Given the difficulties for finding elements for the uncut scenes, it's understandable. The fifteen minute interview with Rosen is a nice bonus feature as well.

All in all, THE PLAGUE DOGS is most definitely NOT children's fare, and I strongly wouldn't suggest anyone under the age of 18 view this. However, for anyone looking for a great example of an animated feature that can stand as both a powerful "adult" film and different from the norm, you can't go wrong with this one. I give it my highest recommendation.

Okko's Inn (2018)

"Harunoya Springs rejects no one."

[10/10 · 23 April 2019]

OKKO'S INN, a disarmingly charming, instantly likable Japanese animated feature, is the sort of family-friendly movie rarely seen from a lot of western productions of this type nowadays. While most kiddie flicks I've seen these days tend to go for loud, noisy, in-your-face schtick and disgusting scatalogical humor for the heck of it, this one instead aims to be a more gentle, down-to-earth sort of tale. Whatever humor we get is thankfully brief and of the clean and clever kind. More importantly, it's a film with a lot of heart. It's only weakness may be that it may fall somewhat short of the standards often set by, say, Studio Ghibli, but director Kitaro Kosaka (himself, incidentally, a Ghibli veteran) still manages to make this a delight for kids and adults while emerging as a beautiful work in its own right.

The main character of this tale is Oriko Seki (aka Okko), a 12-year-old girl who is tragically orphaned within the first five minutes when her parents' car crashes into a derailed truck while traveling home from a performance. Miraculously surviving this incident, Okko is subsequently sent to stay with her grandmother, who happens to be the proprietor of an inn in the countryside. The inn in question, which doubles as a hot springs house, goes by the name of Harunoya, with a philosophy that all are welcome.

Naturally, it does take Okko some time to get settled into this new establishment. She is befriended by three ghosts -- two of which are children who passed away years ago: the spunky but friendly Uribo, and the sassy, mischievous Miyo -- and a pesky "demon" known as Suzuki. With encouragement from these three (invisible to all but the little girl), Okko aspires to be a "junior innkeeper". Predictably, she starts off on the clumsy side and makes some poor calls of judgment, but gradually gets better, learning lessons about selflessness and valuing life. Over the course of Okko's coming of age journey, we meet a variety of other characters, among them a sullen teenage boy, a friendly fortune teller called Glory Suriyo (who takes her on a memorable shopping trip), and a bratty rival junior innkeeper named Matsuki, who treats Okko contemptuously at every opportunity. Of course, at the major core of the story is Okko coming to terms with the fact that her mother and father are no longer with her.

A lot of this movie's subject feels strikingly similar to Hiroyuki Okiura's A LETTER TO MOMO, as well as numerous other animated tearjerkers such as MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO, COCO, and KUBO AND THE TWO STRINGS, but OKKO'S INN manages to carve out its own niche thanks primarily to its plucky cast of characters. Okko is an easily relatable protagonist, and her similarly likable ghost buddies provide moments of gentle humor without treading into "annoying" territory. Only Matsuki comes across as downright unsympathetic -- at least for a good majority of the film -- until we find out that she, too, has troubles of her own. (As you might expect, the ending is a bit of a tearjerker, but not so much that it makes the movie downright depressing.)

In lesser hands, this tale could potentially tread into draggy territory. Thankfully, Kosaka keeps an energetic pace throughout all 96 minutes, making even the more quieter, slower moments flow without draining interest. That said, there are a couple of moments when the development of some moments feels a bit hasty, notably in the handling of Matsuki's character. Some additional scenes where we get to see her being nicer would have been welcomed, but that's honestly my only complaint.

Despite being directed by a Ghibli veteran, OKKO'S INN was animated at Madhouse Studios, whose output has ranged from gritty productions like NINJA SCROLL and PERFECT BLUE, to somber, friendlier stuff such as THE GIRL WHO LEAPT THROUGH TIME. If you're not familiar with this studio, these works you may have been fortunate to see. OKKO'S INN, naturally, being among the more softer offerings of this studio, has a predictably sunny, beautiful look to it. There is a digital sort of look to the animation, but it still offers the sort of warmth that hand-drawn craft is usually known for. On occasion there are uses of computer images, but thankfully they don't stand out in all the wrong ways.

I went to see the dubbed version, provided by NYAV Post. It's yet another quality effort, with terrific performances by all involved. Madigan Kacmar does an outstanding job as Okko, providing the character with just the right amount of warmth, spunk, and heart. She has terrific chemistry with K.J. Aikens' somewhat smart-alecky but lovable Uribo as well as her other co-stars. Carly Williams' Matsuki is as snarky and prissy as you'd expect, while Tessa Frascogna's Miyo and Colleen O'Shaughnessy's Suzuki complete the trio of ghost companions for Okko. Glynis Eliis is also great as Okko's grandmother. NYAV Post has turned out excellent work lately, notably in the form of of big hitters such as A SILENT VOICE, MIRAI, and even the flawed, forgettable FIREWORKS. It's gratifying to see them continue to live up to their standards here.

There have been a lot of great contenders for emotionally resonant animated features from Japan lately. OKKO'S INN may be among the lesser known of them, but it certainly deserves a following. If you ever decide to check out this charmer, I highly would recommend doing so.

Mirai (2018)

Nothing short of amazing and heartwarming.

[9/10 · 30 November 2018]

Mamoru Hosoda's fifth animated feature, MIRAI, may seem a bit more small scale compared to his earlier movies such as THE GIRL WHO LEAPT THROUGH TIME, SUMMER WARS, and WOLF CHILDREN, but it's no less mesmerizing. To anyone unfamiliar with these aforementioned films, I do recommend them highly -- they're all magnificent movies, almost the equivalent of Hayao Miyazaki's work. MIRAI isn't quite that, but it's the next best thing.

The film tells the story of a pampered little boy named Kun, used to his parents catering to him all the time. So much so that when he gets a new sister, Mirai (which means "future"), his parents start neglecting him, and of course, he gets jealous. He behaves like any kid in his situation would. He throws tantrums, he bawls, he says nasty things, and at one point, even throws one of his toy trains at his sister. "Your attitude stinks," says another character in the film, quite accurately.

At the peak of every outburst he flees into the garden where a tree is growing, at which point the scene changes to a different location where he meets members of his family when they were younger -- including the pet dog(!), as well as, most mysterious of all, his new sister as a teenager. These close encounters send Kun on flashback journeys where he must learn to be more appreciative and caring and stop acting like a spoiled brat. (In a way, this is sort of like A CHRISTMAS CAROL for 4 year olds, but not feeling "dumbed down" in the least.)

Hosoda handles this story with just the right touch of tangibleness as well as his occasional trademark moments of surrealism. However badly Kun behaves, he remains a very relatable character throughout -- in fact this might be the most realistic portrayal of any such boy I've ever seen in any animated feature. And of course, the animation, as mentioned, is nothing short of gorgeous, complete with a mix of CGI and hand-painted backgrounds -- a rarity in animated films these days... even in Japan. (Hosoda laments how rare this style of background art is becoming and is quite vocal for its support, and rightly so.)

MIRAI is also a surprisingly funny film -- one scene in which Kun and two new friends of his have to put away some dolls without Dad in the room suspecting in particular is hilarious. There's even a brief episode in which Kun tries to ride a bike for the first time -- without training wheels! The results go as well as you'd expect, resulting in yet another outburst as well as a visitation, after which he gets a second chance. There's even a frightening climax at a train station, although I dare not reveal more about it at the risk of spoiling the story.

If you're a fan of Japanese animated features and Hosoda's work in general, MIRAI should be a great one to check out. It's accessible to children and adults, and easily superior to many other Western animated features released this year, notably the overbloated RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET. GKids is releasing this movie and treating it as a contender for Best Animated Feature Film for this year. Even if it probably doesn't nab the prize, it nonetheless is strong enough to make an impression of its own. I dare say it even stands alongside the recent Chinese animated fantasy BIG FISH & BEGONIA as one of my favorite animated films this year.

Adding to an already great movie is an even better dub provided by the folks at NYAV Post, with top notch directing by the always reliable Mike Sinterniklaas and script adaptation by the similarly talented Stephanie Sheh. This dub, like the similarly grand Disney-Gkids-Ghibli dubs, features a cast of noteworthy names such as John Cho, Rebecca Davis, and Daniel Day Kim. Surprisingly, too, Crispin Freeman -- yes, that Crispin Freeman(!) -- has a brief cameo, and it's always a pleasure to hear him. The real triumph of the dub is, as per usual in a NYAV Post, the casting of the kids. Young Jaden Waldman does an absolutely excellent job at rendering Kun, effectively conveying his mood swings and giving him a lot of appeal in spite of this character's sometimes unlikable personality. (Only issue is that he screams a bit too much, but on the other hand, it makes sense considering the circumstances.) I've always appreciated hearing children voice children -- as evidenced in my praise of the dub for "Nadia: The Secret of Blue Water", and it's a pleasure to see that there are dubs doing this practice today, MIRAI being one of them. The lipsync is also spot on with well timed and written dialogue -- a difficult task for any scriptwriter, but it's done well here.

MIRAI marks yet another glorious achievement for Hosoda, all the more so because he bases it on a personal story. It's often been said that some of the more inspiring features sing best when the writers write from their own experiences. This is no exception. I look forward to seeing what this director does next.

Ralph Breaks the Internet (2018)

Disappointing and inferior sequel reeking of commercialism.

[4/10 · 25 November 2018]

The original WRECK-IT-RALPH was hardly a Disney classic, but that film was nonetheless a clever commentary on videogames and provided a sense of comical, imaginative, tongue-in-cheek humor. RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET, on the other hand, has only the occasional clever moment and at least one compelling concept. That concept, the visualization of the internet world, a sort of futuristic city straight out of one of the STAR WARS prequels, is admittingly impressive and imaginative. Sadly, that's the only good thing about this sequel, which otherwise ranks as one of the weakest Disney animated films I've seen in a long time. In trying to top everything that made the original so great, it ultimately trips over itself. It also reeks of commercialism as well; there's a painfully unnecessary sequence in which the princesses from previous Disney films show up in cameos. The primary reason seems to be to sell more merchandise and cheap laughs more than anything else. The film really hits rock bottom when Venelope sings a song clearly belonging in a better movie. Her deliberately shrill, tonedeaf singing voice -- intended for laughs -- again, falls flat, as do most of the jokes in this movie. Even the chemistry between the two leads doesn't have the same sincerity or heart as the original. This is mostly a noisy, frantic, emotionless, soulless mess with no heart. The filmmakers attempt to redeem this mess by shoehorning a "toxic friendship" message, but that moral has been done better, and is nowhere nearly as lame as this. Kids might get a kick out of this, and I can see why some internet nerds would gravitate to it, but on the whole, this is a major disappointment from the House that Walt built. Even the original was far more fresh and entertaining than its successor.

The Happytime Murders (2018)

Uneven mix of raunchiness and mystery. Great puppetry though.

[6/10 · 25 August 2018]

"Sesame Street" this ain't. Neither, unfortunately, is it AVENUE Q. THE HAPPYTIME MURDERS, a pet project of Brian Henson, the son of the famous Jim Henson, is an ambitious and technically amazing but uneven and at times, too distractingly vulgar, production which aims to be primarily for adults. Although capably directed and packed with a likable cast of stars and an interesting if familiar mystery plot, the end result is a mixed bag more than anything else. Critics were especially harsh on this film, declaring it to be an unfunny mess and one of the worst films of the year. My opinion: it's nowhere near that. But it's not exactly a great movie either. It's somewhere inbetween.

The best part of the film is the puppetry. Although the characters in question are a far cry from the likes of Big Bird or Kermit the Frog -- they swear constantly, snort drugs (read: rock candy with a Twizzler!), have sex, and in one disgustingly overlong scene ejaculate silly string over the room(!). But the puppeteers and the technical wizardry behind making these puppet characters as convincing and believable as they do cannot be faulted. This is top notch work. Particularly impressive are some wide shots where we see the puppets in full size walking across the street without having to look at them from the waist up. (As a bonus, there's an end credit sequence in which we see outtakes -- or rather, footage of how this stuff works.) The lead character, a disgraced police officer named Phil Phillips, puppeteered by Bill Barretta, goes through a relatable character arc to keep one invested in his plight.

The other assets are live actresses Melissa McCarty and Maya Rudolph. McCarty shares the top-billing as Phillips' ex-partner, Connie Edwards, and while your opinions about the actress may vary, she actually gives a great performance in this film. She treats the puppets as equals and is a lot of fun to watch. Ruldoph gives a more tender turn as Phillips' secretary, oddly named Bubbles. Although she doesn't have many scenes, she brings a lot of much needed heart to the picture.

The idea behind the picture is sound: a world where puppets are treated as second-class citizens (think WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT but with puppets instead of cartoons and you get the idea), and a murder mystery which involves puppets getting bumped off by a mysterious assassin. These murders, oddly enough, are actually among the most visually humorous moments in the film! Rather than spraying blood, we see stuffing pop out of these puppets as they are gunned down, decapitated, or mutilated -- you name it! It's oddly funny in a twisted way. And the plotline, although not especially original or groundbreaking, at least builds well to its climax, even if the final showoff is disappointingly short.

The primary problem with THE HAPPYTIME MURDERS is that it spends much of its 90 minute running time indulging in a lot of tastelessly vulgar stuff. Although meant to provide humor, sights of seeing these characters doing the things mentioned earlier actually proves to be more off-putting than funny. An overlong sex scene involving Philips and another puppet, femme fatale Sandra, which culminates with a gross, extensive silly string gag, in particular, left me sick to my stomach and did take me out of the picture. The wonderful Broadway musical AVENUE Q had a similar scene that was nowhere near this disgusting and arguably funnier.

Worse still, there's no major purpose to a lot of this shock value stuff. It feels as though Henson was trying to push as much comfort zone as possible, but I feel that bad taste for bad taste's sake does not a great movie make. I can't help but wonder if maybe the film would be better off toning down a lot of this over-the-top raunchiness, as it would at least make its storyline more tighter plotted. There are also some implied ideas that puppets are treated as second class citizens, but the script doesn't delve into them as deeply as it could have.

There are flashes of brilliance in THE HAPPYTIME MURDERS, and it isn't an altogether failure, but the inconsistent shift in tone and overemphasis on the shock value cause the picture to be a mixed bag. It is worth watching for the amazing puppetry and McCarthy and Ruldolph's performances, but as the show is quite profane and extreme, it's definitely not for kids.

Your Name. (2016)

Hilarious and heartfelt.

[10/10 · 21 August 2018]

Makoto Shinkai's YOUR NAME achieved what would arguably be a most improbable feat: it dethroned Hayao Miyazaki's Spirited Away to become Japan's most successful film. And what a movie it is! Heartfelt, hilarious, moving, thrilling, and enthralling, this movie cleverly mixes together the central idea from Disney's FREAKY FRIDAY with a bit of BACK TO THE FUTURE for good measure.

It's about two teens -- Taki and Mitsuha -- who somehow find themselves switching places in their bodies periodically. (A running gag involves Taki waking up in Mitsuha's place noticing "his" breasts.) Stakes get higher in the latter half when the two star-crossed strangers use that connection to avert a tragedy. Sounds like a bizarre story for an animated film, doesn't it? But it works. The first half in particular, where we see the difficulties that Taki and Mitsuha experience during their supernatural "body swapping" episodes, is hysterically funny. It's only in the second half when things get a little slower, but even then, Shinkai manages to maintain a lot of interest for the viewers, notably in the form of a stylized "time travel" sequence and of course the chemistry between the leads.

The dubbing is very well done as well, as per usual by NYAV Post. Both Mike Sinterniklaas and Stephanie Sheh voice the lead characters (and apparently directed each other as well), and turn in great performances. The show stealer, though, is young Catie Harvey as Mitsuha's little sister Yotsuha, who arguably gets the best lines in the film: "I see you're not touching your boobies today!" she snarks at her sister.

YOUR NAME is more of a story for teenagers and adults, but kids might enjoy watching it, too, for aside from the occasional sexual innuendo (which is mostly played for laughs and frankly, is tame compared to what you would see in raunchier Anime), there's little else to offend.

Horus: Prince of the Sun (1968)

Takahata's first feature

[7/10 · 19 August 2018]

HORUS: PRINCE OF THE SUN was the first and only film Isao Takahata directed for what was Japan's top animation studio in the 1960's, Toei, with a little bit of contribution from Hayao Miyazaki, of course. At the time most Japanese animated features were made cheaply and quickly. But Takahata wanted to go one step further and create something elaborate and beautiful. It drove up the budget, to the point where it annoyed the Toei executives. At one point during production, the budget froze and so the animators were reduced to using still shots for certain scenes, such as a wolves attacking on a village at about 29 minutes in, and later, when rats stampede through the same village. For similar reasons, the film was only given a limited release in Japan and it received poor box office numbers, even though the critics greeted it with raves. To add insult to injury, Takahata was demoted and never directed another feature for Toei again. Sometime later, Takahata and Miyazaki left Toei to find work elsewhere.

Watching this animated film today you probably wouldn't even realize that any of this happened, but it did. The animation style is obviously 60's, but it has a vibrant, rich palette. It's not quite as gorgeous as the Studio Ghibli classics we've come to know, but nonetheless it is lovely.

HORUS starts out with an intense action scene in an unknown Scandanevian region in which we see our hero, a boy warrior named Horus (Hols in the dubbed version) battling a pack of silver wolves with only a hatchet as a weapon. In a quick twist not all that different from King Arthur, the tide turns in his favor when he draws a sword from a massive rock giant who appears out of nowhere. After this victorious fight, Horus returns home to his father, who dies after telling him about his village being razed by the evil Ice Lord Grunwald. Vowing to avenge his village, Horus sets off and eventually comes across a village of innocents. En route, he also encounters Hilda, a golden-voiced girl who sings songs on her harp. Unfortunately, she turns out not to be as nice and innocent as she seems, setting the stage for a potential showdown.

The story contains many plot elements that Miyazaki would later use in his subsequent films, but in terms of character development, I'm afraid HORUS comes up a bit short. Horus himself isn't all that interesting, and neither are his companions. Even the villainous Lord Grunwald is pretty much what you'd expect from a manipulative, scheming, power-hungry baddie. Perhaps the most interesting character is Hilda, who is presented as a conflicted character torn between her friendship with the hero and the temptations of the villain. But her redemption at the end feels a bit rushed. Perhaps part of that can be attributed to the running time of 82 minutes; although it results for a faster pace, it does cause for some character bits that seem a bit hasty.

Despite being a financial failure in Japan, HORUS: PRINCE OF THE SUN has attracted considerable attention from viewers both in Japan and even in the U.S.. Bizarrely, the film was shown on American television in the late 60's, renamed LITTLE NORSE PRINCE, although uncut. The dub was done by Fred Ladd's New York-based Titan Productions , so a lot of the voice talent will be reminiscent of shows around this period such as KIMBA THE WHITE LION and ASTRO BOY. They also dubbed THE WONDERFUL WORLD OF PUSS 'N BOOTS and ANIMAL TREASURE ISLAND. As such, the dub is occasionally campy and theatrically stylized, using only four actors(!). Because this was done in the age of reel-to-reel, there are obvious places where the actors struggle to match the mouth movements, and some stiff delivery. Truth be told, the dub is not so awful that it ruins the film, but it is mediocre by today's standards. (It should also be noted that Hilda's songs come across differently in the Japanese version, the English versions are noticeably dissimilar.)

Despite its flaws, though, HORUS is still a fascinating look at historical Japanese anime. Try not to get too high expectations of this film and you'll enjoy it more.

Mary and the Witch's Flower (2017)

Borrows from the great masters with charm and wondrous beauty. No classic, but pleasant enough.

[8/10 · 12 August 2018]

Studio Ghibli had long established itself as the pinnacle of Japanese animation starting in the 1980's, but recently the studio went into hiatus, leaving most of its younger employees at a dead-end. Not to be discouraged, some of these employees decided to start a new facility of their own. Now christened as "Studio Ponoc", this team of former Ghibli animators, led by Hiromasa Yonebayashi (THE SECRET WORLD OF ARRIETTY and WHEN MARNIE WAS THERE) begin their career with MARY AND THE WITCH'S FLOWER, based on a children's book by the late Mary Stewart. The end result could very well be described as basically a "Greatest Hits" of Ghibli as opposed to something that would establish a new identity for the studio, but considering the alternative, which would be a complete extinction of a beautiful form of art, for once, this isn't a flaw.

Probably the best way to describe this feature is that it's a sort of KIKI'S DELIVERY SERVICE meets HARRY POTTER, with a dash of SPIRITED AWAY, and occasionally PRINCESS MONONOKE, HOWL'S MOVING CASTLE, as well as CASTLE IN THE SKY for good measure. While MARY AND THE WITCH'S FLOWER doesn't quite live up to the standards of those titles, it is nonetheless a pleasant enough venture. It's also refreshing to see an animated feature targeted at kids and adults which goes all-out on being ambitious. In fact, the film's action-packed opening scene, in which we see a mysterious girl flee from a burning laboratory on a broomstick while chased by dolphin-shaped watery-like creatures, provides a great start.

After this thrilling sequence, we meet Mary (voiced in the English version by Ruby Barnhill), a bored little girl who has just moved to the countryside to stay with her aunt. She's friendless, depressed, and even clumsy. The only other person her own age in the town she has recently moved into, a boy named Peter, also rubs her the wrong way: he jokes about her red hair, which for some reason she is sensitive about. While pursuing a runaway cat into the woods beyond her house, Mary discovers both a little broomstick and a glowing flower. Before you know it, she is suddenly transported to Endor College (no, it's not a reference to STAR WARS), an elaborate fortress of a university which doubles as a school for witches. She is "welcomed" by the school's domineering headmistress Madam Mumblechook (Kate Winslet) and scientist Doctor Dee (Jim Broadbent). But things get ugly when she takes a spellbook that doesn't belong to her and accidentally puts Peter's life in danger. The last act of the movie involves Mary trying to correct her mistake, building to an edge of your seat climax with just enough pyrotechnics and thrills to please any fan of such suspenseful finales.

It's evident that director Yonebayashi is paying homage to his former master with every scene in his film. More often than not, there are visual references that one will make to classic Ghibli films along with visual touches of its own. Endor College is located on a tall mesa stretching above the clouds, bizarre assortments of chimera creatures abound in cages, and there are also the sort of rubbery, shape-shifting, ooze-like creatures that can be found from HOWL. At one point our heroine crash-lands in the forest, with her broomstick broken in half. And the entire climax involves scaling a massive tree which houses scientific technology. The animation is also as richly detailed and colorful as anything from Studio Ghibli, with the character designs each containing Miyazaki's signature style, from the cherub-like faces of the protagonists to the grotesquely proportioned "caricature" creatures.

Musically, too, MARY AND THE WITCH'S FLOWER excels. Although Joe Hisaishi's musical services are missed, Takatsugu Muramatsu supplies a beautiful orchestral soundtrack with occasional Hammer-dulcimer strummed interludes for good measure. There are times when the director does allow the music to take a back seat and let occasional still shots filled with environmental sounds do the talking instead of spoon-feeding us.

Perhaps the only issue with this otherwise enjoyable feature is that it doesn't quite achieve the same heights of Ghibli's classic films. It might be due to Yonebayashi trying to do a bit too much within 104 minutes or so, but there are a few plot points that feel a bit unresolved. I was unclear about Mary's issue regarding her hair, for instance, especially since the film decides to discard it in the second half. Her relationship with Peter also could have used a bit more fleshing out as well -- her sudden shift from annoyance to wanting to rescue him feels abrupt, even for a kid her age. The ending itself, while thrilling, also seems a bit rushed as well. Moreover, Mumblechook and Doctor Dee aren't all that scary for being antagonists, and despite Yonebayashi's claims that they are "misunderstood", all we're permitted to see in the film is both characters mostly engaging in despicable acts.

Probably the most interesting character in the movie is the one that doesn't utter a word, and that is Tib, a black cat who very much resembles Jiji from KIKI'S DELIVERY SERVICE. He pretty much acts like any ordinary cat would. He meows, prances, acts independently, and mostly communicates with facial expressions. For good measure, Tib even has a girlfriend. Not that the other characters are unlikable by comparison, but these two animals, for some reason, really stand out.

Following in the tradition of the Ghibli movies, this movie also employs some well-known actors and actresses to provide the voices for the dub -- only this time, the dub is recorded at England's Tambourine Studios, resulting with a mostly British-accented cast. Considering that this is based on a British children's book, this provides a nice change of pace, and is arguably all the more fitting for this film perhaps because of that. (None of this is a slight against any of the Disney-produced dubs for the Ghibli library -- they're still excellent, warts and all.) Oddly, the only performance that took a while to grow on me was that of Barnhill as Mary (recently seen as Sophie in Steven Spielberg's THE BFG). Her voice is a bit grating at first, with the occasional moment of tentativeness, but she gradually steps it up as the film goes on and by the end her Mary grew on me. Broadbent and Winslet are fine in their roles as Mumblechook and Dee, by contrast, while Louis Ashbourne Serkis (son of Andy Serkis from LORD OF THE RINGS fame) speaks appropriately for the role of Peter. Strangely, my favorite performance of the dub might be that of Ewen Bremner as as Flannagan, a pompous fox-like character who chastises Mary for how she handles her broomstick. The Scottish accent is a great fit, and he brings a lot of character. There are a few moments where the lip sync is less than perfect, but not distracting enough to take away from the film. I can't speak for the Japanese version, as I haven't seen it.

In the end it doesn't matter which version you watch. MARY AND THE WITCH'S FLOWER, inferior though it may be to Ghibli, is nonetheless lovely and a great way to spend two hours. Although it does little to set Ponoc apart from the studio it takes inspiration from, there's plenty to enjoy. That it comes at a time when hand-drawn animated features like these are scarce (at least in America) is a blessing as well.

Big Fish & Begonia (2016)

Hauntingly gorgeous and mesmerizing Chinese smash hit feature.

[10/10 · 12 August 2018]

The first thing I should mention about BIG FISH AND BEGONIA is that it is visually stunning. I do not recall seeing many Chinese animated productions (although I wouldn't be surprised if I had inadvertently stumbled upon one without realizing it), but this is one of the most visually impressive I've seen from the country. Like a magnet, it seduces you from the first frame and keeps you entranced for all 100 minutes. In a way, this film reminded me a bit of Laika's recent KUBO AND THE TWO STRINGS. That film, while not a tightly plotted story, was nonetheless so visually stimulating that one could not help but be glued to their seats throughout. BIG FISH is the same way.

Describing the plot, it's sort of a mixing pot of THE LITTLE MERMAID with shades of SPIRITED AWAY and Chinese mythology. Basically, this film imagines an "alternate world" way beneath the ocean -- a sort of mythological Chinese flavored kingdom whose inhabitants are some sort of humanoid "spirits" with powers who are responsible for guarding the balance of nature. One of its residents, 16-year-old Chun, participates in a sort of "coming of age" ceremony, in which she is transformed into a crimson colored dolphin and swims to the surface world. Here she comes face to face with a human boy and his little sister. But the visit turns tragic when she is trapped in a fisherman's net. The boy courageously rescues her, only to drown. Feeling responsible, Chun travels beyond the boundaries of her village to some sort of one-eyed demon (Lengpo, the Lady of Souls), where she strikes a Faustian bargain. The boy will be reborn as a dolphin, whom she will have to tame and grow until he is old enough to return to hid world. But the price is two-fold. First, she must give up half of her life force to revive the boy in question (whom she names Kun), and whatever pain he receives, she'll receive too. The second and more dangerous outcome involves unnatural disasters such as rainstorms, maelstroms, and even snow which threaten to destroy her world's existence. Only her closest friend Qiu, who secretly harbors a crush on her, might be able to set things right.

As mentioned, BIG FISH AND BEGONIA is absolutely breathtaking to look at. The film is also rich with metaphorical imagery, particularly when talking about matters such as life and death. In one scene, for instance, when an old man dies, he is reborn as a tree. His similarly deceased wife, incidentally, is some sort of peacock who comes to rest on the tree in question. In terms of character development, BIG FISH AND BEGONIA isn't very heavy on it, but Qiu, oddly enough, emerges as the most interesting of the characters. When we first meet him he appears to be somewhat mischievous and playful. But he also has a very serious dedicated side to him, and ultimately goes to great lengths to help the person dearest to him. The rest of the cast don't stand out as much, but with the possible exception of one fairly negligible potential baddie (who lives in a rat-infested sewer), nobody comes across as truly unsympathetic. Only issue is that there are a plethora of minor characters who only have about five minutes of screentime, to the point where we don't get to know them as well, but that's my only issue.

The dub by Studiopolis is well done for the most part, with no noticeably bad performances, although I DID detect some mistimed lines at least in the first half hour -- I do find it jarring to see a character's mouth start flapping only for no sound to come out until the second one, and this unfortunately sometimes happens in the beginning. Thankfully, this problem disappears in the second half, and other than that, as mentioned, everyone plays their roles well. Stephanie Sheh and Johnny Yong Bosch, in particular, do great turns as the lead characters, Chun and Qiu, respectively.

Perhaps the best way to describe this film is that it is more visual poetry rather than a cohesive plot, but it also offers a sincere heart that somehow manages to win the viewer over. The ending is also bittersweet and will surely wrench tears. (I know I was crying toward the end!) Directors Lian Xuan and Zhang Chun spent more than 12 years(!) working on this film, most of it being a series of starts and stops. According to the making-of-featurette, this film started off as a wildly successful 7 minute short made in Flash, but acquiring funds for expanding it into a feature proved problematic, and nearly disbanded the animation studio B & J. So what saved the day? Crowdfunding, that's what. The amount of interest from said crowdfunds prompted a Chinese distributor to take a chance and fund the film. Xuan and Chun's lengthy labor of love was greatly rewarded: the film was a smash hit in China, the second most successful animated film over there

I wouldn't say this movie reaches the echelons of say, Studio Ghibil, but it doesn't have to. If you're an animation fan and want to see something this breathtaking and emotional, you can't go wrong with this one. Every second of it will have you nailed to your seat.

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)

Probably my least favorite Disney-made STAR WARS, but still better than both the prequels and than it has any right to be.

[7/10 · 31 July 2018]

Disney's purchase of the STAR WARS brand was something I never dreamed I would live to see. Considering the uneven and lackluster nature of the prequels (particularly ATTACK OF THE CLONES and THE PHANTOM MENACE -- REVENGE OF THE SITH being the only saving grace, albeit flawed, too), I wasn't sure if their inevitable sequel trilogy would be any better. Happily, for the most part, it was. THE FORCE AWAKENS may have been a callback to A NEW HOPE, and THE LAST JEDI, for better or worse, was a daring, controversial turning point, but I found both films to be far more compelling than Episodes I & II of the franchise. In between, Disney has also provided us with an "anthology film", ROGUE ONE, which was quite good all around. Now along comes yet another "anthology film" for STAR WARS, this time focusing on the series' most famous scoundrel, Han Solo. This one had a much more rocky road to completion -- apparently the original directors assigned to the project were fired, and a new one, none other than Ron Howard (director of the much underrated fantasy WILLOW -- still one of my favorite movies), was brought in to reshoot scenes. Based on this production nightmare, one would assume that SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY could very well be a disaster. Thankfully, it isn't. Simultaneously, though, of the new STAR WARS movies, SOLO is probably my least favorite of the four so far.

Don't get me wrong, SOLO is not a bad movie at all. It is competently made, well cast, and moves along well for the most part. But compared to what I may argue would be its more ambitious and even daring predecessors, SOLO seems a little too "safe". The stakes in this tale aren't as high -- it's basically about a younger Solo, and so there aren't going to be any major casualties like there were in the previous entries. Consequently, it also lacks the "must-see" factor that was there even for the prequels. Perhaps the worst I can say about it is that it's a bit more forgettable. Other than a few standout action sequences and great performances, I'm hard pressed to remember a lot about SOLO.

That said, does SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY still have its points of interest? Absolutely. Alden Ehrenreich had a very daunting task stepping into the shoes of an iconic character made famous by Harrison Ford. He was never going to be able to top the actor no matter what. But having said that, he still does a very respectable job at making Solo a charismatic, swaggering badass. Part of it might be because he is in the hands of a director who understands the importance of gaining cast chemistry. Either way, his turn as Solo is far more engaging than Hayden Christensen's Anakin in the prequels any day. That said, the real star of the show is Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian. Arguably an even better match for what Billy Dee Williams created in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RETURN OF THE JEDI than Alden would have been for Han, Glover fits seamlessly into the role like a glove, and is charming from the start. Every second of his performance is a delight. Oddly, my favorite performance in the film might be that of Chewbacca. Don't get me wrong, the performances are well done in general, but there was something about Chewie in this movie that I found really appealing, and for some reason he stands out here.

The two sequences that also stand out in the film include a thrilling train chase which must have been inspired by Hayao Miyazaki's CASTLE IN THE SKY. Well staged and timed, this ranks among the most exciting in any STAR WARS action sequence. Just as good is later on in the film when Han steers the Falcon into a nebulous space cloud, dodging TIE fighters at breakneck speed, and outrunning a massive space octopus-sort of creature that threatens to consume the ship. Both of these are worth the price of admission.

So why three and a half stars out of five? The main reason is because I didn't really find a lot of the new characters all that remarkable or interesting. It's not the fault of Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Thandie Newton, or Paul Bettany -- they all breathe life to their roles, but none of them really stand out in any way. Perhaps a second viewing will change my thoughts, but I honestly didn't remember much about these new guys worth talking about. That and the storyline, although interesting, does drag at times, particularly the last act. Still, the script by Lawrence Kasdan does contain enough barb and wit from the characters to provide a humorous tone for what are mostly one-note roles. Musically, too, the score is lacking compared to what we've heard from John Williams -- it's not John Powell's fault, he does the best he can, but I'm hard-pressed to remember a cue.

Don't take any of these complaints to suggest that I dislike SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY. Despite its faults, it's still a competently executed entry and is worth viewing at least once. Simultaneously, though, it's not one that I'm so eager to see again on the big screen, partially because it doesn't really do anything that we didn't already see. All in all, SOLO is good, but not great -- all things considered, it's better than it has any right to be, but it's not really a "must-see". At least it beats Episodes I & II.

Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)

"This is not going to go the way you think."

[8/10 · 31 July 2018]

It can't be denied that the original STAR WARS trilogy is one of the most iconic cornerstones of filmmaking -- an ambitious mixing pot of space-blasting action, alien cultures, and mythological nuances that has captivated so many audiences for years. The namesake suffered something of a stall, however, with George Lucas' flawed prequel trilogy, which, with the exception of REVENGE OF THE SITH, couldn't live up to the reputation of the original trilogy. In a bizarre twist of fate, Disney of all companies purchased the rights to STAR WARS, beginning work on a new trilogy with other movies to come in the subsequent weeks. 2015's THE FORCE AWAKENS, handled by J.J. Abrams, while perhaps too much of a copycat of A NEW HOPE, was nonetheless breezy, flashy, and entertaining -- a great love-letter to the trilogy (with the exception of one character death). The subsequently released ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY was arguably even better: a thrilling tale which was arguably everything the prequels should have been.

Now along comes the eighth canonical episode in the STAR WARS series, THE LAST JEDI. Unlike predecessor THE FORCE AWAKENS, this one is helmed by a different director, one Rian Johnson. Naturally, expectations for this were going to be sky-high no matter what, and regardless of how the movie plays out there are always going to be naysayers who will say nay. THE FORCE AWAKENS had a lot of detractors, despite being highly reviewed by critics. THE LAST JEDI, ironically, is suffering the same outcome. Critics have greeted the film with rave reviews, and of course the film was a box office smash, but already there's a huge debate on how this film compares to the original trilogy, and whether this newest chapter charts the series in a bold new direction or if it derails it like the prequels did.

I personally find the latter a very questionable claim, as I didn't particularly enjoy the prequels all that much -- ATTACK OF THE CLONES was the weak link. THE LAST JEDI is nowhere near that territory -- the performances by everyone involved are terrific and the dialogue is thankfully devoid of any laughable, groanworthy lines. There isn't any winceworthy love story either. Which isn't to say that THE LAST JEDI is flawless.

Picking up from where the last movie left off, Rey (Daisy Ridley) meets Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) on planet Ach-To, but the latter is reluctant to help out on account of a tragedy that he blames himself for. Meanwhile General Leia (the late Carrie Fisher) tries to evacuate the Resistance from Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) and his First Order, while hotshot pilot Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaacs) disagrees. Meanwhile former Stormtrooper Finn (John Boyega) tries to take the situation into his own hands. All of this makes THE LAST JEDI the longest of any STAR WARS movie, clocking it at a whopping 153 minutes. For the most part it moves along at a breathless pace, but the second quarter of the movie stalls when our heroes take an unexpected detour to Canto Bight, a newly fashioned casino city planet. Although visually intriguing, this scene takes too long to get through and ultimately builds to what seems to be a pointless attack on Ren's ship, which is nonetheless negated.

There are also a few moments that seem to break plausibility in bizarre ways, particularly one moment where General Leia is literally blown out into space when a photon torpedo smashes her starship, and she somehow uses the Force to pull herself back on board. This scene comes across as too goofy to be believable, more along the lines of SUPERMAN than anything else. Considering that Fisher tragically died last year, it probably would have been better to have her killed off at that point. (Yet she survives anyway.)

Then there's the handling of Supreme Chancellor Snoke (Andy Serkis), a shadowy, bald crone who appears to be the brains behind the whole operation. Surprisingly, however, we get to know very little about him, and he's unexpectedly discarded halfway through. Although at the same time it does provide an interesting twist to how we think the story is going to turn out, it is a bit of a letdown that we don't know who he is or where he came from. On a similar note, some of the film's newer characters, like a potential love-interest for Finn (Rose), a self-appointed codebreaker, DJ, and a female commander who temporarily takes Leia's place on the Rebel ship feel underdeveloped as well.

Despite my quibbles, there's a lot going for THE LAST JEDI. The dynamic between Luke, Rey, and Kylo Ren is compellingly presented and all around engrossing, thanks to the skillful acting of all three performers involved. Hamill, in particular, deserves a shout-out. Although Luke here is portrayed as a depressed, demoralized hermit who initially refuses to have anything to do with the Force, Hamill succeeds in making this incarnation very three-dimensional and sincere. He gets to have an especially epic moment at the end of the movie (no spoilers for what it is). The man is a genius at voice acting, but as an actor he's very underrated, and this is arguably his best work as Luke yet. Ridley, Boyega, Isaacs, the late Fisher, and especially Driver as the emotionally conflicted Ren are all at the top of their game as well.

The cinematography is also deserving of a shout-out; this is probably the best shot of the STAR WARS movies, with a lot of iconic moments that rival any in the series. One very poignant scene toward the end in which Luke gazes off at the binary sunset on the island, in particular, is a fitting callback to A NEW HOPE. The visual effects are top notch, as well, without being overly showy or upstaging the actors. The prequels had gone overboard with this problem, seeming to overload CG-effects for the sake of it. Here it's not so much of an issue.

Perhaps the thing that struck with me most about THE LAST JEDI is how daring and bold this newest entry is. Aside from showing familiar faces in a different light, it also makes the controversial choice of deconstructing some of the tropes that fans have come to expect from STAR WARS, therefore charting a new direction for the series. For some who feel the franchise may grow stale with every entry, this change of pace will be refreshing, but others have been miffed by it. This also very well be the darkest and bleakest STAR WARS entry yet -- there's a high body count in this movie, and one spectacularly staged kamikaze attack (with a brief pause of silence for good effect) is something that we haven't seen in STAR WARS before.

The humor didn't really stand out to me that much, it was more or less there. The only jarring moment for me was when Luke takes time to milk an alien -- but even then it's only brief.

All in all, THE LAST JEDI does take the series in directions that I sometimes agreed with and at others I didn't, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't entertained by it. On the contrary. It's miles above both THE PHANTOM MENACE and ATTACK OF THE CLONES, and arguably more original and less derivative than the (still enjoyable) FORCE AWAKENS. I'm not quite sure where this newest film ranks in the STAR WARS saga -- perhaps a few extra viewings and the eventual next chapter will provide me with a new light. Despite my quibbles with some aspects of the story (mostly in terms of space logic and in a few rushed moments), I found a lot of THE LAST JEDI to my liking, and can recommend it wholeheartedly, if mainly to see Hamill go badass at the finale. Even after seeing it twice, I stand firmly by what I said. It is in no way the nadir of the STAR WARS movies and still surpasses the prequels by far. Just a few (minor) quibbles hold it back from my highest rating.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

Superior to the prequels and an overall great film, but not quite on the same level as the original trilogy.

[8/10 · 2 January 2016]

Ten years after the lesser STAR WARS prequel trilogy wrapped up with the mostly solid if not perfect REVENGE OF THE SITH, George Lucas' ever-popular space opera saga gets yet another trilogy in the making, this time in the hands of J.J. Abrams, the man behind the magnificent SUPER 8 and the equally enthralling STAR TREK reboot.

This time, he reunites most of the original cast members (including Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Anthony Daniels, and yes, Peter Mayhew as Luke, Han Solo, Leia, C-3PO, and Chewbacca, respectively) while introducing a welcome host of newcomers. These include Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, and even LORD OF THE RINGS' Andy Serkis. Rather than relying on the mostly CGI approach of the prequels, Abrams also opts to use models, bizarre aliens, and lots of action as well as surprise twists out of nowhere.

Does it all work? For the most part, the answer is yes.

This is certainly a much more spirited and lively chapter than the more sluggish prequels, emphasizing humorous byplays between its characters over sometimes overdone CG effects. As impressive as the visual effects are, they never overcome the way of the story. More importantly, the acting is consistently great from everyone involved: something that could never be said for the prequels. Both Ridley and Boyega get into their roles and exchange rapid- fire chemistry in the same manner as the original, and of course Ford, despite being older, obviously hasn't lost his swagger and badassery as Han Solo. Although villains Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine are missed, the mentally unstable, bad-tempered Kylo Ren makes for a promising villain (Driver), and his big boss (Serkis) also emerges to be just as menacing as the late Darth Sideous.

Some have quibbled that the plot line for THE FORCE AWAKENS is mostly a retread of the original STAR WARS movie "A New Hope", what with the usual destructive space weapon + secret map + hidden weakness formula as well as a little bit of THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. In that aspect, the movie is probably the least "original" of the movies. But the end result of a movie isn't measured upon its originality or derivativeness, but in its delivery. While the prequels were not guilty of repeating themselves, they still suffered from stiff acting and dialogue. On that level, this movie improves on both of those weaknesses by far. The return to the jokey banter atmosphere is more than welcome, and while there is humor, it's never of the juvenile kind.

All in all, THE FORCE AWAKENS IS better than PHANTOM MENACE and ATTACK OF THE CLONES (as well as even REVENGE OF THE SITH; good as that film was, it was still held back by flaws), but I cannot recommend it as highly as the original trilogy as I would like to because it just slightly misses the mark due to a shocking and less effective final third. Having said all this, though, you'll of course want to see this first entry in a new trilogy; even with my quibbles, it does show promise.

The Secret of NIMH 2: Timmy to the Rescue (1998 Video)

Lame.

[3/10 · 13 May 2015]

The title pretty much says it all for this inferior direct-to-video sequel to the now legendary animated classic from Don Bluth. Eric Idle's performance and musical number is a high point (only marginally), but SECRET OF NIMH 2 is obviously no match for its predecessor, which features disappointingly choppy animation and a story that is better suited to an average Saturday morning kids' cartoon. In other words, the whole tone of the movie plays out like one. Really embarrassing considering that the original had a more realistic, gritty edge to it. NIMH itself, for instance, is portrayed in this sequel as a Dr. Frankenstein sort of castle with a mad scientist as opposed to a facility of scientists oblivious to the cruelties they inflict on animals. Even the music is second-rate; apparently the filmmakers wanted to steal Disney's formula, as evidenced from the uninspired songs. The original NIMH had a far better and more inspiring score, courtesy of the late Jerry Goldsmith. Other elements of ripoff: the overeager hero, comic sidekicks, and the inclusion of a love interest. But none of these ingredients mesh into a tale with any of the depth, drama, or magic of far better animated features. Alas, such is the case with so many of these direct-to-video sequels. As a matter of fact, you can just skip it and not miss much at all.

Into the Woods (2014)

Terrific translation of classic crossover musical.

[9/10 · 1 January 2015]

In 1987, composer Stephen Sondheim and writer James Lapine collaborated to fashion a rather warped but darkly entertaining musical called INTO THE WOODS. It's a sort of "crossover" fairy tale which answers the question of "what if Cinderella, Jack from the Beanstalk, Little Red Riding Hood, and Rapunzel all crossed paths?" Linking this eccentric collage together is an original story thread about a baker and his wife who are cursed by a vengeful witch to never have any children. The witch is willing to reverse their predicament if the couple can retrieve the necessary ingredients to provide a potion. Although the first act deceptively seems to end the show on a "happily ever after" note, along comes Act II which twists the conventions of fairy tales upside down. Things begin to fall apart. Characters betray one another. Some even die. Bittersweet though its final resolution may be, INTO THE WOODS nonetheless proves to be a work rich with cautionary messages, flawed characters, and a surprisingly deep amount of intelligence.

It is extremely ironic that the long-awaited movie adaptation is a Disney production of all things, especially since the overall tenor of the musical clashes with the Mouse House's usual reputation of toning down much of the darker, violent aspects of the Grimm Fairy Tales. As it turned out, though, the marriage of Disney and Sondheim couldn't have been more ideal. (Amusingly, the lively title tune for "Into the Woods" recalls a classic era of Disney long since forgotten.) Considering that the Mouse House has recently been turning its own fairy tale conventions on its head with their recent and massively successful FROZEN, INTO THE WOODS turns out to be a perfect fit just like Cinderella's glass slipper to its rightful owner. Rob Marshall has done an outstanding job of translating the musical to the screen; from the first frame of the film, where we hear a disembodied narration intone the words "once upon a time" followed by the two-note clang of Sondheim's overture and a cross-cutting opening between the primary characters, the show exuberantly comes to life. Marshall clearly understands the tone of the story and laudably remains faithful to the mood of the musical.

Even having said all this, there are some elements of the show which unfortunately didn't make it into the translation. In the musical there is a narrator who serves as a character to the story; later on in the second act he is bumped off (No, seriously!), which causes the characters and the story to go completely off-rails! (Naturally, this wouldn't work for the medium, so instead it's the baker who does the narrating, which is fitting considering how the show ends.) As mentioned, there is also a high body count, with one of the victims being Rapunzel. In this version, Rapunzel survives instead and rides off with her prince, but even then it is still presented in the film rather ambiguously.

Loyalists to the show will probably still find some things to carp about aside from those; two songs are cut (but as a compromise, we hear the melodies as background music instead). These include the jubilant "Ever After", which concludes Act I and the somber, reflective "No More" from Act II. Frankly, though, even with such "changes", there is very little else that INTO THE WOODS loses in its new dress.

Helping matters along is the very fine cast of actors, all of which provide fantastic performances, both on an acting and vocal level. (The latter is especially crucial, because Sondheim's songs can be very difficult to sing.) As the witch, Meryl Streep turns in a performance that could easily garner her another Oscar. She is simply marvelous in the part; her bombastic turn in the witch's climactic number "Last Midnight" in particular a wickedly glorious highlight. Anna Kendrick has the perfect fairy tale heroine voice for Cinderella, while James Corden and Emily Blunt excel as the Baker and his wife. Johnny Depp growls and snarls in his brief cameo as the Wolf (and his second bigscreen Sondheim musical to date). Both Daniel Huttlestone and Lilla Crawford are outstanding as Jack and Little Red Riding Hood; it is refreshing to see both parts portrayed by actual children for a change. Chris Pine and Billy Magnussen contribute to the film's funniest scene, "Agony", in which both lament their seemingly impossible quests for finding their wives, and suit their princely roles quite charmingly. Seriously, I could not find fault with anyone in this cast.

Visually, too, INTO THE WOODS looks quite pleasing; rather than adopting a lavish, big, over- the-top style, Marshall and cinematographer Dion Beebe use computer enhanced effects rather sparsely, opting instead for a richly dark and gritty color palette. Nothing about the sets or effects looks fake; even some of the more potentially implausible moments, like birds "communicating" with Cinderella, are handled with a simplicity that works well, and the witch's transformation scenes are effectively done without being overly "showy." Only a brief, trippy interlude where we see Little Red Riding Hood toppling through an abyss of billowing blankets as she recounts being swallowed by the wolf in her amusing "I Know Things Now" may strike some as a bit artificial, but even then it is done quite artfully and in a way that does not come across as distracting.

Rich with moral ambiguity and with a twisted, macabre edge, INTO THE WOODS is treated with the respect it deserves for its big screen treatment. With a terrific ensemble cast, fitting cinematography and skillful direction on the part of Marshall, any omissions or changes are more than compensated for by the efforts of everyone involved. Admittingly, your mileage may vary when it comes to enjoying this movie, but for anyone dreading any sort of "Disneyfication"s of whatever kind can gladly put such fears to rest. Major kudos to everyone involved for doing justice to this much loved musical.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

More frantic and action-packed with the occasional deviation.

[8/10 · 20 December 2014]

I don't know how one is supposed to turn a rather short book like J.R.R. Tolkien's THE HOBBIT into a trilogy, but that's exactly what Peter Jackson has done. No stranger to Middle-Earth, having helmed the phenomenal LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, the best things that can be said about his re-imagining of this classic tale is that at least the production values and acting are on par with its predecessors. As with the aforementioned trio, THE HOBBIT was shot back-to- back in New Zealand, resulting in the release of one sequel per year. For better or worse, AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY kicked off what would be an all new adventure, albeit on a rather sluggish pace, particularly its overlong dinner party sequence and character introductions that made up most of its first half.

Luckily those problems do not extend to the second part of the trilogy, here titled THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG. Having already established the cast, the film picks up from where we left our heroes after being rescued from orcs by eagles. The pace is certainly tighter and less slow, although there still is the occasional lag. The film begins, oddly, with another prologue scene: this time a conversation between the battle-hardened dwarf prince Thorin (Richard Armitage) and the ever-wise Gandalf (Ian MacKellen). After that we cut back to where we last left the Hobbit and his dwarf companions. As before, THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG really comes alive during the moments which readers are familiar with. Lots of new hazards await our heroes in the form of monstrous spiders, suspicious elves, more and more orcs, corrupt townsfolk, and ultimately, the titular villain himself.

Speaking of which, the crowning jewel of this second part is the fated scene where Bilbo confronts Smaug the dragon in his treasure-laden lair. Like Gollum, the folks at Weta Workshop, through the wizardry of motion capture technology do a bang-up job of rendering this beast a truly dangerous, terrifying monster. Benedict Cumberbatch, too, deserves credit not only for performing the motion capture movements of the dragon (similar to Andy Serkis as Gollum), but for providing the beast with a rumbling, floor-shaking baritone that sends chills up one's spine. For audiences more familiar with Cumberbatch as Sherlock Holmes and Martin Freeman (Bilbo) as Watson, the scene, perhaps unintentionally, is also dryly amusing if you make the connection. Either way, Smaug is a real triumph, emerging as one of cinema's greatest dragons.

That said, DESOLATION OF SMAUG takes quite a while to get there, and as with its predecessor, it ultimately depends on whether the viewer is prepared to accept the changes and additions Jackson made from the book, appreciate the film at face value, or are prepared to grumble with disappointment. En route, the film zigzags back and forth between talky bits and CGI effects as well as other additions. The fight with the spiders in the Mirkwood forest is chillingly handled and builds to its climax with true terror, the arachnids themselves being the stuff of nightmares. There's also an extensive roller-coaster style escape in which our heroes escape downriver in barrels while dodging attacking orcs. For the most part this sequence is viscerally exciting, but there are a FEW moments when it gets a bit silly, particularly in the sometimes implausible choreography of the elves as they fight back against the attackers. There's an even lengthier showdown between the dwarfs and the dragon in the Misty Mountain which mostly works on a crowd-pleasing level (especially for audiences who want to see Thorin face off against the beast that destroyed his home), but may infuriate Tolkien loyalists expecting an untarnished adaptation what they see as a work of art.

Then there's the inclusion of two new characters, one of who is familiar to audiences of LORD OF THE RINGS, Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and a skillful she-elf named Tauriel. While it's nice to see Legolas again, I'm not quite sure what Jackson is going for by including him in the incidents where the dwarfs are taken prisoner. There's also an implied "love story" subplot between the youngest of the dwarfs and Tauriel which, although not fatal to the film, is a curious addition nonetheless. We also see Gandalf and Radagast (Sylvestor MacCoy) trail a mysterious evil to stone ruins, which turns out to be the ghost of the major baddie from THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. This is obviously meant to tie THE HOBBIT to the more famous trilogy, which is quite understandable given that this is, after all, a prequel to LORD OF THE RINGS. Lake Town is also stunningly realized as a destitute but simultaneously seedy village with a corrupt mayor. Luke Evans also makes a very pleasing Bard, and the addition of his family brings a lot of emotional weight to his character.

In short, THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG's length and additions will understandably annoy anyone expecting Jackson to adapt the novel more "accurately", but my "criticisms" are mostly just shameless nit-picking, because on the whole I really did enjoy THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG. It's certainly more frantic than its predecessor and never boring. The only major drawback of the movie is its cliffhanger ending. This is intentional and meant to make audiences come back for the final film, but it's still done in a way that feels very abrupt. On that level, then, THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG is not meant to be a standalone film, but a two-parter in the same way that HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS ended up being.

Love it or hate it, Jackson's enthusiasm for the material still shines through even in places where it occasionally goes off the rails. While it may be in the shadow of its predecessor trilogy, it's nonetheless great to go on another adventure with Jackson, Weta, and company.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)

Uneven but overall solid closing chapter for Bilbo and company.

[8/10 · 20 December 2014]

The first thing I should mention about THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES, is that in order to truly enjoy this film you have to be prepared to come to terms that this is not meant to be a standalone movie, but the final act of a story. Because each of these movies are meant to be viewed together as a single unit, viewing this without seeing the first two parts is not recommended. Tolkien purists will also find plenty to carp at for the occasional additions and liberties Jackson chooses to take. If, however, you're prepared to accept all of that, then it's much easier to appreciate the movie at face value.

THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES starts off with a thunderously explosive bang as Smaug takes out his fiery rage on the village of Laketown. This spectacularly staged sequence is nothing short of visceral as we see buildings topple and others torched by the dragon's fiery breath. Everything about this scene all the way up to the climactic showdown between heroic Bard (Luke Evans) and Smaug (who gets to have several new lines) is magnificent, and arguably the highlight of the movie. The story takes a more slower but essentially darker turn, however, as the once proud Thorin Oakshield (Richard Armitage) becomes greedy and refuses to part with any share of the gold in his now reclaimed home. Naturally, Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) doesn't take too kindly to this and, in an act of daring defiance, hands over the Arkenstone to the Elf King in order to prevent a bloodbath. This and Thorin's paranoia strain their friendship and ultimately build to what Jackson promised to be the longest battle ever committed to screen. And long the battle of the five armies itself truly is, taking up a good forty-five minutes of the film's 144-minute duration. (Ironically, this is the shortest of the Middle Earth movies!)

In between that and en route, there are other positives to this final chapter. The dynamic between Thorin and Bilbo is powerfully presented, with Freeman and Armitage both providing strong, emotionally charged performances. The chemistry between the two is very powerful, and arguably the real heart of the movie. Indeed, it makes the final parting scene between them all the more heartbreaking and misty-eyed. Armitage also does an expert job of portraying Thorin's conversion to an avaricious tyrant -- at some points his voice melds with that of Smaug's, providing for a rather chilling and frightening effect. This change of character culminates with Thorin having a nightmarish vision of being swallowed by the gold he craves; a somewhat surreal but nonetheless very effective scene.

The performances in THE HOBBIT have always been among the strongest points of this trilogy. Aside from Freeman and Armitage, Evans is a very charismatic and instantly likable Bard, and the addition of him having a family of similar strength provides the character with an arguably greater dynamic both for taking down the beast. He is easily another hero to root for, as are returnees Ian MacKellen as the wizard Gandalf, Hugo Weaving as the elvish Lord Elrond, Cate Blanchett as Galadriel, and Orlando Bloom as Legolas. Christopher Lee also gets to show off some real fighting stunts in his return as Saruman. Billy Connelly, although mostly seen on a CGI-rendered pig and wielding an unrealistically huge sledgehammer, is a pleasant new addition to the cast as Thorin's uncle.

For all its positives, though, THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES isn't without its faults. Although most of it is just excessive nitpicking on my part, there were several bits that I felt could have been handled differently. Although the battle between the armies itself is dramatically staged for the most part, there were times when I felt disconnected from it, not necessarily because of the onslaught of CGI characters. Legolas' heroic action stunts such as catching a ride on the talons of a bat, slaying said bat with his arrow, and dodging falling bricks like Super Mario also border on goofiness. Even his antics in the LOTR trilogy weren't as "cartoonish". The climactic showdown between Thorin and the nasty Orc Azgog is also too drawn out to have any major emotional impact one way or the other. (That said, the final parting from Bilbo and Thorin that follows this showdown takes the movie's emotional heart back on track.) I'm also unclear about the love triangle between the she-elf Tauriel, the young dwarf Kili, and Legolas. Although all three actors involved play it well, and the resolution is indeed heartbreaking, it doesn't feel very necessary to the momentum of the story and I do question why Jackson thought to include it. Admittingly, Tauriel is a pretty cool character, but again, her presence feels extraneous at times, as if there needed to be a heroine. Probably the only really useless character is Alfrid, a corrupt town official who, aside from having a getaway disguised as a woman, is otherwise a fairly forgettable character.

But these are only minor negatives. Everything else about THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES excels; the production values are as top notch as you'd expect from Jackson, Weta, and company, Howard Shore's score is, as usual, magnificent, and as mentioned, the casting and performances are all spot-on. Aside from the opening and the dynamic between Frodo and Thorin, the other major highlight of this last chapter is the ending. It is brilliantly done and faithful to the book, concluding with a very clever lead-in to THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING as the older Bilbo (Ian Holm) goes to greet Gandalf for the first time in years as the camera slowly trucks in on the map before the closing credits begin.

For all that, THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES, although sketchier than one might expect, is still worth a good recommendation and ranks as a solid final chapter overall.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Well executed and good fun overall, but also quite long. Best when it follows the story.

[8/10 · 19 December 2014]

More than seventy years ago, J.R.R. Tolkien wrote a story called "The Hobbit", in which the title character somehow gets mixed up with a bunch of dwarfs to reclaim missing treasure. The success and acclaim of this book led to the highly acclaimed "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, which years later was transformed into one of the greatest movie trilogies of all time by Peter Jackson. It was perhaps inevitable that one day Jackson would return to this territory to tackle the trials of Bilbo Baggins, but because this movie follows on the heels of a towering achievement like the LORD OF THE RINGS films, comparisons are bound to be inevitable.

Adding to the burden of the brunt is the controversial decision to extend THE HOBBIT into a trilogy. That approach worked ideally well for Jackson's THE LORD OF THE RINGS, but because THE HOBBIT is a considerably shorter book (more like one third of the trilogy), it doesn't really merit the decision for three two-and-a-half hour movies. A more ideal approach would have been to film the book as a two-part series, not a trilogy. On a technical level there's nothing majorly wrong with Jackson's direction; the casting and performances are both excellent, the cinematography breathtaking as always, and the visual effects, for the most part, are as impressive as ever. The problem is that the movies are just too unnecessarily long.

In fact, it takes a whopping 45 minutes to get Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) out of his cozy home in Hobbiton to go out on his fateful quest with the eponymous wizard Gandalf (Ian MacKellen), as well as a pack of dwarfs led by a brooding fellow named Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage). En route, we first see a lengthy, ten-minute prologue in which the old Bilbo (played with a wavering sincerity by Ian Holm) begins writing his book about his adventures, starting with the downfall of the Dwarven city of Erebor. The subsequent half hour is basically the first chapter, in which Bilbo's quiet humble life is turned upside down when the dwarfs intrude into his household and take over his pantry in no time. The nature of this scene is also noticeably more lighthearted than even the prologue of the first RINGS film, THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. In all fairness, the tone of Tolkien's HOBBIT is more of a children's story and what's on the screen is more or less true to the original, but it also requires a subjective approach. Fans familiar with the book will get the gist of it and more or less be fine, but for more antsy audience members, it does require patience to sit through this scene.

Extending scenes like this aren't the only aesthetic choices that Jackson chooses to approach when tackling the story to screen. Sometimes he ends up culling information from the footnotes of Tolkien's fantasy, even borrowing bits of THE SIMILARION for good measure. For instance, we meet the wizard Radagast, an eccentric fellow who cares for animals and goes around riding on a massive "rabbit" sleigh. There is also a shady backstory involving a conflict between Thorin against a nasty-looking orc named Azgog (a mostly computer-animated villain with a vicious grin and a prosthetic arm). Finally we get a surprisingly long scene at the Elven city of Rivendell in which Gandalf converses with his colleague, the ill-fated sorcerer Saruman (Christopher Lee) about the potential return of Sauron. This is obviously meant to tie THE HOBBIT into THE LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, which is understandable because this is, after all, a prequel, but again, whether one is willing to sit through such slow scenes depends on the nature.

THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY really comes to life during the bits when it actually sticks to the story. The sequence where Bilbo and company are captured by giant trolls does justice to the book. In the second half, we get a scarifying roller-coaster style confrontation with two stone giants to a visit to the infamous Goblin City, ruled by a bloated fellow called the Goblin King. But the film's real highlight is the "Riddles in the Dark" sequence, a cunningly choreographed, thrilling confrontation in which Bilbo must outsmart the twisted Gollum (again brought to life by the remarkable motion capture and hoarse voice of Andy Serkis).

While Jackson's choices may be questionable for some, to his credit, the man hasn't lost his ability to extol performances from his cast. Freeman was practically born to play Bilbo, embuing the character's neurotic reluctance with a charm that easily makes even the slowest parts of the film tolerable to sit through. Armitage mostly portrays Thorin as a grumpy, dour fellow who doubts his new charge, but he does so with hints of a tortured personality. Sylvestor McCoy is also quite good as the eccentric Radagast, and the dwarfs are all well cast and fitting for their roles. And of course, it's gratifying to see McKellan, Lee, Serkis, and even Cate Blanchett (as Galadriel) reprise their roles.

Is this HOBBIT trilogy on par with the original LORD OF THE RINGS? No. But it's still well-made and executed with a style that only Jackson can do. In short, whether you decide that THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY is for you depends on how much you are willing to overlook the eccentric decision to extend what is essentially a shorter story and embark on another adventure. Having said that, though, I still quite enjoyed the movie and if nothing else, it left me eager for the next chapter.