Movie review: The Nutcracker and Four Realms

Movie reviews

Hello!

And welcome to a review of a first Christmas movie of the 2018 holiday season. If the whole season will be as rocky as its start, then we can just cancel Christmas. This is a quite negative (as you have probably already guessed) review of The Nutcracker and Four Realms.

IMDb summary: A young girl is transported into a magical world of gingerbread soldiers and an army of mice.

Writing

The Nutcracker and Four Realms – a mouthful of a title, huh – was written by Ashleigh Powell. It’s a remake/reimagining of a classic fairytale and a famous ballet. Disney has been making quite a few live-action fairytales. Some of them crashed, like Alice in Wonderland and its sequel. Some blossomed like Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast. The Nutcracker seems like it will be joining the first group. I feel like there is a general fatigue of live action fairytales and only the really special ones turn into something. The Nutcracker, being a niche and holiday-specific fairytale, is already a hard sell. The fact that it’s premiering so early in November also almost guarantees that it will have a small opening. Maybe it will play for a long time?

Anyways, speaking of the writing: it wasn’t bad but wasn’t original in any way, shape or form. The message on how to deal with grief was a neat one and the young woman’s journey into self-confidence was also a nice thing to spotlight. The actual adventure was sooo by the numbers. The twist could be seen from miles away. The characters were also just meh. The nutcracker especially was so unexceptional despite being the titular character. The dialogue was very simplistic. It just seemed that this whole film was aimed at a very young audience. And by young, I mean babies.

Directing

The Nutcracker was directed by Lasse Hallström (of The Hundred-Foot Journey and A Dog’s Purpose) and Joe Johnston (of Captain America: The First Avenger) – what a weird duo of directors. And even a weirder end product. They did a good job with the visuals – I cannot fault the film’s production value. The CGI could have been cleaner. The pacing was way off. At least the runtime was fairly decent. To end on a positive note: the ballet scenes and the ballet-inspired credits were nice touches. The score, which included the classic melodies, was good too.

Acting

The Nutcracker’s cast’s performances were a huge letdown. Mackenzie Foy and Jayden Fowora-Knight were both wooden. Hellen Mirren and Morgan Freeman were folding in their performances and were still the best just because they are true pros and can outact everyone in their sleep. Keira Knightley was killing her career with every minute of being on screen. She was both a cartoon and a parody: everything about her performance – from the look to the speech to the behavior – were just so cringe-y. Her work her kinda reminded me of Anne Hathaway in Alice in Wonderland (another unfortunate comparison between the two less than good Disney fairytales).

The actor who played the father – Matthew Macfadyen –  looked like off-brand Armie Hammer. The British comedian Jack Whitehall also had a cameo role – good on him for finally getting into a Disney movie (even if bad one) after being cut from Frozen.

In short, The Nutcracker and Four Realms was a boring film that won’t bring anyone any Christmas joy. A basic narrative, oversaturated visuals, and some cringe-y acting – that’s this picture in one sentence.

Rate: 2.4/5

Trailer: The Nutcracker and Four Realms trailer

The_Nutcracker_and_the_Four_Realms

Advertisements

5 ideas about a movie: Smallfoot

Movie reviews

Hello!

And welcome to my once-in-a-blue-moon review of an animated film. This time, we are discussing Smallfoot!

IMDb summary: A Yeti is convinced that the elusive creatures known as “humans” really do exist.

  1. Smallfoot was written by Karey Kirkpatrick, Clare Sera, John Requa, and Glenn Ficarra. I actually quite enjoyed the film’s story and how it took a popular myth – that of the bigfoot – and reversed it. The actual story was also well written: it was quite similar to the story’s of a lot of children’s film but it was executed really nicely.
  2. Thematically, Smallfoot wasn’t breaking any grounds either. On the other hand, a big part of the world still can’t make these themes into a reality (looking at you, US), so maybe they are not that common. Smallfoot highlighted the importance of integrity and called for a complex truth rather a simple lie. It invited us to question everything rather than ignore stuff and had an ultimate message that the old way might not necessarily be the right way.
  3. Smallfoot was directed by Karey Kirkpatrick. I didn’t know that going in but this film was actually a musical. I guess its kinda fitting then that a song – Niall Horan’s ‘Finally Free’ that was released as a promo for this movie – was the thing that got me to see the movie. I actually quite enjoyed the rest of the soundtrack too, as I unironically enjoy pop music.
  4. The animation of the movie was really beautiful. It was also used effectively in all the slapstick humor of the film. I wasn’t the biggest fan of that part of the film but all the physical jokes got a great reaction from the audience at my screening. And it wasn’t just the kids who were laughing.
  5. Smallfoot had quite a star-studded voice cast, led by Channing Tatum (Kingsman 2), James Corden (I loved his voice work both here and in Peter Rabbit. His voice is instantly recognizable!), and Zendaya (The Greatest Showman). Common, Gina Rodriguez and even LeBron James also had supporting roles.

In short, Smallfoot was a pleasant all ages film with some neat messages and catchy songs!

Rate: 4/5

Trailer: Smallfoot trailer

5 ideas about a movie: Christopher Robin

Movie reviews

Hello!

And welcome to the second Winnie-the-Pooh centric film of the year – Christopher Robin (not to be confused with Goodbye Christopher Robin).

IMDb summary: A working-class family man, Christopher Robin, encounters his childhood friend Winnie-the-Pooh, who helps him to rediscover the joys of life.

  1. Christopher Robin was written by Alex Ross Perry (writer of smaller, quite obscure films), Tom McCarthy (Spotlight, Up, 13 Reasons Why), Allison Schroeder (Hidden Figures), Greg Brooker (Stuart Little), and Mark Steven Johnson (writer of early 00s Marvel films). What a mish-mash of talent, looking at their previous projects. Looking at this list, I really would not have thought that Christopher Robin’s script could be good but it was!
  2. Like the first film (of the year) about Winnie-the-Pooh’s origin, Christopher Robin was heartwarming in its promotion of childhood and living the adult life that one’s past/inner child would be proud of. It celebrated imagination and silliness and portrayed life as a game to be played. The film’s message felt heartfelt and sincere rather than cheap or cliched.
  3. Christopher Robin was directed by Marc Forster (who previously did Finding Neverland – a spiritual predecessor of sorts of this film; Quantum of Solace, and World War Z). Both thematically and visually this film felt like a mixture of Paddington, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Rabbit, A Wrinkle In Time, Toy Story 3, and Peter Pan.
  4. Ewan McGregor (T2, Beauty and The Beast) played the titular character and was amazing, as always. He managed to make Robin into an empathetic character, even when his actions could have easily seen as annoying or frustrating if handled by a lesser actor. Hayley Atwell played Robin’s wife. It was nice to see her on a big screen as I loved her a lot as Agent Carter.
  5. The voice cast consisted of Jim Cummings as Winnie the Pooh, Brad Garrett as Eeyore (my spirit animal!), Nick Mohammed as Piglet, Peter Capaldi as Rabbit, Sophie Okonedo as Kanga, Sara Sheen as Roo, and Toby Jones as Owl. All of the voices sounded quite peculiar and were done in such a similar style that I couldn’t neither recognize any of the voices nor discern one from another.

In short, Christopher Robin was an adorable mashup of a variety of writers’ talents and seen before ideas that still, unimaginably, was a successful movie.

Rate: 4/5

Trailer: Christopher Robin trailer

img_0621

Movie review: Peter Rabbit

Movie reviews

Hello!

And welcome to a review of another vaguely Easter-themed movie that is not really about Easter and has been out for almost a month. This is Peter Rabbit!

IMDb summary: Feature adaptation of Beatrix Potter’s classic tale of a rebellious rabbit trying to sneak into a farmer’s vegetable garden.

Writing

Peter Rabbit was written by Rob Lieber (the writer of Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day) and the director Will Gluck. The film’s script was based on the characters and tales by Beatrix Potter. I haven’t come across Potter’s stories before so this movie was my introduction to them. And I absolutely loved the experience of watching the movie, even though I certainly wasn’t its target demographic.

The adorable nature of the whole thing was just undeniable. I feel like Peter Rabbit did the same thing with rabbits as Paddington did with bears: made them cute and British. I also loved the self-referential writing of the film and how the story wasn’t afraid of owning its cliches (the character flaws, ulterior motives said out loud, journey reduced to highlights). I also loved the cheeky humor. The film had a lot of simplistic physical humor but it also had a plethora of more adult snippets, poking fun at British nature, salads, and human contact (what a group). It also had a sweet rural romance and an overall nice message to share the love. That might sound cheesy and not particularly original, but when it is executed well, I can’t complain much and can only enjoy.

Directing

Will Gluck (the director of some of my favorite comedies, like Friends with Benefits and Easy A, as well as the Annie reboot from a few years ago) directed Peter Rabbit and crafted an energetic and infectious all-ages film. The live-action and animation combination was seamless. All the woodland creatures were both realistic and cutely cartoonish – there was just a perfect balance in their design. The main rabbits were goddamn adorable. Just look at those ears!

The paintings, which were included in the film as part of the story, were a stellar nod to the origins of the tales in illustrated children’s books. The credits, drawn in a similar fashion, were neat too. Speaking about the credits, there were quite a few scenes dispersed throughout them, so make sure you don’t leave as soon as the film ends. Peter Rabbit also had an amazing soundtrack, full of older and newer pop songs that made for some great cinematic moments.

Acting

Domhnall Gleeson played the human lead in the film and was an absolute delight to watch. He is one of the few constantly working actors, who stars in everything: experimental art pictures (mother!), mainstream franchises (Star Wars 7 and 8), indies (Unbroken), biographies of various genres (American Made, Goodbye Christopher Robin), and awards films (The Revenant, Brooklyn). His co-star Rose Byrne (X-Men: Apocalypse) was also good: very relatable and sympathetic. Sam Neill (Hunt for the Wilderpeople, The Commuter) also had a fun and unexpected cameo.

On the voice front, James Corden was just brilliant as Peter Rabbit. His three sisters were voiced by three equally brilliant actresses: Daisy Ridley (Star Wars 7+8, Murder on The Orient Express), Elizabeth Debicki (Guardians of the Galaxy 2, The Man from U.N.C.L.E.), Margot Robbie (Suicide Squad, I, Tonya, Goodbye Christopher Robin, The Legend of Tarzan). A TV actor Colin Moody was also fun to listen to in the role of the cousin rabbit.

In short, Peter Rabbit was a great kids movie that I, as an adult, enjoyed immensely! Maybe a bit too much. But that’s a conversation for a different time and a different platform.

Rate: 4.2/5

Trailer: Peter Rabbit trailer

images

5 ideas about a movie: Early Man

Movie reviews

Hello!

While some people flocked to the theater to see the last Fifty Shades, I joined my favorite demographic – kids – at the cinema. This is Early Man.

IMDb summary: Set at the dawn of time, when prehistoric creatures and woolly mammoths roamed the earth, Early Man tells the story of Dug, along with sidekick Hognob as they unite his tribe against a mighty enemy Lord Nooth and his Bronze Age City to save their home.

  1. Early Man was written by Mark Burton (comedy writer) and James Higginson and directed by Nick Park (Chicken Run director). This animated feature comes from Aardman – one of the few stop-motion animation studios still working in the mainstream (the other studio being Laika). I have always loved this type of an animation style and the aforementioned style was one of the factors that drew me into the cinema to see Early Man.
  2. Having seen the trailer numerous times (they were showing it literally before every movie here in the UK, Aardman being a British company), I vaguely knew what the story was going to be and wasn’t certain how to feel about it. Part of me was thinking that it’s a good thing to educate children on the origin of humans but another part of me (the anthropology student) wasn’t sure how the film would handle the ideas of a ‘primitive’ (can’t stand that word anymore, thanks, anthropology). Anyways, Early Man’s solution to the tricky representation was to just make every character into an idiot and also, have the movie to turn out to be about something completely different: not the origin of humans but the invention of football.
  3. The whole football storyline (which was, basically, the main plotline) was where the movie shined. All the real world comparisons and jabs completely worked: starting with the instant replay puppets, unfair referee, players acting as if they were hurt and ending with Lord Nooth being a corrupt sports manager (‘Voluntary contribution…everybody has to pay’ was such a great oxymoron of a line). This whole idea to focus on football (or soccer for the US) also seemed very British/European. South America enjoys football too, so maybe this film will be financially successful down there. In addition to smart jokes, Early Man also had a plethora of really stupid ones, which I didn’t care for, but the primary audience (a.k.a. children in my screening) absolutely loved.
  4. The animation of the picture was really great and the character design stayed within the Aardman brand (more round, obviously clay-like characters in contrast to Laika’s more spindly and weirdly shaped ones). The pacing of the movie was good too and I did appreciate how quick and short it was. As all sports-movies (yes, Early Man is a sports movie), this film had a fun and quite inventive training montage. Lastly, I’d love to find out whether any of the football players in the movie were based on real athletes.
  5. Early Man’s voice cast featured some incredible British A-listers (their involvement was the second major draw to the movie for me, personally). Eddie Redmayne (Fantastic Beasts, The Danish Girl, Jupiter Ascending) was great as aloof, optimistic, and infectious lead Doug, while Tom Hiddleston (Thor 3, Kong, High-Rise) sounded like he had fun embodying such a caricaturish old-school villain. Game of Thrones’ Maisie Williams was basically voicing an animated version of Arya (only obsessed with football, not revenge). While one could definitely recognize the voices of all the actors, their accents did sound a bit thicker than usual, which seemed like an intentional choice to go with the overall tone of the film.

In short, Early Man was a lovely and neatly animated movie with a nice message of writing one’s own story. It also kinda made me want to watch a football match or even kick a ball around for a bit myself.

Rate: 4/5

Trailer: Early Man trailer

images.jpg

Movie review: Coco

Movie reviews

Hello!

The latest Pixar film has finally landed in my local theatres. This is Coco!

IMDb summary: Aspiring musician Miguel, confronted with his family’s ancestral ban on music, enters the Land of the Dead to find his great-great-grandfather, a legendary singer.

Just before we start, here are the links to my other Pixar reviews: Cars 3, Finding Dory, Inside Out.

Writing

Coco was written by Adrian Molina (worked on Monsters University, Toy Story 3, The Good Dinosaur, Ratatouille) and Matthew Aldrich (who doesn’t have much on his IMDb). Disney/Pixar have been dipping their toes into different cultures more and more (just recently with Moana) and have been attempting to showcase these certain cultures without appropriating them. I think that they succeed at this with Coco. On a side note, Coco is not the first animated film to have explored the day of the dead – 4 years ago, 20th Century Fox animation studios made The Book of Life to little or no fanfare. This only goes to show the importance of the attachment of a big name to any project – people trust Pixar, similarly how they trust Marvel or up until recently, Lucasfilm.

Anyways, back to Coco. So, Molina and Aldrich took the rituals and the beliefs of Dia de Los Muertos and turned them into a mythology of the film. To my mind, they were respectful of the culture and did a very good job of explaining it/informing others about it. I’ve always been interested in this particular celebration (even wrote a paper on it in my first year of uni), however, I only had a limited knowledge of it and Pixar’s Coco expanded it. I loved how they also included other iconic elements/people from the Mexican culture (loved the recurring Frida Kahlo gag). I also liked how the move took something culture-specific, like the idea that people decorate altars with photos, candles, and their ancestors’ favorite things, and used it in a very universal, familiar way, a.k.a in the shrine that Miguel dedicates to his favorite singer. While not all of us have made shrines for our favorite things, I’m certain that everybody who reads this blog has at least one movie poster on their wall. I can tell you that I’ve made many movie shrines in my days.

From the structural point of view, I thought that Coco was a well-written and fun adventure. It had some unexpected twists and turns. Thematically, the movie explored the idea of a family v. individual, though, the true conflict of the film was secrets within a family. In addition, while the Dia de Los Muertos setting of the picture already made it a bit dark, some reveals in the third act made it even darker. The Dia de Los Muertos focus of the film also allowed Coco to stress the importance of remembering one’s ancestors – that was such a nice message to spread. Lastly, in the usual Pixar fashion, all the heartstrings were pulled by Coco too.

Directing

Lee Unkrich (director of Toy Story 3, who has also worked on other Pixar films in various roles since the creation of the beloved studio) directed Coco and did a magnificent job. To begin with, the whole animation department at Pixar should get raises or a standing ovation every morning because Coco was the most beautiful animated picture I have ever seen. The amount of detail that went into the design, the vibrancy of the colors, the lighting – everything was just perfect. A lot of these praises are based just on the original visual appeal of Dia de Los Muertos but I do think that the animators deserve recognition for their work of translating this real-world visual appeal into an animated form. I loved the opening sequence with the backstory given through papercuts – it was both original and a culturally-appropriate way to do exposition.  In addition, I loved the aural cultural aspects that were included – mainly the music and how it was both there to embellish the story and be an important part of the story. ‘Remember Me’ was such a great song and, while it might not be the catchiest one, it carried so much sentimental weight. Lastly, the film was paced very well too. It had a good mix of funny moments, entertaining action, educational information, and heart-wrenching emotions.

Voice work

Anthony Gonzalez voiced Miguel and did such a brilliant job. He had such an expressive and strong voice that was just perfect for the lead in an animated film. Gael García Bernal voiced Héctor, while Benjamin Bratt (he does quite a lot of voice work and was recently in Doctor Strange) was Ernesto. I also really loved the brief but important work of Renée Victor (as Abuelita Elena) and Ana Ofelia Murguía (as Mamá Coco) in the movie. One brought such energy to the character, while the other – such love and affection to her respective character.

In short, Coco was a beautiful story brought to life by gorgeous animation and majestic voice work. This is one of those reviews, where any positive synonym of the word ‘beautiful’ works. And the film is very much worthy of all praise.

Rate: 4.8/5 (I’m taking a few points off not because of the movie but because of its messed up international release date)

Trailer: Coco trailer

Coco_(2017_film)_poster

Movie review: Ferdinand

Movie reviews

Hello!

Welcome to a review of a film that dared to go against Star Wars: The Last Jedi at the box office. This is Ferdinand!

IMDb summary: After Ferdinand, a bull with a big heart, is mistaken for a dangerous beast, he is captured and torn from his home. Determined to return to his family, he rallies a misfit team on the ultimate adventure.

Writing

The list of writers on Ferdinand is quite extensive. Robert L. Baird, Tim Federle, and Brad Copeland wrote the screenplay, while Ron BurchDavid Kidd, and Don Rhymer received the story credits. The original source material – the children’s book The Story of Ferdinand –  was written by Munro Leaf and Robert Lawson. Even though movies with a lot of writers rarely turn out well, Ferdinand proved to be the exception.

To begin with, Ferdinand critiqued some elements of the Spanish culture quite bravely. The element I have in my mind is the Spanish bullfighting also known as corrida. I expected the film to shy away from the more violent and controversial aspects of corrida – mainly, the killing of the bulls. However, the picture surprised me by taking that element and making it into one of its main plot points. The corrida killing of bulls also allowed Ferdinand to have the good old dead parents trope that all children’s’ movies use way too much. The anti-corrida idea also seemed just a tad bit pro-vegetarian too (honestly, knowing the spread of vegetarianism and veganism, I’m surprised we hadn’t got a more overtly explicit movie about such lifestyles). While I would like to praise Ferdinand’s writers for not being afraid of angering a whole culture, I wish that they would have included some more celebratory elements of it to balance out the critique (and to maybe avoid the backlash). Some more Spanish cultural traits (maybe some Spanish words, dances or settings) could have been included too.

Not only did Ferdinand have some things to say about Spain, but it also had some other national stereotypes as characters. The horses in the film were German (I personally didn’t see the connection between the animals and the country), while one of Ferdinand’s bull friends – Angus – was Scottish. While that character was just the typical stereotype of the Scottish people, it wasn’t offensive one. In fact, everything to do with Angus got a very positive reaction from the audience in my screening in Scotland.

Ferdinand also tackled some interesting ideas about animal gene development with that Frankebull character and presented an idea of a calming goat (which is a real thing, if Daily Mail is to be believed). In addition to all the innocent humor, the movie also had some lovely message about being oneself rather than sticking to the plan that others have formed for you. It also had a neat idea about pacifist not being cowards and celebrated pet (an unlikely pet but still a pet) and human friendship as well.

Directing

Ferdinand was directed by Carlos Saldanha of Ice Age and Rio films. He did a good enough job with the film. The animation was adorable (the ear wagging was the cutest thing ever). The dance battle sequence came a bit out of nowhere but was, nonetheless, fun. The finale was also super silly but also lovely. The Nick Jonas song Home was a good choice as the main theme for the movie. In general, Ferdinand wasn’t super unique but it was perfectly serviceable children’s film. Plus, I sort of felt a personal connection to it because it reminded me of an animated feature about cows that I loved as a child – Home of the Range.

Voice work

The main character Ferdinand was voiced by John Cena, who was the perfect fit for the character. The film had a tonne of jokes about Ferdinand being gigantic and they sounded even funnier when one realized how John Cena looks in real life (bigger than an average human). Kate McKinnon (Ghostbusters, Rough Night) was fun to listen to in the role of the goat – also, in her most PG role yet. Lastly, my beloved Scottish bull was voiced by none other than the Doctor and Kilgrave himself – David Tennant.

In short, Ferdinand is a cute little children’s’ movie that is perfect for the holiday season.

Rate: 4/5

Trailer: Ferdinand trailer

Ferdinand_(film)

 

Movie review: The Lego Ninjango Movie

Movie reviews

Hello!

Welcome to a review of the 3rd Lego movie and the 2nd one this year. This is The Lego Ninjago Movie!

IMDb summary: Shunned by everyone for being the son of an evil warlord, a teenager seeks to defeat him with the help of his fellow ninjas.

To begin with, I really loved the 2014’s original The Lego Movie and adored the 2017’s The Lego Batman Movie as both a continuation of the Lego franchise and as a parody of the comic book movie/the superhero genre. The Lego Ninjago Movie seemed like a cool expansion of the Lego cinematic series though I didn’t know anything about the Lego ninja sub-brand. Also, I had no idea why they chose to release it this year, so close to The Lego Batman.

Writing

The Lego Ninjago Movie was written by a bunch of screenwriters, way more than it should have had. The two directors Bob Logan and Paul Fisher, and the writers William Wheeler, Tom Wheeler, Jared Stern, and John Whittington. Additionally, the story credits went to Hilary Winston, Dan Hageman, and Kevin Hageman. This just seems excessive: why would not that original children’s movie need 10 writers????

Speaking about that lack of originality: The Lego Ninjago Movie was super similar to The Lego Movie. And while we applauded its originality in 2014, 3 years later and a second-time around, the same ideas just don’t seem that fresh. This film had the same type of a framing device – real-world/live-action set-up which enveloped the lego story. The message – one about encouraging the imagination, play, and the storytelling during childhood – also stayed the same but I can’t really fault it because of how positive even if repetitive it is.

Speaking about the Lego part of the narrative: it was fine but nothing new. The plot focused on the child of a villain (Disney’s Descendants?) and dealt with his experiences as a high schooler (any teen movie ever?) who has a secret superhero life (Big Hero 6?). The ninja characters, in general, seemed to have been inspired by Transformers, Power Rangers, Pacific Rim, and Ironman. I’m guessing that a lot of Japanese/samurai movies were also consulted (and their clips included in the actual film). The elemental powers were cute but old. Lastly, the whole father-son thing was very Star Wars.

The humor of the film wasn’t bad but, at times, it did feel like the movie was trying too hard to be hip and cool (and the kids are cynical these days). That ultimate weapon reveal was super dumb but still hilarious, though.

Directing

The Lego Ninjago Movie had three directors: Charlie Bean, Paul Fisher, and Bob Logan – all long time animators but new to directing.  Speaking about that part of the film which they were best at – the animation was spectacular. This animation style still amazes me and I applaud all the animators for achieving the visuals that I haven’t thought possible just a few years back. The pacing was good too, stuff was always happening for the most part and the movie’s runtime wasn’t stretched out for no reason. Also, this quick pace kinda gave a movie a video game-esque feeling, which was good. There were a lot of dances and songs included too, similarly to the other two Lego films. However, The Lego Ninjago Movie differed from its predecessors in one aspect: it actually did feel like a commercial for the Lego toys way much more than the others did. I know that both The Lego Movie and The Lego Batman Movie were ads for Lego too but at least they were not as obvious about it and had something extra (like the originality or the references) to embellish the ad. The Lego Ninjago Movie lacked that extra.

Voice work

The Lego Ninjago Movie assembled quite a stellar voice cast. Of course, one cannot make a ninja movie without Jackie Chan, so he both voiced a character and appeared on screen (I kinda think that he is still appealing to kids, while the adults don’t care much for him anymore). Dave Franco (Nerve, Now You See Me) and Justin Theroux (The Girl on The Train) voiced the son and the father and were fun to listen to. Silicon Valley’s Kumail Nanjiani (The Big Sick) and Zach Woods played the child-friendly version of their characters from the HBO show. Michael Peña (Ant-Man, The Martian, Collateral Beauty), Abbi JacobsonFred Armisen, and Olivia Munn (X-Men) rounded out the cast and delivered good aural performances too.

In short, The Lego Ninjago Movie was an okay addition to the Lego movie franchise. It mostly just rehashed the same stuff and didn’t add anything new but was still entertaining and enjoyable.

Rate: 3.2/5

Trailer: The Lego Ninjago Movie trailer

images

Movie review: Batman & Harley Quinn

Movie reviews

Hello!

Last summer, I branched out and reviewed a straight-to-DVD animated movie because it was an adaptation of a famous graphic novel – Batman: The Killing Joke. This summer, WB/DC has released another Batman animated film, and the reason to review it this year is Batman’s co-star – the highly popular character of Harley Quinn. The Joker’s girlfriend has definitely broken the boundaries in which she was created and become a favorite of both niche comic fans and mainstream audiences (Suicide Squad is mostly to blame/thank for that). So, let’s see what Batman & Harley Quinn have to offer!

IMDb summary: Batman and Nightwing are forced to team with the Joker’s sometimes-girlfriend Harley Quinn to stop a global threat brought about by Poison Ivy and Jason Woodrue, the Floronic Man.

Writing

Batman & Harley Quinn is an original story, written by Bruce Timm (Jim Krieg helped with the script too). Timm has earned the respect of fans by co-creating Batman: The Animated Series. However, recently he lost some of the said respect by doing something ‘original’ with Batman: The Killing Joke (his producing gig resulted in the ruin of the Batgirl character), so I was preemptively concerned about where his originality will go in this film. And I was right to be worried.

The core story of Batman & Harley Quinn certainly wasn’t bad. The eco message was actually quite interesting, while some of Harley’s character development moments were neat too (seeing her ‘going straight’ and being compassionate). However, a lot (and I mean really a lot) weird choices were made with the details of the narrative and the humor. And not weird in a good kind of way, but in a way that made me wonder ‘what?’ and ‘why?’ a lot.

Let’s start with the biggest problem of the film – the sexual references (both obvious and hidden) that lacked all subtlety or sophistication. The therapy joke, the super-babes bar, the freeze frame kiss? Not only were they quite tasteless but also quite meaningless details. They were just there for some reason and didn’t contribute much to the plot.

Another elephant in the room (movie) was that implied Nightwing/Harley sex scene. It seemed really weird but at least it raised a few problems/questions. First, it allowed the film to analyze the sexualization of Harley Quinn as a character (the line about the job offers as well as the interplay of cuteness and sexiness in the portrayal of the character were two fascinating additions)). Maybe, then, that sex scene was quite fitting, knowing how the character has been perceived? Her partner of the scene – Nightwing – has also been involved in a fair share of adult themes too prior to this picture. Another, more real-world, problem that this sex brought into the forefrunt was the fact that our society still can’t comprehend romantic or sexual pairings where the woman is older than a man. In general, age gaps are a big topic even if the consent is there.

 

Speaking about the non-sexual part of the humour, it wasn’t that good either. The fart joke and ‘smells like discipline’ line were bizzare. I can’t even call them childish – that was something else. The singing in the bar scene was odd too. My favorite joke in the movie wasn’t actually part of the movie – it was the post credits scene with the Ask Dr. Harley TV show. It was a smart jab at reality TV and doctor shows and I also appreciated its meta qualities.

Directing

Sam Liu, who has directed my favorite DC animated film Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths as well as already mentioned last year’s The Killing Joke, helmed Batman & Harley Quinn. I though that he did an okay job. I really liked ‘the Pink Panther meets James Bond’ type of credits. The action was quite campy but I thought that it was an intentional omage to the 1960s Batman TV show. The animation style itself was fine too – the familair 2D of all the WB/DC animated projects.

Voice work

It was lovely to hear Kevin Conroy as Batman/Bruce Wayne as well as Loren Lester as Nightwing/Dick Grayson. These role have become synonyms to their names. The Big Bang Theory’s Melissa Rauch voiced Harley Quinn/Dr. Harleen Quinzel. It was her first time doing that and I wasn’t completely onboard with the choices she made. Frankly, she sounded quite annoying and I wasn’t sure about the southern accent (if it even was a southern accent).

In short, Batman & Harley Quinn was a uncohesive and strange mess of a movie. It’s kinda hearbreaking to write that, as all the characters involved in the picture are loved not only by me but a lot of people.

Rate: 2.75/5

Trailer: Batman & Harley Quinn trailer

bat-man-harley-quinn-poster-afaed3b301082f2260d8bb4869e94d7e.jpg

5 ideas about a movie: The Emoji Movie

Movie reviews

Hello, my dear readers!

Yup, I did it. Didn’t much want to but did it. Let’s just get this over it. This is the review of *sigh* The Emoji Movie!

IMDb summary: Gene, a multi-expressional emoji, sets out on a journey to become a normal emoji.

Before I sink my teeth into that trainwreck of a film, I’d like to praise the animated short that preceded the main feature. The Emoji Movie was accompanied by Puppy!, a Hotel Transylvania short directed by Genndy Tartakovsky. The short picture was cute and relatable and once again proved to me that Hotel Transylvania franchise is the only Sony Pictures Animation series that is worth something. Now, onto the main attraction.

  1. The Emoji Movie was directed by Tony Leondis (he has worked for all the big animation studios before, but only on their lesser known projects), from a script written by Leondis himself, Eric Siegel, and Mike White. The film has already been compared to Inside Out (cause of the focus on emotions), Wreck-it Ralph (cause both films revolve around technology based characters), and The Lego Movie (cause of the obvious corporate advertisement aspect). However, even though The Emoji Movie might be topically similar to these pictures, it vastly differs from them in quality.
  2. If we take the movie’s concept on its own – the emoji culture – it sort of sounds like a good idea. Nevertheless, if we just dig a tiny bit deeper, we soon realize that there is literally no inspiration for a story – an actual narrative – to be created out of the concept. That’s the main problem of this film – the narrative was simply worthless and just a collection of cliches. The conflict of the plot was super artificial too. The film attempted to have an emotional core but did not succeed at all.  Actually, when the emoji characters tried to display or withhold emotions, they seemed borderline psychotic rather than fun or relatable.
  3. The Emoji Movie seems to have been made by filmmakers (or a board of executives) that have zero understanding of their audience. It appears that they were trying to make a movie for a stereotypical millennial who doesn’t really exist. This could be obviously seen in the humor of the film. While half of the jokes were plain bad, the other half was an obvious example of the writers trying too hard and attempting to be cool and ‘in-with-the-kids’. Plus, the tongue-in-cheek jabs at social media culture didn’t really have a place in the film either. One cannot both perpetuate the culture and critique it in the same film.
  4. Despite generally hating the movie, I still found a few positive things in its script. Mostly, these were the spot-on inclusions of the phone related stuff. For example, I liked the fact that the film acknowledged the smiley emoji as being the OG emoticon and how the favorites section was turned into a VIP club.  The realization of the whole phone world wasn’t bad, actually. I liked the inclusion of the spam emails, the viruses, the cloud, Instagram, CandyCrush, Dropbox, Firewall, JustDance (even if the addition of apps was just for promotional/financial purposes) and the viral videos. The 3D animation style was good too but it always is nowadays.
  5. The voice cast of the film consisted of: Deadpool’s T. J. Miller (he was a good choice for such an ”out-there” project, I just wish that the film would have been crazy in a good way and worth his talents), James Corden (he was trying his best and his voice was instantly recognizable), Anna Faris (she was fine), and Logan’s Sir Patrick Stewart (he had like 5 lines in the film and, honestly, the only reason he was cast was so that this  film could have an honor of being the movie that turned a respectable actor into literal poop).

In short, The Emoji Movie was a mess, not even worth the ‘meh’ emoji.

Rate: 2/5

Trailer: The Emoji Movie trailer

MV5BMTkzMzM3OTM2Ml5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDM0NDU3MjI@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,674,1000_AL_