From a young age, I have been told by those of previous generations that older movies were nicer; that is, they didn't have the content concerns that ninety-five percent of the primetime shows or theatrically released films of the past two decades have had. According to those people, that's why they don't have MPAA ratings; back then, no such system was needed. Weil, I'm not as well-versed in the cinema of yesteryear as some people, but, I was disturbed by this film's content. Between the sexual content--including sexual relations between unmarried people and a scene implying nudity--the smoking and drinking, and even the profanity--yes, I know there were only three such words, but, I wasn't expecting any!--this is proof that cinema has a history of being morally offensive, even in the days before the ratings system.
I know many of you are likely thinking, "If you think this is bad..." and will point me to something in your collection that makes Breakfast at Tiffany's look like an episode of Sesame Street. Yes, I know that there's much worse entertainment out there, and that there has been for a long time...but, as a Christian, I'm commanded to "avoid every hint of evil," and I wasn't raised around such content like most millennials--even many who grew up in Christian homes--were. So, if even this was a shock to my system, I think it's obvious that I should avoid edgier fare like the plague...and that's just what I'll continue to do.
Years ago, I saw the Nancy Drew movie starring Emma Roberts. It was pretty much my first experience with the famed teenage sleuth; not only had I read absolutely zero of her books at the time, I was just as unfamiliar with the Hardy Boys. The main reason I was seeing that flick was because Emma Roberts was the star; as a longtime fan of young Hollywood talent, I was curious about her, especially since she and I share a birthday. Prior to that, about all of my experience with the franchise was Relient K's song about Nancy Drew. I remember very little about that Emma Roberts film, but I did enjoy it.
In recent years, especially after working at a library, I have become much more familiar with Miss Drew. I've read numerous novels about her; mostly from the original series and the Files one from the eighties, the latter of which I have a random garage sale in my area to thank for jumpstarting my collection of those. I've also seen some episodes of a nineties(?) series based on the franchise on the Tubi app. So, you might say that me and that famed teenage sleuth have become much better acquainted, which meant I was watching this celluloid version of her through much different eyes.
So, what did I think? Mostly, I enjoyed it: Nancy was (generally) her typical likable self; her friends were (pretty much) just as reliable; there was a mystery afoot, and Nancy used her sleuthing skills to solve it; and, some action and intensity--a hallmark of the books--were present. However, some unnecessary content found its way into the mix. Between misuses of God's name, the immodest outfits of some of the female characters, a suggestive remark here and there, and Nancy engaging in a revenge prank. this was not entirely what I'm used to from this franchise. Granted, it's still cleaner than the CW version, but, at one point, I felt like I was watching a trashy reality show instead. From what I hear, this film tanked at the box office, and it's not the first attempt at making a film series based on the long-running book series; maybe that's a sign that Nancy Drew should stay a literary character.
Who hasn't heard the song "Amazing Grace"? Even if you've never attended a church service, you've probably heard it in some form or another. I can remember a scene in According to Jim where that hymn was played on a harmonica during a funeral of sorts, and an episode of Home Improvement where Jill alluded to it. Most songs have a story behind them, and "Amazing Grace" has quite the history; after seeing this, you won't hear that hymn the same way ever again! Better yet, the production values and story were better than usual for a Christian film; the performances were all outstanding, especially the lovely Romola Garai as Barbara. However, what I didn't expect was for some problematic content to be thrown into the mix. While I knew there would be disturbing descriptions of slavery, as that was a deplorable practice, I was bothered by some of the female characters' low-cut outfits, as well as several utterances of profanity, including British crudities "b----y," "b------s," "arse," and right many uses of the h-word not in reference to the place. Despite its problems, it was still a great movie; however, with a bit more decorum, it could have been much better.
Okay, confession time: I watched the entire series of The Librarians before completing this film. Many years ago, I tried watching this and ended up losing interest about halfway through it. Despite the fact that it was out of order, I'm actually glad I watched it that way...because I don't think I would have even bothered with The Librarians if I had seen this mess first.
As a longtime reader, fantasy fan, and current library employee, you'd probably think this is right up my alley...but it isn't, because this telefilm is downright absurd, especially its finale. The nonsensical plot seems like something out of a video game than a book, and some of the scenes were just ridiculous: Bob Newhart beating up bad guys? Seriously? Also, the content issues were disappointing; while I expected violence and occasional profanity, I wasn't prepared for slight bloodshed, a WWE-style catfight, and especially a scene implying sex. The latter two, along with the villainess' outfit, seemed to be merely there to appeal to male viewers.
If you're completely unfamiliar with the Librarian franchise, start with the TV series, not this garbage. Now, I'm unsure whether or not to continue with the next two movies, despite the fact that they're currently sitting on my shelf.
Despite having seen the first four seasons of Good Witch in their entirety, this is only the second of the telefilms which preceded it that I've watched. I much prefer series to movies, even ones made for television, and I've had too much else on my plate to get around to seeing the flicks, even though I've admired Catherine Bell since the late '90's; she was on my desktop before anyone cared one bit about Hilary Duff or Anne Hathaway. So, I'm watching this through a different lens than those who saw it when it originally premiered.
What did I think? All of the actors did very well, and the story drew me in, even though the conclusion was obvious from the get-go. Instead of just having one plot, throwing in a couple of subplots made it more interesting. True to Hallmark style, the content concerns were rather minor: occasional slightly immodest dress, usage of terms like "moron," etc. Of course, Cassie seems to have mystical powers of some sort, but her magic seems to be based more on intuition and smarts.
However, this has some continuity problems with the series. Where is Grace in all of this? She was one of my favorite characters! Also, if that police officer proposed marriage to her, then how did she later end up engaged to Sam? Maybe watching the rest of the telefilms will explain more; I've got them all waiting on my DVR, thanks to a fairly recent marathon on Hallmark Channel.
Despite being a household name, Robin Hood is one figure with whom I'm not all that familiar. Sure, I read the original Howard Pyle book...but that was all the way back when I was in elementary school. The only flicks I've seen before that relate to the legends are Prince of Thieves (rather violent, in my opinion), Men in Tights (hilarious, though I only saw the edited for TV version; I don't want to see the uncensored one), and the Wonderful World of Disney telefilm _Princess of Thieves (starring Keira Knightley as the super-capable daughter of Robin; need I say more?). All those I saw well over a decade ago, so, this was a bit of a reintroduction to the characters and story.
So, how was the movie? It definitely had a lot of old-school charm going for it. Robin and Marian were likable, not to mention a cute couple. The villains were appropriately despicable. Though there was a lot of action--Robin was a thief, after all--the violence was completely free of blood or gore, and the fight sequences were spot-on. True to classic film style, this flick was completely free from profanity, and it also respectfully portrays the Christian elements of the legend.
The only annoyance I had with the movie was that, a few times, they tell you what happened via onscreen text instead of actually showing it. While I understand having words like that at the start--Star Wars, anyone?--to have it happen more than once is a bit annoying; why not just show us the events? Still, that's a minor complaint. Maybe I should check out more old-school flicks like this.
Years ago, on Christmas Day 2013, my entire immediate family and I headed to the theater to see Frozen, the movie about which everyone was talking. It had been out for a while; a friend from work told me she and her kids saw it on Thanksgiving. While I had heard the song "Let It Go," and even had the Demi Lovato cover of it on my iPod, I was unfamiliar with the fairy tale The Snow Queen. (I know; what kind of avid reader am I?) The story was engaging, and the animation breathtaking, especially seeing it on the big screen. Since then, my mom and I have often referenced that movie, particularly Elsa's infamous show-stopping number; I would even think to myself about how various people I knew needed to "do an Elsa and let it go."
As big of a success as the first film was, it's no surprise that the House of Mouse churned out a sequel; thankfully, it wasn't another direct-to-video one. How does this one stack up to the original? Well, everything here looks incredible; at times, I felt like I was watching a Pixar flick instead. The story was exciting, and had plenty of twists and turns. Olaf was his usual hilarious self, and Anna and Elsa were likable and attractive heroines.
Unfortunately, the music here fell flat. As a kid, I was always a bigger fan of Disney's live-action productions--Flubber, George of the Jungle, Rocketman, etc.--than their animated fare; part of the reason why was because the cartoon characters tended to randomly break out into song, which I found annoying. I still feel that way to a degree, though I have learned to like some of the tunes from old-school Mouse movies. However, despite many people's annoyance with it, I found "Let It Go" to be rather iconic; I can see why plenty of other artists have covered it. This sequel's music is nowhere near as good. While the singing is beautiful, the tracks here lack the punch of the first film's. Of lesser note is occasional bathroom humor; was that really necessary?
In spite of its flaws, this is still a great movie; it's just not what it could have been. If they make a Frozen III, they need to bring back the style of music that the first film had. I enjoyed watching this over the past week; however, I could have enjoyed it more. Then again, that's a non-musical-fan talking; if you like your characters to break out in song, you might feel differently.
Many years ago, VeggieTales made its theatrical debut with Jonah, where the various fruits and vegetables retold the story of the prophet who went the other way when God told him what to do, only to be swallowed by a whale (or big fish, depending on who you ask). In the special features on the DVD release of Jonah, one of the producers or directors mentioned that they had considered doing a Noah's Ark movie, but decided not to, saying that "the fur would kill us." I have no experience with doing computer animation, but, from what I've heard, that's one of the hardest things to animate realistically. Even secular studios have trouble with that; remember how fake Scooby-Doo looked in his first two live-action flicks?
Since then, there have been plenty more Veggie episodes...but, this one takes a different tack. Not only is the animation style upgraded--for good or for ill--but mainstream stars Wayne Brady (Whose Line Is It Anyway?) and Tress MacNeille lend their voices to this project, alongside CCM singer Jaci Velasquez and the usual cast. As usual, Big Idea makes the Bible story kid-friendly, and there were plenty of cute moments alongside an inspiring story of faith.
Unfortunately, what ruins this episode is the new animation. While technically superior, it loses the charm of the original episodes. The first time I saw the cover for this DVD in a LifeWay catalog, Larry's appearance reminded me of that dumb purple dinosaur. Your kids may not care that much about the graphics, but, for longtime fans like me who grew up on the old-school releases, that's a deal-breaker. Online research shows that Big Idea eventually went back to the original character designs; while that's good, it may be hard for the franchise to recover from such a big shark-jumping moment.
I used to like Christian cinema.
When I was younger, I had a blast with VeggieTales, especially the Jonah movie. Though I never saw The Passion of the Christ due to the graphic violence, I enjoyed other Christian flicks such as Hangman's Curse (which, oddly enough, aired on ABC Family during their "13 Nights of Halloween" in 2004) to even Thr3e.
However, I've matured since then, and what used to enthrall me no longer does.
Case in point: I was an avid reader in elementary school, but fell out of love with literature in middle school thanks to being introduced to Pokémon/Nintendo, contemporary Christian music, and classic television. That trend continued when I became the Disney Channel guy in high school...until my junior year was nearly over, and I found a couple of Star Wars books at a local garage sale. Lucas' space opera was a big deal at the time; Revenge of the Sith had recently been released in theaters. I bought those novels on a whim, and ended up being enthralled by one of them, called I, Jedi. For years after that, I sang that book's praises...until earlier this year, when I read it and thought: What is this garbage? It was nowhere nearly as good as I remembered; that just goes to show how one's tastes can change over the years.
The same applies to other forms of media, including Christian cinema: What used to keep me glued to the screen no longer does; sometimes, finishing a movie over the course of a week--regardless of its genre--can be a chore...and that was the case here.
First off, the movie is rather edgy for a Christian flick, especially one rated "G". I was disappointed to hear a usage of the h-word; it was only one, but it was still unnecessary. Other unfortunate exclamations included two crude uses of the term "suck," one of which was by Joshua. Another letdown was the character of Maggie; most of her outfits were either low-cut or too tight.
The biggest problem, however, is with the plot: It's just inane. While Jesus is going to return to Earth, He isn't going to return the way this movie portrays; one reading of the Biblical book of Revelation shows that Christ will return as King, not a humble carpenter. While this film could be taken as a parable, there doesn't seem to be much of a lesson here; this is no Prodigal Son story or anything in that vein.
It's a shame; with A-list talent, including Oscar nominees/winners, a movie like this could have had serious benefit for the Christian faith. Instead, all it does is make people of the Way look bad.
The Good: Will Smith was amazing as the Genie; while he may be no Robin Williams, he brings his own flair to the role and does it very well. Naomi Scott also did very well as Princess Jasmine. The songs were fun, and I was glad to see a new tune included instead of all the same ones I practically know by heart. I enjoyed the special effects, and had a blast with the slightly modified version of the original story.
The Bad: Though not quite as egregious as in the original, some of the wardrobe choices of the female characters bothered me. Jafar was nowhere near as convincing this time around; he seemed like a "bad guy" from Sesame Street. Also, though the longtime entertainment fan in me enjoyed watching this, I have to question why this is necessary. Disney has become to movies what Nintendo used to be to video games: constantly re-releasing "new" versions of the same films we've seen time and time again. As classic and timeless as the original Aladdin was, why even remake it? It's been available on DVD for ages! It seems that the House of Mouse would do anything to make some moolah; the executives there must not know the words of 1 Timothy 6:10: "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil." (NIV)
This flick was of interest to me for two reasons: One, my mom is a longtime fan of Broadway musicals, especially this one, so, I grew up hearing the songs and knowing the story. While I've never read the Victor Hugo novel--I know; what kind of reader am I?--I've become familiar with it thanks to its various interpretations. Two, Anne Hathaway is an old Hollywood "flame" of mine. In March of 2005, she replaced Hilary Duff as my number one favorite female celebrity after I saw Ella Enchanted thanks to a friend's recommendation. (Believe it or not, not only was that friend of the male gender, he was a former drill sergeant; no joke!) So, when I saw this recently at a garage sale, I knew I had to give it a whirl.
In short: I was blown away. The grand scope of the story; the performances, especially from Hugh Jackman, Anne Hathaway, and Samantha Barks; the authentic sets; the musical numbers; pretty much everything about this flick wowed me. Better yet, it portrayed faith in God in a positive light; so much so, I almost felt like I was watching a Pure Flix production at times. An appearance by original Broadway cast member Colm Wilkinson was a plus. Not since the celluloid adaptation of Andrew Lloyd Webber's Phantom of the Opera have I been this impressed with such a film. Despite their popularity and my penchant for Disney Channel media, even the High School Musical and Camp Rock flicks didn't have such an effect on me.
However, I did have one quibble: There were certain moments that I found unnecessary. I understand that violence and sex were a big part of the original novel, and any faithful adaptation would have to be at least "PG-13"; still, there were a few brief scenes that could have been left out, and that would have embarrassed me if I'd had a friend--especially one from my church--watching it with me. So, discerning viewers may want to proceed with caution.
When Disney bought Marvel, people had a lot of questions: How would the universes of beloved characters such as Spider-Man, the X-Men, or the Avengers be affected? Some people had their doubts, and rightfully so; when the Mouse owned Saban, the Power Rangers seasons they produced are still to this day widely considered to be the worst, and many longtime space opera fans feel that The Last Jedi was a shark-jumping moment for Star Wars. Still, Disney has gotten their own franchises wrong, too; The Lizzie McGuire Movie may have been the first theatrically released film to be the series finale of a television show, but it betrayed the now-iconic sitcom on which it was based. So, they could have either hit a home run...or completely strike out.
Well, if this movie is any indication, then Mickey's ownership of Marvel is working very well. This film packed a punch unlike any animated movie I've seen in a while. Some scenes made me almost tear up, whereas others made me want to cheer. The animation was outstanding; seriously, it was on par with Pixar's creations. As usual, there was plenty of action and heroism, not to mention a cameo by Stan Lee, albeit one after the credits.
However, I do have to warn viewers that, though this movie was amazing, it is also very emotional. Early in the movie, the main character's brother is killed; later on, multiple characters are feared dead, including the protagonist's robotic companion. For those who can't handle seeing such tragedy because of events in their own lives, it might be best to avoid this.
I've always been a fan of strong female characters. My first celebrity crush was the original Pink Power Ranger, and most of the ones I've had since were best known for playing characters who were both powerful and feminine: Lizzie McGuire, Mindy McConnell, Mia Thermopolis, Maddie Fitzpatrick, etc. When I was a senior in high school, I wrote a novel (of sorts) about a super-heroine who, alongside her best friend/significant other, saved her entire town from the threat of a dastardly villain. Part of it was inspired by the first two Tobey Maguire Spider-Man flicks; however, I would never have even come up with such an idea if I hadn't seen my high school's production of Seven Brides for Seven Brothers...which featured a longtime female friend of mine as its lead. Looking back, I think the Disney sitcoms were a big influence, too.
So, to see a film center around a superhero of the fairer sex is a dream come true. True, we already got that when Gal Gadot wowed the world as Wonder Woman; still, Captain Marvel features a former Disney actress as its lead, so, in a way, I was more eager to see her flick than Diana Prince's. The fact that it takes place in the 1990s--complete with grunge music on the soundtrack and a scene in a Blockbuster Video location--had my curiosity piqued even more.
While good for what it was, it wasn't quite what I've come to expect from Marvel. Superhero movies usually have epic battles and lots of excitement; though there was some action towards the end, parts of this film were a bit dull. Brie Larson is attractive, but, her acting leaving something to be desired here. If this wasn't a Marvel flick and didn't feature a female superhero, I wonder if it would have gotten nearly as much acclaim as it has.
I'm a sucker for a story.
Seriously, anytime I hear, read, or see a story--in any form--I always want to know what happened next. I still remember years-old incidents where somehow--flipping channels, being at a friends' house, a technical problem, etc.--I saw only part of a movie or show; to this day, I wonder what happened before or after what I saw. True, some tales are not worth telling; if it's morally offensive, I don't want to hear any part of it. However, as long as it isn't sinful, pretty much any story can grab my attention.
So, despite the critical drubbing this movie got, I found it to be a captivating tale of redemption, with a charming historical setting. The performances were wonderful, and the production values were amazing. It seems to me that the critics were just too hard on this movie because it fell into the genre of Christian cinema. I would say that we need more films--and, for that matter, television shows--like this.
Then again, I'm such a sucker for a story that I stayed up past midnight to finish watching The Witches of Oz, which had the worst special effects I've ever seen, so, maybe I'm not a fair judge. To adapt an old song lyric, "Here I am now; entertain me!" That's what this movie did; you may feel differently.
(I do want to issue a content concern: This film has a surprising amount of violence; more than I would expect in a "PG". The initial shock I had while watching this is akin to what many people felt when Prince Caspian first came out. While there's no blood or gore, the intensity of the action made me feel like this should have been "PG-13" instead.)
First off, a little personal history: All the way back in 1995, I received a computer game as a Christmas gift called Putt-Putt Goes to the Moon. My mom didn't even know what it was; I still can hear her saying, "What is that? A golf game?" Despite its title, it had nothing to do with any sport; Putt-Putt was actually an anthropomorphic purple convertible that actually gets launched on a rocket to the Moon while visiting a fireworks factory. As the game progresses, that titular vehicle does everything from save an alien from moon goo to play the arcade game Bear Stormin' to meet up with an abandoned NASA Rover...and, eventually makes it back to terra firma. I quickly got addicted to that game, and soon got my hands on not only other Putt-Putt titles, but also others from the same developer, Humongous Entertainment. One of their games, Let's Explore the Airport, I awaited owning for well over a year, playing the demo to death the whole time. Words can't describe my excitement when my mom randomly decided to purchase it for me as an end-of-school reward.
Fast forward to 2004: I hadn't touched any Humongous Entertainment games in years, but I did fondly remember playing them on my first Mac, which was long gone. That November, I went with some friends from church to see The Incredibles in theaters, where the trailer for the first Cars flick was unveiled. As you can imagine, those Putt-Putt games were the first thing I thought of; it was almost like a 3-D version of a childhood favorite. I actually didn't see Cars until well after it came out on DVD, but I enjoyed it, particularly the vehicle-themed spoofs of other Pixar films during the end credits.
That was years ago; the Cars franchise is now a trilogy, and I'm just now seeing the second outing. What did I think? Honestly, I had a blast with it; the action and intensity was on point, and Mater's triumph over dire circumstances was very inspiring. I loved the voice actors, especially the female British spy, Holley Shiftwell. As usual, the animation was excellent. Despite what some people may think, I think this is another winner from the studio that pioneered computer animation; it was vastly superior to the last one I sat through: the dreadful, nerve-grating Incredibles 2. If you like family-friendly action/adventure flicks, this one is for you.
I've been a fan of Scooby-Doo for over two decades. Ever since a family member introduced me to it just as I was finishing fourth grade, I've enjoyed "those meddling kids" in various forms: television shows, movies (both animated and live-action), books, comics, and even a soundtrack on audio cassette. For the first two years or so after getting into it, I was known--for good or for ill--for being a big fan of the franchise.
When I heard that they were making a movie that told the origin story of Daphne and Velma, it sounded like something worth checking out; while Scooby may have been the most popular character, I liked the whole gang (well, except shark-jumper Scrappy.) The fact that the two leads were played by Sarah Gilman (I Didn't Do It) and Sarah Hyland (Geek Charming) only sweetened the deal.
However, I barely started it when I considered giving up on it; even though I didn't, it didn't get any better. If this was supposed to be the early days of two teenaged characters who first appeared in 1969, then, why do they have modern conveniences, not to mention technology that seems like something out of Spider-Man 2099? As much as I like Brian Stepanek (The Suite Life of Zack and Cody), he was just plain stupid here; I wonder how he felt playing such an inane role. Also, this movie betrays its "G" rating; while there's no profanity or sexual content, the scariness--which is more intense than anything in the old-school Where Are You! cartoons, partly due to the live-action setting--should have earned a "PG," and is likely to frighten youngsters, even ones who have seen the original show.
I do have to give the makers credit; they didn't decide to add drug references ("What's your name?" "Mary Jane." "Like, that is my favorite name!"), occultic plot devices, or profanity like they did in the first live-action flick featuring "those meddling kids". Still, just like in the case of the Mystery Incorporated cartoon, I think this is an insult to the legacy of Hanna and Barbera; they were likely turning in their graves at the release of this butchering of their most popular creation.
All the way back in 1996, I saw a Family Channel telefilm called Christmas Every Day, about a kid who has to relive December 25 until he learns the error of his ways. That was my first experience with a time warp film; the following February, Groundhog Day came on TV, and, when my mom and I watched it, she said, "This is like that Christmas Every Day movie!" Since then, the same plot device has been used in everything from the Nintendo 64 game The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask to Pure Flix's In the Blink of an Eye, the latter of which also used the Rapture as part of its storyline.
If you find movies like Groundhog Day annoying--and I've known some people who do--you won't enjoy this, but, I did. It feels like a Disney Channel production at times: teen romance, no profanity, and former Mouse network star Christy Carlson Romano (Even Stevens, Kim Possible, Cadet Kelly) both in a starring role and behind the camera as well, not to mention an appearance by one of the Lawrence brothers. Unless you absolutely adore Yuletide films, you probably won't want to buy this; I'm hopefully trading my copy in soon. Still, it was fun for what it was.
One of the problems with prequels is that, if you've seen the films that take place afterwards, you know who lives and who doesn't. That's what took all the drama out of the battle scenes in Attack of the Clones and Obi-Wan's battle with General Grievous in Revenge of the Sith. Those who watch the flicks for the first time in chronological order may feel differently, but, for those like me who grew up watching the original trilogy on VHS back in the day, there's no surprise there.
Also, after The Last Jedi, I lost faith in Disney's take on "a galaxy far, far away". If you've seen my other reviews, you know that I've watched a lot of shows and movies from the House of Mouse: Lizzie McGuire, Queen of Katwe, Incredibles 2...and plenty more! Since high school, I've been known as "the Disney guy," which is why I had faith that they'd do Star Wars justice...and that made the travesty that was Episode VIII all the more heartbreaking.
So, how was Solo? To be honest, Han Solo has never been among my favorite characters from the franchise; I was a much bigger fan of the Jedi: Luke, Yoda, Obi-Wan, etc. Still, I felt that I had to watch it...and, although it had its moments, it didn't really feel like Star Wars. Between the annoying feminist droid, the excessive profanity--seriously, even the novels don't have that much language!--the appearance of Darth Maul--wasn't he cut in half?--and occasional crude allusions, this only furthers my opinion that Disney has ruined the franchise. Instead of more of this dreck, Lucasfilm needs to reboot the series and bring the Thrawn trilogy to the big screen. Now, there's good space opera!
Me and this second Star Wars prequel have an interesting history. (I know; I say that a lot, don't I?) My first time seeing it was actually in an IMAX theater at a local museum; at the time, that place had the only supersize movie screen anywhere close by. What I didn't know until after it was over was that the IMAX version actually was shortened; as soon as me and my brother-in-law walked out of the theater, one guy said to his friend who saw it with him, "So...how much did they cut out?" Still, despite the hate this movie has gotten--it was widely considered to be the worst of the saga even before the prequel trilogy was finished--I enjoyed it; the action sequences were spot-on, and it's interesting to see the start of Anakin's journey towards the Dark Side. True, the romance was a bit overdone, but, this series isn't about lovey-dovey scenes anyway.
The one complaint I did have is that it feels a bit...well, oversexed. Between seeing Anakin shirtless and Padmé's various immodest outfits, it seems that the makers were trying to provide unnecessary eye candy for viewers of both genders. Also mildly disappointing was the single profanity; the only one in the entire prequel trilogy!
Me and this movie have an interesting history. When it came out in theaters, I had friends who were chomping at the bit to see it, but I didn't want to because I thought it was graphically violent due to some Star Wars video games having a "T" rating. (Ironically, when I became a big fan of the franchise, those guys didn't care for it anymore; they said they "grew out" of it.) I did actually see it around Easter of 2000 at a family members house, and I had fun with it. My mom bought me a shirt that had to do with the movie, but didn't want me to have one with Darth Maul on it, because she felt he looked too much like the devil. (Looking back, I can see how such an image would have been perceived by some of my friends and family, especially those who were elderly.) This film was my introduction to the Star Wars franchise; though I had played games and read books about it prior to seeing this, I didn't really understand them.
So, maybe I'm biased, but I enjoyed this movie. Even though the acting wasn't the best, the scope is appropriately epic, and it sets the stage for later events that are even more tumultuous, such as Anakin's turn to the Dark Side. Like a lot of media, I can see why some people don't care for this or the prequels in general...but I still liked it, even this time around. It may not be perfect, but it's light years ahead of the shark jump that was The Last Jedi.
As usual, I'll start with my history with this franchise: In 2000, when I was in sixth grade, our teacher had us all read The Hobbit as it was adapted into a play in our literature textbook. Another teacher that year had copies of the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy in her personal collection, so, I tried it...and just couldn't get into it. The next school year, a teacher recommended that I read the actual Hobbit novel, so, I attempted to...and had the same problem. When the movie came out in 2001, me and some family members went to see it on Christmas Day...and I was quickly bored. Not only was the flick overly long--probably the longest one I'd ever seen, and definitely the longest I'd watched in a theater--but, we arrived at the theater quite early, so having to sit still that long just drove me crazy. I was used to sitcoms and quick Super Smash Bros. Melee matches; a three hour movie couldn't hold my interest.
Despite that history, thanks to DVD technology, I discovered that watching long films in more than one sitting helped me appreciate them better. For example, I had trouble sitting through Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban at the cinema, but watching it and the other flicks in the series on DVD over the course of two or more days was much more fun. So, since I had the Lord of the Rings flicks on my DVD rack, I figured: Why not give them a whirl? For the past couple weeks or so, I've been watching Fellowship in fifteen-minute increments; this time, my reaction has been completely the opposite. The flick that once nearly bored me to death has proved amazing, inspiring, and beautiful.
I would say that I can't wait to watch the sequels...but, before I do that, I'm going to try out the extended edition, so I can see the entire story. Plus, I'm going to give the original novels a try as well; I had them years ago, and enjoyed the first two...but never finished the trilogy, even though I meant to do so for quite a while.
If you're a fantasy fan, and haven't seen this...you need to!
Let me start by discussing my history with this story, both in book and celluloid form: I was recommended the original novel in second grade, but couldn't get into it; I was too enthralled by computer games and television for it to interest me. In sixth grade, my homeroom teacher made it required reading; I was a bit hesitant to try it, but, when I did, I enjoyed it so much that I read the sequels later on in middle school, even though it wasn't required. To this day, that's the only book that was required reading for my entire class--at any point in school--that I actually liked. When the ABC telefilm came on, I started to watch it...but, then it got too late, and I had school the next morning, so, I taped the rest...and never watched it. Later on, I got the DVD from the library, but, it took multiple attempts to finish it. As an adult, I read/listened to the entire Time Quintet again, and it still held up, even though I wasn't too enthused by L'Engle's other works, especially A Ring of Endless Light, which I didn't care for even in DCOM form. When I heard that Wrinkle was getting the big screen treatment, I was curious what the House of Mouse would do with it; would they bring new life to it like they did the Muppets, or would they butcher it like they did Star Wars with The Last Jedi?
Unfortunately, I have to say that this falls into the latter category. To me, the best thing about this film was seeing Rowan Blanchard (Girl Meets World) in a role that was very different from Riley Matthews. If only she had gotten more screen time. The rest of the movie falls flat. Oprah Winfrey's performance was awful; while Reese Witherspoon and Mindy Kaling were attractive, they also were just awkward here. The flick also takes too much liberty with the novel; so much so, I'd hate to see Ms. L'Engle's reaction to this if she were still alive. As it is, she probably was turning in her grave at this movie's release. Not only was the story butchered, but the Christian elements were removed as well. Fans of the books who are also part of the Way will likely be disappointed by that. Yes, the special effects were good, but, you can get that pretty much anywhere these days.
In short: Go read--or listen to--the book and its sequels; don't even bother with this mess.
Synopsis: We all know the story of Simba's triumph over his evil uncle Scar, who killed Simba's father Mufasa...but, there's even more to that tale than you knew! Focusing on the backstory of Timon and Pumbaa, this sequel/prequel features the original cast and music by Elton John and Tim Rice.
The Good: Timon and Pumbaa have always been my favorite Lion King characters; they were comic relief in a rather serious film. So, this direct-to-video spinoff is charming and cute; it also brings the adventure and drama of the original film.
The Bad: The commentary nature of the flick--Timon and Pumbaa watch the film with you, and intersperse their own remarks--was a bit annoying. Also, the ending was a big cash grab by Disney.
Conclusion: Me and the original Lion King have an interesting history. Like most kids of my generation, I grew up watching it on video; on the last day of eighth grade, we even watched it in Spanish! I've also watched the sequel...and now this, to complete the "trilogy". As good as it is, I can't help but think they should have stuck with one movie; this seems like a mere attempt to cash in on a recognizable brand.
Synopsis: Continuing where the first film left off, the Incredibles work together to defeat the Underminer...only for it to result in serious destruction of the city. When superheroes are made illegal, the Parr family thinks it's time to hang up their super-suits...until Bob (Mr. Incredible) and Helen (Elastigirl) get contacted by a wealthy businessman who wants to change that law. He selects Elastigirl to be his "it" girl, and she soon saves the day...only to find out that an old nemesis, known as Screenslaver, is bent on her and her family's destruction. Who could this evil villain be? Will the Incredibles be able to save the day once again?
The Good: Pixar basically pioneered the computer-animated film, so, it's no surprise that the animation here is beautiful. The decades-old setting brings some old-school charm, particularly when the kids are seen watching the vintage Saturday morning cartoon Jonny Quest. As you'd expect, the action was spot-on.
The Bad: If only the rest of the movie matched up. As much as I love female superheroes, Elastigirl was annoying here; her voice nearly drove me bonkers. Violet's adolescent tantrums were just as ingratiating. The villain here wasn't very convincing, either. Some content concerns popped up as well: Though I expected violence, profanity (including misuses of God's name) and occasional crudity simply weren't necessary.
Conclusion: I first saw The Incredibles in a packed theater back in November 2004, and had a blast with it; so much so that, the following March, I begged my mother to buy the DVD when it was released. We popped the movie in one night...and never watched it again; soon after, I sold it at one of our garage sales. On the small screen--which really was small; we didn't have a very big television set back then--it just wasn't the same; it was almost as if I were watching Barney and Friends instead. Despite that, I had heard great things about the long-awaited sequel, so, I figured, why not? Well, I hate to say it, but Pixar got it wrong here. Yes, the animation was fabulous, but, these days, you need more than great visuals to win me over. While the content concerns were minor, the problems lied in poor voice work, annoying characters, and a sub-par villain. Part of me says they shouldn't make an Incredibles 3; then again, that would give them a chance to redeem themselves for this second outing.
Synopsis: Simone Burner is walking home from work...when a guy named Patrick Walters follows her and attempts to rape her. She finds a gun and shoots him in self-defense...but, Patrick's family is bent on proving him innocent and her guilty as not to besmirch the family name. Will Simone be able to prove her innocence? Meanwhile, three young American soldiers--one of whom is a mother of a young child--get captured by the Taliban; will their rescuers find them in time? Also, a young nurse has a rather difficult elderly patient; what secret is the old man hiding?
Stars Erik Estrada (CHiPs) and former soldier Jessica Lynch.
The Good: I like how the stories all come together in the end; at the start, they seem like disparate narratives, almost as if someone spliced three different films into one. By the time the credits roll, though, you see how they fit together. Simone is a likable heroine; she may have had a rough past, but, her dedication to overcoming it despite dire circumstances is inspiring.
The Bad: The biggest annoyance was the constant fadeouts; they could have saved a lot of running time if they'd just cut from one scene to another instead of continually fading to black. Also, though the ending was mostly inspiring, I would have liked the people who were trying to frame Simone to face consequences, such as jail time, for what they did; when the case was dropped, they got off scot free. Also, as you may have guessed, this isn't for kids; with an attempted rape being the main focus, and references to prostitution and drug use, this would have earned this a "PG-13" from the MPAA (and rightly so).
Conclusion: Christian movies can be hard to review at times; while I admire the heart and message behind them, the production values often leave something to be desired. Though there are times where they've gotten it really right (Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie, for example) they've also seriously flubbed it more times than I would want to admit, such as the epic fail that was C Me Dance. This movie is somewhere in the middle: not amazing, but not terrible either. Fans of Christian cinema may want to give this a try, though I'd suggest renting it before purchasing it.
Synopsis: Josie couldn't be more excited; she is about to marry her sweetheart, Liam Page! Unfortunately, her joy turns to sorrow as Liam stands her up at the wedding. Several years later, Liam is living it up as a country singer...but has had enough of that life, and ventures back home to see his old flame. To his surprise, he discovers that he has a daughter, and a rather precocious one at that! Josie is hesitant about allowing Liam back into her life after what he did. Is he truly repentant? Will he and Josie reconcile their differences?
The Good: As a whole, I enjoyed this movie; it was cute for what it was, especially Billy, Liam's precocious daughter. Sure, it's predictable, but it's well-made, and it has the sweetness of a Hallmark telefilm, which you rarely see in theatrically released flicks, even Christian ones.
The Bad: Some may find this to be a bit edgy, both for a Christian film and a "PG". For Liam to have a daughter with a woman he didn't marry, as well as to have another lady in his hotel room after a concert, implies things that you may not want to explain to your youngster. Teens and adults will understand, but, I wouldn't want to answer a five-year-old's questions about that. Also, this film doesn't feel all that Christian, even minus the aforementioned content; sure, some of it takes place in a church, but that's mostly wedding and funeral scenes.
Conclusion: Overall, this was sweet and touching for what it was. You'll see the ending coming a mile away, but, that's part of the fun of movies like this. It's one of the better Christian movies I've seen recently, despite its flaws.
Synopsis: It's Hannah Montana...live and in person! This concert film features her performing some of her smash hits, such as "Girls' Night Out" and "Best of Both Worlds". Alongside the concert footage is a behind-the-scenes look at Miley's rehearsals and family life, including appearances by her parents, Tish Cyrus and country star Billy Ray Cyrus (Doc). Also featuring an appearance by the Jonas Brothers, this is a Hannah fan's dream come true!
The Good: Say what you will about Miley; she definitely knows how to put on a show. The choreography and showmanship here is impressive. My favorite part of this was the appearance by the Jo Bros.; they even did a rendition of "Year 3000," which is my favorite Jonas track.
The Bad: Unfortunately, parts of this concert film fall flat. While the behind-the-scenes footage is mostly fun, it was disheartening to hear Miley call her mother "woman". (Mark Lowry once said that, if you did that to your mom where he grew up, you'd be wearing your teeth around your neck.) I felt really bad for those dads who raced in high heels to get tickets to the concert; not only does that ensure that I'll never have kids, but...what guy would want that captured on film for all eternity?
Conclusion: If you know me, you know the Disney Channel and I have a long history that goes back way before anybody had ever heard of Miley Cyrus. After discovering Lizzie McGuire just after starting high school, I was known for my love of the Mouse network, whether for good or for ill. It wasn't just Lizzie, though; I was also a fan of Raven, Suite Life, etc. I still watch those old favorites sometimes, thanks to them being available on iTunes. However, I didn't do much with Hannah Montana until after the show's run was over; it just didn't appeal to me, and Miley was no Hilary Duff or Ashley Tisdale. Eventually, I started watching it, and I had fun with it, even if the title character wasn't my favorite Disney star. That's still true; I found Miley's backup dancers and singers to be more attractive than her, even if she was the main attraction. Still, as a Mouse network fan, I enjoyed it, even if it is a bit bittersweet when you realize that neither Miley nor the Jonases are the clean-cut stars they used to be.
I've never been a fan of Kim Possible. Even back when I watched Lizzie McGuire, Even Stevens, and Raven practically every day, I only watched one full episode one time; everything else I know about the show and its characters comes from endless Disney Channel commercials, or tail ends of episodes I saw while waiting for one of my favorites to start. My problems with it are twofold: One, I'm not a fan of Kim's usual style of dress; the Mouse network would never have allowed a live action heroine to consistently dress that way. Two, while I'm all for strong female characters, Kim is too much of a Mary Sue, whereas her best friend is unacceptably dimwitted. On Lizzie McGuire, Gordo may have been a different sort of best friend, but, at least he was smart. Even the fact that my second top celebrity crush, Christy Carlson Romano, voiced Kim wasn't enough to make me a fan.
Still, the show had its admirers; otherwise, it wouldn't have lasted nearly as long as it did. So, some time ago, when I saw this at a garage sale, I thought: Why not give it a chance? This one definitely had its moments; the animation was great, and the plot was rather convoluted. However, the problems I always had with the show were present in multiple ways. Not only was Kim too perfect of a heroine, but Shego was the only smart villain around. Yes, Ron may have saved the day, but, he did it by accident. When the movie opened with a suggestive cheerleader routine, I knew this wasn't going a very good production...and it wasn't. It was fun at times, but, I don't think I'll bother with any more Kim Possible episodes again...and that's a longtime Disney Channel fan talking.
Pure Flix is the leading studio for Christian movies, and they have some great films...but, this isn't one of them. The plot starts off interestingly enough: Mia never knew her father, and loses her mother to a car accident while in college. However, the further turns of events don't make sense: Daniel isn't Mia's father, and knows that he isn't, but pretends to be anyway? How heartbroken would she end up being in the future once the actual truth comes out, as it almost always does? Why would a woman change her last name without getting married? I've heard from female friends that getting your new surname on everything can be a doozy, even in this day and age. Also, why would a rape victim go from dropping charges to agreeing to testify? Doesn't make much sense to me.
Not only that, but, the content wasn't as clean as I've come to expect from this studio. At least four profanities--one d-word, two h-words, and a misuse of the Lord's name--and an immodest fashion sense, ranging from waitresses in low-cut outfits to seeing Mia twice in a bikini. Did the executives at the studio watch this before releasing the DVD? While I know that Christian movies often feature tough issues, the attempted rape scene may be hard for some to watch, especially for those who have past experiences with such an act. All in all, this is one of the films that gives Christian cinema a bad name.
Synopsis: High school student Aaron Carlson aspires to be a lawyer...but, his parents and his high school principal think it's just a pipe dream. While pursuing his goal, Aaron finds his way into a local chess club...and finds out that becoming the regional champion could lead him to being accepted into his college of choice. He studies the game extensively...only to lose badly. Will he be able to emerge victorious and fulfill his goal?
The Good: As someone who grew up playing board games, both old and new, it's nice to see a movie that focuses on one, especially a timeless one such as chess. Also, a story a character shares serves as a good analogy for what an obsession or addiction to something--regardless of what it is--can do to you...something that definitely hits home in a world where people everywhere are glued to their phones or social media.
The Bad: Unfortunately, the rest of this film falls flat; it's just utterly boring. Add to that dislikable characters, a sparse and poorly done soundtrack, and a scene where the protagonist answers the door in his underwear--no joke!--and this was definitely a dud.
Conclusion: Back in the day, my neighborhood friends used to call me "the king of board games," because I had so many; most of them came from garage sales throughout my area. I eventually had to get rid of all of mine, because I had nobody to play them with anymore; still, I do have fun when I play them from time to time, because you never know what will happen! Despite my history with checkers, Monopoly, and such, I don't really want to watch a movie about a board game...especially a thinking game like chess. It may be fun to play, but, simply watching it is dull, especially how this movie presented it. After my bad experiences this month with this and other films in the genre, I'm beginning to see why Christian cinema has such a bad reputation.
Score: 1/5
