Midsommar is a complicated beast. Those going for something as linear as Hereditary will be immediately disappointed by Midsommars somewhat convoluted plot elements and meandering pace. I sat in the cinema as the credits rolled by, deep in thought about what I just watched, and if it was any good. Nothing really sat well with me, and the film didn't really connect upon immediate completion, but I gave it time to digest.
Ari Asters two movies are very much at odds with each other. Hereditary slaps you with it's excellent presentation, pace, sense of dread and quality of acting on display. Then, upon further inspection, it's woven plot elements and symbolism shine through on subsequent viewing.
Midsommar is very much the opposite. The film almost dawdles in it's presentation and doesn't fully attack you with it's acting chops or narrative (although Florence is simply stunning in her portrayal of Dani). Midsommar more presents it's parts in a very matter-of-fact fashion, and then leaves it up to you to connect the dots of both the plot and what's on display. While there is far too much to unpack in this small comment section, I'd just like to detail some of my favourite themes on display in Midsommar, and why it went from a 6/10 during my cinema viewing, to a solid 8 - 8.5/10 upon reflection.
--- LONG DISCUSSION OF SPOILERS BELOW THIS POINT ---
One of Midsommars central parallels is the individualism/selfishness of Western life and it's stark comparison to the commune we are introduced to. Examples of this are: During the intro, Dani is going through the trauma of a suicidal family member and her boyfriend, Christian, is encouraged by his friends to abandon her in her time of need telling her to see her therapist as it's not his problem. Christian echos these sentiments directly to Dani about her sister, telling her to leave her alone as she is just doing this for attention. Upon arriving at the commune in Sweden, Mark is unwilling to wait for Dani to be ready to take shrooms. Josh, knowing of Dani's recent trauma involving death, subjects her to the suicide of the elders for his own thesis and research. Christian uses the situation to further his own academic efforts, much to the annoyance of Josh. Everyone is acting in their own self interest regardless of the emotional toll this takes on their friendships. This is a stark contrast to how we see the commune deal with distress, emotion and personal issues. When Dani sees Christian cheating on her, the female members of the commune bawl, weep, scream and cry along with Dani, literally experiencing her burden with her to lessen the load. As described by Pelle, the commune "hold" you during your distress, helping you cope and living through those emotions with you. This is further cemented by the scene earlier in the movie, shortly after Dani's sister commits suicide. We see Dani hunched over Christian's lap overcome with emotion, screaming out the pain of the loss of her sister. Christian is anything but present however, his eyes vacant as if he weren't there with her at all. This is possibly my favourite theme of the movie, as it really paints how alone we are in modern society regardless of how many people we surround ourselves with. How many people are actually there for us in our time of need? Sure, they might be physically present, but are they actually there, sharing our pain? It's truly terrifying to think about.
My other favourite theme is who is and isn't a bad person. I've seen many people online say they think Christian is a horrible boyfriend for how he treats Dani. While I can understand their position, I struggle to see how Christian is the bad guy for his actions. Christian finds himself in a dying relationship which he is mentally checked out from but decides to stay to help her through the grief of losing her parents and sister. Christian even goes as far as to bring her on vacation with him to help her through her trauma, even though he wants to split up with her. Would the audience have prefered Christian leave Dani right after she lost her family? That would have been MUCH worse. Do these actions warrant what happens to Christian? I don't think so at all. Christian is so misunderstood in this movie, I can't wait to see it again to draw more conclusions on his character. Is Josh a bad person for wanting to fully envelope himself in a foreign culture? Although we know it is largely for academic gain, Josh does seem to love learning about the culture of these people, wanting to see how they operate and know every intricacy of their faith. Does this warrant his murder for trying to document their sacred texts? Should an outsider be murdered for enjoying and absorbing someone elses culture and customs, or should they be thanked for their interest and passion? (Sidenote, I see Josh's character as a direct reflection of the usual racial stereotypes we see in movies of this ilk. Usually we see the white academic researching the savage native/minority tribe, but Josh is the exactly flip of this, which is a nice touch). Were Connie and Simon wrong for coming into another culture and expressing disgust at their customs? Should they have been so outwardly disgusted and vocal about their disapproval while being welcomed in by the commune? Sure it didn't warrant their ultimate fate, but this small subplot asks an interesting question about outsiders attempting to shape and alter other cultures and customs as it doesn't sit with their ideals.
Other small details:
While it's directly conveyed to the viewer that the red haired girl is attempting to cast a love incantation on Christian via pubes in his pie and runes under his bed, very little attention is given to the fact that Christians drink is a slight shade darker than everyone elses. From the tapestry we see at the start of the festival, we know exactly what the red haired girl has slipped into his drink :face_vomiting: Fantastic subtle horror/grossness.
Pelle talks about how his parents died in a fire and the commune helped him through the trauma of that loss. After the ending, it's pretty clear the fire wasn't an accident, and they evidently died for some kind of ritual.
Artwork above Dani's bed at the beginning shows a girl with crown kissing a bear. While direct foreshadowing to latter events, it also asks the question if this was all fate. Dani's sister's final message reads "I see black now" (potentially a reference to The Black One) before killing herself and her parents. Were Dani's parents 72 and this was the end of their cycle? Was Dani's sister already a distant member of the commune?
Runes are scattered all throughout the film to foreshadow certain character arcs or add more meaning. My favourite hidden rune is the doors to the temple, which when open, make the rune for "Opening" or "Portal". Amazing attention to detail.
Yeah, this movie is much MUCH better on reflection and I absolutely cannot wait to see it again. I really hope Ari's 3 hour 40 minute directors cut is released so there is more to dissect. While not as immediately impressive has Hereditary, Midsommar definitely has the layers and complexity to be a slowburn horror classic.
EDIT: I am now 4 days out from my first viewing and I've not stopped thinking about this movie. I've become a frequent visitor of the films subreddit and have even purchased/listened to the films dread-inducing yet somehow joyous soundtrack a number of times throughout the days. I've been reading up on runes and their meanings, reading up set analysis for hidden meanings and any other small details others can find. A movie hasn't vibed with me like this for a long long time so to reflect this, I think it's only right I bump my score from an 8/10 to a 9/10. When I can get my hands on the digital download/Blu-Ray, I'm sure this might even go higher.
I don't think I have ever been in love with a movie, like I'm in love with La La Land. From the first few seconds, till the very end. This movie had me and didn't let go. My english vocabulary is not good enough to express my love, heck, my dutch vocabulary is not good enough to express it. This movie is everything.
It is beautiful, happy, magical, romantic and I could go on for a little while longer but I won't. I wasn't expecting it to be this musical-y, but I mean, I love musicals so I'm not complaining. I think this is a great "musical" because there isn't non stop singing, so people who don't like musicals might like this one because it's more "subtle". I can only imagine how much practice went into all those dance routines and don't get me started on the impressive piano skills Ryan Gosling showed us.
Something that really impressed me as well was the way they filmed everything. It's a very creative and different way, which I really enjoyed and think makes this movie a great inspiration for those who love film and camerawork themselves. The build up and flashbacks and stuff were really cool as well. Yea I really enjoyed that. Also, the storyline, which does so much for a movie, was so great.
This is normally the part were I talk about the actors, but seeing that there were mainly only two actors and they were both amazing (I do think tho, that Ryan Gosling his character wasn't a very challenging one for him because we have seen him in roles like these before. Mixing it up with all the dancing, singing en piano playing though, you got something quite different and I loved it), I'm going to skip this part and say that you should watch this movie, do nothing more, just watch it, enjoyed it and love it.
I went into this expecting a stupid movie with hopefully a few laughs. I was blown away by not only how funny the movie was, but how well it deconstructed religion, faith, and reason, and how those all need to work together to make our lives better.
For people who thought this movie was stupid - sorry, but you're stupid. If you couldn't appreciate how well this movie showed the uncaring, awful universe - and why we need to tell ourselves stories that make us enjoy it for as long as possible - then you're just stupid. If you didn't see how this movie talked to atheists, how it presented a convincing argument for faith and religion, alongside the perils of both, then you're the one who missed something. If you couldn't see how this movie demonstrated science, reason, and skepticism, and why those are still not enough, then you're just stupid. It showed, beautifully, the power of mind altering drugs, and how some folks are just going to go ahead and do the worst of them, with no regard as to what others have to say about it. That's a reality that we need to accept, and need to stop pretending that we can make go away just by wishing it so.
Within this cartoon universe, the creators of this movie explore themes in a way that I've not seen done before, demonstrating the power of animated story telling applied to adult themes. Yes, the movie has crass humour, some of which falls flat but some of it is tear inducing funny. But if this movie doesn't make you think, it's because you're stupid.
Go see this movie.
While looking for the dragonballs Kylo Vegeta Ren finds the emperor and he reveals a clown car with 10 trillion death stars in it. Instead of conquering the galaxy the emperor chooses to just give it to Kylo as long as he kills Rey, because she is a sayan prince or something.
Meanwhile Rey is also looking for the dragonballs and to find a dragonball she needs a wooden stick that some guy made 10 days ago.
Luke and Lanpedo have been looking for this stick for 10 years, but Rey finds it after falling in a hole and helping a snake. She blows up 10.000 people with a kamehameha, but is sad because she lost her dog. Their robot needs to talk with an alien monkey on another planet because it can give him red eyes. Rey goes on Kylos ship to find her stick, kills a few hundred more people with a gun and finds her dog. Rey notices the stick looks like a death star so they go to the death star and find the dragonball. Vegeta comes and is killed by Rey because his mom calls his name. Rey brings him back to life because she wants to smooch and kills his mother. Kylo finds his sayan spirit and becomes a good guy (he only killed a few million people no big deal). Rey rams her ship into another planet for fun and finds another stick that points to the emperors clown car. The emporer wants to get whipped, by his granddaugther, because he is into that. Rey charges a spirit bomb with the power of her 10 trillion fans, but the emporer snaps his fingers and kills all her fans in 1 hit. Kylo comes to help Rey whip her granddad, but he slips and falls down a staircase. Rey grants her grandad's his dying wish, but because the she used the wrong whip they are both dead now. Kylo revives Rey, they smooch and he turns into a ghost. Also his mom now is a ghost. Rey uses the dragonballs to destroy 10 trillion death stars and become a dirt farmer with a different last name, because some ghosts nod their head. Somehow her 10 trillion fans are back alive, her dog gets a medal and Lanpedo starts an inappropriate relationship.
10/10
An underwhelming effort from a company that seems to have fallen behind the curve. Creatively it’s pulling too much from Zootopia and Inside Out while not adding much of its own flavour, almost every choice in this movie is predictable. Sure, the racism/prejudice commentary is more aggressive now that we’ve entered the post-Trump era (seriously, you should go back and look at how Zootopia handled that same topic, it feels quaint now), but besides that it doesn’t bring much to the table. The worldbuilding lacks the clever intricacies of Zootopia, the pretty animation style has some unique textures but it’s no Across the Spider-verse, and emotionally it feels more like Illumination than Pixar. It’s a very straightforward, cheesy romcom with a formulaic set-up for the main characters (think Notting Hill, Crazy Rich Asians, and countless other movies your mom loves), some ok comedy (bad puns notwithstanding) and a boring adventure (fixing pipelines, how exciting). The score’s pretty interesting because it seems to pull a lot from Indian folk music, on the other hand the songs sound generic and overproduced. Overall, I’d easily recommend this over some other animated films from this year, as this does genuinely try as a movie. However, that doesn’t change that I expect both children and adults to be mostly bored by this.
4.5/10
[7.3/10] I tend to think of movies in terms of their stories. I think about characters and plots and dialogue first and foremost because they’re the things that grab me. But the beauty of cinema is that it is malleable. It can be a medium where storytelling is put at the forefront, or it can be a visual showcase, or it can be a freeform dose of bold expressionism. There’s no one right way to do it, which is what makes film such an exciting, but also difficult, medium to wrap your arms around, no matter how long you’ve been steeped in it.
Pinocchio, the Walt Disney Animation Studios release from 1940, is pretty weak in the story department. Based on an Italian children’s novel, the Disney adaptation is a simple morality tale. The title character is a marionette come to life, tasked with earning his way to becoming, ever so famously, “a real boy.” Along the way, he gives into any number of simple temptations and suffers the consequences, only to see the error of his ways and earn the transformation of his wood and paint into flesh and blood.
There’s meat to that story, but there’s just not much to it in execution. Each temptation goes wrong very quickly and Pinocchio recants just as fast. He skips going to school and takes “the easy road” by becoming an actor, only to end up the prisoner of a broad ethnic stereotype. He famously tells a series of lies only to watch his nose grow to comical lengths, replete with a birds nest. He succumbs to the allure of Pleasure Island only to nearly turn into a donkey before he realizes the problem and escapes.
Those errors and escapes just don’t have moral force because Pinocchio is essentially too innocent and oblivious to really deserve any blame for what happens. During most of these events, he was literally born yesterday, and his naivete makes those consequences feel pretty undeserved. Pinocchio seems genuinely excited to go to school and return to his father, only to be swindled by “Honest Joe” taking advantage of his rube-like “gee whiz” qualities. Hell, it’s not even clear why he lies to the Blue Fairy in the famous nose-growing scene. This stuff just sort of happens.
At best, you can read it as a warning to be on your guard. The plain didactic message of Pinnochio is that young boys should go to school, tell the truth, and avoid vices like drinking, smoking, fighting, and destructiveness. But the broader message is that there’s any number of hucksters out there who will try to take advantage of your innocence and point you in the wrong direction for their own ill-gotten gains. There’s a literalism to the movie’s aesops (lies that are “as plain as the nose on your face” and literal jackassery), but also a broader lesson that the world is full of perils and tricks, which makes it all the more necessary to listen to that vaunted conscience and learn right from wrong.
But at worst, it’s just a blunt and societally-mandated lesson to the young men and women expected to watch this movie that they should be good and behave and do right. There’s nothing wrong with that exactly, but it makes for a pretty dull narrative when most of what happens to the hero is either outside of their control or not really their fault.
But the truth is that Pinocchio isn’t really about its story. It’s about the animation: the expressive movements of puppets and crickets and other fumbling, dancing, characters; the lush and colorful backgrounds that bridge the gap between something real and something magical; the looks and gestures of rotoscoped fairies and Warner Bros.-esque anthropomorphic foxes alike that populate the film and give it life.
On those terms, Pinocchio soars. Much of the film feels like throat-clearing, with long stretches of characters repeating obvious information or laying out the point of a given vignette. And yet, reading those scenes as an excuse for Disney’s team of animators to depict Jiminy Cricket bumbling through an array of imaginative cuckoo clocks and other knick-knacks, or to have a regrettable Romani caricature bounce around like his midsection is filled with superballs, or to have an impossibly adorable kitty cat smile and tussle and exalt at each bit of attention or interruption, the movie is a triumph.
It’s also a classic in terms of its music. There’s a reason that almost every song in the film has become an indelible part of the Disney songbook. “I Got No Strings” is infectious as hell and backed with some of Pinocchio’s best animated moves. “Give a Little Whistle” is an ear-worm (ear-cricket?) that gives Jiminy the chance for more visually fun hijinks. “Hi Diddly-Dee” is the song so nice, Disney reused in Peter Pan. And the seven note-sting of “When You Wish Upon a Star” has become the studio’s signature melody. It’s hard to separate the merit of these tunes from a lifetime of internalizing them through cultural ephemera, but they stand out nonetheless.
The movie’s best stretch, though, comes when it marries its aesthetic brilliance with the most compelling part of its story. Pinocchio choosing to go find and rescue his father from the belly of a whale is one of the few times in the movie he takes deliberate, meaningful action in the picture. It’s an important moment of character growth and intelligence (which is good since “Pin-oke” is a literal and figurative dummy for most of the movie) that arguably earns him his humanity. And it provides an excuse for the animators to deliver some brilliant water-drenched action that still dazzles eighty years later.
The encounter with Monstro the Whale is easily the high point of the film. The joyousness of Pinocchio’s reunion with Gepetto, the fearsomeness of the aquatic mammal in action, and the suspense and cleverness of Pinnochio and company’s escape through his gaping maw prove to be both the movie’s narrative and aesthetic peak. The design team pulls out all the stops for the raging climax, and there’s genuine stakes and choices for the hero of the story that makes it more engaging than his other nigh-random misfortunes and maladies.
But even if that’s the only point where Pinocchio offers a story worth telling, it’s still worth watching for its visuals alone. Narrative need not be the point of a trip to the theater. It can also transport us, amuse us, tickle us, or amaze us with personalities, performances, and presentations that don’t have much in the way of plot, but which find other methods to earn our interest and joy. The cinematic tale of a wooden boy, and all the expressive friends and colorful locales he runs into along the way, certainly qualifies.
Ted is THE poster child for the fact that every great concept doesn't automatically become a guaranteed winning project once it leaves the drawing board. This movie SCREAMS "Here's a great idea, but we just didn't know what to do with it." Whether it was because of lack of imagination or too many tokes on the community bong, nobody will ever know.
Having a movie about a real-live Teddy Bear existing in the every day life of a 30-something underachiever sounds like a winning formula. However after the first few moments, the movie stalls, the dialog gets stale quickly and the majority of the story revolves around Ted getting high and/or trying to bang shallow, attractive women (even though Hasbro didn't include on him full, working equipment) while the main character tries to balance his 4-year ongoing relationship with a woman completely out of his league and his life-long Thunder Buddy (Ted).
Lewd, crude and rude, Ted does little to entertain beyond the limited soph-moronic humor. Unless you are a rabid fan of Family Guy or the 80s Flash Gordon, live in or around the Boston area or think it's funny to hear the F-word every other second, this one won't be for you.
You're gonna have some tough days; days where you feel like everything sucks, and you don't wanna get out of bed; days when you gonna feel like you just don't belong. I've had a lot of those days. And I want you to know; you are not the only one that feels the way you do. There's a whole world out there for someone like you. I promise you are not as different as you think you are. And mom and dad that might not get it; all of your friends might not get it either, and some of them might say some pretty mean and awful things, because they just don't get it. But I get it, and I know that you're gonna learn to be happy... with who you are. And you may need to be at another place to be happy, and you know what? That's okay; that's why I left home. It might seem like the hardest thing to do at first , but it might be the right thing for you to do. And in another time, at another place, you're gonna meet the right people; people that are just like you. People that are just like me. So hang in there, Andrew. Things tend to get a little darker before they get brighter.
Just beautiful.
This is an honest, spoiler-free review coming from your average fan (not a critic):
I just saw this new marvel film, and I have to say... it's no where near as bad as the critics make it out to be.
Yes there is a lot of dialogue. But it gives the characters a chance to shine and for scenes to breathe.
People call this film dense. I would disagree. Yes there is a fair bit of plot and history told, however I would say that other mcu films have simply much simpler plotlines most of the time.
There are moments when things are just about to become exciting, and then it is interrupted with more dialogue which instantly kills the suspension.
There are a number of plot twists in this film, and some unexpected things happen that I wouldn't have seen coming.
This film has a slow burn, but sometimes that's a good thing. Would I have liked more action? Yes. Was I unhappy with the action we do get? No.
I will admit, going into this film I was expecting a masterpiece, and while I wouldn't quite call it that, its definitely a well-made film, marvel or not.
Oh. And expect to have to do some reading at the very beginning. Kinda reminds me of a classic Star Wars opening crawl.
Although it belongs to the Disney juggernaut, Pixar has always allowed itself to tell different stories, stories far removed from the world of princesses and dragons that made the mouse factory so famous. It proves it year after year (Luca and Soul are clear proof of this), and in 2022 it has done it again by focusing on something so important for young people: the arrival of adolescence and the changes they undergo in their bodies, added to how a family with such traditional dyes as the Chinese live through it all.
Red is hilarious. Not only is the script excellent (although it becomes less and less funny with each passing minute, turning the story into something more serious) and will make you laugh all the time, but Mei Lee's character is a real sweetheart. She's a real girl, with real problems, and all excellently portrayed.
Moreover, it focuses on the quality of the script, leaving the technical needs of the animation aside. Where other films seek to faithfully represent elements of fire and water, Red seeks fluidity of animation and elegance. Though kudos must be given for those few seconds of mouth-watering kitchen animation.
Musically it's not memorable, but that hasn't been Pixar's hallmark, so it's nothing new. The Spanish dubbing is also very good, but I'm curious to hear the original voices.
Ideal for family viewing, no doubt about it.
I just stepped out of the theatre and I'm ready to write this review for you all. So, let me start off by saying, this movie is nothing like the other Star Wars movies. I was expecting something like Rogue One, but as soon as they started making jokes I knew it was going to be something different. I liked it though, I did. It was action packed, quite funny and a bit romantic. I dig it. The action scenes were probably my favourite thing about this movie, those were very well done.
Alden Ehrenreich did Han Solo proud. I didn't really know the actor before this, but he's good! Sometimes it almost felt like I was listening to Harrison Ford. It was great to see him and Chewbacca together en find out how their relationship started in the first place. I really enjoyed seeing them bonding and all that. Woody Harrelson never ceases to amaze me, to be honest. He is a brilliant actor if you ask me. I felt like his character stayed a bit in the background throughout the movie but I think Tobias Beckett sure made an impact on Han. Talking about making an impact, let talk about Qi'Ra (probably the coolest way to write Kyra). First off, I adore Emilia Clarke. I think she's a great actress and she's absolutely gorgeous. I had to get used to the idea of her in a space movie but she did very well. Her character is still a bit of a blur, to be honest, but I think Qi'Ra could be an interesting character to explore further. Donald Glover as Lando is perfectly cast. They truly did a great job. My brother said, "I thought he was the son of the original Lando". I think when people say that, you've done a pretty great job. I liked L3 as well, she was a bit much sometimes but she brought some humour to the movie.
Overall it sure was a fun movie to watch. It all looked very beautiful and the special effects were great. The only thing that bothered me was some of the creatures they created. I think they could've been "more real". I don't know if that makes sense, but maybe you notice it too when you're watching the movie. It could also just be me, I don't know, it confuses me a bit. I really liked getting a glimpse of Chewbacca's story and a closer look at the Millenium Falcon. That's one great ship with way too many buttons, isn't it?
I enjoyed Solo: A Star Wars Story and I'm going to rate it with a solid 7. I'm pretty sure there's more where this movie came from so I will be waiting patiently till then.
The movie was well crafted and visually beautiful even if not fancy, but personally I didn't feel any emotional rapture, neither positive (empathizing with the characters, loving them) nor negative (despise, disgust, fear..). I could feel Rose's uneasiness, but it was not really explored, delved into.
Also the final death didn't carry much to it, no significance or growth for the others, no tension release. Meh
Still not perfect, but 'Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith' is such a more enjoyable entry in the prequel trilogy - which ends strongly.
I had a fun time with this. I do have a couple of (relatively minor) complaints, but first the positives. I'd say this is the best that this cast produced during this run of films. Hayden Christensen is excellent in his role, it's the most I've liked him in 'Star Wars' for sure. Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman give more than solid performances as well.
The special effects look nice throughout, while the score is pleasant. I also found the pacing to be practically ideal, which is a marked improvement on its predecessors. The humour and dialogue still isn't great, yet is also bettered. Crucially, the plot is very good.
With all that noted, I do have two things I didn't love. The first being the event that includes Samuel L. Jackson's character. I completely get the intention and reasoning of what occurs, but how it is shown did feel kinda forced and poorly written.
Another is the end, which overruns ever so slightly. I know it's setting up the original trilogy, but there are a few too many scenes; could've/should've ended on you know who's first breath.
However, all in all, I got a positive amount of entertainment and would class this as a step above the preceding two films. I'm glad about that, as it makes the prequel productions way more meaningful and memorable than they were looking to be based on the 1999 & 2002 releases.
THE WACPINE OF ‘STAR WARS: EPISODE II – ATTACK OF THE CLONES’
WRITING: 2
ATMOSPHERE: 4
CHARACTERS: 2
PRODUCTION: 4
INTRIGUE: 3
NOVELTY: 5
ENJOYMENT: 4
The Good:
Christopher Lee is never bad in anything, and he brings much-needed experience and authority to this film.
The Jar Jar Binks scenes have been cut to a minimum.
The Geonosis sequence is long, but it's rewarding. The mega-battle at the arena and the duel with Dooku are high punts of the film. We finally see multiple Jedi in action.
The Bad:
Let's get this straight. Hayden Christensen is atrociously awful from his first scene until his last scene in Revenge of the Sith. He is the definition of wooden, terrible and unnatural.
Natalie Portman is marginally better when compared to the phantom menace, but only when she is not forced to speak more than two lines.
I'm annoyed by how plastic-y and fake the surroundings look most of the time. The original trilogy and sequel trilogy managed to capture the gritty, flashy and futuristic much better, by mostly relying on partial effects and sets.
George Lucas cannot write dialogue. The lines he gives to his character, the leading ones, in particular, are so unnatural that not even a skilled actor like Ewan McGregor could pull them off without sounding overly theatrical or wooden.
George Lucas cannot write a compelling story, with drama, romance, comedy and action. Most of what he has written falls apart, either intentionally or because the actors cannot deliver what he wants without looking stupid. Lucas' world-building serves no real purpose and his secondary characters are just unnecessary chess pieces on an overstuffed chessboard.
Obi-Wan and Anakin's relationship is at the centre of the film, and it's terrible. Anakin is whiney and erratic and Obi-Wan is patient with him for no reason at all. It's pretty much given that Anakin goes and ruins everything with his childish tantrums.
What hurts me most is how Lucas has ruined Anakin's journey, He goes from bad to worse in no time, and we never see that true fall from grace that we had hoped for. He is annoying from the start.
This is also e of the stupidest political plots I've ever seen in anything. How could everyone be so stupid that they don't realize that Palpatine is slowly taking power?
The film is too long. By the time we arrive at the endgame, I'm already feeling fatigued.
Christopher Lee wasn't fit for lightsaber duels at age 80, which unfortunately shows since his presence during the final battle is very stiff whenever he's not replaced by his stunt double. The final battle lacks any of the epicness from the first film's climactic showdown.
The Ugly:
Obi-Wan is pretty stupid. He had to see Yoda realize that Kamino was deleted from the planetary archive. A little child could see that. Come on!
Oh.
AND I DON'T LIKE SAND!
WACPINE RATING: 3.43 / 10 = 1,5 stars
Let's get the good out of the way first. Christopher Lee does his best with the nothing he's given, fitting genuine affability and remorse where he can. McGregor is better as Obi-Wan even if it'll still take him one more movie to really feel comfortable in the role. "Good job!' is genuinely funny.
That's it for the good. Phantom Menace could at least entertain some kids for a few hours, even if it probably wouldn't stick with them. This doesn't even have that. Lucas' directing hamstrings the cast, who can't be blamed for their wooden delivery. RD-D2 and C-3PO's comic relief does not fit in at all. Dex's Diner is an incredibly jarring shift. The film has no idea what it's trying to say or go for. The fights are just silly. The 'mystery', the chase sequence, and the droid factory sequence all go on for too long with no real excitement.
And the romance. Star Wars, in all of its films, has not had a single good romance. Not one that it's stuck with, at least (RIP to Finn and Rey, Finn and Poe, and Finn and Rose). This is the one movie in the franchise to focus primarily on it, and the result is abysmal. It literally starts with Padme telling Anakin he'll always be that little boy she knew on Tatooine. Not a great start! Combine that with the awkward and overwrought lines, the constrained acting, Anakin pursuing her even when she's made it clear she's uncomfortable with it, and the forgiveness of genocide, and you have a slog of a film. I can't even see kids having a fun time with this one, and that's the most damning slight of all.
A huge drop off the original trilogy. I still like it, mind.
I do have split feelings about 'Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace' though. One positive is the casting, which is well done.
Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor are strong choices to enter the franchise, I enjoyed both of them. Jake Lloyd does a fine job in his role, while the likes of Terence Stamp, Samuel L. Jackson and Keira Knightley also feature. Natalie Portman appears too, but I honestly never really cared for her lot's side of the story. Ahmed Best, meanwhile, is very hit-and-miss as Jar Jar Binks.
Speaking of Binks, the CGI is rather iffy in this fourth installment of 'Star Wars'. Of course it did come out in 1999, but other films from that era and beyond have aged better in these terms. The score is, at least, more than up to scratch.
Overall, I'm OK with this but it most definitely should've been far greater. Some scenes do go on for too long, while I did find a lack of a serious threat for the first chunk of the film. Darth Maul looks the part, but ends up being rather forgettable.
I can see how diehard fans of the series could be disappointed by this.
THE WACPINE OF 'RETURN OF THE JEDI'
WRITING: 8
ATMOSPHERE: 7
CHARACTERS: 8
PRODUCTION: 9
INTRIGUE: 7
NOVELTY: 7
ENJOYMENT: 7
The Good:
I love Luke's darker persona as he has to fight to stay on the light side. It shows how much he has developed throughout the trilogy, but also how he is similar to his father.
The climactic lightsaber duel is awesome, as is the operation to destroy the second Death Star.
The production design is impeccable, the costumes look amazing and the music and sound design are top-notch. I'm happy that the model work and basic visual effects have been conserved, even in the altered versions.
The Bad:
The added song performance in Jabba's palace is the most cringeworthy and unnecessary addition to the original trilogy. I wish the Disney+ version would have edited that part out.
The Jabba sequence, while at times exciting and well-made, just feels like a prolonged intro before the real film begins. The same goes for the endless Endor sequence before the Battle of Endor begins.
One of the main problems is the fact that this film doesn't divide the action into several smaller blocks of a story like the previous two films, and only really focuses on three very long acts (Jabba, Endor, final battle). That makes Return of the Jedi feel slower than the first two films.
The new characters don't stand out this time, and most of the old ones remain fairly bland. Luke, Leia, C-3PO and Vader are the only interesting characters.
While I understand that adding Hayden Christensen's force instead of the original one at the end is a way to tie the original trilogy closer to the prequel trilogy, it doesn't make any sense. Yoda and Obi-Wan look the way they did when they died, so Anakin should be older here.
The Ugly:
Is it just me, or we're the Ewoks created just to boost plush toy sales?
WACPINE RATING: 7.57 / 10 = 4 stars
This honestly missed the mark as a Disney classic. There wasn't really much originality in it and it felt really rushed. I mean, I saw Onward after Raya for the first time and it was so much superior, so much more deep! I mean, they are both about a quest, a journey to save a loved one, but Raya's journey just felt so... unsatisfactory.
While Raya herself was a strong, indipendent woman, she still fell in the category of the personality-less hero, with good motives, good skills, but overall flavorless. Namaari was a much better written character and even more interesting; shame we didn't see much of her in the movie. I guess they had to make space for SISU'S AWFUL JOKES.
Yeah, Sisu was just annoying. I also wanted to see more of the dragons, but they decided that the beings that were the premise of the movie weren't important enough, so let's just show them all together at the very end, for exactly 2 minutes
In conclusion, this might be a decent animated movie for a child (or for someone who approaches animated movies for the first time), but it will not do anything for any die-hard Disney/Pixar fan.
[7.5/10] No full review for this one, since I was helping to wrangle a toddler while watching it, but I liked it! It’s certainly one of the most conventional Pixar film’s there’s been. The whole thing leads to a big race featuring our literally-titled underdog protagonist against a cartoonish jerk of villain, to the point that this could be a 1980s sports movie. But it’s cute, and more to the point, the emotions land, which is the biggest thing I ask for from these types of films.
Despite the protestations of the director, it’s hard not to read the film as an LGBT allegory. Little Luca dreams of exploring other worlds, but his family and friends are worried that he won’t be accepted for who he is given his hidden identity. But he meets someone without those connections who’s ready to test the waters (er, the land) and make their way in a different community together, managing to pass despite a few hiccups. The way the journey and new friends lead to jealousy, turning on one’s own, and ultimately self-acceptance and communal understanding, plays as heartening and real. Whether or not the creative team wants to acknowledge it, the subtext of all of this gives the film a real resonance, and boosts it above its very basic storytelling roots.
The animation is quite nice to look at, with an almost Rankin Bass approach to the look and movements of the characters, and the natural colorful beauty of an imagined beachside Italian town. Beyond the traditionalness of the tale, the only real anchor holding this one back is the villain, a cheese-stuffed meatball of an antagonist who has no depth or inner life beyond the “jerk jock” archetype. But Luca’s relationship with his best friends and his family, Alberto struggling with the sense of losing someone close yet again until finding a surrogate father, and Giulia’s pluck and understanding all make the heart of this one sound as a pound.
Luca doesn’t exactly break new ground for Pixar (though by making a few things more explicit than hinted at, it could have been), but what it does, it does well, and makes for an endearing little tale.
Well made documentary. Interesting to see viewpoints from both sides. Happy, hopeful, sad, embarrassing, thought provoking. Good to show to someone who always says "we need more factory jobs back in America"
**spoilers ahead
**long review
this was interesting & hopeful then also sad & depressing & can make you angry & disappointed.
Global economics, labor unions, local jobs, lack of education, overworking, disregarded by employers.... These all topics you can deep dive into.
It starts off hopeful that a foreign Company takes a chance in a town in middle America where many are desperately seeking work.
(as opposed to some billionaire company opening a location in a town that has very low unemployment, and many people decide to quit their locally owned job to work there..small businesses can't keep up and decide to shut down.. I am Personally in fear of this happening in my town in the next few months.. I literally do not know anyone who needs a job, yet I know many business owners that can even get anyone to respond to a job opening)
Even though I'm sure they got a great deal opening in a former Ford factory that shut down during the recession, it's still nice to see the stories of people happy to go back to work. It's nice seeing Americans being open to becoming friends & working together with workers that came over from China, many of whom, sadly will not see their families for many years as they came here for the job opportunity. It's nice to see people being open to Learning about a culture on the other side of the world.
It was nice to see the group of Chinese men all cooking food together.
Then the flipside starts to show, It's upsetting to see how many people are still racist and do not like people from other countries.
There will never be any solution that make a majority of a factory workers happy, while watching 1 business man getting richer & RICHER & richer every day while you & hundreds of your neighbors still struggle week to week. It's upsetting to see workers that work hard and just want to do their job and go home and not get involved in politics of joining labor unions while being pressured by fellow co-workers to join. There will always be people that work hard, don't get recognized & promoted, sometimes are treated unfairly but.... they are just happy... Or, I could just say..content to have a job:
there will always be people that don't want to work as hard as others and want raises & complain a lot (even though some complaints are justified).
The world is constantly changing, and the days of working at one company for 40 years & getting a pension are over)
You never know what tommorrow will hold and we live in constant fear of losing our jobs, weather it be an injury, lack of job improvement, OR businesses just decide to cut labor costs or just shut down and close shop.
It's upsetting to hear so many people talk about bringing factory jobs back to America and yet when one comes to a city that is desperate to put many people back to work... You see how much higher work expectations are & people are not used to that, but still want collect a paycheck.
It's insane to think an American Factory will ever be as productive as a Chinese Factory that pays their workers much less money, and has less regulations, so you could be in many dangerous situations.
Sometimes they overwork their employees, but that happens here as well.
The suicide rate is much higher in China, especially in white color jobs
Some U.S. Officials want to cut lots of safety regulations & pollution output for corporations. For some, they may have proven over time to be unnecessary and time to get rid of, but many are established for workers safety..... While costing more money and time for production......
But in China, much less regulations... The work related injuries and DEATH % in China is 16 times that of the U.S. (of those REPORTED... many people do not claim an injury was done on the job in fear of losing their job and bureaucrats are at work to disprove an injury happened at work so China can claim the injuries # are going down every year. Yes, the U.S. Does this as well.
Especially if it is an illness that has been years in the making.
It is estimated that around six million workers in China have contracted the deadly lung disease pneumoconiosis after working in mines, construction sites and factories filled with mineral dust. However, only about ten percent of these workers ever got their illness classified as work-related because of the numerous bureaucratic obstacles placed in front of them.
LooK at our own government trying to not provide adequete Healthcare for firefighters suffering many years later for being heros on 9/11.
The last sad embarrassing part is when U.S. Workers travel to check out the China factory and it is a big group of overweight men, what a STEREOTYPE.. not really interested in the art & culture of the special performances at the party. (I'm sure environmental influence has a lot to do with their personalities.
It's sad that so much beautiful art is not enjoyed by blue collar workers.
I'm sure many of the workers had a father that worked at the GM factory most of his life and had much exposure to cars and mechanics. Which is still and always be important, but you need a balance.
- It's sad that when a school cuts their budget, arts are usually the first to go.
Focus more is on the trades and what can get you work the fastest after high School
I couldn't stop rolling my eyes when they got on stage to perform Y.M.C.A
Blue collared Americans are so scared of art and culture.
You can see in China all the workers, blue and white enjoying dancing, singing together, eating & enjoying all the arts.
I've spent time in Dayton, and the exposure to art is limited, as compared to Cincinnati, 45 minutes away.
However, you have to take into consideration they are from Dayton, a city that had very high unemployment and poverty levels, and low Healthcare and being overweight is the result of not being able to afford healthy food everyday and there are many cheap fast food options.
Ugh...
Capatalism is always a double edged sword, you will never make everyone happy.
But we have to consider is it right for 1% ers to exist and have so much endless money that they made with the help of thousands of minimum waged employed that are
being disrgarded as just another #, another part of the inventory? among thousands
Yes, we want Capatalism to maintain global economy and hopefully all the $$ goes into opening new jobs and more opportunities, and freely helping and donating $ for good causes,
And not toward causes that are only to make more money for just a few people live an obscenely "money burning" lifestyle
We still need to take care of the people that helped along the way, and not let the 1% take advantage and control the world, influencing policies, governments and laws and the world's humans right to able to live a happy productive life.
So ya.... This movie really makes you think about so many things, and hopefully can open eyes and mind of someone who prefers to keep them closed
This movie was excellent. Director Spike Jonze has done some amazing work in the past with other writers being in charge of the story like Adaptation and Being John Malkovich, so with him being the sole writer and director of the film I was surprised to see something this great. both the writing and the presentation flow so perfectly together in this movie that I am glad he has the directing skills to pull this off and bring his vision to life. I liked that this movie didn’t endlessly lecture you on the rules of this universe, and while that can work for some futuristic movies, this movie is more focused on the characters. The future like setting is merely a vehicle for the characters story. He made sure his universe’s rules did not conflict with itself. Without a consistent universe, its not a believable universe. Spike was able to add more legitimacy to his universe through his presentation, rather than have characters explain things like the prevalence of technology in their lives or the smog in the atmosphere etc. The movie subtly showed these things so that we could pick it up for ourselves. And because of that, it implies to our brain that there is a universe bigger than the one we are seeing on screen and thus adds to the believability. Making the futuristic and surreal, feel real. The film also pays attention to humans behave psychologically. Even nowadays, we are seeing technology having more of a presence in our romantic lives. This is shown in a quick scene at the beginning. Joaquin phoenix, again, does a phenomenal job of playing his character. The soundtrack from arcade fire was perfect. The made sure not to use cheesy futuristic music and went for a more acoustic feel to mix the familiar with the unfamiliar. I loved EVERYTHING! Even the characters. And when a certain character appears in a scene, in the context, it makes so much sense. This is easily one of the best movies to come out in 2013.
It's weird to think that there was a time when a film was released in cinemas, packed with strangers, call coughing and throwing their popcorn around. But what's even weirder is the thought that a film exists which combines the biggest British film director right now with the biggest British film writer. I'm talking of Yesterday, which was directed by Danny Boyle and written by Richard Curtis.
Yesterday is a film that seems to have slipped under the radar somewhat; it opened to relatively lukewarm reviews, with critics seeming somewhat indifferent. And honestly, I can kind of see why. It's not a bad film, but it's not the best work of either Danny Boyle or Richard Curtis either.
Yesterday sees warehouse worker by day/musician by night Jack Malik (Himesh Patel) wake up in a world where the Beatles don't exist, after his road accident with a bus happens to coincide with a global blackout. The establishing of this strange new world is a lot of fun too, as we learn over the course of the film that not only did The Beatles never form, but there was also no Oasis, Coca-Cola or Harry Potter either. It makes you wonder what a world without these major cultural landmarks looks like. Without Harry Potter, did the Young Adult film adaptation craze of the 2000s never take off? Without Coca-Cola, does Santa still wear green?
It also forms somewhat of a plot hole, as you would assume that if the entire world blacked out, even for a few seconds, that it would cause major ramifications. What happens if people are thrown off life support in the hospitals? Do they all die?
And speaking of plot holes, what about the pair from Liverpool (one who is played by Sarah Lancashire), who remembers The Beatles? How does she remember? Surely that means there could be potentially more people who do, and would take a more antagonistic approach to Jack using The Beatles' songs?
Despite all that, however, there are some great pieces of humour dotted throughout (no surprise given that it's written by Richard Curtis). I laughed at Jack's constant attempts to sing Let It Be being interrupted by door bells and ringing phones, for example. And Ed Sheeran's suggestion that 'Hey Jude' should instead of 'Hey Dude' for added relevance was very funny too.
Ed Sheeran is certainly no actor though, to say the least. He forms somewhat of an extended cameo here, dropping in and out of the film, and his acting is a little on the wooden side. He delivers his lines in a somewhat monotone intonation, and you kind of wonder why they didn't just draft someone in to play a fictional celebrity musician.
Himash Patel and Kate McKinnon (who plays Jack's L.A. manager Debra Hammer), on the other hand, are brilliant. Both add some real depth and character with their portrayals, and are consistently engaging throughout the movie. They feel perfectly cast for their roles, and really help to bring the film to life.
Something which I found interesting was how this film never fully resolved the overall plot. Jack may have openly confessed to the songs not being his own, but by the end of the film he's still stuck in a world where the Beatles never actually formed - and you've go to wonder, how do Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and John Lennon (the latter who is in the film, played by Robert Carlyle) feel about being named as the real people behind the songs? In a world where they never wrote or sung them? The cynic in me wonders if they're leaving these unanswered questions open for a future sequel, which I would watch, but if no sequel is planned then it does make the screenplay feel a little unfinished.
Overall, Yesterday is a solid film. It's far from either Danny Boyle or Richard Curtis's finest efforts, but it provides a fun piece of entertainment, with some good humour and obviously great music. The script does contain some plot holes, however, which are never explained in the finished film, and Ed Sheeran's acting is questionable at best. It's a film that could use a follow-up entry, and I for one would be interested to see where the story could go next.
I sort of loved this, but at the same time I sort of really didn’t. I found the cinematography so beautiful and engaging. However, the movie itself is somewhat forgettable and includes a lot of pointless scenes. Call Me By Your Name was highly successful in Hollywood, including in attracting many other people, causing my opinion to be thrown into the minority. Sadly, this movie left me a bit disappointed. It is a weird feeling, sort of like I cannot make up my mind on whether I enjoyed the movie or not. It is so beautiful, and half of the movie starts of well-scripted and somewhat enjoyable, however, ends up setting itself as a very dull and kind of depressing film for me. This film ended up being way less than romantic for me. In a way, very fucking sad and disturbing. And as I said, the film started of somewhat enjoyable but that ‘somewhat’ means that I found that all that passion and intensity between Elio and Oliver started really out of fucking nowhere. They barely hung out and the film gives us no depth in any of the characters. Why did they all of a sudden become so interested in each other? In addition, I found most of the supporting characters had absolutely no use in the film. In a way they could really not even have been involved in the film and it wouldn’t really change the story as much. This disappoints me so much having had seen the actors’ chemistry in interviews—so authentic as Timothée and Armie seemed to know and connect to one another more than Elio and Oliver ever did. Furthermore, I know a few people found that the film glorified pedophilia and child-pornography but I honestly did not seem to find that at all as there was not really a huge age difference like some people exaggerated it to be. What I did find problematic was that the makers of the film seemed to exaggerate the age difference between Elio and Oliver, attempting really hard to demonstrate that Oliver was an older man. I mean, literally, Oliver looks like he could be 35-40 years old, when Elio looks like a 15 to exactly just 18. Also, the constant mix between Elio getting involved with Oliver and then what seems to be his girlfriend; the somewhat grotesque sexual behaviour with a fucking peach; the ‘call me by your name’ scene; and the depressing actions of Oliver taking off and literally just utilizing Elio as like a summer sex toy, are awkward and/or disturbing as fucking hell, but, other than that, 10/10 for the cinematography. I think that was the only enjoyable thing other than that fun and kind of hilarious dance scene and the acceptance of Elio’s sexuality from the parents. Ultimately, as I said, I have a weird opinion on this film. I love it but I don’t, so, I don’t know. I guess this is my review. Fairly a 60%.
This is an excellent film which becomes extremely deep and meaningful towards the end. It is a universal love story that is very touching. The acting is phenomenal, especially the last shot of the close up of Timothée Chalamet, as the credits roll. I think we've all been through his emotions, which makes it all the more emotional.
I'd love to mark this film high, but I had to knock off points due to one, pointless, and cruel shot of a fish struggling to breathe. There was absolutely no need for it, and so the torture and pain the fish went through was completely in vain.
And while I appreciate that it was meant to be a slow film for artistic and storytelling purposes, there were moments when it felt a bit too slow. However this is only nitpicking.
The focusing and composition of the camera work and editing was very artistic, which worked well with the feel of the film. Most of the music was very well chosen, but not all of it. The film was so close to being a masterpiece, but never quite made it. Apparently there's gonna be a sequel. I will look forward to seeing it.
i don't know what to say, other than i love this goddamn movie. i can truly say that my experience was enhanced by the fact that i'm not straight, as i definitely feel like this was a movie made for people who are struggling/have struggled with coming out. that's not to say it can't be enjoyed by a wide demographic of people (as it obviously can and has been), but i definitely feel like they got the "gay high school experience" down to a t in a way that it makes it all the more enjoyable if you've been through it. all of simon's mannerisms are incredibly relatable, and the dialogue is especially touching and well written (i cried buckets). their tagline, "everyone deserves a great love story" pretty much sums up my feelings, and not to be dramatic (too late), but it's a rom-com that i can really connect with on a deeper level and for that i'm grateful.
in addition to literally everybody, i encourage any lgbt+ people to see this if you're struggling with your identity or the fear of what others will think, or even the fear that you'll never find anybody to love or that loves you. this is truly a movie that you watch and think, "this guy gets it".
Tomboy is your little brother, a sweet, uncomplicated child whose purity makes loving him the easiest thing you'll ever do.
An 11-year-old kid moves to a new neighborhood and when a local girl introduces herself, he tells her his name is Mikaël. Later that evening, Mikaël takes a bath with his little sister and when he stands up to exit the tub... we realize Mikaël is a girl.
Tomboy is the tale of this transgender adolescent and his struggles over the summer to keep his assigned gender a secret from his friends and the girl he's maybe falling in love with.
Céline Sciamma (writer of the brilliant My Life as a Courgette) wrote and directed this film in 2011 with a handheld SLR camera, and in only 20 days. She's getting a lot of attention recently because her latest film, Portrait of a Lady on Fire, made a splash at the Cannes Film Festival -- where it won best screenplay and the Queer Palm (and also explains the theatrical re-release of Tomboy) -- but while I enjoyed Portrait... Tomboy is the better film.
Portrait... strives to be 'grand' film with it's historical setting and panorama shots of the coast but it doesn't always reach its mark, often because it feels smaller and more intimate than the pompous costume it dons.
Yet, much like its central character (played to perfection by Zoé Héran), Tomboy knows exactly what it wants to be and reaches it, takes it, and makes it its home. It's simple, honest, and sincere which is precisely Sciamma's zone, and why Portrait felt the same despite its trappings.
The French deal extremely well with the concept of young children recognizing at a very early age that their birth gender isn't their real gender. Ma Vie en Rose (My Life in Pink, 1997) broke ground in this area and remains a must-see in the genre, while Tomboy adds to it with a soul so pure it'll steal your breath.
THE WACPINE OF ‘ARTEMIS FOWL’
WRITING: 2
ATMOSPHERE: 2
CHARACTERS: 3
PRODUCTION: 8
INTRIGUE: 2
NOVELTY: 2
ENJOYMENT: 2
The Good:
The CGI and visual style captures Eoin Colfer’s vision well; this film looks and feels like a typical Disney family fantasy.
Judi Dench is great as always and is surprisingly spot-on as Commander Root despite the gender-swap. Her performance is unlike anything else she has done and she is one of the better aspects of this feature.
Josh Gadd is somewhat good as Mulch and seems like a good fit for the role. He looks like a smaller Hagrid though, which is probably intentional.
The fairy parts are the more faithful and well-made parts in the entire film, even though they strongly simplify from the culture depicted in the novels.
The Bad:
Not a good call to have Mulch Diggums narrate the film, because that voice is tiresome to listen to.
From his very first scene until the end, Ferdia Shaw in his feature-film debut t is terrible as Artemis. He is wooden and fails to capture the rather deep characteristics of the brilliant-minded, calculating and cold Artemis in the novels - he acts older than his 11 years, but this version is a whiney, useless brat and nothing more. It's sad to see Artemis reduced to this because he such a unique child genius in the books.
In the novels, Butler is Artemis' most trustworthy friend and right hand, but here he is nothing more than a father surrogate and not the cool and fearless servant. And why do they keep calling him Dom?
Opal Koboi is horrible. The film version is a shadow of what the second book gives us. She is pointless, clichéd and underused. We never see or interact with her properly. I don't even know why she's in here, since 95% of the adapted material is from book one.
The plot is a mess. For some unexplained reason, it tries to cram two novels into one film but doesn't utilize any of the sources satisfying. It takes almost 30 minutes for the film to feature its first scene adapted from actual material from the first book. The script dial to fully bring Colfer's world and characters to life and changes so much that it's wrong to call this an adaptation. 95% of the film is original content, and none of it is justified or makes the film any better.
The film moves through the first novel so swiftly it barely has time to touch upon the more intricate parts of the plot or to bring the details of Colfer's world alive. It's a very shallow film, not at all representative of the original novel. They have to cram in so much that there's no time to set up things properly and the resulting scrip lacks any of the heart and soul of the original work.
I appreciate the attempt to diversify the cast somewhat, but Nikesh Patel’s Foaly is very different from the funny and absent-minded novel counterpart. It’s not a very successful adaptation of one of the better characters in the books.
I cannot forgive the fact that they decided to have Artemis and Butler actively engage in battle with the elves in a series of horribly choreographed, shot and edited sequences. It's a far cry from the brilliantly plotted and slow trench war in the book. They've changed the entire encounter and none of the greatness of the book is present here.
You wouldn't believe this film is directed by Kenneth Branagh and produced by Robert De Niro. Both are capable of so much better.
The Ugly:
What the heck is the Aculos they Keep going on about? And why is Holly going on about her father all the time? AND HOW DARE THEY SET UP A SEQUEL?
WACPINE RATING: 3.00 / 10 = 1,5 stars
THE WACPINE OF 'THE WITCHES (2020)'
WRITING: 5
ATMOSPHERE: 6
CHARACTERS: 7
PRODUCTION: 6
INTRIGUE: 5
NOVELTY: 4
ENJOYMENT: 6
The Good:
Octavia Spencer and Anne Hathaway keep this ship floating. Hathaway makes for a fine villainess, from her appearance to her accent. She makes the Grand High Witch distinctly her own and fits that role perfectly. Anne Hathaway is to this movie what Glenn Close is to the 101 Dalmatians live-action film from 1993.
The film follows the basic plot from the novel fairly closely, only making it slightly more action-packed for younger viewers.
The Bad:
The Witches has a beginning that feels very clumsy and tacked on somehow and fails to draw me into the world of Roald Dahl's classic novel.
The script changes the setting and period for no good reason and doesn't do anything interesting with the change.
Jahzir Bruno is unnatural in such a way that he takes me out of the experience altogether. All of the child actors are pretty horrible here. Their acting is better in mouse form, though.
As much as I like the spot-on characterization of the witches, they do become a mouthful very quickly and their overly theatrical manners turn the film tiresome for adult viewers.
The CGI is pretty clunky, and unfortunately, it is pretty prominent, especially after the first 30 minutes or so.
The Ugly:
That rash looks pretty bad.
WACPINE RATING: 5.57 / 10 = 3 stars
