Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 2.5/10
Acting- 5/10
Kinematography- 7.5/10
Time- 3.5/10
Total - 26.5/5 = 5.3
That whimper into the finish line. Man oh man, who could predict that continuing a show that was already tenuously holding to the life of one character who leaves before the end, would be a bad idea. Charlie, the guy they spent the last quarter of last season gearing up to fill in Eric's position in the group, is killed off, Josh Meyers then is brought in as a replacement character, Randy, who has no flaws which makes him rather bland. Kelso was in the first four episodes before being written off and is replaced with Leo which is fine I guess. Jackie ends up with Fez... REALLY?! Going from Kelso to Hyde, I was fine with that and felt sorta natural. To continue to go through the guys in the group to pair Jackie up with is poor writing and Jackie/Fez felt very Rachel/Joey, forced and unnecessary. The finale is easily the best thing about this season and is a nice enough ending to the series as a whole. This is a bad and skippable season and if you want to just watch the finale after season 7, apart from the spoiler above I don't believe you need any other context from this season.
Top 3 Episodes:
1. That '70s Finale
2. Stone Cold Crazy
3. Long Away
Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 4/10
Acting- 7/10
Kinematography- 8.5/10
Time- 6/10
Total - 33.5/5 = 6.7
That not so last season. The realization that this show is being carried on too long is prevalent in this season. With Topher Grace no longer wanting to be on the show, building up his departure and Kutcher soon to follow suit, it's apparent the show should have just built to a series ending rather than try to continue to an eighth. I don't know if Fox had ordered season 7 & 8 together and Casey-Werner were put in an awkward position between Fox's order and Ashton/Topher's ambitions to continue a gutted show or everyone was simply looking for an easy meal ticket but the show has reached the point of unnecessity. They create a character, Charlie, to replace Eric. While Charlie is a likeable character, They simply bulrush him into that spot at the latter half of the season, which in hindsight, not a great investment in time. Nevertheless, I still enjoyed this season because everybody performs their roles well enough to accommodate the time spent watching it. But that doesn't mean I can't see the flaws of a once better show.
Top 3 Episodes:
1. Can't You Hear Me Knocking
2. 2120 So. Michigan Ave.
3. Till the Next Goodbye
Theme- 9.5/10
Rewatchibility- 7.5/10
Acting- 8.5/10
Kinematography- 10/10
Time- 8.5/10
Total - 44/5 = 8.8
Richard Strauss... cue the music. I have known parts of the movie going on 20+ years without ever having watched it. Now having watched it I can say that it's probably gonna be a decisive watch for most. There is not a lot of fence-sitting with 2001 you'll either like it or you'll find it difficult to understand why people do. It's visually brilliant and technically marvelous but you already know that because that's a predetermined fact. But what may not be as quickly determined is the great story told with that cinematography. Now even if you strip away the Kubrick interpretative style plot that a lot of detractors scoff at, within it still lies a story of humanity from two perspectives: observer and participant. Now most will have the complaint of 2001 being slow and that is justified. It has deliberate pacing for sure and I even saw a couple of parts where I thought trimming that down would do wonders for that boisterous two-and-a-half-hour runtime and do nothing to hurt the movie in any way. Whichever side of the fence you'll find yourself standing, this movie has become cinematic-required viewing. Watch; Then decide.
Theme- 7/10
Rewatchibility- 6.5/10
Acting- 10/10
Kinematography- 6/10
Time- 6/10
Total - 35.5/5 = 7.1
On a very not-so-special review of Clone High. After watching this, I'm wondering what would have happened if this aired on Comedy Central or Adult Swim instead of MTV because the show was definitely good enough for at least a second season to follow up on the cliffhanger. At the same time had Clone High continued, would it receive the constant praise that merited a revival, honestly I don't think so. The humor works on average, the animation style is unique (cue supinated hand gesture) yet absolutely a product of its time, and the episodes at times can be a bit of flash in the pan. However, compliments have to be given to the unnecessary but appreciated historical and/or humorous subtleties throughout the show. For example, in the first episode in the bathroom when Gandhi gives a couple of friendly finger guns in Abe's and JFK's direction, and JFK flinches. I'll give the revival a try at some point, good show.
"Top" 3 episodes:
1. Litter Kills: Litterally
2. Changes: The Big Prom: The Sex Romp: The Season Finale
3. Raisin the Stakes: A Rock Opera in Three Acts
Theme- 9/10
Rewatchibility- 9/10
Acting- 10/10
Kinematography- 8/10
Time- 7.5/10
Total - 43.5/5 = 8.7
Hello, how do-do-do? Mrs. Brown's Boys hit my peripherals from a clip that one of my high school teachers shared on social media some years ago which was funny enough for me to explore further. After watching the pilot, I was hooked. The pseudo-theater-style approach of rolling with mistakes and acknowledging them as entertainment within themselves is a unique touch I haven't seen before that I can recall. The show does edit a lot of those moments out, but keeping some of it in gives the show a raw feel to it and adds to the charm. You can tell the cast has been working together and in most cases are legit family on how well they feed off each other. The scripts are very theatrical and at times you can see some of them going through the motions of just getting through it with their lines intact. But more often than not you just see people having fun playing make-pretend, and that's all I want to see sometimes. Good job Mammy!
Top 3 Episodes:
1. Mammy's Merchandise
2. Mammy Rides Again
3. Mammy's Secret
Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 9.5/10
Acting- 9.5/10
Kinematography- 8/10
Time- 9/10
Total - 44/5 = 8.8
Take a little walk to the edge of town and go across the track... to the quiet little town of Woodsboro, CA. Wes Craven provides us with the final form of new horror with Scream. What I mean by that is that it is what I call smart horror. The characters are aware of classic horror tropes, are more prepared for a 'stuck in a movie' scenario, and yet even still fall into a couple of those tropes in the heat of the moment. Wes & Kevin also bring us the ultimate 'Survivor Girl', Sidney Prescott. Sid is the final evolution of the character type that Nancy was becoming by the end of Elm Street. A character that's rife with trauma and someone who is genuinely terrified of their situation. Yet despite the fear and trauma, Sid is a character who acts pragmatically and even brings the fight to the threat turning things on their head. My only gripe with Scream is the anamorphic lens they used in the first few movies, I hadn't noticed it until the last time I watched it. Most notably in Casey Becker's kitchen at the beginning, it distorts the environment in a way that bothered me enough to mention it but it's not used enough to be a detractor. Ultimately, Scream is filled with enjoyable characters, and a metaplot, and is a satisfying watch.
Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 7.5/10
Acting- 8.5/10
Kinematography- 9/10
Time- 8/10
Total - 41/5 = 8.2
This movie is the reason I need to write down my thoughts like this. Often I will watch a movie show, track it, score it, and wait to write my thoughts on it later. Well, can't do that anymore and Donnie Darko is to thank for that. I looked at this movie and went "What exactly did I watch with this one?" I remember liking it and the 8.2 seemed to coincide with that, but all the details were foggy. Actually most of the details, some are engraved into my mind... (I'm looking at you, Swayze). But as I'm typing the plot is becoming more clear and I believe that the initial fogginess seems to be because of the film's intent. It's an interpretative film with a unique artistic swing. Some will hate it, some will love it, and most will be with me somewhere in the middle scratching their head and saying, "Well, that was... a movie." My experience with Darko is like that of 'Requiem for a Dream' in that I thought it was a really good movie but I don't know if I'll ever voluntarily watch it again.
Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 8/10
Acting- 8.5/10
Kinematography- 9.5/10
Time- 9/10
Total - 43/5 = 8.6
Harnessing the power of the sun in the palm of his hand is one Doctor Octopus in the superior sequel in the Sam Raimi trilogy. It is in essence what most great superhero movies have replicated since 2004. A hero who must overcome a battle with themselves to save the ones they love. It's a tried and true method of insurmountable odds that Raimi nearly overplayed. You will understand if you've seen this that there is a point of, 'Jeez I get it Peter Parker's life sucks and Spider-Man's not helping things much'. It does work even if it feels heavy-handed at times. Peter starts to signs of depravity opening the character up to the moral ambiguity needed for a certain symbiote to exploit. Alfred Molina is astounding, J.K. Simmons continues to crush it, and James Franco is beyond punch-able for every second he's on-screen and continues the tradition of me disliking every iteration of Harry Osborn I've ever seen. Franco is only a small gripe as well as a handful of others that exist but doesn't detract from me having a really good time with the movie. Now if only I can muster up the nerve to watch Spider-Man 3 one last time.
Theme- 5.5/10
Rewatchibility- 4/10
Acting- 5/10
Kinematography- 5.5/10
Time- 3.5/10
Total - 23.5/5 = 4.7
"I ask you to kill Superman, and you're telling me you couldn't even do that one, simple thing." Now Webster, this movie's Luthor, says that to Gus on the phone but in retrospect it feels like that was something that was said to the director, Richard Lester. I like Richard Pryor a lot, but when he is at least half of a Superman movie and he is not Superman, we have a problem. The new group of villains isn't unique or interesting. The best bad guy in the movie is Superman himself. To that point, there are elements of great potential in this movie. A synthetic kryptonite that has red kryptonite properties, the supercomputer has Brainiac potential and a Clark romance with Lana that can throw a monkey wrench in the Lois and Clark adventure. But none of it is done particularly well or at the very least isn't written well enough to translate over physically. Annette was great as Lana and Chris did a great job at again creating another version of the same person that feels completely independent from the other parts, it's just a shame that everything happening around these two, kind of waters down their performances. Part of me wants to like 3, but it's just not good.
Theme- 6/10
Rewatchibility- 6.5/10
Acting- 10/10
Kinematography- 7/10
Time- 9.5/10
Total - 39/5 = 7.8
"Somebody save me!" I wish I had watched this when it first came out. I may have been a touch too young for it, but I remember hearing about this show and seeing ads on The WB for it and thinking, 'A Superman show where he doesn't fly or wear the suit? Why would I waste my time?' So over two decades after the fact, I decided to waste my time on it, and man was I wrong. It has a level of drama fitting of the era of television teen drama but it's wonderfully melded with the superhero qualities that were more present than my initial reservations led me to believe. The cast is sort of spot-on. Tom & Michael have such great chemistry together that is quickly making them my favorite Clark & Lex. Everybody else is serving their purpose quite well. The only character that irks me from time to time is Chloe and that's not an acting issue but a writing one. The meteor freak of the week format with an overarching story sprinkled in a hefty 21-episode season works well to keep things interesting and watchable. Looking forward to seeing what happens.
"Top" 3 Episodes:
1. Pilot
2. Stray
3. Tempest
Theme- 6/10
Rewatchibility- 5/10
Acting- 8/10
Kinematography- 6.5/10
Time- 5.5/10
Total - 31/5 = 6.2
The Man of Steel is back, and better than ever!.. or is it? Maybe if I held any nostalgia for the Reeves' Superman movies I may feel differently, but this one really challenges that line of "good" movie for me. There are elements of the movie I liked. I enjoyed the third act more than the first film's (ignoring the whole 's' symbol thing completely) as it felt more Superman-esque and less convoluted and I stress 'less' as opposed to 'not'. The Clark/Superman & Lois relationship was the star plot point to me, but that was only one half of the overall plot and that's where the problem lies. Zod and company were missing something, charisma maybe. As much screen time as they were given, you would probably want them to be captivating enough to not need the crutch of Hackman's Lex playing hype-man. It felt more like a writing or directing problem as opposed to an acting one though. Much like the first film, there are filmmaking choices that made it feel so off to me. There's a great movie in there I just wish it could have gotten there.
Season Scores:
1 -6.1 / 2 -5 / 3 -3.7
Average Total: 4.93
Holy time capsule, Batman! It's the show that saved Batman from the island of irrelevancy. For that alone, this show deserves its place in history and should be preserved and experienced by everyone who cares about their precious pop culture and superhero geekdom. While I will stand by that conclusion, that does not mean I recommend a complete watch of the entire show. I would say stick to season one for optimal enjoyment. Any episode with Gorshin's Riddler, Newmar's Catwoman, Meredith's Penguin, or Romero's Joker you really can't go wrong with. What I would add is don't sleep on a King Tut episode either. Victor Buono portrays maybe the only TV original villain that consistently entertains. Could you get what you need from the '66 Batman with the movie? Perhaps. But the only way to truly experience the legend of Adam West's Bright Knight is in a glorious two-part cliffhanger format. Final note, Batman is like Brylcreem, 'A Little Dab Will Do Ya!', don't waste your time on season 3 and you will likely find yourself tuning back in for more wacky fun. Same bat-time, same bat-channel.
Theme- 5/10
Rewatchibility- 0/10
Acting- 1/10
Kinematography- 7/10
Time- 0.5/10
Total - 13.5/5 = 2.7
Jinkies, it's a polished turd. It's the best I can describe this show honestly. In fact, the animation is why it scores as high as it does. Why Mindy Kaling and Charlie Grandy decided to make this choice with Velma is inconceivable. An adult take on Scooby-Doo seems like a no-brainer, hell just watch Mystery Incorporated and you have a good start. If you make it through these ten episodes you can find redeemable qualities for just about every single character except one... VELMA. That wouldn't be awful if we weren't talking about the titular character but seeing how it is, well here we are. I really don't give two shits what race the characters are or who they like or what they identify as so long as there is a story compelling enough to tell and you can deliver on that. There was a good enough story, Velma's first real mystery of her missing mother, but the delivery is like trying to spoon-feed a baby glass, no one is gonna enjoy themselves. Given that season 2 is on the way, I will say that there is a chance at a great redemption story. Should those in charge make the call to not try so damn hard to be funny and edgy for the sake of an actual story with characters we can actually sit and watch without complete contempt and you could actually have a decent show. But for now, I'll leave this far in the Mystery Machine's rearview mirror.
"Top" 3 Episode
1. Marching Band Sleepover (The ONLY one I found myself enjoying to some degree)
Theme- 5.5/10
Rewatchibility- 6.5/10
Acting- 10/10
Kinematography- 7.5/10
Time- 6/10
Total - 35.5/5 = 7.1
Hanging out, down the street. The same old thing, we did two decades ago. Doesn't quite have the same ring to it as the original and that sorta works for this show. I did enjoy the first outing of the sequel series. It benefits greatly from having a good group of new kids to build up from, the sprinkling of nostalgic characters, and a short season that keeps the show's faults from being too harmful. But to that point, the large complaints about the show modernizing the '90s are somewhat valid. Some of that is lost from being on a soundstage, its predecessor suffered from that as well. But there is a bit of miscommunication in the writing almost as if the writers themselves were under 30 and their impression of the decade is movies that took place in that decade and BuzzFeed articles. I do hope that Season 2 tackles the reality of Ozzie's life as a gay teen in that decade, I appreciate them trying to not hang a spotlight on it and just have a character who is gay rather than a gay character but that's simply not a passive thing to be at that time. Hopefully, we'll get to see Ozzie have to deal with bigotry and the fairly conservative Red defend him because you can be a good human being whichever way your political bias bends and both characters would benefit the most from that type of story. It's not terrible by no stretch if I made it seem that way. Season 1 of "That '70s Show" had its issues as well and it was given time to marinade into the we love. Hope That '90s gets the same opportunity.
"Top" 3 Episodes:
1. Summer Storm
2. The Birthday Girl
3. Kids in America
Season Scores:
1 -6.7 / 2 -5.5 / 3 -5.1
Average Total: 5.77
To boldly go where no man has gone before. Gene Roddenberry created what I recognize as the Father of Space sci-fi in Star Trek, (Lost in Space being the grandpa). I went 30 years without ever watching a single episode of any of the series, many years of which I actively avoided them. But I decided any nerd worth their spot in the club should at least watch Trek to gain personal insight and a valid viewpoint to build off of. That being said, I was surprised how much I enjoyed this series, it certainly had its ebbs and flows but I was finding myself enjoying the journey 99% of the time. I wasn't put off by the 60's production feel, but I was strained a bit by the lack of time conservation. Nearly 80, hour-long episodes are a lot to watch and when some of those episodes were put together with as much care and attention as food at a drive-thru, you can understand why. If I sat down and chopped 15-20 episodes out this would be a 9 or 10, but in its totality, a 7 is where it sits. A modest beginning to a franchise still operating with, much like our universe, no end in sight. Did this show make me a Trekkie? No. Did it make me Trek-curious? Absolutely.
Theme- 6.5/10
Rewatchibility- 4/10
Acting- 5/10
Kinematography- 7/10
Time- 3.5/10
Total - 26/5 = 5.2
Each of us... at some time in our lives, turns to someone - a father, a brother, a God... and asks..."Why am I here? What was I meant to be? Where's the editor? Who's dragging this out?" When the original series ended, it was a tad bittersweet. On one hand, the quality of the episodes was very clearly on the decline. On the other, it was quite an abrupt ending, a five-year mission ending at three. Enter the Slow Motion Picture. The film doesn't pick up where the show left off as too much time has passed to convince us otherwise but it does collectively bring us back or forward I suppose to the original crew in a sort of 'we're getting the band back together' kind of way. It was nice to see the OG crew in a bigger budget setting and an updated Enterprise. Bones went from someone I would often be irritated with to being the most enjoyable to watch on the screen. I guess he's earned the old curmudgeon character legitimately for me now that he's been drafted back after retirement. Spock's in a less-is-more capacity which I didn't have a problem with. Even Shatner felt like he toned Kirk down a notch for the big screen which is always appreciated. The only character that felt off was Scotty and I'm not sure why. No problem with Riker and Ilia as they were purely plot fodder. Now then all that's left is the large V'ger in the room, speed. My god does this movie move at a snail's pace. There are long extended scenes purely built on a visual standpoint with no real reason to exist beyond a fraction of the time that they do. The movie does exactly what 2/3 of the show did, draw out a story nearly twice as long as it needed to be, which was the case here. If this was a 90-minute movie we would likely be having a completely different conversation about the first Star Trek movie.
Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 7/10
Acting- 9.5/10
Kinematography- 6.5/10
Time- 4.5/10
Total - 35.5/5 = 7.1
Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it's a simple adventure story. Others can watch Superman the Movie and unlock the secrets of the universe. In 1978 Richard Donner set forth to make history with Superman. The biggest credit towards this movie should be Lynn Stalmaster, the casting director who pushed for unknown Christopher Reeve for the titular role when no one else saw it. Also, a fun fact David Prowse trained Reeve to pack on muscle for the role (Vader trained Superman!). Reeve plays both roles perfectly, and nearly 50 years later he is still the bar. The rest of the cast are great as well, Hackman and Kidder especially. The SFX are good for their time though I believe they went further than they needed to. The plot's a bit goofy and ridiculous in the third act which is a weird clunky tonal shift. The runtime is my biggest problem in the movie. I know they paid Brando a lot to play Jor-El, but to spend nearly an hour with him phoning it in on "Krypten", as he liked to call it, is just too much for me. Regardless, it is a fun movie.
Theme- 5.5/10
Rewatchibility- 0/10
Acting- 2.5/10
Kinematography- 5/10
Time- 4/10
Total - 17/5 = 3.4
Is he strong? Listen bud, he has radioactive blood. Can he swing from a thread? Not a single comic has the writers read. Hey there, here comes the Budget-Man. This season opens with an origin episode and I thought to myself that the show was a big enough success that they were gonna put more time and attention into building a show with strong canonical stories, the following episode was the debut of Kingpin, to whom they were pretty faithful. After that, however, things took a turn. For whatever reason, the writing staff decided to forgo the Spider-Man rogues gallery for randomly created villains. Also to make sure you knew they were the bad guys, 90% of the time they had green skin because normal flesh-colored people can't be bad I guess. Episode duration was another major problem. Every episode was a single 22-minute story as opposed to two 11-minute tales and the thinly-veiled plots of this show can't support that kind of time. What started as hopeful optimism, turned into foreboding dread for Season 3.
Top 3 Episodes:
1. The Origin of Spider-Man
2. Home
3. King-Pinned
Theme- 9.5/10
Rewatchibility- 7.5/10
Acting- 10/10
Kinematography- 9/10
Time- 9.5/10
Total - 45.5/5 = 9.1
This is K-Jason's Neat Narratives of the 90s and coming up next is Quentin Tarantino and his debut film Reservoir Dogs. For a directorial premiere, Dogs sets a very early precedent for Tarantino movies. This perhaps is one of his best, every minute from start to finish is properly used. The opening scene is the type of long-winded dialogue that I love. It seemingly doesn't do anything while at the same time providing the characters and audience with the calm before the storm conditions because, after this, there is not a lot of time to come up and breathe. We're only given a few moments of reprieve from the main narrative and when we do it's always necessary. What some may argue is not as necessary is the amount of blood. Quentin is known for the gratuitous amounts of blood he uses to the point he has his own brand of the red stuff he uses for his movies. I would say Dogs is on the light side of color by comparison to others but it may be too much for some. Overall, this a film with a solid story, great acting, and even better pacing.
Theme- 8/10
Rewatchibility- 7.5/10
Acting- 8.5/10
Kinematography- 5/10
Time- 6/10
Total - 35/5 = 7
Dunham's first special hits us with a ventriloquist comedy act that hadn't been used in stand-up successfully in a very long time. Along with Terry Fator shortly later on Season 2 of AGT, Dunham brought back a gimmick that for better or worse, has stuck around with no real end in sight. A quick analysis:
*His solo stand-up - Forgettable. I'm sitting here trying to even remember a single line and nothing comes to mind.
*Walter - The opening puppet and coming strong out of the gate with, IMO, the best of the group.
*Bubba J - I know and live around a lot of people whom are the catalyst for the creation of Bubba J. This bit was funny once but is not repeatable in terms of laughing at the same joke.
*Sweet Daddy D - Oh... let me lay this out; a white ventriloquist... with a black puppet... who's a pimp. I'm not gonna elaborate on the bit other than to say, NO just NO.
*Peanut - Presented as the star puppet, merchandise sales clearly back that up. Peanut is hit or miss with me. A coked-up Sesame Street reject seems like an accurate description.
*José Jalapeño on a Stick - Another racially insensitive, stereotype-filled character. José is at the very least mildly entertaining compared to Sweet Daddy, and I do mean the very least.
I do feel like if I watched this again the rating would go down. For now I'll keep it as is, as I do recall liking the special overall. Maybe it's because I enjoy the art of ventriloquism and this was the first I had seen in a mainstream format.
Theme- 7/10
Rewatchibility- 7/10
Acting- 8/10
Kinematography 5/10
Time- 6/10
Total - 33/5 = 6.6
Striking while the iron's the hottest is the first thing to come to mind with Dunham's second special. This special made Jeff white-hot in stand-up comedy because at the time ventriloquism wasn't common and had yet to overstay it's welcome. A quick analysis:
*His solo stand-up - Average it did provide fuel for some of the puppets acts and it's short because nobody came to see him without the puppets.
*Walter - One of his star puppets and arguably his best. Grumpy old man that's easily the most digestible bit in the special.
*Achmed, the Dead Terrorist - I'll start off by saying I hate this character. Cultural stereotypes are abundant as you would imagine and political correctness & right/wrong arguments aside, it's just not funny to me.
*Melvin, the Superhero Guy - This is his one and only special which is a shame. I did find him amusing but I imagine he clashed with the Achmed and José fans to atempt to do anymore material with him especially since to superhero genre of film was getting ready to boom at that time.
*Peanut - Along with Walter, one of the mainstay puppets. Peanut is hit or miss with me. A coked-up Sesame Street reject seems like an accurate description.
*José Jalapeño on a Stick - So now we move away from cultural stereotypes to racial ones. Admittedly, I do find José more entertaining than Achmed but that might be due to be being partnered with peanut the entire time.
Despite my objections towards a few characters I did enjoy this special. Still though at this point with the collective puppets, Melvin excluded, you can see who the target audience is becoming or has already become and Jeff knows that and I do believe this is the tipping point before it is truly leaned into in future specials. And it is that lean I believe that will likely push me away completely.
Theme- 10/10
Rewatchibility- 10/10
Acting- 10/10
Kinematography 10/10
Time- 10/10
Total - 50/5 = 10
This movie is such a rare case for me, as it unequivocally checks all the boxes in an outstanding fashion. It blends drawn animation and live-action perfectly while telling a 1940's film noir story, which are hard to screw up in my opinion. The film ages remarkably well, partly due to it being a faux period piece in the first place and also the balanced use of timeless characters that don't overstay their welcome. Visually I can't say anything that hasn't already been said. Voice acting aside, the real actors on screen, especially Hoskins, make you believe the animated characters are really there and that's a true testament to great acting. Most importantly I feel, the film leaves you wanting more and you really can't find this magic truly anywhere else, that void can only be filled with replays of Roger Rabbit.
I always believe a 10 rating should be reserved for movies that you find so great, that if you happen across it playing at any juncture of the film you will stop, watch, & enjoy. Who Framed Roger Rabbit fits that mold like a toon-sized hole in the wall.
