Monday, December 26, 2011

Brother Bear (2003)

Rating: 50%

Not much to say as an intro to this one except here's Disney review # 37: Brother Bear.


Plot: the movie is set in a post-ice age where a tribe lives in a place where they believe their ancestors are in a aurora where they are all formed as animals. One of the tribe members, Kenai is finally given his scared totem which - to his disappointment - turns out to be the bear of love. Later they find their basket of fish taken from bears, so Kenai goes after one, followed by his brothers Sitka and Denahi. The fight ends with Sitka sacrificing himself to save his brothers. Angry over his brother's loss, Kenai goes after the bear and succeeds killing it. As punishment, the spirits come and turn Kenai into a bear and he has to go to where the lights touch the earth in order to be turned back into a human. Along the way, he comes across an obnoxious, chatty cub named Koda who agrees to take him to where the lights touch the earth on the condition that he takes Koda to the bear salmon run.

It's a fairly cute movie, but at the same time, it's just far from very creative. You completely know what's going to happen in the end, so the only amusement is just some of the supportive characters and a couple of the songs.

Chracters:
Kenai: I didn't like this character. His type just has been done so many times and I'm sick of it.
Koda: eh, so-so character.
Rutt and Tuke: They were a little cute.

Music:  I liked "Great Spirits", and "On My Way". The rest was just okay.

And that's my review for Brother Bear. It's a half and half film filled with a cheesy plot and main character balanced with some nice characters and some good music. 

The Rescuers (1977)

Rating: 70%
Now I grew up more with Rescuers Down Under, but my siblings and I at least had a book on this one, and we did rent it once in a while. So here's Disney review #36: The Rescuers.


Plot: Penny is an orphan who is kidnapped by the evil, greedy Medusa who forces her to go into a cave to go after the Devil's Eye, the biggest diamond in the world. Penny manages to drop a message in a bottle to try to send for help. The bottle is eventually recovered by mice that are part of the Rescue Aid Society. The Society sends out the Hungarian representative, Miss Bianca to find and rescue Penny accompanied by Bernard, the Society's janitor.

I think that this is definitely one of Disney's darkest and most depressing movies. I mean the swamp was very dark and gloomy, and just the way they introduced Jenny throughout most of the film was just so sad. I mean I knew Penny's problem was a big deal, but now that I'm older, when I saw this movie again last week I was like "...OH MY GOSH!!! THIS IS REALLY SAD!!!" I mean it helps that this movie does balance it out a bit with still having fun animal characters and having a particular kind of ending, but still.

Characters:
Bernard and Miss Bianca: I just plain like these characters. The one thing I like that's different between them in this movie and the second one, is that Rescuers Down Under didn't have much of Bernard's superstition. I liked that because I thought that enough of that was shown already from this movie alone so I'm glad that they stopped after this film.
Penny: I thought she was a cute character. They did a pretty good job in showing how much she was so sad and desperate to be rescued.
Medusa: Oh goodness gracious I hate this woman. She was just so evil forcing Penny into that cave and even telling her things like no one was going to adopt her and stuff. You just have to really hate her, she's that good of a villain.

Music: I didn't like a lot of the music just because it was much too depressing. The music for the animals in the Bayou was good and I am a little fond of the "Tomorrow is another Day" song.

And that's my review for The Rescuers. It's a nice film, just did a little to well in making it sad and dark.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadow

Rating: 60%
In case you haven't read my review to the first movie, I thought that, that film was interesting particularly in reveling that Sherlock Holmes was actually a pretty skilled fighter with knowing martial arts, swords, guns and stuff like that. And now they have a new one where it's Holmes against his rival who is ACTUALLY from the books. The result: the villain aside, it ended up pretty much the same thing.


Plot: *WARNING SPOILER ALERT* Irene Adler sends a package to Dr. Hoffmanstahl which turns out to be a bomb. But the bomb is stopped shortly afterwords by Sherlock Holmes. Adler reports this to Professor Moriarty who suspects that her position is compromised due to her love for Holmes and poisons her. Shortly before Watson finally gets married to Mary, Holmes stops an assassination that gives him the chance to finally attempt to take down Moriarty.

It was...okay. It was really the villain that kept me interested in this movie. Aside from that, it was just the same thing. Although to be fair, it was easier to understand what everyone was talking about. And the action was a bigger and better. But regardless, it was roughly the same thing, which wasn't bad per say but it was not a super big improvement. It's alla round just a nice action film.

Acting/Characters:
Robert Downey Jr./Sherlock Holmes: When it comes to his talking, he was much better. And he was also a bit funnier. The Camouflage suit was a nice touch.
Jared Harris/Professor Moriarty: So this is the so-called Professor Moriarty. Interesting. I'm interested to know how he's similar to the book.
Jude Law/Dr. John Watson: He was Watson. Just as funny and as irritated with Holmes as ever.

Music: It was pretty good. Same as last time. And frankly, I'm delighted to know that. Because I really thought 2011 was a horrible year when it comes to his less than impressive work with Rango and Pirates 4 so I'm glad to know that not ALL of the work he did this year wasn't all that good.

Editing: I thought it was roughly good. They did help things become a little bit more understandable.

And that's my review for Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. It's roughly just the same stuff as last time, only that it has more action and a better villain.

Hugo (2011)

Rating: 90%
Now this film looked interesting from the moment I saw one of it's trailers. Frankly, I thought it would be a bit more sci-fi fantasy the way it looked in the trailer. But, I'd say that it is a bit of fantasy in it's own way.

Plot: Hugo is an orphan who lives in a train station where he works as the clock keeper. But also lives as a thief. In his spare time, he works on a mechanical man who he was working on with his father before he died. One day he's caught steeling from a toymaker named Georges Melies who takes his notebook containing blueprints for his mechanical man and intends to burn it. He tries to keep him from actually burning his notebook by the help of Melies' goddaughter, Isabelle whom he befriends and starts to have many adventures with.

This was a very clever movie. The characters where lovable, the story was really imaginative when it comes to how it's connected to real life people from that time, and it made you rather amazed with the kind of things they did for effects and such when it came to making movies back in those days. The most interesting part of the film to me was introducing the automaton. I don't know if there has been any that can do what this one did back then, but even if there hasn't it was a pretty fascinating mechanical thing. The only thing that seemed missing - but maybe it is in the film and I just have to see the movie again to find it - is what the automaton had to do with Melies. Maybe it shows, maybe it doesn't but if it didn't, then that's a down on the story.

Acting/Characters:
Asa Butterfield/Hugo Cabret: He did  pretty good job with his acting. I thought it was well done.
Chloe Moretz/Isabelle: I wish it didn't take until AFTER I saw the film to know that she's Hit-Girl from Kick-Ass. Although in my defense, how could I? she's grown a fair bit since then. But anyway she did a pretty good job too. Her characters was pretty fun.
Ben Kingsley/Georges Melies: His character was pretty interesting. Certainly a pretty fair performance at least to portray the actual person.

Music: I thought the music was pretty good.

3-D: mostly unnecessary. It was cool when it came to some shots inside the train station and with the snow earlier but other than that, it was just mostly nothing noticeable.

Editing: It was nice. fairly well done.

And that's my review for Hugo. It was an interesting, imaginative movie with a very fascinating way of trying to show movies and movie makers from that time.   

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

The Decendants (2011)

Rating: 80%

Now I was very surprised that this was getting good reviews. In fact, when a saw a trailer to it when I went to see Breaking Dawn part 1, I thought it was going to be a really cheesy film. So I found it to be a bit of a raise in the eyebrow to find out that it currently has an 89% on Rotten Tomatoes. And when it got nominated a few times for the Critics Choice Awards and the Golden Globes, I decided to put my foot down and see this film for myself. The result...not bad.


Plot: Matt King is a lawyer in Hawaii who is currently working on selling untouched land from the island of Kauai with his cousins. But one day his wife, Elizabeth, ends up in a boating accident and is in comatose. So Matt has to start looking after his to daughters, Scottie and Alex who he hardly ever sees anymore while Elizabeth is still in comatose. Trying to raise the kids becomes very hard to do considering that he doesn't really know them, and to top it off, Alex reveals to Matt that Elizabeth was cheating on him prior to the accident.


Okay to I was wrong that this was going to be cheesy as cheesy gets. I mean the story isn't extremely original, but the acting was nice, it was well put together, I'd say this is definitely a film to see whenever you want to see a plain old nice movie. I think my favorite scenes are the first one when Matt is talking about how Hawaiian people have problems like everyone else, and when Alex was going underwater in the pool. There are some parts that are predictable, but nothing to incredibly bad.


Actors/Characters:
George Clooney/Matt King: He did a good job. Well, what's more to say is that he was just...George Clooney. His acting was well done and all that, but it's nothing unique to what George Clooney does.
Shailene Woodley/Alexandria King: I thought she did a nice job. And again, I liked her first scene in the pool.
Nick Krause/Sid: He was an okay character. He had his cute moments for sure.

Music: The music was nice. Nothing much to it.

Editing: Most of the editing I was fine with. My only issue was a point when Matt was sitting down at a restaurant. It started as a medium, profile shot where he just sits down, but then three seconds later after he sits down, they roughly play the entire action again only it's in a close-up profile shot (roughly). I thought that was really dumb.


And that's my review for The Descendants. It was an enjoyable film, but I wouldn't go so far as to nominate it for best picture. In my opinion, if the film does become nominated for best picture at the Oscars, it'll really be there just as one of those films that are there just to fill in the remaining spots like Avatar, Social Network, and The Kids are Alright from the last to years.  

Sunday, December 18, 2011

One Hundred and One Damatians (1961)

Rating: 90%

Oh I've been waiting a long time to see this very old friend of mine once more. This was one of my all time favorites as a kid and it's such a delight to finally see it again and let it bring back a fine collection of memories. So without further ado here's Disney review # 35: One Hundred and One Dalmatians. 

Plot: Pongo is a dalmatian who lives with his owner or 'pet', Roger. One day, Pongo spots a lovely woman named Anita and her female dalmatian, Perdita, and devises a plan where both pairs meet and fall in love and marry. Six months later, both couples live in a small apartment and Perdita gives birth to 15 puppies. Anita's old school mate, Cruella de Vil, attempts to buy the puppies with a secret intention to make fur coats out of them. Roger and Anita refuse to sell the puppies and so Cruella storms out of the house. Later however, two crooks barge into the house as steal the puppies. The police try everything to no avail, which leaved Pongo and Perdita to rely on the "Twilight Bark" (the gossip chain for dogs) to find their puppies.


Well there's no doubt about it. I love this movie. It's fun, it's exciting, and lovable characters. My favorite part was the chase scene which was just suspenseful as heck. The interesting thing is that it's roughly very loyal to the book. I'm almost curious to know what the book is like. The only thing that i'm a little "huh?" over now that I've recently thought about it, is how the place where they disguise themselves has an unusually huge amount of soot. But still, I love this movie.

Characters:
Pongo: Pongo I really liked as a leader and a hero as a kid.
Horace and Jasper: These guys are probably one of the best Disney villain sidekicks. They were just funny as heck whether they were getting their buts handed to them or when Jasper gets mad at Horace.
The Colonel and Sargent Tibbs: Tibbs was pretty funny. And I think it's going to be a while before I get Colonel often saying "On the double man, on the double!" off my head.
Cruella de Vil: Now this woman is definitely one of the best Disney villains there is. I mean it's one thing that she intends to kill 99 puppies just to make fur coats out of them. But boy will she do ANYTHING to see that it's done. And her car was really cool in terms of it looking like it's alive and looking evil too. And when she falls off the bridge, boy does she just crack. She just gets manically crazy and is destroying her car so she can get back on the road an ram the truck. It just comes to show that few things can be called an excellent pure evil villain like one who will do practically more than anything to get what he/she wants.


Music: Do I even need to bother with this? This is the movie with the infamous Cruella de Vil song, which is just a total classic!

And that's my review for One Hundred and One Dalmatians. It's an excellent film and one of Disney's ultimate classics, no questions. Which leaves me to be done with all the Disney movies from the 60's. 

The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad (1949)

Rating: 70%


We are now entering the second to last package Disney film to cover. So here's Disney review # 34: The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.


Plot: The movie contains two stories that are based on popular literature.

The Wind in the Willows: Mr. Toad is a rich toad who lives in Toad Hall (yeah I know that's three times I just said toad but what can you do) and is known to recklessly have all sorts of fun and adventure, causing damage everywhere he goes. His friends try to knock some sense into him, but things seem to get out of hand when he's caught for supposedly stealing a motorcar.

The Legend of Sleepy Hallow: Ichabod Crane is a schoolmaster at the small town of Sleepy Hallow. Despite his odd behavior and appearance, he falls in love with the local town beauty, Katrina Van Tassel and becomes a rival for her affections against the town bully Brom Bones. But one night on Halloween, Brom tells the story of the headless horseman which leads Ichabod to become frightened and possibly run into the headless horseman himself.


These are good stories. Wind and the Willows was a fun tale with talking animals and cherry music. While Sleepy Hallow was a slightly happy but mostly suspenseful story that makes me half curious and half scarred to know what the Tim Burton version of the story is like. The only thing with Sleepy Hallow is the ending, which I won't say what kind of ending it is, but it's just that I didn't fancy it a whole lot. Though what i thought was the most interesting thing was that the narrator for Sleepy Hallow was none other than Bing Crosby. (yeah I know. what do you know about that.)


Characters:
Mr. Toad: He was a fairly fun character. Crazy, but fun.
Ratty and Moley: I particularly liked this film when it came to seeing these guys. It's mostly because I'm primarily familiar with these characters from their part in Mickey's Christmas Carol. So it's good to know where they originated from if not from that particular video.
Ichabod Crane: I kinda liked Ichabod. Mostly because of how he's totally into food (as messed up as it is that he stays skinny after being such an eater) and how he was doing just fine in winning Katrina's heart.


Music: I liked the music. I think the best was "Nowhere in Particular."

And that's my review for The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad. It's a fairly nice film through and through for some decent Disney fun.

Home on the Range (2004)

Rating: 40%

Nuthun much to say for this one except; Here's Disney review # 33: Home on the Range.

Plot: Maggie is a cow who once her home was sold after every cattle in the ranch is stolen by Alamida Slim, is taken to a small farm called Patch of Heaven. But the farm becomes bankrupted to the point where the owner must pay $750 or her farm will be sold to the highest bidder. So Maggie goes out with her fellow cows Mrs. Calloway and Grace, and try to capture Alamida Slim and use the bounty money on him to save the farm.

Okay so this time, Disney based a film on the title of the actual song "Home on the Range". Boy the things that they base their movies on. Anyway, I didn't care much for this movie. There were a decent bit of comedy, and some of the music was pretty nice, but I wasn't very interested in the main characters, the story wasn't all that good, and while the villain was kinda unique, it was the way that made him unique that made him bad.


Characters:
Maggie, Mrs. Calloway and Grace: Eh, I just didn't feel like I had a good reason to care about these characters. I mean Grace being tone deaf aside, there was nothing truly unique about these three characters.
Lucky Jack: He was a little funny in his first scene which was nice.
Alamida Slim: I've recently considered making a list of the top best and worst Disney Villains. And for one of the worst, I think it's safe to say that Slim should be one of them. I mean yes, he does some fairly evil things, but It's just that his secret weapon is yodeling. I mean sure, make him unique, but yodeling...is not the way to go. It just killed the way he was introduced earlier in the film.

Music: "(You Ain't) Home On The Range" I liked, "Little Patch of Heaven" was okay. But "Yodel-Adle-Eedle-Idle-Oo" was bad and I didn't like Slim yodeling to some classical songs.

And that's my review for Home on the Range. It was nothing special, the characters were not very good, and it just wasn't a good movie all around.

Melody Time (1948)

Rating: 70%

Well this is about the third to last Disney theatrical, animated, package film. So without much left to say, here's Disney review # 32: Melody Time


Plot: The film consists of several short stories:
Once Upon a Wintertime: Frances Langford sings the title song about two couples - a human couple and a rabbit couple - going skating.

Bumble Boogie: A bee tries to escape from a visual and musical frenzy.

The Legend of Johnny Appleseed: the classic tale of Johnny Appleseed going west and planting apple trees.

Little Toot; based on the actual story Little Toot, Little Toot is a young tugboat who can't say out of trouble.

Trees: a recitation of the Alfred Joyce Kilmer poem by Fred Waring and the Pennsylvanians where the lyrical settings are shown throughout the seasons.

Blame it on the Samba: Donald Duck and José Carioca bump into the Aracuan Bird who introduces them to the Samba.

Pecos Bill: The tale of a man who was raised by wolves and becomes the best cowboys that ever lived.



This a pretty nice film. Most of the stories are pretty cute, the music is good. My only problem was Blame it on the Samba and Pecos Bill, which I will explain in the next section.


Stories:

Once Upon a Wintertime: It's a cute story. A little suspenseful but you have to like the ending nonetheless.

Bumble Boogie: eh,  I didn't think very much of it.

The Legend of Johnny Appleseed: Now this story I really enjoyed. I just liked the character to begin with, with his apparent relationship with The Lord and how he was set out on this quest to introduce apples to the west.

Little Toot: It's a cute story. nothing more.

Trees: I didn't think much of it. It just seemed like a sequel to a couple of scenes from Bambi, nothing special considering that.

Blame it on the Samba: I didn't really like this because to me, this was just The Three Caballeros all over again. Hot girl singing or playing a musical instrument and bringing Donald and Jose and some other character into it. So considering I found that very boring particularly during the second half of The Tree Caballeros, I can't say that I gave this story much of a chance.

Pecos Bill:  *WARNING, DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THIS AND DON'T WANT TO FIND OUT THE ENDING YET* What! The! HECK!?!?!?!?!?! What in the world is up with Disney actually having a story in one of their movies that ends SADLY!?!?!?!?! I mean yes, this studio has had some very sad scenes in the past. Man killing Bambi's mom made Man one of the biggest villains ever, I wasn't very happy with that widow getting rid of Tod, and the "Baby Mine" scene in Dumbo makes my friend Brianna cry every time. But that's DURING the movie. No matter what, those stories always ended happily. But not this one. In fact, other versions of the story are hardly any happier. There's even one version where Bill has to shoot Sue to put her out of her misery. SERIOUSLY! You'll make a lion version of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead that end happily (The Lion King 1, 1 1/2 and 2), but they'll actually take the time to end one of the earlier movies sad as heck!?!?!! What the frick!?!?!?!?!!?!


Music: The music was nice.


And that's my review for Melody Time. It's a decent film, but not a movie I'd want to watch for a while just because of the last two stories.

The Sword in the Stone (1963)

Rating: 60%


Another film I didn't grew up with, but saw a few times nonetheless. So here's Disney review # 31: The Sword in the Stone.

Plot: This movie tells the tale of King Arthur and some adventures before he became king. The Story is set with Arthur as a 12 year old boy (mostly known throughout the film as Wart) who lives with his foster father Sir Ector and is training to become a squire for Extor's son Kay. One day while Kay goes hunting, he calls Arthur to bring back an arrow that he over shoots all the way into the woods. Wh8ile he finds it, he comes across a mysterious wizard named Merlin who declares himself to be Arthur's tutor and so takes him back to the castle where they have adventures from Merlin teaching Arthur.

This is an...okay movie. It's not the best. On one hand, the story is nice, there's some pretty cute comedy. On the other hand...well it's just a nice film. Not the best. In a way, It's enough that it's still Disney, but on the same note, it's not entirely as thrilling as most of the Disney films... to me anyway.

Characters:
Merlin: Merlin I really liked. He was silly, clever, and you didn't know what he was going to say, especially with hm rambling on over what's going to happen years after the events of this film.
Archimedes: Archimedes was a nice character. I enjoyed him enough because he was voiced by Junius Matthews who was the original voice for Rabbit in Winnie the Pooh.
Arthur: Arthur was...okay. I'm not sure what to say about him. He was mostly just a simple boy learning to become a squire while doing a bunch of crazy stuff with a Wizard. I'm not sure what to say much about him.


Music: eh, it was just okay. nuthun special.

And that's my review for The Sword in the Stone. To me, it's an okay movie, not the best. I'm not sure how to explain why. It's just no my kind of film I suppose.

Sleeping Beuty (1959)

Rating: 80%

I grew up with this movie like the rest of us. so nuff said for and intro except saying here's Disney review #30 Sleeping Beauty.


Plot: After many years, King Stephan and Queen Leah finally have a child, Princess Aurora. Their Kingdom celebrates for this occasion as well as made her betrothed to also-young Prince Phillip, son of Hubert, King of the nearly kingdom. But the witch Maleficent, as a way of showing that she's upset for not being invited to the party, casts a spell declaring that before the sun sets on her 16th birthday, she'll prick her finger on the spindal of a spinning wheel and die. But The three good fairies counter the spell so that if she does prick her finger, she won't die, but fall asleep until true loves kiss where the spell will break. But to make sure that it does happen even then, the three good fairies disguise themselves as peasants and take the baby to be raised secretly hiding from Maleficent until the 16 years are past.


This is a nice movie. The music is classic Disney style, pretty good villain, and nice bit of comedy. The only thing is that, in my opinion, this movie has way more of every other character in this film than the title character. I mean that's not a huge deal, but still.

Characters:
Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather: In a way, these were the actual main characters of this film. Because most of this film has been about how it's all been about them trying to counter Maleficent's spell, preparing Aurora's 16th birthday, or helping Phillip escape and fight Maleficent and her goblins. I mean they were nice characters, Flora with her wisdom, Fauna with being the total gentle one, and Merrywether with being a little hot-tempered. But still, while we may not totally find it a big deal, they still are in this movie way more than the supposed ACTUAL main characters ever where.
Maleficent: She did a pretty good job in being a villain. She was cruel, she was deadly, and she was determined as heck to complete her goal no matter what.

Music: I enjoyed the music. Once Upon a Dream was a fair classic. Not my favorite Disney love song, but still.

And that's my review for Sleeping Beauty. I may not have said much, but a classic like this does speak for itself a little.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

The Aristocats ( 1970)

Rating: 80%

Now here's a movie that's also been quite some time. I never owned this movie, but I remember I use to see it plenty of times either at a neighbor's house or at the preschool I use to go to or something like that when I was little. So anyway, here's Disney review #29: The Aristocats


Plot: Duchess and her kittens Marie, Berlioz, and Toulouse, live with their rich mistress Madame Bonfamille and her butler Edgar. One Day, Madame Donfamille calls her lawyer to create her will. She declares that when she dies, everything she owns will go to her cats and when they're gone, everything will go to Edgar. Edgar overhears this and is unwilling to wait until the cats die. So the puts sleeping pills in the cat's food and at night, takes them to drown them in a creek. However, his plot is interrupted by two hounds dogs and while Edgar manages to escape them, leaves the cats under a bridge. The next day, the cats come across an alley cat named O'Malley who agrees to help them get back to their mistress.


This is a nice film. The music is pretty good, some of the characters are just hilarious, and the story is pretty good all around.


Characters:
O'Malley: The thing I personally really like about O'Malley is how it didn't take him very long to be totally friendly to the kittens as well as being really smitten with Duchess. You see, normally for a guy who's trying to get with a girl in a movie, he has to just pretend to be playing with the siblings, or children, or children she's baby sitting or something like that, and then actually care for the kids during the climax of the film. So we're talking about movies like Just Go with It (Never saw it, but I'm sure that's how it ends) or Despicable Me (no woman involved, but he's still using those kids to reach his goal.) But O'Malley starts to actually care for the kids almost right away. Not to mention - * WARNING SPOILER * -  he eventually asks Duchess to stay and make him the kittens' father. I mean I don't know about you guys, but O'Malley here is a heck of a break from plenty of other guy characters that comes across something around that.
Duchess and the Kittens: they were pretty nice characters. the only thing is that I thought it was silly that Marie seemed to have an English accent even though she's French. (I don't know if she really was, i couldn't really tell.)
Napoleon and Lafayette: I loved these guys. In terms of comedy, they totally stole the show.
Edgar: I'd had to say that Edgar was one of the worst Disney Villains. Just because he was a wimp.

Music: "Everybody want to be a Cat" I enjoyed. Mostly just during the end of the actual song and at the end of the movie, but still the song in general.

And that's my review for The Aristocats. It's a pretty good film and certainly one of the Disney Classics. 

Muppet Treasure Island (1996)

Rating: 70%

It's been an extremely long time sine I last saw this film. I mean I think the last time was like, at church back in 1997 or 98, something like that. But now I've seen it again so off to this review of Muppet Treasure Island.

Plot: Jim Hawkins is an orphan who lives and works for Mrs. Bluberidge's inn with his friends Gonzo and Rizzo. But then adventure calls when sailor, Billy Bones is given the black spot, the pirates' death sentence. Before Bones dies, he tells Jim to take his treasure map and to beware the one legged man. So Jim, Gonzo and Rizzo escape the pirates that attack the inn shorty after Bones dies, and travel to Bristol where they meet Squire Trelawney (Fozzie Bear) who agrees to finance a voyage to the treasure. So they set off to find the treasure with Captain Smollett (Kermit the Frog) and his first mate, Mr. Arrow (Sam the Eagle). But Gonzo becomes worried when Jim befriends the one-legged cook Long John Silver.

This is a nice film. It's not the best but it's enjoyable enough with the Muppets and some familiar actors. It's just a nice, funny, movie with a little bit of action, nice music, and some cool movie references (most notable, Star Trek and On the Waterfront.)


Actors/Characters:
Kevin Bishop/Jim Hawkins: He did a nice job acting. He wasn't the best, but I think he did a good enough job.
Tim Curry/Long John Silver: He was pretty nice. I mean it's Tim Curry, so naturally he played a pretty nice villain. I only hate his last scene with Jim because it was pretty cheesy. But other than that, pretty good.
The Muppets: Rizzo and Gonzo were funny. I liked Gonzo's Star Trek reference. I thought it was a little silly how Kermit and Miss Piggy kinda fell in love again a little too easily. The rest of the group were good.


Music: I enjoyed "Shiver my Timbers" a lot. I mostly enjoyed "Cabin Fever", but it took some getting use to with how music kept changing, but it's still good.

Editing: editing was nice. the only thing is that i noticed that when the pirates were attacking the inn, one shot was use twice, only that the second time it was speed up.


And that's my review for Muppet Treasure Island. It's a decent enjoyable film that has the Muppets' version of Treasure Island.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992)

Rating 70%

Well there had to be some point where I had to finally start watching and writing reviews to some Christmas films. So let's get started with The Muppet Christmas Carol.


Plot: The story is told by Gonzo as Charles Dickens and Rizzo the Rat. Mr. Scrooge is a old greedy money-lender who is more interested in profit than celebration. But on Christmas Eve, he gets a warning from the ghost of his old partners that three spirits will come and attempt make him change his old ways.

...well... there's not much to say. It's Christmas Carol with the Muppets. Nuthun spectacular about that aside from the fact that it's a nice film that mixed two things that we all love.

Actors/Characters:
Michael Caine/Ebenezer Scrooge:He was good...I just didn't care for the beginning where he made this really creepy grin over how much profit he was making at the time.
The Muppets: Fun as ever.

Music: the music was fairly nice.

Editing: the editing is nice.

And that's my review for The Muppet Christmas Carol.  I know I'm not saying a whole lot, but it's just that the whole concept of the film kinda speaks for itself.

The Muppets (2011)

My Rating: 100%

Ah yes. The Muppets. you gotta love them. Nuff said.


Plot: The story begins with a puppet named Walter who throughout his life, has been through hard times and has found comfort during those times by watching the Muppets with his human brother Gary. One day Gary goes to Los Angeles with his girlfriend Mary to celebrate their tenth anniversary,  and invites Walter to come with him to see the Muppets studios. They come to find out that it is in ruins and during their time there, Walter secretly finds out that a business man named Tex Richman is attempting to buy the studio and take it down and drill for the oil under the studios. So Walter, Mary and Gary go out and find Kermit the Frog and convince him to try to bring back the whole band and attempt to do one last show in order to make the 10 million dollars they need to buy the studio back.

This is a simply lovable film. I loved the music, I love the character like any normal parson. and I think this one my favorite movies in terms of cameo guest stars. And of coarse, the jokes hilarious. Whether they're just being silly or someone's breaking the 4th wall, it's just hilarious.

Actors/Characters/Muppets:
Jason Segel/Gary: Gary was pretty cute. I loved it whenever he's saying that he has just did some musical number the scene after doing just that or something.
Amy Adams/Mary: She did a pretty good job with her singing and all that.
The Muppets: well they ere the Muppets. you just have to love them all. Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Animal, Gonzo, everyone!

Music: I enjoyed the music. "Man or Muppet" was definitely the most memorable. And you do have to love them bringing old Muppet classics like "Rainbow Connection," the theme song and "Mahna Mahna". And the movie has gotten me interested to take close look at "We built this City."


Editing: it's was pretty nice.

And that's my review for The Muppets. It just was a fun an enjoyable as any other Muppet film.

The Fox and the Hound (1981)

Rating: 80%

Now just like Lady and the Tramp, this was a Disney film I wasn't very thrilled about but after watching it again now that I'm older, I've come to appreciate more. The only difference is that there's no story behind seeing it again that has to do with my grandfather. Ah well. Here's Disney review # 28: The Fox and the Hound.


Plot: Tod is a Fox who is raised by Widow Tweed after his mother was killed by a hunter. Copper is a Hound dog who is raised by Widow Tweed's next door neighbor, Amos Slade and his other dog Chief, to become a hunting dog. They first meet when Cooper smells Tod in the woods and so they begin to play and become best friends. But their friendship easily ends up in jeopardy when Cooper is sent to a hunting trip to officially become a hunting dog.

This is a nice film for sure. The story is cute, the music is alright, very nice characters. It's certainly more happy than the book, let me tell you that.

Characters:
Tod: I'd have to say Tod was always my favorite...I don't know why, maybe just because he was a fox just like Robin Hood or something like that. I don't know. But even after seeing this again, I still like him.
Cooper: He's nice too...but when it comes to fighting, he's a whip. I mean biting that bear a fair amount of times aside, both Tod and the bear knew how to manhandle Cooper.
Big Mama, Dinkey and Boomer: To me, these guys were really stealing the show in this film. Mostly Dinkey and Boomer with trying to get that caterpillar, but Big Mama had her points to. Boomer was my favorite because he was the funniest and...well he was voiced by Paul Winchell who did the voice of Tigger before Jim Cummings so that was a bit of a personal score with that character for me.

Music: it was nice.

And that's my review for The Fox and the Hound. It's a nice film and I'm a bit glad that I can appreciate it more just like Lady and the Tramp.

Chicken Little (2005)

Rating: 10%

*moans* I really didn't want to watch this movie. It got bad reviews, it just looked bad to begin with... I just didn't want to do it...but I have my marathon and all that so...here's Disney review # 27: Chicken Little.


Plot: A year ago, Chicken Little rings the school bell telling everyone to run in panic because a piece of the sky fell. But when people can't find the "piece of the sky," his father assumes an acorn just fell on his head, thus the misunderstanding which makes Chicken Little the laughing stock of the town. Now in the present, another "piece of the sky" seems to fall so he comes to investigate with his friends.

Now to be fair *WARNING, SPOILER ALERT* I have to admit Chicken Little winning that baseball championship was a nice touch. I thought he was going to become even more an embarrassment from that considering what usually falls in line to the concept of this kind of story. But he didn't become an embarrassment and even become the hero, and I liked that. That was a decent contrast to the of the ball of cheese that is the rest of this movie. That alone is why this movie is given at least a 10% . But the rest of the movie was just terrible. The story was predictable, the characters where totally forgettable, and I hate that they put a bunch of things that I like into this movie like a clip from Raiders of the Lost Ark and a whole bunch of good songs. In a way, this was practically Hoodwinked.

Characters:
Chicken Little: CHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!! He's not very original, he makes Robert Patterson practically look good. My word, this character was predictable.
Fish Out of Water: he was kind of interesting with how he has to make gurgling sounds to communicate...but not interesting enough.
Abby: She was no more original than Chicken Little.

Music: Again, I hated that they used some pretty good music into this terrible movie.
 
And that's my review for Chicken Little. Now, I may have yet to officially see all of the theatrical animated Disney features. But I think it's safe to officially declare in my somewhat professional opinion as a man who watches Disney, that this movie is definitely the worst of all the 51 theatrical, animated films. I mean The Three Caballeros: manageable, Dinosaur: whatever, The Black Cauldron: fine, but whatever I still have to see, I'm pretty confident that I can put up with no problem compared to this horrible, HORRIBLE film. 

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 (2011)

Rating: 40%

Well once again we have another Twilight film to take a look at. I have figured that it would go pretty downhill after Eclipse. Because Eclipse had better story and the movie all around turned out to be much more acceptable. Breaking Dawn isn't as good as Eclipse book-wise in my opinion so I thought it would just stay really, really bad like the rest of the films. But it turns out - while it's not better than Eclipse - that it did manage to become a little bit amusing.


Plot: Well now that Edward and Bella have graduated and have now gotten rid of Victoria once and for all, they now are getting married. As per usual, Jacob gets very pissed off because of this. But they do get married and then go off in trheir honeymoon where they destroy the bed while doing it, and pick random areas to...play chess... I really don't think that was in the book and even then...that's just lame. But then just fourteen days after their wedding, Bella becomes pregnant and considering that apparently never happens between a vampire and a human, everyone gets scared and the fetus grows inside Bella really quickly and is apparently killing Bella.

Once again, this movie is generally good in any possible way just for the fans. But it did manage to have actual ups along with the downs. The main up was how they made Bella look during her pregnancy. she was looking really bony and grayish. I mean she looked like a totally different person, they did just a good job with that. And at least there was at some action, which I didn't think there would be any considering that Eclipse is the one that has the really big battle unlike the rest of the books. But there were some downs aside from the acting which I'll of coarse get to. For one thing, the first time the wolves got together, it did start out well because the wolves where barking and moving around to show how they were feeling about the situation. I mean I liked that, because I though they were just going to stand in a circle while talking through their thoughts. But they didn't which was nice. But what ruined it was Jacob overcoming Sam's power or whatever. It's was just so cheesy how Jacob is bowing at first but then rises up while shouting via his thoughts that he's a decedent of this chief and stuff like that. That just ruined it for me. Another down is when Jacob imprints on Renesmee and we get so see what she's already going to look like growing up. In a way that works, but...I don't know. In a way I think it was a good idea, but at the same note, I wanted to wait until the next movie to see what she looks like as she's growing up. And then *WARNING, SPOILER ALERT* after Bella gave birth, Edward tried turning her into a vampire by ejecting his venom into her rather than biting her. And then when she's transforming, Carlisle is telling Edward that she's going to be okay by telling him to 'listen to her heart'...DUDE!!!!! SHE'S BECOMING A FRICKING VAMPIRE!!!! VAMPIRES' HEARTS ARE FROZEN SOLID!!!!! But I think the worst *WARNING, ANOTHER SPOILER* was that the movie ended with a shot of her eyes just as she opens them, which is just the same darn ending as in Avatar. It was just about the same camera angle and shot and everything. That's just so stupid.


Actors/Characters:
Robert Patterson/Edward Cullen: Well it's remarkable the he had a little more emotion amidst of just standing their with his eyes half closed. But you just have to like it when he tried to act a really angry halfway through the movie.
Kristen Stewart/Bella Cullen: Same psalm, 5th verse. little bit more emotion but still.
Taylor Lautner/Jacob Black: Okay ruining that werewolves scene aside, he was still as bad as Patterson and Stewart. He even cried and it wasn't very believable.
Ashley Greene/Alice Cullen: She seemed to have done only half her job as Alice. Wspecially in the beginning which I didn't like because I like Alice's personality and it sucks that Geene didn't entirely give us that character as much as she use to.


Music: If there was one thing I noticed particularly in the first half of the film that's just sad, it's just how that half of the movie made me realize how much the entire movie franchise fails in terms of music. I mean, a lot of the music they play are a bunch of songs from various artists that very few of us have heard of, and the actual score is pretty much never worth noticing anyway. That's just sad.

Editing: There were plenty of editing points that I didn't like. The only one I can remember is one of Jacob where he's just standing there waiting - at first in a wide shot, then less then a second later it turns roughly to a medium shot, and then not even a second after that, a medium close-up. But they did a very good job with Bella giving birth with making so many cuts - especially in the beginning - to build up the suspense.

And that's my review for The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1. It's still not a good movie, but I think they did enough to make it at least the second best of the movie franchise.

Lady and the Tramp (1955)

Rating: 80%

It's been some time since I last saw this film. It was only a couple of days ago that I saw it again with my grandfather, who told me how this was the first animated film his father ever saw and loved it ever since. Apparently my grandfather was having some surgery thing going on (I forget what it was) and so a little afterword they went to see it and his father laughed at how this movie contained some dogs doing a barber shop quartet. So anyway, here's Disney review # 26: Lady and the Tramp.

Plot: Lady is a cocker spaniel puppy who lives with Jim Dear and his wife Darling. The Tramp on the other hand is a mutt who goes around living life moment by moment even if he's just begging from a nearby Italian restaurant. They first meet when Lady asks her friends why Jim Dear and Darling act strangely to her (which later turns out to be that Darling's pregnant) and Tramp offers his opinion which her friends disapprove of. Later, Jim Dear and Darling go on a trip and leave Aunt Sarah to look after the baby. But when Lady gets in trouble because of Aunt Sarah's Siamese cats. She takes her to put on a muzzle where she escapes and runs into Tramp who helps her get her muzzle off and then shows her around town where they being to all in love.

As a kid, I really didn't care for this movie. I can't explain why, it was just not as amusing to me as a bunch of other Disney films. Now that I'm older, I'm a bit more fond of it because I like the music a little more, and I kinda liked how there were a whole bunch of characters with various accents.

Characters:
Tramp: Tramp I thought was pretty fun.  My favorite part of him in this film was probably when he first met Lady, just thought that was funny.
Lady: Lady was a nice character.
Jock and Trusty: I really liked them. mostly just because of Jock's Scottish accent and Trusty's...voice to begin with, but still.
Joe and Tony: They were pretty fun. But when it comes to the trailer to the DVD to this film from other Disney movies, I kinda hate that I can't get it off my head where the trailer always starts off with Joe and Tony going "Hey Joe, look who's here!" "Well what do ya know, it's-a Butch!"

Music: The music I've come to appreciate more, especially Belle Notte.

And that's my review of Lady and the Tramp. It may not be one of my favorite Disney films, but I've come to appreciate it much more than I have in the past. 

Sunday, December 11, 2011

The Lion King (1994)

Rating: 100%
(singing the beginning of 'Circle of Life') NNNNNNNNNNNNNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATS INGONYMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BAGITHI BABA!!! (Sithi uhm ingonyama) NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTT
TTTTTTTTTTSSSSSSSS INGONYAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BAGIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITHI BABA!!!!! (sithi uhm ingonyama. ingonyama.) Siyo Nqoba (ingonyama)

Translation for that beginning of Circle of Life:

Nants ingonyama bagithi Baba  [Here comes a lion, Father]
Sithi uhm ingonyama           [Oh yes, it's a lion]

Nants ingonyama bagithi baba
Sithi uhhmm ingonyama
Ingonyama

Siyo Nqoba                    [We're going to conquer]
Ingonyama
 
Anyway, here's Disney review # 25 and my 150th review: The Lion King!
 
 
Plot: Simba is the newborn cub of King Mufasa and Queen Sarabi who dreams of 
becoming a great king after his father. But Mufasa's evil brother Scar also wants to be kind and is 
displeased with Simba's birth. So Scar comes up with a plan to kill both Mufasa and Simba. And 
while he succeeds in killing Mufasa, Simba escapes and lives in exile with a warthog named Pumbaa 
and a Meerkat named Timon. Years later, the ghost of Mufasa comes to Simba and tells him to face 
Scar and become the true king.
 
Yes, yes I know, the movie shamelessly rips off Hamlet. But that doesn't make the movie any less good.
The characters are lovable, the music is spectacular,  the animation is extremely well done. It has a huge 
lack of originality but honestly, that's something people who grew up with it like me can live with. 
 
Characters:
Simba: I remember only too well how my youngest brother use to LOVE Simba. And why not? he was a 
good character.
Scar: He's a pretty good villain. He may have been acting like a wimp once he rose into power but still, I 
mean she did kill one of the main characters. 
Timon & Pumbaa: Man these guys are the best. They're some of the best supporting Disney characters 
and I still remember their TV show. 

Music: Dude! It's the Lion King! all the songs are pretty much classics. "Circle of Life," "Hakuna Matata"
"Be Prepared", "Can you feel the love tonight."


And that's my review for The Lion King. Despite it's lack of originality, it's still an excellent film to enjoy to make as my 150th review and to use as my Disney review to make me halfway though my marathon.
 
 
  

The Black Cauldron (1985)

Rating: 30%

I've been curious about this film for a long time. In fact I became more curious to see it when i saw a trailer to it on the DVD to Great Mouse Detective. And I was pretty interested in it then because it sounded like a nice, Disney version of a mix of between Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Legend of Zelda video games. Now this was not the case considering A) this was based off of a book series called The Chronicles of Prydain from around the 60's. (So it turns out that once again, Disney has actually based one of their movies on a book series that was once again, more recent than one from the 19th century.) and B) While Lord of the Rings was around for decades, Legend of Zelda still had another year for their first game anyway. *sigh* But boy do I wish that was actually the case. So here's Disney movie review # 24: The Black Cauldron.

Plot: Taran is a assistant pig keeper who dreams of becoming a mighty warrior. But then the pig he is in charge for, Hen Wen is threatened by the Horned King who intends to use Hen Wen's power to find the Black Cauldron: a cauldron with the power to summon an army of invincible undead soldiers. enchanter Dallben sends Taran to take Hen Wen to a hiding place. But on the way, Taran's day dreaming causes Hen Wen to get captured. Taran goes to rescue Hen Wen, but after he succeeds, he gets captured and then comes across Princess Eilonwy and musician Ffewddur Fflam who help him escape and aid him in his journey to find the Black Cauldron and destroy it.

Well the good news is, this movie is pretty loyal to SOME of the stuff from the book series, the bad news is...well... I didn't really care for it. From what I hear, the book series has WAY more depth in it which would've helped this movie if there was. Especially since there were things in the movie that weren't explained.  For example, Fflam has a harp that has strings that snap off whenever the stretches the truth. And they never explain it. It took me a while for me to realize why his harp kept doing that. I mean I may not have the sharpest mind ever, but still.

Characters:
Taran: I didn't really like Taran. In a way, he made The Black Cauldron look like a prologue to Quest for Camelot when it comes to that film's main character Kayley. You see in that film, Kayley also dreams of having adventures and all that, but she often has to be saved all the time. There was one time where she actually saved someone but that was it. With Taran, he was roughly the same thing only that at least once he had his sword he helped a fair bit. And I'll admit it's good that in the end of the movie he's not as stubborn and he's more honest and faces reality a bit more than Kayley which I really liked...but not enough to like the character.
Princess Eilonwy: eh, she was okay. There wasn't anything bad about her but there wasn't anything that really stood out compared to other characters like her.
Gurgi: Gurgi...Gurgi was a bit messed up when it comes to the voice. Why? Because he sounds like Gollum - or at least how I sound like with my Gollum impression. Other than that, he was just an okay character.
The Horned King: The Horned King is definitely not one of the best Disney villains. Because to me, what ruined it with this character was that they showed his face. I just thought he was a little more menacing without seeing his face.

Music: nothing special.


 And that's my review for The Black Cauldron. If you want to be entertained from this kind of story, read the books.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Peter Pan (1953)

Rating: 100%

Yeah. It was time to get to this film sooner or later. Because for many of us I'm sure, this was one of our favorites. So, here's Disney review # 23: Peter Pan

Plot: Wendy Darling who is a great believer in Peter Pan, loves to tell stories about him to her younger brothers John and Michael. One night, Peter Pan sneaks into their room in search for his shadow that he lost and Wendy has kept secretly since. But in the midst of finding his shadow, he wakes up Wendy and eventually John and Michael. So eventually after giving his shadow back, Peter teaches them to fly with his fairy, Tinkerbell, and they fly away to Neverland and begin to have some adventures with the Lost Boys, the Indians and Captain Hook with his band of pirates.

What can I say? It's a good movie. Like everyone else, I like the story, the characters, the music. I really don't have any thing else to say with this movie in general.

Characters:
Peter Pan: I remember really liking as a kid. And while I may have moved on from all the stuff back then, I still like him.
Captain Hook: He was a pretty good villain. He's not the darkest or the bravest Disney villain, but he's still a decent villain.
Tinkerbell: All I have to say is that I remember well how she would be jealous all the time which was nice. And that when it comes to a boy with a fairy, while I prefer Link from Legend of Zelda over Peter Pan any day, I wouldn't hesitate to choose Tink as the fairy. I mean the fairies in Legend of Zelda are annoying as heck with always saying "HEY! LISTEN!" and otherwise just fly around and is only useful once in a while. Tink on the other hand can make you fly and kinda has her own language. I don't know what she says but I'm sure none of it is putting together the words 'hey' and 'listen' together. I know this totally off topic but I just wanted to say that while we are bringing up fairies.


Music: well it was Peter Pan so the music was spectacular. I mean "You can fly" "Never smile at a crocodile" and "What mad the Red Man red."

And that's my review for Peter Pan. I know it's not saying much, but this is one of those Disney classics that speak for themselves

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

My Rating: 20%

Well everyone, the time has come at last. I have now watched, from what I understand is one of the worst of the worst, a Star Trek film so bad that the franchise might not have continued because of it. This is my review for Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.


Plot: In the neutral zone, on the planet Nimbus III, three ambassadors ( a human, a Klingon and a Romulan) are captured when the city they are in is attacked by a terrorist group. So the members of the new USS Enterprise are brought out of shore leave to rescue the ambassadors. However, along the way, a Klingon Captain named Klaa begins to chase the Enterprise in order to fight Kirk for personal glory, and the leader of the terrorist group tursn out to be Sybok, Spock's half-brother.


Well...in my opinion it's not quite as bad as I thought it would be. I mean yeah, they totally had it coming with the Razzies they won for this film. But for me, when it came to hearing about this film long before I even got very far on the original series of Star Trek, people made it sound like it's practically Batman & Robin/Last Airbender/effects that contain things like just filming a model spaceship hanging on wire under a poorly done background kind of bad. But it was STILL bad. I mean for one thing, yes, the effects where just terrible. I mean not even the effects for the background showing a lot of stars on the windows of one of the rooms inside the Enterprise weren't all that good. And there were a lot of things that just didn't make sense. For example, Uhura was dancing naked just to distract a few enemies (effective but still...seriously?) Kirk shooting the sign off of that bar in the middle of the battle (okay, that sign was not exactly to coolest sign ever but...seriously?) and Scotty randomly gets knocked out unconscious after bumping his head on a part of the ship while walking down the hall (a little funny but again...seriously?) And what really messes with my head was Sybok with the fact that he's a Vulcan and he actually has EMOTION!!!! Seriously!! I mean in one way it's cool, I mean with going out of the ordinary a little, but that leaves out a couple of questions: 1) Who is Sybok's mother and was she Sarek's first wife before Amanda? ( I mean I'm sure she was but still) and 2) I may not know everything about Star Trek yet, but based on what I remember from a original series episode, can't it be a dangerous and kinda fatal for Vulcans to have a certain amount of emotion? I mean I know Sybok was not exactly Jim Carry in Liar Liar, but still. And the scenes with Klaa where kinda pointless. I mean yes his part helps during the climax, but most of the time he's just scheming over fighting Kirk. I mean sure it hasn't been done with any villain...except for Vader & Palpatine, Robotnik & Snively, Voldemort with Wormtail and Barty Crouch Jr, The Decepticons, Lord Becket, Crocker from Fairly Oddparents, the villains from the new Muppets movie, well you get the picture. Although it did have good points. I mean the comedy was okay, and while both times that Kirk, McCoy and Spock were camping weren't spectacular, they were still nice with how Kirk and McCoy are trying to teach Spock the ways of camping all the way to get him to sing songs like "Row, Row Row your boat." (although when they say the title, I think they say row around 6 times instead of just 3)



Acting/Characters
William Shatner/Captain James T. Kirk: I heard it once said that William Shatner has NEVER seen any film or TV series that he has done except the dailies from this film. So really combine that fact and that he DIRECTED this film and I think it's a bit acceptable that he got worst director and actor at the Razzies. The only way it was acceptable was at the end with how he reacts to God wanting a spaceship.
Leonard Nimoy/ Spock: Luckily for many fans...or at least for me, Spock stayed just the way he was even if Shatner's directing.
DeForest Kelley/Leonard McCoy: I may not be the best judge ever when it comes to acting, but I'm not really sure why Kelley was at least nominated for worst supporting actor. I mean to me he was just being McCoy. I guess it has something to do with the scene that has to do with his dad but I can't really say. I mean maybe he wasn't good in that, but I honestly can't really tell considering he's not exactly Robert Patterson, Kristen Stewart or that girl that's always crying that played Katara in Last Airbender.
Laurence Lucinbill/Sybok: he was...an okay character. Certainly interesting considering, again, that he's a Vulcan with emotion.


Music: it was nothing special. just good that they play the theme music at some points.
   

Editing: eh, it's nothing special.

And that's my review for Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. It was not the worst movie I've ever seen but it still was pretty bad. But at least in some ways it was still enjoyable...very very small ways.

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home


My Rating: 70%

The fourth Star Trek movie, nuff said.


Plot: Shortly after defying Starfleet Command in order to rescue Spock, the exiled former crew members of the USS Enterprise begin to come back to Earth to face their charges (except for Saavik for some reason.) But along the way, a mysterious probe that sends out a signal disabling any electronic thing in it's path, heads to Earth with the intention to destroy it. Spock finds out that the only way to communicate with the probe and stop it from destroying Earth is to find some humpback whales which are extinct in the 23rd century. So Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Uhura, Chekhov, Sulu, and Scotty go back in time to the year 1986 to bring back two humpback whales in order to save Earth.


Now this was no Wrath of Kahn, but it's still a rather enjoyable film. There was no action at all but in a way making this particular kind of film worked in the idea of keeping things like they were in the original series. So in this case they've done it by having the former members of the USS Enterprise once again go back in time (or go to a planet that just happens to be inhabited with a culture exactly like one from the past.) So while there was no big space fighting or...really being in space a whole lot to begin with, it still became a very cute comedy to enjoy.


Actors/Characters
William Shatner/Admiral James T. Kirk: Kirk did a pretty good job.
Leonard Nimoy/Spock: I kinda like how they set up Spock in this movie. I mean I didn't like how he didn't remember everything from before he died, but it still was cute how he was reacting to the things he saw in the year 1986.
DeForest Kelley/Leonard McCoy: Well McCoy was the same as ever. Yapping at Spock about his logic and all that. I liked how he was going crazy at the hospital with what doctors did back then compared to the 23rd century.
Catherine Hicks/Dr Gillian Taylor: She was a nice character to put in during the events of the film.

Music: The music was nice. nothing noticable aside from the theme music but it was nice.


Editing: *shrugs* good editing, nothing special.

And that's my review for Star Trek IV: It was not the best of the series but it still was a nice film that kept the series true to what it's been since the original series.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Star Trek III: The Search for Spcok

My Rating: 80%

Now we're on to one of the few good third movies. And we're also about halfway there with the movies I have to watch before moving on to the next TV series. So let's move on to the third Star Trek movie which is also the first of the franchise that Leonard Nimoy has actually directed. (yeah I know.  how about that.)


Plot: Shortly after the defeat of Kahn and the death of Spock, the damaged Enterprise flies back to Earth for repairs. But along the way, McCoy begins to act strangely and becomes detained. Later Spock's father, Sarek comes to Kirk over the belief that Kirk has Spock's katra (his spirit). But they later find out that it's McCoy who has Spock's katra which is why he has been acting strangely. Meanwhile, as Saavik and David explore the Genesis planet, they get captured by a Klingon ship lead by Commander Kruge. 

This wasn't as good as Wrath of Kahn but I still enjoyed it. Nice action, good plot, the only thing I didn't like was David and the Enterprise's part in the film. But in a way, the ending kinda made up for that.

Acting/Characters:
William Shatner/Admiral James T. Kirk: He did good. Just was being good ol' Kirk.
DeForest Kelley/Leonard McCoy: I liked how this was a little bit of a change for McCoy considering how he shows that he really missed Spock and starts to show more that he really found Spock his friend.
Christopher Lloyd/Commander Kruge: This character was a little harder to review fairly because...well...I'd be lying if I said I wasn't shocked when the intro to this movie reviled that Christopher Lloyd was going to be in this movie. I mean I know this actor a fair bit from the Back to the Future trilogy, Who framed Roger Rabbit, and Angels in the Outfield. And finding out that he has performed as a main villain to a Star Trek film, and a Klingon to boot...that's just messed up. I mean too me, that's like next thing you know, there'll be something in Star Wars where he's the main Sith Lord to the story...and his character's a Sith pure-blood on top of that (if you don't know what I mean, that's okay. It's just something I know from the Star Wars Expanded Universe.)  But anyway, Lloyd turned out to give a fairly decent villain so it turned out alright with Lloyd getting in the picture when it comes to Star Trek.



Music: Music was nice.



Editing: They did a nice job on the editing.



And that's my review for Star Trek III: The Search for Spock. It was a nice film and a good way to tell the story that it was particularly telling.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

My Rating: 90%

Oh. my. gosh. I am so relived to have finally seen this particular Star Trek film. I already unfortunately found out what happens at the end and from there have been trying to avoid knowing any other thing about it from skipping a scene from this film on a list from a Nostalgia Critic video, to needing to plug my ears whenever my Ethics class had to say something that had to do with Spock's saying "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Now I can sigh in relief and enjoy this film finally knowing what everyone's talking about when it comes to it.

Plot: Around the end of season one of the original Star Trek series, The Enterprise encountered some super criminals lead by Kahn who Kirk eventually exiled on the planet Ceti Alpha V. 15 years after that, another Federation ship; the USS Reliant, is searching for lifeless planets.Tthey come across Ceti Alpha V (believing it's Ceti Alpha VI) where the captain and Commander Chekov are captured by Kahn who uses them to aid his attempt to get his revenge on Kirk.

Better. Much, much better. The story was set up better, the character development was much stronger, and it became more complex with it's introductions, to much more interesting new characters than what they gave us in the first film. I mean you have a female Vulcan, you have one of Kirk's old flames and her son who you begin to like more as the movie goes on. Plus the effects were better and there was way more action. Anything else I won't give away but still, this was a really good film.

Actors/Characters:
William Shatner/Admiral James T. Kirk: Now this was WAY better on Shatner's part. Less of the weird behaviors from the first film and way more of the Kirk we all know and love and more.
Leonard Nimoy/Spock: I really enjoyed what they had for this character. I can't really explain why but in a way that's for the best that his part in the movie kinda speaks for itself. 
Deforest Kelley/ Leonard McCoy: Well...he was McCoy.
Ricardo Montalban/ Kahn: So THIS is the Kahn I've been hearing about...interesting. I wonder how I'm going to view him the next time I watch the second or third Spy Kids movies. He did a really good job with his acting in showing this guy who really desired his revenge no matter the cost. In a way I'm a little bummed that he's not in any other movies since I've kept hearing about him basically being the Darth Vader to Kirk's Luke Skywalker or the Joker to his Batman or Megatron to his Optimus Prime. But I've heard something about the next film containing this character so if that's the case, here's to that film and to the actor that's going to try to fill Montalban's shoes in being the evil, *Kirk's voice* KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!

   
Music: much more enjoyable. especially since they played a little bit of the theme song to the franchise which- like I said -  was a little dumb to have been left out in the first film.
Editing: Better.


And that's my review for Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. As I keep saying, it is so much better than what Motion Picture had to offer. If you want a better idea at it, watch and enjoy the darn film yourself.

Star Trek- The Motion Picture (1979)

My Rating: 60%


Well guys, I finally made it.  I'm currently going through the whole star trek franchise by year. I've been trying to go through the original series and the animated series for over a year now while trying to watch other stuff and take care of everything else going on in my life, and now I'm finally done and I'm set with watching the first five movies before movie on to The Next Generation series. so last Saturday I borrowed the movies from my boss who is a huge Star Trek fan - with the promise that I make sure they don't get a scratch. So now I finally understand a whole bunch of the stuff I keep hearing that have to do with movies. So without further ado, here's my review for the first movie, Star Trek: The Motion Picture



Plot: this is set about some time after the five year mission to explore strange new worlds from the crew of the USS Enterprise. Kirk has become an Admiral, Spock has resigned from Starfleet and has been working on becoming a disciple of Kolinahr, and McCoy...I'm not sure but I think he just reigned too. But the band comes back together on the Enterprise when they try to stop a mysterious, massive cloud of energy heading for Earth.

This was...an okay film. not the best. My big problem was that everything was going extremely slow. Like things did speed up after Spock started joining the others on the mission, where afterwords I only remember one or two other scenes that seemed to take forever. The slowest scene I hated the most was Kirk and Scotty flying around just to look at the Enterprise. I mean seriously, there weren't even a lot of shots through most of that scene were you even get a good look at the Enterprise. I mean it works in the extent of just keeping the audience, Kirk and Scotty excited, but they took it way too far. The other problem was that the plot turned out to be pretty close to the plot of an original series episode "The Changeling" but at the same time I really liked the plot still because this story turned out to be much more interesting.  But what definitely helped the film was that it generally stayed very true to what Star Trek had so far been during this time. And for the most part, we still had our lovable characters exactly the way we like them from Uhura to Spock.


Acting/Characters:
William Shatner/Admiral James T. Kirk: My feeling is... mixed with Shatner's performance. In one way, he was being just the Kirk I currently know well from the original and animated series, yet in another he's giving Kirk a slight weird change of how he behaves, and not really in a good way.
Leonard Nimoy/Spock: ummm...he was Spock and I like that.
Defrorest Kelly/Leonard McCoy: Well he was McCoy just the way we love him. I didn't like how I couldn't realize he was there right away though. You see he first comes into this film with this big bushy beard and I didn't know it was him until I heard him yapping the way he usually yaps and from there I went "wait, that's McCOY!?!?!?!" I mean when it comes to the first movie and all, how are we suppose to be all excited to see him again the first time watching this movie when we don't even know he's there until right as he's talking?



Music: The music was okay, but I didn't really like how there wasn't any point where they played any original star trek music. That just doesn't make sense to make a movie of Star Trek without even playing a single bit of original Star Trek music.

Editing: Yeah I wasn't that impressed with the editing considering of coarse that the movie was way too slow and there was a moment when the Enterprise was launching where the movie just took seven seconds to show a guy trying to get through an electronic, closing door for no reason.


And that's my review for Star Trek- The Motion Picture. It's still enjoyable in terms of how they remained loyal to the characters and the all around general concept to the franchise. But it still was way too long with it having a lot of things it didn't need at all.

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Oliver & Company (1988)

My Rating: 80%

I still roughly remember a bunch of trailers to this film from some of the VHS copies of the Disney films we had during my childhood. And even though it was years ago since it was already out. I do remember something about seeing it in a theater with my family around age...either 3 or 4...5 tops. I may have seen it a couple of other times over the years but it was around this year when I finally borrowed it from the library and watched it a couple of times so that I'm all set to write my review to it. It took months to finally get on with writing it after seeing it, but better late than never. So without further ado, here's Disney review # 22: Oliver & Company

Plot: Based on Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens, the movie is set in New York where an little orphaned kitten is left alone after his fellow kittens are adopted by passerby. He comes across a dog named Dodger who helps him steal hot dogs from a hot dog vendor. Dodger flees without giving the kitten his share but Oliver tracks him down to meet Dodgers group of dogs and his pickpocket owner Fagin who after a while give him a warm welcome. The next day the group and the kitten are trying to get money for Fagin to payback a loan shark named Sykes. Things don't go well after trying to break down a limousine and the kitten is caught by a young girl named Jenny and her butler Winston who takes him to her home and gives him the name Oliver.

I enjoyed this movie for the most part. The characters are funny, there are some good songs, it just was a nice film all around.

Characters:
Oliver: Oliver was good. He definitely was a Disney version of the character Oliver from Oliver Twist.
Dodger: Now Dodger I liked. He was pretty cool and it's really interesting that he was voiced by Billy Joel.
Tito: Tito was very funny.  we was totally the comic relief of the film.
Sykes: He was a pretty nice villain.

Music: "Once Upon a Time in New York City" and "Good Company" were nice. But "Why should I worry" was definitely the best song in the film.

And that's my review for Oliver & Company.

Friday, November 25, 2011

The Three Caballeros (1944)

My Rating: 50%

To answer your question as to whether or not this is a sequel to Saludos Amigos, it isn't. Though I agree that in a way it feels like it is. I mean it's roughly taking off where they left off from that film with telling stories about other countries and Donald's time with his friend Jose. But apparently it's not a sequel. So now that we have that pointed out, let's get on with Disney review # 21: The Three Caballeros

Plot; It's Donald Duck's Birthday and he's been given a whole bunch of presents that each start with a story. As the film goes on, we once again meet José Carioca and come across a new character named Panchito Pistoles and so the trio forms the Three Caballeros.

Now this one I didn't really care for. It's not that it was a really bad movie despite that I'm giving it a  50%. But it's just that like Saludos Amigos, it's not really my kind of film. Which made it - for the most part - boring. A lot of the stories where okay and it was still a little interesting in terms of how they intend to educate us. I do personally like watching Donald and his friends actually forming the Three Caballeros because I wondered what it was all about with there being something about Donald hanging out with two other birds wearing sombreros. But what I really hated was the very end was right after Donald gets kissed a bunch of times, the rest of the movies is nothing but a sort of "the Pink Elephants on Parade"  moment or a mind f*ck moment that mostly are all these weird scenes and stuff that usually have to do with Donald having to chase some chick that's appearing in whatever scene is coming up. I really didn't like because it was boring and it did sorta mess with my head which is the point to a mind f*ck but still. 

Music: I really didn't care for anything aside from the actual song The Three Caballeros.

And that's my review for The Three Caballeros. It's not a really bad movie, I mean if you do like it, that's excellent, but considering that it's not my kind of film like Saludos Amigos and adding to the mind f*ck at the end, it's no Disney movie I would ever want to see again.

Saludos Amigos (1942)

My Rating: 70%


Without much introduction here's Disney review # 20: Saludos Amigos.


Plot: This film is split into four segments based on the travels of the Disney artists of at this time.

Lake Titicaca: Donald Duck explores the sights and people of Lake Titicaca
Perdo: a little plane from Chile goes on an adventure to collect the mail to and from Mendoza

El Gaucho Goofy: Goofy as an American Cowboy travels to the Argentine Pampas.
Aquarela do Barsil: the film ends with Donald Duck befriending a new character named Jose Carioca

Now The problem for me with this film is that it's not really my kind of film in any way whatsoever. but that doesn't make it any less interesting in terms of that fact that Disney has made one of it's animated films as a way to show us foreign countries with our beloved characters. The stories where nice. nothing super original but it's still nice. I think the best parts were really just anything with Donald and Goofy because...well...it's Donald and Goofy.

Music: It was nice. I know I'm saying that probably too often with this review but still, there was nothing that really stood out as really good or super bad.

And that's my review of Saludos Amigos. It's an okay films that's a nice way to know a little bit about other countries and to see more of Donald and Goofy, the rest is probably best understood if you see it for yourself.

The Great Mouse Detective (1986)

My Rating: 70%

Well fellas, It's been some time since my last Disney review for my Disney theatrical animated feature films marathon. But considering that I intended to finish it and make the last review to it my 200th review long before Christmas, it's high time I get get right back on track to the marathon and start with a movie I wondered for many years how it is after repeatedly seeing a trailer to it from when I had a VHS copy of 101 Dalmatians. So without further ado, this is Disney review # 19: The Great Mouse Detective.

Plot: This is based on the book series: Basil of Baker Street (yeah didn't see that coming.) Toymaker Hiram Flaversham is celebrating his young daughter Olivia's birthday when a crippled bat with a peg leg named Fidget kidnaps him leaving his daughter alone and searching for him. Eventually she comes across a mouse named  Dr. Dawson who helps her find Basil of Baker Street to find her father. When they find him and tell him what happened, Basil tells them that Fidget is working for the evil Professor Ratigan whom Basil has been working for years to put behind bars. So Basil, Olivia and Dr. Dawson go on a quest to find Olivia's father and find out what evil plot Ratigan's up to.


I can't really explain why I say this in a way that makes sense to all of you. But for a fair amount of personal reasons I really wonder how I would've viewed this movie if I grew up with it as well as many of the Disney films. Now that I'm older thought all I can kinda say is...huh. Most of that that has to do with the idea to the story in general, with the fact that it sounds like Disney just decided to adapt Sherlock Holmes and turn it into a cartoon with animals. But then it turns out that they based this off an actual book series. I mean gee...a Disney animated film that's based off just a book series roughly from around that film's current time instead of a legend, fairy tale, play, or book/book series from the 19th or early 20th century (The Jungle Book, Tarzan and The Hunchback of Notre dame if you're wondering about the last one) ...didn't see that coming. And what's stranger is that they actually include Sherlock Holmes and Watson in this film. I mean they weren't main characters but still. Other than that, it was...nice. It was decently dark, the characters were good it was a little funny. But really I think this is more or less just another one of those movies where the villain steals the show hands down. (which I will get to) which isn't really a bad thing but I'm sure that's not what they were aiming for. 


Characters:
Basil: He was nice...I guess. There's nothing really super positive to say about him since I never grew up with him, but he certainly wasn't terrible. He was fun, smart, witty...but  the only down was that his weakness was pride. Not the best weakness to have. And it's interesting how much he really is a mouse version of Sherlock Holmes with things like doing all these experiments and actually saying "Elementary my dear Dawson" about two-ish...maybe three-ish times. 
Dawson: He was nice. A decent, cartoon mouse adaption to Watson.
Professor Ratigan: like I said, this one of those movies where the villain steals the show. Ratigan had this unique way from how the moves, how he talks, how he tries to control his emotions, and how he especially loves every. single. minute. of being evil that made him a really cool villain. And his song helped point that out with how his minions talked about all his evil deeds such as drowning widows and orphans. I'm really curious as to how the Professor Ratigan from both this movie and the book series is similar to this so called Professor Moriarty from Sherlock Holmes that we're soon to learn more about in Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. So yeah. Good job on the villain.
Hiram Flaversham: there's nothing to really say about this character. I just want to say that it's interesting that Alan Young (the voice actor to this character) has done something voice acting wise in Disney that's not just being Scrooge McDuck.
Toby: funny dog. nuff said.

Music: It was okay. the songs were nothing special aside from "The World's Greatest Criminal Mind". And I really did like the music in the beginning of the Big Ben fight. It really worked to set things at a really dark mood.


And that's my review for the Great Mouse Detective. It's a decent film that's nothing extraordinary outside of the villain.