facebook_twitter

Gavin Grades The Movies


Puss In Boots

by Gavin , posted Nov 7 2011 8:24AM
The last time I enjoyed a Shrek movie was in 2004 when the second one came out.  Ever since then it was Shrek overload and the franchise was toast in my opinion.  When I saw that they were making a Puss in Boots spinoff from the series, I groaned out loud in the theater and literally screamed out, “Dear Lord, let it go!  Stop trying to squeeze blood from this stone!”  And that’s from a cat lover too!  Although Dreamworks has made some very quality animated movies in the past, I had rock-bottom expectations for this movie and perhaps that’s one of the reasons why I enjoyed it as much as I did.

Yes, it’s true that Antonio Banderas is back voicing the titular character, but aside from that, there is nothing that links this film to the Shrek movies.  That might be a good thing.  It was almost as if the makers of Puss in Boots know full-well that the Shrek movies have run their course and making those characters show up again would be a mistake.  So what we’re left with is a totally separate movie about the origin of Puss in Boots.

Joining him in this new adventure is a fellow feline named Kitty Soft Paws and Humpty Dumpty; voiced by Selma Hayek (Dogma, From Dusk Till Dawn) and Zach Galifianakis (The Hangover films).  The three of them are on a mission to redeem their reputations among the citizens of their hometown by stealing the Golden Goose from the Giant at the top of the beanstalk.  We have all the makings of a fun (albeit familiar) adventure story though storybook land, but the action is quite lopsided with very few and disappointing sequences rounding out the ending.

Luckily, the film is funny enough to have that error keep you from being bored.  The same writing team are back with the same style of adult innuendo that made the first two Shrek films so enjoyable.  Unfortunately, there aren’t any characters that are as likable as Donkey and Shrek, but the cuteness of Puss and Kitty are adorable enough to offer a pass.

The animation in the film is also well done enough to keep you from glancing down at your watch.  It might be some of the best animation that Dreamworks has put out since How To Train Your Dragon.  The colors are vibrant and human characters look more realistic than ever.  (I can’t comment on the 3D aspect of it since it wasn’t offered when I saw it.)

There were some pleasant surprises in Puss in Boots that I didn’t expect.  First was that it was produced by director/writer Guellermo Del Toro (Pan’s Labyrinth, The Devil’s Backbone) and he voiced one of the minor characters too.  It seems as if Del Toro is getting involved in more and more family animation entertainment, which is quite a departure from his fantastical horror that he does so well.  Another hidden enjoyment was the soundtrack.  The Shrek films also feature great songs by talented artists that you’d normally not pick for a children’s movie and Puss in Boots is no exception.  The end credits feature a great song by Lady Gaga and the movie features several selections by the very talented Rodrigo y Gabriella.

Director Chris Miller should be pleased with himself for what he created in Puss in Boots.  Sure he may be the guy that directed the Shrek films into the ground and over the shark, and Puss in Boots isn’t good enough to forgive him for that; but it’s enjoyable enough that I would consider it a good start…as long as I don’t see a Puss in Boots 2 coming soon.
Puss in Boots  (Rated PG )
Gavin Grade: B

 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Topics : Entertainment_Culture
Social :
People : Antonio Banderas, Chris Miller, Gavin Grade, Guellermo Del Toro, Kitty Soft Paws, Lady Gaga, Puss, Selma Hayek, Zach Galifianakis

 

Real Steel

by Gavin , posted Oct 6 2011 4:34PM
If you were to tell me that the generations-old children's game Rock 'Em Sock 'M Robots would be turned into a movie one day and that that movie would actually be fun to watch, I wouldn't believe you.  But here we are in 2011 and Hugh Jackman has teamed up with director Shawn Levy to create a fun, family movie about giant robots that beat on each other till they piss oil and it's very effective as entertainment...but there might be a sinister reason why. Shawn Levy is the director behind some truly awful films that make lots of money.  He directed Date Night, Cheaper by the Dozen and Just Married.  But he's also the guy that made the Night at the Museum movies which were shockingly funny and awesome!  So does a higher budget and bigger FX make Levy a better director?  Apparently so. It probably didn't hurt that he has two coaches in his corner named Steven Speilberg and Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump, Back to the Future series) as two out of the WHOPPING 12 Producers on Real Steel.  Seeing their names in the opening credits gave me hope that this wouldn't be rusty crap and I was right.  The film is brightly colored and slickly put together.  It's also edgy enough that it won't lose older teens but innocent enough that tweens will dig it too.  The CGI FX are top notch and although they may not be as plentiful and bloated as Transformers, it's the subtlety  that makes them seem so much more impressive.  I also appreciate that not all the robots in the film are the work of Hollywood computers.  Yes, they went old school in some scenes and actually used giant puppets. One of the other biggest surprises of the film was in its childhood lead, the 12-year-old Dakota Goyo (Thor), who blew me away with his performance.  Not only does he have the energetic smart-ass down cold, but taps into his inner daddy issues convincingly well too.  Oh yeah, this isn't just a popcorn-chomping action movie; there's a chance you may shed a tear or two.  It depends on whether or not you buy into Jackman's completely unlikable lowlife father character deserving any of your sympathy by the end. But not so fast... There's one thing about Real Steel that needs to be said and that's because it might be downright illegal.  The script, which was penned by John Gatins (Coach Carter, Hardballs), was highway robbery.  You may feel yourself enjoying Real Steel to the fullest but get a vague sense that you've seen this before.  That's because you have.  It was called Rocky and it won Best Picture in 1976.  I know you're thinking that it's easy to compare every boxing movie to Rocky.  That's not what I'm talking about.  Real Steel is SO MUCH like Rocky that I'm shocked it's legal.  Aside from the family drama, Real Steel is about a small, junkie robot that no one believes in getting a shot at the title because of a publicity stunt.  And that's not all.  The champion that he has to fight is a big, black, strong robot named Zeus.  In case you forgot, in Rocky the small, junkie boxer gets a shot at the title against a big, black, strong champion named...wait for it...Apollo.  Same story just switching the character's name from Roman to Greek.  I won't spoil the ending for you, but let's just say that that's not where the stealing...er....I mean similarities run out. So what am I trying to say?  How about this - if you've never seen Rocky, you may think that Real Steel is a great, emotional, well-made family boxing movie that will win your heart.  If you have seen Rocky, you'll still feel that way but you will have trouble getting past the blatant ripoff.  That's why I have to give this film two grades.  One, overlooking the copyright infringement, which many people (sadly) won't care about; and Two, taking that into consideration.  Either way it's a fun, entertaining movie...because you've probably already seen it. Real Steel  (Rated PG-13) Gavin Grade: B+ and D+
 (1) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , 

 

Lion King 3D

by Gavin , posted Sep 15 2011 3:50PM
What really needs to be said about this?  It's The Lion King!  It's the best Disney movie ever made (if you don't count Pixar films).  I know that's an arguable point but when you ask most lovers of cinema what their favorite Disney film of all time is, it's usually The Lion King.  And now you can enjoy it all over again. It came out in 1994 and was part of the rebirth of the Walt Disney film company.  Sure the amusement parks were always making money, but most people don't realize how close the film company was to being sold off.  The Lion King was the most ambitious and emotional films they've made.  And now it's back on the big screen and this time it's in 3D.  What's so amazing is that Disney took a print of a movie that's 17-years-old and put it through a 3D conversion that didn't look like garbage. See, 3D is a controversial thing among film lovers.  Some love it and some think it's the devil come to destroy cinema as we know it today.  I'm somewhere in the middle.  I don't mind it as long as it's not gratuitous and done well.  Hollywood was losing money hand over fist and needed something to come along that pumped some life back into it and 3D technology was that thing.  Now studios could charge people a premium cost for a ticket and make profit back tens times faster.  However, if you're gonna charge me almost twice as much for a movie ticket, you damn well better give me almost twice-as-nice value. 3D Conversions is a four-letter word among us movie maniacs.  It means you put a print of a movie through a 3D conversion AFTER it was shot in 2D.  The two examples of this blowing up in its face and the high-water mark of 3D gauging was 2010's Clash of the Titans and Alice in Wonderland.  These looked terrible, caused migraines and had theater-goers screaming for refunds.  However The Lion King's 3D conversion looks incredible.  It makes the movie look like it was just illustrated and was made to jump off the screen. Not to mention the fact that The Lion King is a film worthy of enjoying on the big screen again.  There's a reason why it resonates so well with children and adults.  That reason is that it's based on one of the most famous stories ever told...Hamlet.  Sure there's no "To Be or Not To Be" scene in which young Simba contemplates the pros and cons of committing suicide, but it's the Cliff's Notes version as told to children.  That's brilliant and it always will be.  The young prince.  The mighty king for a father.  The jealous uncle.  The murder of brother against brother.  It's all there in gorgeous color! Plus how can you forget the music?  The Lion King has one of the most impressive musical scores of all the Disney movies, which is no easy task.  How can you avoid getting goosebumps at the final thunderous THUMP at the end of "The Circle of Life" opening sequence or not bop your head to "Hakuna Matata?"  I would hope that seeing it again on the big screen would inspire you to sing out loud with your favorite song, shed tears at the stampede scene, and introduce a whole new generation to the film that literally makes you celebrate being alive. The Lion King 3D  (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A+
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , 

 

The Smurfs

by Gavin , posted Aug 3 2011 9:10PM
In 1981, Saturday morning cartoons were introduced to a 1958 comic strip called The Smurfs.  It was quirky, weird, innocent and from Belgium.  Despite all the people saying it would never work, it still did.  In fact, The Smurfs ran as a cartoon on Saturday mornings for 8 more years and generated hundreds of millions of dollars in merchandise.  So is it that crazy to think that a feature length, live-action movie based on the same characters would still work 22 years after the show was canceled?  The people at Columbia Pictures didn't think so, but good God were they wrong. Yes it's true that director Michael Bay took another '80s Saturday morning cartoon, Transformers, and created a juggernaut franchise.  That does not mean that it will work every time.  Especially when you ignore what made Transformers so successful and that was to make it appeal to the adults that loved it as kids.  The Smurfs is a PG-rated piece of dribble that insults the intelligence of adults who see it for nostalgia and bores the children that don't know it at all. Even talented performers like Hank Azaria (The Simpsons, The Birdcage) and Neil Patrick Harris (How I Met Your Mother) can't pump life into this.  In fact, I was embarrassed for them while watching it.  Especially for Azaria who is one of the greatest comedic character actors out there right now.  He gave his performance as the villainous wizard Gargamel the best he possibly could but it overshoots campy and just comes across desperate. The biggest problem comes from hiring Raja Gosnell to direct it.  This man hasn't made a good movie yet and seems to have the bargain bin DVD movie at Walmart down pretty good.  He's the disaster that's given us films like Scooby Doo, Beverly Hills Chihuahua and Big Momma's House.  Congrats Mr. Gosnell, because you've added another travesty to your catalog of crap cinema. The Smurfs is a rotten script with bad voice acting from some very talented people.  Even people like the legendary Jonathan Winters (It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World), Alan Cumming (X-Men 2), Fred Armisen (NBC's SNL, Anchorman) and Anton Yelchin (Star Trek, Fright Night) couldn't help it.  It almost seems like an insult too that they had to perform besides George Lopez and Katy Perry...and yes, they both suck as much as you think they would. The jokes in the film are awful and too on-the-nose even for the 7-year-old I brought with me.  I suppose the writers thought it was edgy and funny to replace a swear word with the word "smurf" but after you hear it every 5 minutes or so, it just makes you think the movie is smurfing horrible.  The best thing The Smurfs has going for it is the infectious theme song they sing over and over and over again.  At least hearing that brought back to the surface some pleasant childhood memories...just too bad they were then sullied by this movie. The Smurfs (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: F
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , , , 

 

Cars 2

by Gavin , posted Jun 22 2011 5:41PM
There is only one movie studio out there that is pitching a perfect game and that's Pixar.  All of their films have been huge financial hits and several have won Oscars.  All of them have over a 90% on RottenTomatoes.com...all of them except one - Cars.  So why would they select that one for a sequel?  The reason is simple, it's Disney's bread and butter for selling merchandise to boys.  So much so that Disneyland is building an entire land dedicated to Cars that opens next year.  So, I get it.  But the geniuses at Pixar know that in order to not sully their sterling reputation, they can't just make a sequel for the sake of marketing; they need to reinvent it.  They did not accomplish that with Cars 2 though. My issues with the Cars series really kind of shows my colors as a movie snob.  I enjoy ALL of the Pixar movies, but Cars is certainly my least favorite.  The reason why is because I consider it to be the least imaginative and original of their pedigree.  Every single one of the Pixar movies involve these fantastical characters that have crazy adventures.  But you buy into all of them as an audience member because even when they involve monsters, talking toys or talking fish, they still show how those fantasy characters exist in a real world.  They show how they interact with humans and make it believable.  Cars doesn't do that.  It's our world, but with zero humans and cars just exist without us.  It's weird and also kept me from really enjoying them.  That, and I hate NASCAR. But Cars 2, just like Toy Story 3, isn't simply a repackaging of the original in a crapfest-of-a-sequel.  They did a decent job of making it its own film with a totally new story.  In Cars 2, that story is a "spy thriller."  Clever, especially when you employee the magnificent Michael Caine (The Dark Knight, Inception) as one of the new characters - a super spy named Finn McMissile.  The action is great and thrilling at times no matter what your age is.  There's racing, but very little, which is totally fine with me.  The animation in the film is also one of the highlights.  It's worth the extra dough for 3D and the colors and clarity is better than any computer animated film I've ever seen. The problems started when I realized that Lightening McQueen, who's voiced by Owen Wilson, is not the star of this one.  Sadly, it's his dim-witted counter part, Tow Mater, voiced by Larry the Cable Guy and the only funny thing he's ever done.  I enjoyed Larry the Cable Guy in Cars but he's like Russell Brand; he's great as a supporting character but annoying and trying as a lead. Cars 2 is not a bad movie.  It's good.  There are vast sequences that made me laugh out loud, mostly brought on by another new Italian character voiced by the awesome John Turturro (Big Lebowski, Transformers) in one of the best performances he's had in years.  It also has a heartwarming montage set to Weezer (my favorite band) doing a cover of The Cars...again with the cleverness!  I think the victim here is Pixar itself.  They have raised the bar so high with their films that we don't expect another animated movie for kids; we expect art.  Toy Story 3 was the best movie of 2010 and made adults weep buckets.  The first 10 minutes of Up was more of a sweeping romance than anything that came out in the last decade.  The final scene of Monsters Inc. is still one of the best, most emotional endings I've ever seen.  Cars 2, though, is just slightly above another animated movie for kids.  And that's kind of upsetting. Cars 2  (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: B
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , 

 

Kung Fu Panda 2

by Gavin , posted May 25 2011 8:43PM
In 2008, when Kung Fu Panda came out, I remember saying that it looked like one of the worst children's movies I ever saw.  It looked insulting to Asians, a mere merchandising vehicle, and annoy since it was just as we started to get over-saturated with Jack Black.  Despite many people telling me that it's good and that I would enjoy it, I have yet to sit down and watch it.  So I brought my co-host Katie's 7-year-old daughter with me to the screening so that she could fill me in on what I needed to know from the first one.  Since 7-year-olds can't really do a great job of recounting something like a movie from three years ago with great detail, I didn't learn too much; however that had no effect on the fact that I enjoyed its sequel immensely! Since I never saw the first one I can't tell you if this picks up where the last one left off.  What I can tell you is that it gets off to a relatively slow beginning.  There isn't anything particularly funny or action-packed until you're almost a third of the way into the film, which is about the original Kung Fu crew going to a far-off city to stop an evil peacock from destroying all of Asia.  But once the plot picks up and the adventure begins it's nothing but a fun, exciting ball that keeps building in size and speed. I know that the tradition for animated movies is to pad them with a ton of celebrity voices since doing voice work is easy, quick and it's a way to get big names to endorse your silly kid movie but this is an impressive pedigree!  Returning from the first besides Black is Angelina Jolie, Seth Rogen, Jackie Chan, Dustin Hoffman and the always funny David Cross (Men in Black II, HBO's Mr. Show).  The list gets even better with new characters for the sequel voiced by Gary Oldman (JFK, the Harry Potter series), Jean-Claude Van Damme (JCVD, Bloodsport) and Michelle Yeoh (Sunshine, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon).  These are all small, backseat performances compared to Black's but that's totally fine when you look at the subtly of the whole picture.  The only standout show-stealer is Gary Oldman who plays the villainous peacock named Lord Shen.  He rarely gives a bad performance, even when he's bad movies like Red Riding Hood, and has a never ending rolodex of character voices he can do to make you go "That was Gary Oldman?!?" when the credits roll. To me, the most impressive thing about this movie was how the action gave me goosebumps and the ending gave me tears.  This is probably the best animated film since Toy Story 3 and certainly the one with the most heart.  There are scenes in the movie where the action is so well executed and directed by comic book nerd Jennifer Yuh (Kung Fu Panda, Spawn) that you're delivered the same emotion you get from watching a great action sequence from an adult, live-action film.  Her use of slow motion as a homage to other kung fu films is not on-the-nose or pandering, it actually makes the scenes better.  In addition to that, it builds to an emotional climax that impressed me to the point where I hid a tear or two behind my 3D glasses. Kung Fu Panda 2 is so good that it makes me feel foolish that I ever said those things about the original.  I plan on watching the first one as soon as I can, but if I had to guess, Kung Fu Panda 2 has done what few movies, whether they're for kids or adults, can pull off...it's better than the original!  Plus it did it with the uphill battle of having Jack Black in it. Kung Fu Panda 2 (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A-
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 

 

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules

by Gavin , posted Mar 24 2011 8:53PM
In an effort not to come across creepy, I try to bring friend's kids along when I go to screenings of movies intended for them since I have don't have any of my own.  It also helps me get an idea how they enjoyed it.  I did not do this for the first Diary of a Wimpy Kid which came out last year.  I really enjoyed the first one and thought that, besides being very funny, it worked on multiple levels.  The first being that it appealed to the 11 and Under crowd that was preparing to go into middle school; a time period of a kid's life that seems to get overlooked by Hollywood.  The second being that it appealed to adults in that it truly conveyed what it was like to be a scared poopless kid going into the dreaded 6th grade.  But because I didn't have a kid with me at the time, I didn't know if children would find the movie as entertaining as I did.  This time around I brought Katie, my co-host's, 7-year-old daughter.  She and I sat in a packed theater and laughed our asses off from beginning to end; good to know it's not just me. Although we have a new director in David Bowers (Astro Boy), the same cast is all back.  Such a relief too because beside the comedic brilliance of the parents who are played by Rachel Harris (The Hangover, Best in Show) and Steve Zahn (Sunshine Cleaning, Strange Wilderness), all the same kids are back too. This time around the film doesn't focus on main character Greg, played by Zachary Gordon (National Treasure, Diary of a Wimpy Kid) and his obsession to be popular in school.  Now we have a more mature and timeless story about brothers getting along.  His older high school brother Rodrick is played even better than the first one by Devon Bostick (Saw VI, Land of the Dead).  These two are fantastic together in scenes that had the whole theater in a steady, rolling chuckle.  Not to mention that the supporting child actors that fill out the rest of the film are all equally hilarious. A common complaint I hear is that there aren't films for families to enjoy together anymore.  I don't really agree with that considering the quality films that Pixar puts out.  But when it comes to live action, nothing could be more true.  But now we have the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series to enjoy together.  The quirky tone of a family dealing with odd and familiar situations reminds me a lot of TV shows like Malcom in the Middle or The Adventures of Pete & Pete.  It's even more impressive that the series is trending in a way that makes me think the films will get better and better.  In a quagmire of rotten, over-the-top Disney Channel garbage, it's refreshing to see a live action children's film that this adult doesn't feel wimpy saying he loved it and looks forward to seeing it again. Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , 

 

Rango

by Gavin , posted Mar 3 2011 5:50PM
When the first Pirates of the Caribbean came out I read an interview with Johnny Depp and he said that he "wanted to do a movie his kids could watch for once."  Seems like they've had quite the grip on him because he hasn't done many "adult" films since.  Rango is by far his most childish, but since he put his trust in the hands of director Gore Verbinski (the Pirates films, The Ring) it still comes across very enjoyable for adults.  Rango is a classic Western story that's been done and done again.  The outsider comes to a new town, is mistaken for being braver than he is, pretends until real danger shows up, but in the end is actually as brave as he portrayed.  Think of The Three Amigos but with only one Amigo and everyone is an animal.  The cliche, uonoringal story is something that can be overlooked due to how original everything else is.  This is a children's movie about talking animals that would only look more realistic if you used actual talking animals.  I consider Verbinski a very talented director and was worried when I saw him doing an animated film fearing that his vision and signature look would get lost.  Nope.  Not one bit.  Rango is every much a Gore Verbinski film as anything else he's done.  Part of that is due to the animation being captured from the actual actors movements filming the scenes, just like the did for Avatar.  Plus the decision to make the creatures dirty, wounded and jarringly realistic was risky and brilliant.  That may prove to be too unnerving for some small kids - be warned.  They are as far removed from the traditional Disney talking animals as I've ever seen.  But that nod to realism works incredibly well for the film.  The other aspect that makes the film so good is the choice of casting.  The voice work of Isla Fisher (Wedding Crashers), Abigail Bresslin (Zombieland), Ned Beatty (Toy Story 3), Bill Nighy (Pirates of the Caribbean 2) and Ray Winstone (The Departed) is superb!  Everyone in the film committed to their part and treated it like they were performing for adults.  You don't get the impression from any of the performances that they're pandering to kids.  On a side note, they did pander to people like me as there is a reference to Hunter S. Thompson and his characters from Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas...but me and one other guy were the only ones laughing our asses off at that.  You won't hear me say this too often but Rango would have been better in 3D.  I think animation is the only genre that really impresses in 3D and this world is so rich with color and action that it seemed like a waste to not offer an extra dimension.  I hope that Johnny Depp considers Rango as much of a success as I do and will go back to making movies for grown-ups again.  We miss him in R-rated craziness. Rango (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: B+
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , 

 

Tangled

by Gavin , posted Nov 24 2010 11:09AM
When The Princess and The Frog came out last year, there was a trailer for this movie before it and it almost appeared that Disney was going to keep this classic 2D animation of the classic fairytale musical stories going.  You know, like The Little Mermaid, The Lion King, Aladdin and Beauty and The Beast.  I thought The Princess and The Frog was marvelous and just as worthy to stand among those other Disney classics.  But then I saw that Tangled was going to be computer animated and...even worse...released in 3D!  I wrote this film off as another crappy Disney movie that could've been released by any other studio before I even saw it.  I was wrong.  I enjoyed this movie SO MUCH more than I thought I would.  First off, the computer animation is made to look (almost in tribute too) the 2D animation.  Second, the 3D effects are fun but not too gimicky to make me think I'm in an amusement park.  But most importantly, this is a classic Disney movie in every sense.  It's a musical with great songs.  It's fun and colorful.  It has a hilarious script and is directed well by a team of guys who worked on Bolt, which was far from traditional Disney.  It follows the formula for a successful Disney film to the finest point: a princess who's in trouble but is still tough, a charming hero that doesn't like her at first, talking (or not talking) animal friends that steal the show with their human emotions, an evil villain that has one, clear goal, unlikely friends the two main characters meet along the way, love that comes from their shared expierence and songs, action and comedy to wrap it all up.  Put it all in the pot, bring it to a slow boil and you've got a successful Disney film.  Sure they're all the same but remember that the target audience is children; the more you can keep it familiar to them, the more they'll dig it.  The whole thing is wonderfully acted by the shockingly good team of Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi (ABC's Chuck), who can actually sing pretty well.  There are times when you're watching Tangled that you forget that it's computer animated and, for me, that's what really won me over as a fan.  I guess I just need to come to terms with the fact that the classic 2D animation might be dead.  Although The Princess and The Frog was a critical success, it was considered a box office failure and I suppose that's because kids want to see 2D animation as much as adults want to see Black and White films.  But as long as Disney still pays homage to the old school, I can learn to love the new school. Tangled (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A-
 (1) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , 

 

Megamind

by Gavin , posted Nov 4 2010 10:05PM
These 3D computer animated movies are a really risky gamble for consumers.  You have a 50/50 shot at seeing something that's worth your money usually, but when the movie is in 3D and the ticket price could be as much as $15 a person, you damn well better deliver the goods or you're gonna have some really pissed off eyes behind the shaded specs in the theater.  Megamind stars the voices of Will Ferrel, Brad Pitt, Tina Fey, David Cross (Mr. Show, Arrested Development) and Jonah Hill.  Yeah, Brad Pitt doesn't really fit in that comedic lineup but he holds his own considering that his role of the heroic Metro Man isn't meant to be all that funny.  In fact the movie isn't really meant to be anyone's except for Ferrel who plays the titular Megamind, the dastardly villain.  The movie is from the director who did Madagascar and the production team behind Kung Fu Panda and How to Train Your Dragon.  The animation is okay and it's full of cheap 3D tricks that are usually reserved for a theme park, but what saves this movie is the fairly original story mixed with the comedic timing of Ferrel and Cross.  To my knowledge, Will Ferrel hasn't done any voice work prior to this but I hope he makes another go of it because he's terrific at it.  David Cross plays Minion, who is Megamind's henchman.  Almost half the scenes in the film are done with those two as the subjects and the jokes are subtle and quick.  The animation aids the comedy at times but also stifles it by being...well, animated.  There are some animated movies that are so funny that I consider them some of the best comedies of the year they came out; such as the original Shrek, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Aladdin to name a few.  But, and perhaps it's the lack of inner child in me, I can't ever enjoy a comedic cartoon as fully as I would if it was life action because of that.  So in that respect, when an animated movie makes me laugh pretty hard, I feel it deserves the respect that its earned.  However with Megamind, the scenes that don't involve those two are still fun, but just barely.  Tina Fey is a very funny actress but she's given no funny scenes.  Jonah Hill plays his usual fat doofus and stretches his thin threads of comedy to the breaking point.  And Brad Pitt seems kind of out of place in this and rather luke warm in the role.  The story is relatively good, playing off the lore of Superman and borrowing from other superhero stories.  But it's nothing that will blow your socks off.  Your kids will like it and you'll love half the film and like the other half.  Let me know when Megamind the live action, PG-13 version comes out and I'm sure I'll fully love it then. Megamind (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: B-
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , 

 

Toy Story 3

by Gavin , posted Jun 17 2010 6:18PM
Can you believe that it's been 15 years since Toy Story came out?!  That's an insane amount of time to pass in between segments of a trilogy.  However the company that brought us the first computer animated feature film in 1995, has finally gotten around to rounding out the story in the way that only Pixar can.  Toy Story 3 picks up in real time from when we last saw toys, Woody (Tom Hanks), Buzz (Tim Allen), Jessie (Joan Cusack) and the rest of the toys.  But time has passed by and now it's time for their boy Andy, who's now 17, go off to college.  Alone, that premise chokes up adults while making them laugh when we see the family dog Buster, who was a puppy at the end of Toy Story, has become a slow, grey senior dog.  That simple story of the passage of time turns into one of the most creative "Prison Break" films I've ever seen  It's also the best film of 2010 so far and the MOST satisfying ending to a trilogy I've ever seen in my life.  Pixar doesn't make films, in my opinion; they make pure art.  There are other children's movies that are fun and funny but nothing can even come close to a Pixar film.  This is their 11th movie and all but one (Cars) have a 90% or higher on RottenTomatoes.com and they keep getting better and better.  They do things that no other children's films can and that's touch the soul in all of us no matter what age we are.  Seeing adults and children crying together at a Pixar movie is common place, but that's fine for two reasons; one, you do much more laughing and two, it's okay to have kids feel for characters on a deeply emotional level...in fact it might even be good for them since they seem to do it so seldom anymore.  Toy Story 3 introduces us to the voice work of Ned Beatty (Deliverance) as Lots'O'Huggin' and Michael Keaton (Batman, Beetlejuice) as Ken among many other new characters.  Not all of them are good though and they put our group of friends in very dangerous situations.  It's because of that that we see some very adult themes shine through that kids won't pick up on.  We see an ending that consists of so many epic moments that the 3D glasses come in handy for hiding your tears as well as adding spectacular depth to the film.  There is a moment that deals with excepting your fate and saving your dignity that is wrapped in such symbolism that even most adults won't pick up on the masterful storytelling that went into it.  These initial endings will lead to what is ultimately a bigger theme that pulls the whole trilogy together, it hammers the feelings we all have inside, regardless of our age at the moment, for the importance of friendship and letting go of the past.    Don't get me wrong though, the film isn't all serious and full of heavy thematic elements.  There are countless scenes that had me laughing harder than any Rated-R film in the past year and excited my nerves with thrilling action that lacked in almost all live-action thrillers recently too.  What I'm trying to say is that Toy Story 3 has miraculously raised the already sky-high bar again by making not only a perfect ending to a trilogy I'm sad to see end but by making an overall perfect film.  Bravo, Pixar!  I can't wait to see what you do next. Toy Story 3 (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A+
 (3) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , 

 

How to Train Your Dragon

by Gavin , posted Mar 25 2010 2:57PM
If anyone out there still thinks that, even though it helped push the highest grossing movie of all time (Avatar) into that slot, 3D films are a fad that will soon go away; I think you're sorely mistaken.  In fact, if anything, they're just going to keep getting better and better and better.  How to Train Your Dragon is an example of that.  I thought that Avatar was the best 3D film I ever saw, but that was only because I hadn't seen How to Train Your Dragon yet.  This film is from the two guys that brought us the inexplicably popular Disney movie Lilo & Stitch.  I never understood why anyone could stand that movie, let alone enjoy it.  But after breaking away from Disney and joining the ranks of Dreamworks, they are allowed to fly higher than they ever did before...literally.  This animated movie employees half the cast of Superbad and Knocked Up, such as Jay Baruchel, Jonah Hill, and Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Craig Ferguson and Gerald Butler, who's finally allowed to use his real Scottish accent and shows that he's not such a rotten actor after all.  The film involves a group of Vikings and their daily battles with neighboring dragons until the scrawny Hiccup (voiced by Baruchel) finds out they're not so bad.  Yeah, it's predictable.  I keep reminding myself that when it comes to plots, I should consider that the target audience is about 20 years younger than me.  These are not the same genius writers of the Shrek movies or anything from Pixar; there's no clever jokes that kids laugh at but adults laugh at harder because of the subtext.  Actually there aren't many jokes in this at all, but it doesn't need them.  The story opens up to allow for some amazing action sequences that are gorgeously animated.  When they're paired up with the 3D animation and the sweepingly epic score by John Powell (the "go-to" guy for computer animated films), you've got filmmaking that takes even the most jaded of moviegoers' breath away.  What's even more impressive is the character and emotion they give to the dragons without copping out on the old trick of making them talk.  It's a brilliant move on the directors' and animators' part to make the dragons a seamless mix between domestic dogs and cats.  By showing both they hit the heartstrings of probably 85% of America.  Do I wish the plot was a little less formulaic?  Yes.  Do I wish there were some jokes written in that would entertain the adults as well as the kids?  Absolutely.  Did I still think it was a fantastically entertaining movie?  You bet your ass!  But failing to see this film in 3D will undoubtedly not give you the same enjoyment level that it gave me.  Spring for the extra $4 on a ticket and you'll know what I mean when you'll feel like the only thing missing from this film is the wind on your face as you ride on the back of your dragon too. How to Train Your Dragon (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , , 

 

Diary of a Wimpy Kid

by Gavin , posted Mar 18 2010 7:33PM
Ever since Harry Potter hit the box office, it seems like movie studios have been gobbling up as many children's book series as possible, making them into movies and keeping their fingers crossed that it turns out good enough to make gobs of money.  Usually those books involve lovable monsters, magic, talking animals and an exciting adventure.  The good news about Diary of a Wimpy Kid is that it doesn't have any of that and if the rest of the series is as wonderful as this first one, I look forward to them with the anticipation I'd have for a Summer Blockbuster.  Hard to believe that Thor Freudenthal was the same guy that directed Hotel for Dogs.  Every frame of this film oozes with quirkiness that seems like it's taken right from the Arrested Development or Malcom in the Middle playbook.  I understand that that humor doesn't appeal to everyone and is easily made ridiculous, but Diary of a Wimpy Kid is executed with talent that prevents that from happening.  I'm unfamiliar with the book series by Jeff Kinney, but this did make me want to read it.  The major reason is because it's about Middle School.  I sat in the theater and racked my brain trying to think of movies that dealt with going into Middle School and I couldn't think of any.  There are lots about Elementary School kids and an abundant saturation that deal with High School, but no Middle.  Interesting too since Middle School for me was complete Hell on earth.  There wasn't one day that passed that I didn't wish I was someone else; someone more popular.  That's exactly what this story deals with.  The main character, Greg who's decently plays Zachary Gordon (Four Christmases), is obsessed with becoming popular...what kid in 6th grade isn't?  He stops at nothing to achieve his goal either and yes, that even includes throwing his best friend Rowley, who's played by the wonderful Robert Capron (Bride Wars) under the bus to make himself a "cool kid."  Again, this is a theme that rings SO true with most people.  It was such a wonderful story that seemed to capture the weirdness and misery that is Middle School in the way that makes it funny for everyone but the main characters.  The only faces  you may or may not recognize in this film are the Greg's parents, who are Steve Zahn (Joyride, Sunshine Cleaning) and Rachel Harris (The Hangover, Best in Show).  They're fantastically funny in almost everything they do but they don't overshadow the ensemble cast, in fact everyone else is on level with them.  The film is peppered with exceptionally comedic performances from quirky kids of all shapes and sizes that really surprised me with their skill level and bravery to mock themselves.  As a former fat, little kid I know that I would never have taken my shirt off and ran around in slow motion.  I wonder what audience this movie will find though.  I understand the book series is very popular and hopefully that will be enough.  But as just a film, it seems too adult and weird for young kids and too childish for older kids.  I wonder if this children's film will end up in the cult status enjoyed by adults but panned by kids category, just like the classics The Dark Crystal, Monster House, and The Incredibles.  I guess time will tell.  But in the meantime, I suggest you take your kids to see it to find out.  And if you don't have kids, I suggest you take yourself.  It's a viciously funny reminder as to how horrible, confusing and terrifying a time Middle School can be but told in a narrative that makes laughing at it therapeutic. Diary of a Wimpy Kid (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A-
 (1) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , 

 

Tooth Fairy

by Gavin , posted Jan 21 2010 9:58PM
There are certain movies that you go into with a negative preconceived idea about, almost like a chip on your shoulder.  You sit down thinking that a movie is going to be garbage because nothing you've seen about it gives any indication otherwise.  It's the kind of movie where you almost get mad that it was even made because it's purely a money churning machine that was manufactured from assembly line type movie makers with no imagination, talent or skill put into it.  I thought that about this movie but I remembered that it was made for children.  So what I did was bring kids with me.  I sat down with my friend's 5-year-old Ryan and 7-year-old Dani and watched Tooth Fairy starring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.  Before the movie, Ryan even lost his first tooth not that long ago and was telling me how the tooth fairy came recently.  His excitement rubbed off on me a little and I was prepared to enjoy this movie through their enthusiasm.  Sometimes I hate it when my initial instinct is right.  What an awful, uninspired movie.  I'm not sure how The Rock has a successful career because he is one of the worst actors I've seen in a long time.  The movie steals the same plot almost as Tim Allen's The Santa Clause but with less jokes, less heart and less...well, plot.  I should've seen that coming since director Michael Lembeck directed The Santa Clause movies...sorry, not the good one but the other ones.  Even the special FX appear as if they were thrown together as a crude afterthought.  The script for this movie was originally written in 1992 and sat on the shelf at Fox all those years until it was taken down, brushed off and rewritten by five different guys clearly showing how little time anyone put into this.  There is a saving grace about it though and that comes in the form of a very funny supporting cast.  Julie Andrews, Billy Crystal, Seth McFarlane (Family Guy) and Stephen Merchant (BBC's The Office, Extras) save this from the pit of shame.  Billy Crystal is in the movie for only one scene and in those precious 8 minutes he delivers enough laughs to almost recommend someone see it just for that.  I feel bad for someone as comically brilliant as Stephen Merchant since he had to endure the entire movie as The Rock's fairy case worker, Tracy.  His timing, British wit and improv talent make the movie tolerable for just that alone, but it's wasted on the kids and doesn't amuse them at all.  This brings me back to my guests for the night.  Only once did I hear Ryan and Dani chuckle and as I looked at them periodically during the film I saw them growing increasingly bored.  By the end of the movie I felt bad that I invited them.  For all I know I ruined their imaginations forever and the next time Ryan looses a tooth he'll just throw it away out of fear that someone as untalented as The Rock shows up as the tooth fairy. Tooth Fairy (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: D+
 (3) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 

 

The Princess and The Frog

by Gavin , posted Dec 9 2009 9:47AM
Oh Disney!  I don't know how you did it in the past.  You used to create such wonderful movies that they would dazzle our eyes, inspire our dreams, dare children to imagine and earn Oscars.  But for some reason Disney, you got away from that.  Thank God Pixar came along and saved you from the quagmire film nightmare you built around yourself.  But as a fan of the Golden Age of Disney and an owner of those childhood dreams and imagination, I can proudly scream out, "Welcome Back Old Friend!"  The Disney Animation Studios assembled a dream team to create "The Princess and The Frog."  It's directed by Ron Clements and John Musker who are the geniuses behind "Aladdin" and "The Little Mermaid."  Then just to make sure it gets even better they get Randy Newman to write all the songs...like he's been doing for decades, and get Pixar's John Lasseter (The "Toy Story" movies, "Bug's Life," "Cars," "Up") to Produce.  I dare you to make a bad movie with them at the helm!  This film, I'm sure you've heard, is a first for creating a black Disney Princess character.  Her name is Tiana and will be one of the most loved no doubt.  But this movie has several other firsts in it that I can't say without ruining the plot.  One of those firsts was actually quite shocking.  The film takes place in New Orleans in the 1920s, an age of jazz and food...way before it was sadly destroyed, which adults will feel morose about when seeing it the way it was.  The music fits the mood of the city perfectly having each song be a different New Orleans style.  There was jazz (of course) but also gospel, zydeco, ragtime and never once feeling like a stereotype or trite caricature of the culture.  The acting is great and in true Disney fashion, it's done by mostly no-name actors, except for John Goodman, Oprah, Terrence Howard and Keith David in smaller roles.  Sure the story if formulaic (you can easily swap out Louis the Alligator and Ray the Bug in this for Timon and Pumba) but it kind of has to be because that's what we love about classic Disney films.  But what I loved the most about this movie is something that kids will only pick up on subconsciously.  Disney films have always fit the mood of the country when they were made.  "Snow White" was made during The Depression and had songs like "Whistle While You Work."  "The Little Mermaid" was made during the materialism of the 1980s and reflected that in Ariel's relentless collecting of things and selfishness "look at this stuff, isn't it neat...but I want more."  This film is no different and it's even better that it speaks to African American kids.  Tiana reflects what President Obama tried to say to high schools earlier this year (although he was banned in some schools).  She doesn't hope for a better life through luck and circumstance but instead works really hard at it and doesn't rely on short cuts to do it.  Every song in the movie is about working hard, being optimistic and keeping your gumption.  Of course it's not just message but also whimsy, wonder and thick helpings of that classic Disney mood and charm, slathered all over every frame of 2-D animation that makes this movie fantastic and worthy to be stand among the other Disney greats! The Princess and The Frog (Rated G) Gavin Grade: A+
 (2) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , 

 

A Christmas Carol

by Gavin , posted Nov 5 2009 9:51PM
There is a big part of me that is so angry that director Robert Zemeckis no longer directs live-action movies.  I miss films like "Forrest Gump," "Cast Away," "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" and The Back to the Future series.  Lately he's only done these CGI animated movies, like "The Polar Express" and "Beowulf."  However his new one, which is the next in a long line of film versions of Charles Dickens' story is absolutely incredible!  For those of you out there that say, "Oh great!  This is being made into a movie AGAIN?!"  I say, I'm glad.  This really is one of the greatest stories ever written and the fact that it has been made so many times is a testament to that.  Is this the best version of the story?  That I'm not sure of since there have been so many great versions, but I can say that it's in the Top 3.  What it is the best at though is 3D creativity.  This was by-far the greatest 3D movie I've ever seen.  You know from the opening credits that Zemeckis is going to take you on a trip through London that could never ever be done in live-action.  Because of that, the sequences are not only vibrantly gorgeous to look out, they're creative in a way that I never would've imagined.  (I think a Best Director Oscar should be in consideration.)  That remarkable ingenuity not only leads to adventure and thrills but it also takes us down some very dark and scary places.  WARNING: some of these scenes are too intense for small children.  Zemeckis didn't pull back on the reins at all and created some downright frightening images and sequences in an attempt to make the movie as close to the book as possible.  That includes some scenes that The Muppets and Mickey may have left out.  If there is anything bad to say about the movie it might be in the performances from the actors.  Don't get me wrong; it's amazing to see the same actors play multiple roles of all ages and sizes because they're not really on the screen.  I'm just one of those snobs that still can't look past the CGI characters to the human emotions behind them.  But that's not the fault of stars Jim Carey, Gary Oldman and others.  Carey is 80% of this movie playing Scrooge (of every age) and all the spirits.  However his Scrooge is nothing more than a realistic Mr. Burns from "The Simpsons," his Ghost of Christmas Past is a distractingly creepy gay Irishman and his Ghost of Christmas Present is merely a fat Ring Starr.  But those borrowed characters are more amusing than pitiful and don't ruin the film at all.  Will this version of "A Christmas Carol" put you in the Christmas spirit after watching it?  I can't imagine how it wouldn't.  Now whether or not you can hold on to it since they released it almost 2 months before Christmas is another question. A Christmas Carol (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A
 (0) Comments
Tags :  
Social : , , , , , , , , , , , , 

 

Up

by Gavin , posted May 31 2009 8:47AM
Up (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A I read somewhere that Pixar said they were no longer concerned with making good films for kids but are now focused on making good films.  That couldn't be more true with their latest opus.  As the first 15 minutes of "Up" are playing out in front of us, I heard a woman talk to her friend next to her and say, "This is way too serious for kids."  She might be right, although I don't think kids will understand the gravity of what's going on.  But the opening montage shows you one man's life in 15 minutes and I'd be lying if I didn't tell you that I had tears pouring down my face from behind my 3D glasses.  Don't worry though, it's get lite.  But Pixar really has evolved to the point where they can get away with stuff like that.  I've been a HUGE fan of Pixar since "Toy Story."  But their movies have increasingly gotten better and better.  They do such a good job of taking adult subjects and packaging it in bright, colorful, funny stories that kids can still enjoy.  And they are boldly taking more risks.  Can you imagine how the pitch meeting with Disney went for "Up" when they said they want to make a movie with only 5 main characters, virtually zero celebrity voices and the main one is a grump, old man?  That alone shows their power.  The Disney marketing team must've scratched their heads till they bled trying to make toys and costume characters that kids would want to hug on that one.  But "Up" captures the human soul so well and will strike a chord with everyone who has ever loved and lost or watched their grandparents go through it.  The story gets absurd at times, but you're totally willing to forgive that since you feel so deeply for the characters.  The animation is still a work of art, although the 3D isn't worth the extra cash at all.  Pixar is utterly amazing!  They've released yet another movie while still keeping their perfect box office and critical success stellar...and they've made me desire a dog with a talking dog collar more than anything in the world!
 (0) Comments

 

Night at the Museum 2

by Gavin , posted May 31 2009 8:27AM
Night at the Museum 2 (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: B The last time Ben Stiller spent the night at the museum it got crapped all over by critics but raked in over a half-billion dollars worldwide.  However the second time Stiller gets trapped in the museum...well, nothing much is different.  But I'm one of the people who don't understand why these movies don't get the love they deserve.  Maybe the inner-kid in me is still loving the concept of a whole museum coming to life.  When I was a kid and my dad would take me to the museums in Philadelphia, I had that fantasy and would even imagine what that would be like.  So to see it in vivid life on the big screen is awesome!  I actually found the first one very funny as well as adventurous.  But the comedy was definitely punched up for the sequel.  When you add gifted comic actors like Hank Azaria, Christopher Guest, and Bill Hader to the already existing comedy team of Stiller, Owen Wilson, Robin Williams, and Steven Coogan; then add the adorable sexiness of Amy Adams...hey, I'm on board!  (By the way, Adams is one helluva an actress.  I knew that already but she commits to her part in this with the same "moxy" that she does when she's vying for an Oscar in others.)  It's also fun to sit back and count the cameos that float through like Johah Hill, the cast of The Office, the cast of Reno 911, The Jonas Bros and Eugene Levy's voice.  The fact that the special effects are as plentiful as a Star Wars movie amazes me because with such an expensive production you'd think they wouldn't allow improv from the actors at all.  I'm glad they did though.  Some of the improvised scenes between Stiller and Azaria (who steals the show) and the "axis of evil" had me almost in tears.  Of course the story is a little absurd.  I know it's a kid's movie, but the motives for the plot in the sequel are a little bit of a stretch.  That being said, I hope they end these movies on this one so we don't need to imagine a worse plot but as long as they continue to make gobs of money, I'm probably wrong.
 (0) Comments

 

Monsters Vs. Aliens

by Gavin , posted Apr 5 2009 1:51PM
Monsters Vs. Aliens (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: C+ I think this movie was pitched as a MUST to see in 3D, however compared to more recent 3D releases, I feel like it was a put-on.  The premise of the movie is that when Aliens attack the world the only force strong enough to stop them are Monsters that the government has kept secret for decades.  That plot screams adventure and action; plenty of chance to flex a 3D muscle.  But it was almost like the makers of the film didn't know how to flex it.  The real winner in this movie was the voice work from an all-star comedy team; ie: Seth Rogen, Stephen Colbert, Will Arnett and half the cast of "The Office" just to name a few.  The inside jokes that only adults would get run rampant through the story and result in a few legit belly laughs.  I definitely think that Seth Rogen, who plays a gelatinous character named B.O.B., steals the show as far as the jokes come.  Surpringly funny in the movie was Hugh Laurie, who you know better from Fox's show "House."  He uses his real British accent as Dr. Cochroach and shows off his comedy chops for once.  Makes me look forward to a comedy starring him at some point.  However, the movie itself didn't stand up to the calabir that its stars could produce.  It seemed like the voice work was an A+ effort but the director and other people making it were playing on a J.V. level.  I felt like I wasn't alone feeling that either.  As I looked around the theater, it seemed that halfway through I saw a lot of bored faces and yawns.  Even through the 3D glasses I could tell the eyes were glazing over, and yes I'm talking about the kids too.  It was almost as if the crew at Dreamworks knew they had a cash cow on their hands and just assembled a huge comedic cast of voice actors and then crapped out a story and slapped it together just to put out there and make some quick, easy cash.  I'd say I was wrong perhaps if the movie wasn't set up with a cliffhanger to set up a franchise before they were even sure how it would do at the Box Office
 (1) Comments

 

Coraline

by Gavin , posted Feb 9 2009 1:16PM
Coraline (Rated PG) Gavin Grade: A- I recently read the review for this movie in Entertainment Weekly and they said that what's so perfect about "Coraline" is that it finds an audience in everyone.  I would say that they're wrong and in fact it's the exact opposite; it may find an audience in no one.  This new movie from director Henry Selick (Nightmare Before Christmas) is too childish for adults and way too terrifying for children.  But that's not to say that the movie isn't great.  When I went to see it, I saw it in 3D, which I'm pretty sure is the only way to see it.  I can only describe seeing this in a theater in 3D as being a total experience; an event.  The fact that it's stop-motion claymation and is also in 3D makes it feel like you've stuck your head inside a moving diorama, like those things you made out of shoeboxes in Elementary School.  And the visuals that you see while inside these dioramas are stunning!  That aside, the story is also fantastic!  It's gothic and creepy, but still totally appealing to the kid in all of us that dreams of a better world.  Of course that was easy to achieve in the movie since the book, by Neil Gaiman, has already been such a success.  The acting was good too from the voices of Dakota Fanning and Teri Hatcher.  The only flaw in "Coraline" was the script.  It was written for the screen by Selick and the dialogue verged on downright idiotic...even for a kid's movie.  Because of that, the movie feels every second of it's 101 minute runtime.  However, I can forgive the script being so bad since you spend much of the time getting lost in the consuming worlds of the film.  But be warned that those worlds are probably too scary for most young kids out there.
 (2) Comments

 


advertise with us
Recent Blog Posts
Monsters University
Gavin
Jun 19
Channing All Over Your Tatum
The Wake Up Call
Jun 19
Much Ado About Nothing
Gavin
Jun 18
Man of Steel
Gavin
Jun 14
Travis Pratt Sings Opera
Wake Up Call
Jun 13
This Is The End
Gavin
Jun 12
Obama Doesn't Have His Speech
The Wake Up Call
Jun 10
The Purge
Gavin
Jun 6
Categories
Archives