Indiana Jones and the Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (2008) Film Review: An Over-hated Crystal Gem?

If there is a film that is universally hated by all, it would be the long-awaited return to the "Indiana Jones" franchise. Despite being a financial success and given a warm reception, the fourth film in the beloved series received so much backlash that it got people to appreciate the originally-despised "Temple of Doom." With a fifth film being filmed despite many fans saying that enough is enough, was "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" really that bad to deserve all of the hate it gets to this day? Surprisingly, no. The story is set in the Cold War with Indiana Jones being kidnapped by the Soviets to acquire an alien corpse from Area 51. After he manages to escape the villainous Russians, he is approached by a young greaser named Mutt Williams, who seeks Indy's help to find a long-time colleague as well as Mutt's mother who are tied to the discovery of a crystal skull and the Soviet's goal to control the world by harnessing its power. Indy accepts this one "final" adventure while being confronted with various surprises and revelations. The story gets a lot of flack for introducing aliens into the universe, which I personally don't get. Like, is it really hard to accept aliens being real with a world where various religious artifacts exist and contain various powers? I don't think so. However, it's not really the story that's the issue many have, rather than the tone itself. Unlike the previous films, this is perhaps the most lighthearted or family-friendly adventure Indy has got on with plenty of levity, over-the-top moments, and the least graphic deaths or kills in a franchise. That doesn't mean it's a straight-up kids film, but rather that the film was made to introduce younger audiences into the franchise, which many resent. While the first and third films had far better uses of tone, I still believe that this film is far more structured than the oddity that was "Temple of Doom." On top of that, I did chuckle more often than whatever joke was in "Temple of Doom."

Harrison Ford returning as the titular character is a bit of a mixed bag. Ford still nails the intellectual and badass side during exposition and action sequences. It's the quips and line delivery that's awkward though as it feels really forced, almost as if Indy wanted to be more cool than he really is. Shia LaBouf gets a ton of hate for his performance as Mutt due to his rising stardom, but I don't think he's that bad in the movie. I do think he feels out-of-place in this adventure, but he completely sells himself as a fight-first, think-never greaser who acts like he belongs in the time period. Cate Blanchett as Irina Spalko, a KGB agent and leader of the squad of Soviet soldiers, is well-acted and distinct as a Indy villain, but she has weird motivations as she first wants the skull to better the Soviet Union, only to want knowledge for herself at the end of the film. The wonderful Karen Allen returns as Marion Ravenwood, who is both fiery towards Indy after a messy break-up and still wanting him back due to Mutt being his son. Seeing how that she was the best love interest from the previous films, it's nice seeing her again as the definitive Indy girl. John Hurt as Harold Oxley, a long-time friend of Indy and Mutt who becomes insane from stealing the crystal skull and needs to return it to the lost city of Akator, is great in playing this crazy individual, but we barely see Oxley as himself until the very end, which isn't really much to grant him his own identity. Lastly, there's Ray Winstone as Mac McHale, an ally-turned-enemy of Indy who sells him out to the Russians for money and only sticks around to see if the lost city of Akator really has gold. A lot of people hate Mac as a character for good reasons and the character himself isn't that interesting aside from his chemistry with Indy, but Winstone does such a great job in bringing this slimy yet likeable presence to the character. Overall, the cast and characters aren't bad and the actors give it their all, but they mainly suffer from a limited presence and screentime to keep them from being truly memorable or fleshed-out, so it just leaves Ford and a few awkward line delivers to carry the film.

Despite what you feel about the film, you can't deny that Stephan Spielberg knows how to make a movie, no matter the quality. The decision to set the film in the 1950's is genius for Ford's appearance, the culture and trends, and the overarching conflict of the Cold War that is pushed heavily in the story and landscape. Not only did Spielberg wanted the film to be set naturally in the 50's, but the film to feel like it's from the 50's as well in regards to the introduction of aliens and the gorgeous use of colour and shadows. The Technicolor-inspired aesthetic gives off so many vivid colours, but the use of gothic shadows and sets feels like it can easily be converted to black-and-white, which was the format for many sci-fi and horror productions. The cinematography by Janusz Kaminski is fantastic in the use of lingering, tracking, aerial and angle shots that show off the spectacular sets, landscapes, and action set-pieces. It all feels ambitious and cinematic, while not being overly flashy. The score by John Williams is as great as ever with the use of classic and new renditions of familiar themes. While I do think the previous films have better tracks associated with the respective film, Williams still puts out some nice adventure and awe-inspired music cues throughout the film. The visual effects are quite good for the most part. The use of practical sets, stunts, and miniatures look great to this day and the CGI has aged fairly well more than a decade later. It's true that the film does overuse CGI in various scenes and moments, but the visuals don't look horrendous and the optical effects can mix really well with the live-action actors and sets. Yeah, the monkeys and the prairie dogs could have been done with real-life animals, but the killer ants couldn't and the effects on them hold up extremely well. However, I do think that the alien should have had a more unique design after such a long build-up with its cool-looking skull and skeleton. The action sequences themselves are great, provided if you accept the toned-down violence and over-the-top moments. I love that they do try their best in making the action as practical as possible with the opening sequence, motorcycle chase in New York, the temple and tomb explorations, the jungle chase, and the fight surrounded by killer ants. Yes, I love the rocket sled and the nuclear fridge moment as well, since I can suspend my disbelief for them. While the action is consistently solid for the film, I will admit that the previous films had more iconic sequences with the plane brawl in the first, the mine/voodoo fight in the second, and the tank sequence in the third. The fourth has decent action sequences altogether, but nothing that truly sticks out as the best in the film. Regardless, the direction by Spielberg is as outstanding as always.

"Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" clearly doesn't deserve the hate and doesn't deserve the title as the worst film of the franchise. It's clearly not on par with the first and third as the tone does feel more lighthearted than the earlier films, the cast can suffer from limited screen-time and not being fleshed-out as characters because of it, the overuse of CGI on the animals and alien can feel lazy, and the action sequences, as entertaining as they can be, don't stand out amongst each other as the best or iconic out of the bunch. Despite these issues, it's far from being a bad film as the story does keep my interest with the introduction of aliens, the comedy is fairly good with the witty deliveries, Ford returning as Indy still nails down the character perfectly aside from the quips, the acting in general from the entire cast is great with not one person phoning in their performance, Kaminski's camerawork is stunning as always, the score by Williams is almost on par with his previous works with the adventurous themes and re-use of iconic music, the practical effects are great to see in a film like this, the CGI actually holds up fairly well and looks pretty good in various sequences, the action is still entertaining with the maximum use of practical stunts and environments as possible, and Spielberg's direction masterfully transports Indy to the 50's backdrop and introduces a brand new sense of colour and scope to the franchise. Removing nostalgia out of the equation, this is a great return for the character that really should be the final adventure that, while not on par with the best titles, still feels like a wonderful adventure.

Verdict: 6.5/10. Decent film overall, but really needed another rewrite to be just as perfect as the previous films. And yes, it's better than "Temple of Doom" by a long shot. 

F9 (2021) Spoiler-Filled Review/Rant: A Literal Middle Movie...

 

The "Fast & Furious" franchise has its highs and low as each installment is released. While I managed to enjoy the previous two films the most as of late, the latest film of the absurd series is perhaps its most divisive yet for various pros and cons, which all evens out to a pile of mediocrity.

Positives:

• The flashbacks of Dom and Jakob Toretto. While the pacing and storytelling isn't the best in these sequences, I love the use of film grain and the competent actors they got to portray young Vin Diesel and John Cena.
• The main returning cast and characters. I won't go too much in detail, since there's too many characters to list, but Dom, Letty, Roman, Tej, and Ramsey are as enjoyable as ever.
• The directing by Justin Lin. Lin continues to add a variety of locations and hues to the film that makes this franchise so visually interesting.
• The cinematography by Stephan F. Windon. While he can have too much shaky-cam at times, Windon knows how to have a cinematic sense of scope in establishing shots and action highlights.
• The music. While Brian Tyler's score is as generic as you can get for this franchise, it feels appropriate for the film to get you pumped up. The licensed soundtrack is also a banger with the continued use of English/Latino rap and hip-hop.
• The action sequences. From the shootout in Central America, to the hand-to-hand fights in Tokyo and the hideout, the chase between Dom and Jakob, and the climax with its use of powerful magnets, the action sequences are as great as ever with the stand-out easily being the one-man-army stand-off with Dom and a bunch of mercenaries. It's so brutal and awesome that Captain America will be eating his heart out. I don't care how unrealistic they can be, they are just so fun to watch.

Negatives:

• The story itself. While the premise seems fun with the bitter reunion between Dom and Jakob, the story itself contains some weird convoluted plot-lines and questionable plot holes and moments. The cause for the death of Dom and Jakob's father is confusing in how completely unavoidable it was, the betrayal with Jakob and the villain is so forced that I don't even understand why he was betrayed for in the first place, the reason for Han surviving his apparent death is completely glossed over, and there's literally a scene where Cardi B and her girls could have killed the villains so early into the plot rather than pretending to have arrested Dom. While the stories of the previous films could have their contrived moments and over-the-top writing, they do try to have a coherent sense of storytelling that doesn't confuse you or make you question the logistics of the narrative. It doesn't help that the pacing of the movie can be so slow at times due to the flashbacks or minor side characters.
• The tone and humour. This is F&F at its campiest and meta yet, and it's a problem because of it. Yes, this franchise is silly and over-the-top, but by the time characters are talking about their survivability and the cliches, it's basically losing any sort of investment. The fact that no one huge still hasn't died or stay dead, with the film itself teasing about big sacrifices and deaths, is unreasonable. While there are a few laughs to be had, the humour is either too pop-culture centric or out-of-touch in context with the film.
• The villains. While Jakob is a decent, personal villain for the group, John Cena is miscast apperance-wise to Dominic and the lack of charisma is strange for the novelty of Cena as an actor. Charlize Theron as Cipher barely does anything in the movie and is only there to remind the audience that she is still going to be the villain for the last few films. And lastly, there's Thue Ersted Rasmussen as Otto, the main antagonist who wants to control the world because he's a spoiled, rich, Slavic brat with enough resources and men that it makes him the generic bad guy that takes more screen-time than Jakob. While Rasmussen's enjoyable performance keeps Otto from being the worst villain from the franchise, his involvement is akin to the sin "Furious 7" committed with its villains.
• The new and returning faces from the franchise. Jordana Brewster as Mia continues to have no importance in the films as even her role as sister does nothing for Dom and Jakob's character and she still hasn't proved her worth other than being Brian's baby momma. Kurt Russell as Mr. Nobody barely shows up in the film as he only serves as a connective thread to certain characters and it's still unclear if he's dead or alive. Helen Mirren as Queenie Shaw just drives Dom to Otto's party in one scene and drive super fast as the punch-line. The old-ass Lucas Black as Sean Boswell from "Tokyo Drift" is practically a different character from before as he's now a rocket engineer and pilot all of a sudden? And the last returning face is Sung Kang's Han. For all of the build-up and love the character has to be brought back to life, what does he do in the story? Literally introduce a brand-new character/MacGuffin for the movie. It almost begs the question why bring any of these characters back if they either continue to do jack-shit or just act completely different altogether. As for the new faces, there's only two worth mentioning. Micheal Rooker as Buddy, an old mechanic who knows Dom and Jakob from childhood, is just there to just tell Dom that Jakob is in London, despite there being no reason for why Jakob would tell Buddy where he would be in the first place. Lastly, there's Elle, played by Anna Sawai. She's the literal key to the literal plot device that is introduced from a literal marketing ploy for the movie. Sawai is a good actress, but the future films really need to give her an actual character.
• The CGI. While there's some great stunts shown through the film, the quality of the CGI can be hit-and-miss as things can look too cartoony or unpolished. Shots like Jakob's car going through a building, Tej and Roman in outer space, the drones, and other notable moments can have some pretty bad visual effects given the advancements of technology and the $200 million plus budget. The sequence in outer space looks strangely bad, especially when compared to various other movies with outer space scenes with far lower budgets.

"F9" serves itself as a pit-stop for the rest of the franchise in terms of building up the cast of characters for the final two or so films, which makes it as bland as a necessary stop at a gas station in real life. While I enjoyed the creative style of the flashbacks, the central returning cast of characters we all grown to love, Lin's directing, Windon's camerawork, the music and soundtrack, and the action sequences as a whole, I can just watch better entries from the same franchise to have my fill. The story is overly-convoluted and messy with various plot holes and questions that pile on each other, the tone gets way too goofy and meta for its own good that any sense of emotional or serious moments are removed, the humour is way too geared towards pop-culture references and oddly-timed moments, the returning cast is either different in characterization to fit into the narrative or just completely useless, the villains are pretty weak due to Otto being the central with Jakob and Cipher being pushed aside from the plot, the new characters are just literal MacGuffins or signs pointing to the next objective, and the CGI can be pretty unpolished at times for a big-budget movie. The film just has too much excess and bloated negatives to keep itself as a good movie, both as an individual product and as an installment in its own lengthy and notorious franchise.

Verdict: 5/10. The most "mid" of the franchise, which is both impressive and unimpressive. Watch for the action sequences as you struggle with an overly-long and tedious movie.

Luca (2021) Non-Spoiler Film Review: An Disney+ Exclusive I Would Have Actually Paid For...

 

Disney+ is always trying to make you pay an extra thirty bucks to unlock their big blockbusters such as "Mulan", "Raya and the Last Dragon", and "Cruella". These movies are complete garbage in their own right and is clearly a scheme to ensure they don't lose as much money as possible. However, Disney never bothers to do this for the last two Pixar films, "Soul" and "Luca". Is it because they believe that no one would pay extra for these "boring" movies or do they actually think quality titles should absolutely be free for all subscribers? I think it might be the latter. The titular Luca is a sea monster who lives with his parents as a shepherd and wanting more out of life. When he meets another young sea monster named Alberto, who spends his time on an onshore island, the two start a great friendship that is at risk from Luca's demanding parents. The two boys begin a plan to visit the nearby town of Portorosso and win a contest that can buy them their very own Vespa, which they can use to ride together out to the world. When the two team up with the determined Giulia, this new friendship is put to the test while they must hide their secret to the rest of the town. Compared to the other Pixar films, this is the most slice-of-life that the studio has gone, and I'm rather pleased by it. There are still good themes and morals to take out of the film much like any Pixar film, but the emotional moments are more downplayed to make way for charm and comedy. I will touch on how the emotional moments could have excelled in a bit when discussing characters, but this is perhaps one of the most safest Pixar films in terms of ambition and execution, which is not a bad thing.

Jacob Tremblay as Luca is so wide-eyed, innocent and wholesome, much like most of the child actor's roles. Luca as a character is easy to get and understand in terms of desires. He's not like Arial, who wants to get close to the human world by being in love with a prince, his want of knowledge and wonder is pushing his character rather than having a crush on Giulia, which would have been so easy and lazy to do. A aging Jack Dylan Grazer voices Alberto, the slightly older and reckless friend of Luca who only wants to spend time with him rather than open up to others. The voice-cracking Grazer is practically perfect in playing both the loveable and distasteful friend who is more interested in his wants rather than what he or Luca needs. The chemistry between Alberto and Luca is pretty good for the most part as you can see how they would be friends and how their personalities can both unite and split them apart. However, the only issue is that they literally just became friends, which is a bit hard to get invested in during the emotional moments. If they just tweaked the story to have the two been long-life childhood friends with one of them befriending someone else and wanting to seek more out of the world, it would be fantastic. As is, the friendship is likeable enough, but Alberto becomes too much of a jerk and the emotional centre despite the time spent together as friends. Giulia is almost like young Ellie from "Up", but given much more screen-time and chemistry with the leads. She's really loveable and I give tons of credit that the chemistry between her and Luca is far more on the platonic side rather than a romantic one, as it serves greatly for Luca's character as a whole. Ercole is the return to form for the straight-up villain archetype for both Disney and Pixar and he's good at being the typical bully archetype that challenges the younger protagonists. He's not going to be a memorable character, but he works for the movie and the naivety of the characters. As for the side characters, they are also really good. Maya Rudolph and Jim Gaffigan as Luca's parents have such enjoyable banter in the overly-concerned mother and the carefree father, Massimo is practically the best character as Giulia's intimidating yet caring father who gets along with Luca and Alberto in a genuine matter, and there are Ercole's croonies who obey Ercole until the end, even if it means to slap one another. Overall, the cast is really great with a ton of likeable leads, side cast and friendship dynamics. I do believe though that Luca and Alberto's friendship could have been tweaked to be more emotionally impactful.

The animation is as top-quality as you can get for Pixar. At first, I wasn't a fan of the human designs being more cartoonish and exaggerated sort of like a Sony Pictures or Illumination film. However, the designs manage to really grow on me, mainly due to how the animation as a whole is varied and moody depending on the energy of the characters. Portorosso is brought to life in such a gorgeous and personality-fuelled way that you would want to spend the weekend in the fictional costal town. I love how they use the Italian language to its advantage, the staples of pasta, espresso, gelato as well as the goal of getting a Vespa adding to the child-like wonder along with a bit of culture to the film. The animation isn't concerned on being hyper-realistic, but rather have cartoonish-looking characters behave real in the natural-looking town and environment. The animation gets to be more expressive and vibrant during Luca's fantasies, which is kind of surreal when watching a Pixar movie. The designs of the sea monsters are vivid and kind of cute with Luca's sea monster form being freaking adorable at times. They do look a bit too much like sea monkeys, but it's still a great design. I also love the animation details when the monsters transform or start to reveal their scaly nature when getting wet. The score by Dan Romer is pretty good in capturing the costal town, summertime energy and Italian inspired cues in the music, along with some uses of classic Italian songs and opera. It's not super memorable, but it's practically his best work in his resume. Overall, the feature-length debut of Enrico Casarosa is an extremely strong start and I hope he gets to do more Pixar films in the future.

"Luca" is surprisingly just as strong as the previous films the legendary studio had put out. Sure, the emotional weight could have been far stronger if the friendship between Luca and Alberto were ironed out, but that's really about it. The story is simple and sweet, the tone is more charming and fun rather than super dramatic or emotional, Trembley as Luca is such a great lead in his innocence and child-like wonder to explore the world, Grazer's Alberto is perfect as the jerk with the heart of gold, Giulia is eccentrically loveable and shares a nice friendship with Luca, Ercole is a funny bully archetype, the parents of both Luca and Giulia are greatly portrayed and voiced, the score by Romer feels calm and spirited, and the animation is as excellent as it can be with bringing the costal town to life, having odd human designs work well in the realistic setting, and having a wide variety of vivid colours and effects. If the film managed to work on the emotional centre, I would honestly think that it would be on par as "Coco". As it is though, it's still a fantastic Pixar film.

Verdict: 9/10. Just as strong as the best of the best the studio has to offer. Check it out whenever you can!

The Empty Man (2020) Film Review: The Mostly-Full Movie...

 

Disney buying out 20th Century Fox has got to be one of the worst outcomes that has acquired in the past decade. Not only did it lead to countless jobs being lost and Blue Sky Studios being shut down, but any films completed prior or during the acquisition have little to no care put in them from Disney. The film that managed to get the worst treatment would have to be "The Empty Man". It had no marketing until a week before release, the release itself was in a middle of a global pandemic, and the few people and critics that did see it slammed it because it was not what they were expecting. Disney has so little faith in the film that there's not even a DVD release for it or even change the Fox opening to 20th Century Studios. However, is it really that horrendous? Based on the graphic novel of the same name (yet has nothing to do with the source material), the film follows James Lasombra, a former cop who is in a state of heavy depression due to the sins he has made in the past. When his friend's daughter disappears, he tries to find her, discovering the link between her, a mysterious and creepy cult, and an urban legend known as the Empty Man. I won't go into spoilers, since I do believe that the mystery contained in the film is super intriguing. I will admit however that the ending could lead people to a level of disappointment. Not only does the ending get extremely confusing for those not picking up the themes of the film and it feels like nothing was worth it by the end of the two hour plus film, but it also causes some inconsistency as it never explains why the Empty Man kills when it's said to unify all under one. Regardless of the ending, I actually got really invested in the mystery and wanting to find out more while also attempting to figure out what's been going on. The film takes itself seriously and it's not meant to be a straight-up horror film with jump-scares and cheesy dialogue. It's more built up on atmosphere and the somber tone rather than gory kills and overuse of fake-out creepy moments. 

James Badge Dale as James Lasombra does a great job as the grieving ex-cop who is fixated on solving this case and wanting some type of redemption. Dale helps add a bit of charm and personality to the character to keep him from being dull while also playing up a sense of vulnerability, which is hard to do for an adult lead protagonist in horror films. Marin Ireland as Nora Quail, the friend and former fling of James, is obviously a fantastic actress and does sell the grieving mother role really well. Newcomer Sasha Frolovo as Amanda Quail, Nora's teenaged daughter who disappears after summoning the Empty Man, is good in playing up the eerie dread that her character is experiencing and hopefully will continue to do more stand-out performances in the future. Ron Canada as Detective Villers is great as usual for the type-casted actor, but he doesn't really get to do much in the overall story. Lastly, there's Stephan Root as Arthur Parsons, the leader of the Pontifex Institute who only appears in one lengthy scene as he describes to James what the purpose of his cult is, to which Root does a fine job in controlling the scene. Aside of Amanda's friends and a few other minor side characters, that's really all the cast has to offer with Dale having the most amount of focus. All of the actors and actresses are talented and play their jobs well, but they don't exactly stick with you much after watching the movie. While I would chalk it up to a negative, the ending does actually help making the lack of memorability or care of the side characters work to its effect with James Lasombra being not an amazing, but still riveting, protagonist.

David Prior worked for Fox for decades in the home media department before finally managing to make his own movie thanks to befriending some of the biggest producers in the studio. The fact that Disney sabotaged his directorial debut should be a crime as Prior shows that he has a talented gift and vision. Despite this being his directorial debut, Prior completely nails the atmosphere and mood of the movie to have a creepy and, at times, terrifying nature to it. The colour is all washed out, but the shadows and gothic imagery pop out as Prior makes his film have this dream-like, almost ethereal aesthetic. There are tons of visual motifs that are sprinkled throughout the film that connects overall with the film's themes and it's practically genius on every level. The cinematography by Anastos N. Michos is fantastic with unique angles, pans, iconography, framing of people and objects, and some inventive transitions helped made possible by editors Prior and Andrew Buckland. I'm dumbfounded that Michos wasn't even nominated for an Oscar this year, because his camerawork is freaking phenomenal. The music by Christopher Young and Lustmord is perfectly eerie and foreboding that it feels like it's ripped out of a "Silent Hill" game. The audio design and editing is also pitch perfect with the whispering and subtle instrumental cues. There's not much in the way of effects, practical or digital, but whatever is seen in the film is pretty decent. The Empty Man himself is creepy in his cloaked form and the few deaths present in the film are really brutal yet creative in its imagery. While there are some dodgy digital effects with green-screen and the climax, it's not too distracting or out of place in the film. Overall, the filmmaking by Prior and the crew is fantastic and I hope Prior gets to direct more films in the future.

"The Empty Man" is not perfect and not for everyone. Aside from diehards of the obscure graphic novel that will offend them, the film does suffer from an ending that tends to not successfully pay off the otherwise brilliant mystery it had along with the film being too long and philosophical for the average horror movie. Despite these issues, I think this is a great film regardless. The suspense and premise hooked me right off the bat, the serious nature of the film and philosophical metaphors made me brainstorm and be in sync with the mind of the filmmaker, Dale is great in giving charisma and vulnerability to the character of James Lasombra, the rest of the cast are acted flawlessly for what characters they were given, the cinematography by Michos is brilliant on a visual and artistic level, the score by Young and Lustmord is perfect horror ambience, and Prior's directorial debut shows that he is a horror master in building atmosphere, dread, effective uses of dark colours, imaginative transitions, use of audio and visually-interesting horror and death sequences. This is a film that may have a bad ending, but everything is just so excellent that it doesn't make the film and the viewing experience awful. Disney is at its lowest point of creativity and respect of the filmmaker when they tossed this movie like trash rather than attempt to put their best efforts in making the film be seen in awe by audiences.

Verdict: 8/10. Really good, but keep in mind of how disappointing the ending can be. Still one of the best horror movies I've seen in recent years!

Raya and the Last Dragon (2021) Spoiler-Filled Review/Rant: An Avatar Ripoff That Needed To Be A Show...

 

Ever since "Zootopia", Disney Animation has kind of slumped for the past few years. "Moana" was decent, but not really great in regards to themes or tone, and the sequels to "Wreck-It Ralph" and "Frozen" are just god awful. "Raya and the Last Dragon" however appeared to be the studio's most ambitious yet with an action-adventure approach, a non-musical story, and an East Asian-inspired setting. However, this film is yet another product of untapped potential by a studio that has gone lazy.

Positives:

• The animation. Disney always has great animation and this film is no exception. Considering the smaller budget and COVID-19 forcing the animators to work from home, it looks really good. Not only does the film has the more realistic approach to the animation, but there is also some anime-inspired shots and stylization.
• The setting. Kumandra is a really distinct world and the five distinct nations named after the specific regions of the dragon lake offers both character, flair, and colour to each country.
• The music by James Newton Howard. Howard is a fantastic composer and his contributions to this film is no exception. It may not be the best or most memorable of his work, but the dramatic and action tracks are really nice to listen to and the original song, "Lead the Way", is fairly decent.
• The side characters. They outshine the main characters so much that they really more time to be spent on them. From the young shrimp cook, Boun, to the baby con-artist, Little Noi, and the giant yet humble warrior, Tong, the side cast of allies are perhaps the only enjoyable element of the film, which is unfortunate to say the least.

Negatives:

• The story. The premise itself isn't bad, but it's the execution. Raya is a warrior princess who needs to find all five pieces of the Dragon Gem in order to save the lives lost by the Drunn, including her father. To aid her, she needs to find the last living dragon named Sisu as well as a new group of people that she needs to learn to trust as her childhood rival, Namarri, is also after the pieces to seek glory for her region of Fang. The issue with the story is that it's basically an "Avatar: The Last Airbender" clone, but made into a single film. While the story works as a movie, it really needed to have been a show or mini-series as the pacing is too fast to let certain characters or regions grow with you. On top of that, the story carries one of the biggest plot holes I've ever seen in a Disney film, which I will explain when I discuss the Drunn.
• The tone. While the film takes itself seriously for the most part, the comedy centring on Raya and Sisu really drags the quality as the dialogue gets really modern and out-of-place for this fantasy world. The whole banter between Raya and Namarri is so modern that it almost seems like it was written for a completely different film. The comedy that centres on the side cast is good, but it gets cancelled out by how bad the modern jokes are.
• Raya as a protagonist. While Kelly Marie Tran does a great job voice acting, the character herself is just a complete idiot. Her entire arc and the whole message of the film is to trust others, which she has stopped doing ever since Namarri betrayed her as a kid. Here's the problem: There's a clear difference between being naive/not wanting to trust others and being stupid and Raya fits in the latter. From the choice to show Namarri the Dragon Gem as a kid, telling Namarri that she found Sisu (despite the latter not believing her initially), and stupidly antagonizing Namarri when she was holding Sisu at gunpoint, Raya has got to be one of the worst Disney protagonists simply due to how braindead she can be for such a badass, female-empowered lead.
• Sisu. Where to start with this character? For one, the character design really doesn't suit the rest of the film. Second of all, the jokes she makes can be painful at times. Third of all, her role is completely ridiculous once she reveals her backstory as why she is the last dragon. And finally, Awkwafina is clearly miscasted in this role. I don't hate the actress, but her raspy voice doesn't suit the character, especially with the cartoonish design of the dragon.
• Namarri. While she's fine for the most part as a villain/obstacle for Raya, the climax really drops the ball on her intelligence. For one, she agrees to meet up with Raya by using a firework to show that she got the message. That same firework though was used to alert her guards in the beginning of the film and a firework is way too loud to alert someone for a secret meeting. Second, she tries to betray Raya and the others all by herself with only a crossbow as leverage. Thirdly, she blames Raya for partially killing Sisu, even though she was squeezing the trigger before Raya interfered. The choice to make the character sympathetic really hurts her role as a villain and the film in the long run.
• The Drunn. These purple evil cloud things are described as a plague that seeks after souls and turns people into statues. Not only are the Drunn just a lame excuse for an overarching "villain", but their weakness is so pathetically stupid. You want to know what it is? Water. You know, the most plentiful element in the planet. The reveal isn't even treated as a surprise for the end. Raya's father literally tells the audience by the beginning so it explains why Raya and the others can't get attacked on boat. Not only is it such a lazy writing excuse for the Drunn not to attack the main characters, but the world six years past the beginning doesn't use their weakness of water for combat. It gets even worse when you find out that Sisu's brother was able to control rain as his power. And yet her brother not only wasn't able to stop the Drunn, but decides to sacrifice himself rather than Sisu just to have a female dragon to join Raya.
• The action sequences. Considering how much the marketing pushes on the action and epic nature, you'd think the action would be a highlight. But it's extremely underwhelming. Aside from a fun montage scene with a cool art style and some neat shots, the action as a whole is pretty lame and standard as it's just generic sword-fighting and martial arts with no brutality or uniqueness.
• The ending. For a film that takes itself pretty seriously in the emotional beats, the ending is one of the most sappiest shit I've ever seen. After realizing that they need to trust each other as a nation, the heroes sacrifice themselves to activate the Dragon Gem without relaying on the dead Sisu. The Gem brings everyone who has turned to stone back to life as predicted, but the dragons also come back for literally no reason. Keep in mind, 500 years prior, the dragons never returned back to life when the same act was done. But only now did the dragons come back just to resurrect Sisu? GET OUT OF HERE! So, the ending allows everyone to live happily ever after as everyone turned to stone is back alive, the dragons are now alive again, and the nations reconnect as one. In fact, the one person that actually stays dead in the movie is... A BLACK PERSON! No joke, the leader of Tail, who is a black woman, literally is the only character to die in the entire film because she was reduced to a skeleton rather than becoming a statue. Pretty racist if you ask me!

"Raya and the Last Dragon" is not the worst film from Disney Animation, but it's nowhere near its best. While the animation is Disney-quality, the setting is vibrant and unique, the score by Howard is great as always, and the side cast is more enjoyable than the main cast, everything else is just plain awful. The story is paced way too fast for a "Avatar" rip-off, the tone is uneven as the mature and serious aspects of the story gets completely ruined by a sappy ending, the humour is hit-and-miss with the latter being cringe at times, the character of Raya is just brainless, Sisu is both miscast and annoyingly voiced by Awkwafina, Namarri is also just as stupid as Raya with the third act degrading her role as a serious threat, the Drunn are some of the dumbest monsters I have ever seen in a movie with their weakness of water and lack of character, the action sequences are lame as hell, and the film contains some of the biggest plot holes that can rival "Avengers: Endgame"! If the story was just made into a show and expanded upon, it would have actually been pretty good. As it is, it will just be a disappointing installment to Disney's never-ending empire.

Verdict: 5/10. Average animated film, but extremely poor for an "original" Disney film. If you think this is a masterpiece, you're in for a rude awakening...

V For Vendetta (2005) Film Review: An Aged Adaptation That Is Even More Relevant Today Than Ever Before...

 

Alan Moore is perhaps the hardest person to cater towards with film adaptations of his iconic work. Whether his reasons make sense or not in regards to the changes the films make to the graphic novels, alterations doesn't equal a tarnished movie. While there have been decent adaptations of his works such as "Watchmen", it's the 2005 adaptation of his 1988 hit that I feel is the strongest to date. In a dystopian future, the U.K is a totalitarian regime with strict laws and neo-facist views. A woman named Evey is roped into an ideological and political battle after she is rescued by a vigilante known as V. V is hoping that he can wake people up from their average lives and realize the corruptive nature of their government that needs to be changed with the act of destroying Parliament in one year's time. In the meantime, Evey is forced to take refuge with V while the vigilante seeks revenge on the people who have made him the man he is today. While the story is largely the same like the source material, aspects of the characters and political context has changed to respond to the Bush administration in the early 2000's. This context has also managed to age brilliantly with the Trump administration and even the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in some capacity that makes sure that this movie will not leave the spotlight for a long time. The tone takes itself seriously for the most part in regards to the political agenda, but V's eccentric personality does add a bit of levity to a film dealing with heavy and relevant subject matter.

Natalie Portman is an actress who is hit-or-miss in regards to her performances. Sometimes, she can be really good like in "Black Swan". Other times, she can be pretty bad like in the "Thor" and "Star Wars" movies. Her performance as Evey is one of her better ones, but still flawed in areas. Portman easily delivers on the naivety of the character and her overall growth throughout the story from being a victim to V's protege. The issue is really that Portman doesn't act that wrathful or arrogant in the scenes where Evey shows extreme hatred to V for the circumstances she is put in, which makes her performance a bit awkward in areas. Hugo Weaving  however is fantastic as the titular V, mainly due to the vocal and physical performance. While the body language expresses the more theatrical and playful aspects of the character, Weaving's voice acting adds that playful energy and a hint of anguish of the character. Stephen Rea as Chief Inspector Finch is also doing a great job as he sells the reluctant yet determined detective who is both pursuing V as a criminal while questioning the government he has worked for in his lifetime career. Stephen Fry as Gordan Deitrich, Evey's boss who hides his political views and sexuality to keep her show, adds a good bit of humour and character to the world-building and the spread of V's message. Lastly, the late John Hurt plays Adam Sutler, the High Chancellor who is always seen via a television screen with diluted pupils and a bitter rage about V's influence on the public. Hurt knows how to ham up his roles and Sutler is perhaps his most hammiest yet effective in the appearance and position of power. As a whole, the cast is great for the most part with Weaving and Rea doing some of the best performances in their career. The only one that's a bit behind is Portman, who needs to channel more rage in critical moments of the film. 

While the promotion and screenplay seems like the Wachowskis are behind the whole film, the directing duty actually went to James McTeigue, a long-time assistant director for various projects before this film taking up his official directorial debut. This is easily McTeigue's best film to date, both by the quality and overall skill he presents for the film. The goal was clearly to make the film both visually stylized while making it feel extremely grounded in its imagery and palette. The world is devoid of colour with the only striking colours being red, white and black as everything else is muted, almost like a film noir. V's hideout is perhaps the only pleasant location in the film, due to the various art and antiques the terrorist has "liberated" for himself in a windowless environment. However, the film can offer some surreal and iconic images from V's "birth" and the use of the Scarlet Carsons. The transitions and editing by Martin Walsh can be excellent at times, particularly with the seamless cuts and parallels with V, Evey and Finch. The cinematography by Adrian Biddle captures the look of the graphic novel by having a static camera with slight pans. The score by Dario Marianelli is good in the suspense/intense tracks, but is practically overshadowed by the use of 1812 Overture during the film's most iconic sequences. The visual effects are quite obvious, whether it's the green screen, compositing, or armies of V's supporters, but it's not done so much in the film that it's distracting. The action sequences are also on the weaker side, considering that the film is more of a political thriller rather than a superhero beat-em-up. The first action scene where V saves Evey feels way too cheesy and out of place for the character and film, almost like it came from Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man". The second in the television station is cool for V's intelligence and quick movements, but it's way too short. Lastly, the climatic showdown between him and Sutler's right-hand man involves some cool use of slow-motion and suspense, but the obvious blood effects and slowed-down grunts make it a bit too silly to take seriously. Even though the effects and action are underwhelming, it's not a huge issue given the film's modest budget as well as the rest of the quality filmmaking handled by McTiegue and the others.

"V For Vendetta" is a flawed yet almost excellent adaptation of Moore's work. From the story being left intact while being updated for the modern climate, the tone being both serious and comical when it needs to be, V is brought to life by the charismatic Weaving, the side cast are generally well-acted and have organic roles and development for the overarching narrative, the editing by Walsh is well-timed and matched to the film's pace and thematic threads of the characters, Biddle's cinematography perfectly captures the graphic novel origins onscreen, the score by Marianelli offers some nice tension to the respective scenes, and McTeigue's direction allows both wonderful stylization and gritty reality to co-exist in this dystopic setting. There are issues to be called out though, as the film does take liberties with the source material, Portman's performance as Evey is decent but lacking some emotional energy in the more demanding scenes, the CGI is very noticeable, and the action set-pieces aren't anything mind-blowing or well-executed in contrast to the rest of the film. With that said, this is still an amazing adaptation that, whether he would accept it or not, Moore needs to be proud of.

Verdict: 8/10. A great comic-book adaptation and political thriller. Watch it for the first time or a repeat viewing, especially after the year that was 2020.

Willy's Wonderland (2021) Film Review: As Good As A FNAF Movie Could Really Get...

 

"Five Nights at Freddy's" is an iconic franchise that, regardless of its questionable lore and never-ending sequels, will stand the test of time. It has done so well that fans still anticipate the live-action adaptation from Blumhouse Studios. However, considering the film has yet to even begin filming as of this writing, it's going to take a while before it will ever see the light of day. Because of the long delay, other studios managed to take the opportunity to make their FNAF-inspired films with WB's "The Banana Splits Movie" and now this latest attempt from Screen Media Films. When a mute drifter gets his tires blown out in a small town, he is given a deal to clean up a run-down family entertainment centre known as Willy's Wonderland in exchange to pay for his expensive bill. The drifter takes a strange pride in his work to the point that he's unfazed by the killer animatronics that reside in the building nor the multiple warnings given to him by the local youth. Because as one of the characters quote later in the film; "He's trapped with them, they are trapped with him." The story is simple as a FNAF rip-off can be and the short runtime complements the simplicity. There is a lore and conspiracy revolving the run-down facility, which I won't go into, but I will admit it's far better than what the FNAF games have done for the past years. The tone however doesn't really play up to the story's full potential. It has its fair share of camp and cheese, especially in regards to the drifter, but the film is still a horror-comedy at the end of the day and it is contrived by the genre cliches from it, mainly in regards to the side cast, which I will get into right now.

Nicholas Cage as the nameless drifter/janitor is one of the actor's most unique performances to date, purely by how bizarre it is. The janitor is played up as a mysterious yet charismatic badass who doesn't utter a word and chooses to remain inside the building and clean up the entire place for unknown reasons. Cage plays up the apparent badass and goofy aspects of the character in both the action and montage sequences. He is the true attraction of the film, which is a huge win, especially given how awful the rest of the characters are. Emily Tosta as Liv, the teenage protagonist who wants to save the Janitor and burn the building down, is as generic of a final girl trope as you can get. Granted, I have seen worse characters and performances from the genre, so Liv isn't really a big problem. Beth Grant as Sheriff Elosie does a good job as the bitter and despicable sheriff, but her motivations are rather confusing in wanting the janitor to be killed instead of him continuing to destroy the animatronics. As for the deputy and Liv's group of friends, they are practically "nothing" characters. We all know that a ton of people die in horror films, but at least make an effort in making characters or space their deaths out throughout the movie to keep people guessing for a bit. Not only do Liv's friends all die in a ten-minute span of runtime, but some of them don't even have a chance to get a hint of character or personality. On top of that, their acting ranges from okay to abysmal. It's issues like this that really make the film get bogged down. I won't go over the animatronics much as they don't really have a personality, but I appreciate the creativity given to their designs and representations for being realistic characters in that type of business. Overall, Cage is the only person from the entire cast that's putting effort in saving this film, all without any line of dialogue. 

Kevin Lewis isn't really known for his previous work on obscure projects and this venture might not aid him that much. The issue with Lewis's directing is that there's no sense of style or polish aside from the scenes with Cage. For the most part, the film looks rather cheap and uninspired and looks like it was straight out of YouTube. However, the editing by Ryan Liebert manages to go all out on the silliness of the film whenever Cage is on screen. Liebert would have weird uses of lens flairs, colours, and transitions that actually aid the film's enjoyment, aside from one awful strobe-light sequence. The cinematography by David Newbert is also on the same approach as Liebert. Whenever it's centred on Cage and the various scenes and montages, it's actually done well with clever close-ups, distancing and pans. When Cage isn't on screen, it just becomes really amateur and lame. The music by Émoi is actually really good. The 80's synth is a blast to listen to and the original songs created in-universe for Willy's can be ear-worms for some. I hope Émoi can get to do more films, because they did a fantastic job in all fronts. The practical effects and make-up is a mixed bag. On the one hand, the animatronics look perfectly aged and dated with some great gore effects on them during the action sequences. On the other hand, the kills presented in the film, aside from the animatronics, are on a creative dead-end. Most kills just have the animatronics bite or claw at their victims with fair blood effects, but some will be entirely off-screen and one even had their victim breath normally for a dead guy. I wouldn't give too much slack if the budget was so low that this was the best they can do, but the budget was actually a decent $5 million. To put in perspective, the horror-comedy, "Freaky", had a budget of $6 million and that film contained some imaginative and practical gore-filled kills. The team might have run out of money by the time they needed to film the kills, but it's still not a great excuse and look for the film, especially compared to others of the genre with similar budgets. Overall, the filmmaking is both uninspired and full of character depending on the elements.

"Willy's Wonderland" strangely could have been far better than what we got at the end. While the story is a fun hook, the tone can be perfectly cheesy at times, Cage as the nameless and mute janitor is simply a joy to watch, the editing by Liebert is on the same level of strange as Cage, Émoi's score and songs are actually really solid with the setting and 80's synth, and the designs and character of the animatronics feel pretty legit in their appearance and inspirations, the film suffers from the typical tropes of the horror genre, Liz is a generic lead, Sheriff Elosie is weirdly written, Liz's friends are laughably pointless in their brief appearances, the deaths have no budget to them with some having no gore or being off-screen, and Lewis has no direction outside from the scenes including Cage. At the end of the day, if you just want to see a silent Nick Cage killing animatronics and cleaning up a restaurant, you will get some enjoyment out of it for sure. However, that's all you're really going to get, because it doesn't fair well in comparison with other horror-comedies.

Verdict: 5.5/10. Great as a Cage project, pretty average for a straight-up horror comedy. At least it's better than "The Banana Splits Movie"...

The Croods: A New Age (2020) Film Review: The Age Of Quality Has Arrived...

 

If there was any surprise release that 2020 brought to cinemas, it would be the sequel to the 2013 "The Croods". While the first film made a good amount of money, it received a lukewarm reception and the proposed sequel by Chris Sanders was left in developmental limbo due to the studio and Universal being unsure of the film's success. Despite a brief cancellation, the sequel actually managed to be released last year in theatres. But, what was the seven year hiatus worth it? The story picks up from before with the Croods family still searching for a place to call home while surviving the treacherous wildlife. When Grug manages to find an oasis containing an endless supply of food, the family is shocked to find another family, the Bettermans. The Bettermans are a condescending couple who flex their intelligence and lifestyle to the brutish and unintelligent Croods, while also trying to hook up their teenage daughter with the long-lost Guy. The family tension continues to rise until a turn of events forces the squabbling family to partner together for a new adventure. I haven't even begun to mention everything that the story contains and it's already an improvement from the original. True, the sequel tends to borrow elements from other Dreamworks hits such as "Over the Hedge" and "How To Train Your Dragon", but the story is constantly shifting at a fast pace, which helps to the film's comedic edge. Unlike in the first film, where it was half goofy comedy and half serious drama, the sequel goes all the way into the comedy and goofy nature and it manages to really shine because of it. There are little dramatic elements and heartwarming moments, but they don't override the film compared to the first film. On top of that, the comedy probably makes this one of Dreamwork's funniest films to date with well-written banter, deliveries, innuendos, and slapstick.

One of the biggest surprises that the sequel offers is the full return of the cast reprising their roles, including the now A-list Ryan Reynolds and Emma Stone. Stone returning as Eep continues to offer her charisma and the rebellious nature of the character is now played up for comedy rather than drama. Reynolds as Guy feels far more in nature with the actor's persona and makes Guy the wholesome yet clueless partner of the blossoming romance. Nicholas Cage as Grug almost steals the entire film as Cage manages to go full "Cage" and overact like never before. Grug was already enjoyable, but now he's one of my favourite characters that Dreamworks has put out. Another neat surprise is that some of the side cast has actually improved from before. Catherine Keener as Ugga manages to get a lot of milage from her rivalvry with Mrs. Betterman and her bond with Grug and Eep. Cloris Leachman, in one of her last performances, completely hams it up as Gran and her fixation of the female-empowered clan she once took part of known as "the Thunder Sisters". Even Chunky the Death Cat and Douglass have more personality as the loyal pet and mode of transportation for the family. However, the same can't be said for Belt and Thunk. Belt is far more minor compared to the previous film (mainly due to Sander's lack of involvement in the story), which is good since the sloth's humour was a bit hit-and-miss. But Clark Duke's Thunk has actually reduced in his character as his running gag is that he's obsessed with his window/screen. To be fair, Thunk does have some of the funniest moments of the film, but you almost forget that he is a character in the film since he's the only one to not have a type of arc or relevance in the film. And then there are the Bettermans, who some people can't stand because of their awful personality. However, I think it's their personality that actually makes them so enjoyable as well as their mini-character arcs for accepting the Croods. Peter Dinklage is practically competing with Cage in how much he can overact as the laid-back and egocentric Phil, Leslie Mann is hilarious as the passive-aggressive Hope, and Kelly Marie Tran is so loveable as the bubbly and carefree Dawn who manages to befriend Eep rather than spite her. Overall, I think the characters (minus Thunk) manages to greatly improve from before as the returning actors and actresses are far more comfortable in their roles and the energy of the sequel, and the newcomers are talented enough to be on par with the seasoned cast and making their characters stand out.

The animation is frankly a huge improvement from before, despite it seeming like a downgrade at first. The first film had the odd decision to utilize motion-capture for the character animation in order to make them feel more realistic and grounded in their movements despite their cartoonish designs. Because of the pandemic and the reduced budget, the sequel completely ditches the motion-capture and just made the characters fully animated. This decision manages to benefit the movie in so many ways. Not only does the animation contrast better with the tone and elements, but it manages to actually make the film even funnier. The various expressions and exaggerations from the characters can be priceless at times and there are so many little gags in the facial responses alone that it makes the film ooze with personality. The only drawback of the switch in animation is that the textures of the characters aren't as detailed, aside from the hair, which is not a bad thing considering the uncanny valley the original film had to endure from people. The colours are also even more vibrant than ever and there's still variety in the use of colours depending on the setting and atmosphere. The world also manages to expand with the new vegetation, new animals such as the wolf-spiders and even expansion on established elements such as the punch-monkeys having their own society and agenda. The score by Mark Mothersbaugh replaces the one from Alan Silvestri with only a few renditions of Silvestri's work used in the sequel. While Mothersbaugh's music works fine for the film and respective scenes, Silvestri does have more memorable themes and cues from the first film. However, the soundtrack almost blows Silvestri's offerings out of the park as the sequel manages to use a spaced amount of established and original songs. "I Think I Love You" by the Partridge Family is so well utilized to enforce Eep and Guy's teen romance and the end credits uses an awesome cover version of the song by "Tenacious D". The film also has an original rock song called "Feel the Thunder" during the climax that actually works so well that I legitimately thought it was an already existing song from a couple decades ago. Overall, it's no secret that first-time director, Joel Crawford, made the sequel his own and has quickly been promoted to save another sequel from developmental hell, "Puss in Boots: The Last Wish".

"The Croods: A New Age" is shockingly great, despite the first film's reputation and the sequel's production troubles. While the story is a bit unoriginal at times, Thunk is still a nothing character, and Motherbaugh's score isn't as memorable as Silvestri's contributions, that's all the flaws the sequel endured. The tone is unapologetically goofy and fast-paced, the comedy is extremely sharp with dozens of jokes offered left and right, Eep and Guy offer a cute and funny relationship thanks to the talented Stone and Reynolds, Grug is even better than ever with Cage being himself as always, Ugga and Gran have much more to do now than just being reactionary characters, Phil and Hope are fantastically overracted by Dinklage and Mann, Dawn is so innocent and wholesome thanks to Trans's performance, the animation has improved extremely thanks to the revamped character movements and expressions, the colours and world-building are built up upon, and the lyrical songs introduced use a familiar favourite and a catchy original that add to the personality of the film. If the mistakes were patched up, this would actually be a comedic masterpiece. As is though, it serves as a healthy reminder that Dreamworks is still able to produce great content, even if it comes from the most unexpected of projects.

Verdict: 8.5/10. An amazing sequel to an average Dreamworks film. Hopefully this does sets a new age for the once-glorious animation studio...