I think most of this film’s reviewers have all got it wrong.

Yes, Robin Williams’ comedic genius is marvelously on display. Yes, the animators who kept up with Williams’ rapid-fire antics and those who animated the adorable magic carpet all deserve the mountains of praise they received. Yes, Princess Jasmine was anachronistic (not portrayed accurately according to the times and traditions of the film). But was it a ‘will the boy get the girl’ film? I don’t think so.

Aladdin, himself, asks the greatest question of the story: Will anyone ever see that I’m so much more than just some street rat?

The answer is given by the sultan at the end of the film: Today, you have demonstrated your worth. Aladdin was even qualified to be sultan!

What positive traits did Aladdin demonstrate that set him apart from the other characters in the story? Perseverance, gentleness, compassion, patience, kindness, ingenuity, common sense, gratitude, loyalty, sincerity, and acknowledgment of the worth of other people in both lower and higher classes than himself. And—once his question had been answered and someone had seen he was more than just a street rat—he responded with modesty, humility, and joy.

Okay, yes, he was a liar and a thief. There would be no story without that. All good stories take the hero on a progression, usually a successful progression through something they must learn to win the prize at story’s end (in this case the prize being Princess Jasmine).

Aladdin’s progression started with thieving for physical survival. By story’s end he had learned the importance of honesty and integrity, even when he knew it might cost him the girl he loved. “The diamond in the rough” had begun to be polished—and isn’t that something we all long for?


Related Reviews:
Animated movies
WALL-E (2008)
Cars (2006)


Other Critic's Reviews:
The Washington Post
The Austin Chronicle



Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See:
Watching Movies Through a Christian Lens

Labels: animated, film, Linda Larkin, movie view, Robin Williams, Scot Weinger

My children love this story. Given how truly subversive, or just plain awful, kids entertainment is these days, the old Disney classics are great to have around.

One thing that strikes me watching the movie as an adult is that the actors are the bad guys in the story. As they explain in the film, an actor’s life is one of selfish irresponsibility and is essentially hollow and meaningless. I like that. I like that a great deal.

If you have children, this is a safe, harmless ditty. Be mindful that Pinocchio does smoke a cigar and drink beer which may upset some parents. But those parents probably need to settle down. It is okay by me; my boys have a running shot of seeing me with a cigar and beer. As long as they don't partake until they are men, we're fine.




My long-suffering wife has just interjected that my children are also prone to seeing me turn into a jackass. That doesn't make being a jerk acceptable. Point taken.


Related Reviews:
Other animated movies
The Incredibles (2004)
Bambi (1942)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Decent Films Guide
Rotten Tomatoes



Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See:
Watching Movies Through a Christian Lens

Labels: animated, classic, Disney, film, movie review

Short Review: If you ignore the lack of humor, originality or actual content, you will probably enjoy this, at least for a while.



This is content-free movie making. There is nothing at the heart of this essentially unnecessary sequel to Toy Story. It is a series of perils and little else. Woody, Buzz Lightyear and Jesse along with their cadre of other old toys have been discarded for years as their owner Andy has grown up. Andy is now moving out to college and his toys have been donated to a daycare center.


The daycare center is run by a cruel teddy bear named Lotso. Lotso condemns the new arrivals to live in the toddler's room where the children play too rough and torment their toys. Woody who gets separated from the others comes to the rescue of his friends. This leads to him sneaking around, chase sequences and other visually grabbing moments. What is missing is a point. There is plenty that happens throughout the movie but very little that has any real value other than just sitting there and taking it in.

Yes, I understand I'm talking about a movie with talking toys.

Even kids movies have a point and can be told with proper, solid stories. The original Toy Story had some depth, not much, but enough. Woody faced being replaced, forgotten in his own time. The juxtaposition between the old-fashioned (Woody) and the new and improved (Buzz Lightyear) was a strong place from which to write. There were issues regarding one's purpose, friendship and judging others.


In this outing, there are fleeting moments where content could have been inserted but those moments remained empty. Instead we are given toys that shout about their desire not to be thrown out. The loud protests cover the fact that there is nothing really going on in the characters.

I can recommend this film, but not strongly. It is enjoyable, the characters are still likable and the filmmakers have some inventiveness. My recommendation in place, I will say that you shouldn't expect to be blown away. This is not a great movie. It's barely a good one. It is lukewarm, but in a summer of dead cold productions - lukewarm is pretty good.


Worldview:

Given that these are talking toys, the theological musings are kept to a minimum. Woody does commit himself to his duty to Andy. He knows his purpose in life and sticks to the plan, even when everything looks hopeless. He is right to do so.

There are a couple of interesting moments beyond Woody's denial of his self-interest. The display of Ken, I found to be interesting. Ken, Barbie's accessory, is shown to be a sissy-boy who likes clothes, fancy things and ascots. He is not a man's man. This fact is routinely exploited for laughs. In our politically correct society, this mockery is not common, and in my book - very welcome. They actually make an appropriate cross-dressing joke (that sounds worse than it is). This is a good thing. Anything that reinforces the fact of gender roles in our debased society is a good thing.


The other item I noted is the overall anti-authoritarian slant of the storyline. The daycare is lorded over by Lotso, a thuggish teddy bear. The toys fight to escape his clutches. The toys loathe being controlled and long to live free to be themselves, to fulfill their passion to be useful (i.e. be played with). This is a nice message supporting the idea that we have a point in life beyond being tools for the State. We have a purpose and are happiest when we spend our existence exploring that reason for being.

One final note in this section, the Lotso character plays differently today than he would have just three years ago. After the Bush-era, it is odd to have an authoritarian figure on screen without some clunky reference to Bush/Cheny. I found myself waiting for that political boot to drop - it never did. My flinching, waiting to be hit with an agenda, reminded me of how ingrained the politics of filmmakers have gotten into their works. Maybe since a liberal is in office, perhaps we can finally relax and enjoy entertainers getting back to entertaining, at least until election season kicks in again.

Cautions:

This is Pixar so there is no critical cautions for parents. I will say that there are a few moments of deep peril that may be a bit much for the younger and/or more sensitive kids. There is also a scary monkey - he freaked out my six-year-old.




Related Reviews:
Pixar movies
Cars (2006)
The Incredibles (2004)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Christianity Today
The Film Reel


Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: animated, film, Joan Cusack, Michael Keaton, movie review, Ned Beatty, Pixar, Tim Allen, Tom Hanks

Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: animated, Anne Hathaway, film, George Lopez, movie trailer, Rodrigo Santoro

Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: animated, film, Michael Keaton, movie trailer, Tim Allen, Tom Hanks

How to Train Your Dragon is Dreamworks latest 3D animated adventure featuring Vikings, dragons, and monsters. The story is a sort of Androcles and the Lion parable where the main character "Hiccup", is a nerdy 98 pound weakling of a Viking who desperately wants to kill a dragon to impress the hottest girl in the village.

During a devastating dragon attack, Hiccup manages to shoot down one of the most dangerous and elusive dragons. Unfortunately, it is still alive and he can't bring himself to dispatch the helpless critter with his only weapon - a tiny, rather symbolic, knife.

Instead, Hiccup discovers the dragon can be quickly tamed, trained and flown - which doesn't sit well in a village where every building has had to be rebuilt due to dragon attacks and the art of killing them is considered a necessary survival skill.

The movie is cleverly written and the art design excellent. The story moves pretty well right up until it gets to the anti-war on terror message. The message may act as a bit of a sucker punch for adults, but will likely be missed by the kids. The final outcome of the story tends to moderate the message in any case.
Pet peeve: the usual PC female lead who can and does literally kick the butt of the protagonist.



Related Reviews:
Animated movies
Chicken Little (2005)
Chicken Run (2000)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Culture Catch
Robert Ebert




Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: adaptation, Amadeus, America Ferrera, animated, Craig Ferguson, film, Gerald Butler, Jay Baruchel, Jonah Hill, Kristen Wiig, movie review

Animator Nick Park's claymation duo Wallace and Gromit has an international following of devoted fans. For years, Park has delivered the goods with clever, well-structured short films Wallace and Gromit in A Close Shave, A Grand Day Out with Wallace and Gromit and the brilliant Wallace & Gromit in The Wrong Trousers. Following the success of these shorts, Park was given license to expand his inventive work to the full-length film Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit.

Were-Rabbit was loaded with puns and fun but seemed a little stretched in its full-length format. With Wallace & Gromit: A Matter of Loaf and Death, Park returns to his more comfortable short form. Made for television, this film clocks in at thirty minutes. Too bad Park is working with about ten minutes of material.

The pair get wrapped up in a murder mystery while they run a bakery. The production has a rushed feeling, as if it wasn't done cooking. A few more runs at the script perhaps? The visuals don't compare to the previous films and the jokes lack Park's joyful punch.

I hate to write these words, but it appears Park phoned this one in.



Related Reviews:
Animated films
Monsters, Inc. (2001)
Toy Story (1995)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
PopMatters
The One-Line Review

Labels: animated, Nick Park

Along with Bambi, this film is the foundation of the entire Disney empire and for good reason. This is an intricate film that stands as one of the great pieces of animation. The script captures the perfect tone and paces the story marvelously. Like Sleeping Beauty, Snow White’s villain the Queen/Witch is a notable nemesis. Her motivation is easy to understand keeping her cruel plotting in clear context. When she arrives at Snow White’s doorstep with the poisoned apple, there is actual tension, which is remarkable for a decades old children’s movie.

If you know a kid who hasn’t seen this movie, you know a kid who isn’t being raised right. This is one of maybe three family movies I consider a must-see.


Related Reviews:
Animated movies
Beavis & Butthead Do America (1996)
Meet the Robinsons (2007)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
FilmCritic.com
At-A-Glance Film Reviews

Labels: animated, classic, Disney, film, movie review

This is a second (or third) tier Disney movie for a reason. The story of King Arthur gets some sight gags and animated animals. The animation is uninspired, the story lags and the characterization are flat. Imagine the tale of King Arthur and Arthur is a bore.

Children will probably find the physical jokes a hoot. The evil wolf and others are constantly falling down, spilling things over and bumping into things. All of these gags are shoehorned into distract from the lacking story.

There are far superior kids movies available, including many Disney films. Why waste your time with second (or third) rate material?


Related Reviews:
Animated movies
Robots (2005)
Pinocchio (1940)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Film Father
Movie Mom

Labels: animated, classic, Disney, film, movie review

This is a rare film: a non-Pixar animated film that isn’t irritating and avoids scatological jokes. While this still doesn’t compare to the brilliance of almost all of the Pixar films, its still better than 90% of the kids movies dumped into the culture every year.

Susan (Reese Witherspoon) is a meek bride-to-be who lives in the shadow of her narcissistic fiancee Derek (Paul Rudd). Susan is struck by a meteor on her wedding day. The radiation transforms her into a giant, later she is . Due to her monstrous size, she is captured by the government and renamed Ginormica. The government imprisons with other monsters: an amorphous blob named B.O.B. (Seth Rogen), a smart giant cockroach/scientist named Dr. Cockroach Ph. D. (Hugh Laurie) and a brutish monster known as The Missing Link (Will Arnett). A brood of aliens attack Earth and Ginormica and her new monster pals are enlisted to fight off the exterrestrial threat.

The plot for the film is predictable and a bit slow. On the upside, the script does have some bright spots in its characte work. This film is saved by its personality and light charm, that and it's a kid’s movie that’s actually safe for the kids. It is light on agenda and avoids crudity. Someone somewhere must have made a mistake.

While it is not a must-see, its also not a must-avoid-at-all-costs.



Related Reviews:
Animated movies
Kung-Fu Panda (2008)
Chicken Little (2005)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Decent Films Guide
Roger Ebert

Labels: animated, Hugh Laurie, Keifer Sutherland, Paul Rudd, Reese Witherspoon, Seth Rogen, Stephen Colbert, Will Arnett

While not the best, it is one of Disney’s more memorable films. This is a case where the villain outshines the hero. The villain Maleficent is a fully conceived, potent nasty who overwhelms the precious heroine Princess Aurora. Aurora is a wisp of a girl who has little going on other than her relationship with Prince Phillip.

The film is well structured and still entertains even in this age of hyperactive, screaming animated flicks. For a break from the breakfast cereal commercials with plots that comprise a bulk of the animated films released these days, this calm, intricately created classic is well worth your consideration.


Related Reviews:
Animated movies
The Care Bears Movie (1985)
The Incredibles (2004)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Decent Films Guide
The Onion A.V. Club

Labels: animated, classic, Disney, film, movie review

Short Review: It's called Up but the plot never takes off.


It appears that Pixar’s quiver is just about empty. I’ve been praising Pixar for a long time and see them as one of the most consistent and reliable shops in business. Something that has always impressed me about Pixar’s films is how realized they all have been. From the carefully crafted scripts to the detailed visual designs, each outing up to this point has been worthy of the praise it has received. This film makes me worried that they have finally run out of ideas.

Like most other Pixar films, this movie centers on a journey. In this case, we are following Carl, an old man who straps balloons on to his house and flies away to a idyllic land in South America. He does this to fulfill the lifelong dream of his deceased wife Ellie. The set up for this works wonderfully and plays into the strengths of the story. Carl is a curmudgeon but we know he is a softy at heart. He remains in his home despite the developers and construction workers laboring literally right outside his door. Carl does his best to protect his home and by extension his memories of Ellie. This conflict works and is interesting, but it is a brief sideshow. In a moment of desperation mixed with inspiration, Carl hooks his house up to the balloons and he floats away in his house. This kills the conflict with the developer and sends the whole production down a dead end. The movie effectively ends at this point and it lingers on with no central conflict. XXX lands in South America and finds a villain that puts him in peril but the conflict is forced and illogical. It is there so Carl has something to do. Heck, the entire second half of the movie is there so Carl has something to do. There's no continual conflict from the beginning of the film to the end. This leads to a broken focus and a meandering storyline.

This is easily the weakest of all Pixar movies, including A Bug’s Life and Toy Story 2. This is a Pixar short stretched out to meet a longer running time.

The film isn't a complete loss. The visuals are pleasant to watch and there are moments that work. In particular the opening. The realtionship between Carl and Ellie is condensed into a tight review that is one of the best character summaries I've seen. It is truly moving.

I don’t recommend this film if you’re going because you trust Pixar. Its just not that good. If you’re going to entertain the kids, then this will work. It probably won’t be a huge hit with the kids but it should keep them quiet for a while.







Related Reviews:
Pixar movies
Cars (2006)
The Incredibles (2004)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Fistful of Donuts
Big Fanboy Reviews

Labels: animated, film, movie review, Pixar

Because there's so many unanswered questions from the first two.




Screenwriter: Michael Arndt (Little Miss Sunshine)
Director: Lee Unkrich (Finding Nemo)
Actors: Tom Hanks (The Da Vinci Code), Tim Allen (Redbelt), Michael Keaton (White Noise), Don Rickles (Dirty Work) and John Ratzenberger (Cars)

Labels: animated, Don Rickles, film, John Ratzenberger, Michael Keaton, movie trailer, Pixar, Tim Allen, Tom Hanks

Zack Snyder’s adaptation of Watchmen didn’t cover the entire series. This is understandable since the episodic nature of the books isn’t capable of being translated to screen. First, it would take too much time to present all of the material. Secondly, its structure would be too chaotic for most audiences. This direct-to-video animated accompaniment to the film is for serious fanboys only, and even these geeky losers may turn their nose up to this nonsense. The story is simple enough, having survived a deadly naval ambush, a captain creates a raft out of the corpses of his dead men. He sails the waves to the port where his enemies are celebrating. He shows up and slaughters said enemies. In the context of the graphic novel this all makes some thematic sense. On its own, it is a violent, gory and needless tale of empty revenge.

The story was never meant to stand alone. This film is proof.


Related Reviews:
Gerald Butler movies
Beowulf & Grendel (2005)
Rocknrolla (2008)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
PopMatters
DVD Verdict

Labels: animated, film, Gerald Butler, movie review, watchmen, Zack Snyder

Screenwriters: Bob Peterson (Finding Nemo)
Director: Peter Docter (Monsters, Inc.) and Bob Peterson
Actors: Christopher Plummer (Syriana), John Ratzenberger (Cars) and Edward Asner (JFK)

Labels: animated, Christopher Plummer, film, movie trailer, Pixar

Screenwriters: Jeffrey Price (Shrek the Third) and Peter S. Seaman (How the Grinch Stole Christmas)
Director: Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump)
Actors: Bob Hoskins (Doomsday), Christopher Lloyd (Things to Do in Denver When You're Dead), Joanna Cassidy (Blade Runner) and Kathleen Turner (Body Heat)

Labels: animated, Bob Hoskins, Christopher Lloyd, film, Joanna Cassidy, Kathleen Turner, movie trailer, Robert Zemeckis

Classic fairy tales updated with a sardonic post-modern viewpoint and fart jokes. This isn’t without its charm, despite the unnecessary sexual and scatological humor and it does contain some genuinely funny moments. Our culture has dropped a few levels which is why this is so beloved today. In decades past this would have been called out for what it is, classics smudged with bathroom humor.

I advise against the film since it is a deconstruction of useful fairy tales and replaces them with a hollow, modern gag fest. The film has nothing of value to impart except being an amusing waste of time. While kids may enjoy the movie, isn’t it better for them to become acquainted with better films? To come to know the classics which were made to entertain but with a respect for the audience? Why submit your kid to a life of butt-jokes and dick humor? Drop this nonsense and get them in front of Laurel and Hardy, old Walt Disney or Looney Tunes.


Related Reviews:
Animated movies
Charlotte's Web (2006)
Monsters, Inc. (2001)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Hollywood Jesus
Need Coffee

Labels: animated, Cameron Diaz, Eddie Murphy, film, Mike Myers, movie review

Short Review: A movie dumbly.



What's worse than a boring, pointless movie? A boring, pointless movie coated in intensely irritating animation. Writer/Director Richard Linklater (Dazed and Confused, Slackers) is responsible for this dismal yawn fest. To water this down, this is a bunch of bored actors portraying unattractive people yammering through seemingly endless strings of meaningless dialog. Every scene is bookmarked by an intrusive soundtrack that blasts during transitions. Linklater's script is surprisenly bad for someone who's been a professional screenwriter for so long. The dialog is wandering and at times completely incoherent. The characters offer no reason to like them. Its fine if the characters are dispicable people but it is only common sense for the writer to find something positive to give the audience to connect with. Linklater avoids this not because he's making a point, but because he's either ignorant of the flaw or too lazy to fix it.

Bad script. Lifeless acting. Grating animation. Don't bother.



Related Reviews:
Robert Downey Jr. movies
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005)
Iron Man (2008)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Rolling Stone
Film Critics United

Labels: animated, Keanu Reeves, Robert Downey Jr, Rory Cochrane, Winona Ryder, Woody Harrelson

Short Review: In a time when most family films are little more than subversive, strobe lights with soundtracks I have only one thing to say. Thank God for Pixar.


Living up to the pedigree of Pixar Animation is not an easy task. Pixar may be the only consistent and wholly trusted name in Hollywood these days. Each production from Monsters, Inc. to WALL-E is a high quality, and most importantly safe choice, for parents. Each of their outings has been a richly layered, intelligent gem. Nine major releases under their belt and only one (A Bug's Life) was less than stellar. Cars is another feather in their cap.

Like the other Pixar films, this is a character driven, morality tale about self-awareness and improvement. Rookie race car Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) is at the top of his game and hopes to win the coveted Piston Cup. On his way to California to the big race he is stranded in the nowhere town of Radiator Springs. Lightning McQueen gets into a spot of trouble in Radiator Springs and is sentenced by the town judge/doctor Doc Hudson (Paul Newman) to repave the main road in town (it makes sense in the film.) During his forced stay in the ghost town, McQueen must content with the town citizens including the buck-toothed tow truck Mater (Dan “Larry The Cable Guy” Whitney) and the sleek town attorney Sally (Bonnie Hunt.) The plot unfolds without many surprises but still satisfies thanks to well-rounded characters and some clever writing.

Comparing the content of this film is to what is found in other kids movies shows a stark difference. This film is a welcome break from the breakfast commercial pacing and rectum oriented jokes that are usually pushed at our kids. The opening of Cars involves a drawn out car race and there is plenty of lights, sound and flash. This hyper-paced, dazzling display has its purpose when contrasted with the remainder of the film. Other than the opening and closing race, the flash and kinetic pace slows to allow for an actual story to take place.

The standout of the film is Dan Whitney, a.k.a. Larry The Cable Guy as Mater. He is the obvious and best pick to play a small town redneck. He handles this role with a comfortable delivery and is the highlight in his scenes. Owen Wilson, Paul Newman, Bonnie Hunt and Michael Keaton also provide good performances. Then again, it is difficult imagining any actor messing this up. This isn't exactly Shakespeare. Despite characters shallow characters, they wind up being an inviting lot. Even the auxiliary members of the cast, while being stereotypes maintain a sense of fun. Having George Carlin portraying a burnt out hippie 60’s Volkswagen Van that wants to sell “natural blend” gas is going to have good results. Place him next door to a rough n’ ready military Jeep named Sarge and the jokes write themselves.

This film isn’t an unbelievable success like The Incredibles nor as touching as Finding Nemo. However, this is a fine piece in its own right if you're not expecting the world. It lingers in the second act and the jokes aren’t as spry as they are in Monsters, Inc. but it still entertains. The film relies heavily on puns and quick visual jokes for its humor. An example of this is the villainous race car Chick Hicks (Michael Keaton) has HTB sponsor stickers on his body. If one looks closely, HTB stands for Hostile Takeover Bank. It’s not hilarious but it’s a darn clever film and your kids will love it.

My five-year old son summed up the film well when he said the following:

“This movie’s too long, but we still gotta sit and keep watching it, it’s the best movie of all time.”


Related Reviews:
Other Pixar Films
The Incredibles (2004)
Finding Nemo (2003)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Celluloid Heroes
Dark Matters

Labels: animated, Bonnie Hunt, film, Larry the Cable Guy, movie review, Owen Wilson, Paul Newman, Pixar

For those who love VeggieTales this film will probably not disappoint. It retains all of the charm and humor that fans have come to expect. As a film however, it is lacking. The story of Jonah, as important as it is, does not translate well to the screen because of its broken structure. To accommodate the narrative holes the filmmakers are forced to sandwich the story between opening and closing scenes that have nothing to do with the biblical tale. These added scenes make the tale of Jonah just an extended piece of meta fiction. This makes portions of the film awkward since the focus is splintered. All of that and the script isn’t good. There’s a lack of inspiration in the movie, it comes across as something they had to do more than they wanted to do. It is as if they found themselves stuck with this biblical story and just couldn't figure out which direction to go with it. They made some choices for the sake of making choices and just ran them through to their end. There’s no overarching themes or symbols, no connecting humor, it’s all just episodic and forgettable. This said; kids will like it. It’s colorful and has music and is devoid of anything scary or too adult.


Related Reviews:
Animated movies
The Pirates Who Don’t Do Anything: A VeggieTales Movie (2008)
The Incredibles (2004)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Reel.com
Ain't It Cool News

Labels: animated, film, movie review, Veggie Tales