Film Review- The Good Dinosaur

     So, in my very ill-spent youth, I surfed the web extensively. I also had an obsession with dinosaurs. Both of those collided when I found out about the "Speculative Dinosaur Project." Basically, it was a collaborative online project which describes a world where the Dinosaurs never went extinct, and evolved into present time. It was very creative, as far as I could tell, given most of the site was blocked off (in German.) It is virtually gone now, though the Wayback Machine could access those old pages, and there are places where the ideas live on. I start my review with this, because since discovering it, I have been fascinated with the idea of a world where the dinosaurs never went extinct, and they continued to reign. If you want to go earlier, The New Dinosaurs by Scottish naturalist Douglas Dixon is also a good spin on the idea. Still, even with the my longtime fascination with the premise, I was skeptical of The Good Dinosaur. Primarily because the way it was described by the people who made it was... eh. I was not interested in watching farmer dinosaurs. The trailers didn't really help with that. Maybe because I had seen Inside Out, which was a great film by all measures, but I felt, in the end, The Good Dinosaur would not measure up. Now that I've watched the film, it doesn't measure up. But, it's still good. A lot better than I thought.
    Before I get into the film, I just briefly want to discuss the opening short, Sanjay's Super Team. It revolves around Sanjay, who was forced to do the traditional Hindu prayers with his father, rather than watch his beloved superhero cartoons. He then fantasizes about the Hindu gods (Vishnu, Hanuman, and Durga) fighting a demon (presumably Ravana) in the style of those cartoons he watched. As someone who grew up watching a lot of Cartoon Network, and was also raised in a Hindu household, it appealed to the child inside me, and I am likely more inclined to enjoy it than others, who don't share that background. Still, it was enjoyable, fun, and cute. I just wanted to bring that up.
    The actual film, as I said, is set in a world where the Dinosaurs never went extinct. Millions of years after the asteroid missed, they have some form of early agriculture. The film focuses around Arlo (Raymond Ochoa), the youngest (and smallest) of a family of sauropod farmers.(All of whom remind me of the Sinclair Oil logo) They farm corn, primarily, and raise these odd chicken like dinosaur. (This bothered me throughout the film. Sauropods have long necks, so they could feed in trees. Why would they grow corn, which is very low to the ground? And if they were herbivores, why are they raising chickens. The only reason to raise chickens is to eat them. Am I overthinking this?) Anyway, Arlo's family includes his parents, Henry (Jeffrey Wright) and Ida (Frances McDormand), his brother Buck (Marcus Scribner), and his sister Libby (Maleah Padilla). Arlo's main problem on the farm is his cowardice, which makes his main responsibility as chicken feeder difficult. While his siblings gain the respect of their parents (symbolized by a muddy print on the food storage building), Arlo struggles with his intense fear. To soothe this, Henry decides to give Arlo the responsibility of preventing a pest from feeding on their food storage, by trapping and killing it. Arlo manages to catch the little culprit, a little humanoid creature later dubbed "Spot" (Jack Bright) (He's not named Spot until later, but for convenience, I'll call him Spot), but does not have the heart to kill it. Arlo lets it go. However, Henry then scolds Arlo for letting it go, and forces him to join him in capturing Spot in a storm ridden mountains. However, Arlo is injured, and Henry is forced to turn back, right as a major flood occurs. Arlo watches as his father drowns. Arlo then encounters Spot again, and furious from his father's death, he chases him, but both are caught in the river, and Arlo is knocked out. He wakes up to find himself miles from home, along with Spot. While initially hostile to poor Spot, Arlo grows to like him, particularly after Spot leds him to some berries, and saves him from a snake with legs. Arlo, remembering his father's advice that the river will led him home, resolves to go back, with Spot by his side. All the while, he encounters colorful characters, like an eccentric Styracosaurus named Forrest (Peter Sohn, who directed the film. It is also his debut as a director), a band of pterosaurs, led by Thunderclap (Steve Zahn), who are viciously fanatical carnivores (and my sister pointed out to me later that they were meant to parody apocalyptic religious fanatics, so thanks to her), and a group of Tyrannosaur ranchers, father Butch (Sam Elliot) and siblings Nash (A.J. Buckley) and Ramsey (Anna Paquin). Can Arlo and Spot return home to their families.
   First, I really like the production design, particularly the backgrounds. I live in Colorado, and I sometimes drive through the state. It easily replicates the environments I see whenever I head into the mountains. It looks beautiful. The animation is also well done (par for the course regarding Pixar). I liked the way Arlo was animated. Loose and flexible, which allows for a lot of creative gags and fluid motion. Sort of like a classic 2-D cartoon transposed to a 3-D setting. The character designs for most of the character also benefit from this flexibility. It's also has a lot of creative ideas, like, for instance, using a cricket for a harmonica. The plot is not deeply complex, but it does have the appeal of a traditional Campbellian "Hero's Journey," which makes films like Star Wars enjoyable.
    A lot of times, Arlo makes very poor decisions, which cause problems later on. I understand this is meant to show that he is making mistakes and growing, but really, there are moments, where Arlo should have made the other choice. There is also not a lot exciting about the plot. Like I said, it's a standard Hero's Journey. Not a lot of intrigue. It's not bad, but it really doesn't hold up compared to other Pixar films. There is also a lot of things that outright don't make sense when you think about them.
   This surprised me. It honestly did. It was fairly good. Not just decent. Legitimately good. I really enjoyed it. Not one of the best films of the year, but one I'm glad I watched once. If you want a really good Pixar film, well, Inside Out's on DVD now, so go watch that. If you just want a film to watch for your younger relative, I'd say go and watch it. Thanks for reading.

Movie Review- Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part II

      If you've been cryogenically frozen since 2007, or have been astrally projected to the Kuiper Belt, The Hunger Games is a popular book series, centered around a futuristic gladitorial games held in a nation called Panem, by an oppressive post-apocalyptic government called the Capitol, against 13 districts, who had rebelled in the distant past, and the eventual rebellion against said government. The three books, Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay, have become New York Times best sellers, and have essentially defined a new era of post apocalyptic, young adult novels. The film adaptations have introduced the concepts and characters into a larger pop cultural landscape. Me? I'm ambivalent towards the series. I liked the first book. Detested the second book. Never finished the third one. Conversely, I didn't like the first film. It felt bloated, excessive, somewhat overly serious, and proved to be a difficult adaptation. The second film was an improvement, both on the problems of the first film (much more focused and concise), and the book (marked differences between it and its predecessor). I liked the third film, though I wouldn't exactly call it a great film, by any measure. So, is this a good send-off to the franchise. Well, let's take a look....
      An adaptation of the second part to the third book of the franchise created by Suzanne Collins. the film picks up where the last left off. Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) is recovering from the beating Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutchenson) gave her. He has been brainwashed by the Capitol, and is suffering from a bout of severe paranoia and delusion. Meanwhile, as the rebels continue to press on, they plan to take a Capitol military base in District 2. Katniss joins in, but sees the rebels committing atrocities against Capitol refugees. She is shot by one of the refugees. She spirals into depression afterwards. During this time, she decides to finally end her, and the district's, suffering, by killing President Coriolanus Snow (Donald Sutherland). However, this is rejected by President Alma Coin (Julianne Moore) and  Plutarch Heavensbee (Phillip Seymour Hoffman, sadly in his final role). Instead, she ultimately sneaks on a transport to the rebel held area of the Capitol, where she joins a squad, which serve as more a publicity face for the battle, not actually serving. This group includes Finnick (Sam Claflin), who recently married lover Annie (Stef Dawson), and Boggs (Mahershala Ali), and is led by Commander Paylor (Patina Miller). They are joined by Peeta, who is now functional, although still mentally unstable from the brainwashing (or "hijacking") the Capitol forces gave him. As they trudge on to Snow's mansion, they learn that the battle isn't over yet. Katniss also begins to doubt the intentions of President Coin, wondering what are her plans when they finally rid of Snow, and the oppressive policies of the Capitol....

     Technically, the film is decently made. The set design, as always, looks very impressive, very futuristic in the Capitol, very classic in the Districts. The acting, also as always, is very good. Jennifer Lawrence virtually disappears into the role of Katniss, and Josh Hutchenson is very good as the mentally unstable Peeta. The seasoned actors in the cast also give it their all. It has a good plot, and from what my sister told me afterwards, it was largely accurate to the book. It also looks and feels large and epic, which should be required of any conclusion to any long running franchise. It also has a small, very intimate ending to contrast the pomp and circumstance of the rest of the film

     This was long. REALLY LONG. Some scenes just drag minutes after it should have ended. Especially the calmer moments, which take nearly forever to conclude. This length is my primary problem with this film. It felt like an eternity for the film to get from one plot point to the next. I suppose it suffers from the same problem that Halloween II did: it essentially amounts to an extended third act. And because of that, it feels extremely padded, and you really just want it to get the interesting part, as in the end. Also, the cinematography during the action scenes made some scenes hard to see. As in, it was hard to tell what was even going on. This is apparent during a scene set in a sewer. Several characters died, yet it was hard for me to tell which had died, because the camera would not focus on the characters long enough for me to actually distinguish them. Speaking of that scene, that scene was odd. It was like the film turned into a found footage horror film for a few minutes. I was told that scene was in the book, but it felt completely incongruous with the rest of the movie.

   Honestly, I think my words are irrelevant in this case. If you were going to see it, you were likely to still see it regardless of what I had to say. Needless to say, if you watched and liked the first three movies, you're probably going to, or have already seen it, no matter what I have to say. If you haven't, there really isn't much to offer you. You do need to see the other films just to appreciate it. Me? Decent conclusion, though I would have preferred it not be split into two movies. That's all I have to say, folks. Next month is Pokecember, so join me, as I review the Pokemon films of the Advanced Generation.

Movie review- The Peanuts Movie

    Not much I could say about this one. Even you don't live in the United States, most of you are probably familiar with the Peanuts franchise largely through cultural dissemination, i.e. various uses of the characters in commercials, or cultural references in shows like The Simpsons and Family Guy.  Most of you in the US are likely familiar with the basic premise either from the comic strip it originated from, or several holiday specials made in the 60's and 70's. I suppose I could tell you why it's called Peanuts. Apparently, it's an old term for "children", which fits the strip. I suppose. That's also why a rowdy audience is called a "Peanut gallery." On old TV shows, there was a children audience in the background. Shulz actually wanted to name the strip "Li'l Folks" or "Good Old Charlie Brown", but "Peanuts" was chosen isntead.

      Based on the long running comic strip by Charles M. Shulz, the film revolves around everyone's favorite loser, Charlie Brown (Noah Schnapp). He is not good at much, but he is a good person at heart. He also always has the company of various colorful character, including his younger sister, Sally (Mariel Sheets), his blanket loving friend Linus (Alex Garfin), HIS sister, the very vain and condescending Lucy (Hadley Belle Miller), piano player Schroeder (Noah Johnston), tomboyish Peppermint Patty (Venus Omega Schultheis), and her sidekick Marcie (Rebecca Bloom), and of course, Charlie Brown's loyal beagle Snoopy, and his bird friend Woodstock (both voiced by Bill Melendez via archive recording). In the unnamed town they live in, a "Little Red Haired Girl" (Francesca Angelucci Capaldi) moves into town, and Charlie Brown is deeply smitten with her, and is determined to impress and grab her attention. However, he is not the most impressive of people. Lucy (in the role of "psychiatrist") advises him to remold himself as a winner. However, every one of his attempts to impress end up backfiring miserably. Can Charlie Brown overcome his various shortcomings and impress the "Little Red-Haired Girl". A B-Plot is Snoopy, inspired by his master's love story, deciding to write his own love story on a typewriter he found in the garbage. Basically, this is an adaptation of those scenes where Snoopy battles World War I flying ace the Red Baron, but with an added bonus of a love interest, Fifi (Kristin Chenoweth, for some reason; she barely says anything in the film). This B-Plot serves the same purpose as the "Tales of the Black Freighter" did in Watchmen. Just parallel the main story, and underscore the message of the whole affair.

     I was impressed by the animation of this film. It looks like those old tv specials, but expanded into 3-D. They even have moments where there are 2-D effects surrounding the characters, which was a nice touch. At the same time, they do take advantage of the more fluid animation process available, and it feels more fluid. I'm glad they took voice actors who actually sound like the people in the old specials, not just shoe-horn in celebrity voice actors, which would have ruined the effects. The main story is cute.  Snoopy is, as always the highlight of the piece, with his subplot very entertaining, and him having the best gags in the entire movie. The score, at times, also uses that very iconic jazz soundtrack, which is always enjoyable to hear.

    I suppose I did have an issue with the more openly slapstick tone of the film. From what I remember, the sense of humor deployed was more nuanced and subtle in the bits involving the kids. They revolved around more sardonic humor and failure (with sentimental moments, of course).The film uses a lot of fast paced physical humor. I suppose that's why those bits with Snoopy work the best. Those were the bits in the original cartoons, which used physical comedy, and used them to memorable effect (primarily because Snoopy spoke like he had a hairball in lungs). Again, I might be misremembering the original shorts. Maybe they did have more physical bits. I didn't read much of the comic strip, so I don't know if it was common there as well. Also, remember that soundtrack? Yeah, it's inconsistent. Sometimes, it's the piano based portion, sometimes its orchestral. Not very distracting, but got my attention.

      This is a cute movie. Something nice and simple for children. I admit, I enjoyed the film, and I did laugh alot. (Although I could have done without the kid behind making comments at the film) It has a good message of never giving up, no matter the circumstances. So, if you like Peanuts growing, you'd probably like this. If you have any relatives 10 or younger, they'll enjoy the film. That's all I have really to say.
   Next time, we go from Everytown, USA, to Everytown, USA in a post-apocolyptic dictatorship. Yeah, bad segway, sorry.  Next review is the final installment in the Hunger Games franchise, Mockingjay, Part II.



         

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- The Babadook

     Jennifer Kent was an Australian actresss, who grew tired of acting. Seeking something new, she had asked to assist Danish filmmaker Lars van Trier on his 2003 film Dogville, which the latter accepted. She learned most of her film-making technique from working on Dogville. Using this experience, she directed a short film in 2005 called Monster, about a mother and child being tormented by a monster. At some point, she decided to expand the premise of that short film into a feature length picture. Kent, inspired by her experiences on Dogville, decided to assemble a "family" of sorts to help her make the film smoothly. Among the people she recruited was her old drama school classmate Esse Davis, Polish director of photography Radek Ladczuk (his first English picture), and American illustrator Alexander Juhasz. While the producer was able to raise $1 million, they still needed around $30,000 for sets, so they turned to Kickstarter to raise the remaining budget. The film was shot primarily around Adelaide, South Australia. A Victorian style home was built specifically for the film. Released in 2014, it was critically acclaimed, and a moderate financial success.

        Amelia (Esse Davis) is a widow struggling to raise her 6 year old son, Sam (Noah Wiseman), after the death of her husband while he was driving her to hospital to give birth. Sam is a very troubled child. He has no friends, he was kicked out of school for emotional disturbance, and he seems to be obsessed with this imaginary monster, particularly building weapons to defeat it. Amelia receives little sympathy from her sister Claire (Hayley McElhinney), but is relatively well off in her job at a nursing home. One night, Sam gives Amelia a red story book called The Babadook, about a monster, who torments a person when they learn of its existence.. Amelia is clearly disturbed by the contents of the book, and Sam is convinced that the imaginary monster is the Babadook. Soon, a number of odd occurrences happen. Almost as if a ghost was there. After one incident, where Amelia finds glass in her soup, she rips up the Babadook book. At the party of Claire's daughter, Ruby (Chloe Hurn), Claire admits that she dislikes being around Amelia's house, primarily because of Sam. At the same time, after Ruby essentially bullies him, Sam punches her. On the drive home, Sam sees the Babadook again, but suffers a severe seizure. The doctor recommends sleeping pills for Sam. After giving Sam some sleeping pills, Amelia finds the book, restitched, and featuring even more distrurbing imagery of Amelia killing the family dog, Sam, and eventually herself. However, when she goes to the police to report a potential stalker, they notice her hands are black. She also sees the Babadook in the police station....

     This is another one that's hard to talk about. Not for the reasons last time, but because it is very, very good, and I don't want to give anything away. You have to see this film in order to fully appreciate it. Merely reading the synopsis doesn't do the film justice. First, Esse Davis is incredible in this role. She knows how to be sympathetic in one scene, while also psychotic in another, but pulls it off with consistency. She was the best part of this movie. The relationship between Amelia and her son, the basic heart of the story, is done so well, some scene are difficult to watch, because it is emotionally hard to watch scenes, where Amelia has to deal with such a difficult child, or having to yell at her son, even though it is obvious she loves him deeply. Because the film shows us the relationship, and establishes it. This mother-son relationship aspect, in my opinion, overshadows the monster, though that is also handled well. In fact, I think the two are interconnected. My interpretation is that the monster was never real. It is merely the manifestation of Amelia's and Sam's collective grief at losing their husband and father, respectively. Amelia couldn't handle the stress of raising Sam alone, so she begins to hallucinate about the imaginary monster Sam keeps finding. Minor spoiler, but the Babadook is never actually shown fully, which ties into this theory quite well. Granted, I'm not sure if that is the filmmakers intention, but that's my interpretation of the film. There is actually a lot more to talk about. In fact, I could go on for hours about the film. But that would require spoilers.

    I can't think of any major flaws with this film. I could go into some nitpicking, but in the end, it still has no major flaws. This film was incredibly good. I can't praise it enough, nor can anyone else. I implore you. Even if you're not a horror fan, you should go watch this movie. Don't go in, though, expecting your typical gory monster flick, because it isn't. It is a film about a mother and son dealing with grief, while being haunted by a mysterious entity. You have to know that going in. Please, go and see this. It is definitely worth your time.

 Happy All Saints Day, everyone. Please remember not to eat candy in one go,  to rake the leaves, and always look under your bed. Just in case. Anyway, hope you join us next year.