“Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil”

Movie Review

Directed by Mike Disa, Written by Mike Disa, Cory Edwards, Todd Edwards, and Tony Leech, 85 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Animated films can get away with a lot. Audiences watching on TV or at the movies suspend disbelief before even sitting down. These films create unrealistic characters and illogical worlds, never needing to justify its absurdity. Despite all of this, no animated film should ever be boring.

“Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil” commits this crime. Already stretching the first film’s premise to the world of unnecessary sequels, its charm wares off during the first lengthy action sequence. Unable to balance laughs with thrills, almost every scene, horribly converted into 3D, feels flat, causing the short 85-minute runtime to feel like an eternity.

The problems begin at a plot level. Red (Hayden Panettiere), having renounced the Happily Ever After Agency, turns to the “Sister Hood,” a type of culinary ninja clan. During her training, she learns of Granny’s (Glenn Close) kidnapping and asks her old partner, Wolf (Patrick Warburton), to help get her back.

Throw in a sub-plot about a magical truffle and some tired references to other, better movies, and you get “Hoodwinked Too!” The script tries to construct a zany fairy tale world a la “Shrek,” but forgets its prime motif just as quickly. Disa has these iconic characters, yet does nothing with them. Instead, the script relies heavily on stale pop-culture references and generic messages.

What the film has over its predecessor is the ever-popular, post-converted 3D look, which doesn’t fix the lackluster animation. Red and co. awkwardly sit in the sparse settings, bursting from the screen without depth or energy. The film has sat on the shelf since 2009 to add the 3D effect, but Disa should have concentrated on making his world look interesting.

This doesn’t come as too much of a surprise – most converted projects end up looking awkward -- but a good cast can overcome this problem--usually. “Hoodwinked Too!” boasts Glenn Close, Amy Poheler, Bill Hader, Joan Cusack and Patrick Warburton, yet no one seems to be in their element. Casting Poheler and Hader sounds like a good idea. Casting them as Hansel and Gretel does not. This film is the proof.

“Hoodwinked Too!” can’t seem to make heads or tails of what it wants to do. Instead, everything from the animation to the performances seems lazy, with each plot point and joke detracting from the already weak premise.

The very nature of animation is to appear lively, and if that’s the case, “Hoodwinked Too” fails at almost every turn.

Grade: D+

“Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil”

Movie Review

Directed by Mike Disa, Written by Mike Disa, Cory Edwards, Todd Edwards, and Tony Leech, 85 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Animated films can get away with a lot. Audiences watching on TV or at the movies suspend disbelief before even sitting down. These films create unrealistic characters and illogical worlds, never needing to justify its absurdity. Despite all of this, no animated film should ever be boring.

“Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil” commits this crime. Already stretching the first film’s premise to the world of unnecessary sequels, its charm wares off during the first lengthy action sequence. Unable to balance laughs with thrills, almost every scene, horribly converted into 3D, feels flat, causing the short 85-minute runtime to feel like an eternity.

The problems begin at a plot level. Red (Hayden Panettiere), having renounced the Happily Ever After Agency, turns to the “Sister Hood,” a type of culinary ninja clan. During her training, she learns of Granny’s (Glenn Close) kidnapping and asks her old partner, Wolf (Patrick Warburton), to help get her back.

Throw in a sub-plot about a magical truffle and some tired references to other, better movies, and you get “Hoodwinked Too!” The script tries to construct a zany fairy tale world a la “Shrek,” but forgets its prime motif just as quickly. Disa has these iconic characters, yet does nothing with them. Instead, the script relies heavily on stale pop-culture references and generic messages.

What the film has over its predecessor is the ever-popular, post-converted 3D look, which doesn’t fix the lackluster animation. Red and co. awkwardly sit in the sparse settings, bursting from the screen without depth or energy. The film has sat on the shelf since 2009 to add the 3D effect, but Disa should have concentrated on making his world look interesting.

This doesn’t come as too much of a surprise – most converted projects end up looking awkward -- but a good cast can overcome this problem--usually. “Hoodwinked Too!” boasts Glenn Close, Amy Poheler, Bill Hader, Joan Cusack and Patrick Warburton, yet no one seems to be in their element. Casting Poheler and Hader sounds like a good idea. Casting them as Hansel and Gretel does not. This film is the proof.

“Hoodwinked Too!” can’t seem to make heads or tails of what it wants to do. Instead, everything from the animation to the performances seems lazy, with each plot point and joke detracting from the already weak premise.

The very nature of animation is to appear lively, and if that’s the case, “Hoodwinked Too” fails at almost every turn.

Grade: D+

"Rio"

Movie Review

Directed by Carlos Saldanha, Written by Carlos Saldanha and Don Rhymer, 96 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Cliché plagues 20th Century Fox animation in their latest offering, "Rio," but the film manages to successfully transplant its well-worn topic to the tropical climates of South America. This familiarity doesn't make the film an outright waste, like the recent Easter adventure "Hop."  Quite the contrary. "Rio"'s audience can feel right at home in the plotting and enjoy the dazzling animation and pretty darn funny script in the mean time.

Our lead bird, Blu (Jesse Eisenberg), faces a problem many Disney princesses and talking animals are quite familiar with: After a lifetime in captivity, Blu finds himself in the wild without a clue how to navigate it. But Blu didn't mean to end up in this position. Blu, along with his protective owner (Leslie Mann), is invited to Rio so that he, the last male macaw, can mate with the last known female one. What other choice does he have?

Unfortunately, Blu and the female Macaw, Jewel (Anne Hathaway), are kidnapped and, thus, set forth on an adventure to find both freedom and Blu's owner.

The familiar themes that "Rio" settles on are numerous. Blu's conflicts are well-worn territory in animated films, while his will-they-won't-they relationship with Jewel follows the beats of a romantic comedy. Neither point ever develops beyond a base level, though. It’s like “Finding Nemo” without that strong emotional center and uses its script as a way to show off the animation and cast. Blu finds his bearings, gets the girl, and reconnects with his owner. Obviously, this shouldn't come as too much of spoiler, because the film earns its breezy feel through the knowledge that everything is going to be ok.

However, "Rio" does flourish in its animation and humor. The brilliant colors and swooping shots create an immersive and enjoyable visual style. Don Rhymer's script never complicates things too greatly, creating a series of funny situations for the talented voice cast to tackle. His film is decidedly simple in this regard, thus allowing the animators to really go to town. It’s enough to keep parents and kids quietly occupied, but will probably leave them slightly underwhelmed.

"Rio" never reaches the loftier heights some may expect from today's animation studios, but it makes good use of its resources. From the stunning animation to the talented and game cast on hand, the film makes something familiar look new, even if it's not at heart.

Grade: B-

"Rio"

Movie Review

Directed by Carlos Saldanha, Written by Carlos Saldanha and Don Rhymer, 96 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Cliché plagues 20th Century Fox animation in their latest offering, "Rio," but the film manages to successfully transplant its well-worn topic to the tropical climates of South America. This familiarity doesn't make the film an outright waste, like the recent Easter adventure "Hop."  Quite the contrary. "Rio"'s audience can feel right at home in the plotting and enjoy the dazzling animation and pretty darn funny script in the mean time.

Our lead bird, Blu (Jesse Eisenberg), faces a problem many Disney princesses and talking animals are quite familiar with: After a lifetime in captivity, Blu finds himself in the wild without a clue how to navigate it. But Blu didn't mean to end up in this position. Blu, along with his protective owner (Leslie Mann), is invited to Rio so that he, the last male macaw, can mate with the last known female one. What other choice does he have?

Unfortunately, Blu and the female Macaw, Jewel (Anne Hathaway), are kidnapped and, thus, set forth on an adventure to find both freedom and Blu's owner.

The familiar themes that "Rio" settles on are numerous. Blu's conflicts are well-worn territory in animated films, while his will-they-won't-they relationship with Jewel follows the beats of a romantic comedy. Neither point ever develops beyond a base level, though. It’s like “Finding Nemo” without that strong emotional center and uses its script as a way to show off the animation and cast. Blu finds his bearings, gets the girl, and reconnects with his owner. Obviously, this shouldn't come as too much of spoiler, because the film earns its breezy feel through the knowledge that everything is going to be ok.

However, "Rio" does flourish in its animation and humor. The brilliant colors and swooping shots create an immersive and enjoyable visual style. Don Rhymer's script never complicates things too greatly, creating a series of funny situations for the talented voice cast to tackle. His film is decidedly simple in this regard, thus allowing the animators to really go to town. It’s enough to keep parents and kids quietly occupied, but will probably leave them slightly underwhelmed.

"Rio" never reaches the loftier heights some may expect from today's animation studios, but it makes good use of its resources. From the stunning animation to the talented and game cast on hand, the film makes something familiar look new, even if it's not at heart.

Grade: B-

“Hop”

Movie Review

Directed by Tim Hill, Written by Cinco Paul, Ken Daurio, and Brian Lynch, 95 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Like the colorful candies of Easter, the latest animated Easter Bunny adventure—and more surprisingly, probably the first—is a pastel distraction lacking any kind nutritional value. Inside its foil wrapping exists an endless array of predictable jokes, aimless subplots and obnoxious characters.

“Hop” is an utter failure.

Director Tim Hill follows the formula of his last film, “Alvin and the Chipmunks,” and delivers another an anthropomorphic rodent musician and characters that eat his poop, literally—which seems a lot better than what he’s feeding us.

“Hop” follows the adventures of E.B. (voiced by Russell Brand), the son of the Easter bunny (Hugh Laurie) and next in line for the crown. Only problem is--wait for it--he doesn’t want to be the Easter Bunny, he wants to play the drums. So, following an argument with his father, E.B. heads to Hollywood to follow his drumming dreams and sidestep his lineage.

Meanwhile, in L.A., 30-something slacker Fred O’Hare (James Marsden) is also arguing with his parents about the future. Get a job they tell him, but, wait for it, he doesn’t know what he wants to do with his life. A chance encounter (Fred hits E.B. with a car) brings the two together, and they help one another fix their meaningless lives.

Between the script and the editing, the film is far too busy to make sense or provide any entertainment. Just when we seem to be moving in one direction (E.B. ruins Fred’s job interview), we’re suddenly thrown into another subplot (Fred upstaging his nine-year-old sister at an Easter pageant). The very mythology of the Easter Bunny barely has enough to work with—it’s essentially Santa-lore fashioned with Easter themes—so the three screenwriters litter their script with filler.

None of it makes a whole lot of sense, but it’s mostly harmless. Some of these plots, however, like Carlos’ (a Spanish accented Hank Azaria) worker’s revolution take some strange turns. The Easter Bunny mocks Carlos for asking for a promotion because Carlos isn’t a rabbit, but then gives it Marsden. Hill inadvertently makes a film that supports job discrimination, because neither he nor his screenwriters gave a second thought to the specifics of their script.

“Hop” is another example of a family movie gone horribly awry. Hill expects very little of his audience, and even less of his writers, putting whatever half-baked idea he has on screen, regardless if it makes sense or not.

Grade: D+

“Hop”

Movie Review

Directed by Tim Hill, Written by Cinco Paul, Ken Daurio, and Brian Lynch, 95 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Like the colorful candies of Easter, the latest animated Easter Bunny adventure—and more surprisingly, probably the first—is a pastel distraction lacking any kind nutritional value. Inside its foil wrapping exists an endless array of predictable jokes, aimless subplots and obnoxious characters.

“Hop” is an utter failure.

Director Tim Hill follows the formula of his last film, “Alvin and the Chipmunks,” and delivers another an anthropomorphic rodent musician and characters that eat his poop, literally—which seems a lot better than what he’s feeding us.

“Hop” follows the adventures of E.B. (voiced by Russell Brand), the son of the Easter bunny (Hugh Laurie) and next in line for the crown. Only problem is--wait for it--he doesn’t want to be the Easter Bunny, he wants to play the drums. So, following an argument with his father, E.B. heads to Hollywood to follow his drumming dreams and sidestep his lineage.

Meanwhile, in L.A., 30-something slacker Fred O’Hare (James Marsden) is also arguing with his parents about the future. Get a job they tell him, but, wait for it, he doesn’t know what he wants to do with his life. A chance encounter (Fred hits E.B. with a car) brings the two together, and they help one another fix their meaningless lives.

Between the script and the editing, the film is far too busy to make sense or provide any entertainment. Just when we seem to be moving in one direction (E.B. ruins Fred’s job interview), we’re suddenly thrown into another subplot (Fred upstaging his nine-year-old sister at an Easter pageant). The very mythology of the Easter Bunny barely has enough to work with—it’s essentially Santa-lore fashioned with Easter themes—so the three screenwriters litter their script with filler.

None of it makes a whole lot of sense, but it’s mostly harmless. Some of these plots, however, like Carlos’ (a Spanish accented Hank Azaria) worker’s revolution take some strange turns. The Easter Bunny mocks Carlos for asking for a promotion because Carlos isn’t a rabbit, but then gives it Marsden. Hill inadvertently makes a film that supports job discrimination, because neither he nor his screenwriters gave a second thought to the specifics of their script.

“Hop” is another example of a family movie gone horribly awry. Hill expects very little of his audience, and even less of his writers, putting whatever half-baked idea he has on screen, regardless if it makes sense or not.

Grade: D+

"Mars Needs Moms"

Movie Review

Directed by Simon Wells, Written by Simon Wells, Wendy Wells, and Berkeley Breathed (book), 88 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matt Schimkowitz

Robert Zemeckis won’t be bound to this planet when it comes to exploring the creepy depths of motion capture technology, and with “Mars Needs Moms,” he shows that the style can ruin the cosmos just as quickly as Christmas. Much like “The Polar Express” and “A Christmas Carol” before it, the Zemeckis-produced “Mars” fails to deliver emotional and comedic blows thanks to the dead-eyed mannequins standing in for characters.

The plot is insane: Milo (voiced by Seth Dursky and motion-captured by Seth Green) doesn’t want to eat his broccoli, take out the trash, or live with his supposedly tyrannical mother (Joan Cusack). However, all that changes when Martians abduct Milo’s mother and take her back to their home planet to mine her brain for parenting skills.

Milo stows away on the spaceship and heads to the red planet to save her but not without his fair share of misadventures. On Mars, he meets Gribble (played by the endlessly hyperactive and irritating Dan Fogler), an overweight man-child marooned on the rock since the mid-'80s. With the help of Ki (Elisabeth Harnois), a cheerful Martian obsessed with stereotypical hippie culture, Milo and Gribble hatch a plan to save Milo’s mom before it’s too late.

Directed by Simon West, the film is terribly misguided, thanks mostly to Zemeckis’ motion capture. Each character is stiff as a board on the gravity-less plane, with their movements ranging from the awkwardly slow to inhumanly strange. Milo and Gribble’s freakish appearances take away from the gorgeous scenery of Mars’ landscape and look even more alien than their Martian co-stars.

West’s attempts to amuse and teach his audience vanish in a script muddled by bad jokes and confusing lessons. Each quip about "who let the dogs out" and how listening to your mother will get her abducted by malevolent space mutants should horrify parents and children just as much as the creepy character models. The film’s antifeminist leanings about what mother’s do and what family’s are should freak out the rest. It all waters down the more emotional moments, which, in turn, slows down the film. It's a domino effect ending in one bad movie.

Nothing in "Mars Needs Moms" really gives the sense of adventure one would hope. The weird motion-capture movements and dull vocal performances are too slow to keep the film moving. "Mars Needs Moms" is only consistent in that it's a mess.  Somebody should have told the filmmakers to clean it up.

Grade: D

"Mars Needs Moms"

Movie Review

Directed by Simon Wells, Written by Simon Wells, Wendy Wells, and Berkeley Breathed (book), 88 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matt Schimkowitz

Robert Zemeckis won’t be bound to this planet when it comes to exploring the creepy depths of motion capture technology, and with “Mars Needs Moms,” he shows that the style can ruin the cosmos just as quickly as Christmas. Much like “The Polar Express” and “A Christmas Carol” before it, the Zemeckis-produced “Mars” fails to deliver emotional and comedic blows thanks to the dead-eyed mannequins standing in for characters.

The plot is insane: Milo (voiced by Seth Dursky and motion-captured by Seth Green) doesn’t want to eat his broccoli, take out the trash, or live with his supposedly tyrannical mother (Joan Cusack). However, all that changes when Martians abduct Milo’s mother and take her back to their home planet to mine her brain for parenting skills.

Milo stows away on the spaceship and heads to the red planet to save her but not without his fair share of misadventures. On Mars, he meets Gribble (played by the endlessly hyperactive and irritating Dan Fogler), an overweight man-child marooned on the rock since the mid-'80s. With the help of Ki (Elisabeth Harnois), a cheerful Martian obsessed with stereotypical hippie culture, Milo and Gribble hatch a plan to save Milo’s mom before it’s too late.

Directed by Simon West, the film is terribly misguided, thanks mostly to Zemeckis’ motion capture. Each character is stiff as a board on the gravity-less plane, with their movements ranging from the awkwardly slow to inhumanly strange. Milo and Gribble’s freakish appearances take away from the gorgeous scenery of Mars’ landscape and look even more alien than their Martian co-stars.

West’s attempts to amuse and teach his audience vanish in a script muddled by bad jokes and confusing lessons. Each quip about "who let the dogs out" and how listening to your mother will get her abducted by malevolent space mutants should horrify parents and children just as much as the creepy character models. The film’s antifeminist leanings about what mother’s do and what family’s are should freak out the rest. It all waters down the more emotional moments, which, in turn, slows down the film. It's a domino effect ending in one bad movie.

Nothing in "Mars Needs Moms" really gives the sense of adventure one would hope. The weird motion-capture movements and dull vocal performances are too slow to keep the film moving. "Mars Needs Moms" is only consistent in that it's a mess.  Somebody should have told the filmmakers to clean it up.

Grade: D

"Rango"

Movie Review

Directed by Gore Verbinski, Written by Gore Verbinski, John Logan, and James Ward Byrkit, 107 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Director Gore Verbinski certainly had a lot on his mind when directing his first animated feature "Rango"--and he shows it all off in the film's quick 105-minutes. Utilizing the boundless tools of his technically arresting animation, Verbinski puts our titular lizard through the ringer and makes sure he feels every obstacle. Rango may be a CGI-talking lizard, but his character and journey are as complex as any you'll find at the movies this year.

Johnny Depp voices the thespian reptile, who, after accidentally being released from his comfortable but lonely life as a pet lizard, finds himself at a desert outpost with a serious water shortage. Armed with nothing but a red flower shirt and an overactive imagination, the lizard takes on the moniker Rango and accidentally saves the town from a local hawk. Impressed by his ability to tackle the bird with a single bullet, the town names the newcomer sheriff -- his first case: Locate the missing water.

Verbinski populates his film with great heroes and villains that pay homage to and revise their influences. Fellow lizard Beans (Isla Fisher) makes a good match for Rango, complementing his incompetence with logic, while giving her enough history to make her need for a savior reasonable. She never appears incapable, yet remains entirely vulnerable. The same holds true for Rango, who, despite having the guts to stand up for the town, just flies by the seat of his pants. He's the mythic Man without a Name as well as the Man without a Clue.

These characters aren’t perfect, which makes steering the complex plot exciting. Rango hits many walls that his confident cowboy influences wouldn't do as his naiveté and silliness add humor to the spaghetti Western without openly mocking it. Rango plays off clichés, and in turn does his best to fulfill them, and Depp has a ball trying to pull it off.

"Rango" has everything going for it -- strong characters, complex plotting, and a knowledge of the genre it parodies without excluding newcomers to it. It’s smart without being alienating and exciting without being mindless. Verbinski's skill with the beautifully rendered animation--and his dynamic character work--make "Rango" a great time for all comers, and with such a fun lead character, his journey becomes as surprising as the overall production.

Grade: B+

"Rango"

Movie Review

Directed by Gore Verbinski, Written by Gore Verbinski, John Logan, and James Ward Byrkit, 107 minutes, Rated PG.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Director Gore Verbinski certainly had a lot on his mind when directing his first animated feature "Rango"--and he shows it all off in the film's quick 105-minutes. Utilizing the boundless tools of his technically arresting animation, Verbinski puts our titular lizard through the ringer and makes sure he feels every obstacle. Rango may be a CGI-talking lizard, but his character and journey are as complex as any you'll find at the movies this year.

Johnny Depp voices the thespian reptile, who, after accidentally being released from his comfortable but lonely life as a pet lizard, finds himself at a desert outpost with a serious water shortage. Armed with nothing but a red flower shirt and an overactive imagination, the lizard takes on the moniker Rango and accidentally saves the town from a local hawk. Impressed by his ability to tackle the bird with a single bullet, the town names the newcomer sheriff -- his first case: Locate the missing water.

Verbinski populates his film with great heroes and villains that pay homage to and revise their influences. Fellow lizard Beans (Isla Fisher) makes a good match for Rango, complementing his incompetence with logic, while giving her enough history to make her need for a savior reasonable. She never appears incapable, yet remains entirely vulnerable. The same holds true for Rango, who, despite having the guts to stand up for the town, just flies by the seat of his pants. He's the mythic Man without a Name as well as the Man without a Clue.

These characters aren’t perfect, which makes steering the complex plot exciting. Rango hits many walls that his confident cowboy influences wouldn't do as his naiveté and silliness add humor to the spaghetti Western without openly mocking it. Rango plays off clichés, and in turn does his best to fulfill them, and Depp has a ball trying to pull it off.

"Rango" has everything going for it -- strong characters, complex plotting, and a knowledge of the genre it parodies without excluding newcomers to it. It’s smart without being alienating and exciting without being mindless. Verbinski's skill with the beautifully rendered animation--and his dynamic character work--make "Rango" a great time for all comers, and with such a fun lead character, his journey becomes as surprising as the overall production.

Grade: B+

“Bambi” 

DVD, Blu-Ray Movie Review

Directed by James Algar, Samuel Armstrong, David Hand, Graham Heid, Bill Roberts, Paul Satterfield, and Norman Wright, Written by Felix Salten (Story), Perce Pearce, Larry Morey, Vernin Stallings, Melvin Shaw, Carl Fallberg, Chuch Couch, and Ralph Wright, 70 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Disney’s fifth animated feature--now out on Blu-ray disc--is a film of firsts.

Following a young fawn through the first year of his life, the film offers its audience a glimpse into the life of animals, from birth to death, and it recalls the joys of youth in the process. The film's realistic illustrations, careful structure and its depiction of death make it one the studio’s most beloved works. It's a coming-of-age story told with charm, beauty and reality.

Beginning at his birth, the film follows our titular fawn prince throughout his first year. Born in the summer, we see Bambi (voice of Donnie Dugan) take his first steps, hear him say his first words and watch him make his first friends. Bambi learns through socialization as do Thumper the rabbit (Peter Behn), Flower the skunk (Stan Alexander), and Faline the female fawn (Cammie King Conlon). They listen to their parents and thus learn through experience.

Bambi is born without a personality, and as we watch his character develop, we connect with his fresh look at the forest, whether he's doing so with curiosity or fear. Man provides Bambi with his first taste of the latter. With guns and fire in toe, man terrorizes the forest and, keeping with the film’s realistic view of nature, man succeeds in killing main characters.

The death of Bambi’s mother is one the most defining moment in Disney animation and, frankly, film itself. Moving away from the fairy tales of their first few pictures, Disney’s team doesn’t shy away from mortality in “Bambi.” It creates not only Bambi’s first look at death, but also a first look at death for the film's young audience. It's a moment that traumatized children across the nation, and one that Disney continued to replicate in such films as “The Lion King.”

“Bambi” offered the studio something entirely different. The forest's dim colors and the realistic depiction of animals make the film feel more down to Earth than, say, “Pinocchio” or “Snow White.”  The animals may talk, but they never appear as cartoonish as Disney's other works. The film’s loyalty to this realistic aesthetic bleeds over into the plot, and it does a remarkably fine job of it.

Grade: A

“Bambi” 

DVD, Blu-Ray Movie Review

Directed by James Algar, Samuel Armstrong, David Hand, Graham Heid, Bill Roberts, Paul Satterfield, and Norman Wright, Written by Felix Salten (Story), Perce Pearce, Larry Morey, Vernin Stallings, Melvin Shaw, Carl Fallberg, Chuch Couch, and Ralph Wright, 70 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Disney’s fifth animated feature--now out on Blu-ray disc--is a film of firsts.

Following a young fawn through the first year of his life, the film offers its audience a glimpse into the life of animals, from birth to death, and it recalls the joys of youth in the process. The film's realistic illustrations, careful structure and its depiction of death make it one the studio’s most beloved works. It's a coming-of-age story told with charm, beauty and reality.

Beginning at his birth, the film follows our titular fawn prince throughout his first year. Born in the summer, we see Bambi (voice of Donnie Dugan) take his first steps, hear him say his first words and watch him make his first friends. Bambi learns through socialization as do Thumper the rabbit (Peter Behn), Flower the skunk (Stan Alexander), and Faline the female fawn (Cammie King Conlon). They listen to their parents and thus learn through experience.

Bambi is born without a personality, and as we watch his character develop, we connect with his fresh look at the forest, whether he's doing so with curiosity or fear. Man provides Bambi with his first taste of the latter. With guns and fire in toe, man terrorizes the forest and, keeping with the film’s realistic view of nature, man succeeds in killing main characters.

The death of Bambi’s mother is one the most defining moment in Disney animation and, frankly, film itself. Moving away from the fairy tales of their first few pictures, Disney’s team doesn’t shy away from mortality in “Bambi.” It creates not only Bambi’s first look at death, but also a first look at death for the film's young audience. It's a moment that traumatized children across the nation, and one that Disney continued to replicate in such films as “The Lion King.”

“Bambi” offered the studio something entirely different. The forest's dim colors and the realistic depiction of animals make the film feel more down to Earth than, say, “Pinocchio” or “Snow White.”  The animals may talk, but they never appear as cartoonish as Disney's other works. The film’s loyalty to this realistic aesthetic bleeds over into the plot, and it does a remarkably fine job of it.

Grade: A

“Gnomeo and Juliet”

Movie Review

Directed by Kelly Asbury, Written by Kelly Asbury, Mark Burton, Kevin Cecil, Emily Cook, Kathy Greenberg, Andy Riley, Steve Hamilton Shaw, John R. Smith, Rob Sprackling, and William Shakespeare (play), 84 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Well, here’s an idea any studio would fast track--A revisionary telling of “Romeo and Juliet” starring computer-generated garden gnomes, set to the music of Elton John, and presented in glorious 3D.

The hits keep coming in “Gnomeo and Juliet” as squeaky parodies of John’s songs pump through the speakers and somehow reflect the not-so-tragic retelling of this classic tale.

As one Gnome so eloquently puts it, this story is very old and has been told many different ways. This one, however, is even more different. It’s the story of two sides of the fence--Red Garden Gnome and Blue Garden Gnome. Gnomeo, the blue gnome alpha male, falls for Juliet, the repressed daughter of the Red leader. It seems redundant, but in case you’re unfamiliar, the star-crossed lovers hide their love from their respective families, hoping to elope in a new garden across the street.

Crisis strikes when Juliet’s cousin Tybalt takes the war too far and destroys a priceless tree belonging to the Blues. In retaliation, Gnomeo attacks Tybalt, who is accidentally smashed in the process, and goes into exile.

By turning tragedy into comedy, “Gnomeo and Juliet" strips the Bard’s tale of its heart. Their romance isn’t palpable in the mess of gardening and pop-culture references. These attention-deficit characters numb Gnomeo and Juliet’s pain, which might be good for younger audiences, but an unfortunate parent will be bored to tears.

“Gnomeo and Juliet” is “Toy Story”-lite. Afraid to tackle tragedy, “Gnomeo and Juliet” plays it safe, pandering to the worst versions of children’s cinema. While other studios and filmmakers continue to challenge notions of the genre, Kelly Asbury goes for laghs. The animation is top notch, but with such a classic source, it’s as if they didn’t even try with the story.

Asbury resolves on having a good time, except her film isn’ behind hert. The characters are weak, the jokes are even worse and the garden gnome vehicle appears to be chosen to fit a forced rhyme.

"Romeo and Juliet" warrants endless retellings because of its tragedy. It builds its romance carefully only to leave the audience in pain, shooting for the heart and hitting the bull’s-eye. “Gnomeo and Juliet” asserts that a happy ending is better--though, if you don’t want to make a heartbreaking tale of romance, I suggest choosing a different story that sort-of rhymes with gnome.

Grade: C-

“Gnomeo and Juliet”

Movie Review

Directed by Kelly Asbury, Written by Kelly Asbury, Mark Burton, Kevin Cecil, Emily Cook, Kathy Greenberg, Andy Riley, Steve Hamilton Shaw, John R. Smith, Rob Sprackling, and William Shakespeare (play), 84 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Well, here’s an idea any studio would fast track--A revisionary telling of “Romeo and Juliet” starring computer-generated garden gnomes, set to the music of Elton John, and presented in glorious 3D.

The hits keep coming in “Gnomeo and Juliet” as squeaky parodies of John’s songs pump through the speakers and somehow reflect the not-so-tragic retelling of this classic tale.

As one Gnome so eloquently puts it, this story is very old and has been told many different ways. This one, however, is even more different. It’s the story of two sides of the fence--Red Garden Gnome and Blue Garden Gnome. Gnomeo, the blue gnome alpha male, falls for Juliet, the repressed daughter of the Red leader. It seems redundant, but in case you’re unfamiliar, the star-crossed lovers hide their love from their respective families, hoping to elope in a new garden across the street.

Crisis strikes when Juliet’s cousin Tybalt takes the war too far and destroys a priceless tree belonging to the Blues. In retaliation, Gnomeo attacks Tybalt, who is accidentally smashed in the process, and goes into exile.

By turning tragedy into comedy, “Gnomeo and Juliet" strips the Bard’s tale of its heart. Their romance isn’t palpable in the mess of gardening and pop-culture references. These attention-deficit characters numb Gnomeo and Juliet’s pain, which might be good for younger audiences, but an unfortunate parent will be bored to tears.

“Gnomeo and Juliet” is “Toy Story”-lite. Afraid to tackle tragedy, “Gnomeo and Juliet” plays it safe, pandering to the worst versions of children’s cinema. While other studios and filmmakers continue to challenge notions of the genre, Kelly Asbury goes for laghs. The animation is top notch, but with such a classic source, it’s as if they didn’t even try with the story.

Asbury resolves on having a good time, except her film isn’ behind hert. The characters are weak, the jokes are even worse and the garden gnome vehicle appears to be chosen to fit a forced rhyme.

"Romeo and Juliet" warrants endless retellings because of its tragedy. It builds its romance carefully only to leave the audience in pain, shooting for the heart and hitting the bull’s-eye. “Gnomeo and Juliet” asserts that a happy ending is better--though, if you don’t want to make a heartbreaking tale of romance, I suggest choosing a different story that sort-of rhymes with gnome.

Grade: C-

“Alice in Wonderland”

DVD, Blu-Ray Review

Directed by Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, and Hamilton Luske, Written by Lewis Carroll (novel), Winston Hibler, Ted Sears, Bill Peet, Erdman Penner, Joe Rinaldi, Milt Banta, William Cottrell, Dick Kelsey, Joe Grant, Dick Huemer, Del Connell, Tom Oreb, and John Walbridge, 75 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Disney may have sent Tim Burton down the rabbit hole in 2010’s 3D pseudo-sequel, but the mouse house’s animated “Alice in Wonderland” is the studio’s seminal version. Capturing the sublime absurdity of Lewis Carroll’s original work, "Alice" uses Disney’s animators, writers and voice actors to create something altogether playful and wicked.

Now enjoying its 60th anniversary, “Alice in Wonderland” follows a young girl named Alice (Kathryn Beaumont), who, after deciding that a life of homework and reason wasn’t the life for her, chases an anthropomorphic rabbit down a deep hole. When she reaches the bottom, she discovers an illogical world filled with bizarre creatures and plants.

As she travels, she comes across a host of distractions, including the twins Tweedledee and Tweedledum (J. Pat O’Malley); the mischievous Cheshire Cat (Sterling Holloway); the over-caffeinated Mad Hatter (Ed Wynn); and the fascist Queen of Hearts (Verna Felton). However, the further into wonderland she goes, the more dangerous these absurd characters become.

If “Alice in Wonderland” has one flaw, it’s Alice. As Alice wanders from character to character, it becomes clear that she has no bearing on any of the events. She’s a spectator, and in some cases, like at the "Mad Tea-party," her presence is trivial. Despite the rousing location, Alice’s passivity slows the plot.

Disney more than compensates for Alice’s character problems, however. Their animation team makes the diverse creatures of wonderland pop off the screen, while the script keeps the playful wordplay of Carroll lively. Finally, the voice acting of the whole cast is fantastic. They are expressive, impulsive, and, most importantly, funny. Carroll’s story is an exercise in nonsense, and the production team takes this idea to heart.

Disney’s team makes the story’s pitfalls irrelevant. Alice may not be the strongest protagonist, but her time in Wonderland is everything a movie goer could want. The animators, cast and script move things along nicely, with an air of doubt that makes Alice’s adventures slightly dangerous.

Despite the lack of forward motion, Alice’s adventures in wonderland are altogether exciting. After 60 years, "Wonderland" is still worth visiting.

Grade: A-

“Alice in Wonderland”

DVD, Blu-Ray Review

Directed by Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, and Hamilton Luske, Written by Lewis Carroll (novel), Winston Hibler, Ted Sears, Bill Peet, Erdman Penner, Joe Rinaldi, Milt Banta, William Cottrell, Dick Kelsey, Joe Grant, Dick Huemer, Del Connell, Tom Oreb, and John Walbridge, 75 minutes, Rated G.

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

Disney may have sent Tim Burton down the rabbit hole in 2010’s 3D pseudo-sequel, but the mouse house’s animated “Alice in Wonderland” is the studio’s seminal version. Capturing the sublime absurdity of Lewis Carroll’s original work, "Alice" uses Disney’s animators, writers and voice actors to create something altogether playful and wicked.

Now enjoying its 60th anniversary, “Alice in Wonderland” follows a young girl named Alice (Kathryn Beaumont), who, after deciding that a life of homework and reason wasn’t the life for her, chases an anthropomorphic rabbit down a deep hole. When she reaches the bottom, she discovers an illogical world filled with bizarre creatures and plants.

As she travels, she comes across a host of distractions, including the twins Tweedledee and Tweedledum (J. Pat O’Malley); the mischievous Cheshire Cat (Sterling Holloway); the over-caffeinated Mad Hatter (Ed Wynn); and the fascist Queen of Hearts (Verna Felton). However, the further into wonderland she goes, the more dangerous these absurd characters become.

If “Alice in Wonderland” has one flaw, it’s Alice. As Alice wanders from character to character, it becomes clear that she has no bearing on any of the events. She’s a spectator, and in some cases, like at the "Mad Tea-party," her presence is trivial. Despite the rousing location, Alice’s passivity slows the plot.

Disney more than compensates for Alice’s character problems, however. Their animation team makes the diverse creatures of wonderland pop off the screen, while the script keeps the playful wordplay of Carroll lively. Finally, the voice acting of the whole cast is fantastic. They are expressive, impulsive, and, most importantly, funny. Carroll’s story is an exercise in nonsense, and the production team takes this idea to heart.

Disney’s team makes the story’s pitfalls irrelevant. Alice may not be the strongest protagonist, but her time in Wonderland is everything a movie goer could want. The animators, cast and script move things along nicely, with an air of doubt that makes Alice’s adventures slightly dangerous.

Despite the lack of forward motion, Alice’s adventures in wonderland are altogether exciting. After 60 years, "Wonderland" is still worth visiting.

Grade: A-

"The Illusionist"

Movie Review

Written and directed by Sylvain Chomet, 80 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

For those who have seen Sylvain Chomet's outstanding, 2003 Academy Award-nominated film, "The Triplets of Belleville," it would be difficult to believe that he could top it with his latest animated film, "The Illusionist." And guess what? He hasn't.

But he's come close.

The film is so good, it recently earned the Academy Award nomination for Best Animated Film it deserves. It's a beautifully rendered mood piece that features so little dialogue, it might have been a silent movie--if a silent movie didn't employ title cards to help nudge the story along, which this film doesn't.

Instead, Chomet leans hard on his talent to tell his story with almost no words (there's the occasional grunt, the happenstance "oui," a muddled line used more to capture a sense of emotion than to offer a clear sense of insight). He also leans hard on his audience to trust him to tell his story well. That he accomplishes each is an admirable feat.

The movie is a slick sleight-of-hand for many reasons, beginning with the script, which comes with an intriguing history.

Since the movie is based on a character who smacks of Jacques Tati, the writer, director and actor who is perhaps best known for directing such films as "Mon Oncle" and "Mr. Hulot's Holiday" (and also for co-starring in them), it's no wonder that the dialogue here is mashed into nothingness, since that's how Tati approached his own work. The film’s other kicker? Tati actually wrote the script's first draft before his 1982 death. It fell into Chomet's hands, who reworked it, and what we have now in the main character is an affectionate nod to Tati himself.

You don't need to know any of this to enjoy the film, but it does deepen the experience of watching it. Set in the 1950s, when the stage's footlights were giving way to the brighter lights of televisions and jukeboxes, the film follows Tatischeff (Tati's real surname), an illusionist of a certain age who is approaching the end of his career thanks to the intrusion of technology.

The movie opens in Paris, where Tatischeff is reduced to performing his act to the slim few who still care that a man can pull a scrappy rabbit out of a hat, which isn't many--certainly not what it used to be. And so, knowing there is little left for him here, he leaves for London, where he's struck with the onslaught of rock-and-roll just as it's taking root. With no chance to compete with this brash, new wave of music and its screaming fans, he travels on to Scotland, where he finds work at a local pub and meets Alice, a poor chambermaid who is fascinated by him.

Soon, this odd couple is living together. He's older than she is by decades and so he assumes a fatherly role, taking money he doesn't have to buy Alice a few things that might make her happy--new shoes, a beautiful dress, a smart coat. But for Tatischeff, the money is running out and worse, Alice has caught a younger man's eye. What's he to do? Since he's a gentleman, he let's Alice choose her own course.

Mirroring "The Triplets of Belleville," the water-colored animation in "The Illusionist" is presented in such a way that it gives the movie a unique sense of style and depth--you feel as if you could reach into it. Occasionally, Chomet allows for bits of computer-generated imagery to shock the screen with the unexpected, such as in a train's realistic puff of smoke or in the scenes in which silvery sheets of rain fall from the sky (there is another effect that's so smashing, it won't be revealed here--but you'll know it when you see it, and movie buffs just might faint at the sight of it).

Each of these moments are as real as the characters Chomet has created. And while it's true that his movie loses momentum midway through, that's a quibble because it finds itself again. For a film of so few words, the human emotions that are explored and revealed here are as staggering as they are ironic. Nobody communicates traditionally in "The Illusionist," but since Chomet lifts the movie to a high level of art, what's clearly communicated is that this is one of last year's best films.

Grade: A-

"The Illusionist"

Movie Review

Written and directed by Sylvain Chomet, 80 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

For those who have seen Sylvain Chomet's outstanding, 2003 Academy Award-nominated film, "The Triplets of Belleville," it would be difficult to believe that he could top it with his latest animated film, "The Illusionist." And guess what? He hasn't.

But he's come close.

The film is so good, it recently earned the Academy Award nomination for Best Animated Film it deserves. It's a beautifully rendered mood piece that features so little dialogue, it might have been a silent movie--if a silent movie didn't employ title cards to help nudge the story along, which this film doesn't.

Instead, Chomet leans hard on his talent to tell his story with almost no words (there's the occasional grunt, the happenstance "oui," a muddled line used more to capture a sense of emotion than to offer a clear sense of insight). He also leans hard on his audience to trust him to tell his story well. That he accomplishes each is an admirable feat.

The movie is a slick sleight-of-hand for many reasons, beginning with the script, which comes with an intriguing history.

Since the movie is based on a character who smacks of Jacques Tati, the writer, director and actor who is perhaps best known for directing such films as "Mon Oncle" and "Mr. Hulot's Holiday" (and also for co-starring in them), it's no wonder that the dialogue here is mashed into nothingness, since that's how Tati approached his own work. The film’s other kicker? Tati actually wrote the script's first draft before his 1982 death. It fell into Chomet's hands, who reworked it, and what we have now in the main character is an affectionate nod to Tati himself.

You don't need to know any of this to enjoy the film, but it does deepen the experience of watching it. Set in the 1950s, when the stage's footlights were giving way to the brighter lights of televisions and jukeboxes, the film follows Tatischeff (Tati's real surname), an illusionist of a certain age who is approaching the end of his career thanks to the intrusion of technology.

The movie opens in Paris, where Tatischeff is reduced to performing his act to the slim few who still care that a man can pull a scrappy rabbit out of a hat, which isn't many--certainly not what it used to be. And so, knowing there is little left for him here, he leaves for London, where he's struck with the onslaught of rock-and-roll just as it's taking root. With no chance to compete with this brash, new wave of music and its screaming fans, he travels on to Scotland, where he finds work at a local pub and meets Alice, a poor chambermaid who is fascinated by him.

Soon, this odd couple is living together. He's older than she is by decades and so he assumes a fatherly role, taking money he doesn't have to buy Alice a few things that might make her happy--new shoes, a beautiful dress, a smart coat. But for Tatischeff, the money is running out and worse, Alice has caught a younger man's eye. What's he to do? Since he's a gentleman, he let's Alice choose her own course.

Mirroring "The Triplets of Belleville," the water-colored animation in "The Illusionist" is presented in such a way that it gives the movie a unique sense of style and depth--you feel as if you could reach into it. Occasionally, Chomet allows for bits of computer-generated imagery to shock the screen with the unexpected, such as in a train's realistic puff of smoke or in the scenes in which silvery sheets of rain fall from the sky (there is another effect that's so smashing, it won't be revealed here--but you'll know it when you see it, and movie buffs just might faint at the sight of it).

Each of these moments are as real as the characters Chomet has created. And while it's true that his movie loses momentum midway through, that's a quibble because it finds itself again. For a film of so few words, the human emotions that are explored and revealed here are as staggering as they are ironic. Nobody communicates traditionally in "The Illusionist," but since Chomet lifts the movie to a high level of art, what's clearly communicated is that this is one of last year's best films.

Grade: A-

Here's some sound advice--check out this terrific slide show for the February 1st release of "Alice in Wonderland: 60th Anniversary Special Edition" on Blu-ray & DVD.

We've loaded still images from the film and photos of Kathryn Beaumont, the original character reference model and voice of Alice, performing in the Disney studios into an easy-to-post slide show. 

Here's some sound advice--check out this terrific slide show for the February 1st release of "Alice in Wonderland: 60th Anniversary Special Edition" on Blu-ray & DVD.

We've loaded still images from the film and photos of Kathryn Beaumont, the original character reference model and voice of Alice, performing in the Disney studios into an easy-to-post slide show. 

"Yogi Bear"

Movie Review

Directed by Eric Brevig, Written by Jeffrey Ventimilia, Joshua Sternin, and Brad Copeland, Rated PG, 80-minutes.

By our guest blogger, Matt Schimkowitz

It was only a matter of time before the remake police grabbed Yogi Bear by the tie and dragged him across the mud of Jellystone Park. The result may not be the worst offender of these adaptations, but it’s right up there.

2010’s "Yogi Bear" bores the audience with redundant jokes and incessant catch phrases. Director Eric Brevig squeezes the life from the basket thief, who boasts an intelligence higher than the average bear. 

So, you know, it’s just a shame we can’t say as much for the film.

"Yogi Bear" places the character in modern times, as he racks his brain for new ways to steal the ever- elusive pic-a-nic basket. With a soft touch, he’s pursued by the eager, yet woefully incompetent, Ranger Smith (Tom Cavanagh), who fumbles between catching Yogi (Dan Aykroyd) and flirting with a documentarian (Anna Farris), who is researching the strange -- but apparently, not that strange -- talking bear.

Shoehorned into the plot is a local mayor (Andrew Daly), who looks to sell the park to agricultural developers. In response, Yogi, Boo Boo (Justin Timberlake) and Smith band together to stop him.

While this isn’t much more than any "Yogi Bear" film should be, it never really seems to get off the ground. Stealing picnic baskets works for about 10 minutes, but after 90 or so of the same gag, things start to get a bit more trying.

Smith himself doesn’t offer much of a human touch to the film. Cavanagh plays him with such soulless hyperbole that it should lose even the most focused of six-year-olds. He engages in a dull tennis match with his emotions, repeatedly bouncing from frustrated to star struck.

Cavanagh can hardly be blamed for a lack of enthusiasm as the actors frequently stumble over the film’s incessant punning. Screenwriters Jeffrey Ventimilia, Joshua Sternin and Brad Copeland devised an unbearable script that finds the performers struggling to say their lines with conviction.  The lot of it slows the plot with their awkward delivery.

Introducing a new generation to these characters makes all the sense in the world, but why put it on the big screen? Yogi’s picnic gag is funny in small doses but, much like his Chipmunk brethren, inflating these simple pleasures into a feature-length movie is disastrous.

Unfortunately, like Yogi’s hunger, I see no end in sight for these uninspired adaptations.

Grade: D+

"Yogi Bear"

Movie Review

Directed by Eric Brevig, Written by Jeffrey Ventimilia, Joshua Sternin, and Brad Copeland, Rated PG, 80-minutes.

By our guest blogger, Matt Schimkowitz

It was only a matter of time before the remake police grabbed Yogi Bear by the tie and dragged him across the mud of Jellystone Park. The result may not be the worst offender of these adaptations, but it’s right up there.

2010’s "Yogi Bear" bores the audience with redundant jokes and incessant catch phrases. Director Eric Brevig squeezes the life from the basket thief, who boasts an intelligence higher than the average bear. 

So, you know, it’s just a shame we can’t say as much for the film.

"Yogi Bear" places the character in modern times, as he racks his brain for new ways to steal the ever- elusive pic-a-nic basket. With a soft touch, he’s pursued by the eager, yet woefully incompetent, Ranger Smith (Tom Cavanagh), who fumbles between catching Yogi (Dan Aykroyd) and flirting with a documentarian (Anna Farris), who is researching the strange -- but apparently, not that strange -- talking bear.

Shoehorned into the plot is a local mayor (Andrew Daly), who looks to sell the park to agricultural developers. In response, Yogi, Boo Boo (Justin Timberlake) and Smith band together to stop him.

While this isn’t much more than any "Yogi Bear" film should be, it never really seems to get off the ground. Stealing picnic baskets works for about 10 minutes, but after 90 or so of the same gag, things start to get a bit more trying.

Smith himself doesn’t offer much of a human touch to the film. Cavanagh plays him with such soulless hyperbole that it should lose even the most focused of six-year-olds. He engages in a dull tennis match with his emotions, repeatedly bouncing from frustrated to star struck.

Cavanagh can hardly be blamed for a lack of enthusiasm as the actors frequently stumble over the film’s incessant punning. Screenwriters Jeffrey Ventimilia, Joshua Sternin and Brad Copeland devised an unbearable script that finds the performers struggling to say their lines with conviction.  The lot of it slows the plot with their awkward delivery.

Introducing a new generation to these characters makes all the sense in the world, but why put it on the big screen? Yogi’s picnic gag is funny in small doses but, much like his Chipmunk brethren, inflating these simple pleasures into a feature-length movie is disastrous.

Unfortunately, like Yogi’s hunger, I see no end in sight for these uninspired adaptations.

Grade: D+

“Despicable Me” 

DVD,  Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Chris Renaud and Pierre Coffin, written by Cinco Paul and Ken Daurio, 88 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

The 3-D animated movie, “Despicable Me,” is a surprise and a delight. It’s a movie about one horrible supervillain named Gru (voice of Steve Carell), who borrows money from evil banks to support his evil doings. He also lives in a creepy house decorated in ways that would make the folks at PETA cough up a hairball--panda skins used as rugs, alligators turned into sofas, a rhinoceros outfitted as a chair.

Essentially, whatever is on the most endangered list, Gru has it stuffed.

He’s a cruel one, that Gru, and he revels in that cruelty whenever the chance presents itself, which is often. What makes his character interesting is that Gru is cosmopolitan, a witty sophisticate in uber-chic black attire that suits his dark mood.

For sidekicks, he has a hideous dog hybrid with sharply misguided fangs, a gaggle of yellow blobs who are gung-ho to help Gru in whatever task he presents to them, and also Dr. Nefario (Russell Brand), an elderly scientist who provides the movie some of its bigger laughs.

And then there’s Gru’s equally evil nemesis Vector (Jason Segel), who has a mind sharper than Gru’s, which causes a firestorm of jealousy and hatred between them.

As well as competition.

When Gru decides he wants to shrink the moon and steal it, Vector naturally wants to do the same. And so they try to outwit each other, with Gru going so far as to adopt three tots from an orphanage so he can steal from Vector the device that will turn into the moon into the size of a softball, thus making it easier to pluck from the heavens.

Why does he do all this? In clever flashbacks, we’re offered glimpses into Gru’s rotten childhood. He was raised by a fickle mother (Julie Andrews) and poo-pooed his every dream, his every move, his every breath. She never supported him or his wild inventions, which worked to turn Gru against people while he still strived to make his mother proud of him. Would stealing the moon be a turning point in their relationship? Will he finally receive her approval? Gru thinks he might, and so he goes for it.

Meanwhile, knowing why he is the way he is, audiences can’t help rooting for him, especially as he softens toward his adopted children, which is predictable, but which is nevertheless handled well by French directors Chris Renaud and Pierre Coffin.

In fact, you can feel their French sensibility ringing throughout “Despicable Me.” There is a cool aloofness to the proceedings that gives the film an edge and helps to make its dark humor something unique and unexpected.

The animation also is very good, and even in 3-D, which already is a sad gimmick that often ruins a film (and costs ticket buyers a ridiculous amount of money to rent glasses they have to give back), the movie manages to hold back and use its additional dimension only when it offers the maximum effect.

Watching the movie, what you find is a fine balance as to what appeals to children and what appeals to adults. Since many of the film’s jokes can be taken two very different ways, that’s especially tricky to pull off, but “Despicable Me” shows the competition how it’s done and it does so with aplomb.

Grade: B

View the trailer for "Despicable Me" below. What did you think of the movie?

“Despicable Me” 

DVD,  Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Chris Renaud and Pierre Coffin, written by Cinco Paul and Ken Daurio, 88 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

The 3-D animated movie, “Despicable Me,” is a surprise and a delight. It’s a movie about one horrible supervillain named Gru (voice of Steve Carell), who borrows money from evil banks to support his evil doings. He also lives in a creepy house decorated in ways that would make the folks at PETA cough up a hairball--panda skins used as rugs, alligators turned into sofas, a rhinoceros outfitted as a chair.

Essentially, whatever is on the most endangered list, Gru has it stuffed.

He’s a cruel one, that Gru, and he revels in that cruelty whenever the chance presents itself, which is often. What makes his character interesting is that Gru is cosmopolitan, a witty sophisticate in uber-chic black attire that suits his dark mood.

For sidekicks, he has a hideous dog hybrid with sharply misguided fangs, a gaggle of yellow blobs who are gung-ho to help Gru in whatever task he presents to them, and also Dr. Nefario (Russell Brand), an elderly scientist who provides the movie some of its bigger laughs.

And then there’s Gru’s equally evil nemesis Vector (Jason Segel), who has a mind sharper than Gru’s, which causes a firestorm of jealousy and hatred between them.

As well as competition.

When Gru decides he wants to shrink the moon and steal it, Vector naturally wants to do the same. And so they try to outwit each other, with Gru going so far as to adopt three tots from an orphanage so he can steal from Vector the device that will turn into the moon into the size of a softball, thus making it easier to pluck from the heavens.

Why does he do all this? In clever flashbacks, we’re offered glimpses into Gru’s rotten childhood. He was raised by a fickle mother (Julie Andrews) and poo-pooed his every dream, his every move, his every breath. She never supported him or his wild inventions, which worked to turn Gru against people while he still strived to make his mother proud of him. Would stealing the moon be a turning point in their relationship? Will he finally receive her approval? Gru thinks he might, and so he goes for it.

Meanwhile, knowing why he is the way he is, audiences can’t help rooting for him, especially as he softens toward his adopted children, which is predictable, but which is nevertheless handled well by French directors Chris Renaud and Pierre Coffin.

In fact, you can feel their French sensibility ringing throughout “Despicable Me.” There is a cool aloofness to the proceedings that gives the film an edge and helps to make its dark humor something unique and unexpected.

The animation also is very good, and even in 3-D, which already is a sad gimmick that often ruins a film (and costs ticket buyers a ridiculous amount of money to rent glasses they have to give back), the movie manages to hold back and use its additional dimension only when it offers the maximum effect.

Watching the movie, what you find is a fine balance as to what appeals to children and what appeals to adults. Since many of the film’s jokes can be taken two very different ways, that’s especially tricky to pull off, but “Despicable Me” shows the competition how it’s done and it does so with aplomb.

Grade: B

View the trailer for "Despicable Me" below. What did you think of the movie?

“Shrek Forever After”

DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Mike Mitchell, written by Josh Klausner and Darren Lemke, 93 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

Hollywood hasn’t run out of ideas--it just won’t risk bringing fresh ideas to the screen. In an effort to protect what’s increasingly a nine-figure investment, every new major release is second-guessed by legions of terrified executives, all fretting over how to protect the bottom line, which usually is by embracing a name brand.

The result? Too often, the films are safe, one note and rote, with audiences getting hammered by homogenization along the way.

That was the case with the last film in the “Shrek” franchise, "Shrek the Third," and in some ways, it’s the case with the slightly better (and presumably) last film in the franchise, “Shrek Forever After," which is just out on DVD and Blu-ray disc. The movie features impressive animation and a few bright spots of humor, but its midsection is dull and unimaginative, a sterile effort served cold to the masses.

Working from John Klausner and Darren Lemke’s script, director Mike Mitchell (“Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigolo”) nudges “Shrek” into the 3D movement, but to what end? Already, 3D has become tired, if only because it’s quickly being used not as a way to deepen the art form, as “Avatar” and “Coraline” did, but to employ it as a gimmick, which doesn’t serve the film as much as it does the bottom line.
There is little in this movie worth pixilating your pants over.

The film finds Shrek (voice of Mike Myers) irritated that he has become less an ogre and more of a celebrity. Tour busses now hunt him down. He can’t use the outhouse without being bothered by someone wanting him to autograph a pitchfork. Beyond that, everything in his life is routine.

The triplets he had with Princess Fiona (Cameron Diaz) need to be fed, farted and burped. Time and again. Rinse and repeat. There’s no reprieve from it. Now in a slump, he wishes he could be feared again, which is where the movie’s new villain, Rumpelstiltskin (Walt Dohrn), comes in. He promises Shrek that he can have one full day of his old life back again if he signs a lengthy piece of paper peppered with small print. Shrek agrees--and bam! He’s back to being the old Shrek.

But at what cost? In this altered universe, Fiona doesn’t know him, and neither do Donkey (Eddie Murphy) or Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas), the latter of whom has been coddled so much by Fiona, he has gained some serious weight, which offers the movie a handful of serious laughs. Meanwhile, along the periphery is the mincing Rumpelstiltskin, who tricked Shrek in ways that won’t be revealed here.

If the “Shrek” franchise proves anything, it’s just how far we’ve come since Pixar-Disney’s groundbreaking "Toy Story" hit theaters in 1995. Back then, the story mattered as much as the groundbreaking animation. The studios continue to see the importance placed on each, which is why they continue to win Academy Awards. Sometimes, you want to send notes to the terrified Hollywood executives mentioned above and shake them with the truth--what matters are the story and the characters, stupid, and that never will change.

Really, if you don’t have the best of them, you’re “Shrek” out of luck.

Grade: C+

View WeekinRewind.com's preview for "Shrek Forever After" below. What did you think of the movie?

“Shrek Forever After”

DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Mike Mitchell, written by Josh Klausner and Darren Lemke, 93 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

Hollywood hasn’t run out of ideas--it just won’t risk bringing fresh ideas to the screen. In an effort to protect what’s increasingly a nine-figure investment, every new major release is second-guessed by legions of terrified executives, all fretting over how to protect the bottom line, which usually is by embracing a name brand.

The result? Too often, the films are safe, one note and rote, with audiences getting hammered by homogenization along the way.

That was the case with the last film in the “Shrek” franchise, "Shrek the Third," and in some ways, it’s the case with the slightly better (and presumably) last film in the franchise, “Shrek Forever After," which is just out on DVD and Blu-ray disc. The movie features impressive animation and a few bright spots of humor, but its midsection is dull and unimaginative, a sterile effort served cold to the masses.

Working from John Klausner and Darren Lemke’s script, director Mike Mitchell (“Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigolo”) nudges “Shrek” into the 3D movement, but to what end? Already, 3D has become tired, if only because it’s quickly being used not as a way to deepen the art form, as “Avatar” and “Coraline” did, but to employ it as a gimmick, which doesn’t serve the film as much as it does the bottom line.
There is little in this movie worth pixilating your pants over.

The film finds Shrek (voice of Mike Myers) irritated that he has become less an ogre and more of a celebrity. Tour busses now hunt him down. He can’t use the outhouse without being bothered by someone wanting him to autograph a pitchfork. Beyond that, everything in his life is routine.

The triplets he had with Princess Fiona (Cameron Diaz) need to be fed, farted and burped. Time and again. Rinse and repeat. There’s no reprieve from it. Now in a slump, he wishes he could be feared again, which is where the movie’s new villain, Rumpelstiltskin (Walt Dohrn), comes in. He promises Shrek that he can have one full day of his old life back again if he signs a lengthy piece of paper peppered with small print. Shrek agrees--and bam! He’s back to being the old Shrek.

But at what cost? In this altered universe, Fiona doesn’t know him, and neither do Donkey (Eddie Murphy) or Puss in Boots (Antonio Banderas), the latter of whom has been coddled so much by Fiona, he has gained some serious weight, which offers the movie a handful of serious laughs. Meanwhile, along the periphery is the mincing Rumpelstiltskin, who tricked Shrek in ways that won’t be revealed here.

If the “Shrek” franchise proves anything, it’s just how far we’ve come since Pixar-Disney’s groundbreaking "Toy Story" hit theaters in 1995. Back then, the story mattered as much as the groundbreaking animation. The studios continue to see the importance placed on each, which is why they continue to win Academy Awards. Sometimes, you want to send notes to the terrified Hollywood executives mentioned above and shake them with the truth--what matters are the story and the characters, stupid, and that never will change.

Really, if you don’t have the best of them, you’re “Shrek” out of luck.

Grade: C+

View WeekinRewind.com's preview for "Shrek Forever After" below. What did you think of the movie?

"Tangled"

Movie Review

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

For Disney’s 50th animated film, the Mouse House went back to the drawing board and crafted one more classic princess story. Stressing plot, character and humor over pop-culture gags, "Tangled" takes cues from Pixar and thrills the viewer with action and romance. Its lush, 3D environments and likable story make "Tangled" a triumph that should sit next to Disney’s best with ease.

"Tangled" retells the story of Rapunzel (Mandy Moore), who was kidnapped as a child by the evil Mother Gothel (Donna Murphy) for her hair’s regenerative powers. Gothel keeps Rapunzel locked in a tower, where her hair and desire to escape grows with each passing day.

Rapunzel does not remember her former life as a princess, but her parents sure do. Still hopeful of her return, the King and Queen release a thousand lanterns into the sky to guide her home, and on her 18th birthday, Rapunzel wishes to follow them. So, with the help of the charming thief Flynn (Zackary Levi), Rapunzel leaves her tower for the first time, with her evil step-mother hot on her heels.

Flynn and Rapunzel meet some real danger on their journey, leading to moments of sincere threat and excitement. Things get hairy, so to speak, for these two, but it’s never without an accompanying song or joke to defuse the terror.

Each element of the story acts as constructively as the other, with characters building humor and intelligence through their strengths and weaknesses. Directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard successfully realize their cast in three dimensions to match their beautifully rendered images.

"Tangled" boasts some of the best 3D of the year. The characters jump from their vivid backgrounds add great depth to their placement on screen. When Rapunzel stands in the foreground, the lush forest greenery behind her seems to roll on for miles and their rich colors burst from the screen in visceral splendor.

This is a testament to the power of 3D when mastered--and not rushed.

In the end, Disney’s latest is a marvel. It benefits from the studio’s hold of the genre to create some fine characters, thrilling moments and beautiful images. "Shrek" it is not. "Tangled" is animation at its best and this season’s biggest surprise--it treats its audience with intelligence while giving them a jolt of fun.

Grade: A-

"Tangled"

Movie Review

By our guest blogger, Matthew Schimkowitz

For Disney’s 50th animated film, the Mouse House went back to the drawing board and crafted one more classic princess story. Stressing plot, character and humor over pop-culture gags, "Tangled" takes cues from Pixar and thrills the viewer with action and romance. Its lush, 3D environments and likable story make "Tangled" a triumph that should sit next to Disney’s best with ease.

"Tangled" retells the story of Rapunzel (Mandy Moore), who was kidnapped as a child by the evil Mother Gothel (Donna Murphy) for her hair’s regenerative powers. Gothel keeps Rapunzel locked in a tower, where her hair and desire to escape grows with each passing day.

Rapunzel does not remember her former life as a princess, but her parents sure do. Still hopeful of her return, the King and Queen release a thousand lanterns into the sky to guide her home, and on her 18th birthday, Rapunzel wishes to follow them. So, with the help of the charming thief Flynn (Zackary Levi), Rapunzel leaves her tower for the first time, with her evil step-mother hot on her heels.

Flynn and Rapunzel meet some real danger on their journey, leading to moments of sincere threat and excitement. Things get hairy, so to speak, for these two, but it’s never without an accompanying song or joke to defuse the terror.

Each element of the story acts as constructively as the other, with characters building humor and intelligence through their strengths and weaknesses. Directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard successfully realize their cast in three dimensions to match their beautifully rendered images.

"Tangled" boasts some of the best 3D of the year. The characters jump from their vivid backgrounds add great depth to their placement on screen. When Rapunzel stands in the foreground, the lush forest greenery behind her seems to roll on for miles and their rich colors burst from the screen in visceral splendor.

This is a testament to the power of 3D when mastered--and not rushed.

In the end, Disney’s latest is a marvel. It benefits from the studio’s hold of the genre to create some fine characters, thrilling moments and beautiful images. "Shrek" it is not. "Tangled" is animation at its best and this season’s biggest surprise--it treats its audience with intelligence while giving them a jolt of fun.

Grade: A-

"Megamind 3D"

Movie Review

Directed by Tom McGrath, written by Alan Schoolcraft and Brent Simons, 96 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

There is plenty to admire in Tom McGrath's new computer-animated film, "Megamind," particular at the beginning, when Alan Schoolcraft and Brent Simons' script is as its tightest and funniest.

With wit and verve, they sweep the audience into the ether and leave them surprised by something unusual--intelligence. With the exception of Pixar's films and this year's terrific "How to Train Your Dragon," it isn't often when today's animated features are given the kind of care "Megamind" initially enjoys, and so because of this, it's impossible not to get caught up in the storytelling.

The film starts with the ongoing rivalry between two tots from outer space--Megamind (voice of Will Ferrell) and Metro Man (Brad Pitt).

In a well-done montage, we watch them grow into adults on Earth. With his large head and purple skin, Megamind never fits in with his new schoolmates--he's relentlessly bullied, which works to change his initially kind demeanor into something darker. But with Metro Man's muscles, good looks and his cool ability to fly, he's a shoo-in for popularity, which he enjoys...a bit too much.

As for each, they both have a thing for reporter Roxanne Ritchi (Tina Fey, nicely deadpan, as usual), who also must ward off her cameraman Hal (Jonah Hill, nicely frenetic, as usual). But when Megamind decides that the only way he will receive respect in Metro City is by becoming a villain with the help of his sidekick Minion (David Cross), the dynamic between the characters change, especially when Megamind takes Hal under his wing and turns him into an evil undoer.

If all of this sounds like a rave, it's because the first half of the movie deserves one. But then, once Metro Man is out of picture for reasons that won't be revealed here, the comic tension evaporates and we're left with a movie in search of a story. It tries to drum one up with Hal, but that angle has nothing on the caustic chemistry enjoyed by Megamind and Metro Man, and the result is a movie that that eventually falls flat.

Given the potential that's squandered here, it's sad to watch "Megamind" implode. It enjoys a fresh blast of ingenious writing at the start and then it gives way to stark predictability. It's as if someone put the plot on a starvation diet. After feeding "Megamind" with a wealth of clever twists and turns and a mouthful of beautifully written, off-beat bon mots, it all dissipates into a movie that really should have been called "Nevermind."

Grade: C+

"Megamind 3D"

Movie Review

Directed by Tom McGrath, written by Alan Schoolcraft and Brent Simons, 96 minutes, rated PG.

By Christopher Smith

There is plenty to admire in Tom McGrath's new computer-animated film, "Megamind," particular at the beginning, when Alan Schoolcraft and Brent Simons' script is as its tightest and funniest.

With wit and verve, they sweep the audience into the ether and leave them surprised by something unusual--intelligence. With the exception of Pixar's films and this year's terrific "How to Train Your Dragon," it isn't often when today's animated features are given the kind of care "Megamind" initially enjoys, and so because of this, it's impossible not to get caught up in the storytelling.

The film starts with the ongoing rivalry between two tots from outer space--Megamind (voice of Will Ferrell) and Metro Man (Brad Pitt).

In a well-done montage, we watch them grow into adults on Earth. With his large head and purple skin, Megamind never fits in with his new schoolmates--he's relentlessly bullied, which works to change his initially kind demeanor into something darker. But with Metro Man's muscles, good looks and his cool ability to fly, he's a shoo-in for popularity, which he enjoys...a bit too much.

As for each, they both have a thing for reporter Roxanne Ritchi (Tina Fey, nicely deadpan, as usual), who also must ward off her cameraman Hal (Jonah Hill, nicely frenetic, as usual). But when Megamind decides that the only way he will receive respect in Metro City is by becoming a villain with the help of his sidekick Minion (David Cross), the dynamic between the characters change, especially when Megamind takes Hal under his wing and turns him into an evil undoer.

If all of this sounds like a rave, it's because the first half of the movie deserves one. But then, once Metro Man is out of picture for reasons that won't be revealed here, the comic tension evaporates and we're left with a movie in search of a story. It tries to drum one up with Hal, but that angle has nothing on the caustic chemistry enjoyed by Megamind and Metro Man, and the result is a movie that that eventually falls flat.

Given the potential that's squandered here, it's sad to watch "Megamind" implode. It enjoys a fresh blast of ingenious writing at the start and then it gives way to stark predictability. It's as if someone put the plot on a starvation diet. After feeding "Megamind" with a wealth of clever twists and turns and a mouthful of beautifully written, off-beat bon mots, it all dissipates into a movie that really should have been called "Nevermind."

Grade: C+

"How to Train Your Dragon" 

DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois, Written by Sanders, DeBlois, Peter Tolan and Adam F. Goldberg, 98 Minutes, Rated PG

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

"How to Train Your Dragon" is a wonderful fantasy set on the mythical island of Berk, where vikings have been at constant war with neighboring dragons for generations. Like many great fantasies, it concerns a young man who, despite the fate his family line has given him, rises above the life he's forced to live and learns quite a bit about himself in the process.

The young man is Hiccup (voiced by Jay Baruchel), son of the viking's leader Stoick (voiced by Gerard Butler). Stoick and his men venture off one day to seek the nest of the dragons to rid them of their land once and for all, but while he's gone, Hiccup happens upon a wounded dragon himself. After finding that he doesn't have it in him to kill the poor creature, he instead befriends and tames him, and his newfound knowledge of dragons puts his and his whole clan's world in upheaval.

The film has some of the best animation Dreamworks ever has produced--sharp, fluid and absolutely gorgeous; the scenery, flame effects, dragons, humans, water, etc., has a painterly quality that balances realism with Brad Bird-esque character design, which suits the story perfectly. The numerous flight and action sequences are absolutely breathtaking, and a few moments where flames erupt from dimly lit clouds is nearly unmatched by the rest of Dreamworks' oeuvre. Impressive, considering directors' Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois general lack of experience in computer animation (the former Disney animators are perhaps best known for "Lilo & Stitch"). One of the greatest accomplishments in the animation is the transition of the dragons from fierce, violent monsters in the beginning of the film to more relatable, human-like creatures later on. Even in the first act or so of the film, where we only get brief glimpses of the dragons, little details in the animation of their faces hints at an untapped lovability that is really clear when we finally meet Toothless, the dragon Hiccup tames.

Unlike most Dreamworks films (and even the majority of Pixar's), "How to Train Your Dragon" also is a heartfelt and human drama more than it is a comedy or action film, and the comedy always pops up organically, as opposed to something like "Madagascar," where character or story is sacrificed for slapstick humor and unnecessary pop culture references. Yes, there's some of that here, but never so much that it takes precedent over the story.

At it's most basic, "Dragon" is pretty much a story about conflict and the ability of a younger generation to rid themselves of the conflicts of the older. It's also a very sweet story about a son trying to find the acceptance of his father, and Baruchel and Butler both give their characters a lot personality just with their voices (though it's rather bizarre that everyone has a Scottish accent except for Hiccup--but what can you do?).

So, with breathtaking animation (about the best I've seen in recent years, certainly on par with "Up") and a very sweet little tale, "How to Train Your Dragon" remains one of the best films of the year thus far.

Grade: A

View WeekinRewind's video preview of "How to Train Your Dragon" below. What are your thoughts?

"How to Train Your Dragon" 

DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois, Written by Sanders, DeBlois, Peter Tolan and Adam F. Goldberg, 98 Minutes, Rated PG

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

"How to Train Your Dragon" is a wonderful fantasy set on the mythical island of Berk, where vikings have been at constant war with neighboring dragons for generations. Like many great fantasies, it concerns a young man who, despite the fate his family line has given him, rises above the life he's forced to live and learns quite a bit about himself in the process.

The young man is Hiccup (voiced by Jay Baruchel), son of the viking's leader Stoick (voiced by Gerard Butler). Stoick and his men venture off one day to seek the nest of the dragons to rid them of their land once and for all, but while he's gone, Hiccup happens upon a wounded dragon himself. After finding that he doesn't have it in him to kill the poor creature, he instead befriends and tames him, and his newfound knowledge of dragons puts his and his whole clan's world in upheaval.

The film has some of the best animation Dreamworks ever has produced--sharp, fluid and absolutely gorgeous; the scenery, flame effects, dragons, humans, water, etc., has a painterly quality that balances realism with Brad Bird-esque character design, which suits the story perfectly. The numerous flight and action sequences are absolutely breathtaking, and a few moments where flames erupt from dimly lit clouds is nearly unmatched by the rest of Dreamworks' oeuvre. Impressive, considering directors' Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois general lack of experience in computer animation (the former Disney animators are perhaps best known for "Lilo & Stitch"). One of the greatest accomplishments in the animation is the transition of the dragons from fierce, violent monsters in the beginning of the film to more relatable, human-like creatures later on. Even in the first act or so of the film, where we only get brief glimpses of the dragons, little details in the animation of their faces hints at an untapped lovability that is really clear when we finally meet Toothless, the dragon Hiccup tames.

Unlike most Dreamworks films (and even the majority of Pixar's), "How to Train Your Dragon" also is a heartfelt and human drama more than it is a comedy or action film, and the comedy always pops up organically, as opposed to something like "Madagascar," where character or story is sacrificed for slapstick humor and unnecessary pop culture references. Yes, there's some of that here, but never so much that it takes precedent over the story.

At it's most basic, "Dragon" is pretty much a story about conflict and the ability of a younger generation to rid themselves of the conflicts of the older. It's also a very sweet story about a son trying to find the acceptance of his father, and Baruchel and Butler both give their characters a lot personality just with their voices (though it's rather bizarre that everyone has a Scottish accent except for Hiccup--but what can you do?).

So, with breathtaking animation (about the best I've seen in recent years, certainly on par with "Up") and a very sweet little tale, "How to Train Your Dragon" remains one of the best films of the year thus far.

Grade: A

View WeekinRewind's video preview of "How to Train Your Dragon" below. What are your thoughts?

“Toy Story 3”

DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Lee Unkrich, written by Michael Arndt, 98 minutes, rated G.

By Christopher Smith

The  horror movie, “Toy Story 3,” takes the beloved toys from the previous two films and puts them in a movie in which they no longer are needed by Andy, who is off to college. And so, since he’s moving on, the toys in question are given to a day care center, in which hives of scrambling, snot-nosed, unformed tots tear into them with such unbridled glee, their rampage hinges on something close to blood violence.

Thus the horror.

Director Lee Unkrich based the movie on Michael Arndt’s script, and what they created with Pixar is one of the year’s great movies.

Everyone is back--and then some. There’s Woody (voice of Tom Hanks), who remains Andy’s favorite, as well as Woody’s pals Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), Jessie (Joan Cusack) Slinky Dog (Jim Varney), Rex the dinosaur (Wallace Shawn), Hamm the piggy bank (John Ratzenberger), Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head (Don Rickles, Estelle Harris), and Barbie (Jodi Benson), who no longer is wanted by Andy’s sister.

New to the show are those toys at the Sunnyside Day Care, and at first glance, they’re a welcoming bunch with broad smiles and big hearts. There’s a big furry bear in Lotso (Ned Beatty), who leads the pack and is a self-proclaimed “hugger,” as well as Ken doll (Michael Keaton), Big Baby (who wanders the facility like Frankenstein’s monster and who has an unfortunate, droopy left eye), and scores of others, including a rubber octopus and a grinning monkey replete with cymbals and eyes that see everything.

Which is sort of a problem for the Woody and company. After a honeymoon period in which they all believe they struck gold--instead of being tossed out with the trash, they now will be played with and loved by children--it’s quickly revealed that everything isn’t right at Sunnyside Day Care. The place is a nightmare, with its walls so locked down, you might as well consider the other toys’ leader, Lotso, a strict warden with an ax to grind. He plans to keep the new toys captive. And what do you want to bet that Woody, Buzz and everyone else is having none of that? Of course, with that comes its share of problems--such as how to get out, which is what a good deal of this movie is about.

“Toy Story 3” also is about leaving behind one’s childhood, the knowledge of doing so, and the heartache and exhilaration that can come from it when a way of life is lost and a new one is found. It’s a movie that highlights abandonment issues for the toys in question, and it’s a movie that emotes all of those complex emotions with such sensitivity, you’re once again left with a groundswell of admiration for the skilled people at Pixar, who have an uncanny way of balancing all of this emotional weight with outrageous moments of comedy and action.

With a superb set of new characters--you’ll never look at Barbie and Ken the same way again--and its clear understanding of human nature, “Toy Story 3” once again proves that toys not only are for kids, but toys, in fact, are us.

Grade: A

View Week in Rewind's video preview of "Toy Story 3" below. What are your thoughts of the film?

“Toy Story 3”

DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Lee Unkrich, written by Michael Arndt, 98 minutes, rated G.

By Christopher Smith

The  horror movie, “Toy Story 3,” takes the beloved toys from the previous two films and puts them in a movie in which they no longer are needed by Andy, who is off to college. And so, since he’s moving on, the toys in question are given to a day care center, in which hives of scrambling, snot-nosed, unformed tots tear into them with such unbridled glee, their rampage hinges on something close to blood violence.

Thus the horror.

Director Lee Unkrich based the movie on Michael Arndt’s script, and what they created with Pixar is one of the year’s great movies.

Everyone is back--and then some. There’s Woody (voice of Tom Hanks), who remains Andy’s favorite, as well as Woody’s pals Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), Jessie (Joan Cusack) Slinky Dog (Jim Varney), Rex the dinosaur (Wallace Shawn), Hamm the piggy bank (John Ratzenberger), Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head (Don Rickles, Estelle Harris), and Barbie (Jodi Benson), who no longer is wanted by Andy’s sister.

New to the show are those toys at the Sunnyside Day Care, and at first glance, they’re a welcoming bunch with broad smiles and big hearts. There’s a big furry bear in Lotso (Ned Beatty), who leads the pack and is a self-proclaimed “hugger,” as well as Ken doll (Michael Keaton), Big Baby (who wanders the facility like Frankenstein’s monster and who has an unfortunate, droopy left eye), and scores of others, including a rubber octopus and a grinning monkey replete with cymbals and eyes that see everything.

Which is sort of a problem for the Woody and company. After a honeymoon period in which they all believe they struck gold--instead of being tossed out with the trash, they now will be played with and loved by children--it’s quickly revealed that everything isn’t right at Sunnyside Day Care. The place is a nightmare, with its walls so locked down, you might as well consider the other toys’ leader, Lotso, a strict warden with an ax to grind. He plans to keep the new toys captive. And what do you want to bet that Woody, Buzz and everyone else is having none of that? Of course, with that comes its share of problems--such as how to get out, which is what a good deal of this movie is about.

“Toy Story 3” also is about leaving behind one’s childhood, the knowledge of doing so, and the heartache and exhilaration that can come from it when a way of life is lost and a new one is found. It’s a movie that highlights abandonment issues for the toys in question, and it’s a movie that emotes all of those complex emotions with such sensitivity, you’re once again left with a groundswell of admiration for the skilled people at Pixar, who have an uncanny way of balancing all of this emotional weight with outrageous moments of comedy and action.

With a superb set of new characters--you’ll never look at Barbie and Ken the same way again--and its clear understanding of human nature, “Toy Story 3” once again proves that toys not only are for kids, but toys, in fact, are us.

Grade: A

View Week in Rewind's video preview of "Toy Story 3" below. What are your thoughts of the film?

"The Secret of Kells" 

 DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Tomm Moore and Nora Twomey, Written by Moore and Fabrice Ziolkowski, 75 Minutes, Not Rated

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

In the ninth century, the Monastery of Kells is one of very few Celtic abbeys unattacked by approaching vikings. Abbot Cellach, a former scholar and visionary, goes mad with desperation as he orders the construction of a great wall around the city, sacrificing his former eye for expression and art in favor of this massive defense. His nephew, young orphaned Brendan, wants nothing more than to follow in the footsteps of the abbots he has apprenticed under, who have devoted their lives to literature.

One legendary abbot, Aidan of Iona, arrives in Kells after his own monastery was pillaged and destroyed by the vikings. He brings with him his legendary book, a text said to contain the most revelatory and transcendent pages in the world. But it has yet to be finished. As Cellach continues building his wall, Aidan teaches Brendan about his book with the intention of passing it on to him, and this leads Brendan through a series of adventures as he comes to understand himself and the world around him.

Nominated along with such films as "Up" and "Fantastic Mr. Fox" for the most recent Academy Award for Best Animated Film, "The Secret of Kells" sort of popped up out of nowhere recently, just a little hand-drawn feature from Ireland telling the legend of the actual Book of Kells, an ancient text written by the Celtics and containing various important works, including the New Testament.

Thank God for the Academy, because otherwise this little masterpiece would've gone criminally unnoticed. "Kells" will surely become one of the definitive animated works of this generation. Using the mix of traditional coming-of-age stories and various legends that Studio Ghibli has used so well, the film succeeds as a breathtakingly gorgeous work of art that indicates the crucial importance of knowledge and imagination over force and the growing similarities between truth and fiction, as well as a really heartfelt story of personal growth.

The animation is a fine example of how powerful hand-drawn animation can be when implemented well. The animators tell their story through various styles, whether it be chalk drawings, fluid, luscious traditional animation or combinations of both (along with little touches of computer animation here and there), and in the process, the film is told as if it were a mix of multiple interpretations of a legend pulled together into one.

Because it takes its tale from legends of Celtic tradition, the story also is incredibly refreshing and unique. Irish mythology is rich with stories of the power of nature and the mix of faith and art, and there are many different mythological figures from these stories employed in the film, including wood fairies and other odd creatures of nature. The film also succeeds quite well in its combination of legend and reality--it's thought that the Abbey of Kells was in fact a refuge for those under attack by vikings in the ninth century, and the animators used conjecture based on the current ruins of the city in order to design the look of Kells in the film.

Basically, the film is an extremely pleasant surprise. As the film's story says that the pen is mightier than the sword, its technical brilliance suggets hand-drawn animation may be mightier than the computer animation overwhelming theaters today.

Grade: A

View the trailer for "The Secret of the Kells" below. What are your thoughts?

"The Secret of Kells" 

 DVD, Blu-ray Movie Review

Directed by Tomm Moore and Nora Twomey, Written by Moore and Fabrice Ziolkowski, 75 Minutes, Not Rated

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

In the ninth century, the Monastery of Kells is one of very few Celtic abbeys unattacked by approaching vikings. Abbot Cellach, a former scholar and visionary, goes mad with desperation as he orders the construction of a great wall around the city, sacrificing his former eye for expression and art in favor of this massive defense. His nephew, young orphaned Brendan, wants nothing more than to follow in the footsteps of the abbots he has apprenticed under, who have devoted their lives to literature.

One legendary abbot, Aidan of Iona, arrives in Kells after his own monastery was pillaged and destroyed by the vikings. He brings with him his legendary book, a text said to contain the most revelatory and transcendent pages in the world. But it has yet to be finished. As Cellach continues building his wall, Aidan teaches Brendan about his book with the intention of passing it on to him, and this leads Brendan through a series of adventures as he comes to understand himself and the world around him.

Nominated along with such films as "Up" and "Fantastic Mr. Fox" for the most recent Academy Award for Best Animated Film, "The Secret of Kells" sort of popped up out of nowhere recently, just a little hand-drawn feature from Ireland telling the legend of the actual Book of Kells, an ancient text written by the Celtics and containing various important works, including the New Testament.

Thank God for the Academy, because otherwise this little masterpiece would've gone criminally unnoticed. "Kells" will surely become one of the definitive animated works of this generation. Using the mix of traditional coming-of-age stories and various legends that Studio Ghibli has used so well, the film succeeds as a breathtakingly gorgeous work of art that indicates the crucial importance of knowledge and imagination over force and the growing similarities between truth and fiction, as well as a really heartfelt story of personal growth.

The animation is a fine example of how powerful hand-drawn animation can be when implemented well. The animators tell their story through various styles, whether it be chalk drawings, fluid, luscious traditional animation or combinations of both (along with little touches of computer animation here and there), and in the process, the film is told as if it were a mix of multiple interpretations of a legend pulled together into one.

Because it takes its tale from legends of Celtic tradition, the story also is incredibly refreshing and unique. Irish mythology is rich with stories of the power of nature and the mix of faith and art, and there are many different mythological figures from these stories employed in the film, including wood fairies and other odd creatures of nature. The film also succeeds quite well in its combination of legend and reality--it's thought that the Abbey of Kells was in fact a refuge for those under attack by vikings in the ninth century, and the animators used conjecture based on the current ruins of the city in order to design the look of Kells in the film.

Basically, the film is an extremely pleasant surprise. As the film's story says that the pen is mightier than the sword, its technical brilliance suggets hand-drawn animation may be mightier than the computer animation overwhelming theaters today.

Grade: A

View the trailer for "The Secret of the Kells" below. What are your thoughts?

"Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole"

Movie Review

Directed by Zack Snyder, Written by John Orloff and John Collee, 90 Minutes, Rated PG

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

"Legend of the Guardians," no matter how much it's embraced by audiences (if at all), seems set to be one of the more bizarre entries in the filmography of Zack Snyder, the director being touted recently as a "visionary" responsible for some very good films ("Watchmen," "Dawn of the Dead") and one pretty bad one ("300"). He's bafflingly uneven, primarily due to his focus on spectacle over character and plot development (even in stories that desperately call for it), but there are few directors out there as purely distinctive and earnest.

"Guardians" is his first attempt at reaching a broader audience--not only is it his first family film, but it's also his first animated film (though that may be giving him too little credit--"300" was virtually CGI animation behind live action). It would seem a rather odd choice for the director who previously covered pretty adult topics, and ultimately, that lack of experience in the area comes through in the final product.

The film is pretty by-the-numbers fantasy stuff. A young owl named Soren (Jim Sturgess) is told tales of the legendary Guardians of Ga'Hoole, an army of powerful owls sworn to protect the kingdom of Ga'Hoole at any cost. This story becomes all too true, however, when he and his friends are captured by a group of Barn Owls who believe their kind to be the purest race of owl and who intend on hunting down the Guardians and destroying them. In other words, there are some Nazi owls and some cool owls and they have to fight each other, and people learn stuff along the way. It's no "Lord of the Rings," that's for sure.

Snyder and screenwriters John Orloff and John Collee do very little to bring this stuff above sheer cliche--everything explored here has been done better, both in live action and animation. There is a heavy weight to the subject matter, but that generally just comes with Snyder's style. Where stories (books or films) like "The Secret of NIMH" or "Watership Down" really work is how much life is brought into their characters--although, regarding those works, in undoubtable that the animation style of this film would suit those stories extremely well. I don't want to throw out the "r" word, but honestly, remakes with this style with those stories have potential to be spellbinding--at least far moreso than "Guardians."

That's not to discount the animation, though. It's very much the one thing keeping the film afloat. Some of Snyder's more aggravating tendencies do come through even in this medium (for example, slow motion--seriously, if his films had no slow-motion, they'd all be about an hour long, combined). But the animation is quite beautiful, and a lot of detail is captured in the owl designs without them losing personality. It's quite a step above the animation the same studio did for "Happy Feet," which was quite good, but doesn't come close to some of the exquisite visuals on display here.

Generally, the whole affair just seems like what it's very likely to be--Snyder's first "paycheck" movie. With a far more conceptually insane and personal movie on the way in next year's "Sucker Punch," it's probable that Snyder picked up this project just so he'd be able to follow it up with something more oblique (probably even moreso than "Watchmen"). There's not necessarily a lack of effort, but there's very little heart in this film, and with such a dull plot, that's really what it needed.

Grade: D+

"Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole"

Movie Review

Directed by Zack Snyder, Written by John Orloff and John Collee, 90 Minutes, Rated PG

By our guest blogger, Rob Stammitti

"Legend of the Guardians," no matter how much it's embraced by audiences (if at all), seems set to be one of the more bizarre entries in the filmography of Zack Snyder, the director being touted recently as a "visionary" responsible for some very good films ("Watchmen," "Dawn of the Dead") and one pretty bad one ("300"). He's bafflingly uneven, primarily due to his focus on spectacle over character and plot development (even in stories that desperately call for it), but there are few directors out there as purely distinctive and earnest.

"Guardians" is his first attempt at reaching a broader audience--not only is it his first family film, but it's also his first animated film (though that may be giving him too little credit--"300" was virtually CGI animation behind live action). It would seem a rather odd choice for the director who previously covered pretty adult topics, and ultimately, that lack of experience in the area comes through in the final product.

The film is pretty by-the-numbers fantasy stuff. A young owl named Soren (Jim Sturgess) is told tales of the legendary Guardians of Ga'Hoole, an army of powerful owls sworn to protect the kingdom of Ga'Hoole at any cost. This story becomes all too true, however, when he and his friends are captured by a group of Barn Owls who believe their kind to be the purest race of owl and who intend on hunting down the Guardians and destroying them. In other words, there are some Nazi owls and some cool owls and they have to fight each other, and people learn stuff along the way. It's no "Lord of the Rings," that's for sure.

Snyder and screenwriters John Orloff and John Collee do very little to bring this stuff above sheer cliche--everything explored here has been done better, both in live action and animation. There is a heavy weight to the subject matter, but that generally just comes with Snyder's style. Where stories (books or films) like "The Secret of NIMH" or "Watership Down" really work is how much life is brought into their characters--although, regarding those works, in undoubtable that the animation style of this film would suit those stories extremely well. I don't want to throw out the "r" word, but honestly, remakes with this style with those stories have potential to be spellbinding--at least far moreso than "Guardians."

That's not to discount the animation, though. It's very much the one thing keeping the film afloat. Some of Snyder's more aggravating tendencies do come through even in this medium (for example, slow motion--seriously, if his films had no slow-motion, they'd all be about an hour long, combined). But the animation is quite beautiful, and a lot of detail is captured in the owl designs without them losing personality. It's quite a step above the animation the same studio did for "Happy Feet," which was quite good, but doesn't come close to some of the exquisite visuals on display here.

Generally, the whole affair just seems like what it's very likely to be--Snyder's first "paycheck" movie. With a far more conceptually insane and personal movie on the way in next year's "Sucker Punch," it's probable that Snyder picked up this project just so he'd be able to follow it up with something more oblique (probably even moreso than "Watchmen"). There's not necessarily a lack of effort, but there's very little heart in this film, and with such a dull plot, that's really what it needed.

Grade: D+

"My Dog Tulip"

Movie Review

Directed by Paul and Sandra Fierlinger, 83 minutes, unrated.

By our guest blogger, Aidan Thomas

The relationship between dogs and their owners has been a subject for countless films, from "Umberto D" to "Marley & Me." Films like "Umberto D" are the exception, though. Traditionally, these films fall into sentimental nonsense and a string of hijinx that can be fun, but is more often shallow. The directors of these dog-owner films (yes, I just made up a new genre) frequently struggle to fully develop the relationship between owner and dog. These directors use the relationship as a means to an end (as a conduit for low-brow humor) as opposed to exploring the relationship itself.

"My Dog Tulip," adapted from J.R. Ackerley’s novel of the same name, is a pitch-perfect film that illustrates the directors’ desire to truly explore the relationship between man and beast. The film, which was written, directed and animated by Paul and Sandra Fierlinger, is incredibly heartfelt and affecting. It tells the story of Ackerley, an elderly man who adopts Tulip, an 18-month-old Alsatian. The two are instantly inseparable and each devote their lives to ensuring the other’s happiness. Christopher Plummer (as J.R. Ackerley) narrates the film and provides a perfect accompaniment to the film’s stunning animation. Each frame of the film is meticulously hand drawn (over 1,000 drawings were used).

The film is told through a series of vignettes that in tandem with the animation have the feel of miniature picture books. Each story illustrates the intense connection between Ackerley and his new companion. The film isn’t far reaching but it does what it does very well. The stories are alternately sad and hilarious, and when viewed as a whole, they paint a beautiful portrait of Ackerley and Tulip. Toward the end of the film, as Ackerley reflects on Tulip’s intense effect on his own life, he begins to realize that dogs have a lesson to teach all of us. Dog’s live in the moment. They live for the people around them and devote themselves to ensuring that those around them know they care.

What more can one ask for from a companion?

Grade: B+

"My Dog Tulip"

Movie Review

Directed by Paul and Sandra Fierlinger, 83 minutes, unrated.

By our guest blogger, Aidan Thomas

The relationship between dogs and their owners has been a subject for countless films, from "Umberto D" to "Marley & Me." Films like "Umberto D" are the exception, though. Traditionally, these films fall into sentimental nonsense and a string of hijinx that can be fun, but is more often shallow. The directors of these dog-owner films (yes, I just made up a new genre) frequently struggle to fully develop the relationship between owner and dog. These directors use the relationship as a means to an end (as a conduit for low-brow humor) as opposed to exploring the relationship itself.

"My Dog Tulip," adapted from J.R. Ackerley’s novel of the same name, is a pitch-perfect film that illustrates the directors’ desire to truly explore the relationship between man and beast. The film, which was written, directed and animated by Paul and Sandra Fierlinger, is incredibly heartfelt and affecting. It tells the story of Ackerley, an elderly man who adopts Tulip, an 18-month-old Alsatian. The two are instantly inseparable and each devote their lives to ensuring the other’s happiness. Christopher Plummer (as J.R. Ackerley) narrates the film and provides a perfect accompaniment to the film’s stunning animation. Each frame of the film is meticulously hand drawn (over 1,000 drawings were used).

The film is told through a series of vignettes that in tandem with the animation have the feel of miniature picture books. Each story illustrates the intense connection between Ackerley and his new companion. The film isn’t far reaching but it does what it does very well. The stories are alternately sad and hilarious, and when viewed as a whole, they paint a beautiful portrait of Ackerley and Tulip. Toward the end of the film, as Ackerley reflects on Tulip’s intense effect on his own life, he begins to realize that dogs have a lesson to teach all of us. Dog’s live in the moment. They live for the people around them and devote themselves to ensuring that those around them know they care.

What more can one ask for from a companion?

Grade: B+