It's been almost eleven years since this epic fantasy RPG first hit store shelves, but the impact it has left on the video gaming world cannot be forgotten. It's timeless morals, clever writing, large and expansive worlds, loveable characters, and addicting game play makes it a classic. Kingdom Hearts is almost as big a part of pop culture as the Final Fantasy and Disney characters that appear in the game. And yet, as I sit here having completed the most recent entry in the saga, Dream Drop Distance, I still crave more. I crave newer and more challenging experiences battling against the ever-looming dark forces. An entire generation grew up playing and living this game and the impact it has left upon them is everlasting. But can it be called the greatest video gaming series of all time? Well, let's take a look and inhale the wonders of the Kingdom Hearts saga.
PLOT: For those of you unfamiliar with the gaming series plot, I'll fill you in, trying my best not to spoil too much:
There are two forces in the world, light and dark. For years, the forces of dark have been expanding, swallowing whole worlds and consuming their residents. The only person in the world with the power to fight off the darkness is the wielder of a powerful weapon called a Keyblade. Many years prior to the events in the first game, there were countless Keyblade masters who protected the light and dark. But constant wars and fighting drastically diminished the number. The Keyblade holds the power to unlock the many barriers and lock away the hearts of the worlds, protecting them from the Heartless, dark beings that exist without hearts.
Everyone in the world is capable of both great good and great evil. Darkness lingers in virtually every heart of every person of every world. Only seven people have been known to exist without darkness in their hearts, and these seven maidens are called, The Princesses of Heart. Snow White, Cinderella, Alice, Aurora, Jasmine, Belle, and one other.
On an island world called Destiny Islands, three children live and have fun. Riku, a powerful young man who is ever curious about the world outside of the island; Kairi, who appeared during the night of a meteor shower; and Sora, an idealistic and friendly young boy who has been friends with Riku for years. One night, the Heartless invade and the three friends are separated. Kairi vanishes, while Riku and Sora are swallowed by the darkness. But Sora discovers that he can use the Keyblade and after being washed up in a world called Traverse Town, he goes off in search of his friends.
Coincidentally, he bumps into Donald Duck and Goofy, who were sent by their King Mickey to find the person with "the key", and stick with him. Sora, Donald, and Goofy travel to many worlds, stopping the Heartless and sealing the Keyholes of every world so they cannot disappear into darkness. Along the way, the group contends with the likes of the evil fairy Maleficent and her council of evil: the sea witch Ursula, the Lord of the Underworld Hades, the Grand Vizier Jafar, the nightmare making Oogie Boogie, and the ruthless pirate Captain Hook, who have been using the Heartless to destroy worlds and kidnap the Princesses of Heart, who have a mysterious power when combined together.
Sora meets new friends, receives guidance and training from the wizard Merlin, and teams up with many Disney heroes to save the world, but is forced to be at odds with Riku, who has been in desperate search of Kairi and was taken in by Maleficent.
#2: The Characters
The best thing about this saga is the characters, and not just Simba and Tinker Bell.
Sora is a very likable protagonist, who always looks for the best in people before the worst and cares deeply for his friends. But, he is prone to his occasional lapses in judgement and brain power. But his courage and unwavering from the light makes up for that. At times his childish behavior can get distracting, like when he gushes over meeting Santa Claus, but with the oncoming release of Kingdom Hearts III, a much maturer Sora is expected.
Riku is an adventurer, who is enticed by what the outside has to offer. Often, though, Riku is prone to falling back on teasing Sora about his crush on Kairi and often mocks him for being weaker than him. He is also gullible early on, allying himself with Maleficent and the dark and thinking Sora abandoned them when he met Donald and Goofy. But, Riku also cares for both Sora and Kairi like his siblings and after relinquishing the darkness in himself is able to form a friendship with Mickey.
Kairi is almost as idealistic and kindhearted as Sora, but we don't get to seem much of her character in the story. She is often used as a DID, whom Sora must rescue. But she is still loving and cares as much about Sora as he does for her. Kingdom Hearts III should be able to bulk up her role in the story.
#2: The Disney Characters
Often, as you travel around various Disney worlds, you will be given the option to team up with a character from that respective world. Others are forced onto the player when there is no other option. For example, when Sora is separated from both his Keyblade and his friends in Hollow Bastion, and is forced to fight with a wooden sword, the Beast enters your party. Also, these world dwellers are often far more powerful than Donald and Goofy and teaming up with them isn't just for show. Also, I'd rather fight someone like Ursula or Jafar with Ariel or Aladdin. Along with these party characters, you meet several others whom help Sora along his journey, like the Genie, Donald's nephews, Merlin, Winnie the Pooh, Tinker Bell, and many more.
#3: FINAL FANTASY!!!!!
While Lightning has yet to make her cameo yet, Kingdom Hearts has delved deeply into the other pool it borrows characters from: Final Fantasy. Cloud, Leon, Yuffie, Cid, Auron, Tidus, Wakka, Moogles, Selphie, Zack, and even the all powerful Sephiroth make appearances in the saga. Though their roles are more secondary when compared to the Disney ones, they interact more with Sora and his friends. You even fight most of them in the various tournaments held in the games. The two people seem to love the most that appear in the game are Cloud and Sephiroth, who both fight each other to the death twice in the series. Sephiroth is a secret boss in both KH I and KH II, and both times is one of the hardest to fight.These characters also appear in multiple worlds, unlike the Disney characters, who are relegated to their own worlds.
#4: EVIL!!!!
Of course, no fantasy game can exist without villains to fight. And this adventure pits Sora and his friends against an all powerful genie, a dragon, a god, the guardian of the Underworld, a sea witch, and many other forces of evil.
Each of the villains is menacing and also a ton of fun to fight. Even Sephiroth. But the game even comes up with it's own villains, villains whom we despise even more than the Disney ones. The main villain in the series is Master Xehanort, who has been manipulating events throughout history to his advantage and seeks unlimited power.
Xehanort got his beginning explained in Dream Drop Distance, but his first real appearance was in Birth by Sleep, a prequel to the first game. He was once regarded as a powerful and noble Keyblade master, but his heart had become filled with pure hate and darkness. He uses his powers to torment the main characters of the game, Terra Ventus and Aqua in separate but equally tormenting ways, ultimately changing their lives forever.
Xehanort passes his knowledge and hate to Maleficent, who recruits Jafar, Pete, and many others to her cause in an effort to conquer the world. In the end, it is her own darkness that does her in and a new evil rises from the ashes of the old: Organization XIII. Once friends of Xehanort (one even was Xehanort), these beings lost their hearts, became Heartless and allowed their empty bodies to form new beings, Nobodies. These soulless and emotionless beings seek to destroy worlds just to recclaim their lost hearts.
#5: Epic Gameplay
Each game utilizes a different style of gameplay. The first was basically standard, allowing magic to be recharged it you are hit or if you do damage onto an opponent (works best during boss battles).
The gameboy game utilized cards, which would hold the power Sora could use. When Sora ran out, he would have to recharge and summon more cards to him.
The second console game made more powerful moves, such as limit commands take all of Sora's magic, forcing him to charge up his magic over a period of time. This style was perfected in Birth By Sleep, which allowed endless spellcasting, but you would just recharge.
All of the playable characters are able to change the keychain on their Keyblade and make it more powerful. While others boasted incredible strength, others utilized magical attacks. Even Donald and Goofy had changeable weapons.
In Kingdom Hearts II, all of the party members utilize limit commands. These commands are very powerful combo moves that often wipe out an entire group of Heartless, or do insane damage to opponents. Aladdin's even swipes some munny and other rare treasures from them. Each Disney Character and Riku had super powerful moves, while Sora, Donald, and Goofy's are more basic.
Good, Bad, Ugly
Kingdom Hearts has serious competition and serious expectations to meet. Mario, Pokemon, Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, Halo, and countless other games are able to pump out new additions to their saga each year for the most part. Kingdom Hearts III has just started basic development and isn't nearly ready for a close release date.
The expectations are also insanely high. People expect this next addition to be much darker, much more action packed, and more adult than any of the entries before have even considered reaching. I also have my personal things I want in KH III, but that's for another post.
Final Sum Up
Until the final entry into the game is released, it's cultural meaningfulness rides only on the power of the original games. But no one can deny it's impact. While it may not be the greatest video game series of all time, it certainly is on the path towards it. It's a great series that I highly recommend.
Friday, September 27, 2013
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Film Review #33: Fantasia 2000
Talk about a film years in them making. When Walt Disney first came up with the idea for Fantasia, he had wanted it to be a continually expanding and improving upon the original film. Unfortunately, the film's poor box office results cancelled plans for a sequel. It wasn't until the early nineties, when Roy Disney noticed that the film was growing in popularity and that The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast had done so well, that a sequel was greenlit. And as the 90's wound down, audiences around the world awaited two long awaited sequels: The Phantom Menace and Fantasia 2000. And as the future has dictated, neither of these films has been viewed as a classic by general audiences. Nevertheless, I feel it is necessary to give Disney a kudos for all that this film offers: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.
1st Piece: Beethoven's Fifth Symphony
In an attempt to recreate the magic of "Toccata and Fugue", the Disney Animators tell the story of what appears to be colorful butterflies and evil black butterflies. And herein lies the first problem with the film. "Toccata and Fugue" had no plot whatsoever and simply gave the audience various impressions of the orchestra and illustrating what people pictured in their minds when they heard the music for the first time. In this case, there is more of a plot. I guess the opening is just one of those things you can't imitate.
Grade: B-
2nd Piece: Pines of Rome
If the first part of the film lagged and the extremely annoying cameo by Steve Martin made you turn off the video, I don't blame you, but mute the TV until the next guy comes on. He introduces this piece, which is one of the two best pieces in the film. It tells the story of whales who use the power of the northern lights to fly. Such an odd idea, and yet, it works wonderfully. The build up for the piece is brilliant and the animation, while a bit too CGI, is still really good.
Grade: A
3rd Piece: Rhapsody in Blue
This part is easily the best. The film combines one of the jazzier pieces of classical music with Al Hirschfeld's classic drawing style and tells the story of many people living and dreaming of a better life in Depression laden Manhattan. The piece is fun for both kids and adults and is one of the ultimate highlights in Disney history.
Grade: A
4th Piece: Piano Concerto #2, Allegro, Opus 102
This piece is both good and bad at the same time. You know the musicians are giving it their all, but the animators seem to be relying too much on computers at this time. If you can tell, I'm not a big fan of 3D animation to begin with, and this one didn't need it at all. Telling the story of Hans Christian Anderson's "Steadfast Tin Soldier", a broken tin soldier falls in love with a dancing ballerina and faces off against an evil Jack in the box. While changing the ending of it like they did with The Little Mermaid, it still is a decent film.
Grade: B-
5th Piece: Carnival of the Animals, Finale
When did I turn on "Animaniacs"? Wait, I didn't? Fantasia 2000 is still on? Really? Oh, um...well...this is underachieving at it 's finest. A 90 second piece about a flamingo and his yo-yo. Um...can I get my money back?
Grade: C-
6th Piece: The Sorcerer's Apprentice
Grade: A
7th Piece: Pomp and Circumstance
When I first heard that Donald Duck was going to be in a story about Noah's Ark, I was thinking the same thing as I did with the Animal one. But happily, I was impressed with this piece. Donald's comic antics are seamlessly blended a more comic approach to the music. The story is genuine and the animation is still brilliant. Well done, Donald.
Grade: B
Finale: The Firebird Suite
A finale on par with "Night on Bald Mountain"/ "Ave Maria"? No, but it is still pretty good. Giving the message about preserving the environment from the hatred and pillaging ways of both hatred and man, the suite is brilliantly portrayed and the animation is breathtaking
Grade: A
Final Grade: B
1st Piece: Beethoven's Fifth Symphony
In an attempt to recreate the magic of "Toccata and Fugue", the Disney Animators tell the story of what appears to be colorful butterflies and evil black butterflies. And herein lies the first problem with the film. "Toccata and Fugue" had no plot whatsoever and simply gave the audience various impressions of the orchestra and illustrating what people pictured in their minds when they heard the music for the first time. In this case, there is more of a plot. I guess the opening is just one of those things you can't imitate.
Grade: B-
2nd Piece: Pines of Rome
If the first part of the film lagged and the extremely annoying cameo by Steve Martin made you turn off the video, I don't blame you, but mute the TV until the next guy comes on. He introduces this piece, which is one of the two best pieces in the film. It tells the story of whales who use the power of the northern lights to fly. Such an odd idea, and yet, it works wonderfully. The build up for the piece is brilliant and the animation, while a bit too CGI, is still really good.
Grade: A
3rd Piece: Rhapsody in Blue
This part is easily the best. The film combines one of the jazzier pieces of classical music with Al Hirschfeld's classic drawing style and tells the story of many people living and dreaming of a better life in Depression laden Manhattan. The piece is fun for both kids and adults and is one of the ultimate highlights in Disney history.
Grade: A
4th Piece: Piano Concerto #2, Allegro, Opus 102
This piece is both good and bad at the same time. You know the musicians are giving it their all, but the animators seem to be relying too much on computers at this time. If you can tell, I'm not a big fan of 3D animation to begin with, and this one didn't need it at all. Telling the story of Hans Christian Anderson's "Steadfast Tin Soldier", a broken tin soldier falls in love with a dancing ballerina and faces off against an evil Jack in the box. While changing the ending of it like they did with The Little Mermaid, it still is a decent film.
Grade: B-
5th Piece: Carnival of the Animals, Finale
When did I turn on "Animaniacs"? Wait, I didn't? Fantasia 2000 is still on? Really? Oh, um...well...this is underachieving at it 's finest. A 90 second piece about a flamingo and his yo-yo. Um...can I get my money back?
Grade: C-
6th Piece: The Sorcerer's Apprentice
Grade: A
7th Piece: Pomp and Circumstance
When I first heard that Donald Duck was going to be in a story about Noah's Ark, I was thinking the same thing as I did with the Animal one. But happily, I was impressed with this piece. Donald's comic antics are seamlessly blended a more comic approach to the music. The story is genuine and the animation is still brilliant. Well done, Donald.
Grade: B
Finale: The Firebird Suite
A finale on par with "Night on Bald Mountain"/ "Ave Maria"? No, but it is still pretty good. Giving the message about preserving the environment from the hatred and pillaging ways of both hatred and man, the suite is brilliantly portrayed and the animation is breathtaking
Grade: A
Final Grade: B
Monday, September 23, 2013
Film Review #32: Tarzan (1999)
Hey, if hiring a celebrity to write songs worked before, why not go there again? Elton John and Tim Rice's songs from The Lion King are some of the most well known songs in motion picture history. Naturally, if Disney was going to recapture some of the old magic they once had, they needed another rock star. Hey! Why not Phil Collins? Wait, what? Can Phil Collins songs really work in a Disney film? Especially a Disney retelling of the world's most famous jungle man? Um.......
Plot: A shipwrecked family decides to make a home in a tree in the middle of the African jungles. But the parents of the infant boy are killed by a leopard named Sabor, around the same time as the child of two gorillas is also killed by the leopard. Naturally, the ape mother, Kala, comes across the infant boy and takes him in as her son and names him Tarzan.
Tarzan grows up and becomes more ape than man, though he seems unable to win his new father's trust. Tarzan protects his family from many various dangers, until the most dangerous animal in the world comes to Africa: Humans! The humans, a professor, his daughter Jane, and a hunter named Clayton, have come to Africa in search of gorillas. Tarzan begins to mingle with the humans and even decides to take them to the nesting grounds. But after the meeting ends in disaster, Tarzan must decide whether to become a man and leave with Jane for England, or remain in the jungle with his friends.
What's Wrong?: The Phil Collins songs don't really irk me. It is the fact that none of the characters are the ones singing the lyrics. At least with The Lion King, it's the characters singing the songs (for the most part). If not, then they got a Zulu choir to sing. Phil's voice and songs are pretty out of place in a story that took place about a hundred years ago.
Clayton is a pretty predictable villain. In a story that could have had a wide variety of characters be the villains, why did Disney choose to follow the Ratcliffe approach than something like Scar or Ursula? If I had it my way, I wouldn't even have a villain. The main conflict in the movie should be inside Tarzan. It doesn't have to even involve Clayton. It would be the internal struggle for him, whether he should be a human or an ape.
As with the previous three films, the film's supporting cast isn't that memorable or funny. Rosie O'Donnell isn't very funny, nor is the bumbling Professor (who is basically the Sultan with liposuction). None of the other characters are memorable.
What's Good?: The two leading ladies in this movie more than make up for the rest of the film's weaknesses. Glenn Close's portrayal as Kala is one of the best parental performances since Mufasa, and she has her own definitive personality and is one of the first truly definitive non-evil mothers since Bambi's mom.
As for Jane, Minnie Driver is able to give Jane the attitude of a Damsel in Distress done right. She is still able to convey a personality despite being far from her natural comfort zone. And while she does seem willing to throw herself into Tarzan's arms, she does in fact hold her own in a fight.
The animation is stunning. No one had ever thought of visualizing Tarzan as tree surfing. Most picture Tarzan as the vine swinger. But animators made the surfing and swinging swift and yet still amazing to watch.
Overall: Tarzan is the last of the truly brilliant films to come from Disney. While films like Tangled and Wreck It Ralph were really good films, the quality of these films are not and will never be as good as the films of the 90's. Let's face it: we were spoiled. We got to live and grow and raise our kids in the greatest decade of all time. Everything from TV cartoons, to Animated films, to just movies in general were fantastic. We were able to witness the success of the four greatest 2D animated films of all time and these films will exist in pop culture forever. We may and probably won't ever see an era like this ever again.
Report Card
Hero: B+
Heroine: A-
Villain: C-
Side Characters: B-
Songs: B-
Musical Score: B+
Animation: A+
Special Effects: A+
Themes: A
Story: A-
Final Grade: A-
Plot: A shipwrecked family decides to make a home in a tree in the middle of the African jungles. But the parents of the infant boy are killed by a leopard named Sabor, around the same time as the child of two gorillas is also killed by the leopard. Naturally, the ape mother, Kala, comes across the infant boy and takes him in as her son and names him Tarzan.
Tarzan grows up and becomes more ape than man, though he seems unable to win his new father's trust. Tarzan protects his family from many various dangers, until the most dangerous animal in the world comes to Africa: Humans! The humans, a professor, his daughter Jane, and a hunter named Clayton, have come to Africa in search of gorillas. Tarzan begins to mingle with the humans and even decides to take them to the nesting grounds. But after the meeting ends in disaster, Tarzan must decide whether to become a man and leave with Jane for England, or remain in the jungle with his friends.
What's Wrong?: The Phil Collins songs don't really irk me. It is the fact that none of the characters are the ones singing the lyrics. At least with The Lion King, it's the characters singing the songs (for the most part). If not, then they got a Zulu choir to sing. Phil's voice and songs are pretty out of place in a story that took place about a hundred years ago.
Clayton is a pretty predictable villain. In a story that could have had a wide variety of characters be the villains, why did Disney choose to follow the Ratcliffe approach than something like Scar or Ursula? If I had it my way, I wouldn't even have a villain. The main conflict in the movie should be inside Tarzan. It doesn't have to even involve Clayton. It would be the internal struggle for him, whether he should be a human or an ape.
As with the previous three films, the film's supporting cast isn't that memorable or funny. Rosie O'Donnell isn't very funny, nor is the bumbling Professor (who is basically the Sultan with liposuction). None of the other characters are memorable.
What's Good?: The two leading ladies in this movie more than make up for the rest of the film's weaknesses. Glenn Close's portrayal as Kala is one of the best parental performances since Mufasa, and she has her own definitive personality and is one of the first truly definitive non-evil mothers since Bambi's mom.
As for Jane, Minnie Driver is able to give Jane the attitude of a Damsel in Distress done right. She is still able to convey a personality despite being far from her natural comfort zone. And while she does seem willing to throw herself into Tarzan's arms, she does in fact hold her own in a fight.
The animation is stunning. No one had ever thought of visualizing Tarzan as tree surfing. Most picture Tarzan as the vine swinger. But animators made the surfing and swinging swift and yet still amazing to watch.
Overall: Tarzan is the last of the truly brilliant films to come from Disney. While films like Tangled and Wreck It Ralph were really good films, the quality of these films are not and will never be as good as the films of the 90's. Let's face it: we were spoiled. We got to live and grow and raise our kids in the greatest decade of all time. Everything from TV cartoons, to Animated films, to just movies in general were fantastic. We were able to witness the success of the four greatest 2D animated films of all time and these films will exist in pop culture forever. We may and probably won't ever see an era like this ever again.
Report Card
Hero: B+
Heroine: A-
Villain: C-
Side Characters: B-
Songs: B-
Musical Score: B+
Animation: A+
Special Effects: A+
Themes: A
Story: A-
Final Grade: A-
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
What Could Have Been #6: The Black Cauldron
Considering how much little imagination there is little imagination and truly new ideas in Hollywood, it still astounds me that no studio has taken a second crack at this fantasy book series. Considering that the first time this film was tackled was by a group of untried animators and a bunch of bitter old men not wanting to cling onto change. Nevertheless, following the sensational string of success of fantasy movies like The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Chronicles of Narnia, and The Hunger Games, I still hold a firm belief that The Chronicles of Prydain should get another look at for a theatrical release.
The basic story of the series follows the exploits of an "Assistant Pig Keeper" named Taran and his friends, a mischievous furball named Gurgi, a plucky and slightly eccentric Princess Eilonwy, the grumpy dwarf named Doli, and the bumbling bard Fflewddur Flam and there perilous quest to defeat the evil demon, Arawn, who has an army of loyal followers and undead zombie men at his disposal. Along the way, they encounter many dangerous obstacles, including winged vulture like monsters called Gwythaints, greedy and power obsessed Kings of Men, a cruel Sorceress named Achren, ugly hags from the Marshes of Morva, and the demon's lead warmongerer, the Horned King.
When Disney first tackled this story, there was a great deal of optimism about it. At the time, The Chronicles of Prydain was one of the most popular fantasy novel series of all time and was basically the Harry Potter of its time. And considering Disney had failed to bring in the teenage crowd with a string of childish and unimaginative live action movies, this was almost the Holy Grail for Disney. However, the shadows that hung over Disney in the seventies and eighties hung over the production of this film. The key to a successful Disney film is loveable and relatable characters and a good story that doesn't have to rely on action. This film doesn't seem to grasp this, instead going all out into telling a dark and sinister story. This could have worked, but without any developed characters or a reason to care or worry about what happens in the plot, you get one of the worst interpretations of all time.
Now, almost 30 years afterwards, the film is viewed as a guilty pleasure and a great bore to watch and listen to. The Black Cauldron was made in the era when Fantasy movies were odd films that lacked any focus or understanding. Remember guys, this was pre-Fellowship. The only place where fantasy films worked was animation. Between 1985 and 2001, the only really good fantasy movies were films like The Little Mermaid and Aladdin. The question should be, what went wrong with this film?
1. The Characters: Lloyd Alexander develops a menagerie of characters that the reader grows to care about and want to hear and read more about, even beyond the final book. The key character relationship in the series was between Taran and Eilonwy. At first, the two view each other as an annoyance and inconvenience and went along on their journey only because they had to. But by the end of the first book, the two had learned to care about one another, as Eilonwy learned to put up with Taran's arrogance and pride, while Taran learned to put up with the Princess's constant preaching and often annoying attitude. By the time The Castle of Llyr came along, Taran had realized that he loved Eilonwy and would do everything in his power to see if he was of royal blood so he could marry her. Eilonwy seemed to have felt the same way as early as The Black Cauldron.
2. The Plot: The film combines the basic plot of both of the first books into one movie. That was where the first mistake was made. I don't remember if the first book even mentioned The Black Cauldron. Instead, it focused on developing the characters of the world and gave us a strong plot to keep us on the edge of our seats.
3. It's Disney!!: Remember, this was in the era when Disney made nothing but family friendly films and that's all they were known for. So tackling a film this dark and brooding was not the best marketing idea. This film could have been turned into something relatable and in the same veins as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. But, the film tries to be something that Disney could never become.
Final Conclusion: There is still enough of a fanbase to get a movie going, and the era of big budget fantasy films hasn't ended yet. Prydain can still get done and brilliantly. There is just one catch: the "dreammakers" at Disney still own the rights, and we'll probably have as much a chance of this being remade as seeing Song of the South being released to DVD in the US.
The basic story of the series follows the exploits of an "Assistant Pig Keeper" named Taran and his friends, a mischievous furball named Gurgi, a plucky and slightly eccentric Princess Eilonwy, the grumpy dwarf named Doli, and the bumbling bard Fflewddur Flam and there perilous quest to defeat the evil demon, Arawn, who has an army of loyal followers and undead zombie men at his disposal. Along the way, they encounter many dangerous obstacles, including winged vulture like monsters called Gwythaints, greedy and power obsessed Kings of Men, a cruel Sorceress named Achren, ugly hags from the Marshes of Morva, and the demon's lead warmongerer, the Horned King.
When Disney first tackled this story, there was a great deal of optimism about it. At the time, The Chronicles of Prydain was one of the most popular fantasy novel series of all time and was basically the Harry Potter of its time. And considering Disney had failed to bring in the teenage crowd with a string of childish and unimaginative live action movies, this was almost the Holy Grail for Disney. However, the shadows that hung over Disney in the seventies and eighties hung over the production of this film. The key to a successful Disney film is loveable and relatable characters and a good story that doesn't have to rely on action. This film doesn't seem to grasp this, instead going all out into telling a dark and sinister story. This could have worked, but without any developed characters or a reason to care or worry about what happens in the plot, you get one of the worst interpretations of all time.
Now, almost 30 years afterwards, the film is viewed as a guilty pleasure and a great bore to watch and listen to. The Black Cauldron was made in the era when Fantasy movies were odd films that lacked any focus or understanding. Remember guys, this was pre-Fellowship. The only place where fantasy films worked was animation. Between 1985 and 2001, the only really good fantasy movies were films like The Little Mermaid and Aladdin. The question should be, what went wrong with this film?
1. The Characters: Lloyd Alexander develops a menagerie of characters that the reader grows to care about and want to hear and read more about, even beyond the final book. The key character relationship in the series was between Taran and Eilonwy. At first, the two view each other as an annoyance and inconvenience and went along on their journey only because they had to. But by the end of the first book, the two had learned to care about one another, as Eilonwy learned to put up with Taran's arrogance and pride, while Taran learned to put up with the Princess's constant preaching and often annoying attitude. By the time The Castle of Llyr came along, Taran had realized that he loved Eilonwy and would do everything in his power to see if he was of royal blood so he could marry her. Eilonwy seemed to have felt the same way as early as The Black Cauldron.
2. The Plot: The film combines the basic plot of both of the first books into one movie. That was where the first mistake was made. I don't remember if the first book even mentioned The Black Cauldron. Instead, it focused on developing the characters of the world and gave us a strong plot to keep us on the edge of our seats.
3. It's Disney!!: Remember, this was in the era when Disney made nothing but family friendly films and that's all they were known for. So tackling a film this dark and brooding was not the best marketing idea. This film could have been turned into something relatable and in the same veins as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. But, the film tries to be something that Disney could never become.
Final Conclusion: There is still enough of a fanbase to get a movie going, and the era of big budget fantasy films hasn't ended yet. Prydain can still get done and brilliantly. There is just one catch: the "dreammakers" at Disney still own the rights, and we'll probably have as much a chance of this being remade as seeing Song of the South being released to DVD in the US.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Film Review #31: Mulan
When this film came out, people really liked it. It did the best business of any Disney film since Pocahontas, and the critics liked the film more than any film since The Lion King. As time passed, the fanbase for it has grown steadily over the years and many even have this film as the best animated film of all time on their lists. But for me, this film is extremely disappointing, both from a technical and artistic point of view. With a few exceptions, this may very well be the most disappointing film of the 1990's. Now, I'm not saying anyone who likes this film is dumb, nor am I saying that there is nothing at all good in this film. To me, Mulan is something that Don Bluth or Warner Bros. would have done for an animated film. It seems more like a clusterfuck of things that made the other films of the 90's good all taking place in China. There isn't any new ground being covered and while the action is fairly decent, the film lacks in the most important areas in storytelling.
Plot: In ancient China, the Huns invade. This forces the Emperor to issue the draft that one man from every family must defend China from the conqueror, Shan Yu. But the father of a young woman named Mulan is too old and weak to fight and Mulan fears that he will die if he goes onto the front. Mulan disguises herself as a man and enters the army as her father's "son", Ping. One of the family's guardians, a small dragon named Mushu, plans to make her a war hero to earn the praise he feels he deserves.
During her training camp, she and the other recruits hit it off and train well under the command of Captain Shang. But when the King's Majordomo decrees that the men aren't fit to be soldiers, Mushu writes a fake letter to him, stating that the army needs help on the front. After making a long trek to the mountains, they find that the entire army was slaughtered by the Huns. Then, the Huns ambush the army in the mountains, but Mulan causes an avalanche and crushes them. After treating her injury, Shang finds out Mulan's secret and banishes her from the arm. On her way home, she notices that Shan Yu and several of his followers survived and are on their way to the Forbidden City to kill the Emperor. Mulan and Mushu must win back the army's trust and save China before Shan Yu conquers everything.
What's Wrong?: As I stated above, Mulan just appears to be just one giant clusterfuck of things that made the other films of the era good, but instead having it all take place in China. This begins pretty early on with Eddie Murphy as Mushu in this movie. Obviously trying to recreate the buzz from Robin Williams in Aladdin, Disney cast Murphy very poorly in the film. Where the Genie was funny but sympathetic, Mushu is both unfunny and an egocentric douche most of the time, not caring about anything but himself. If Murphy's character was able to be loose and Eddie Murphy like, like Donkey in Shrek, this would have been a memorable role.
Shan Yu is the most boring and uninteresting villain in the history of Disney Animation. Even in Kingdom Hearts II he was unable to have a character. He was just a big burly obstacle in Mulan's way. Especially after Frollo and Hades, Shan Yu sets the bar for Disney Villains very low.
The songs and musical score are again not very interesting. With the exceptions of "Reflection" and "I'll Make a Man Out of You", none of the songs are memorable at all. The score isn't allowed to have it's standout moments, which also hinders the film.
But Mulan's biggest problem is that it wasn't made to be a film. It was one of the first few Disney films where you can plainly see that the film was made to make money, with little to no effort thrown in. Compare this film to three others that came out around the same time: A Bug's Life, The Rugrats Movie, and The Prince of Egypt. You can argue that A Bug's Life pushed the very boundaries of technology forward, following in Toy Story's footsteps. The Rugrats Movie also changed the movie dynamic, turning what could have been a half-hour special about them getting lost at the mall, into a dark an complex story that goes deep into a character's heart and shows what jealousy and fear can really do to people. But the biggest comparison must be done with The Prince of Egypt. Rather than fear what the demographics were going to be or say, this film tells another side of the ancient Ten Commandments story, by studying the relationship between Ramses and Moses and the struggles they would endure, without even needing an incredible string of Alan Menken songs. Mulan is commercialization to the max, following what the numbers would instead of the gut feeling would.
What's Good?: The movie needed something good in it, and at least they got one thing right. Mulan is a very engaging protagonist. We as an audience grow with her and we learn with her. And while Hercules was a big doofus in his movie and Pocahontas was a walking amateur Facebook post, Mulan is able to match the quality of a Disney protagonist of the 90's. Well done.
And while not being particularly interesting, the animation is still Disney Animation. The lines are still smooth and the colors are still great.
Overall: The "Girl Power" mantra aside, the film has little else quality to offer. I'd say you can skip this one, but since it is a renaissance movie, you can see it if you want. Just don't expect pre- Pocahontas good.
Report Card
Hero: B-
Heroine: A
Villain: F
Side Characters: C+
Songs: B-
Musical Score: B-
Animation: B
Special Effects: C
Themes: A-
Story: B
Final Grade: C+
Plot: In ancient China, the Huns invade. This forces the Emperor to issue the draft that one man from every family must defend China from the conqueror, Shan Yu. But the father of a young woman named Mulan is too old and weak to fight and Mulan fears that he will die if he goes onto the front. Mulan disguises herself as a man and enters the army as her father's "son", Ping. One of the family's guardians, a small dragon named Mushu, plans to make her a war hero to earn the praise he feels he deserves.
During her training camp, she and the other recruits hit it off and train well under the command of Captain Shang. But when the King's Majordomo decrees that the men aren't fit to be soldiers, Mushu writes a fake letter to him, stating that the army needs help on the front. After making a long trek to the mountains, they find that the entire army was slaughtered by the Huns. Then, the Huns ambush the army in the mountains, but Mulan causes an avalanche and crushes them. After treating her injury, Shang finds out Mulan's secret and banishes her from the arm. On her way home, she notices that Shan Yu and several of his followers survived and are on their way to the Forbidden City to kill the Emperor. Mulan and Mushu must win back the army's trust and save China before Shan Yu conquers everything.
What's Wrong?: As I stated above, Mulan just appears to be just one giant clusterfuck of things that made the other films of the era good, but instead having it all take place in China. This begins pretty early on with Eddie Murphy as Mushu in this movie. Obviously trying to recreate the buzz from Robin Williams in Aladdin, Disney cast Murphy very poorly in the film. Where the Genie was funny but sympathetic, Mushu is both unfunny and an egocentric douche most of the time, not caring about anything but himself. If Murphy's character was able to be loose and Eddie Murphy like, like Donkey in Shrek, this would have been a memorable role.
Shan Yu is the most boring and uninteresting villain in the history of Disney Animation. Even in Kingdom Hearts II he was unable to have a character. He was just a big burly obstacle in Mulan's way. Especially after Frollo and Hades, Shan Yu sets the bar for Disney Villains very low.
The songs and musical score are again not very interesting. With the exceptions of "Reflection" and "I'll Make a Man Out of You", none of the songs are memorable at all. The score isn't allowed to have it's standout moments, which also hinders the film.
But Mulan's biggest problem is that it wasn't made to be a film. It was one of the first few Disney films where you can plainly see that the film was made to make money, with little to no effort thrown in. Compare this film to three others that came out around the same time: A Bug's Life, The Rugrats Movie, and The Prince of Egypt. You can argue that A Bug's Life pushed the very boundaries of technology forward, following in Toy Story's footsteps. The Rugrats Movie also changed the movie dynamic, turning what could have been a half-hour special about them getting lost at the mall, into a dark an complex story that goes deep into a character's heart and shows what jealousy and fear can really do to people. But the biggest comparison must be done with The Prince of Egypt. Rather than fear what the demographics were going to be or say, this film tells another side of the ancient Ten Commandments story, by studying the relationship between Ramses and Moses and the struggles they would endure, without even needing an incredible string of Alan Menken songs. Mulan is commercialization to the max, following what the numbers would instead of the gut feeling would.
What's Good?: The movie needed something good in it, and at least they got one thing right. Mulan is a very engaging protagonist. We as an audience grow with her and we learn with her. And while Hercules was a big doofus in his movie and Pocahontas was a walking amateur Facebook post, Mulan is able to match the quality of a Disney protagonist of the 90's. Well done.
And while not being particularly interesting, the animation is still Disney Animation. The lines are still smooth and the colors are still great.
Overall: The "Girl Power" mantra aside, the film has little else quality to offer. I'd say you can skip this one, but since it is a renaissance movie, you can see it if you want. Just don't expect pre- Pocahontas good.
Report Card
Hero: B-
Heroine: A
Villain: F
Side Characters: C+
Songs: B-
Musical Score: B-
Animation: B
Special Effects: C
Themes: A-
Story: B
Final Grade: C+
Friday, September 13, 2013
Film Review #30: Hercules
If two darker and more adult movies didn't generate the kind of money Disney wanted, then logically they would go off and make a lighthearted and kid friendly movie. They chose to tell the story of the epic mythological hero with the strength of a thousand body builders. Best of all, the film's directors had directed The Great Mouse Detective, The Little Mermaid, and Aladdin. What could go wrong? Well...let's just get going with the review.
Plot: Atop Mount Olympus, Zeus celebrates the birth of his son, Hercules. But a vengeful Hades, who secretly plans to dethrone Zeus, has his henchmen kidnap the boy from home and take his god like powers away (?). Hercules still retains his god-like strength, and is raised by two farmers (sound familiar yet?)
Hercules, after discovering his true identity, goes off to find the satyr Phil and train to be a hero. Several months pass and Hercules and Phil go off to make Herc a hero. Along the way, he meets the spunky yet kind Megara (*cough "Lois Lane"*cough). When Hades discovers that Hercules is alive, he plans to have Meg seduce Herc to give away his weakness. But Megara, touched by Hercules's kindness, refuses to help Hades. So Hades threatens to kill Meg, which Herc agrees to give up his strength for. Hades invades Mt. Olympus and leaves Herc to stop him however he can.
What's Bad?: With the exception of Meg, none of the heroes are really likable or relatable. Hercules is a klutzy Clark Kent knock off who can't seem to talk well with women he's in love with. Phil (Danny DeVito) is basically a shorter and more annoying version of the trainer from Rocky.
The songs are kind of bland. With a few exceptions, I don't even remember scenes where they sang. The score was really weak after Hunchback's, and isn't very interesting or gripping.
I am not going to discuss how it has absolutely nothing to do with Greek Mythology. I don't care!
What's Good?: Gimme a H-A-D-E-S! Not only does James Woods make this movie, he is the highlight of this movie. After the ruthless and sinister villains of Frollo and Jafar, Hades is basically Hollywood agent with an even shorter temper. He is one of the best villains in the movie and is one of the few times when you actually want the villain to win.
The animation, while not up to the standards the other films set, is still pretty good.
Overall: The film isn't that bad, but it isn't really good either. James Woods makes the movie and the songs at least keep your attention. I like it, and you may too, but don't go in with alot of optimism and you'll be fine.
Report Card
Hero: B
Heroine: B+
Villain: A+
Side Characters: C-
Songs: B-
Musical Score: C
Animation: B+
Special Effects: B-
Themes: B+
Story: C+
Final Grade: B
Plot: Atop Mount Olympus, Zeus celebrates the birth of his son, Hercules. But a vengeful Hades, who secretly plans to dethrone Zeus, has his henchmen kidnap the boy from home and take his god like powers away (?). Hercules still retains his god-like strength, and is raised by two farmers (sound familiar yet?)
Hercules, after discovering his true identity, goes off to find the satyr Phil and train to be a hero. Several months pass and Hercules and Phil go off to make Herc a hero. Along the way, he meets the spunky yet kind Megara (*cough "Lois Lane"*cough). When Hades discovers that Hercules is alive, he plans to have Meg seduce Herc to give away his weakness. But Megara, touched by Hercules's kindness, refuses to help Hades. So Hades threatens to kill Meg, which Herc agrees to give up his strength for. Hades invades Mt. Olympus and leaves Herc to stop him however he can.
What's Bad?: With the exception of Meg, none of the heroes are really likable or relatable. Hercules is a klutzy Clark Kent knock off who can't seem to talk well with women he's in love with. Phil (Danny DeVito) is basically a shorter and more annoying version of the trainer from Rocky.
The songs are kind of bland. With a few exceptions, I don't even remember scenes where they sang. The score was really weak after Hunchback's, and isn't very interesting or gripping.
I am not going to discuss how it has absolutely nothing to do with Greek Mythology. I don't care!
What's Good?: Gimme a H-A-D-E-S! Not only does James Woods make this movie, he is the highlight of this movie. After the ruthless and sinister villains of Frollo and Jafar, Hades is basically Hollywood agent with an even shorter temper. He is one of the best villains in the movie and is one of the few times when you actually want the villain to win.
The animation, while not up to the standards the other films set, is still pretty good.
Overall: The film isn't that bad, but it isn't really good either. James Woods makes the movie and the songs at least keep your attention. I like it, and you may too, but don't go in with alot of optimism and you'll be fine.
Report Card
Hero: B
Heroine: B+
Villain: A+
Side Characters: C-
Songs: B-
Musical Score: C
Animation: B+
Special Effects: B-
Themes: B+
Story: C+
Final Grade: B
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Film Review #29: The Hunchback of Notre Dame
If I can just interject, who at Disney thought that Victor Hugo's dark and brooding novel would bring in the money that Aladdin and The Lion King did? Is what Hugo wrote what kids want to see on the screen? How could Disney possibly make a story about religious corruption, sexual lust, and extreme racial prejudice into a family friendly Disney Film? No one knows how they did it, but they succeeded in a surprisingly effective way, without making adults feel like they were being insulted. Are there flaws in the film? Yes, but they don't distract from the film in whole. Is the film worth showing to your kids? Let's ring the bell and find out.
Plot:Set in medieval Paris, Judge Claude Frollo (a priest in the original) has his soldiers rounding up the city's gypsy population in an effort to "cleanse" the city. After chasing after one of the runaways and killing her on the steps of the Notre Dame cathedral, Frollo saw that the woman was carrying her infant child. But when an almost repentant Frollo saw how ugly the baby was, he attempts to drown it. But the archdeacon shows Frollo how he may never see heaven, and tells him he must now care for child and raise him as his own. Frollo agrees, on the condition that the baby be allowed to remain in the bell tower.
20 years later, the infant Quasimodo grew into a hunchbacked bell ringer, who could only dream about being able to leave his home and join the people in the streets. The Feast of Fools was today, and Quasimodo's "imaginary" gargoyle friends convinced him to leave his sanctuary. Down on the streets, Captain Phoebus returns from fighting in the Hundred Years War and is named Frollo's new Captain of the Guard.
During the festival, all three men are captivated by the gypsy woman Esmeralda. While Quasimodo's love is innocent and Phoebus's is truthful, Frollo's is simply pure lust, which he thinks is due to Satan's temptations. Frollo vows that if he cannot have her, he would kill her. Frollo leads a witch hunt throughout Paris, which leads Phoebus to act against the mad judge. Now, it's up to Phoebus and Quasimodo to protect Esmeralda and her gypsy friends from the lust filled Judge.
What's Bad?: Like Fantasia, the film may not be the best for little kids. The film doesn't have any of the basic 90's film ideas or mentalities. It is trying to attract the adult audience, who had been avoiding animated films until Beauty and the Beast. But the problem is that while it tries to bring in a new audience, it doesn't do much for the basic Disney audience.
The romance between Phoebus and Esmeralda isn't very interesting. While I will admit it is necessary when telling the story to have the idea that the main character doesn't always get the girl, but it could have been explored more.
The gargoyles, while necessary to tell the plot, could have been a lot less annoying. This film has the distinction of starting the animated film cliche of having a really annoying sidekick, either good or bad, that wasn't funny. The following three films would all fail to recapture the magic of Robin Williams' performance as the Genie. In this case, Jason Alexander, Mary Wickes, and Charles Kimbrough bring nothing but a failed Genie re-imagining.
What's Good?: As with the case of Sleeping Beauty, the stuff that is good in this movie is really good. Let's start with one of two villain performances that could contend with Jeremy Irons for the Best Disney Villain award. Judge Frollo is a horrible and evil human being, but he justifies his actions by telling the world and himself that his actions were divine planning. You usually don't have a villain like this who is an avid murderer and Christian in a Disney movie. You usually get a Jafar or an Ursula, who you know probably sold their souls to get the powers they have.
Quasimodo is also a very good performance. After his brilliant work in Amadeus, Tom Hulce was brought in to portray a very human and caring hunchback. Hulce is able to bring a new side to Quasimodo, with portraying him as a socially stunted man who manages to create these vivid delusions of grandeur with his imaginary gargoyle friends.
The songs are very different from the previous few films. Though Alan Menken and Steven Schwartz do return following their success with Pocahontas, they wrote a very different list of songs and a new score idea. The two best songs in the film, "The Bells of Notre Dame" and "Hellfire", do what songs in a musical are supposed to do: tell us how the character is feeling while not detracting from the plot. Even the score is really good. Similarly to how Hans Zimmer used Zulu choirs in
The Lion King, Menken makes good use of his Latin choirs to give the film a strong epic tone while also keeping the film grounded in it's highly religious setting and tone.
Overall: This one is a classic. I personally believe that so long as you give the audience a happy ending, children can handle anything, especially following a movie where the father is killed on screen. The songs are good enough to merit listening to, and the animation is still beautiful. This is a must see for any Disney fan, and a "should" see for the casual movie goer.
Report Card
Hero: A
Heroine: A-
Villain: A+
Side Characters: B-
Songs: B+
Musical Score: A+
Animation: A
Special Effects: B+
Themes: A+
Story: A+
Final Grade: A-
Plot:Set in medieval Paris, Judge Claude Frollo (a priest in the original) has his soldiers rounding up the city's gypsy population in an effort to "cleanse" the city. After chasing after one of the runaways and killing her on the steps of the Notre Dame cathedral, Frollo saw that the woman was carrying her infant child. But when an almost repentant Frollo saw how ugly the baby was, he attempts to drown it. But the archdeacon shows Frollo how he may never see heaven, and tells him he must now care for child and raise him as his own. Frollo agrees, on the condition that the baby be allowed to remain in the bell tower.
20 years later, the infant Quasimodo grew into a hunchbacked bell ringer, who could only dream about being able to leave his home and join the people in the streets. The Feast of Fools was today, and Quasimodo's "imaginary" gargoyle friends convinced him to leave his sanctuary. Down on the streets, Captain Phoebus returns from fighting in the Hundred Years War and is named Frollo's new Captain of the Guard.
During the festival, all three men are captivated by the gypsy woman Esmeralda. While Quasimodo's love is innocent and Phoebus's is truthful, Frollo's is simply pure lust, which he thinks is due to Satan's temptations. Frollo vows that if he cannot have her, he would kill her. Frollo leads a witch hunt throughout Paris, which leads Phoebus to act against the mad judge. Now, it's up to Phoebus and Quasimodo to protect Esmeralda and her gypsy friends from the lust filled Judge.
What's Bad?: Like Fantasia, the film may not be the best for little kids. The film doesn't have any of the basic 90's film ideas or mentalities. It is trying to attract the adult audience, who had been avoiding animated films until Beauty and the Beast. But the problem is that while it tries to bring in a new audience, it doesn't do much for the basic Disney audience.
The romance between Phoebus and Esmeralda isn't very interesting. While I will admit it is necessary when telling the story to have the idea that the main character doesn't always get the girl, but it could have been explored more.
The gargoyles, while necessary to tell the plot, could have been a lot less annoying. This film has the distinction of starting the animated film cliche of having a really annoying sidekick, either good or bad, that wasn't funny. The following three films would all fail to recapture the magic of Robin Williams' performance as the Genie. In this case, Jason Alexander, Mary Wickes, and Charles Kimbrough bring nothing but a failed Genie re-imagining.
What's Good?: As with the case of Sleeping Beauty, the stuff that is good in this movie is really good. Let's start with one of two villain performances that could contend with Jeremy Irons for the Best Disney Villain award. Judge Frollo is a horrible and evil human being, but he justifies his actions by telling the world and himself that his actions were divine planning. You usually don't have a villain like this who is an avid murderer and Christian in a Disney movie. You usually get a Jafar or an Ursula, who you know probably sold their souls to get the powers they have.
Quasimodo is also a very good performance. After his brilliant work in Amadeus, Tom Hulce was brought in to portray a very human and caring hunchback. Hulce is able to bring a new side to Quasimodo, with portraying him as a socially stunted man who manages to create these vivid delusions of grandeur with his imaginary gargoyle friends.
The songs are very different from the previous few films. Though Alan Menken and Steven Schwartz do return following their success with Pocahontas, they wrote a very different list of songs and a new score idea. The two best songs in the film, "The Bells of Notre Dame" and "Hellfire", do what songs in a musical are supposed to do: tell us how the character is feeling while not detracting from the plot. Even the score is really good. Similarly to how Hans Zimmer used Zulu choirs in
The Lion King, Menken makes good use of his Latin choirs to give the film a strong epic tone while also keeping the film grounded in it's highly religious setting and tone.
Overall: This one is a classic. I personally believe that so long as you give the audience a happy ending, children can handle anything, especially following a movie where the father is killed on screen. The songs are good enough to merit listening to, and the animation is still beautiful. This is a must see for any Disney fan, and a "should" see for the casual movie goer.
Report Card
Hero: A
Heroine: A-
Villain: A+
Side Characters: B-
Songs: B+
Musical Score: A+
Animation: A
Special Effects: B+
Themes: A+
Story: A+
Final Grade: A-
Monday, September 9, 2013
Film Review #28: Pocahontas
If The Lion King had unbearable pressure on it, the film that Jeffery Katzenberg headlined as the studios next Best Picture nominee had pressure beyond any conceivable realm. After all, Beauty and the Beast had been nominated for the Oscar, and Aladdin and The Lion King both grossed over $500 Million dollars, The Lion King being one of the top grossers of all time in 1995. Naturally, Katzenberg departed to form Dreamworks around the time The Lion King came out (a film he had proclaimed wouldn't break $50 million). As for Pocahontas, after five successive classics, is a bit of a letdown. But, I do not hate this film, in any sense. Even with it being a story about Native Americans (which I am one), I still see the good points in this film. In fact, this film is still one of my personal favorites.
Plot: In 1607, English settlers led by the greedy Governor Ratcliffe, set sail for Virginia and their hopes for riches and a better life than they had in London. Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the free-spirited Pocahontas dreams of a "spinning arrow" that will point her to her destiny.
Pocahontas and famed "savage tamer" John Smith immediately hit it off and begin to learn more about each other's civilization. John learns to understand what nature can offer to the English, but the greedy Ratcliffe only sees the Powhatan Tribe as savages and leads his men in an effort to wipe them out. Pocahontas and John must convince their respective peoples to talk out their issues and help each other, before their hate consumes the land and they erupt into war.
What's Bad?: We were told that this story was going to be a fantastic story telling us about our history in a historically accurate interpretation. Well, Disney can't tell the side about alleged settlers raping Native woman or about them thriving after discovering tobacco. But even then, Pocahontas saved John because she wanted him to live. Their romance was most likely a fictional retelling by John Smith upon his return to England. Also, Pocahontas was twelve.
After five successive brilliant villains added to the Disney Rogues Gallery, Ratcliffe is just another greedy bastard who wants gold. If the film went into more detail about a prejudice facing the Natives and settlers, then the film would have been interesting. Instead, we get Dances With Wolves animated, which nowadays would be called "normally colored Avatar".
The film's biggest crime is in the boring leads. While there isn't anything awful about them, but they are just so boring to listen to and watch act. Pocahontas is a textbook Disney Princess, while John Smith (who in real life was short and pudgy) is a male Adonis.
What's Good?: The animation is still fantastic. The film was awarded a $10 million budget increase when Katzenberg proclaimed this film would out gross The Lion King by a country mile. You can see this in how beautiful the film is. The colors are wonderful and the animation designs are more realistic than in The Lion King.
The songs, while not gems, are pretty good. The highlight is "Colors of the Wind", which is similar to "Circle of Life" in it's message and that makes the song better. The musical score is one of the weaker ones, despite winning the Oscar in 1995.
Overall: The film is still pretty good, despite not reaching any of it's predecessor in terms of quality of film. But it's really beautifully animated. This film also marked the end of 2D animation's domination of the animation medium. Toy Story would change the way people look at animation forever and would hamper Disney box office records for the next decade. Even Disney's retelling of the most dark and twisted of Victor Hugo's novels couldn't stop the slide. But more on that next time.
Report Card:
Hero: C
Heroine: B-
Villain: D
Side Characters: C
Songs: B
Musical Score: C+
Animation: A
Special Effects: B
Theme: B+
Story: B-
Final Grade: B-
Plot: In 1607, English settlers led by the greedy Governor Ratcliffe, set sail for Virginia and their hopes for riches and a better life than they had in London. Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the free-spirited Pocahontas dreams of a "spinning arrow" that will point her to her destiny.
Pocahontas and famed "savage tamer" John Smith immediately hit it off and begin to learn more about each other's civilization. John learns to understand what nature can offer to the English, but the greedy Ratcliffe only sees the Powhatan Tribe as savages and leads his men in an effort to wipe them out. Pocahontas and John must convince their respective peoples to talk out their issues and help each other, before their hate consumes the land and they erupt into war.
What's Bad?: We were told that this story was going to be a fantastic story telling us about our history in a historically accurate interpretation. Well, Disney can't tell the side about alleged settlers raping Native woman or about them thriving after discovering tobacco. But even then, Pocahontas saved John because she wanted him to live. Their romance was most likely a fictional retelling by John Smith upon his return to England. Also, Pocahontas was twelve.
After five successive brilliant villains added to the Disney Rogues Gallery, Ratcliffe is just another greedy bastard who wants gold. If the film went into more detail about a prejudice facing the Natives and settlers, then the film would have been interesting. Instead, we get Dances With Wolves animated, which nowadays would be called "normally colored Avatar".
The film's biggest crime is in the boring leads. While there isn't anything awful about them, but they are just so boring to listen to and watch act. Pocahontas is a textbook Disney Princess, while John Smith (who in real life was short and pudgy) is a male Adonis.
What's Good?: The animation is still fantastic. The film was awarded a $10 million budget increase when Katzenberg proclaimed this film would out gross The Lion King by a country mile. You can see this in how beautiful the film is. The colors are wonderful and the animation designs are more realistic than in The Lion King.
The songs, while not gems, are pretty good. The highlight is "Colors of the Wind", which is similar to "Circle of Life" in it's message and that makes the song better. The musical score is one of the weaker ones, despite winning the Oscar in 1995.
Overall: The film is still pretty good, despite not reaching any of it's predecessor in terms of quality of film. But it's really beautifully animated. This film also marked the end of 2D animation's domination of the animation medium. Toy Story would change the way people look at animation forever and would hamper Disney box office records for the next decade. Even Disney's retelling of the most dark and twisted of Victor Hugo's novels couldn't stop the slide. But more on that next time.
Report Card:
Hero: C
Heroine: B-
Villain: D
Side Characters: C
Songs: B
Musical Score: C+
Animation: A
Special Effects: B
Theme: B+
Story: B-
Final Grade: B-
Film Review #27: The Lion King
This is it. The big one. The most successful traditionally animated film of all time, the most acclaimed film of all time, and the film from which my writing name derives from: The Lion King. If words could describe this film's impact on popular culture, it would probably be in Swahili. The tragic parable of finding your place in the "Circle of Life" after hardship is the most enchanting story of all time. But the film had almost unreachable goals to reach. Could the film be a contender with the previous four films, when they were all such great films? Or is The Lion King one of the more overrated films of all time? Let's venture into the African plains and take a look at the epic that is The Lion King.
Plot: In the savannahs of Africa, lions reign as King of the Pridelands. The current king, Mufasa, is celebrating the birth of his newborn cub, Prince Simba. As Simba grows, Mufasa teaches him the ways of being one with the "Circle of Life" and how to be a good king and rule in his father's stead when his father is gone.
But all is not well in the African plains. Mufasa's jealous brother and Simba's Uncle, Scar, who was passed over in line to succeed Mufasa when the little cub was born, plots to kill his naive nephew and reclaim his spot as King. Allying himself with the a pack of amusing and loud mouthed hyenas, Scar attempts to have the hyenas kill both Simba and his friend Nala in the Elephant Graveyard, but Mufasa intervenes. This leads Scar to plot to kill Mufasa. The next day, Simba is lured into the gorge, where the hyenas scare a herd of wildebeest into a stampede and send it thundering towards Simba. Mufasa is able to save his son, but Scar throws him back into the stampede and Mufasa is killed.
Scar is able to convince Simba that he is responsible for his father's death and urges him into exile, ultimately hoping that the hyenas would finish him off. The guilt stricken young lion is able to elude the hyenas, and goes into exile a long way from his home. Luckily, Simba is taken in by a warthog named Pumbaa and a meerkat named Timon. Simba adopts their "Hakuna Matata" philosophy and forgets about his sorrow and lives in the jungle for a long time, eventually growing into an adult.
Nala arrives in the jungle and reunites with her friend and tries to urge him to return to his suffering home, which Scar has brought into despair, but Simba refuses to do anything, because of his guilt about his father's death. Eventually, Simba sees a vision of his father in the clouds, who tells him that it is time that he returned to Pride Rock to face Scar and reclaim his throne. Simba decides to leave and goes off to save his kingdom and dethrone his treacherous uncle.
What's Bad?: The film is a story about the relationship between us and our parents, or us and our children. This film was vastly different all of the other blockbusters that proceeded it, because it did not require a love story. Unfortunately, based on somebody's stupid decision, the film has an unnecessary love story. This would begin the long trend of overusing formulas that would lead to the downfall of the Disney Animation Studios in the 2000's. Nala's character was completely pointless to the overall story. She wasn't needed to be Simba's reason to return, because that is why he sees Rafiki and his father's ghost. The romance was only implied, and not really sent into detail. If the story is about Simba and Mufasa's relationship, why is the romance here? In Bambi, it made sense because the plot of the movie was his life, and since most people do find love in their life, it was reasonable to have Faline in the movie. But here? It made about as much sense as The Phantom Menace did.
What's Good?: The relationship between Simba and Mufasa is the strongest relationship between two related people/animals. Mufasa cares deeply for his son and Simba idolizes his father. It makes the deep sorrow Simba feels for his father's death so moving. This is the highlight of the movie, as the father/son relationship even had my usually tough father to break down.
Scar is a truly sinister villain. In his third straight villain drawing performance after Gaston and Jafar, Andreas Deja crafts the slimy and sinister lion Scar and transform a retreading of the weak and paranoid King Claudius into a scheming and cold-hearted murderer who destroys the Pridelands in his terrible reign. It also helps to have the extremely talented Jeremy Irons as your voice over artist. Irons is able to combine the brash and overconfident Shere Khan, the scheming and maniacal nature of Jafar, and the cold efficientness of Maleficent, to create one of the greatest villains in cinematic history.
The songs are still really good. While the film version of "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" irks me, Elton John's version is great. The two best songs in the movie are "Circle of Life", the opening number when Simba is presented to the animals, and "Be Prepared", which is Scar's revelation of his plot to murder Mufasa and Simba. But what amazed me the most is Hans Zimmer's chilling score, which is one of the greatest Film Scores of all time, Star Wars and Godfather included.
The animation is breathtaking. The scale they give to the African Savannah is marvelous. The epic tone of the movie is really interesting when compared to the average scale of it's predecessors. The highlight for me is the wildebeest stampede. The CGI is seamlessly blended with the traditionally animated elements to create a gripping scene and a landmark achievement in Disney history.
Overall: The film met it's expectations, but did not improve on Aladdin. That doesn't mean that the film is bad, but the expectations for the film were set so high, that they couldn't possibly be reached. Nevertheless, the film is a masterpiece that does belong in the same category as it's predecessors. And, despite it's flaws, I do believe it deserves to be the most successful animated film of all time. It may just take a few re-releases to get it done.
Report Card
Hero: A
Heroine: C+
Villain: A+
Side Characters: A
Songs: A-
Musical Score: A+
Animation: A+
Special Effects: A+
Themes: A+
Story: A+
Final Grade: A
Plot: In the savannahs of Africa, lions reign as King of the Pridelands. The current king, Mufasa, is celebrating the birth of his newborn cub, Prince Simba. As Simba grows, Mufasa teaches him the ways of being one with the "Circle of Life" and how to be a good king and rule in his father's stead when his father is gone.
But all is not well in the African plains. Mufasa's jealous brother and Simba's Uncle, Scar, who was passed over in line to succeed Mufasa when the little cub was born, plots to kill his naive nephew and reclaim his spot as King. Allying himself with the a pack of amusing and loud mouthed hyenas, Scar attempts to have the hyenas kill both Simba and his friend Nala in the Elephant Graveyard, but Mufasa intervenes. This leads Scar to plot to kill Mufasa. The next day, Simba is lured into the gorge, where the hyenas scare a herd of wildebeest into a stampede and send it thundering towards Simba. Mufasa is able to save his son, but Scar throws him back into the stampede and Mufasa is killed.
Scar is able to convince Simba that he is responsible for his father's death and urges him into exile, ultimately hoping that the hyenas would finish him off. The guilt stricken young lion is able to elude the hyenas, and goes into exile a long way from his home. Luckily, Simba is taken in by a warthog named Pumbaa and a meerkat named Timon. Simba adopts their "Hakuna Matata" philosophy and forgets about his sorrow and lives in the jungle for a long time, eventually growing into an adult.
Nala arrives in the jungle and reunites with her friend and tries to urge him to return to his suffering home, which Scar has brought into despair, but Simba refuses to do anything, because of his guilt about his father's death. Eventually, Simba sees a vision of his father in the clouds, who tells him that it is time that he returned to Pride Rock to face Scar and reclaim his throne. Simba decides to leave and goes off to save his kingdom and dethrone his treacherous uncle.
What's Bad?: The film is a story about the relationship between us and our parents, or us and our children. This film was vastly different all of the other blockbusters that proceeded it, because it did not require a love story. Unfortunately, based on somebody's stupid decision, the film has an unnecessary love story. This would begin the long trend of overusing formulas that would lead to the downfall of the Disney Animation Studios in the 2000's. Nala's character was completely pointless to the overall story. She wasn't needed to be Simba's reason to return, because that is why he sees Rafiki and his father's ghost. The romance was only implied, and not really sent into detail. If the story is about Simba and Mufasa's relationship, why is the romance here? In Bambi, it made sense because the plot of the movie was his life, and since most people do find love in their life, it was reasonable to have Faline in the movie. But here? It made about as much sense as The Phantom Menace did.
What's Good?: The relationship between Simba and Mufasa is the strongest relationship between two related people/animals. Mufasa cares deeply for his son and Simba idolizes his father. It makes the deep sorrow Simba feels for his father's death so moving. This is the highlight of the movie, as the father/son relationship even had my usually tough father to break down.
Scar is a truly sinister villain. In his third straight villain drawing performance after Gaston and Jafar, Andreas Deja crafts the slimy and sinister lion Scar and transform a retreading of the weak and paranoid King Claudius into a scheming and cold-hearted murderer who destroys the Pridelands in his terrible reign. It also helps to have the extremely talented Jeremy Irons as your voice over artist. Irons is able to combine the brash and overconfident Shere Khan, the scheming and maniacal nature of Jafar, and the cold efficientness of Maleficent, to create one of the greatest villains in cinematic history.
The songs are still really good. While the film version of "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" irks me, Elton John's version is great. The two best songs in the movie are "Circle of Life", the opening number when Simba is presented to the animals, and "Be Prepared", which is Scar's revelation of his plot to murder Mufasa and Simba. But what amazed me the most is Hans Zimmer's chilling score, which is one of the greatest Film Scores of all time, Star Wars and Godfather included.
The animation is breathtaking. The scale they give to the African Savannah is marvelous. The epic tone of the movie is really interesting when compared to the average scale of it's predecessors. The highlight for me is the wildebeest stampede. The CGI is seamlessly blended with the traditionally animated elements to create a gripping scene and a landmark achievement in Disney history.
Overall: The film met it's expectations, but did not improve on Aladdin. That doesn't mean that the film is bad, but the expectations for the film were set so high, that they couldn't possibly be reached. Nevertheless, the film is a masterpiece that does belong in the same category as it's predecessors. And, despite it's flaws, I do believe it deserves to be the most successful animated film of all time. It may just take a few re-releases to get it done.
Report Card
Hero: A
Heroine: C+
Villain: A+
Side Characters: A
Songs: A-
Musical Score: A+
Animation: A+
Special Effects: A+
Themes: A+
Story: A+
Final Grade: A
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)