Category Archives: Fantasy

The Odyssey-2026

The Odyssey-2026

Director Christopher Nolan

Starring Matt Damon

Scott’s Review #1,542

Reviewed July 23, 2026

Grade: A

Christopher Nolan’s film The Odyssey (2026) is a breathtaking spectacle that feels cinematically invigorating and inspired.

It’s movie magic at its finest.

Fortunate to see this film in an enormous IMAX theater, it’s the perfect and recommended way to see a film of this scale. A crowded and energetic audience is also suggested to connect with the overall moviegoing experience.

My hat goes off to Nolan, who has gotten asses back into empty theater seats in recent years where they belong.

It was thanks to his 2023 film Oppenheimer, which won Best Picture, that cinema became a mandatory part of moviegoing enjoyment again, along with the progressive Barbie (2023).

In the story, Odysseus (Matt Damon), king of Ithaca, embarks on a perilous journey to return home after the Trojan War, after many years away from his land and loved ones.

Crossing the Mediterranean Sea with his fellow soldiers, they soon find themselves battling not only the elements but an array of deadly obstacles and mythical creatures that await the men along the way.

In clever and intriguing form, the story traverses a few different timelines.

It is told in non-linear fashion, from early romantic sequences between Odysseus and his wife, Penelope (Anne Hathaway), to the backstory of his son, Telemachus (Tom Holland), and nemesis, Antinous (Robert Pattinson).

We immediately learn that Odysseus has been away for years, but what happens during those years is mysterious and aching to be slowly unraveled.

Other characters like Menelaus (Jon Bernthal), Helen of Troy/ Clytemnestra (Lupita Nyong’o), Athena (Zendaya), Circe (Samantha Morton), Calypso (Charlize Theron), various nymphs, and others are featured as Odysseus and Telemachus’ stories are explored.

Additionally, lands and worlds like Hades, a distinct realm where individuals go after death, and Aeaea, an island inhabited by the villainous Circe, are featured.

Having some knowledge of Greek Mythology is extremely helpful, as it can be quite difficult to keep track of who everyone is and how their history is part of Odysseus’s.

My two favorite sequences are when Odysseus’s men desperately land on Aeaea, fraught with severe hunger. Circe, who seems motherly and kind, delights in preparing steamy stew and other delicious food for them.

As they greedily chow down, they begin to cough and choke, turning into pigs. Circe turns wicked, vowing revenge on the men for an apparent attack on her sister years earlier.

The final thirty minutes of The Odyssey features a grandiose and daring fight sequence after Penelope declares she will marry whoever can string Odysseus’s bow and shoot an arrow through a row of axe heads.

The suitors all fail, but Odysseus succeeds and reveals his identity to her, culminating in a reunion. The hall erupts in battle, Odysseus slaying the challenging suitors.

The sequence features thunderous sound effects that, to me, sounded like footsteps running along a jogging path increasing in their intensity and momentum as the fight turns darker and bloodier.

Way back to the films The Dark Knight (2008) and Inception (2010), directed by Nolan, I vividly recall being enamored with those similar sound scores.

To say that The Odyssey is a spectacle is an understatement.

It proves with technical precision and grandeur that there’s no filmmaker quite like Nolan to reignite an ancient adventure and that there’s no limit to magnificence and perfection in cinema.

Lush seas, gritty battles, and mythical creatures abound in this opus.

Still, the film also has quality acting and a bit of heart too, so the story is never overwhelmed by the technical stuff, which is always a fear in blockbusters of this nature.

Damon, Hathaway, Holland, and Pattinson get top acting praise from me.

Terrific chemistry exists between Damon and Hathaway, specifically, making their passionate and dedicated love story remarkably believable.

I’ve heard complaints about the film being too ‘woke’, a derogatory term tinged with racism and homophobia. Nolan wisely makes the film inclusive, featuring a trans actor (Page) and several black and brown actors.

The Odyssey (2026) offers action, adventure, battles, and all the other trimmings expected from an epic action film shrouded in fantasy and magic.

But on an entirely different level.

It also offers tenderness, humanity, connection, and heart that exceed expectations all around.

Anastasia-1997

Anastasia-1997

Director Don Bluth, Gary Goldman

Voices Meg Ryan, John Cusack

Scott’s Review #1,530

Reviewed April 27, 2026

Grade: B

Anastasia (1997) is an animated film that explores emperors, duchesses, and the Romanov royal family of Russia, offering an important early-twentieth-century history lesson.

Surprisingly, not a Disney film, it’s the first release from Fox Animation Studios, resulting in an overall decent effort. It has potency but lacks the magic of other darling animated creations of the past.

An evil and vengeful wizard named Rasputin (Christopher Lloyd) casts a curse on the royal family as a dazzling ball commences in 1916, and young Anastasia disappears as their palace is overrun by killers, leaving most of the family dead.

She and her grandmother, whom she eventually is separated from when the Dowager Empress Marie (Angela Lansbury) flees on a train, are saved by a mysterious servant boy who whisks them to a secret room.

Years later, the Grand Duchess offers a reward for Anastasia’s return, but finally gives up amid a legion of imitators and attempted schemers, leaving her flustered and hopeless.

Two Russians, Dimitri (John Cusack) and Vlad (Kelsey Grammer), initially plan to pawn off a phony discovered through auditions, but are shocked to learn that an orphan girl named Anya (Meg Ryan) is the real Anastasia.

Dimitri, who has fallen in love with Anya, is torn between his feelings and a potentially lucrative payday.

The film’s wintry backdrop is visually exquisite, with snow, lights, and the glitz and glamour associated with Paris, setting the story in Saint Petersburg and launching the action amid fabulous costumes and palace trimmings at the ball.

A dangerous train ride from Saint Petersburg to the east, winding up in Paris, is also a high point of the film.

The central characters, Anya, Dimitri, and Vlad, escape terrible fates that the evil Rasputin is plotting against them. They slink from first class to the luggage car to finally leap from the train itself in a daring escape.

They then stowaway on a ship bound for Paris.

The trio’s adventures make the film enjoyable and edge-of-your-seat at times.

Another highlight is a compelling sequence in which Rasputin gets Anya to sleepwalk to the edge of the ship, attempting to make her jump to her death. She sees her dead siblings in a sunny pool of warmth as they invite her to dive in and join them.

The glowing, hallucinogenic interplay of summer sun and winter-driving rain aboard the ship is both majestic and frightening. It also shows the connection between her and her siblings, as well as feelings of loss.

I wasn’t entralled with the characters of Rasputin or the hapless Bartok (Hank Azaria), a minuscule albino bat sidekick, who eventually ‘turns good’.

Rasputin, stuck in a mysterious limbo until he kills off the remaining Romanov (Anya), is portrayed as cartoonish and over-the-top. His threats become redundant, as does his one-note nature.

The characters’ situation is complicated by a weird situation in which, because of foiled attempts on the lives of Dimitri, Vlad, and Anya, they are forced to return to the ‘real world’ and kill Anya there.

It makes little sense, feels juvenile, and the characters were wisely omitted from the stage version.

The musical numbers are charming, but they do not knock it out of the park. Tepidly nominated for an Oscar nomination, “Journey to the Past” is okay, but nothing memorable either.

What works best is the romance between Anya and Dimitri, who have tremendous chemistry. Since he is immediately smitten with her, it is interesting to see how the film handles the eventual revelation of his villainy and his subsequent redemption.

Since it’s clear the film will have a ‘happily ever after’ ending, the anticipation of a final showdown reduces some of the predictability.

The reunion between Anya and her grandmother is touching and sentimental without being too mushy. Even in an animated film, powerful performances can be achieved, and the characters can touch their audience as much as a live-action film.

An entertaining film with heart and a intellectually stimulating backdrop, it has enough to recommend to children and adults alike. I could have done with a better villain or perhaps no villain at all, which makes Anastasia (1997) feel more juvenile and less sophisticated than it should have been.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Musical or Comedy Score, Best Original Song-“Journey to the Past”

 

KPop Demon Hunters-2025

KPop Demon Hunters-2025

Director Maggie Kang, Chris Appelhans

Voices Arden Cho, May Hong, Ji-young Yoo

Scott’s Review #1,524

Reviewed March 12, 2026

Grade: B+

KPop Demon Hunters (2025) has become an international hit sensation and a phenomenal crowd pleaser, winning several year-end awards in the process.

This is unsurprising, since the film is a beautifully animated/anime extravaganza, oozing with infectious energy and vibrant colors.

The film contains poignant messages of girl power, self-acceptance, and humanity that make it perfect family entertainment with a terrific soundtrack to boot.

Juicy songs like ‘Takedown’, especially ‘Golden’ and ‘Soda Pop’, are instantly memorable and hummable, celebrating universal pop boy-and-girl band sensations that kids and parents alike can appreciate.

It also incorporates a storyline about South Korean culture and ancient lore, which provides a rich international flavor.

It’s not high art nor groundbreaking cinema, but rather pure bubble gum: fun, sweet, and joyful, and it sticks with you all throughout the running time.

For this type of film, that is acceptable, and the main reason to sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride.

Between gigs as a stadium-headlining, social-media-frenzied pop sensation, the members of the girl band Huntrix use their secret identities as demon hunters to protect their fans. A constant supernatural threat hovers, posed by demons named Honmoon who roam the streets.

It’s unclear if Honmoon are spirits or if the fans can actually see them.

Each of the girls, Rumi (Arden Cho), Mira (May Hong), and Zoey (Ji-young Yoo), has a distinct personality, but Rumi is the leader of the pack with the strongest singing voice.

When a dark secret about one of the girls is revealed, it threatens to break up the group just as a rival boy band, the Saja Boys, of demons in disguise, emerges on the scene.

In teen fashion and a clear attempt to market the film to a young demographic, romance blossoms between Rumi and Jinu (Ahn Hyo-seop), the pretty leader of the Saja Boys.

Of course, they begin as rivals but form a strong alliance later in the film.

The lavish colors, many pinks, purples, and blues, make the look enticing and cotton candy-like, almost like being immersed in a sugary video game version of Candy Land with songs.

The plentiful concert sequences also score big, as the anthemic numbers are sometimes repeated. This reinforces the connection between the bands and the fans, and also the film and the fans.

A main message is one of connectivity. Community, friendship, and having each other’s backs are the main themes and an inspiration for the viewer to come together as one, as evidenced by the concert scenes.

Despite KPop Demon Hunters not being defined as an LGBTQ+ film nor having any specific LGBTQ+ characters, it still resonates on a deep level.

Rumi’s story parallels the experience of coming out, particularly regarding parental and societal expectations. The continuous lyrics focused on the struggle to hide your true self and finally be yourself are highly inspiring.

So that, while an entertaining crowd pleaser, there is more than meets the eye if one is to dig a little deeper.

Victory is achieved by KPop Demon Hunters (2025) through expressive animation, articulate lyrics, and spectacular action, resulting in a gem that’s comical, romantic, exciting, and moving all at once.

It also makes older adults feel like part of things and not embarrassed about watching a youthful film.

A sequel is planned.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Animated Feature (won), Best Original Song-“Golden” (won)

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang-1968

Chitty Chitty Bang Bang-1968

Director Ken Hughes

Starring Dick Van Dyke, Sally Ann Howes

Scott’s Review #1,490

Reviewed August 13, 2025

Grade: B

With a strong connection to James Bond, especially when looking beneath the most obvious details, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968) offers pure escapist fun in the fantasy genre.

Albert R. Broccoli, who produced many of the 007 films, also served as producer, a surprise given the differing genres. Furthermore, Ian Fleming, who wrote a series of James Bond books, also wrote the novel Chitty Chitty Bang Bang in 1964.

The screenplay was written by the famous British children’s author Roald Dahl (James and the Giant Peach and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory), whose handprint is also visible.

I missed some of the subtle and not-so-subtle trimmings upon my viewing until taking a deeper dive into research. I also did not know the James Bond connection before watching the film.

One day in rural England, young siblings Jeremy and Jemima meet the striking Truly Scrumptious (Sally Ann Howes), who falls for their widowed father, Caractacus Potts (Dick Van Dyke), despite their different backgrounds.

Potts tinkers with various oddball inventions, including the family’s noisy rebuilt car, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, which they name because of its unusual engine noises.

Caractacus tells Truly and the children a fantastical fable about the villainous Baron Bomburst (Gert Fröbe) and his evil designs on the Potts family car.

This becomes the film’s central conflict and drives the adventurous events the family experiences.

For much of the film, events meander a bit more than I’d like, and there seems to be a lack of clear direction. There were also too many over-the-top moments, mostly involving Caractacus’s wacky father (Lionel Jeffries) and various bumbling villain accomplices.

While enjoyable, the action felt silly and cartoonish.

After the intermission, the family ‘flies’ by car to a lavish castle owned by Bomburst in the childless nation of Vulgaria. There, they encounter frightened townspeople and the scary Child Catcher, wonderfully played by Robert Helpmann.

The colorful sets and art direction lend a helping hand to the secret of why there are no children in Vulgaria. We meet an odd yet witty toymaker, played by Benny Hill, and a splendid cat-and-mouse sequence involving human jack-in-the-boxes.

Later, a hidden grotto beneath the castle explains where the town children are being kept and why.

While the Baron and Baroness (Anna Quayle) are unbelievably silly, the romance between Caractacus and Truly takes off and cements my investment in the pair.

Obviously and satisfyingly, they experience a happily ever after send-off after a couple of hiccups.

Van Dyke and Howes have dynamic chemistry despite Howes being a runner-up to Julie Andrews, who turned down the role, fearing it was too similar to Mary Poppins.

Fröbe (the diabolical title character from 1964’s Goldfinger) and the actor who played the familiar Bond character, Q (Desmond Llewelyn), make appearances. 

The Chitty Chitty Bang Bang car is practically a character in itself, boasting special powers and gadgets reminiscent of numerous unique Bond cars, and serves as a good comparison.

Finally, the name Truly Scrumptious is a similar character name, albeit much more family-friendly, to Pussy Galore from Goldfinger.

Of course, since Roald Dahl is involved, it’s no wonder children are in peril.

Other than the award-nominated title song, which is easy to hum and hard to forget, the other songs pale in comparison to this standout. I’d give second place to Trudy’s earnest ‘Lovely Lonely Man, a decent song.

For a family-ready affair with deeper particulars for eagle-eyed viewers to spot, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968) is recommended around holiday time when other pleasant children’s musicals make their emergence.

The film serves as a perfect warm-up act for the superior but companionable Oliver! (1968).

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Original Score, Best Original Song- ‘Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’

The Wizard of Oz-1939

The Wizard of Oz-1939

Director Victor Fleming

Starring Judy Garland, Ray Bolger, Frank Morgan

Top 250 Films #33

Scott’s Review #34

70039535

Reviewed June 17, 2014

Grade: A

The Wizard of Oz is a magical film and one of my all-time favorites. Made in 1939, it still holds up amazingly well, and the nuances continue to be admired, especially given the period in which it was made. 1939 and Gone With the Wind belong to this film, as both were and are true classics.

This film is so deeply embedded in people’s minds that it can be challenging to examine it objectively. I fondly recall watching this gem annually as it aired on television each holiday season—traditionally around Thanksgiving if memory serves.

It’s a marvel from start to finish and masterfully artistic. How creative to show the first portion in black and white with dusty muted colors, not to mention the astounding twister sequence- done using a stocking.

Then, we are introduced to a magical world filled with luscious colors and the mind-blowing depth of art direction. Munchkin-land, Glinda the Good Witch, and Emerald City are beautiful, lavish, and treat.

Who does not become teary-eyed during Judy Garland’s rendition of “Somewhere Over the Rainbow”? The poignancy is given by the tragic (yet successful) life the star would lead.

Margaret Hamilton’s performance as the Wicked Witch/Elmira Gulch is deliciously nasty. She almost sneers at the camera as she mocks Dorothy, who whimpers in tears while missing Auntie Em. One can tell she thoroughly enjoyed this role.

And The Wizard of Oz is not simply a pop culture hit- it has merit and creativity. The special effects hold up tremendously well and were simplistic back then. There was no CGI in those days, but it was, in many ways, better than today’s CGI.

Audiences of all ages must see this film at least once, preferably on Blu-Ray. Judy Garland, later a tragic, troubled, and lost figure, captures an innocence that has been sadly lost through the years.

The characters (The Cowardly Lion, Scarecrow, and Tin Man) are perfectly cast and uniquely created without being too over-the-top.

Very few films are timeless, and this is one of them.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Outstanding Production, Best Song-“Over the Rainbow” (won), Best Art Direction, Best Special Effects

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory-1971

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory-1971

Director Mel Stuart

Starring Gene Wilder, Peter Ostrum, Jack Albertson

Top 250 Films #35

Scott’s Review #206

60020949

Reviewed December 18, 2014

Grade: A

More than just a children’s movie, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) is a terrific, imaginative, fantasy film that is timeless and meant for all ages to enjoy.

The mastery and creativity of the sets and art direction are astounding, and the story is sweet, whimsical, and captivating. Often, with children’s movies, we are treated to stories that are either dumb or contrived, which will entertain five-year-olds but bore or cringe adults.

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is none of the above. It is intelligent, filled with magic, and has a heart.

Charlie Bucket (Paul Ostrum) is a poor child whose mother earns a living by washing clothes. Along with his four bedridden grandparents, they live a meager existence in a small cottage somewhere in Europe.

Particularly close with his Grandpa Joe, the two of them become obsessed with a contest held by mysterious Willy Wonka, the owner of an enormous chocolate factory nearby.

The contest consists of five Golden tickets being hidden in Wonka bars. The five lucky winners will receive a lifetime supply of candy and a tour inside the long-since-closed chocolate factory.

After a series of circumstances, Charlie obtains one of the tickets, and the adventure begins.

The build-up to the trip into WiWonka’s factory is gripping- mainly because the viewer knows that a magical treat is in store and is filled with curiosity- what will the chocolate factory look like? What is Mr. Wonka like?

The four other winners- Augustus Gloop, Veruca Salt, Violet Beauregarde, and Mike Teevee are all unique and creatively written characters- all spoiled brats in their way, so Charlie is the “normal” child and has an actual rooting value to him.

As the five children, along with a designated parent- or in Charlie’s case, Grandparent- begin their journey throughout the chocolate factory, the audience is treated to a psychedelic experience with fantastic sets- a river made of chocolate, an entirely edible garden, lickable wallpaper, a bubble room, and a frightening riverboat.

The film is bright and colorful within the factory walls, which perfectly contrasts Charlie’s dreary existence in the outside world.

As the four bratty children meet their fates in joyfully imaginative ways- gum-chewer Violet blows up like a blueberry after chewing experimental Wonka gum that she is warned not to, Veruca is deemed rotten after throwing a fit and topples down a garbage chute.

The film is breathtaking and imaginative, filled with wonderment.

Gene Wilder plays Wonka as over-the-top, and it works tremendously.

All the child actors play their roles competently, and each character is distinguished from the others.

I love the scary riverboat tunnel scene as it is frightening, psychedelic, and magnificent. I also love the contrast between the enchanting, colorful second half and the bleakness of the first. The sets are among my favorites for their lavishness.

Specifically, the relationship between Charlie and Grandpa Joe is excellent. Grandpa Joe is a father figure to Charlie, but so is Willy Wonka in a completely different way.

The children’s greed is also interesting, and one hurrah as each one gets their comeuppance.

The songs from the film are remarkable and quite cutting edge- each time one of the lucky five golden ticket winners meets their doom, the Oompa Loompas sing a tune that visually has weird shapes and colors-psychedelic and very hippy, of the late 1960s-early 1970s era.

Other numbers such as “I’ve Got a Golden Ticket”, “Cheer up Charlie”, and “The Candy Man” are memorable.

A film for the ages, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) is a celebration of creative filmmaking, quite cerebral at times, and far superior to most children’s fantasy/musical films.

Skip the 2005 remake starring Johnny Depp and enjoy the original.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring: Adaptation and Original Song Score

Dumbo-1941

Dumbo-1941

Director Ben Sharpsteen

Starring Various voices

Top 250 Films #138

Scott’s Review #559

Reviewed December 24, 2016

Grade: A

One of the best-produced (and at sixty-two minutes, one of the shortest) of the classic Walt Disney films of the golden age, Dumbo, in a similar fashion to another Disney classic, Bambi, is both heartbreaking and mixed with fun entertainment.

It should be heralded and viewed by everyone —children and adults alike —and teaches a valuable lesson in acceptance and tolerance, messages that never go out of fashion, despite the film being made in the grand old year of 1941.

To draw more comparisons to Bambi, we are introduced to the title character, Dumbo, who is nuzzled and cherished upon being brought into the world by storks by his warm and affectionate mother.

Dumbo is an elephant, and his mother is a circus elephant, where she spends her days as entertainment, along with a group of other female elephants —none of whom possess her grace, kindness, or dignity.

Sweet Dumbo is born with an imperfection- he has enormous ears. While others —namely the female elephants —ridicule and stare in horror at the lovable little elephant, his mother embraces and cuddles her little bundle of joy, eliciting a genuine, good-natured warmth rarely seen in cinematic history.

There is something innately good about this character (Mrs. Jumbo). She has a richness and way about her that is fantastic and consuming.

Sadly, one day, while entertaining the masses, a bratty human child taunts Dumbo, causing Mrs. Jumbo to go ballistic and immediately go into protection mode.

She was then deemed a “mad elephant”, shackled, chained, and worse yet- separated from her baby. How anyone can watch this portion of the film and not shed a tear or get a lump in their throat is beyond me.

Walt Disney was a master at eliciting raw emotion from his audience and writing heartbreaking yet charming stories.

The centerpiece of Dumbo is the extraordinary bond between mother and son —a sweet and powerful connection that almost everyone can relate to. The pride and joy in Mrs. Jumbo’s eyes when she is granted a visit from Dumbo while she is imprisoned is magical – it means the world to her.

The supporting characters are key to the richness of the film- Timothy Q. Mouse is an essential character in the story. Upon Dumbo and Mrs. Jumbo’s separation, he becomes Dumbo’s only friend, sympathizing with Dumbo, and is instrumental to Dumbo’s reunion with his mama as well as his future successes in the circus.

The bitchy female elephants are crucial, too- despite being one of their own, they still reject Dumbo and Mother. There are some light moments, such as when the ladies, (Catty, Giddy, and Prissy), gossip and act superior to others.

Another fun scene, to balance out the heavy drama, occurs when Timothy and Dumbo accidentally mistake champagne for water, causing them to hallucinate and imagine pink elephants.

Dumbo is essential in that it sends a powerful message about the way animals (especially circus animals) have historically been treated. Why animals should be used to amuse and entertain human beings is anyone’s guess, but this film serves as a powerful reminder of this.

Fortunately, the film has a happy and satisfying ending, which should please fans.

Dumbo (1941) is a timeless animated classic.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Scoring of a Musical Film (won), Best Original Song

Tommy-1975

Tommy-1975

Director Ken Russell

Starring Roger Daltrey, Ann-Margret

Top 250 Films #140

Scott’s Review #617

Reviewed February 15, 2017

Grade: B+

The film version of Tommy (1975) is a musical fantasy, a rock opera based on The Who’s famous 1969 album.

Composed and adapted by Pete Townshend of The Who, the film tells the story of a deaf, dumb, blonde kid named Tommy.

Featuring a star-studded cast of actors and singers performing musical numbers, the film is an over-the-top treat and quite campy late-night fare.

The stage version is usually a bit more serious and sedate than the film.

I enjoy the film, but it pales in comparison to the stage versions- which I was fortunate enough to see at my local community theater recently.

Ken Russell directs the film.

Set in the 1940s and told mainly through song, we see a montage of Captain Walker (Robert Powell) and his wife, Nora (Ann-Margaret), on their honeymoon, followed by Walker being sent off to war, leaving a pregnant Nora behind.

When his fighter plane is shot down and he is presumed dead, the montage skips ahead five years, and Nora is now involved in a relationship with Frank (Oliver Reed).

Tommy is five years old and is visited by his father, who is very much alive. After a struggle with Frank and Nora, Powell is killed, and a traumatized Tommy is unable to speak, see, or hear (except within his mind) as Frank and Nora are desperate to make sure he keeps quiet.

As Tommy grows into a young man, he becomes a “Pinball Wizard”, a prodigy at pinball, creating great wealth for Nora and Frank. Still unable to speak or see, he is first abused by his Uncle and cousin, but then championed as they are all able to get rich off of his abilities.

Through the years, Nora and Frank attempt to “cure” Tommy of his ailments via a preacher (Clapton) leading a Marilyn Monroe cult and a prostitute (Turner).

The joy in Tommy (the film) is seeing the star-studded cast- Elton John, Tina Turner, and Eric Clapton, as well as Roger Daltrey- bring a sense of wonderment to the film. Who doesn’t like to see rock stars perform?

Famous actors Jack Nicholson, Ann-Margret, and Reed are featured.

The musical numbers are the splendid part of the film, and one must be prepared to escape into a world of fantasy. Musical highlights for me include “Acid Queen”, “It’s A Boy”, and “We’re Not Gonna Take It”.

My most recent viewing of the film Tommy disappointed me slightly, and this may be because I recently saw the stage version, which I find far superior.

Ann-Margret, while superb and believable as Tommy’s mum, is not the character that Townshend had in mind.

Sultry and sexy, she is cast to bring some sex appeal- nothing wrong with this, but the stage character is more of a working-class woman and more in line with the rest of the cast.

The film also seems a bit too over-the-top, almost silly at times. But Tommy is an escapist film, based on the album, which is more serious.

I wonder if Russell was going for a more late-night, Rocky Horror Show- or Little Shop of Horrors-type feel.

Tommy (1975) has its place, certainly, but I would first recommend the stage or album version as a starting point, then move to the film as escapist fare.

Oscar Nominations: Best Actress-Ann-Margret, Best Scoring: Original Song Score and Adaptation or Scoring: Adaptation

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs-1937

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs- 1937

Director David Hand

Starring Various Voices

Top 250 Films #147

Scott’s Review #625

Reviewed March 18, 2017

Grade: A-

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) is Walt Disney’s debut feature-length production and the first animated feature.

Until their release, animated stories were not features at all, but rather shorts that were shown as gag-filled entertainment, not to be taken too seriously.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs made animated films something to be appreciated and respected. The 1937 film was re-released in theaters numerous times until the 1990s and serves as a blueprint for what animated features would become.

The film is based on the famous fairy tale of the Brothers Grimm, and it is a cherished treasure.

Beautiful inside and out, Snow White is a lonely princess who lives with her devious, wicked stepmother, the Queen. Making the most of her troubled life, Snow White hums and sings with her bird friends, who gather to keep her company as her stepmother forces her to work as a scullery maid.

The Queen is a vain woman, jealous of Snow White’s natural beauty. She constantly consults her mirror to ask, “Who is the fairest one of all?”

One day, the Queen decides to put an end to Snow White and orders a henchman to kill her in the forest and return her bloody heart to her in a box. When the henchman cannot do the deed, he pleads with Snow White to flee.

She winds up in a bit of cottage housing seven dwarf men, whom she befriends, as the Queen is determined to take drastic measures to find her.

In the late 1930s and for years to come, animated features were not created as they are today. Instead, they were simplistic —and excellent —in using storyboards and drawings in their creation.

This daunting task, along with the creativity involved, makes them just lovely to look at.

Since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was the debut animated feature, the drawings are fantastic to view, like pictures, and to appreciate the craftsmanship involved.

The characters are richly created, with bright, vivid colors that distinguish them from one another—Snow White’s bright red lips and the blue and gold colors of her dress contrast with the regal purples used on the Queen, to say nothing of the deep red color of the poison apple.

The color makes the apple appear delicious but also dangerously blood red. These nuances lend the characters depth and texture.

The friendships Snow White forms with the dwarfs and the animal life in the forest are whimsical and filled with love, and the animal element later becomes a staple of Disney’s works, as seen in Dumbo and Bambi.

The animals are naturally drawn to Snow White because she is joyful and kind. They, in turn, warn her of impending danger as the Queen turns herself into an old woman and lumbers towards Snow White, snug in the cottage.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs features an old-style romance. The handsome Prince takes a shine to Snow White, noticing her natural beauty as she sings, and is later determined to save her, which he does when he magically kisses her in the film’s finale.

The songs featured only enhance the love story—”Some Day My Prince Will Come” is a lovely ode to romance, tenderly sung by Snow White as she longs for the Prince’s touch, frustrated with her life.

The seven dwarfs are created magically, and seven little men living together seem quite natural in those innocent times.

Each is distinctive—Dopey is my personal favorite in his innocence and playfulness—and Happy, Doc, Grumpy, Sneezy, Sleepy, and Bashful are all written with great zest. We fall in love with each of them from the first moment we meet them as they belt out “Heigh-Ho” in unison.

Since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs deserve merit for being Disney’s first, it is overlooked that the film omits any family members of Snow White’s besides the evil Queen. Where are Snow White’s father and mother? Any siblings? Indeed, they are presumed dead, but they are never mentioned.

Also, why does the Queen have a Magic Mirror and have special powers that nobody else has?

At one hour and twenty-three minutes, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is a relatively brief film, yet it does not feel underdeveloped. The story and the characters are rich with appeal and intrigue, making the film a classic that should be shared with all youngsters.

It is a classic tale of good versus evil and a great love story, setting the tone for other Disney masterpieces to follow.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring

Juliet Of The Spirits-1965

Juliet Of The Spirits-1965

Director Federico Fellini

Starring Giulietta Masina

Top 250 Films #188

Scott’s Review #725

Reviewed February 15, 2018

Grade: A

A true Fellini film in every sense, and perhaps his most personal, 1965’s Juliet of the Spirits is a colorful, masterful experience with fluid art direction and stunning sets and costumes.

As with most of his films, the story and its intricacies are odd and do not always make perfect sense, but the film is meant to be absorbed and felt, and it has more of a central plot than some of his other works.

Juliet of the Spirits is undoubtedly a must-see for fans of Fellini or any novice who wants an introduction to the great director.

In a compelling tidbit of background information, lead actress Giulietta Masina, wife and muse of director Fellini and sometimes deemed the female Charlie Chaplin, plays a true-to-life character.

In real life, the woman suffered from a philandering husband- Fellini himself!

For this reason alone, the film is fascinating as a true-to-life story, leading the audience to empathize with Giulietta and her life of doldrums and turmoil.

Giulietta Boldrini (Masina) is an affluent woman living in Italy with her successful and dashing husband, Giorgio (Mario Pisu). Despite wealth, two housekeepers, and free time to do whatever she pleases, she is dissatisfied with her life and surroundings.

This occurs mainly after she hears her husband mutter another woman’s name in his sleep. Concerned and intrigued, Giulietta hires investigators to unravel the mystery, which spawns an adventure for her.

Instead of a cookie-cutter film with a basic plot, in proper Fellini form, Giulietta embarks on a journey into a dreamlike, odd experience, tapping into her repressed desires and innermost thoughts while being exposed to her larger-than-life, sexy neighbor, Suzy (Sandra Milo).

The oversexed Suzy enlightens Giulietta to the joys of her mansion, treehouse, dazzling, weird friends, and bubbling sensuality.

Juliet of the Spirits is a joy to watch and quite a bit more linear than other complex masterpieces, such as the 1960s La Dolce Vita or 1969’s Fellini Satyricon.

The plot is spelled out presently- Giulietta is depressed and anxious for something new and exciting. Her journey into this new life, marked by her wrestling with demons and resistance, makes this film so much fun.

Styles and colors are brilliant and lavishly loud. Take the gaudy and glamorous nest that Suzy calls home. Her palace is both tawdry and sophisticated, with a built-in underground swimming pool where she bathes after lovemaking and velvety red walls and furniture.

Fellini uses gorgeous reds, greens, and blues throughout the film to create dazzle and spectacles with larger-than-life characters.

To further focus on Suzy for a minute, the blonde bombshell frequently visits her very own treehouse, complete with a swing. She flirts with handsome young men who gaze up at the scantily dressed beauty as she tosses her high-heeled shoe down to them in a suggestive manner.

When they come up to the top of the treehouse by way of a mechanical basket, presumably for sex, this is too much for the overwhelmed Giulietta, who returns to the safety of her own home.

But she is excited and scared.

The film belongs to Masina, and we cannot help but wonder if Fellini created Juliet of the Spirits for the actress because of his reported years of cheating.

Regardless, Masina plays a confident woman on the outside- insecure on the inside- flawlessly.

With her expressive eyes and a nice smile, Masina enthusiastically embraces the role, making her a perfect fit for a Fellini film.

Juliet of the Spirits mixes several film genres, including fantasy, drama, and light comedy, and contains interesting supporting characters.

Suzy’s seemingly clairvoyant mother is a great side character. When she meets Giulietta, she immediately sees that the woman is troubled. Giulietta’s father, whom we meet when she is a little girl appearing in a religious play, is boisterous and spirited.

I was fortunate enough to stay at the Grand Hotel in Rome, a lavish yet strange establishment where Fellini spent many nights as a guest. While watching Juliet of the Spirits, I fantasized that he drew inspiration for this film from the hotel.

The grand red textures that appear in both the hotel and the Fellini film could have created a truly inspiring setting.

Stalwart, creative, and masterful director Fellini once again crafts a stylish film that warrants thoughtful consideration after a solid viewing.

Too much analysis, however, will ruin the enchanting experience. Juliet of the Spirits (1965) is best enjoyed as a treat that will mesmerize you in glamorous fashion.

Oscar Nominations: Best Art Direction, Color, Best Costume Design, Color

Golden Globe Nominations: 1 win-Best Foreign Film-Foreign Language (won)

It’s a Wonderful Life-1946

It’s a Wonderful Life-1946

Director Frank Capra

Starring James Stewart

Top 250 Films #219

Scott’s Review #863

Reviewed February 5, 2019

Grade: A-

A popular holiday tradition in many households eager to cozy up in front of the fire with an enduring and entertaining classic, It’s a Wonderful Life (1946) serves an essential purpose. It is the ultimate annual festivity passed down through generations.

While not one of my standards, I recognize the influence and endearment the film offers and cannot fault its power to bring people together through its humanistic, sweet message.

James Stewart is perfectly cast as the wholesome and likable George Bailey. He strives to help everyone in his small community who needs it, often at the expense of his own well-being.

Depressed by the failure of his bank on Christmas Eve in 1945, in the snowy locale of Bedford Falls, New York, George is visited by a guardian angel named Clarence (Henry Travers), who teaches him what life will be like if he chooses the dire path of ending his own life.

Along with Stewart, Donna Reed as the wife, Mary Hatch Bailey, is cast exceptionally well and is the perfect counterpart to George.

Together, the actors immerse themselves in their roles, holding their heads high as the leaders of the sleepy little town they reside in, and set an example for the other townspeople with their kindness and thoughtfulness.

A sound “king and queen of the prom,” the duo radiates and elicits tears from audience members living vicariously through the couple.

A perfect companion piece to A Christmas Carol, perhaps the version from 1951, for similar periods, both spirited and teaching life lessons, is recommended.

Both are thematically similar in their depiction of a heavenly spirit’s visitation and in offering glimpses into the past, present, and future; the comparisons are endless, to say nothing of the Christmastime elements both possess.

Arguably, It’s a Wonderful Life is the most uplifting, both in good and bad ways. The lesson repeatedly voiced is that if one is good to others, one will be rewarded, or at least find peace of mind.

This is not a bad lesson, which is the main reason for the film’s lasting appeal. Bad luck and financial hardship will inevitably affect everyone, but kindness is forever enduring.

It’s also worth mentioning the timing of the creation and release of It’s a Wonderful Life.

As the United States, to say nothing of many European nations, struggled to pick up the pieces after the devastation of World War II, the picture was opportune to immerse itself in the lives of many people who needed a strong and uplifting message.

No wonder the film was popular when it was first released as the feel-good film of 1946.

The black-and-white cinematography does wonders to portray the film’s magical atmosphere. The high points are the cold and snowy bridge scenes.

Controversial years later was the colorization, and some would say the ruination, a decision that was met with anger by star Stewart, who went so far as to testify in court to voice his displeasure.

At the risk of being raked across the coals and deemed a “Scrooge”, portions of It’s a Wonderful Life are saccharin and manufactured in the utmost goodness, sometimes too good.

Admittedly, the characters of George, Mary, and their children come across as somewhat trite at times, as they seem to radiate only benevolent characteristics, never engaging in improper or impure actions.

In a fantasy film, the overly humanistic approach can sometimes be a tad silly.

The same can be said for the angel, Clarence.

Nonetheless, films such as It’s a Wonderful Life (1946) serve their purpose in cinema history.

With a robust and heart-warming message, the positive vibes are undeniable, and the warmth and emotion the film possesses radiate even to the coldest hearts and the harshest of critics, who are willing to accept and be enraptured by the film’s staying power.

Oscar Nominations: Best Motion Picture, Best Director-Frank Capra, Best Actor-James Stewart, Best Sound Recording, Best Film Editing

Golden Globe Nominations: 1 win-Best Director-Motion Picture-Frank Capra (won)

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial-1982

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial-1982

Director Steven Spielberg

Starring Henry Thomas, Dee Wallace

Top 250 Films #224

Scott’s Review #756

Reviewed May 10, 2018

Grade: A

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) is a wonderful, magical film that will melt the hearts of anyone with even a tad of cynicism. The film is otherworldly (quite literally) and contains a message of acceptance and appreciation of other beings.

Mixing many humorous moments with tender drama and tears, the film becomes part of a fantasy, science fiction, and humanistic story. The film still feels fresh and relevant today with a bevy of forever-remembered scenes and references- a wonderful story of friendship.

The audience is immediately introduced to a pack of alien botanists, arriving in a California forest from their faraway planet to study plants one night.

When government agents interrupt the peaceful moment, the “extraterrestrials” are forced to depart, leaving one creature behind.

When ten-year-old Elliott (Henry Thomas) discovers and begins to communicate with what will come to be known as “E.T.”, the duo forge a wonderful, lasting friendship as they attempt to return E.T. to his homeland.

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial is crowd-pleasing in every way, offering a bit of everything for all of its lucky viewers.

Director Steven Spielberg reportedly made this film as a result of his desire to share a childhood imaginary friend with the world, so the charm shines through in this very personal story.

The film contains an overall innocence that is pure benevolence- E.T. teaches Elliott as much as Elliott teaches E.T.

Who can ever forget the pair’s initial interaction as the use of Reese’s Pieces candy became a huge cultural phenomenon? The lovely quote “E.T. phone home!” is still as poignant and teary-eyed as it was in 1982.

Enjoyable and recognizable, E.T. himself is becoming a cult figure. Odd-looking, wide-eyed, and yet of a lovable nature, even cute, the filmmakers were careful not to make him too frightening.

Using real actors and distorted voices, E.T. became famous, appearing on lunch boxes, tee-shirts, notebooks, and binders throughout the early 1980s.

The film, released in the “modern age” of 1982, provides a genuine portrayal of suburban life at that time.

In the sunny, subdivision-style neighborhood where Elliott and his family live, the absent father figure (so common in many 1980s films) and the single-mom/divorced-parents phenomenon take hold, making families like this commonplace.

If made in 1960, Elliott would have had two happy parents and a white picket fence.

Dee Wallace, as Elliott’s mother, Mary, received several mom roles throughout the decade, portraying them with a wholesome middle-America quality.

Henry Thomas, like Elliott, is crucial to the success of E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial, and sadly, the actor never did much beyond this great film. While it’s tough to create chemistry with a creature from outer space, the young actor does just that as we see the two as connected friends.

The duo especially shines during the emotional “death” scene and the farewell scene finale.

The other supporting characters rounding out Elliott’s family are well cast and effectively convey what a typical suburban family looks like.

Michael (Robert MacNaughton) is slightly surly yet protective as the older brother, and Gertie, played by a very young Drew Barrymore (soon to become a superstar throughout the 1980s and 1990s), is cute, bubbly, and teeters on the edge of stealing the show as the precocious five-year-old.

At its core, what makes E.T., The Extra-Terrestrial so appealing is its heart- a sympathetic creature’s desire to return home and be with his loved ones is the main focus.

Only slightly reversed is a comparison to the 1939 masterpiece The Wizard of Oz. As Dorothy yearns to return to her home amid an exotic, unfamiliar, and sometimes scary world, so does E.T., making both films similar and equally appealing.

Rich in elegance, intelligence, and creativity, Spielberg crafts a tale that is both primed for mass consumption and ripe for mainstream appeal. Rather than weave a contrived or clichéd story, he spins a magical, long-lasting good story that will appeal to the kid in all of us.

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) reaped many Oscar nominations but lost out on the big prize to the epic Gandhi that year.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Steven Spielberg, Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, Best Original Score (won), Best Sound Effects Editing (won), Best Sound (won), Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing, Best Visual Effects (won)

Barbie-2023

Barbie-2023

Director Greta Gerwig

Starring Margot Robbie, Ryan Gosling, and America Ferrera

Top 250 Films #226

Scott’s Review #1,381

Reviewed July 23, 2023

Grade: A

Greta Gerwig is a tremendously talented director who is influencing Hollywood films. The gifted woman crafted Lady Bird in 2017 to critical acclaim and forged ahead with another feminist and progressive project.

In Barbie (2023), she takes a traditional and iconic ‘Barbie doll’ product by Mattel and explores the positives and negatives of the doll throughout its existence.

An incredible opening sequence harkening to Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 masterpiece 2001: A Space Odyssey explains the evolution of the doll.

Barbie incorporates gender balance, creativity, thought, satire, and slapstick comedy fraught with meaning. Not forgotten is heart and humanity, and a look at how much progress has been achieved for women over the years, and how much more is still needed.

As if that’s not enough, Barbie deserves praise for its direction, production design, costumes, music, and cast performances.

Well done.

The film stars Margot Robbie as Barbie and Ryan Gosling as Ken, who embark on a journey of self-discovery after Barbie faces an existential crisis. Deemed the ‘stereotypical’ Barbie, she begins having peculiar and ‘un-Barbie’ thoughts of death and analytics, and must return to the real world to find her doll’s owner.

She soon longs to return to Barbie Land, which is a perfect place. Unless you’re a Ken who exists merely to pine after Barbie, but do they secretly resent this?

There are numerous positives to explore regarding Barbie, but one slight drawback is its proximity to silly comedy and goofiness. The meaning of the film mostly offsets this, but I fear that some audiences may be overwhelmed by gag jokes and lose the overall point of the story.

Let’s take a deep dive. The production design and art direction are dazzling and immediately noticeable. Particularly, I’m referring to Barbie Land and its pink and pretty sets. Luxurious pools, streets, houses, and cars are rich with color and ooze a fun vibe.

I can’t imagine these teams being overlooked during the year-end awards season.

Robbie and Gosling, looking blonde, buff, and tanned, are wonderfully cast and not only look the part but quickly switch from physical comedy to heavy drama without looking foolish.

Robbie, for example, while the classic Barbie type has layers of emotion that she channels. And Gosling could have looked like a buffoon with over-the-top sequences if not for a startlingly good dramatic scene towards the film’s climax.

The supporting cast is brilliant and includes Kate McKinnon as ‘weird Barbie,’ a perfect role for her to unleash her comedic prowess. How lovely to see Rhea Perlman again in the small but powerful role of Ruth Handler, co-founder of Mattel and creator of the Barbie doll.

Finally, America Ferrera and Will Ferrell add both comedy and meaningful spirit to their roles. And how could the inclusion of British stalwart Helen Mirren as the narrator not create credibility?

The main attraction, though, is the writing. Isn’t it always the case when it’s done intelligently?

The dynamic duo of Gerwig and Noah Baumbach (famous for, among other works, the 2019 film Marriage Story) pair well, giving equality messages to both Barbie and Ken. While it is easy to dismiss Ken, his role is valued and respected within the overall context of showing that everyone deserves a seat at the table.

I was touched by the film in various moments more than I ever expected. Wonderful sentiments about being a mother are powerfully stated by Ruth and Gloria (Ferrera) during various scenes and messages, such as everyone deserves respect and serving a purpose, which are hard not to get choked up over.

Barbie wins points for diversity and inclusion with nearly every ethnic group represented and a transgender character, Dr. Barbie (Hari Nef), featured prominently.

Providing roaring entertainment, bubble gum sets and design, and a message that will break your heart while exuding intelligence, Barbie (2023) is a win.

It’s a story about the wills of plastic and humanity, making for a perfect, harmonious blend. Who would have thought a film about Barbie would be so important?

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor-Ryan Gosling, Best Supporting Actress-America Ferrera, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Costume Design, Best Production Design, Best Original Song-“I’m Just Ken”, “What Was I Made For?” (won)

Poor Things-2023

Poor Things-2023

Director Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring Emma Stone, Mark Ruffalo, Willem Dafoe

Top 250 Films #244

Scott’s Review #1,413

Reviewed December 27, 2023

Grade: A

Yorgos Lanthimos is a peculiar director and the suggestion is for potential viewers to be familiar with his work before seeing his latest film release, Poor Things (2023).

I’ve said recently that other directors like Alexander Payne, Todd Haynes, Quentin Tarantino, and Martin Scorcese can easily be added to this list with a style not for everyone but that Cinemaphiles will salivate for style and texture alone.

Anyone who has seen Lanthimos’s Dogtooth (2009) or The Lobster (2016) will know exactly what I mean.

With Poor Things, he hits a grand slam home run that might garner him some Academy Awards in what can be arguably classified as his most progressive film.

Mentions like the art direction, cinematography, set design, and fantastic performance by Emma Stone must be immediately celebrated and called out as highlights.

The film is hardly mainstream or conventional and way out there channeling a parallel to Frankenstein with frightening and gothic sets and sequences galore.

All with a twisted and refreshing feminist quality.

Ultimately, I was satisfied with the knowledge that I had witnessed a cinematic marvel that encourages repeated viewings.

During the nineteenth century in London, England, Bella Baxter (Stone), is a young woman brought back to life by the brilliant and unorthodox scientist Dr. Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe) who is referred to as ‘god’.

He inserts the tender brain of the baby she was carrying when she leaped from a bridge to her death suicide style.

Under Baxter’s protection and supervision, Bella is eager to learn but acts like a toddler with limited speech and motor skills. She teeters around smashing plates with gleeful joy as she discovers her surroundings.

With superior intelligence and a hunger for the worldliness she is lacking, Bella runs off with Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), a slick and horny lawyer, on a whirlwind adventure across the continents from Lisbon, Portugal to Paris, France, and back to London.

Free from the knowledge and the prejudices women of her time were forced to endure, Bella grows steadfast in her purpose to stand for equality and liberation. She challenges societal norms with her vision and determination.

I can’t think of anyone else to play the role of Bella other than Stone. With wide eyes filled with wonder, she infuses her character with comedy and wit as she asks questions many women have but never dare to utter aloud.

Especially in Victorian London.

Ruffalo is outrageous and Dafoe is hideously stoic. Both actors bring star quality and wacky performances in different ways.

The look of the film is to die for as Lanthimos offers a looming fairy tale set design led by cinematographer Robbie Ryan.

The European cities of Lisbon, Paris, and London are given their chapters in the film and their focus. The waterfront in Lisbon in particular resembles the real city in a gothic and foreboding way.

The hotel in Paris where Bella becomes a prostitute is regal and polished. Bella wonders aloud why the male customers get to decide which woman they want to spend time with instead of the reverse.

It’s a fair question.

Her friend and fellow prostitute introduces her to socialism while Madame Swiney (Kathryn Hunter) explains capitalism.

Finally, the musical score by Jerskin Fendrix offers shrieking classical strings mixed with haunting pizazz and perfectly timed arrangements. They promote tension and drama at just the right moments.

2023 was a fabulous year for women in cinematic terms but not so much by the United States Supreme Court but that’s another story. The bombast and box office enormity of Greta Gerwig’s Barbie is followed by Lanthimos’s celebration of the thought-provoking Poor Things.

Both elicit insightfully quirkiness that successfully bulldozes over traditional gender norms with messages that women can do whatever they set out to do which is a vital quality for young minds to be exposed to.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Yorgos Lanthimos, Best Actress-Emma Stone (won), Best Supporting Actor-Mark Ruffalo, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Film Editing, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design (won), Best Production Design (won), Best Original Score, Best Makeup and Hairstyling (won)

Carousel-1956

Carousel-1956

Director Henry King

Starring Gordon MacRae, Shirley Jones

Scott’s Review #1,486

Reviewed July 27, 2025

Grade: A-

Following the success of Oklahoma! in 1955, Carousel (1956) is similarly based on the lauded Rodgers and Hammerstein stage musical.

It is firmly nestled among the myriad musical productions that emerged in the 1940s, 1950s, and into the 1960s in cinema.

Darker in tone, the musical drama bears a strong resemblance to Oklahoma!

It swaps the Midwest United States for Northeastern Maine. Clambakes and watery harbors lend authenticity to the film.

Easily paired with Oklahoma! as a double feature, it even features the same stars—Gordon MacRae and Shirley Jones, who return to star in Carousel.

As an aside, the filmmakers originally cast Frank Sinatra, who dropped out, so MacRae was a second choice.

As with the original stage production, the film features some of Rodgers and Hammerstein’s most famous songs, particularly ‘Carousel Waltz’ and the emotional ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’.

It also features arguably the most serious storyline of all their musicals, incorporating domestic abuse into the fray.

The story follows the romance of Billy Bigelow (MacRae), a charming carousel barker, and Julie Jordan (Shirley Jones), a pretty blue-collar worker from a nearby mill in Boothbay Harbor, Maine.

When the attractive young couple abruptly and reactively gets married, they also both find themselves unemployed and broke, which puts a strain on their relationship.

When Billy finds out that Julie is pregnant, he resorts to extreme measures to get money, a decision that leads to tragedy.

Cleverly, the film is non-linear, as the first scene features Billy in what appears to be Purgatory (or the back door of Heaven), where he is told that he can return to Earth for one day to make amends.

We know that Billy has died after a tragic event, but we do not know the details.

To its credit, Carousel is not a cheery, bombastic musical fraught with over-the-top phoniness or too much glee. The characters are darker, which makes it feel unique.

This is evident in a comparison of MacRae’s and Jones’s characters in Oklahoma! to Carousel. While Laurey (Jones) is a respectable, virginal good girl, Julie plays with fire, assuredly spending time alone with Billy after being warned of the consequences.

Curly McLain (MacRae) is a good-natured cowboy who admires the beautiful morning while riding to see his wholesome crush, Laurey, whereas Billy is a rough-talking, macho brute.

Supporting characters like Carrie (Barbara Ruick), Jigger (Cameron Mitchell), and Cousin Nettie (Claramae Turner) are fantastic additions, especially Turner, as she brings down the house with ‘You’ll Never Walk Alone’.

Still, I yearned for a bit more substance to their characters. What makes them tick? Are they fulfilled?

A final highlight is the amazing fantasy musical song and dance number that appears towards the finale. As Billy’s teenage daughter, Louise (Susan Luckey), dances amongst her classmates, she is mocked for her father’s reputation and shortcomings.

She writhes around them in a deliciously choreographed sequence that builds tension and kickstarts the action.

Unlike Curly, I found Billy difficult to like, though the character is softened considerably by the end of the film. He’s honestly a dick through most of the story, hitting Julie and plotting ways to find fortune at the expense of others.

To make matters worse, he also slaps his own daughter’s hand when he comes down from Purgatory to see her. Are we expected to like him?

Despite the two aforementioned powerful musical numbers, the other songs don’t carry through as much or are nearly as memorable.

For much of the running time, until the great build with Louise’s musical number, there is a slowness to the events. Whereas Oklahoma! has it all, something is missing from Carousel, and the pacing isn’t as fine-tuned.

Nonetheless, I adore the summery New England setting with the authentic location sequences and attention to detail.

The darkness and edgy religious-themed trimmings combined with two home run-hitting musical numbers are enough to make me a fan of Carousel (1956).

Wicked: Part I-2024

Wicked: Part I-2024

Director Jon M. Chu

Starring Cynthia Erivo, Ariana Grande-Butera, Jonathan Bailey

Scott’s Review #1,453

Reviewed December 1, 2024

Grade: A

The extravagant Broadway musical Wicked (2024) is brought to the silver screen with beautiful results. It overtook the nation in hefty box office returns, and many donned witch hats for the event. The production has enough substance to justify the craze.

It is the first of a two-part film adaptation of the stage musical of the same name. The film is loosely based on Gregory Maguire’s 1995 novel, which is based on L. Frank Baum’s 1900 novel The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, its sequels, and its 1939 film adaptation.

Part II will emerge in late 2025.

Powerhouse Cynthia Erivo leads the charge as Elphaba, a young woman misunderstood because of her unusual green skin who has yet to discover her true power. When conceived, Elphaba’s mother and her secret beau drank a mysterious potion assumed responsible for her nature.

Elphaba is noticed by Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh), the Dean of Sorcerer Studies, and welcomed at Shiz University. Her disabled younger sister Nessarose (Marissa Bode) is a new student there.

Ariana Grande plays Glinda, a privileged and ambitious young woman who is jealous of yet enamored with Elphaba and yearns to discover her talent and powers.

Elphaba and Glinda forge an unlikely but powerful friendship. After encountering The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, their friendship reaches a crossroads, and their lives take very different paths.

The film begins with Glinda (the Good Witch of the North) recounting their relationship as Elphaba (or The Wicked Witch of the West) has just died to much celebration.

Whether viewers are familiar with the novels, the 1939 film, or the stage version, the rich history is well-combined.

The colorful sets and visuals are marvelous, with luminous greens encompassing the shimmering Emerald City. The Shiz University is more pastel with muted blue and pink colors.

Aside from the story, there is so much to look at visually. Be sure to glimpse background activity during dancing or celebration scenes to notice even more particulars.

Hints of what’s to come (the Cowardly Lion, a broomstick) also can be noticed.

The second half is the better portion when the action takes off and gets to a darker place. The colors are also darker than in the first half.

Watching the monkeys start to transition and grow wings painfully is a bit scary, especially for younger children.

The side story of animals losing their rights and being caged in the beginning, when they speak and even teach at a university, is complex to watch and represents the current state of the United States.

Director Jon M. Chu and screenwriters Winnie Holzman and Dana Fox wisely replace humans with animals as they remind audiences of groups of people (immigrants, the LGBTQ+ community) targeted by hate.

Sadly, as the Wizard of Oz and Madame Morrible remind Elphaba, the world needs another. ‘ The parallels between animals and humans are readily apparent.

Perhaps to combat the hate, Chu includes gay actors Jonathan Bailey and Bowen Yang in prominent roles.

Chu, most notable for Crazy Rich Asians (2018), delivers a stunning product filled with glamour, bravura, and necessary female empowerment.

The dynamic between Erivo and Grande-Butera is strong, making their rivalry/friendship believable and layered. Erivo gets the showier, albeit in a less attractive role, but she powerfully uses her voice to her advantage.

‘I’m Not That Girl’ and ‘Defying Gravity’ have quickly become favorites.

Wicked: Part I (2024) is an intriguing and spectacular production that raises critical societal questions. Whether you marvel at the visuals or explore gender and repression more deeply, the film has something for everyone.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Actress-Cynthia Erivo, Best Supporting Actress-Ariana Grande, Best Film Editing, Best Production Design (won), Best Costume Design (won), Best Original Score, Best Sound, Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Visual Effects

Gremlins-1984

Gremlins-1984

Director Joe Dante

Starring Zach Galligan, Phoebe Cates

Scott’s Review #1,443

Reviewed September 28, 2024

Grade: B+

A mishmash of film genres such as black comedy, horror, and Christmas, Gremlins (1984) is one of the films responsible for the introduction of the new Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) PG-13 rating in the mid-1980s.

Too soft for an adult R rating, but too scary for a PG rating, many films fit better in the PG-13 category.

The film features a cute, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982)- inspired creature named Gizmo. Since Steven Spielberg executive-produced Gremlins, there have been comparisons to the successful mega-box-office film.

But Gremlins is darker than E.T., especially when the spawn of Gizmo emerges in a fierce, aggressive manner and one dons a mohawk-style haircut. Many of the gremlins die, and a few humans are killed by the gremlins, giving it a scarier vibe.

This is thanks to director Joe Dante, who gives the film a 1950s B-movie look with a dark, campy tone.

A gadget salesman, Randall Peltzer (Hoyt Axton), is looking for a special Christmas gift for his son, Billy (Zach Galligan), and finds one at a store in Chinatown. The shopkeeper is reluctant to sell him the “mogwai” but does, and warns him never to expose him to bright light or water, or to feed him after midnight.

Naturally, when Randall returns to his home in the United States, all of this happens, and the result is a gang of gremlins that decide to tear up the town on Christmas Eve.

There are a couple of ways to view this film. The ‘message’ is a statement about the consumer culture that ran rampant in the 1980s. Wanting everything but not appreciating what you have is highlighted in the final scene.

The Chinese shopkeeper repossesses the “mogwai”, scolds the family for their negligence, and criticizes Western society for its carelessness with nature.

In a touching scene, Gizmo, having bonded with Billy, bids him goodbye. The touched shopkeeper concedes that Billy may be ready one day and, until then, Gizmo will be waiting.

Anyone with a pet will get a teary eye or two.

One can also view Gremlins as an entertaining popcorn flick with superior special effects and a fun story. The visual effects and the art direction are worth a pause. Impressive are the sequences in the town where the stores and homes are perfectly dressed for the holidays.

The Christmas lights, trees, snow, and other trimmings provide feelings of warmth and spirit.

Galligan and Phoebe Cates, who plays his love interest, Kate, have wonderful chemistry as a teen romance blossoms. This makes the audience more invested in their peril as they try to save the townspeople from doom.

Axton and Frances Mee McCain, who plays Billy’s mother, Lynn, are also rootable. They are believable as a lovely suburban couple who have a wacky side.

Corey Feldman and Judge Reinhold appear in small roles as a friend and Billy’s obnoxious boss, respectively. Neither role is developed or necessary, but familiar faces are always nice to see in the cinema.

Polly Holliday nearly steals the show as the dog-hating Ruby Deagle. In a clear nod to Mrs. Gulch in The Wizard of Oz (1939), she sneers and snickers in an ill-fated attempt to have Billy’s dog destroyed.

Delightfully, she gets a death scene where the gremlins terrorize her to death when her stair chair goes wonky and throws her out a window. Holliday is a hoot and must have had a ball playing the villain.

Other stock characters, like the disbelieving police force, are clichéd and only serve to hinder the main characters’ actions.

Gremlins (1984) is a darling film that holds up well. It’s mischievous without going full horror and can be enjoyed by the entire family on Christmas Eve. The quirky comedy elements and cool visuals make the film fun and impressive.

All of Us Strangers-2023

All of Us Strangers-2023

Director Andrew Haigh

Starring Andrew Scott, Paul Mescal, Claire Foy

Scott’s Review #1,439

Reviewed September 22, 2024

Grade: A

A moody, dark-lit experience, All of Us Strangers (2023) is a dreamy affair in all the best ways. It’s a bit of a ghost story combined with a love story and can be challenging to explain. 

Especially noteworthy are some elements like the lighting and mood which serve as enhancers. The lavish setting of London, England, and its surroundings are presented as lonely and depressing.

Loneliness is an encompassing description of the film summing up the character-driven story set mostly in an enormous yet almost vacant luxury high-rise apartment.

The vacant building is an effective backdrop to the main character’s experience.

We get inside his head and travel down a tunnel of self-reflection and acceptance just as he does. It’s unclear what is imagined or real, raising the stakes and catapulting the viewer into a world of questions.

The best pleasure comes after finishing the film and wondering how all the pieces come together or even if they do. I wasn’t sure what happened in the conclusion but the overall experience left me thinking. 

The British film follows a lonely screenwriter named Adam who works as a television writer. He develops an intimate relationship with his mysterious male neighbor while revisiting memories from the past involving his parents.

Andrew Haig directs the film and Andrew Scott plays the screenwriter from which the story is his vehicle. Paul Mescal plays his neighbor and love interest.

Haigh is best known for efforts like 45 Years (2015) and Lean on Pete (2017). Both are quiet films and character-driven. All of us Strangers is the best of the trio, though.

The film also has some teary moments of sweetness mostly shown through an LGBTQ+ lens but the film is not only for members or allies of the community but for anyone with a heart or craving something cerebral.

Viewers who have lost parents far too soon before feelings are expressed and only cherished memories remain will find All of Us Strangers to resonate mightily.

Specific to the LGBTQ+ community, what gay man wouldn’t want to travel thirty years into the future and have deep conversations with his parents about his lifestyle? Having missed those prominent years because of death. 

In the story, Adam’s parents died in a car accident when he was a child. Since he never ‘came out’ to them he travels to their house outside of London and imagines conversations with them separately and together. 

The best scenes are between Andrew Scott and Claire Foy who plays Adam’s mother. They are lengthy and poignant and brilliant acting by both are showcased. 

In an ideal fantasy, his mother would leap into Adam’s arms and champion his lifestyle becoming his most ardent supporter. Haig writes the scenes better than that as real-life situations might play out with conflict and misunderstandings.

The mother wants to understand and support but has hesitancies and ideas about a lifestyle different than Adam’s. The scenes become tense and complex not because of shouting but because of a deep struggle for understanding.

Not to be outdone by Foy’s performance in the unique relationship between father and son deliciously played by Jamie Bell. 

Adam has resented his father’s emotional distance for years never forgetting how he needed his father’s support as a child and never got it.

In a powerful scene, Adam and his father embrace. The embrace is one that Adam needed as a child.

The film is for everyone because why wouldn’t anyone want to visit their dead parents years later? Even if still alive there are things between parent and child never said or expressed. 

So many scenes are emotional, poignant, and meaningful in All of Us Strangers. 

The finale is trippy and made me recall David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive (1992) where what is real may not be and who we think a character’s life is all about may not be so.

Though wrapped in fantasy, All of Us Strangers (2023) is focused on grief through a deep emotional lens and uses superior acting to tell its story.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Film, Best Director-Andrew Haigh, Best Lead Performance-Andrew Scott

The Wolves of Willoughby Chase-1989

The Wolves of Willoughby Chase-1989

Director Stuart Olme

Starring Stephanie Beacham

Scott’s Review #1,418

Reviewed January 20, 2024

Grade: B+

The Wolves of Willoughby Chase (1989) is a British dark fantasy film directed by Stuart Orme in his theatrical directorial debut. Most notably, as a rock video director, I am unsure if Orme ever directed another film.

The film is based on the 1962 novel of the same name by Joan Aiken, which was popular with children during the 1960s and beyond.

Similar to the book, the film is set in an alternate history version of nineteenth-century England where wolves roam the countryside. The animals prance through the wintry landscapes, causing fear among humans who spot them.

The experience is playful and escapist, with similarities to both Oliver! (1968) and The Witches (1990). Especially regarding the former, some of the action takes place in a bleak workhouse where adults mistreat children.

Predictably and satisfying, the evil adults get their comeuppance while the nice children and warm adults live happily ever after. This is a main part of the fun of watching the perilous situations.

The plot centers around two young girls. Bonnie (Emily Hudson) is the daughter of Lord and Lady Willoughby, who live at the grand yet cozy country estate named Willoughby Chase. Lady Willoughby (Eleanor David) is ill, and the couple plans to recuperate, basking in the warm sun along the Mediterranean.

In urban London, Bonnie’s cousin, Sylvia (Aleks Darowska), is leaving her impoverished Aunt Jane (Lord Willoughby’s cousin) to keep Bonnie company while her parents are away.

While on the train, she meets a mysterious man, Mr. Grimshaw (Mel Smith), whom they decide to bring back to Willoughby Chase after falling unconscious when wolves attack the train.

Meanwhile, Bonnie and Sylvia’s cousin, Letitia (Stephanie Beacham), is their new governess. She is evil and determined to get rid of the children so she can inherit the money and the estate.

Billed as a children’s film, as Oliver! Some of the sequences may be too much for younger kids. The ferocious wolves may be frightening, while a scene in which one of the girls is locked in a chest might cause nightmares.

There is a presumed drowning, and another character catches on fire.

For adults, particularly those who enjoyed the book as youngsters, the dangerous situations are light fare and merely make Bonnie and Sylvia more heroic and justified in escaping the adults’ clutches.

The art direction and set designs are also a big part of the fun. Numerous scenes of winter and snow-covered roads and pathways are what make The Wolves of Willoughby Chase a perfect watch for a frigid January evening.

I’m not sure if the film would feel as atmospheric in July or August.

The estate where much of the action takes place has a warm and cozy feel. It made me want to curl up by a raging fire with a good book.

There’s an undertone of class distinction when the servants are all dismissed to save money, and I questioned why Sylvia and her aunt didn’t simply live on the estate. The poor living amongst the rich is a perfect setup for more meaningful storylines, but the intent is more for The Wolves of Willoughby Chase to be fun.

Beacham is delightful while slightly over-the-top playing a fiendish character. Best known for appearing on television’s ‘Dynasty,’ the actress has also appeared in British horror films.

I assumed she planned to kill the parents and the girls, but what about the aunt?

It doesn’t matter much because her plan is foiled and the girls are reunited with their loved ones.

The Wolves of Willoughby Chase (1989) contains a nice musical score that enhances the adventures. The film is a bit too scary for kids, but perfect for young adults and older adults.

Wonka-2023

Wonka-2023

Director Paul King

Starring Timothée Chalamet, Calah Lane, Olivia Colman

Scott’s Review #1,414 

Reviewed January 3, 2024

Grade: B+

Wonka (2023) is only the third live-action film based on Roald Dahl’s iconic 1964 novel Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, following Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971) and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005).

The latter was an inadequate and unnecessarily dark film starring Johnny Depp that threatened to ruin the trademark fantasy of the original.

Fortunately, director Paul King mostly known for directing the Paddington films opts for a warm and even gooey experience that does perfect justice to the original starring Gene Wilder with many connections to that film, especially costumes, characters, and locale.

It’s saccharine sweet but not sickeningly sweet instead feeling both fresh and genuine.

The wonderful and familiar featured song ‘Pure Imagination’ appears instantly as the film begins which does wonders to capture and captivate the nostalgic audience—mixed with other new gems like ‘A World of Your Own’ hooks newer and younger viewers.

The effort works well as a kindly old friend dusted off the shelf for a new waltz across the dance floor and a dizzying chocolate delight crowd-pleaser is the result of Wonka.

Wonka is released in December amid the sugary Christmas holiday season. A marketing win what parents could refuse a delicious trip to the cinema?

The wondrous story of how the world’s greatest inventor, magician, and chocolate maker became the beloved Willy Wonka (Timothée Chalamet) we know today begins with the young actor brazenly wearing a similar garb as Wilder did in the 1971 effort.

I adore this feat and pointed display because it makes crystal clear the attempt to leverage history instead of upheaval.

Chalamet is perfectly cast as Willy in large part because he resembles Wilder with his wiry build and waifish face. There exists a kindness and trustworthiness that transfers well from the big screen to the audience member.

Throughout the film, there is light peril that Wonka faces like a crooked debt owed to the even more crooked Mrs. Scrubitt’s (Olivia Colman) boardinghouse or the vengeful competitor Arthur Slugworth (Paterson Joseph) but it’s nothing he can’t handle with a grin and shrug of the shoulders.

His feathers are not ruffled easily because he believes in the magic of chocolate. In a dear flashback scene featuring his mother, played by Sally Hawkins, she inspires him to always believe in himself and be a good person.

This is at the heart of the film.

Along for the ride are new friends orphan Noodle (Calah Lane), Abacus Crunch (Jim Carter), and others trapped within Scrubbit’s and henchman Bleacher, played by Tom Davis.

There’s even a connection with the fan favorite Oompa-Loompa’s led by Lofty (Hugh Grant) who becomes a close ally in the end. As historical viewers will know the pair reunites in business.

Despite all these terrific additions the main attraction is the chocolate naturally. Highlights are a lavish chocolate attempted drowning, a chocolate store, and more than enough chocolate colorful flowers to whet one’s appetite.

The film is weird and zany without being too far out there and retains its touchy-feely approach.

Wonka (2023) successfully builds a multi-generational bridge between audiences with a powerful human connection. Grandparents, parents, and children alike can all see the film together with a common love of chocolate and magic.

The dangers are light-hearted and the filmmakers keep age-appropriate sensibilities and the result is family-friendly material with a kindhearted approach.

We all need this sometimes.

Camelot-1967

Camelot-1967

Director Joshua Logan

Starring Richard Harris, Vanessa Redgrave, Franco Nero

Scott’s Review #1,370

Reviewed June 21, 2023

Grade: A-

Camelot (1967) adapts the well-known Broadway spectacle and explores the creation of the Knights of the Round Table. Set in the Middle Ages, the film follows King Arthur as its main character.

Unfortunately, the original stage stars, Richard Burton and Julie Andrews, declined to participate. Still, their replacements, Richard Burton and Vanessa Redgrave, are more than adequate in their prominent roles.

At an epic length of nearly three hours, not every moment is on the edge of your seat, and some lagging exists, but the film does justice to the stage production, only with a big budget to add extravagance.

The setting and experience are pure magic, not only because of the far-removed time. The Shakespearean elements are strong as royalty and entitlement mesh with scheming, jealousy, and dangerous romance.

This creates juicy soap-opera drama.

After the arranged marriage of Arthur (Harris) and Guinevere (Redgrave), the king gathers the noble knights of the realm to his Round Table. The dashing Lancelot (Franco Nero) joins but soon falls in love with Guinevere.

When Arthur’s illegitimate and conniving son, Mordred (David Hemmings), reappears in the kingdom and exposes the secret lovers, Arthur finds himself, by his own rules, trapped into taking action against his wife and closest friend.

There are some dull moments to face at epic length, especially in the first half. I tuned out once or twice, but then I was whisked back into the action.

The great moments are genuinely outstanding, with enough punch to pack a emotional wallop.

During a sequence when Lancelot is challenged to a game of jousting with some knights, events turn deadly, and one knight, Sir Dinadan, is critically injured. Horrified, Lancelot pleads for Sir Dinadan to live, and as he lays hands on him, Dinadan miraculously recovers.

The scene is fraught with emotion as a decisive moment occurs between the men. It’s also pivotal to the storyline because it links Lancelot with Guenevere and sets off a romantic chain of events.

Guenevere is so overwhelmed and humbled that her feelings for Lancelot begin to change. Despite his vows of celibacy, Lancelot falls in love with Guenevere.

More than one song is lovely in Camelot, and as the production went on, I yearned for more musical numbers.

My favorite is the coy  “The Lusty Month of May,” which appears when Guinevere and the women frolic and gather flowers to celebrate the coming of spring. Later, Lancelot and Guenevere sing of their forbidden love and how wrong life has all gone in ‘I Loved You Once In Silence.’

In the eyes of the law, the lovers are to be punished so they are aware they are not long for this world.

Visually, Camelot is a spectacle rich in style and pizazz. Whimsical colors and a ton of vibrant and fragrant flowers appear regularly amid fields of greens and forests of trees.

The castles and battlefields also support Gothic structures and masculine power, which perfectly balance the exquisiteness of the other aspects.

This more than makes up for any drudgery the story might have. It’s nice to sit back and be fulfilled by the cinematic beauty, especially considering the romance at the heart of the picture.

So when the story drags, one can enjoy the visuals and escape for a moment.

Also impressive is the story of friendship, and how a woman’s affection for a man can tear two male friends apart.

Camelot (1967) is a behemoth epic that requires patience. Some parts flat-out drag. But the daring, compelling triangle among the three leads usually turns the experience into an above-average thrill ride.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Art Direction (won), Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design (won), Best Costume Design (won), Best Original Song Score or Adaptation Score (won), Best Sound

Golden Globe Nominations: 2 wins-Best Motion Picture-Comedy or Musical, Best Actor-Comedy or Musical-Richard Harris (won), Best Actress-Comedy or Musical-Vanessa Redgrave, Best Original Score (won), New Star of the Year-Actor-Franco Nero

The Three Lives of Thomasina-1963

The Three Lives of Thomasina-1963

Director Don Chaffey

Starring Patrick McGoohan, Susan Hampshire

Scott’s Review #1,367

Reviewed June 7, 2023

Grade: B

The Three Lives of Thomasina (1963) is a film in which the animal, in this case, a sleek orange tabby cat, steals the show from the humans. It’s not as if the acting by the actors is terrible, but who doesn’t love a cute feline clad in a bonnet?

The film is a Disney production but not one of the top tier nor mainly well remembered and was unknown to me before I watched it.

It’s similar to Mary Poppins (1963) in its cheery tone, and the two child stars were signed to play the Banks children after The Three Lives of Thomasina.

There are enough tender and sentimental moments to satisfy fans who may crave a more profound or darker veneer, but there is some fluff and predictability to wrestle with.

With high hopes of entertaining our cats Zeus and Thora with this film, the furry felines essentially slept through the experience and rendered it uninteresting.

Schoolgirl Mary McDhui (Karen Dotrice) lives in a small village in Scotland with her stoic veterinarian father, Andrew (Patrick McGoohan), and her cherished cat, Thomasina.

When Thomasina is injured, Andrew has the animal euthanized, which infuriates Mary, who vows never to forgive her father. Unbeknownst to everyone, Thomasina’s still-living body is rescued by Lori (Susan Hampshire), a kind animal healer who nurses the cat back to health.

The romantic intention of uniting Andrew and Lori is evident from the start, and the pair have decent chemistry. Lori is a Snow White-type character, whistling, prancing through her grade, and befriending any animal who languishes near her.

Terrified by her healing power, neighborhood kids deem her a witch, but she doesn’t look the part. With golden hair and attractive features, she is more Rapunzel than the Wicked Witch of the West.

Andrew is a masculine character we’ve seen in stories. Widowed, he has lost faith in humanity and god alike, living a sad existence with his housekeeper and kids.

To nobody’s surprise, Andrew, Lori, the kids, Thomasina, and the housekeeper ride off into the sunset as happy as clams.

Though the story is generic, other aspects of The Three Lives of Thomasina spruce things up brighter than the Scottish flowers. The landscape is magical, with lush countryside sequences and cute side streets and cottages.

A fabulous sequence occurs at the midpoint when a ‘dead’ Thomasina soul goes to a feline afterlife and meets the Egyptian cat goddess Bastet. Since Thomasina still has eight lives left, Bastet returns her to her body.

The sparkling and twinkling lights and the myriad of other felines are beautiful and filled with emotion.

Hopefully, the real-life animals were treated kindly, but in 1963, I’m not sure how much could be faked. Still, fantastic work mimicking a wounded badger is impressive.

The thrilling finale involves a tribe of gypsies setting up camp in town and opening their traveling circus. Laden, with apparent stereotypes which seem clear in 2023 but were unnoticed in 1963, the gypsies abuse their animals, causing a stir among the townspeople.

A fight, fire, and justice prevail, and all animals are spared.

A 1960s Disney film with family-friendly themes and compassion, The Three Lives of Thomasina (1963) will satisfy cat lovers or anyone fond of animals. The real-life Thomasina is worth the price of admission for her gorgeous good looks alone.

Encanto-2021

Encanto-2021

Director Jared Bush, Byron Howard

Voices Stephanie Beatriz, John Leguizamo

Scott’s Review #1,323

Reviewed December 16, 2022

Grade: B+

Encanto (2021) is a lovely film produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios. It’s part musical, part fantasy, and part comedy with plenty of bright, colorful, and culturally significant sequences that are quite pleasing to the eyes.

The musical numbers are wonderfully catchy and fun, especially the standouts ‘We Don’t Talk About Bruno’ and ‘Welcome to the Family Madrigal’. Since the musical numbers are primarily created by Lin-Manuel Miranda and composed by Germaine Franco, they are professional and memorable.

The film has a wholesome, upbeat, yet diverse quality that makes it challenging not to enjoy.

The representation provided is a significant win for the film.

The setting of Colombia helps with this, and the main character, Mirabel (Stephanie Beatriz), is darling. Her positive and forthright personality is cheerful and instantly likable, and I imagine inspiring young girls everywhere.

It’s nice to see Disney expand its reach internationally in today’s world of inclusion and diversity.

The Madrigals are an extraordinary family who live hidden in the mountains of Colombia in a charming residence called the Encanto.

The magic of Encanto is well known throughout the nearby town, and its magic has blessed every child in the family with a unique gift, except Mirabel, who mysteriously has no gift.

Or so it would appear.

When Mirabel discovers that the magic surrounding the Encanto is in danger of running out, she may be their last hope.

The success of Encanto lies in the character of Mirabel. She is imperfect and unique, yet firm and confident, defying the mold. This is what Disney does well to make her relatable. You could say that Mirabel feels left out and isolated, different from her more conventional siblings.

The primary objective is to craft a character that the audience can identify with and feel a connection to. Since the target demographic of Encanto is young females, the idea is successful.

The animation is also inspiring. Challenged with genuinely replicating the mountains of Colombia, the gorgeous, lush locales can frequently be seen in sequences. The way the family estate rests along the landscape made me want to be there with them.

The colorful pastels and psychedelic moments are dizzying in a good way. The costumes alone are evidence of this, including embroidered wool with astonishing patterns. With pinks, purples, blues, and yellows, it’s an orgy of spectacular images.

The Madrigals appear to be an affluent family revered by their community, but besides having magical powers, it’s unknown how they cultivate their wealth.

They serve the villagers with their gifts, but what does that mean exactly? Are they paid with cash?

Encanto (2021) won the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature, and this is no surprise. The Academy sometimes rewards creativity and diversity over mainstream fluff, and this film is an example of when the Academy gets it right.

The entire family can enjoy the film for multiple reasons, rather than just a product that appeals to kids whose parents are forced to tag along.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Animated Feature (won), Best Original Score, Best Original Song-“Dos Oruguitas” (won)

The Witches-2020

The Witches-2020

Director Robert Zemeckis

Starring Anne Hathaway, Octavia Spencer

Scott’s Review #1,314

Reviewed November 16, 2022

Grade: B

A remake of the 1990 film starring Anjelica Huston, The Witches (2020) sometimes delivers the goods and occasionally derails off the tracks into campy, over-the-top, wackadoo.

Mostly, on the part of the star Anne Hathaway, who plays an evil and powerful witch.

But, regardless of what this adult thinks, it will please, surprise, and fascinate youngsters who see it. There’s a comforting and vital message of friendship and family roots ingrained in the story, which is a nice touch.

In 1968, seven-year-old orphan Charlie Hansen (Jahzir Bruno) travels from Chicago to Alabama to live with his grandmother, Agatha (Octavia Spencer), after his parents are killed in a car accident.

After a dastardly witch approaches him in a grocery store, they flee to a seaside resort to avoid the child-hating witches. Agatha has a troubled past with the witches who long ago turned her best friend into a chicken.

When the two arrive at their hotel, they find a coven with villainous plans. They are accompanied by a mouse named Daisy and an English boy named Bruno (Codie-Lei Eastick).

I much prefer the first half of The Witches to the last.

The wonderful and caring relationship between Agatha and Charlie is a beautiful dynamic. When she envelops him with love and southern cooking in her cozy home, understanding the trauma he has endured, it is heartwarming and genuine.

Spencer is terrific in any role she plays, of course, but her calm and stoic demeanor when paired against the witches is lovely. She is prepared for trouble and sneaks to a back room where she keeps crystals and other anti-witch weaponry.

But the relationship with the little boy is darling and top-notch. I wish they would have just stayed at home and nurtured their relationship with Daisy and Bruno.

The weakest section of the film involves the witches themselves. As they flock to the hotel for a convention to plot the destruction of children everywhere, they appear more silly than scary, especially when they remove their wigs and reveal bald, scabby heads.

Director Robert Zemeckis must have given Hathaway free rein to ham it up because she certainly does just that.

I’m a fan of hers, so it’s not a personal knock, but she teeters toward ridiculous pretty quickly. I understand the need to make a children’s film villain colorful, memorable, and loud, but there is no restraint, which causes the character to feel more silly than terrifying.

On the plus side, Hathaway must have had a ball letting loose and leaving all constraints on the sidelines.

Inevitably, the kids are changed into cute mice and must convince their loved ones that they are themselves while figuring out how to change back to human children.

Not much has changed from the 1990 version, except for a few tweaks here and there, and the story remains the same. However, I prefer the original by a hair.

Huston beats Hathaway in a comparison.

Some inconsistencies emerge, such as how Agatha can afford to stay in a grand hotel. She knows someone connected to the hotel, but the who’s and why’s aren’t clear.

It’s never explained what happened to Agatha’s friend who wound up as a chicken, and I wanted more from Stanley Tucci than an uninteresting hotel manager role with little to do.

However, the action sequences are adventurous and energetic, and it’s fun cheering as the Grand High Witch (Hathaway) is transformed into a rat.

I wanted more of the homespun love between Agatha and Charlie, as well as the simple Southern town that felt so lovely and welcoming. Still, The Witches (2020) provides family-friendly entertainment that many can enjoy.

Up the Sandbox-1972

Up the Sandbox-1972

Director Irvin Kershner

Starring Barbra Streisand, David Selby

Scott’s Review #1,308

Reviewed October 18, 2022

Grade: B

Up the Sandbox (1972) is likely the least successful film in the Barbra Streisand collection and more obscure than likely desired. The star performs no songs, and the film is experimental, but it’s unclear whether it was intended to be.

Streisand takes a break from comedies and musicals to venture into unknown territory, risking a payoff that doesn’t always come through.

On the flip side, she never looked more beautiful in a film.

The film has its moments. It’s shrouded in early progressive feminism, which provides intrigue, and it’s tough to go wrong with a bankable star like Streisand in a lead role.

Still, the fantasy sequences get too weird and sometimes unnecessary, and the film doesn’t always make a lot of sense.

The film gets taken down at least a notch for two anti-gay slurs that are shamefully unnecessary to any plot direction.

I award Up the Sandbox credit for thinking outside the box and being unconventional. Still, the parts don’t come together into a cohesive unit, leaving me unfulfilled while recognizing the superior qualities.

The cover art (see above) is wacky and thought-provoking.

Margaret (Streisand) is a young wife and mother who is bored with her day-to-day life in New York City, playing second fiddle to her successful and too-busy husband, Paul (David Selby).

He is a professor at Columbia University, and they reside in a cramped yet fairly sophisticated apartment.

To combat boredom, she regularly escapes into increasingly outrageous fantasies: her mother breaking into the apartment, an explorer’s demonstration of tribal fertility music at a party causing strange transformations, and somehow joining terrorists to plant explosives in the Statue of Liberty.

Streisand is well cast, and while other actresses could have given a fine performance, she plays New York Jewish better than anyone. Her struggle to break out of her life of doldrums is perfectly conveyed as she yearns to achieve a balance between men and women.

She resents going down the path of a housewife, just like her mother did, and vows to be nothing like her, as the women bicker and feud throughout the film.

The sequences involving her mother are the best in the film. Played by Jane Hoffman, Margaret’s mother provides all of the expected Jewish mother stereotypes, like nagging and judging, hilariously.

The funniest mother/daughter sequence sees Margaret smash her mother’s head into a giant birthday cake. Naturally, it’s just her fantasy.

Up the Sandbox wins big for the large number of location sequences set in early 1970s New York City, which is absolutely fascinating to watch. One with an appreciation for Manhattan can be assured of a pleasant viewing experience.

The most heartfelt and sentimental moments occur during a long shot of the still-under-construction World Trade Center. Seeing the Twin Towers still being erected brings back teary memories of 9/11.

Lavish sequences are set in and around Columbia University in upper Manhattan, and the campus is frequently seen as Margaret and her friends trudge their baby strollers through the campus and surrounding areas.

Where the film fails is when it teeters too far out in fantasy land. It makes little sense why Margaret would join terrorists intent on blowing up Lady Liberty, or what the group’s intentions are.

Perhaps it is a metaphor for something that went over my head.

Even when the screenplay is a dud, Ms. Streisand holds her head high and plays the comedy or drama with sincerity and professionalism. With her well-known perfectionism, she would have been aware when things were not working.

A film not remembered well, Up the Sandbox (1972) scores some points with its locales, progressivism, and star power, but stumbles off course too many times to recommend.

If only Streisand had belted out a number or two amid her scripted fantasies, the film might have worked better.