Category Archives: Disney

1962 Films, Comedy, Deborah Walley, Disney, Fred MacMurray, James Neilson, Jane Wyman, Jessie Royce Landis, Kevin Corcoran, Michael Callan, Tommy Kirk

Bon Voyage!-1962

January 8, 2026 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bon Voyage! -1962

Director James Neilsen

Starring Fred MacMurray, Jane Wyman

Scott’s Film Review #1,508

Reviewed January 8, 2026

Grade: B

James Neilson, known for directing both film and television and well-versed in the Walt Disney vibe, having worked throughout the 1960s on the television series Walt Disney’s Wonderful World of Color, provides fans of European travel with a feast of locale riches.

He offers Bon Voyage! (1962), an entertaining family adventure that multi-generations can enjoy.

Paris is the primary setting with the Eeifel Tower, the Louvre Museum, and Notre Dame prominently featured. Still, London, the French Riviera, and snippets of New York City are also featured.

Watching the film decades after 1962 is a pure delight, seeing how outfits, people, and landmarks have changed over the years.

This is the obvious highlight for me, though the dynamic between the Willards is fun in a lighthearted way, seesawing between comedy and sentimentality.

At times, the comedy is more bafoonish than laugh-out-loud, and the sequences more plot-driven than believable.

Nonetheless, the chemistry between the actors is prominent, and the story is wholesome and predictable, culminating in a feel-good experience.

After twenty years of marriage, Terre Haute, Indiana, plumber Harry Willard (Fred MacMurray) finally makes good on his promise to take his wife, Katie, played by Jane Wyman (ex-wife of United States President Ronald Reagan), on a luxurious cruise to Europe.

Hardly a honeymoon; they are accompanied by their brood: nineteen-year-old son, Elliott (Tommy Kirk), eighteen-year-old daughter, Amy (Deborah Walley), and eleven-year-old son, Skipper (Kevin Corcoran).

From the moment the group arrives at the dock by taxi cab, the bumbling Harry nearly loses the passports, and an unending series of mishaps ensues, including Amy’s romantic entanglement with handsome, wealthy Nick (Michael Callan), a sewer adventure, and a passionate Hungarian man pursuing Katie.

The film experiences highs and lows throughout.

Is Nick meant to be a disliked character? He’s actually my favorite character, except maybe for Harry, and is written quite daringly for the early 1960s, with him fervently questioning marriage and other institutions.

He ultimately disregards his wealth and decides to relocate to New York to forge a career without his family’s wealth or expectations, much to his mother, the contessa’s (Jessie Royce Landis), chagrin.

However, I could have done with more than one scene from the fabulous Landis, best known for Hitchcock’s To Catch a Thief (1955) and North by Northwest (1959), in which she also plays interesting mothers.

Though she steals her lone scene as she drips with jewels, a gorgeous dress, and struts around her lavish party, exclaiming ‘dahling’ whenever she can, we never get enough of her fabulous antics.

Still, Nick seems to be the only character with a solid set of balls who stands against societal expectations. His tense scenes with Harry about life and love are the only times the film’s writing is daring.

The rest of the writing is relatively safe and tepid.

Amy comes across as a bit wishy-washy about sex and marriage, and after prancing along the beach in a tacky outfit, she seems more of a nitwit than a serious character.

Maybe she and Nick don’t belong together after all?

Elliott, while cute in his pursuit of young women and attempts to impress them with unfounded wealth, his act grows tiresome by the film’s conclusion.

The most palpable couple is Harry and Katie, whose tender love shines through as an inspiration to other characters. The chemistry between MacMurray and Wyman is strong, showcasing them as reliable and stalwarts of true love.

Bon Voyage! (1962) is a kindhearted film, marginally recommended mainly for the locales. It’s mostly a safe affair, save for one character, and pales in comparison to more weighty films to come during the 1960s.

Oscar Nominations: Best Costume Design (Color), Best Sound

#129 Favorite Film, 1942 Films, Animated, Children, Clyde Geronimi, David Hand, Disney, Drama, Eric Larson, Favorite Film of the Year, Top 250 Films

Bambi-1942

August 1, 2025 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Bambi-1942

Director David Hand

Starring Various voices

Top 250 Films #129

Scott’s Review #556

Reviewed December 22, 2016

Grade: A

Bambi (1942) is one of my favorite classic Disney animated features. It is simply a lovely, endearing, and heartbreaking tale.

Gorgeous and flawless, the film conveys a clear message about animals yearning for peace in a world where hunters seek to disturb and kill the graceful deer.

After all these years, this message still resonates loud and clear, sad, heartbreakingly. All deer hunters should watch this film and dare to take a shot.

Bambi was released during the Golden Age of Disney films, which was led by notable films such as Snow White, Dumbo, and Pinocchio, among others.

We first meet baby Bambi as his dear mother nurtures and nestles him, fawning over him with pride and teaching him the joys of the forest. Bambi’s father is the Great Prince of the Forest- protector of all the creatures of the land.

Bambi’s mother (unnamed) warns an exuberant Bambi to be cautious of the gorgeous yet dangerous meadows, where the deer are vulnerable and unprotected.

During the film’s famous gut-wrenching scene, tragedy occurs, and violence disrupts the peaceful forest, leaving Bambi alone, lost, and devastated, forced into a cruel world of tragedy, realism, and responsibility.

The scene gets to me every time, as we see the pain and harshness of life for the sweet deer, to say nothing of the other animals in the forest —namely, Thumper (a rabbit) and Flower (a young Skunk).

These characters are Bambi’s best friends. The dripping teardrop that oozes from Bambi’s eye can never be forgotten.

To counterbalance the film’s darkness, Disney successfully incorporates cheerful scenes of the animals dancing and interacting with each other as a unified community.

This is nice, as it shows the power and bond between the creatures – they are united as a family and take care of one another. I love this message, especially as young people will watch the film for the first time.

There is also a sweet romance offered between Bambi and Faline.

Watching the film and listening to the musical score is a way to experience sheer beauty. The music makes the film powerful- its classical and operatic elements are gorgeous and will elicit emotions.

Visually, each frame is a drawing set against a still, and it is magical to watch and marvel at the amount of work that undoubtedly went into this preparation.

In the end, the circle of life comes full circle. Bambi becomes the Great Prince of the Forest, replacing his father as the protector. Now, all grown up with two tiny babies of his own, he must protect his family and friends.

Life goes on. This is a sad yet realistic message. How brave Disney was in creating a masterpiece like Bambi.

Personal satisfaction is observing my beloved female feline friend, Thora, become mesmerized and attentive to the film each time I watch it.

Disney’s Bambi is a wonderful, cherished treasure that evokes emotions and conveys a valuable, poignant message. It is a timeless masterpiece to be enjoyed for generations to come.

One will not escape the film with dry eyes, a testament to the marvelous filmmaking involved.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Original Song-“Love Is a Song”, Best Sound Recording

#138 Favorite Film, 1941 Films, Animated, Ben Sharpsteen, Children, Clyde Geronimi, Disney, Fantasy, James Baskett, Les Clark, Top 250 Films, Wilfred Jackson, Wolfgang Reitherman

Dumbo-1941

August 1, 2025 scottmet99 Leave a comment

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

#147 Favorite Film, 1937 Films, Animated, Ben Sharpsteen, Children, David Hand, Disney, Eric Larson, Fantasy, Favorite Film of the Year, Les Clark, Musical, Top 250 Films, Wilfred Jackson, Wolfgang Reitherman

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs-1937

August 1, 2025 scottmet99 Leave a comment

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

#241 Favorite Film, 1970 Films, Animated, Children, Disney, Eric Larson, Eva Gabor, Hermione Baddeley, Les Clark, Scatman Crothers, Top 250 Films, Wolfgang Reitherman

The Aristocats-1970

August 1, 2025 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Aristocats-1970

Director Wolfgang Reitherman

Starring Various voices

Top 250 Films #241

Scott’s Review #570

Reviewed December 29, 2016

Grade: B+

The golden age of Disney films mainly occurred before the release of this film, The Aristocats is a latter-day Disney film, released in 1970, the first release since Walt Disney died in 1966.

It is a darling story with a charming subject matter- cats living in sophisticated Paris face peril from their butler.

Like many Disney works, the film’s message pertains to the treatment of animals. The Aristocats is much safer fare than the dark Bambi (1942) or even Dumbo (1941), but it is a fantastic film worth watching.

Glamorous and elegant retired opera star, Madame Adelaide Bonfamille, lives peacefully with her gorgeous mother cat, Duchess, and her three kittens, Marie, Berlioz, and Toulouse, in the heart of Paris, circa 1910.

They are sophisticated beyond measure and enjoy every luxury known to cats, and are accompanied in their estate by an English butler, Edgar.

One day, while Madame is discussing her will with her attorney, Edgar learns that she plans to leave her entire estate to her cats until they die, then all will go to Edgar.

Filled with greed, Edgar plots to kill the cats. This leads to an adventure in the country as the accosted cats attempt to find their way back home to Madame, with the help of feral yet kindly cat friends.

Ever so sweet to the film is the burgeoning romance that erupts between Duchess and Thomas O’Malley, as he aids the cats in returning to Paris. It is the classic girl from high class, who meets the bad boy from the wrong side of the tracks, only cat style.

The chemistry between the pair is readily apparent. On a personal note, my female cat Thora certainly seemed smitten with Thomas O’Malley as she sat smiling at Thomas while she watched the film.

During their adventure, Thomas and Duchess manage to dance and sing along with Thomas’s best friend Scat Cat, who leads a Jazz band of alley cats- this makes the film light and lively in tone. The group also shares adventures with English geese, Abigail and Amelia Gabble, who share a fondness for style and a prim and proper manner.

Throughout it all, the group continues to be pursued by Edgar, portrayed more as a bumbling villain than a sinister one, making The Aristocats a fun film rather than anything too heavy.

The film’s sophistication is really what makes me enjoy it so much. The high style of the Parisian city blocks, Madame’s gorgeous mansion, and the beautifully drawn French countryside are my favorite elements.

I love the contrasts in this film- the city and the country. The high-brow characters meet the more blue-collar ones, but in the end, everyone comes together to conquer the mischievous foe.

Whereas in Bambi, man is the serious enemy, in The Aristocats, Edgar is more of a buffoon than a hazardous element. He is cartoon-like (no pun intended), and the film is more of a caper with hijinks than of actual danger.

For the cat lovers in all of us, The Aristocats (1970) is a delightful film with a nice message and a wonderful cultural experience.

Who can forget the fantastic theme song, “Ev’rybody Wants to Be a Cat”?

1963 Films, Children, Disney, Don Chaffey, Fantasy, Patrick McGoohan, Susan Hampshire

The Three Lives of Thomasina-1963

June 7, 2023 scottmet99 Leave a comment

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.

2021 Films, Animated, Best Animated Feature Oscar Winners, Byron Howard, Children, Chris Buck, Disney, Fantasy, Jared Bush, Jennifer Lee, John Leguizamo, Lin-Manuel Miranda, María Cecilia Botero, Musical, Stephanie Beatriz

Encanto-2021

December 16, 2022 scottmet99 Leave a comment

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)

2022 Films, Angus MacLane, Animated, Bill Hader, Children, Chris Evans, Dan Scanlon, Disney, James Brolin, Keke Palmer, Lee Unkrich, Pete Docter, Taika Waititi

Lightyear-2022

December 13, 2022 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Lightyear-2022

Director Angus Maclane

Voices Chris Evans, Keke Palmer

Scott’s Review #1,322

Reviewed December 13, 2022

Grade: B

The popular Toy Story (1995-2019) franchise spawns a new child with Lightyear (2022), a spin-off prequel film within the franchise. Box office receipts will determine if Lightyear has any children of its own.

It’s a pleasant and fairly conventional offering, as it focuses solely on one ‘toy’, the masculine Buzz Lightyear, and tells his story. The visuals are delightful and colorful, and there is enough adventure to keep the whole family engaged.

Unfortunately, there isn’t much in the way of legacy or connection to the Toy Story characters, and even the voice of Buzz is replaced by Tim Allen and Chris Evans.

One’s enjoyment of the film predominantly depends on one’s preference for the franchise in general or the hero in question. Better satisfied may now be adults who were kids in 1995, harkening back to a nostalgic film featuring a favorite childhood character.

As a semi-fan, but not a diehard fan, of the Toy Story films, I found the overall result pretty good, but not astounding.

It doesn’t explain why Lightyear went from a living and thriving action hero to becoming a suburban kid’s possession, but it also doesn’t matter much, at least to me.

For fans of the series, it’s a nice trip down memory lane, more than anything groundbreaking or breathtaking.

Sometimes familiarity breeds comfort.

The film follows Buzz Lightyear (Evans), a space ranger, as he is marooned on a hostile planet with his commander and crew. He attempts to find a way back home while confronting a threat to the universe’s safety.

His ambitious recruits, Izzy, Mo, Darby, and his robot companion, Sox, serve as new characters following Lightyear’s every move. As this motley crew tackles its most challenging mission yet, they must learn to work together as a team to escape the evil Zurg and his dutiful robot army, which is never far behind.

Possibly the most interesting, and I’ll confess the primary reason why I saw Lightyear, was the notorious same-sex kiss that unceremoniously got the film banned in some Middle Eastern countries.

It also pissed off conservatives who found the kiss too much for them and the potential damnation and ruination of young children everywhere.

In truth, the kiss is timid and a non-issue. The issue is more likely a prominent female lesbian character and her wife, and best friend, Buzz. It’s like, how dare the all-American Lightyear have a black lesbian for a best friend?

Alisha (Uzo Aduba) is strong, confident, and black. She is a commanding officer and arguably the most interesting character in the film.

What an inspiration for young girls everywhere to see such representation and potential. The kicker is that she is in a relationship with a woman who has a granddaughter named Izzy (played by Keke Palmer), one of Buzz’s recruits.

Despite the addition of inclusion and diversity, Lightyear is nonetheless a by-the-numbers offering. The message is one of a robust adventure, though I appreciate the social importance of such a good character.

Once Buzz is in flight and soaring for the stars, Lightyear turns into action/adventure in a hurry. The filmmakers intend to create a popcorn summer blockbuster, with our hero saving the day, and this intention is fulfilled.

The time travel and aging of characters are interesting because we see their life cycles and the generations that follow. For example, Buzz is close to Izzy.

He cares deeply for Alisha, whom he misses terribly, because he has been far away and hasn’t aged, while she has aged like a normal human.

Lightyear (2022) offers a safe flight plan, despite being brave enough to include diverse characters. It doesn’t connect to the origin of Toy Story as much as I’d like it to, and feels somewhat like a stand-alone.

Time will tell if a sequel is made, but it would be unnecessary.

2005 Films, Action, Adam Shankman, Anne Fletcher, Brad Garrett, Brittany Snow, Carol Kane, Comedy, Disney, Faith Ford, Lauren Graham, Tate Donovan, Vin Diesel

The Pacifier-2005

May 1, 2022 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Pacifier-2005

Director Adam Shankman

Starring Vin Diesel, Lauren Graham

Scott’s Review #1,251

Reviewed May 1, 2022

Grade: C

The Pacifier (2005) is the kind of film that has been made for decades in one form or another. The setup is familiar and puts its macho movie star in situations that go against type or are deemed a bit feminine, and lightweight, all for the sake of a laugh.

As far back as the 1950s when Jack Lemmon and Tony Curtis donned lady’s clothing in Some Like it Hot (1959), to Michael Keaton in Mr. Mom (1983), to the 1990s when Arnold Schwarzenegger entertained audiences in Kindergarten Cop (1995), there is a pattern to follow.

And those are just decent films.

In 2005, the sexy Vin Diesel was one of the highest-grossing leading men in Hollywood churning out hits like Boiler Room (2000) and The Fast and the Furious (2001) to rabid audiences.

Known primarily for his action films, someone had the bright idea to domesticate the muscular star and put him in a situation where he would comically change baby diapers or vacuum a living room.

Unfortunately, The Pacifier is juvenile in nearly every way with canned gags and predictability for miles. Diesel is terrific to look at but isn’t the best actor in the world which causes the film to lose credibility.

Despite cliche after cliche and ridiculous situations, the film occasionally will elicit a chuckle or two from anyone brave enough to watch it.

That’s mostly because Diesel is willing to emerge in one scene covered in shit.

But don’t expect much more from The Pacifier.

Shane Wolfe (Diesel) is an elite Navy SEAL with muscles and charisma for miles. He is the type of man who would run into a fire and save a baby or swim out to sea to save a drowning child.

One day he makes a grave error in judgment when he fails to keep scientist Howard Plummer (Tate Donovan) safe from assassination and the man is killed.

Riddled with guilt, he is assigned to protect Plummer’s five children when the mother played by Faith Ford needs to leave the country temporarily. The kids include rebellious Zoe (Brittany Snow), Seth (Max Thieriot), and clingy Lulu (Morgan York).

The kid’s pet duck is along for the ride pushing the seasoned veteran to his breaking point.

Predictably, when Shane is not busy tending to the kids there is a secret project contained somewhere in the household that he must uncover.

Of course, a film like The Pacifier requires some romance so the inclusion of Principal Claire Fletcher (Lauren Graham) is for the sole purpose of having someone for Shane to fall in love with.

There is not great chemistry between Diesel and Graham so I wasn’t invested in them. The casting of the children is so one-dimensional with standard characteristics that it would be easy to laugh at.

I chose not to do this but rather strove to find something enjoyable in The Pacifier.

It’s a cute film but it’s so mainstream, dull, fluffy, and whatever generic adjective one would choose to describe it that it deserves the bland grade of C I am awarding it.

Diesel is the only appealing factor to The Pacifier.

Why make the bad guys as stereotypical as possible? They are North Korean and the ‘twist’ that Shane’s boss is in cahoots with them is as surprising as realizing the two-week-old Chinese leftovers in the fridge have gone bad.

The film has a small comparison to the superior The Sound of Music (1965) which the filmmakers must have realized since they incorporate it into the story. The kids that Shane is in charge of are behaving badly and attempting to play a practical joke on him.

In the end, there is a chase sequence, a reveal, peril, and a happy ending in more or less that order.

The Pacifier (2005) is a Disney film so there is a safe, family-friendly vibe throughout. It marginally entertains largely on the strength of Diesel.

He is sexy, and macho, and provides enough charisma to forget the bevy of standard gags and silly situations that he, and the audience, must endure.

2021 Films, Comedy, Craig Gillespie, Disney, Emily Beecham, Emma Stone, Emma Thompson, Glenn Close, Joel Fry, Mark Strong, Paul Walter Hauser

Cruella-2021

November 19, 2021 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Cruella-2021

Director Craig Gillespie

Starring Emma Stone, Emma Thompson

Scott’s Review #1,197

Reviewed November 19, 2021

Grade: A-

One of the first red carpet premieres to emerge amid the deadly Covid-19 pandemic, Cruella (2021) is a wickedly funny delight and celebrates the return of cinema to the theaters.

What a fabulous choice.

The makeup, hairstyling, costumes, musical score, and the title character herself make this film loud, proud, and lots of fun.

It’s not too dark for the entire family to enjoy, but far from fluff, either. Suspension of disbelief is mandatory since it’s pure fantasy and not to be dissected for its numerous plot holes and ridiculous antics.

Dogs, people, and costumes fly around in frantic motion to fulfill their every motivation.

The film is way better than anticipated, which is always a treat. It’s not that I wasn’t expecting quality, but I didn’t expect to be entertained and enthralled quite as much as I was.

The experience carried me away.

The live-action force sheds light on the backstory of Cruella de Vil, made famous, of course, as the dastardly villain in the animated Disney feature 101 Dalmatians from 1961.

Her life and intentions are explored in a story similar to Oliver Twist, with a 1970s style. Orphaned young, she must survive the mean streets of London during the punk rock era. She becomes an expert pickpocket and ingenious thief while doubling as the humble fashion upstart Estella.

Estella befriends a pair of young thieves who adore her appetite for mischief, and together they construct a cozy life for themselves and their furry friends. While working as a cleaning lady, Estella is discovered by the ruthless and unkind Baroness von Hellman (Emma Thompson), a fashion legend.

Their complex relationship sets in motion revelations that harken back to Estella’s deceased mother, causing her to embrace her wicked side and become the fashionable, revenge-bent Cruella.

Emma Stone basks in the spotlight as Cruella with ravaging fury and a twinkle in her eye. An incredible actress who has played roles in Birdman (2014), La La Land (2016), and The Favourite (2018), Stone goes full-throttle in her dual role, making them as opposite as possible.

She’s terrific and carries the bombastic film with seeming ease.

Thompson is just as good as the Baroness, a woman with a heart of stone and most similar to Miranda in The Devil Wears Prada (2006). With a snap of her fingers or a glance, she expects to be served and pleased, happy to take credit for other people’s work. It’s a toss-up which character I hate more.

Stone and Thompson are delicious together and chew up the scenery, especially when they spar and attack each other. These scenes are wickedly delightful, and a key to their past may link them forever.

The Baroness is difficult to like, as she attempts to kill Estella/Cruella twice.

The actresses make magic together.

Besides the clear parallels to Oliver Twist, Cruella also mirrors Spider-Man with the alter-ego premise. I saw her as a superhero. Traditionally, Cruella is portrayed as evil and fiendish, but here she is the rooting favorite. This may turn some off, but I loved this facet and the complexity of the character.

To go deeper, the Baroness is more like the animated Disney character Cruella than Cruella is!

I joyously anticipated which 1970s rock song would come next, as nearly every sequence incorporated this genre of music. Bands like Blondie, Queen, and Black Sabbath appear, along with fascinating, modern takes on some of the best hits of the period. This adds a wealth of depth and relevance.

What about the costumes? Oh, how gorgeous they are! Numerous dresses, gowns, and other accessories are featured. The sheer number of outfits and designs in the film is astounding.

My favorite appears as Cruella unfolds a flowing dress from a limousine that stretches for miles and miles, much like a domino effect. It’s flashy and beautiful.

Rumors abound that Stone has signed on for a sequel to Cruella (2021). As long as a more thought-out story continues to be developed, the character can remain as complex as she is entertaining. The style, locale, and time make the film a fantastical retelling of a fantasy.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Costume Design (won), Best Makeup and Hairstyling

2020 Films, Angela Bassett, Angus MacLane, Animated, Best Animated Feature Oscar Winners, Children, Comedy, Dan Scanlon, Dave Mullins, Disney, Drama, Fantasy, Jamie Foxx, June Squibb, Lee Unkrich, Pete Docter, Phylicia Rashad, Rosana Sullivan, Tina Fey, Trent Reznor, Trevor Jimenez

Soul-2020

August 18, 2021 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Soul-2020

Director Pete Docter

Voices: Jamie Foxx, Tina Fey

Scott’s Review #1,172

Reviewed August 18, 2021

Grade: B+

It’s pretty reassuring when a magical animated feature comes down the pike. Too often, the mainstream multiplex summer offerings are trite or too ‘kiddish’ for my tastes.

Soul (2020) is creative, colorful, and sentimental, with a terrific musical score composed by Trent Reznor (Nine Inch Nails).

The writing is fresh and inventive, with gorgeous animation that feels magical. I did not see the film on the big screen and bet it would have made the experience even more delightful.

Soul is not too dark, nor is it too trivial. It strikes a perfect balance between humanism, darkness, and hope. The title can be construed with a double meaning.

Based on the musical angle, the lead character is a piano player, the soul could mean rhythm, but I’m only half right. An out-of-body or celestial experience and the essence of a living being are also part of his soul.

While watching the film, I kept ruminating over how lovely and inspirational a film like Soul is during a crushing pandemic. It has heart and magic.

Unfulfilled music teacher Joe Gardner (Jamie Foxx) finally lands the gig of a lifetime at the best jazz club in town, supporting legendary Dorothea Williams (Angela Bassett). But his excitement gets the best of him, and he stumbles into a maintenance hole on a New York City street.

Lying in a coma, Joe enters a fantastical place: The Great Before. There, he teams up with Soul 22 (Tina Fey), and together they find the answers to some of life’s biggest questions while embarking on a journey in the switched bodies of Joe and a therapy cat.

Set in the massive Big Apple itself, the film offers a wealth of hustle, bustle, and life. I adored the setting. The smoky jazz club, with its sultry set design and creative music, made me feel immersed in the wonderful surroundings.

The story itself slightly confused me when Joe arrived in the “Great Beyond” as a soul. Assuming this meant death, I was relieved when he backtracked to the “Great Before” and met with counselors all named Jerry. The counselors, I realized, prepare unborn souls for life with the help of mentor souls.

This didn’t resonate with me as much as other aspects of the film.

Foxx and Fey are fine doing the voices for Joe and 22, respectively, but they are not the highlight either. I never really thought of either of them throughout the duration. There were better aspects to focus on.

Disney/Pixar’s feature film, which features a black central character, is worthy of mention, and it is about time. Joe’s family is black, adding an incredible mother figure and supporting characters of ethnicity to the fold.

The music, the music, the music! This makes Soul as good a film as it is.

Trent Reznor’s collaboration alone made me eager to see it. His creative use of keyboards and partnership with fellow Nine Inch Nails bandmate Atticus Ross provide proper ambiance to the metaphysical sequences.

A hallucinogenic, trance-like musical beat is unique and trippy.

Younger children may be perplexed or bewildered by much of the activity, so I’m not sure I’d recommend it for that demographic. However, music fans and admirers of rich stories with a subtext of life will likely enjoy the experience and the subsequent message that Soul (2020) provides.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Animated Feature Film (won), Best Original Score (won), Best Sound

2020 Films, Adventure, Angus MacLane, Animated, Children, Chris Pratt, Dan Scanlon, Disney, Fantasy, John Ratzenberger, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Lee Unkrich, Madeline Sharafian, Octavia Spencer, Pete Docter, Rosana Sullivan, Tom Holland, Tracey Ullman

Onward-2020

July 23, 2021 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Onward-2020

Director Dan Scanlon

Starring Tom Holland, Chris Pratt

Scott’s Review #1,164

Reviewed July 23, 2021

Grade: B+

An emotionally satisfying adventure film that the whole family can enjoy, Onward (2020) feels fresh and inventive while still employing some standard plot points.

Pixar/Disney sure knows how to churn out animated features with a nice message and a family sensibility.

There is also plenty of diversity that delivers an inclusive feeling, so hugely important in the modern age.

Kids are impressionable and learn so much from the films they watch, so this quality brought a smile to my face in an otherwise enjoyable experience.

The film also celebrates non-traditional families, showing that not having a traditional mother and father and a pet dog doesn’t make you strange or unworthy of love and understanding.

Onward is not entirely outside the box, however, and is careful to lure in the mainstream middle America audience. Still, some progressive treats mix well with a robust brotherly adventure tale.

Though the title, Onward, doesn’t stick in my mind very long, the film itself does.

I may have even shed a tear or two during the heartfelt finale.

Teenage elf brothers Ian and Barley (voiced by Tom Holland and Chris Pratt) embark on a magical quest to spend one more day with their deceased father, who loved magic. Their journey is filled with cryptic maps, overwhelming obstacles, and discoveries like any good adventure.

But when their Mom (voiced by Julia Louis-Dreyfus) finds out her sons are missing, she goes into mother lion mode and teams up with the legendary manticore (voiced by Octavia Spencer) to bring her beloved boys back home.

The lead character, Ian, is a sixteen-year-old boy with growing pains and vulnerabilities that immediately make him likable. He is eager to make friends but awkward about doing so.

It is suggested that he has no friends coming to his birthday party, but it’s unclear why not. Ian is also a nervous driver, terrified of traversing a busy freeway.

He is an ordinary kid whom the audience can see in themselves or a former self of years gone by.

His brother, Barley, is the opposite. He is fearless and doesn’t care who he befriends or what people think of him. His outrageous vehicle, named Guinevere, is a rebuilt van.

Think the mystery mobile from Scooby-Doo.

The crux of Onward is about relationships. At first, we assume that the big payoff will be between Ian/Barley and their father. While that happens, a surprise blossoms along the way, and instead of a standard father/son dynamic, we get a brother/brother one.

This is a treat and conveys a dual message. Never take for granted a loved one already in your life because one day they may be gone.

I enjoyed the adventures of Ian and Barley mostly because I just knew that some reunion would occur between the boys and their father. Their gift of a day spent with their father was marred by the fact that only his bottom half was visible, but I suspected we would eventually see the rest of him.

Avoiding complete predictability, only one of the boys gets to interact with his father as the other looks on longingly.

I enjoyed this element quite a bit as it avoided cliché and offered raw emotion.

Speaking of diversity, two gay female police officers appear in one scene, and a suggestion that some of a motorcycle gang of pixies might be gay is also noticed. Again, this is important for child viewers to be exposed to.

Another win is the animation itself- look at the cover art above for proof. With gorgeous purple and blue colors, the nighttime scenes work exceptionally well with a bright and luminous look that I adored.

A slight miss was that the boy’s mother never got to reunite with her dead husband, and their relationship was treated as merely an afterthought. The featured plot was that the brothers missed their Dad. A reunion between husband and wife would have been nice.

With a tender and emotionally satisfying conclusion, this cemented my appreciation for Onward (2020). There may be a tad too many car chase scenes and a couple of hokey plot ploys, but the film has a lot of heart that shines through.

Oscar Nominations: Best Animated Feature

1997 Films, Amanda Plummer, Animated, Charlton Heston, Children, Comedy, Danny DeVito, Disney, Fantasy, Hal Holbrook, James Woods, Tate Donovan, Wayne Knight

Hercules-1997

February 7, 2021 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Hercules-1997

Director Ron Clements, John Musker

Starring Tate Donovan, James Woods, Danny DeVito

Scott’s Review #1,109

Reviewed February 7, 2021

Grade: B-

Hercules (1997) is a modern-day Walt Disney film that centers on the world of Ancient Greek mythology. The premise is one I find fascinating and the characters of Hercules, Zeus, Hades, and Pegasus are the focus.

The names alone hold intrigue and appeal but the film is only an adequate watch.

The product feels “produced” and lacks the authenticity and sincerity that is rich and seamless in beloved Disney classics like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) or Bambi (1941).

Besides the initial story intrigue, the animations are nothing particularly special and it feels too kiddie-like.

It’s like comparing The Beatles Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band historical album to a latter-day solo effort by Paul McCartney and that’s being generous. It may be fine but can’t hold a candle to the former.

And “fine” is not what I wanted from a Disney film. That’s what I felt about Hercules. It’s okay and entertaining but not up to snuff as compared with finer films.

The film is equipped with a fantastic villain though, the best part of Hercules other than the mythological elements. James Woods, who voices the character of Hades, is wonderful and I’m hardly a James Woods fan but for other reasons, like his politics.

Anyway, the rivalry and competitive edge of Hercules and Hades are unique and compelling and will hold one’s attention.

It all begins in a perfect Disney way when Hercules (Tate Donovan), a son of gods, is snatched as a baby by Hades and forced to live among mortals as a half-man, half-god. When he grows to be an adolescent, Hercules needs to perform a rite of passage on Earth to prove himself worthy of living with the gods on Mount Olympus.

With his sidekick, Philoctetes (Danny DeVito), in tow, Hercules must learn to use his strength to defeat evil creatures.

The strong message is written in Hercules to appeal to a sense of good overthrowing evil. It’s a Disney film, trust me it will.

Though predictable the story feels good in a world where far too often the bad guys get away with bad things and the good guys don’t get enough credit.

Appealing and targeted mostly to kids, the film made a ton of money which means a lot of kids saw it. A great reminder is that with any luck truth and honest will win out. So will remaining true to one’s self.

Woods makes Hades a villain with an edge rather than a generic, cookie-cutter type. Hades speaks rapidly, like a used car salesman trying to sell a customer a good deal. We can tell we are trying to be swindled but there is fun in that.

Megara (Susan Egan), the intended love-interest for Hercules, is working for Hades, which adds a level of intrigue.

Unfortunately, the romance between Hercules and Meg never gets off the ground or works well. The main issue is that there is little chemistry or rooting value for the couple. Meg isn’t my favorite Disney character. She is a sarcastic damsel whom Hercules saves from the centaur Nessus.

After Hercules and the others leave, Meg is revealed to be Hades’ servant, having sold her soul to him to save a lover who then left her. She’s had a tough life and finally does the right thing but I never felt invested in the character.

The main song from the film is okay but rather forgettable. The title of “Go the Distance” is a song of determination but also generic and unmemorable. The look of the animations has a 1990s vibe with bright, vibrant colors that look “of the time” instead of feeling classic or alive.

A decent effort, Hercules (1997) hits its mark sometimes and other times misses completely. I was enraptured with the historical and mythological gods and the trimmings that go along with that mystique, but the modern spin doesn’t work and only made me yearn for the classics from the 1940s and 1950s.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song-“Go the Distance”

2019 Films, Alfred Molina, Animated, Byron Howard, Children, Chris Buck, Ciarán Hinds, Disney, Evan Rachel Wood, Fantasy, Idina Menzel, Jared Bush, Jennifer Lee, Jeremy Sisto, Jonathan Groff, Josh Gad, Kristen Bell, Martha Plimpton, Musical, Sterling K. Brown

Frozen II-2019

July 22, 2020 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Frozen II-2019

Director Chris Buck, Jennifer Lee

Starring Kristen Bell, Idina Menzel

Scott’s Review #1,043

Reviewed July 22, 2020

Grade: B

Six years after the enormous success of Frozen (2013) comes the follow-up, Frozen II (2019).

Surprisingly, the long gap of time between creations is a long gap of time between creations, but the beauty of animation is that these characters do not age unless creators want them to.

The adventure story is fun, incorporating a bit of history, which always creates depth, but also charts familiar territory as the first installment.

The film showcases lovely visuals and songs, which usurp the other elements. Breeding so much familiarity, there seems little need for a third chapter, though I’d bet my bottom dollar another will emerge.

We are reintroduced to Anna (Bell) and Elsa (Menzel) as little girls when they are tucked into bed by their father, King Agnarr of Arendelle, one night.

He relays a story about his father (their grandfather), a treaty made with a neighboring tribe, a dam, and a magical Enchanted Forest.

As a youngster, Agnarr barely escapes alive after a fight erupts with the other tribe, causing his father’s death, and enraging the spiritual elements of the forest. There is also a key mention about Anna and Elsa’s parents’ lost ship, which is apparently how they died.

Fast-forward to the present day, Elsa and Anna are adults, three years after the events of the first film. Elsa, the one with ice powers, runs her happy kingdom with Anna serving as Princess.

They live in peace and harmony with familiar characters, Olaf, the snowman created by Elsa, Kristoff, Anna’s boyfriend, and Sven, his reindeer.

When Elsa begins hearing mysterious voices calling to her from the mountains, she pursues them only to reawaken the spirits and threaten her kingdom and her people. The group must come to the rescue to retain harmony, learning the reason for Elsa’s powers in the process.

Frozen II has a “nice” feel, which is positive and negative. A family-friendly film with a feminist, female perspective is beneficial, crafting a positive and inspiring message for youngsters, especially females, who watch it.

Anna and Elsa control their destiny, are empowered to go after what they want, and achieve results.

They also support each other, share sisterly love rather than being rivals, and treat people fairly.

The adventure that the girls and their friends face will end happily, that much we know. Slight peril emerges when Anna goads and then flees from gigantic earth spirits, Olaf melts and is assumed dead, and Elsa is also thought dead in the forest.

Still, these are aspects added for dramatic effect, and the safe feel of the film ensures that all major characters will remain in happily ever after harmony.

When Kristoff awkwardly attempts to propose to Anna throughout the film, we are sure he will eventually do the deed, which he does.

I criticized Frozen for limiting diversity in its production, which is corrected in Frozen II. Mattias, leader of a group of Arendelle soldiers, is a strong and protective character and is black.

As an LGBTQ presence, one is only hinted at.

When Kristoff befriends Ryder over their love of reindeer, Ryder admits he knows nothing about girls. Mention must be made of Elsa’s barbie doll-like appearance with her bright blue eyes and long blonde hair.

Does she have to look that stunning? Might impressionable girls get the idea that looks are most important?

Let’s hope not.

The best parts of the film are the musical numbers, which feel more enhanced than those in the first Frozen. Using the same song composers, the tunes feel slightly less poppy. The most emotional number is “Into the Unknown”, which possesses a mysterious quality and powerful, compelling lyrics.

Its message is to go for it, which can be interpreted as conquering fears or trying something new. The sound is anthem-like and superior to “Let it Go”.

Frozen II (2019) is a predictable yet fun affair, infused with Scandinavian elements, featuring mountains, fjords, and a gorgeous landscape that provides the necessary cold-weather ambiance and magical quality.

The visuals are lavish, bright, and sophisticated.

Part II is a slightly more mature affair but on par with Frozen and wisely targets the right audience. Tastes change, so if Part III is made, filmmakers might want to consider a deeper plot or additional details to maintain interest.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Song-“Into the Unknown”

2019 Films, Adventure, Angelina Jolie, Children, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Disney, Elle Fanning, Fantasy, Harris Dickinson, Imelda Staunton, Joachim Rønning, Juno Temple, Lesley Manville, Michelle Pfeiffer

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil-2019

July 14, 2020 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil- 2019

Director Joachim Ronning

Starring Elle Fanning, Angelina Jolie

Scott’s Review #1,039

Reviewed July 14, 2020

Grade: B+

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (2019) is the follow-up to the 2014 film, titled Maleficent, and while not a necessary sequel, it surpasses the original.

The intent was to create a significant studio effort that would generate substantial revenue, and the experiment appears to have been successful.

The production is not as frightening as the title might lead one to believe, and children over the age of ten would be a suitable target audience.

While the screenplay features traditional plot elements and a predictable ending, the real winner is the visual and cinematic treatment, which will leave viewers gasping.

The lush landscapes, odd little worlds, castles, and forests blossom with vibrant colors and exquisite shapes and objects.

It may primarily be CGI, but marvelous all the same.

To recap, the character of Maleficent debuted in the 1959 classic animated Disney film Sleeping Beauty. Maleficent is an evil fairy and the self-proclaimed “Mistress of All Evil” who, after not being invited to a christening, curses the infant Princess Aurora to “prick her finger on the spindle of a spinning wheel and die” before the sun sets on Aurora’s sixteenth birthday.

The character has since “evolved”, now portrayed as a sympathetic character, who is misunderstood in trying to protect herself and her domain from humans.

For five years, Aurora (Elle Fanning) has reigned peacefully as Queen of the Moors with Maleficent (Angelina Jolie) serving as teacher and protector. They have a rapturous relationship and flock and carry on with fairies and animals alike.

Handsome Prince Phillip (Harris Dickinson) proposes to Aurora, thereby uniting her kingdom with his, which is met with caution by his parents, specifically his mother, Queen Ingrid (Michelle Pfeiffer).

When the players gather for a celebratory dinner, Maleficent is mocked, causing her to fly into a rage, setting off a war between humans and fairies.

A key positive, and a notable shift in the story, is that Maleficent, a legendary film villain, is written sympathetically, and the plot device is effective. Rather than have her sparring with daughter Aurora, the duo team up to thwart the devious efforts of the evil Queen Ingrid, who is the real villain.

Jolie and Pfeiffer must have had fun playing the roles, and both perform their respective parts adequately. Favorable to me is Jolie, adding just enough vulnerability to balance her fierce nature and blood-red lips. Pfeiffer plays the role straight, as a caricature, with no redeeming value.

Both roles are fun.

Keeping in mind the target audience, the characters of Maleficent and Aurora are inspiring, especially to young females everywhere. The film adds more than a hint of progressive feminism as both characters are strong and no-nonsense.

This does not detract from their sensitivity or sense of fairness. Both could equally be role models of tough yet compassionate female characters.

In most Disney films, there are heroes and villains, and we all know and expect that. The standard storyline of good revolting against evil is on display, and an epic climactic battle scene gives a customary ending to the film.

Likewise, the fairy tale romance between Prince and Princess is prominently featured, and for my money, Dickinson and Fanning are tremendous in the roles.

The chemistry between the actors is apparent, and there is a nice balance between a believable romance and strong, independent characters.

Queen Ingrid, barely a mention in the original animated film, is turned into an evil shrew, all completely plot-driven. The story is what I expected it to be, but not the film’s high point.

More impressive is how the viewer can easily escape into a world of make-believe and long to stay there forever. Especially for the younger viewers, the Moors are a bevy of magical creatures and fluttering fairies rich with goodness.

The comical Knotgrass, Thistlewit, and Flittle, the red fairy, green fairy, and blue fairy, respectively, make a return appearance, though in a limited capacity. It would have been nice to give them a stronger presence, providing more wisdom, more advice, and more humor, but they serve their comic relief purpose well.

Will there be a third incarnation of Maleficent?

The filmmakers provide a strong likelihood. After Aurora and Philip wed, Maleficent returns to the Moors with the other Dark Fey, teaching the young fairies to fly. She promises to return for Aurora and Philip’s future child’s christening.

This vow seems like an easy setup to build on the original storyline, unlocking the next chapter in this engaging saga.

Oscar Nominations: Best Makeup and Hairstyling

1996 Films, Adventure, Children, Disney, Glenn Close, Jeff Daniels

101 Dalmatians-1996

February 13, 2020 scottmet99 Leave a comment

101 Dalmatians-1996

Director Stephen Herek

Starring Glenn Close, Jeff Daniels, Joely Richardson

Scott’s Review #989

Reviewed February 13, 2020

Grade: C+

The classic animated Disney film 101 Dalmatians (1961) is brought to life in a live-action format thirty-five years later to create a fresh spin on the revered original film.

Unfortunately, the result is nothing special save for Glenn Close’s brilliant performance as the dastardly Cruella De Vil. Otherwise, the reworking is too amateurish and largely unnecessary, especially as compared to the brilliance and charm of the original.

Thankfully not modifying the London setting, American video game designer Roger Dearly (Jeff Daniels) lives with his pet dalmatian, Pong.

Lonely, Roger trudges along through life without a love interest. During a walk, Pongo sets his eyes on a beautiful female dalmatian named Perdy. After a chase through the streets of London that ends in St. James’s Park, Roger discovers that Pongo likes Perdy.

Her owner, Anita Campbell-Green (Joely Richardson) immediately falls in love with Roger and the duo are inseparable.

They get married along with Perdy and Pongo. Anita works as a fashion designer at the House of de Vil. Her boss, the pampered and glamorous Cruella de Vil (Close), has a passion for fur.

Anita, inspired by her Dalmatian, designs a coat made with spotted fur, and Cruella is intrigued by the idea of wearing Anita’s dog. She hatches a plot to steal and kill the puppies for her lavish gain.

The scenes between the dogs are cute and work better than the intended romance relationship between the humans. A darling pursuit in the animated feature that does not shine through with real actors.

Either the chemistry between Daniels and Richardson does not exist or the scene is too forced, or perhaps both. I did not buy the love, at first sight, stars aligning moments.

I bet most audiences didn’t either. The result is a banal and stale connection between Roger and Anita, meant to be the core of the story.

Enough cannot be said for what Close brings to the role. The actress gives a tremendous performance and sinks her teeth into the most prominent and interesting part of the film.

With a sinister sneer, a flowing red and white coat, and a token cigarette holder, she infuses Cruella with dazzling menace.

Careful not to overact and result in a juvenile character, she relishes the role, providing just enough comedy without being too scary. The performance is perfect.

A negative is that, unlike the animated version, none of the animals have speaking voices. This detracts from the earnest quality of expressive, talking animals.

What pet owner does not imagine what their cat or dog would sound like if they talked?

Instead, the puppies sniff and look cute, making themselves distracted and unclear about what feelings they have. One wonders why the decision was made in this way, but it does little to provide texture.

101 Dalmatians are too cute for their good, limiting any sophistication. The original had British intelligence and a cultural voice, with small, yet important details, like falling rain, that live-action cannot mimic.

The 1996 version is kid-friendly, but brings little to the table, lacking interesting flair. Why not teach a lesson about the dalmatian dog breed rather than settle for simply an adorable slant?

Rumors abound that parents adopted dalmatians for their children after seeing the film and were forced to return them, rather than invest time in study, realizing that raising a dalmatian is hard work.

The idea to remake an adorable and cozy Walt Disney classic from the 1960s with a fresh approach is admirable. The live-action detail could add a new twist or an inventive spin that could appeal to a new generation of youngsters.

Unfortunately, 101 Dalmatians (1996) works unwell, barely rising above mediocrity, with an aura of fluff and gimmicks that feel forced and trite. The saving grace is Glenn Close, a tremendous talent who gives it her all despite sub-par material.

Stick to the original 1961 version.

2019 Films, Angus MacLane, Animated, Annie Potts, Best Animated Feature Oscar Winners, Betty White, Bill Hader, Bonnie Hunt, Carl Reiner, Carl Weathers, Carol Burnett, Children, Christina Hendricks, Comedy, Dan Scanlon, Disney, Don Rickles, Drama, Estelle Harris, Flea, Jay Hernandez, Joan Cusack, John Ratzenberger, Jordan Peele, Josh Cooley, June Squibb, Keanu Reeves, Keegan-Michael Key, Laurie Metcalf, Lee Unkrich, Madeleine McGraw, Mel Brooks, Melissa Villaseñor, Patricia Arquette, Pete Docter, Rashida Jones, Rickey Henderson, Rosana Sullivan, Tim Allen, Timothy Dalton, Tom Hanks, Tony Hale, Will McCormack

Toy Story 4-2019

December 10, 2019 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Toy Story 4-2019

Director Josh Cooley

Voices: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Annie Potts

Scott’s Review #966

Reviewed December 10, 2019

Grade: B

Toy Story 4 (2019) is the fourth installment in the Pixar/Disney-produced Toy Story series, now nearly twenty-five years old!

The glitter is beginning to fade on a once-endearing franchise, and hopefully, this is the last one- additional segments are not needed unless desperation develops.

After a slow start and too many retread moments, the film shows bombast and familiar heart and tenderness in the finale, presumably wrapping up the long story with a neat bow.

The animation is vivid and colorful, almost astounding, and makes up for an otherwise unnecessary story.

In a flashback sequence, nine years after Toy Story 2, Bo Peep (Annie Potts) is donated to a new owner, and Woody (Tom Hanks) begrudgingly decides to maintain his loyalty to the owner, Andy.

Years later, and now a teenager, Andy donates a forgotten Woody to a young child named Bonnie, who lacks the affection for the toy that Andy had. When Bonnie makes and bonds with Forky, a toy made of plastic, Woody struggles to convince Forky that each is more than garbage.

When Bonnie and her parents embark on a summer road trip to an amusement park, Woody and other familiar faces are along for the ride.

The group meets other forgotten toys, some benevolent and some sinister, at the park and a nearby antique store. Woody’s dear friend and comic relief, Buzz (voiced by Tim Allen), is in the mix and helps all the toys realize that they are not forgotten and that they can still bring joy to children.

The film provides an unwieldy list of celebrities in major and minor roles. The incorporation of characters like Chairol Burnett, Bitey White, and Carl Reineroceros (voiced naturally by Carol Burnett, Betty White, and Carl Reiner) may not be necessary.

Still, it’s fun to watch the credits roll and see who’s who from the cast.

The minor characters are little more than window dressing, but the creativity is admirable.

The main story of abandonment, loyalty, and discarding of one’s toys is ample and pleasant, but has occurred in every segment thus far in the series.

Do we need to see this again? Yes, it is an essential message for both children and adults, but why not simply watch the first three installments of Toy Story, each brilliant in their own right?

Toy Story 4 plays by the numbers with little surprises.

One glaring notice is how almost every single adult is either incompetent or played for laughs.

I understand that the main draw is the toys and outsmarting the adults is half the fun, but when Bonnie’s father assumes his navigation system is on the fritz, rather than catching on to the fact that one of the toys is voicing the system, one must shake one’s head.

Suspension of disbelief is increasingly required in these types of films.

Toy Story 4 picks up steam in the final twenty minutes with a thrilling adventure through the amusement park and a cute romance between Woody and Bo Peep.

When the long-forgotten toy Gabby Gabby (Christina Hendricks) emotionally rescues a lost child, she is rejuvenated and breathes new life into both the child’s life and her own.

In a darling moment, Forky meets another creation named Knifey. Knifey suffers from the same existential crisis as Forky once did, and Forky immediately becomes smitten with her, both realizing that even though they are odd-looking, they still matter.

The nice lesson learned is that even toys from the 1960s and 1970s can provide warmth and comfort to a young child and are more than “of their time”.

This is a clear and bold message that resonates with human beings and acknowledges that advanced age does not come with an expiration date.

Everyone matters and brings importance. The underlying theme is heartwarming and central to the film, bringing it above mediocrity.

What should certainly be the final chapter in a tired franchise that continues to trudge along, the bright message and strong animations remain, but the film feels like a retread.

Given that Toy Story 3 was released in 2010, Toy Story 4 (2019) needs to bring the series to a conclusion before installments 5, 6, 7, or 8 result in a dead-on-arrival sequel.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Animated Feature Film (won), Best Original Song-“I Can’t Let You Throw Yourself Away”

1964 Films, Alan Napier, Children, David Tomlinson, Dick Van Dyke, Disney, Elsa Lanchester, Fantasy, Glynis Johns, Hermione Baddeley, Jane Darwell, Julie Andrews, Marni Nixon, Musical, Robert Stevenson

Mary Poppins-1964

December 9, 2019 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Mary Poppins-1964

Director Robert Stevenson

Starring Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke

Scott’s Review #965

Reviewed December 9, 2019

Grade: A-

Mary Poppins (1964) is a lovely Walt Disney production that shines with zest and an ample supply of good, cheery tunes. A family affair, it will hardly disappoint, with sing-alongs and enchanting stories for miles.

It’s tough to knock a film that has it all, but it sometimes borders on sickeningly sweet wholesomeness with too much schmaltz mixed in.

This can easily be forgiven because of the robust music, dazzling visual effects, and perfect casting, which make the film enjoyable entertainment for all.

The Banks family resides in London, England. The foursome consists of George and Winifred Banks, along with children Jane and Michael. They live a comfortable and happy upper-middle-class existence.

When their nanny quits after the children run away to chase a kite, the panicked George requests a stern, no-nonsense nanny, while the children (now returned home) desire a kind, sweet one. Through magic, a young nanny (Julie Andrews) descends from the sky using her umbrella.

Mary Poppins teaches the children to enjoy chores through tunes with the help of a kindly chimney sweep, Bert (Dick Van Dyke).

Mary Poppins cheerily takes the children on several adventures, teaching them valuable lessons. The drama involves light situations such as the irritable George threatening to fire the nanny because she is too cheerful or a mini-scandal at the bank where George works.

These side stories are trivial and non-threatening since the film is really about the antics of the magically odd nanny and her relationship with the children.

The film is unique because it combines live-action with animation and is magical and inventive. This is most evident during sequences that feature animals, especially the superb scene where Mary Poppins transports Bert, Jane, and Michael into a picture where they ride a carousel and stroll the day away.

The appearance of horses and a fox makes the scene beautifully crafted and filled with joy.

The casting could be no different and is flawless across the board. Standouts are Andrews and Van Dyke, the former appearing in her very first film role.

Not to be usurped by her most iconic role as Maria in the following year’s brilliant The Sound of Music (1965), Andrews possesses a benevolent and delightful spirit that works perfectly in the role, to say nothing of her powerful voice.

Van Dyke, as the romantic interest, is equally well-cast, and together the chemistry is easy and apparent.

Mary Poppins was met with critical acclaim when it was released when Disney ruled the roost and musicals were a dime a dozen.

It received thirteen Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture—a record for any film released by Walt Disney Studios—and won five: Best Actress for Andrews, Best Film Editing, Best Original Music Score, Best Visual Effects, and Best Original Song for “Chim Chim Cher-ee.”

This was quite a feat as the film was up against My Fair Lady (1964), which won the biggest prize.

Rated G and box-office success, Mary Poppins (1964) is a legendary Walt Disney film that uses creative techniques and musical numbers to develop a finely finished product.

The song standouts are “A Spoonful of Sugar”, “Chim Chim Cher-ee”, and “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious”, as each offers candy for the ears and immeasurable fun.

The classic songs and the cohesive sentimentality make this one easy to enjoy with repeated viewings.

Oscar Nominations: 5 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Robert Stevenson, Best Actress-Julie Andrews (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Song-“Chim Chim Cher-ee” (won), Best Music Score-Substantially Original (won), Best Scoring of Music-Adaptation or Treatment, Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Color, Best Cinematography, Color, Best Costume Design, Color, Best Film Editing (won), Best Special Visual Effects (won)

1963 Films, Alan Napier, Animated, Children, Disney, Eric Larson, Karl Swenson, Les Clark, Rickie Sorensen, Sebastian Cabot, Wolfgang Reitherman

The Sword in the Stone-1963

May 10, 2019 scottmet99 Leave a comment

The Sword in the Stone-1963

Director Wolfgang Reitherman

Voices Sebastian Cabot, Rickie Sorensen, Karl Swenson

Scott’s Review #896

Reviewed May 10, 2019

Grade: B

The 1960s, while not known as the best of decades for Walt Disney productions, offers a small gem of a film in The Sword in the Stone (1963).

Flying marginally under the radar, the film is not typically well-remembered but is a solid offering. It mixes elements of magic and royalty within a cute story.

The production has the dubious honor of being the final Disney animated film released before Walt Disney’s death.

While the film is not great, neither is it bad.

Engaging and innocent, it does not offer the ravaging tragedy of Bambi (1942), the emotion of Dumbo (1941), or the beauty of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937).

The Sword in the Stone offers an adventure with an appealing lead character, mildly entertaining supporting characters, and a host of fun antics surrounding education.

Set in ancient times, the King of England has died, leaving no heir to the throne. This situation elicits peril and worries, as the country is doomed to war with no successor.

One day, a miracle occurs, and an odd “Sword in the Stone” appears inside a sturdy anvil in London. The anvil’s inscription proclaims that whoever removes it will be the new king.

Despite many attempts, no strong citizens succeeded, and England was reduced to the Dark Ages, leaving the sword and the stone forgotten.

One day, a twelve-year-old boy named Arthur appears. He teams up with his tutor, Merlin the wizard, and the adventures commence.

Inevitably, Arthur can remove the sword from the stone and lead the Knights of the Round Table, accomplishing many amazing feats and becoming one of the most famous figures in history- King Arthur.

The Sword in the Stone entertains and pleases the eyes in many regards, with vibrant colors and an array of bells and whistles creatively interspersed throughout many scenes.

The main villain, Madam Mim, is Merlin’s main nemesis. Haggard and dripping with black magic powers, she can turn from a pink elephant into a queen with the flick of her wrist as she giggles and prances about.

Despite being dastardly, she is also fun and zany and delights in her brief screen time.

The whimsical antics of Merlin are the best aspects of The Sword in the Stone as the senior gentleman bursts and bumbles from one oddity to another in earnest attempts to aid Arthur.

Thanks to clever writing, an educational angle is robustly incorporated into the story. Merlin can see into the future, such as knowing that the world is round, not flat.

What a great learning tool the film provides for young kids to discover.

The story risks playing juvenile in some parts where I can see children under age twelve enthralled but adults finding the film too childish to take seriously.

Despite my efforts to stay tuned, I noticed tidbits of the film that seemed too cute.

When Merlin and Arthur are turned into squirrels and strike the fancy of adorable but clueless female squirrels, the scene seems best catered to very young audiences.

What would give the film some excitement would be a good, solid theme song or a powerful love story. Both aspects, which can solidify a hit for Disney, are glaringly missing.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs contain the lovely “Someday My Prince Will Come,” while Snow White and the Prince offer a rich love story.

While sound, The Sword in the Stone can only reach the second tier of Disney classics, missing the upper echelon with its only so-so musical offerings.

A slight miss is how Arthur’s voice changes back and forth between a child and a teenager going through puberty. This is drastically noticeable.

When analyzed, the reason is somewhat perplexing because three different actors were used to play Arthur, resulting in some consistency issues.

Why not just use one actor or age the character slowly and gradually deepen his voice? The back and forth feels sloppy.

The criticisms targeted at The Sword in the Stone (1963) are minor and forgivable as the film plays above average graded on its terms.

The film has a lovely message for children about the importance of education and is a delight best enjoyed by the whole family.

Oscar Nominations: Best Scoring of Music-Adaptation or Treatment

1955 Films, Animated, Children, Clyde Geronimi, Disney, Eric Larson, Hamilton Luske, Les Clark, Musical, Peggy Lee, Wilfred Jackson, Wolfgang Reitherman

Lady and the Tramp-1955

May 5, 2019 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Lady and the Tramp-1955

Director Clyde Geronimi

Voices Peggy Lee, Barbara Luddy, Larry Roberts

Scott’s Review #894

Reviewed May 5, 2019

Grade: A-

Released midway through a decade of prosperity, Lady and the Tramp (1955) is a lovely production that represents an innocent time and still holds up well decades later.

The Walt Disney film’s story, animations, and characters are charming, with a wholesome yet sophisticated vibrancy. A year in the life of its main character (Lady) has never been more richly created, providing adventure, romance, and fun for the entire family.

At the turn of the twentieth century, John Dear, presumed to be somewhere in the midwestern part of the United States, gives his wife Darling a Cocker Spaniel puppy that she names Lady.

The couple is immediately smitten with Lady, who provides her with all the comforts of warm and lavish country living.

After months, the Dears become pregnant, causing Lady to feel left out. When the baby arrives and the Dear’s go on a trip, their dog-hating and incompetent Aunt Sarah arrives, leaving poor Lady at risk for her life.

Meanwhile, a stray mixed-breed named Tramp prowls the streets, protecting his friends and avoiding the dog catcher. He dines on Italian leftovers at Tony’s and lives his idyllic life, proud not to be owned and able to live on his terms.

He befriends Lady through mutual acquaintances Jock and Trusty, who reside nearby.

When Lady faces peril, the duo embarks on an exciting escapade that leads them to a dog shelter and a farm. They fall in love, resulting in a candlelit dinner for two at Tony’s, which is the highlight.

All the animals are treasures and voiced appropriately, giving Lady and the Tramp life and zest. Tramp is gruff yet lovable, with a “footloose and collar-free” outlook. He is charming and bold in his determination.

Lady’s voice is the polar opposite—demure, feminine, and proper. It is cultured without being too snobbish.

In supporting roles, Tramp’s fellow strays Peg (a Pekingese) and Bull (a bulldog) possess a New York street-savvy, perfect for their characters.

Besides Aunt Sarah, the dog catcher, and a hungry rat, Lady and the Tramp contain no villains, and each character is somewhat justified in their motivations. The rat wants to eat, the dog catcher is doing his job, and Aunt Sarah, a cat lover with two Siamese pets, is foolhardier and more clueless.

She can be forgiven for wanting Lady to have a muzzle because she misunderstands Lady’s intentions toward the newborn baby. These characters are more comical than deadly, and Si and Am add mischievous shenanigans to further the plot.

The heart belongs to the sweet romance between Lady and Tramp. The two dogs immediately appeal to the audience with instant chemistry.

The “Footloose and Collar-Free / A Night at the Restaurant / Bella Notte” medley is the best arrangement of the songs, as the duo shares a delicious plate of spaghetti and meatballs.

In the film’s most iconic and recognizable scene, the pair lovingly munches on the same spaghetti noodle—if that is not love, what is?

Lady and the Tramp (1955) is a charmer containing innocence, vivid colors, and a rich, welcoming story.

Beginning on Christmas and ending precisely a year later, Lady and Tramp’s incredible journey is topsy-turvy but culminates in the birth of a litter of puppies cheerily celebrating life.

The happy ending is a perfect bow on a Disney film that is enchanting, harmless, and inspiring.

The quintessential American love story between the pampered heiress and the spontaneous, fun-loving pup from the wrong side of the tracks — has rarely been more elegantly and entertainingly told.

1946 Films, Animated, Bobby Driscoll, Children, Disney, Eric Larson, Harve Foster, Hattie McDaniel, James Baskett, Les Clark, Musical, Musical Drama, Ruth Warrick, Wilfred Jackson

Song of the South-1946

May 4, 2019 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Song of the South-1946

Director Harve Foster, Wilfred Jackson

Starring James Baskett, Billy Driscoll

Scott’s Review #893

Reviewed May 4, 2019

Grade: B+

Song of the South (1946) is a Walt Disney film buried in the chambers of cinema history, reportedly an embarrassment never too soon forgotten by the legendary producer and his company.

The reason for the ruckus is the numerous overtones of racism that emerge throughout an otherwise darling film.

Admittedly, the film contains a racial cheeriness that cannot be interpreted as anything other than condescension to black folk, and numerous stereotypes abound.

The mysterious appeal of the film during modern times is undoubted because of the surrounding controversies that hopefully can be put aside in favor of a resoundingly positive message and glimmering childlike innocence that resonates throughout the film.

The hybrid choice of live-action and animation is superlative, eliciting a new progressive experience. Given the surrounding controversies, it would be shameful to spoil it.

The film takes place during the Reformation Era in Georgia, the United States of America, a period of American history shortly after the end of the Civil War and the abolition of slavery. It has a pretty Southern flavor and feel.

Seven-year-old Johnny (Bobby Driscoll) is excited to visit his grandmother’s (Lucile Watson) lavish plantation outside of Atlanta along with his mother, Sally (Ruth Warrick), and father (Erik Rolf). He is soon devastated to learn that his father will return to Atlanta for business, leaving Johnny behind.

Johnny plots to run away from the plantation and return to Atlanta but develops a special friendship with kindly Uncle Remus (James Baskett). Uncle Remus enchants the young boy with sentimental lesson stories about Br’er Rabbit and his foils, Br’er Fox and Br’er Bear.

Drama ensues when Johnny feuds with two poor neighbor boys and develops friendships with their sister, Ginny. He also bonds with Toby, a young black boy who lives on the plantation.

Thunderous applause must go to the creative minds who thought of mixing the animations with the live-action drama, resulting in positive and compelling effects.

As Uncle Remus repeatedly embarks on a new story for Johnny to listen to, the audience knows they will be transported into a magical land of make-believe as a precise lesson results from these stories.

Uncle Remus is an inspiring character- it is rare to find a black character written this way in 1946. Often, black characters were reduced to maids, butlers, farmhands, or other servant roles.

While the film does not stray from the course by casting many of these roles, including Uncle Remus himself, his character is different because he is beloved by little Johnny, respected by the grandmother, and treated as part of the family. His opinion counts for something and is not merely dismissed as rubbish.

The musical soundtrack to Song of the South is particularly cheery and easy to hum along to. The most recognizable song is “Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah,” which recurs several times throughout the feature. The best rendition is at the end, when the mix of live-action and animation culminates with the sing-along.

My favorite appearance is when the “bluebird” referenced in the lyric comes into play, resting on one character’s shoulder, true to the lyrical content.

The accusations of racism are justified as keen viewers will understand the condescension towards blacks in several scenes.

More than once, a parade of black people is seen traipsing through the plantation, singing songs, not precisely cheerfully but not despondent.

The scenes have eerie slavery overtones- despite the black character’s all presumably being free to come and go, the reality is they all work for white folk. The black plight and struggle are completely sugar-coated and dismissed.

The animated characters are voiced by strong ethnic voices and are presumed to be ridiculous. The usage of a Tar-Baby character, ultimately enshrined in black tar, seems offensive, almost teetering on the implication of promoting a blackface minstrel show moment as the character, once white, is then turned black because of the tar.

Song of the South is not the only film of its time to face racist accusations- the enormous Gone with the Wind (1939) and Jezebel (1938) faced similar heat.

Song of the South (1946) is recommended for those who recognize the existing racism and appreciate the film’s artistic merits. Wise and resounding friendships between white and black characters are evident, and it is a lovely story about determination, fairness, and respect.

The film should be treasured for its lovely moments and scolded for racist overtones.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Original Song-“Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah” (won)

2019 Films, Adventure, Alan Arkin, Children, Colin Farrell, Danny DeVito, Disney, Eva Green, Fantasy, Michael Keaton, Roshan Seth, Tim Burton

Dumbo-2019

April 24, 2019 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Dumbo-2019

Director Tim Burton

Starring Colin Farrell, Danny DeVito, Eva Green

Scott’s Review #889

Reviewed April 24, 2019

Grade: C+

Dumbo (2019), the live-action remake of the charming and emotionally charged animated original from 1941, contains some positives but ultimately underwhelms, coming up with less than a stacked deck.

The problematic and gnawing element that persisted throughout the Disney film was its overly cute or child-leaning quality, which was not to my taste.

Nevertheless, for an afternoon at the theater with young children under the age of twelve, the film is a recommended and utterly appropriate activity for fun.

My expectation, knowing that Tim Burton was at the director’s helm, was for a darker, perhaps murkier interpretation, given some of his films in the catalog.

After all, Beetlejuice (1988) and Dark Shadows (2012), though flawed, contain some wicked charm and naughty humor. Dumbo is considerably softer as the director chooses a safe, more accessible path.

Creating magic from nearly eighty years ago is a challenging task for anyone to achieve.

World War I veteran and amputee, Holt Farrier (Colin Farrell) returns from the war to rejoin the financially problematic traveling circus owned by Max Medici (Danny DeVito).

A widower, reunited with his two children, Holt is assigned to oversee the pregnant elephant, Mrs. Jumbo, as she gives birth to an unusual-looking elephant with giant ears who comes to be known as Dumbo.

The children discover that Dumbo can fly when aided by a feather, as the evil V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton) attempts to profit from Dumbo’s talents at any cost, adding to his fabulous creation, Dreamland.

The art direction and the look of the film are where Burton succeeds.

With dark, visually striking creations and intricate, spider-like sets, especially in Dreamland, the film bears the director’s unmistakable signature. The costumes and styles are well-suited to the year 1919, and the wardrobe and hairstyles are in line with the times.

The circus stars and characters, from the fat lady to the exotic jugglers, are well-cast, adding good texture and multicultural flavor to the production.

The standout musical number is the poignant and sentimental “Baby Mine,” wisely featured twice during the film. Since the song is so lovely, this proves a bold move and my favorite part of what is otherwise a mediocre experience.

Sharon Rooney sings the version featured during a touching and painful scene between separated elephants Dumbo and Mrs. Jumbo, and the rock band Arcade Fire performs a different rendition over the end credits.

Anyone needing a good cry would be advised to check out the emotionally charged song.

While the acting among Farrell, DeVito, and Eva Green as Colette, the French trapeze artist who falls for the sexy Holt, is all admirable, two performances left me with critical fire. Keaton, typically a standout performer, goes full-throttle with an over-the-top and one-note performance as the villainous Vandevere.

Cartoon-like with herky-jerky head snaps and tic-like movements, the actor appears silly and ineffectual at creating any sort of robust character. Young actress, Nico Parker as Milly, Holt’s daughter, gives a dreadfully wooden performance in what could have been the film’s most likable character.

Besides one or two tender scenes the film largely goes for a cutesy vibe, not feeling fresh nor especially genuine. A Disney production, the film feels quite mainstream, lacking edginess, like the producers had dollar signs and major success on their minds over artistic merit or staying true to the original.

Other than a quick shot of the number “41” on the front of a train, a clear tribute to the animated original’s year of release, the remake strays very far from the first Dumbo with a few new characters and sadly no gossipy female elephants anywhere.

A disappointing offering, the live-action Dumbo (2019), the year’s first in a series of five expected Disney releases (Aladdin, The Lion King, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, and Lady and the Tramp being the others) lacks much more than a couple of sweet scenes, an adorable elephant, and admirable sets, feeling utterly ordinary in flavor.

This is a misfire compared to the legendary, teary 1941 version of Dumbo.

2018 Films, Angela Lansbury, Ben Whishaw, Children, Chris O'Dowd, Colin Firth, Dick Van Dyke, Disney, Emily Blunt, Emily Mortimer, Fantasy, Julie Walters, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Meryl Streep, Musical, Rob Marshall

Mary Poppins Returns-2018

December 29, 2018 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Mary Poppins Returns-2018

Director Rob Marshall

Starring Emily Blunt, Lin-Manuel Miranda

Scott’s Review #848

Reviewed December 29, 2018

Grade: A-

Mary Poppins Returns is a charming mixture of reboots and sequels to the immeasurably glorious original, Mary Poppins (1964).

Although it is impossible to live up to the magic of that film, the 2018 version comes quite close with a delightful turn by Emily Blunt, numerous Hollywood stalwarts in small roles, and gleeful musical numbers sure to leave audiences humming upon their exit from theaters.

Events begin to percolate twenty-five years after the original story, and the setting is 1935 London amid the Great Depression. His recently deceased wife, Michael Banks (Ben Wishaw), lives in the house he grew up in with his three children and housekeeper (Julie Walters) in tow.

His sister Jane lives and works nearby as a labor organizer.

Faced with the dreary reality that the historic Banks house may be foreclosed, Mary Poppins (Blunt) arrives elegantly on her umbrella to restore order and save the day.

Though her character does not overtake the film, Emily Blunt is dynamic in the title role. Her prim and proper good British charm and sensibilities crackle with wit and poise. It is tough to imagine anyone but Blunt in the role, as she puts her stamp on it so well.

With a smirk and a quick, matter-of-fact tone, the character is no-nonsense and utterly kind. The casting of Blunt is spot-on as she becomes Mary Poppins.

The London setting is adorable and fraught with good culture and sophisticated manners. Including the storied Big Ben is meaningful to the tale in a significant way and a teachable moment for children unfamiliar with London.

Furthermore, including a negative period in history—the Great Depression—is immeasurably positive.

The supporting characters are rapturous and a treat for elders familiar with the original Mary Poppins film. Meryl Streep plays Topsy, Mary Poppins’s eccentric eastern European cousin to the hilt, but never teeters over the top.

Colin Firth adds snarky charm as the villainous bank president, and Angela Lansbury gives grandmotherly zest as The Balloon Lady, an ode to the original novel.

Finally, Dick Van Dyke is a delight as the heroic Mr. Dawes Jr. who comes to the rescue at the last hour.

The real winners, though, are the enchanting musical numbers. With the lovely London landscape in full view, Mary Poppins Returns gets off to a spectacular groove with “(Underneath The) Lovely London Sky”.

Performed by the charming Lin-Manuel Miranda in the role of Jack the Lamplighter, Mary Poppins’ sidekick, the star has what it takes to keep up with Blunt. This is evident as the duo mesmerizes and entertains with a colorful number, “A Cover is Not the Book”, alongside an animated music hall.

Finally, fans will revel in the naughty and clever “Turning Turtle”, performed by Streep.

The costumes and lighting are both big hits. As Jack lights and defuses the street lights, we see the luminous dawn and sunsets, which give the film a nice touch.

During the film’s conclusion and subsequent race against the stroke of midnight, moonlight is featured, giving the film a warm glow.

The period piece costumes are lush, but not garish, adding flavor and capturing the period perfectly.

Although it lacks the oomph of the original Mary Poppins (but really, who expected that?), Mary Poppins Returns (2018) is nonetheless enchanting and inspiring in every way that a remake or sequel should be.

Given the mixing of humans and animations, the film is polite, polished, and filled with authentic zest: a fine creation and splendid entertainment.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Score, Best Original Song-“The Place Where Lost Things Go”, Best Production Design, Best Costume Design

1988 Films, Animated, Bette Midler, Billy Joel, Cheech Marin, Children, Dean DeBlois, Disney, Dom DeLuise, Glen Keane, Joey Lawrence

Oliver & Company-1988

October 8, 2018 scottmet99 Leave a comment

Oliver & Company-1988

Director George Scribner

Voices Joey Lawrence, Billy Joel, Cheech Marin

Scott’s Review #818

Reviewed October 8, 2018

Grade: B

Oliver & Company (1988) is a darling animated film released by Walt Disney Pictures, the twenty-seventh Disney feature film to be produced.

The film is based on the Charles Dickens novel Oliver Twist, but Oliver is now a homeless kitten who joins a gang of dogs, and the setting moves from London to the dangerous streets of New York City- present times.

We meet Oliver (Joey Lawrence) as he huddles with other homeless kittens in a cardboard box, chilly from a driving New York rain. As all of the other kittens are snatched up by adoring animal lovers, Oliver is inexplicably left on his own.

He eventually meets up with Dodger (Billy Joel), a mongrel with street smarts, and the duo steals hot dogs from an abrasive food vendor.

When Dodger swindles Oliver out of his share, the kitten follows the dog to a barge, which turns out to be the hideout of Fagin (Dom DeLuise), a human pickpocket. Fagin houses a gang of assorted dogs as he is bullied by loan shark Sykes.

As Oliver bonds with the miscreants, his life suddenly takes a positive turn when he is rescued from the streets by a kindly, wealthy little girl named Jenny and her bumbling butler, Winston.

Jenny’s parents are on holiday in Europe, leaving her and Winston running the house. Along for the ride is Jenny’s sophisticated and spoiled pet poodle, Georgette (Bette Midler), who takes a dislike to Oliver.

By the 1980s Disney films were hardly the hot commodity they once were, and the small budget is evidence of that. Oliver & Company is not on par with classic, lovely offerings such as Pinocchio (1940), Fantasia (1940), or Dumbo (1941).

The film has a severe and decidedly “1980s quality”, mostly due to the upbeat soundtrack, which decades later makes the film feel rather dated.

Speaking of the soundtrack, the highlight is a treat entitled “Why Should I Worry?”, a tune sung by the ensemble cast and impossible not to hum along to.

The film features an array of famous voices that are perfectly cast. The filmmakers wisely cast plenty of native New Yorkers, which results in a huge measure of authenticity. Brazen voices like Midler’s, Joel’s, and Cheech Marin’s as feisty chihuahua Tito, give credibility to their characters.

The odd romantic pairing of Georgette and Tito, on the surface completely mismatched, gives a good dose of comic relief to the story.

The story written for Oliver & Company is the best part of the entire production. Anyone familiar with the famous Dickens novel or Oliver! (1968), the most famous of the film incarnations knows how the story will end.

This did not hinder my enjoyment of the animated film though, a compelling and charming experience. Sykes makes a great villain, drawn with a long face and enormous chin, interesting, but not too scary to frighten young children.

One conspicuous omission is the elimination of the important character of Nancy. As fans know, Nancy played a vital role in the original story. Perplexing is the decision not to include her, but perhaps her ultimate death would have made the story too dark, so this can be overlooked.

Surely not the best in the Disney bunch, Oliver & Company (1988) is nonetheless a decent offering sadly overlooked by fans and critics alike.

The film is nearly forgotten and suffers from a dated quality if not for the widespread knowledge of the classic novel. The film is not one of the storied Disney treasures, nor should it be dismissed altogether.

The result is a darling, innocent experience meant for pure enjoyment.

2018 Films, Adventure, André Holland, Ava DuVernay, Children, Chris Pine, Disney, Fantasy, Levi Miller, Michael Pena, Mindy Kaling, Oprah Winfrey, Peter Ramsey, Reese Witherspoon, Storm Reid, Will McCormack, Zach Galifianakis

A Wrinkle in Time-2018

July 16, 2018 scottmet99 Leave a comment

A Wrinkle in Time- 2018

Director Ava DuVernay

Starring Storm Reid, Oprah Winfrey, Reese Witherspoon

Scott’s Review #788

Reviewed July 16, 2018

Grade: C

A Wrinkle in Time (2018) is a film I had high hopes for, given the enormous marketing push, first-rate cast, and especially the acclaimed female director involved with the project, Ava DuVernay (Selma, 13th).

Additionally, having admired the 1962 novel, I expected a rich, earthy, and mysterious experience. Sadly, whether it be a “too many cooks in the kitchen” situation given the star power involved, or some other factors leading to a disconnect, this film disappointed me.

It’s not terrible, but it suffers from miscasting, too much CGI, and a story that is not very compelling.

Thirteen-year-old Meg (Storm Reid) is having a tough time in school. Smack dab in the “awkward phase,” she is picked on by schoolmates because her father (Chris Pine) has disappeared, presumably having ditched the family.

In reality, he is a scientist transported to another world after solving the question of humanity’s existence.

After Meg and her family are visited by a strange woman named Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspoon), Meg, her little brother Charles Wallace, and Meg’s crush, Calvin, time-travel to find a way to save her father.

Fans who have read the fantastic novel written by Madeleine L’Engle will most certainly be disappointed since many details of the film are vastly different from the written page.

DuVernay attempts to take the film out of the 1960s and into 2018 (I have no issue with that), but the film feels so slick and modern with the visual elements and heavy use of CGI that the story suffers enormously.

The film is gorgeous, especially in the sweeping outdoor scenes, but in this case, too many bells and whistles spoil A Wrinkle in Time.

The three strange women characters, Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), and Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), are completely butchered. In the novel, each is portrayed as peculiar, mysterious, and similar to witches: frumpy, awkward, yet lovable.

In the film, however, they are colorful, glamorous, and empowered, but lack uniqueness or intrigue.

I am all for female empowerment, but the characters just felt wrong.

Kaling is fine in the most minor role, but in the case of Witherspoon and Winfrey, it appears to be a case of “we have big stars, let’s find roles for them.” A tough sell with Mrs. Which is to think of Oprah as anyone other than….well, Oprah!

Witherspoon’s attempts to be goofy and the comic relief of the film do not work.

The casting of newcomer Storm Reid is lackluster. I have no issue with the character of Meg being changed to bi-racial, I feel that’s a plus in the modern age. However, the actress is not the greatest, appearing both sullen and wooden in various scenes.

Nor does she have any chemistry with her love interest, Calvin.

This is a shame since the theme of young love would have been a nice addition to the film and was a coming-of-age element in the novel.

At the risk of being overly critical, A Wrinkle in Time is not a total disaster either. The progressive and heroic message of the overall film is quite inspiring if kids watch the film (and since it is Disney-produced and heavily advertised, I can see no reason why they wouldn’t), they will be exposed to a nice message of good conquering evil.

On a side note, the villain is safe and hardly conjures up much fright, so parents need not worry about the film being too scary.

With heaps of buzz and anticipation regarding A Wrinkle in Time (2018), the film seemed poised to become a blockbuster hit and a great spring flick. Instead, critics and audiences alike have largely derided it.

With creative genius, star power, and a considerable budget, something ran amok as the final product is fair to middling.

Let’s hope director Ava DuVernay gets her groove back with her next project- I expected more.

Welcome to my blog!1,521 reviews posted so far! I'm Scott Segrell and I reside in Stamford, CT. My site features hundreds of film reviews I have written since I launched the site in 2014. I hope you enjoy reading my latest reviews or searching for your own favorites to see if we agree. Please see my featured films of the month, and don't forget to utilize the tags and category links.