"Something very meaningful and definitely not the Fall Out Boy lyrics I wanted to put here." - Fancy Header
j.r. dawson
  • Home
  • THE FIRST BRIGHT THING
  • About
    • Press Kit
    • Recent News
    • Contact
  • STORIES

WALT DISNEY PICTURES: THE EARLY YEARS

9/4/2014

1 Comment

 
Picture
Copyright Walt Disney Pictures. No copyright infringement intended.

Best Quote from Audience Member:

"Nooo! That's a dead bird! ... That's ANOTHER dead bird! Stop shooting things! Noooo! There's an indiscriminate hunter just shooting everything! What the eff!!! ... Are you effing kidding me? They set the dogs on her?! Watch where you're going!!!!! KICK IT! God, this is awful! ... Stop it! ... I was telling YOU to stop it. ... Oh my God, BAMBI's gonna die! ... WHAT THE HELL! DID BAMBI JUST GET SHOT?! ... Yes. ... And now there's a fire."

Review:

This week's Movie Madness will be a little different. I could have reviewed any of the forgettable movies I've seen in the last two weeks in theaters. This included Ninja Turtles and Let's Be Cops. But honestly, these movies are pretty much what they say they are, and there's nothing much more to say about them than what's been said.

So I wanted to go back in time to the beginnings of an empire.

Both adults in our household are now employed, which is no small feat considering we are both under thirty with minimum experience during a recession. But this means one very important thing (other than the ability to pay rent): We are able to afford a trip to Disney World.

Seeing as we are about 100 days out from our plane departure, we decided to watch all of the Disney movies ever created between now and December. This past weekend, we put our Labor Day celebrations to good use as we chugged through Snow White and ended with Alice in Wonderland. This weekend, we'll take up the helm with Robin Hood and His Merrie Men.

If you're anything like me, you grew up on Disney. Ariel was born around the same year I was, and so I grew up through the Golden Age of Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King, Pocahontas, Hercules, and Mulan. I was old enough to appreciate the revival that came with Tiana and Rapunzel and Elsa. But once upon a time, there was no Disney World. There was no major cartoon corporation that made moralistic movies for little girls to fantasize about their perfect prince.

No, there was just a man and a mouse.

Actually, there were three men and a rabbit with messed up copyrights, but that's a less rosy version of the fairy tale. And if there's one thing Disney excels at, it's cleaning up those stories until they're squeaky clean.

I had never seen a lot of these early movies. Of course we've all seen Snow White and Dumbo, but what about Saludos Amigos or The Reluctant Dragon? I would recognize a scene here and there from the Sing-Along VHS's I watched religiously in the 90's, but other than that, I met new characters and plots this weekend.

These films show an awkward time in the Disney franchise; a new series getting its feet wet and the kinks worked out in a flimsy first season. Steve Carell's Michael Scott is a little younger and little meaner, A Wayans brother is the third roommate on New Girl, Captain Kirk's XO is a woman, and Walt Disney does vignettes to mostly music instead of the big-deal princess pictures we've all grown up with.

The animation in these films is brilliant. These men (and yes, men, because Disney would only hire male animators) had a passion to be there working with Walt, and each gesture, background piece, special effect, and sound effect comes from a labor of love. There are no Elsa braids cutting through anyone's shoulders, or lopsided townsfolk with one eye hiding in the background. No, these are clear, crisp cartoons that transcend what 2D Animation's limits should be.

There is a whimsical factor that I can only imagine was magical in a time where our country bounced from a Depression right into a World War. I can only imagine the newsreels were full of the Holocaust, the wartorn buildings of London, and bloody Normandy. And back home, dads were struggling to pay the mortgage and moms were finding their way through old fashioned beliefs battling with the need to find a job at the factory and in turn, find new freedoms. So imagine living in that world that makes our current situation look puny, and then going into the theater and watching Pinocchio come to life or Bambi learn how to skate.

That said, there is a dark undertone to these old films that are consciously left out of the movies I grew up with. In The Reluctant Dragon, a zebra centauress arrives with big lips in tow. The female colorists are not allowed to be male animators. And in Fantasia, they can't erase the racism from YouTube's "banned scenes" clips.

While Song of the South holds adorable children and amazing animation, it also holds Uncle Remus and a white lady telling her white son they'll have "the laughinest time of all." It makes me worry that people really honestly thought slavery looked like an old Hagrid-esque black man strolling down a cartoon path with a little blue bird singing along to his tune. The sexism, racism, and elitism rampant in these early movies spearheaded by Disney are unapologetic and never reflected upon. It makes it hard to enjoy the Seven Dwarfs when one does an impersonation of a Chinese man.

The argument against this is that it was a different time. However, this still says something about the man himself. Walt Disney, although an imaginative genius, did not have the foresight to understand women's equality, multicultural futures, or collaboration of different minds.

Walt Disney got his inspiration from the four years he spent in Marceline, Missouri, as a child. Three hours east of Marceline is another preserved town for tourists where another groundbreaking storyteller was born and inspired. Mark Twain, who was bowing out as Disney was learning how to draw mice in cornfields, did have this foresight. I see the kindness in Twain's stories, the understanding that although everyone around him was saying racism was totally acceptable, it wasn't acceptable. Reading his writings, I see an empathy for the human race that does not ring out in these earlier films of Walt's.

So the question becomes: how much greater could Walt have been?

Perhaps we see the answer in his legacy. I hope, as we continue this sojourn through the discography of this company, we find that empathy grow. We see stronger girls and the white male protagonist take a back seat for others. I know it will happen eventually, because I was there to see it.

The beginning of every tale is always full of mistakes. Let's hope the future continues to correct them.
1 Comment

MAGIC IN THE MOONLIGHT

8/21/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright Sony PIcture Classics 2014

Best Quote from Audience Member:

Woman: Did you like it?
Man: (vigorously yet apologetically shakes his head)
Woman: Yeah. I hear you. I'm sorry. We should have seen Guardians again.

The Review:

This review is the first to use a new format. Because that's what you do when something isn't working, Woody Allen. You grow from it. You learn from it. And then your product will get better.

I'm going to be honest. I'm not a Woody Allen fan. I don't appreciate his history as a human being, and I don't appreciate his recent remarks on not casting black actors. However, I sat through his last movie, Midnight in Paris, to see what I was missing.

Unfortunately, I didn't find much to miss.

I was forced to watch Magic in the Moonlight, although there was a boycott on this film for the director's blatant and racist disclusion of POCs. Someone else paid for it, and I still felt absolute dirty guilt as I sat through the 90 minutes of white people doing white things.

The question then becomes: can a movie be separated from the artist? Can we enjoy a piece of art when the creator obviously has some beliefs issues? It is a question we come up against with Ender's Game, and it surfaces once more with Woody Allen.

I think the answer to this hard question is twofold. First, we have the question of royalties and money. Because I went to see this movie, Woody Allen made money. Did he make a bunch of money? No. But he still made something. By seeing art made by artists we don't wish to support, we support the artist. This becomes difficult when the artist's work is amazing and awe-inspiring and does some good in the world, although the artist himself does not do these things outside of the art's world.

But what if the piece itself is harmful? What if the piece itself is just no good? This is the second portion of the answer. If the piece itself has hateful or inclusive issues, then do we forget how there are other good parts to the piece? And do we go into the experience too biased to come to an honest conclusion?

Magic in the Moonlight does not have anything sinister in it, except for the fact that there is still an elephant missing oh my GOD where did the elephant go?! But beyond the magic elephant, to the naked eye, no racist words are uttered, no violent propaganda or improper romantic this and thats are had. It's a pretty boring movie about rich white people doing stupid rich white people things. In the midst of their richness and elitism is a story about a man who is trying to decide if the world runs on science or magic.

But see, that's the problem. This movie is not seen as wrong. The first five minutes of the film is Colin Firth in yellow face pretending to be a magician named Wae Ling Soo.

What?

We then move on with Emma Stone calling Colin Firth from the Orient and acting as a Chinese. No one ever points out that Firth was in yellow face, and he is the only thing close to a non-white person we see. In fact, the Other in this film is pretty little waify Emma Stone and her mother, because they're American and poor and from Kalamazoo.

This would be fine because it fits the time and the story, but only if the author knew this was wrong.

So can we really pull away from the narrator or the writer? As writers, aren't we the least bit responsible for social awareness? Why can't Woody Allen point out that perhaps all of these people are rather silly and rather pampered and you can tell something about Firth's character because he dresses as "a Chinese?"

I don't have the answers. I only have a lot of questions.

The movie itself, morality aside, is not worth the trouble. Firth and Stone are both brilliant actors, but they are so enamored with Woody Allen being the director that they act like anyone else who has been to the Woody Allen School of Acting in One of Woody Allen's Films. They speak quickly, punching the script and not their character. They move like puppets or pawns being moved around a chess board. At one point, when Firth must make a proposal, he nearly gets to breathe as a professional performer, but the script moves too fast and he loses his chance for freedom from the puppet master.

Is it fair to call him a puppet master? Perhaps I'm being too partial.

The story has been done before. You know immediately what is going to happen. The ending would have been cute a hundred and fifty years ago when Wilde and Shaw were still hot and new. Unfortunately, the world has moved forward and developed from where we were. Woody Allen still uses a typewriter and doesn't believe in the internet.

I give this movie a C-. If you enjoy Woody Allen, I would be curious to hear what you have to say, or if I'm right in believing that this was not a stroke of genius. If you like spiritual movies, you will not like this movie. If you like rich white people with parasols playing ukeleles, driving in fancy cars, and sunbathing on the beaches of Southern France, you are in for a treat.


0 Comments

INTO THE STORM

8/13/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright 2014 New Line Cinema

Best Quote from Audience Member:

"Well, that was nightmare-fueled."

The Story:

A storm ransacks a town with tornadoes, fire-nadoes, multi-nadoes, and plane-nadoes.

Meanwhile, we watch a motherless family, a single mother, a jerk documentary maker, and a high school darling as they battle to stay alive.

I mean, there's not much else to it.

For Writers:

There's an old saying: Either do it first, or do it best.

This film does neither.

It was done first in the 1990's. I remember, because I was obsessed with tornadoes back then. Mostly, because I lived in Tornado Alley and this had caused me to develop a phobia. In order to battle this phobia, I battled tornado movies like they were slasher films.

Twister did it first. Night of the Twisters did it best.

Into the Storm teeter-totters between being Sharknado and Titanic. The Sharknado moments are laughable, with stinted dialogue and absolutely ridiculous Bay-esque effects that make you wonder if you are actually wearing ScyFy. Not Sci-Fi, mind you. ScyFy.

However, there are these brilliant moments where you forget you're watching a stupid movie, and maybe --- just maybe --- you're watching something that matters in the world.

If you are dragged to this movie, get your notepads ready for the scene where the oldest son and the girlfriend are giving their final messages to the camera. It's heartfelt and it means everything when it comes to writing. Oldest son talks about his brother and how important that brother is. It's a beautiful character moment.

The rest of it? I mean, the planes go up into the twister and crash into each other. Another tornado sweeps up some fire and rages around until it catches someone on fire and sucks them up. All of these are cool moments. And I just didn't care enough.

And forget about the dramaturgy. Funnel clouds are called wall clouds, tornado sirens were represented by the A-Bomb sirens, and we won't even get into why a small town in Southwest America has an international airport.

Plane-nado!

For Girls:

And this is where it gets real sketchy.

There are three girl characters in this movie. The first is a high school girlfriend who is pretty and sweet and smart and totally fodder for the main character.

The second is a single mom who is trying to get home to her daughter but falls in love with the main family's widowed father.

And the third is the dead mom.

While the single mom's story is interesting, it wasn't enough for me. I wanted to see more of her, and less of her getting saved by the dude characters.

When it comes to POCs, there were two. The first was a camera man. He didn't die. He just stayed behind.

The second was the mean principal who wouldn't let people leave the shelter, even when the F5 is barreling closer. 

For Who?

This one is a good popcorn film if you need to get to the movies and just see something. If you are terrified of tornadoes or really like watching tornadoes, you're gonna love it.

The Rating:

THE MOVIE ITSELF: Yeah, just no. For a theatrical release, this thing wasn't ready. I feel like one writer had talent, another writer was confused as to proper expectations, the special effects team was on board, and the actors were highly underpaid and just didn't care. Good lord, at least it's short.  C

ENJOYMENT FACTOR:
I wouldn't watch this one again. There were some cool scenes, but there are cool scenes in good movies. C

VERDICT:
If you want a good movie with rounded-out characters, I'd just go see Ninja Turtles at at least be entertained while you're disappointed. C
0 Comments

GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY

8/6/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright Marvel 2014

Best Quote from Audience Member:

"Wait, we have to wait for after the credits! It's a Marvel movie."
(five minutes later)
"Wait, what?"

The Story:

Peter Quill is kidnapped from earth the night his mother dies back in 1988. His mother leaves him two things pivotal to the plot: a mix-tape of her favorite 70's songs, and a need to hold females' hands.

Twenty years later, Peter Quill has grown into Chris Pratt, who is your typical Han Solo-esque scavenger for hire. He accidentally comes across an orb that is wanted by the bad guys, and off he is on his adventure. Following along is Zoe Saldana, Bradley Cooper as a pissed off raccoon, and Vin Diesel as The Iron Giant Redux ... I mean, Groot. He is Groot. We are all Groot, actually.

For Writers:

It's difficult, really, to explain how much I appreciate this movie and how much frustration I have with this movie. As someone who is a hardcore space opera fan (and writer), I will openly say I don't think this was the strongest story I've seen done in this genre. I do still believe A New Hope and the Firefly series did it better and clearer. However, it was so much better than it could have been.

There is one scene that encompasses my feelings for this movie. All of the characters sit around, hemming and hawing over whether or not they're going to "do the thing" or "not do the thing." The discussion goes on for so long, I actually spaced out in the middle of a space opera. However, the movie knows what cliche ground its treads. All of the heroes stand up one by one, pledging to "do the thing." Finally, Rocket Raccoon stands up and says, "There. Now I'm standing, too. Are you happy? We're all a bunch of jackasses standing in a circle."

It's self-aware and breaks cliches, just not as well as Whedon did in both Avengers and Firefly. Rocket doesn't meet the expectations of Hulk smashing Loki mid-monologue, nor does it live up to the memories of Mal Reynolds throwing a thug into his ship's turbine when the thug threatens the crew.

Beyond that, Chris Pratt's Quill is a well written character, but his bigotry toward women and his wavering character arch isn't enough to allow him to stand as a grown, fleshed out character. Perhaps that's part of his arch, that he is a boy as of right now, but I really wanted to like him as much as I like Andy Dwyer. Or hell, as much as I like Luke Skywalker or Chris Pine's Kirk. Luke's obsession with Leia in the first film comes off as kiddish, and we expect chauvinism from James Kirk. Quill is supposed to be a good, decent Southern boy. And yet he has a whole scene dedicated to showing off the literal scars left by women to whom he done wrong.


The other characters, Drax excluded, also felt like we'd seen them before. Groot was the Iron Giant, Rocket was Tony Stark and Jayne the Hero of Canton. Even Saldana's green lady felt like a less assertive version of Uhura. Perhaps the comics were a breakthrough, but we're coming up on 2014. It's kind of like trying to be surprised by The Lord of the Rings movies after decades of riffs from the original source material.


As for the plot, it was winding, complicated, and had way too many moving parts.


If you're a writer looking to study space adventures, this is a nice beginning, but please go watch Firefly. And then watch the first three Star Wars films. Then pick up some Ray Bradbury and read that to round it out. This is a good door opener, but the world is still in need of a real meaty epic in space.

For Girls:

Gamora is a lethal assassin, but that doesn't mean her neckline has to be anything but boob-tastic. The other girls are seen as slaves, servants, and forgotten one night stands. Oh, unless you count the mom, and then they're also seen as weak, wispy cancer patients on their death beds.

While it could have been worse, it did not pass the Bechdel test. While some male characters like Quill and Rocket are a softer sort of emotional male, there's just not much in the way of ladies. We do have Glen Close playing the head of an entire race, but she's in literally two scenes.

I will say, that Gamora's sister the cyborg was amazing and I would argue more ruthless than her male counterparts. But to say that Gamora is the lead in this movie is not seeing Quill for what he is and not giving an honest look as to who does what. While you watch this film, you decide for yourself who the "hero" is. Gamora is a hero, but Pratt is the protagonist.

This is all so very surprising, since the head writer was a woman. Although the director, James Gunn, was said to have had last say. And Gunn was the one who said Pratt shouldn't play Quill because he was "fat."

For Who?

I would say that boys are gonna like this one. I would also say that space adventure fans will adore it, although please don't think it's the Star Wars of our generation. I was told that before going in, and it is not. Which I think accounts for my disappointment. I also believe that people who see themselves as outcasts will find a special place for Guardians in their hearts.

I also would recommend this to anyone who has lost someone lately, especially a parent. When you see it, you'll understand, but it is a therapeutic exercise to watch while you're trying to make sense of close death.

The Rating:

THE MOVIE ITSELF: The movie is a good movie, I'm not going to cheat it out of that praise. Is it the game changer we've been waiting for in the sci fi community? No. But is it better than Thor and The Phantom Menace? Yes. Do they do the comic justice? Of course. We're not talking about a Watchmen situation here. The special effects are wonderful, although Rocket doesn't really compare to Caesar in Apes. The acting is great. The script is funny. But it does lack that special legendary umph factor. A-

ENJOYMENT FACTOR:
A lot of fun for everyone. There's the talking raccoon for kids, the romance, the heroics, the grief, the comedy. It's all here. Everyone involved had a good time. Just don't ruin it by waiting around after the credits. A-

VERDICT:
Go see it. Go enjoy it. And then go home and write that game changing space opera. Please. I want to see it. A-
0 Comments

DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES

7/23/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright 20th Century Fox

Best Quote from Audience Member:

"So ... they take over, right? The apes?"

The Story:

We pick up ten years after James Franco and the virus. Caesar has a mate and two sons. The eldest son, Blue Eyes, is a sensitive little chimp who wants to do right by his dad. Unfortunately, he starts to feel like his dad is not doing right by him.

Because enter the humans! Malcolm heads up his son and partner in a small expedition to go to the dam on the other side of the ape encampment and start up power for the Gary Oldman-led tribe of virus-resistant humans hanging out at the train station village in San Francisco. Caesar wants to help, even to the detriment and safety of his family and home. Koba, on the other hand, has other plans.

For Writers:

This movie is as ridiculous as that poster. The ape rides the horse, holding a gun as the Golden Gate Bridge burns in the background. They just tried so hard, guys. So very hard.

The difficult thing about writing spec fic or science fiction, is that you as a writer are writing an outlandish thing happening in the very real world. Crafted science fiction allows you to suspend belief and follow the story like it all happened and it's all as plausible as George Washington and World War II (although ... not George Washington in World War II, because that would be spec fic). However, there were so many times that I felt the world was shoved at us or stretched to look cool for posters (see above), and I was taken out of the movie in those moments.

There was also a challenge in starting the movie ten years after the end of the last movie. Info dumping was abound as the writers tried to fill in the holes. There were whole scenes dedicated to info dumping, where the humans sat in the car and did everything but stare right at the camera as they threw out world-building factoids, like how the woman worked for the CDC, or how the virus worked, or how long they had been without power.

One thing they did do well was Caesar's character arch. But I don't know how much of that was the writing, and how much of that was Andy Serkis being awesome.

For Girls:

Not much here, gals. It does not pass the Bechdel test. We have two mother characters, one ape and one human, but even they don't have much overlay. One spends her time being sick and the other one spends her time taking care of her adopted son and partner. It was an ape versus white man story, and it stuck to the franchise's tradition of not having much to do with anyone else.

As for POCs, we have one dominant black character in the whole ordeal. I just kept looking at Malcolm, who was white, and thinking how cool it would have been if he had not been white. Instead, we get one black man in the entire group of dam-seekers whose main line was, "You shut up before I kick your ass."

I don't think the rest of this series will change much in this regard.

For Who?

If you like apes riding horses and shooting off never-empty guns at Gary Oldman, then this is the show for you! I would also recommend it to visual arts students, because holy lord those apes are cool looking.

The Rating:

THE MOVIE ITSELF: I appreciate its visual effects. If everything else failed in this story, the visual effects soared above anything you've ever seen. Caesar is gorgeously done and more human than most of the human actors. Koba moves so fluidly. Blue Eyes told a coming-of-age story through full computerized effects. It was just beautiful. Other than that, I give it one of Koba's raspberries. B-

ENJOYMENT FACTOR:
I'm glad I saw it, but it was just too damn long with too little to it. We all know how this is going to end, and there are no surprises. The apes will come out victorious, the humans will slink into slavery, and Caesar will die as his teachings are corrupted by Tim Roth. We know. We get it. Apes. C

VERDICT:
If you like the series, go for it. Otherwise, maybe go see it as a matinee when you're really bored on a "sick day." C+
0 Comments

EARTH TO ECHO

7/9/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright Relativity Media

Best Quote from Audience Member:

(Clap clap clap!)
Person: Oh ... we're not clapping.

The Story:

Three boys live in a Nevada neighborhood that is about to get torn apart for a freeway. These boys are Tuck, Alex, and Munch. Tuck is a budding filmmaker and Youtuber, Alex is a foster kid, and Munch shows signs of Asperger's. They're best friends who have looked out for one another, and now they want to spend one more night having boyish adventures.

Except their boyish adventures include following a signal (why is it always guys following a signal?) to a hunk of junk that suddenly bursts to life and introduces itself by whistling Alex's ringtone. He needs the kids' help to put his ship back together, and thus their adventure truly begins.

For Writers:

Echo was a good example of the up-and-coming multimedia storytelling. Tuck uses iTunes in order to score their conversations via Skype, and the whole thing is recorded on Youtube. Through these different mediums, we see a story arise.

However, this convention is broken as soon as Echo shoots to life. Echo brings with him a movie score, that immediately reminds us that we are not watching a kid's mismatched Youtube channel, but instead we are sitting in a theater with day-old popcorn.

There is also the question of protagonist. Who exactly is the protagonist in this story? We believe it's going to be Tuck, since he's the one with the camera and we're seeing it from his perspective. This made me excited, because Tuck is black. He isn't kind of black, in that way that white people will feel comfortable and can relate to him. He's just who he is, and so is his family. With Home coming soon to theaters with a black girl as the main character, I was excited to see this new trend of branching out to POC protagonists. You think this trend would have happened a long time ago and just become everyday use.

However, Tuck disappears behind the camera, leaving room for Alex to take the reins. Sometimes Tuck is neither behind the camera or in front of the camera, leaving Munch to get a story, Alex to get a story, and Tuck to return to react to his friends' stories. While Tuck has an arch, it is completely dependent on his friends' archs.

This disappointed me. However, one good thing the story did was focus on Alex's fear of abandonment and Munch's awkwardness. It was good to see a boy struggling with Asperger's not as the butt of a joke or as an outsider, but a hero.

Little boys can be heroes, too. That's their take-home message.

For Girls:

However, girls cannot.

I suppose they can, but they don't need names to do it. Or autonomy. Or respect.

Emma does have a name, but they barely use it. She's known as "Mannequin Girl" for the first half of the movie. She's beautiful, sweet, and poised. The first time we see her, she's approached by Tuck who is trying to prove that his new glasses are a chick magnet. Emma is enjoying lunch with her own friends when this random kid in weird glasses comes up to her and starts to try to talk. The expression she gives him isn't one of Regina George, but instead just confusion and a little annoyance that her meal and conversation has been interrupted by a strange unknown boy (she is literally in the middle of a sentence when he cuts her off). Because of this, he stumbles and feels stupid, and we're supposed to feel sorry for Tuck because Mannequin Girl didn't give a nerd like him the light of day.

Could it be that this is not Emma being a jerk, but Tuck feeling entitled to the trophy of prettiest girl's phone number, and because she gives him a weird look, he's emasculated in his adolescent growth? Come to think of it, Tuck doesn't even ask Emma for her number; he gets cold feet and mumbles that he needs a piece of paper.

The loving nickname Mannequin Girl comes from Munch saying she looks like a mannequin, and mannequins are beautiful.

Later on, these boys break into her room and mess with all of her stuff, and she's just supposed to be okay with it. She takes it better than me, and forces them to take her with them on their adventure. On this adventure, she falls in love with Alex. And thus she becomes the girlfriend.

Emma does not get a say in any of the storytelling. Tuck purposefully and violently cuts her footage out, fast forwarding and mocking her in a voiceover. What we do see is her saving Alex and her being "pretty," as Much and Tuck keep pointing out.

That was gross.

For Who?

This is for young boys. My brother would love this movie. The kids play games on the computer together, they sneak behind their moms' backs, they are wonderfully awkward and trying to find some sort of voice in a world that gives no voice to children. This is for the Youtube generation. Unfortunately, I feel like the POCs and women in this film were not given a voice at all.

The Rating:

THE MOVIE ITSELF: The alien was cute. The effects were nice. The kids were good actors. It had a story and a message. Quaint and well put together. It's just unfortunate that E.T. did it better thirty years ago. B

ENJOYMENT FACTOR:
It's a fun time at the movies, and Munch and the other two boys are adorable. But it's one of those movies where you think you like when it's done, and then it percolates and you realize you're never going to see it again. B-

VERDICT:
A fun time with your little brother or child you nanny. If you are childless and know no boys around the age of twelve, then perhaps see it at the cheapees. B-
0 Comments

AMERICA/THE PIRATE FAIRY

7/2/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright Lionsgate Films 2014
Picture
Copyright Disney 2014

Best Quote from Audience Member:

The Pirate Fairy:
"Wow. That was awesome. How was that awesome?"

The Story:

I was slated to review America today. I advertised that I would be doing as much. Last week when I went to see The Signal, there was a commercial for America, that showed the history of America rewinding and then disappearing as George Washington was shot and killed by a sniper during the Revolutionary War. Then the narrator asked, "What if America never existed?" And we see the monuments disappear one by one.

I wrote an entire book about American history, speculating what would happen if there was no more America, and how Americans would rebuild their country, etc. I also write historical fiction, and I am currently finishing up the first book in a trilogy about an alternative universe set in 1888 America (it's steampunk!). To say that I love alternative history America, and American history in general, is an understatement.

So to say I was excited to see America was an understatement. I was totally stoked. I talked with my writing partner about how this could finally push AU literature to the forefront, how I was so happy there was a big-budget movie focusing on history, and ... and ... and ...


I must have sounded like an idiot.

The promised movie was abandoned five minutes into the film. This was not a film about alternative history, speculative fiction, or anything really that was advertised on the poster or the trailer.

I debated how to go about reviewing America. And I decided to focus on the contract that a film makes with its audience.

We talked about this contract a little last week with The Signal, and this breach is just another clause of the complicated relationship between author and reader. We as writers do not write a book about giraffes' digestive systems and then slap
robots on the cover to get more people to read our book about giraffes' digestive systems. That's not how marketing is supposed to work. You are supposed to advertise your work to gain attention from those who would be interested in reading your work, and then perhaps bring some interested general audience members to the table. People who like action movies go to action movies; they don't want the trailer to make Chocolat look like a James Bond film. They're not going to enjoy themselves, and they aren't going to rope more people into coming to see it. It's being honest; that's the contract.

So I did not receive the film that was advertised. And that saddened me.


So I decided to also not give you what I promised. I will not be reviewing America today, but instead Disney's The Pirate Fairy. Those who would have enjoyed the America review will get no such thing and probably have little interest in The Pirate Fairy. And those who would have really loved The Pirate Fairy will be confused and turned off by my original premise, because America is not a Disney movie, it's not rated PG, and it's not for children. Two films with two genres and two different objectives will now be mashed into one review, and no one will be happy.

The Pirate Fairy  is the latest installment of the Tinkerbell fairy movies that I have long avoided due to thinking that these films were trite and not in sync with the Neverland canon. However, it does follow the canon and has created its own canon.

Zarina is a pixie dust fairy who works to sack up the dust for the other fairies. Fairy Gary, a kind-hearted boss who loves Zarina but just absolutely cannot deal with her doing stupid stuff, like wanting to mess around with
dangerous pixie dust to experiment. Obviously Zarina takes a leaf out of Tinkerbell's rebellious book and goes ahead and does the experiment anyway, causing the destruction of the pixie dust tree and a huge problem for her entire ... people? Tribe? Town? Pixie fairy girls and boys.

Zarina then leaves. The movie cuts to a year later, when a celebration of the seasons is taking place in the big arena. Zarina returns with a dastardly plan, and the fairies have to go after her to bring her home and save their community.


For Writers:

This movie was awesome. I'm a huge Disney nerd, and I love to learn how to structure my stories from watching Pixar and the full-length animated features. This isn't because I'm a crazy person, it's because that's how they teach you in playwriting school how to do it! Or maybe my professor was a crazy person ... Regardless. Pixar and Disney movies have to shove a fulfilling, sensible story into 90 minutes and simplify it to PG standards. The Pirate Fairy, while not holding any deep themes of betrayal or racial equality, it does in fact touch on those Disneyrific ideas of unconditional love, home, family, and friendship.

One thing I appreciated about this movie is that it draws from earlier movies, including Tinkerbell's sister and a character arch for all of the girls. SPOILER We also see the emergence of the one and only Captain Hook, as his character is actually very much fleshed out. He is ruthless, conniving, elitist, and terrified of crocodiles. However, we see a gentler side to him, where maybe, even for just a moment, he is envious and open to the magic that the other Neverlanders can share with him. I enjoyed his character and his interactions with the crew and Zarina.

ANOTHER SPOILER. One thing I did not understand, however, was the complete absolving of Zarina's crimes. Zarina messed up. Zarina needed to learn a lesson. And maybe she did? But Tink and the gang sort of gloss over the truth when it comes to telling the other fairies what Zarina did, and Zarina is welcomed back into the township under a false understanding. I didn't like that, and usually Disney is better at their denouements.

For Girls:

This movie was very girl power. I appreciated that. All the main characters were female, they were not weak ... not a one of them ... and not all of them were dressed in skimpy outfits. Tink has grown to mean more than the jealous little harpy flitting around Peter's head, and I appreciate that. She's an inventor, she's got ingenuity, and she's a leader. However, I do feel like there was a larger problem when it came to POC. One of the fairy gals is Asian, and I thought that was cool. However, one of the pirates is a walking stereotype with a Fu Man Chu moustache and a thick accent. One of the fairy gals is black, but not too black. A fair-skinned fairy is the closest we get to any black characters in the entire film, and that worries and bothers me. Why are fairies predominantly white? They're fairies. Especially when you're creating a film to work as a learning tool for empowerment for little girls, you want to be a little more inclusive.

For Who?

Pirate Fairy should be watched by anyone who is a Disney fan or a Neverlander. It's got beautiful animation (better than Frozen, I dare to say), it sticks to canon, it has a couple inside jokes thrown in there, and the girl power is abound. I think anyone who is young at heart will be pleasantly surprised that this film isn't just a cash-grab, but a legitimate piece of animation and storytelling.

The Rating:

THE MOVIE ITSELF: Pirate Fairy was pleasant, and I had few complaints about its animation, storytelling, characterization, consistency, or themes. It was actually more than what it had advertised, and that is always a great surprise. However, it is aimed at younger audiences, so those who are not Disney nerds and looking for a good Saturday date film, this may not be for you.  A-

ENJOYMENT FACTOR: I enjoyed it thoroughly. Again, I got what I paid for, and then some.  A-.

VERDICT: I am in no way saying that viewers should only go see movies inside their comfort zones. If that were the case, I would have never seen Judd Apatow films, Mayazaki movies, or even Au Revoir, Mes Enfants. But I learned from a young age that you need to try things you don't like to see if you actually like them. So please, please go see movies that you don't think you'll like. Go read books you wouldn't usually pick up. But it is the writer's responsibility to properly represent their work. And it is the filmmaker's responsibility to inform you of what you're paying money to see. My verdict? Go explore. Go see movies. And go rent The Pirate Fairy on Netflix.
0 Comments

THE SIGNAL

6/25/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Copyright Focus Features

Best Quote from Audience Member:

"That was an hour and a half of build up for a screensaver."

The Story:

I'll admit, I did not know anything about The Signal going into it. Exhausting every other movie on the marquee, it was either this or see 22 Jump Street again.

Maybe should have gone with Jump Street.

The movie starts off with a story about a nice kid who knows a bunch of math and science, and his two nice friends who also know a bunch of math and science. They're driving cross-country, having laughs and montages of road-trippy type activities so you will feel connected to them and love them all the more. You soon find out that Nice Kid #1 and Lone Girl were together, until Nice Kid #1 ended up getting some kind of degenerative disease and Lone Girl "betrayed" them and their collective MIT-student status to transfer to CalArts. Thus why Nice Kid #1, Lone Girl, and Nice Kid #2 are driving to California.

Nice Kid #2 is a geeky sort of fellow, and it's revealed that he and Nice Kid #1 have been "agitated" by a hacker who tried to frame their good name at MIT last school year. The hacker, known only as NOMAD , keeps taunting them until finally the two Nice Kids lose their cool and track NOMAD's signal down.

And by "tracking down," I mean they drive into an abandoned part of Nevada at midnight, turn off the road, find an abandoned Blair Witch trailer house, leave Lone Girl in the backseat by herself, and go traipsing into the trailer house with flashlights, a camera, and nothing else.

As you can imagine, bad things happen.

For Writers:

As I left the theater, I made a hypothesis: Hollywood has started a horrible, mistaken craze of letting cinematographers become writers and directors. I thought to myself, "Noooo, it can't be true. I'm just being snotty. Just because a cinematographer ruined Transcendence doesn't mean that was the case with The Signal."

Well, guess what. It was.

After a quick fact- check at IMDB, it seems William Eubank is the director and writer of this awful, awful trash bin of nonsense, and yes, he is an established and very talented cinematographer.

I don't know why the film making industry has all of a sudden decided that "pretty" means "a good story," but it's happening more and more. I will give it to Mr. Eubank that this movie was beautiful ... visually. There is a stunning ... stunning ... scene where Nice Kid #2 is doing some major physical stuntage, and it's gorgeous. However, my emotional reaction to this beautiful music video was relative to watching traffic go by. I just did not care, because other than looking pretty, this movie has absolutely way too much crap going on for me to continue to keep up.

I feel like as a writer, you make a contract with the audience. A Social Contract, if you will. You as the writer promise to keep the audience engaged and caring, and the audience promises to tag along and buy into your story. However, in The Signal, I felt like my brain was just rattled around from one red herring to the next buried gun to a possible clue to an unfinished thread that we never come back to. There was just too much to follow, and the payoff was not worth the trouble.

Be kind to your audience, writers. And give your pretty screenshots a point.

For Girls:

There be spoilers ahead.

There were two women in this entire film: Crazy Jesus Lady and Lone Girl.

Crazy Jesus Lady did not matter. She was just crazy. Although the actor playing Crazy Jesus Lady was astounding (Lin Shaye). She gave me the chills and made everyone very uncomfortable, which was her job.

Lone Girl was played by a Zooey Deschanel look-alike. I feel for this girl, because I can tell she's intelligent and has so much more to give, but there just wasn't much to do. Lone Girl starts off interesting; her boyfriend of forever has contracted a degenerative disease and she has promised to stay with him, even though she's leaving for a year to go to CalArts. However, he doesn't want to stay with her, because I don't know ... he likes moping and feeling sorry for himself? She even calls him out on that point, saying that she will not be made the villain for his decisions.

Angered/Saddened by his breaking up with her, she decides to follow the two boys into the abandoned signal site. I don't know why, but sure, why not? It isn't like this will be the last actual choice she makes in the film. So I was more confused at this point as to why her clothes had changed halfway through the last scene, because honestly, this is all we know about Lone Girl. She isn't a part of the actual hacking stuff, and the reason why she's moving is not explained. But from what I can tell, she's the smartest of the bunch. This idea is supported by the fact that (SPOILER ALERT) the aliens take her gorramed brain! Or spine ... it's never really explained. We're going with brain!

More spoilers continue as we enter into the second act of the piece, where Lone Girl is a vegetable, then a confused zombie, then a catatonic lobotomized zombie, then a confusing romantic partner who gets swooped up and never seen again. At the end of the movie, after all of the clues and mystery and terrifying what-not, the only real worry I had was, "Where the hell did that one girl go?!"

So no, this movie does not pass the Bechdel Test. An interesting character who could have helped the Nice Guys was instead a victim and a current reminder of Nice Guy #1's guilt and duty, although the movie was again too worried about mystery and suspense than fleshing that out.

For Who?

So who would like this movie?

Honestly, there were some scary parts in it. The trailer house took a night of sleep from me. I will never again be able to look in a tree at night with a flashlight. It is indeed a suspense thriller. So I would like to say suspense thriller geeks.

However, usually suspense movies have some kind of a payoff. If you like movies to pay you for your time, don't go to this one.

If you don't care and really like high-budget Linkin Park music videos, come on in! The water's fine!

The Rating:

THE MOVIE ITSELF: It was visually stunning (except for Lone Girl swapping out shirts halfway through a scene). Brenton Thwaites (Nice Kid #1) works his drooling acting chops off, and you can tell he really cared about this role. Fishburne doesn't seem to really care, and he gives us this last look of "Yeah, I know. It's no Matrix" the last time we see him. And that's the thing. It just isn't The Matrix. It's not Blair Witch Project. It's a rat's nest of storytelling. D

ENJOYMENT FACTOR: I'm never going to see this movie again. But I did enjoy some of the acting, and I did like some of the visual effects. For a good night out with friends, I'll give it a C.

VERDICT: Wait for the Redbox, pop some popcorn, and watch it the next time you can't sleep.

0 Comments

Wait ... When Did This Get Here?

6/20/2014

0 Comments

 

Good question, blog follower. The answer is, about five minutes ago. You see, I have a problem. I watch too many movies. Every Tuesday, I go see another movie. Sometimes I see more than one movie. I think about what I learned via writing, and then I wonder if anyone else would enjoy this movie or absolutely hate this movie. And since this is the internet and we all believe our opinions matter, I'm adding my opinion to the pot.

FOR WRITERS.
This blog is going to focus on the writing and storytelling aspects of movies. I know we all read a lot, but there are things we can learn from the visual narrative as well.

RATINGS.
I'll give it two ratings. The first will be THE MOVIE ITSELF, meaning the solidity of the film and an objective kudos for its successful storytelling.

The second will be ENJOYMENT FACTOR, which means how much I actually enjoyed watching the thing and whether or not you may enjoy it as well.

Sometimes a really great movie can be really awful to watch, for one reason or another.


Welcome to my movie review blog. We begin June 25.

0 Comments

    I like movies.

    I see a lot of them.

    And then review them.

    Because why waste your money on a robot riding a robot dinosaur if it's not even a good robot dinosaur?

    Archives

    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014

    Categories

    All
    Alice
    Apes
    Asperger's
    Bambi
    Caesar
    Children
    Contract
    Crappy
    Disney
    Dumbo
    Earth To Echo
    Elitism
    Fantasia
    Feminist
    Firefly
    Fishburne
    Groot
    Guardians
    Info Dump
    Into The Storm
    Introduction
    Lacking
    Lack Of POC
    Magic In The Moonlight
    Male Gaze
    Marvel
    Movie
    Planet Of The Apes
    POC
    Racism
    Review
    Science Fiction
    Sexism
    Sharknado
    Snow White
    Space Opera
    Speculative
    Star Wars
    Suspense
    The Signal
    Thriller
    Thwaites
    Visual Effects
    Walt
    Woody Allen

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
Photo used under Creative Commons from josh(dot)photography