The Lego Movie (A Review)

Ladies and gentlemen...we have it. The greatest 1 hour and 40 minute toy commercial of all time.

A crazy unique looking cast that works remarkably well together

The Lego Movie is pure joy. There's no better way to describe it. By all accounts it should be a shallow marketing ploy for one of the most popular toys ever, but the movie is actually so strong of a comedy that it transcends it's superficial marketing purposes. The humour travels a mile a minute, the characters are brilliant send-ups of classic story archetypes, the visuals are bright and colourful, and that song...oh man, that song. Like the song says: "everything is awesome." Y'know, I could just stop there and tell you I highly recommend this flick, but if you're interested in the finer points within this tiny bricked world, then read on.

First of all this film is written and directed by the duo of Phil Lord and Christopher Miller. Don't recognize those names? Well, maybe it's about time you do. They started with the criminally underrated animated comedy Clone High before directing Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (a movie I thought was gonna suck until I saw it,) and more recently the 21 Jump Street remake (a movie which, again, people thought was gonna suck, but then were pleasantly surprised with it.) Are you noticing a trend? Clearly, people need to take note of Lord and Miller and start giving these two the benefit of the doubt on whatever project they're working on. (Or studios need to know how to advertise their shit better.) As soon as I saw these two were attached, I knew we were in for a tight comedy with clever writing and a joyfully juvenile spirit. In short: I was pumped when I saw that they were directing this movie, even more pumped when I saw the first trailer, and yet the movie still somehow met my lofty expectations. That's pretty rare nowadays!

Fun Fact: Will Forte voices Abe Lincoln in both The Lego Movie and Clone High!

So what's the plot? Well, the best way I can describe The Lego Movie is Toy Story meets The Matrix on a sugar high. Enter a world completely made out of Lego where our hero, a construction worker named Emmet (voiced by Chris Pratt,) is optimistically taking part in the corporate system he seems to fit right in with, when suddenly he is thrust into an undercover resistance against the ruler of this Lego land, President Business (Will Ferrel.) President Business (moonlighting as the evil "Lord Business") has separated each themed Lego world into their own sets (wild west, space, etc) and is obsessed with order. Meanwhile, Emmet is recruited by the Master Builders, an underground rebel group fronted by the kick-ass Wyldstyle (Elizabeth Banks) and the wise wizard Vitruvius (Morgan Freeman.) The Master Builders believe in creativity over all, and have the ability to construct wild, new and outstanding things out of the Lego pieces that their world is made out of. As it turns out, Emmet got himself stuck with a mysterious relic, dubbing him "the special" who is meant to fulfil some sort of prophecy (there's always a prophecy) that will stop President Business for good. The problem: Emmet doesn't have a creative thought in his head, and is in no way the messiah-type figure the Master Builders are looking for.

Our hero, Emmet: The Untalented Optimist

If this is all sounding classic "hero's journey" fare, that's because it is. You have the unknowing hero, the evil bad dude, the tough chick, the wise mentor, the Batman (oh yeah, Batman is in this movie. We'll get to that in a bit.) They're all archetypes we've seen a million times, just now they're represented by goofy looking Lego figures... and that's why it's brilliant! Everything is over the top to the point of parody, but without being patronizing. Everyone takes all of this action and plot seriously, despite using terms laughably attempting to be "epic" such as "the special" or "the piece of resistance." And if that was the only note on which this film worked, we'd have a good movie on our hands...but the rabbit hole goes even deeper then that...

Without giving too much away (and yes there are things to give away in The Lego Movie, so please try to avoid spoilers,) this movie isn't just about characters living in a Lego world, it's about Lego itself. About Lego, the child's play thing, in today's mainstream culture, and about how different people approach the toy. You have those who follow the instruction manuals and builds the structures that are in each Lego set, then you have those who just take whatever Lego pieces you have available and build whatever comes to mind. It's here in where The Lego Movie goes from good to great, and while some will definitely see where this is all going ahead of time, I'm convinced the younger movie goers will mark this as one of the best executions of a film's message of this generation. But again, I don't want to say too much about this, so let's just go ahead and talk about Batman.

"I'm the Lego piece that Lego Land deserves..."

Yes, the goddamn Batman is in this movie. For you see, since the movie can use any property that Lego has made toy tie-ins for, this leads to the movie having a ton of Lego-versioned cameos from various areas of pop culture. Some you see coming, and some I was genuinely surprised about, but definitely the big one Warner Brothers is focussing in on their advertising is Lego Batman. And for good reason. Not just a cameo, Lego Batman (played by Will Arnet, pitch perfect casting by the way) becomes a main supporting character about a third of the way into this movie. And then he proceeds to totally steal the show. He's a perfect parody of the brooding, gritty Dark Knight era Batman. It's an era of Batman that pulls on our nostalgic heartstrings from our childhood, but is now portrayed as a dark and serious drama. In a way, Lego Batman shows us that this whole damn movie is like that: a epic movie-tie in to what was originally intended as a simple children's product. It's kinda getting meta, I know. I'm surprised Lego Batman got me to this point almost as I'm sure you are. Nevertheless, the lampooning of Batman here perfectly encapsulates why this film works, and on more than just the level of "oh hey look, it's Batman! Cool!"

Limited movement. Unlimited fun.

What adds even more to the fun is the visuals and animation itself. The film is a computer animated feature, but it takes major cues from the stop-motion amateur animated Lego movies I'm sure many budding animators have attempted at some point (yet another notch for the nostalgic charm-o-meter.) Things like a lowered frame rate in some areas, to attention to texturing details in scratches and smudges on the Lego figures are the little attentions to details that make the film's visuals stand out. But since this film is computer animated, they're not totally limited to stop motion techniques, making things like face acting (blinks, lip-sync, etc) nice and smooth.

But there are other challenges with animating this movie. Because of the rules they've set up with this world, these characters still move and act as Lego figures. That means stiff movements, light weighed characters, and no character can even bend their knee! It does make some aspects of the animation limited, but I often say that limitations force people to be creative, and luckily the animation team on this feature rose to the challenge to give us something truly different. The lack of joints in a character's model is never an issue with the way the characters dart and move, and also in how the world around them is build and is optimized for the Lego characters to act around. And thanks to some rather obvious animation cheats, the Lego characters can perform hard to imagine tasks (like a Lego man changing a shirt) all while winking and nodding at the audience. It's all self-aware visual humour, which is always a bit of a gamble, but it works remarkably well here.

Pew, pew!

And I didn't even mention the effects animation yet! Holy jeez, give the effects animators on this feature a prize or a delicious dessert of some kind, because these guys really had to work in a different way for this one. Remember me saying some rules of this Lego universe provides some challenges for the animation teams? One of those rules is everything in this Lego world is made of Legos... EVERYTHING! That includes all effects: water, fire, explosions, smoke, soap, lasers, EVERYTHING! That's really working outside of the box for effects animation, and the team blew it out of the water! You haven't seen anything until you've seen a Lego ship race across an ocean of blue Lego pieces acting like real water with waves and splashes and everything. Good job guys.

This was that sugar high I was talkin' about...

I'm not surprised this movie worked. The talent behind every aspect has proven themselves, and a movie about a world of Legos always sounded fun to me. What I'm amazed at is how well this movie works, and on how many levels. I didn't even mention characters I loved like Benny the 1980-something space guy (Charlie Day) or the Unikitty (part unicorn, part kitty, all awesome, voiced by Allison Brie.) Hell, there's a whole subplot with Liam Neeson's Good Cop/Bad Cop character, that is surprisingly touching, that I didn't even get a chance to mention! This is a film that revels in creativity, both in its message and it's execution. It's a glorious send-up of a nostalgic brand from our youth being turned into a big budget Hollywood film, while somehow still being it's own special and unique animal. If you still haven't seen this one, I highly recommend you do. It's still early in the year, but I wouldn't be surprised if come December this is in my top 10 movies of 2014. Yeah. It's that good.

"Everything is awesome" indeed. (I did mention that song is super catchy, right? Cause...y'know...it is.)

5/5

- Moo

Top 10 Animated Dragons

Sooo, I’m a little late on this one, but nevertheless: Happy Chinese New Year everyone!! 2012 marks the Year of the Dragon! Probably the coolest of all the Chinese zodiac signs (sorry pig and rat.) So what better way to ring in the new year for all my Chinese reader (you know who you are,) by counted down my list of the top 10 animated dragons!! 

(Honorary mention goes to Dragonite from Pokémon, photoed here being a total boss.)

10) Elliot (Pete’s Dragon)

Honestly, I always found this movie pretty dull as a kid. It was slow, boring, and pretty sappy. But I watched it anyway. Why? Because there’s a sweet-ass animated dragon that only the main character can see! Plus, Elliot here’s animated by famed animator Don Bluth before his departure from Disney. That’s pretty frickin’ cool. And honestly, what kid wouldn’t want their own personal invisible cartoon dragon? Boring kids. That’s who. The kind whose favorite ice cream flavor is vanilla and who actually enjoy the plot of Pete’s Dragon. 

9) Puff (Puff the Magic Dragon)

Originally a hippy-dippy sing-along song, later turned into a hippy-dippy animated movie. He’s often confused with our number ten spot, Elliot, but I feel Puff gets the edge over him for two reasons. One: he has a bow tie, and that’s just plain classy. And two: pretty sure he’s high, which is funny. If he’s not, then his parents certainly were when they named him “Puff.” That would also explain why his hair kinda looks like pot. 

8) Mushu (Mulan)

The first actual Chinese dragon to hit this list, Mushu here’s kind of a mixed bag. He’s a dragon, yes, but he’s also puny. He did a pretty good job being the tokin comic relief in Disney’s Mulan. I mean, he’s pretty much just Eddie Murphy as a dragon. That’s pretty cool. But on the other hand…he’s just Eddie Murphy as a dragon…hrmm… Like I said, it’s a mixed bag. 

7) Dragon (Shrek)

The dragon creatively named “Dragon” was first used as a big second act set piece in the first Shrek movie, then later as a reoccurring character in a franchise that’s slightly overstaying its welcome. She deserves a spot on this list, not just for being kick-ass, but for also reppin’ lady dragons everywhere. Although the weird thing is Dragon gets “bizz-ay” with Eddie Murphy’s Donkey character, producing three little adorable dragon/donkey abominations. Man! Eddie Murphy mustreally like dragons…ehhh, it’s probably best not to think about it too much…

6) That Dragon From Beowulf (Beowulf)

Sometimes just being really, really, really, really badass is enough reason to make it on a list. This dragon acts as the final act in the 2007 mo-capathon film directed by Robert Zemeckis. The film kinda falls into that category of looking soooo realistic at the time, but just kinda looks like standard stuff CG now (along with Polar Express and Final Fantasy: Spirits Within.) But what does hold up is this dragon and the epic fight old man Beowulf has with it. When you think about what a classic dragon should be, think of this sucker. He’s classic dragon all the way. 

5) Draco (Dragonheart)

Yes he’s old CG in a live action movie. Doesn’t matter. Wanna know why? It’s Sean Connery as a dragon… Let me repeat that again. It’s Sean Connery as adragon. Nuff said.

4) Toothless (How to Train Your Dragon)

Remember when I was talking about Elliot from Pete’s Dragon? And how cool it would be to have a personal dragon as your best bud? You know what would be cooler than that? A freakin’ kick-ass dragon who’s crazy fast, a powerful fighter, is feared by all, and let’s you ride him. And on top of that, when you feed him he acts like a kitty cat. Sign me up movie! I want to live in your world!

3) Trogdor the Burninator (Homestar Runner)

Sometimes, you don’t need to look proportionally accurate to be awesome. Sometimes all you need is a S shaped body, consummate V’s, and a big beefy arm stickin’ out of the back of your neck to strike fear into the hearts of peasants and to have kickin’ rock songs about you. Trogdor’s popularity sky rocketed during the mid 2000s as one of the internet’s earlier inside jokes, getting so popular to have his own adventure game, and his song appearing in Guitar Hero II. Way to go, Burninator. Way to go. 

2) Smaug (The Hobbit)

Ohhhh, ho ho! We’re certainly getting in to the heavy hitters now. While we still have to wait until we get a glimpse of Peter Jackson’s version of this Tolkin terror, Smaug has already had his big screen debut in the 1977 Rankin/Bass animated film. True, this isn’t exactly how I pictured this big baddy, what with the Thundercat-like face and the headlight-like eye beams, but still! With his booming voice (by Richard Boone) and all the great hype the film gives to this character, it’s hard to deny how cool he is. This is a dragon you don’t want to mess with. Honestly, there’s only one dragon that I think could give ol’ Smaug a run for his money…

1) Shenron (Dragon Ball) 

With all the fighting, powering up, grunting, yelling, and more powering up that the series is known for, it’s not uncommon to forget about the dragon that the titular balls are named for. Known as Shenron, the summoning of this dragon was the main MacGuffin of the original Dragon Ball series. And even while it was used more as a side element in Dragon Ball Z (really only being used as a means to get dead characters back into the show) you got to admit that even though the cast has summoned this guy time and time again, his presence was always a big deal. I mean, just look at the guy! Apart from being just so impossibly massive, this dragon also has the power to do…well…anything! He’s pretty much dragon God, and deserves to be number one atop this list. 

I hope you all enjoyed this list. Happy Year of the Dragon, everyone!

- Moo

A Tale As Old As Time…IN THREEE-DEEEEE!!! (A Rant about Beauty and the Beast in 3D)

This past week I was able to step inside a time capsule and revisit an old animated gem. And here’s my thoughts on seeing it again for the first time since the 90s, and my thoughts on Disney’s trend of 3D rereleases. 

Originally released in 1991, Beauty and the Beast is probably one of Disney’s most prestigious animated films. It’s considered by many to be the crowning gem in Disney’s animation renaissance of the 90s, and for a long time held the honour of being the only animated film to be nominated for the best picture Oscar (until Pixar’s Up in 2010.) And now, after the success of The Lion King’s 3D efforts,Beauty and the Beast returns publicly to theatres after over two decades of its release. And it’s a good thing too, cause I actually haven’t seen the film since I was a kid!

I still loved watching it, but I was surprised. Perhaps it was the goggles of childhood nostalgia, but many of the reasons I loved the film now changed from the reasons I loved the film as a kid.

So…what more is there really to say about this movie? It’s the same animated tale that was released years ago, after all. And chances are if you’re reading this you’re already familiar with the source material. So instead of actually “reviewing” said film, I felt like I should just mention some of my passing thoughts while enjoying this particular screening.

I suppose the first thing that came to my mind is “wow…this film feels old.” Not in that the story doesn’t hold up, but rather that you would never, ever see a new flick like this in theatres nowadays. Case in point: our leading lady. Belle, while being perhaps a bit more independent then previous Disney princesses, surprisingly still feels very much the easily frightened damsel of bygone years of Disney’s golden past. That’s something I didn’t remember noticing when I was a kid. Maybe it’s the fact that since Belle we’ve had princesses who are even more self reliant, such as the titular Mulan and Tiana from The Princess and the Frog. But rather than seeing the character as a big step forward for women characters in animation, like it was back then, looking backwards it’s surprising to see just how much she has in common from princesses of Disney’s golden era, like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. It’s not a bad thing, and I kind of like how it pays homage to the fairy tale princess archetype that Disney set before this, only making Belle a more proactive version of the archetype. Again, not bad, but just something that didn’t really cross my mind seeing this as a kid. 

Speaking of things that I liked as a kid, let’s talk about the side characters, specifically Lumiere and Cogsworth. As a kid, I was crazy about these characters and my love for them probably went even so far as to cloud the whole movie with their presence. Their antics are still amusing, but now as an adult I’m able to appreciate other characters for their subtlety. The Beast’s emotional transition was much more interesting to me now. I was able to actually see Gaston’s transformation from a harmless (albeit, ignorant) brute to a full fledged, bloodthirsty villain. And suddenly, these side characters that completely populated the movie as a kid were put…well…to the side. And I guess that just speaks volumes to classic Disney and it’s ability to craft well rounded stories that both kids and adults can enjoy, but now I can see first hand that they don’t have to enjoy it for the same reasons. It’s something that seems like a no brainer now, but experiencing it first hand was noteworthy. 

Ok, enough on looking back. I’m ignoring the big three dimensional elephant in the room and the one thing different about this screening. So, does the 3D really add anything? Well, in The Lion King’s 3D outing, there actually were some moments where the 3D really helped me get sucked into this world, such as the “Circle of Life” opening and the stampede scene. But that was about it. WithBeauty and the Beast there’s even less scenes that benefited from the 3D “enhancements.” I already found hand-drawn animation with 3D effects a bit odd, like someone holding a piece of paper infront of another piece of paper, but I’m sure weather or not a film would benefit from 3D didn’t even factor why they chose this film (and others on it’s way, like The Little Mermaid) to get the 3D treatment. So let’s call this rerelease of classic Disney movies with 3D upgrades out for what it really is: a cash grab. Disney is the master of milking old titles to get the maximum amount of profit from them (with George Lucas being a close second.) With 3D, Disney has another excuse to rerelease old movies to new audiences. I see both good and bad things that can come out from that. 

Let’s start with the bad: adding 3D to a movie does not automatically make it a better movie. That’s something I wish Hollywood would understand. The best uses of 3D are films that have, since the beginning of their development, decided to be done in 3D. That way, the choices made during the film’s development directly effects the use of 3D and the audience’s viewing experience (great examples are movies like Avatar, Hugo and Coraline.) The problem with adding 3D effects to a completed movie not made with 3D in mind is that you have no idea if the 3D would benefit it at all. In the end three things could happen: scenes could benefit from the 3D, scenes could be worsened by the 3D, or the 3D doesn’t do anything in particularly special. Beauty and the Beast falls into this third category easily, but depending on what movie they’re adding 3D to, it’s still just a crap shoot. I could go on and on about my thoughts on 3D in animation, but I won’t (at least not today.) So I’ll leave the subject for now with this thought: if 3D wants to be seen as more than just a gimmick, we need to start seeing it as less of an add-on and more as its own separate medium.

Now the good part about this 3D rerelease is, and it might seem like not much, but it’s the fact that it gives an excuse to bring this movie back. Honestly, if it wasn’t for the 3D pull, Beauty and the Beast wouldn’t get another worldwide theatrical rerelease like this. And I think that’s very important. There are many kids who probably have never seen a classic Disney musical like this. And even though it’s in “3D” let’s not forget that the animation itself is still 2D, and any excuse to get 2D animation back in theatres is a good excuse in my book. Maybe these types of events by Disney will inspire more traditional animated movies to be made in the future. Only time will tell. 

Overall, yeah, Beauty and the Beast is still awesome. Would I have seen a 2D version last week in theatres if I had the choice? Probably. But the 3D wasn’t distracting, and regardless it was well worth revisiting this epic tale, finding new things I enjoyed about it, and reminding myself why Disney is still regarded as on the finest animation companies in the world.

Now, here’s an amusing picture!

- Moo

2012: The Animation Apocalypse (Or Anipocalypse?)

The holiday season is nearing an end. I hope you all got that special gift you wanted, and gained several jolly pounds from absorbent amounts of feasting. It seems there’s only one thing left to do: ring in the new year! But looky what we have here! It’s the year 2012. And if Roland Emmerich films are to be believed, we’re rapidly approaching the end of the world. Crapballs. 

Well, if the end of the world is coming Dec 21, 2012, there’s really only one question I have…what’s my final year of animated films looking like? So I’m gonna do a quick look ahead at what animated goodies are on the horizon before the ol’ apocalypse, and quickly give my early opinions of each flick. Let’s see if this final year on earth is a worthwhile one for the animation fan! YEAH!

Beauty and the Beast (3D) - Jan. 13

We start out this doomed year by looking back on a classic love story. It’s arguably one of the most beloved animated movies ever; Disney’s Beauty and the Beast get’s a brand new shiny 3D re-release thanks to the top notch ticket sales of The Lion King’s 3D run. Really, my thoughts on this is the exact same as my thoughts on The Lion King in 3D. I’m not going to theatres because it’s in 3D; I’m going cause this is an amazing film. I always found the choice to use 3D on hand drawn animation odd… It’s almost like holding a beveled piece of paper infront of another piece of paper. Exciting, non? Beauty and the Beast is only one of many previous Disney and Pixar movies slated to get the 3D re-release treatment. It’s a shame we won’t get to Finding Nemo! Damn, pesky apocalypse…

The Secret World of Arrietty - Feb 17

Oh snap! We get a Studio Ghibli film before the apocalypse? Sign me up! Yeah, I know this movie was already released in other parts of the world; this is just the dubbed version. And yeah, typically in anime I’m a “subs b4 dubs” kind of man, but honestly Ghibli’s dubs are probably the best I’ve seen in anime. So yeah. I’m excited about this. Plus it’s based on The Borrowers! That just adds to the cool. Will I watch this in theatres? You bet! Will I watch it in the original japanese once I get ahold of my own copy? Also you bet. 

The Lorax - Mar 2

Eeeehhhhh…maybe…I don’t know….just maybe…it won’t suck. I’m hopeful…but I also have this deep seeded feeling that this movie is gonna suck hard. Ok listen. I’m a huge Dr. Seuss fan, but film adaptations of his works range from pure crap to “I didn’t hate that.” The latter being Horton Hears a Who, whom the writer of also wrote the script for this film. And a lot of people working on this also worked on Despicable Me. Hey, I didn’t hate that either! And Danny DeVito as The Lorax? Well, that sounds like perfect casting. Keeping my finger’s crossed on this one… Prove me wrong movie! Prove me wrong!

The Pirates! Band of Misfits - Mar 30

One thing I am grateful of is the amount of stop motion flicks before total global annihilation. Seeing as how long it takes to complete one of these films, it’s nice that these years of blood, sweat and plasticine won’t go to waste. And leading the bunch is the brits with Aardman Animation returning to their stop-motion roots, but without the talents of Wallace & Gromit and Chicken Run director, Nick Park. Park’s absence is a bit off-putting, especially cause the characters are clearly modeled in his style. Regardless, the movie looks like a blast, and Aardman pretty much always delivers the goods. And hey! It’s pirates! They’re still popular, right guys? …guys? …whatever, I’m excited. 

Dorothy of Oz - May…??

No film on this list is as much a wild card as Dorothy of Oz. Slated to release…May-ish…all we have to go on this one is the knowledge that it’s a sequel to The Wizard of Oz and it’s a musical. No trailer to be seen, but there’s some gorgeous concept art. Let’s just hope May-ish is accurate and this one reaches the 2012 mark. T’would suck to enter the apocalypse without even knowing more about this movie. My curiosity on this one knows no bounds!

Ice Age: Continental Drift - July 23

Really? They’re making more of these? Sigh… well what else to say? I liked the first Ice Age, but this Dreamworks franchise is almost as guilty as The Land Before Time for prehistoric themed unwanted sequels. Almost. Also, isn’t the titular “ice age” already over in this franchise? That title really doesn’t make any sense anymore. Ahh, who am I kidding. Do I really care? No. Will I see this movie? Probably not. Compile a version that only has the Scrat scenes in it, and maybe we’ll talk.

Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted - June 8

Speaking of Dreamworks and sequels nobody asked for…TA-DAH!! I don’t know…I’ve never really enjoyed this franchise. It seems to embody everything that people criticize Dreamworks Animation to be: a loud annoying film littered with animals doing things animals don’t normally do while making pop culture references abound. I expect nothing less. Also, like the pre-stated ”age of ice,” why is this franchise still called Madagascar? They haven’t been there since the first film. I know, branding and shit, but seriously Dreamworks! If you plan on having umpteenth animated sequels, you should have more foresight in naming your franchises. Seriously. 

Brave - June 22

Now this is more like it! After what many people consider Pixar’s first stumble with Cars 2, I think they’re in need of something very special to get them back into the grove of churning unfiltered dreams into animated gold. And Brave looks very special indeed. It’s a lot of firsts for Pixar: their first female lead character, their first time in a fantasy setting, their first…um…family of gingers? Regardless, this looks epic beyond belief. And it’s not a sequel! Or a remake! Just take my money, Pixar! Just take it! (Also, where in the world are they going to hide the Pizza Planet truck in this movie?!)

ParaNorman - Aug 17

Watch out Tim Burton! There’s more than one stop-motion, slightly creepy, animated movie coming out this year! Trying to jump on board with the same vibe as Coraline, ParaNorman follows a boy who can see and talk to ghosts as he’s tasked to save his town from a curse. Sounds fun to me! I don’t know the directors or writers of this one, so it can’t really fall back on credentials. But with so many movies being remakes and sequels, I’m always willing to give something new a shot. 

Frankenweenie - Oct 5

I have a love/hate relationship with Tim Burton. His early stuff is the stuff of goth kids’ wet dreams (that’s a compliment, by the way.) Vincent is still one of my favorit animated shorts, ever. But as time went on, I cared less and less if the Burton name was on a project. It didn’t help that most projects he directed were just remakes or reinterpretations of already existing franchises or stories…just making them more “twisted.” (Which, in Tim Burton land, means adding black and white stripes and spirals.) Luckily, Burton is finally getting back to his roots…by remaking his own shit. Ok, to be fair, even though there’s no trailer yet, this film, based on a live action short Burton directed early in his career, looks pretty damn cool. It’s classic Burton style with a classic Burton love of all things weird, creepy and fun, while still playing homage to classic horror movies. Don’t let me down this time, Tim. Hot Topic needs more t-shirt designs, after all. 

Rise of the Guardians - Nov 21

No trailer on this one either, and I knew nothing about this movie, so I consulted my good friend, IMDB, and it said, “Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Jack Frost and the Sandman band together to form a united front against the Bogeyman.” …soooo…it’s an holiday animated version of The Expendables? …this is either the greatest, or the worst idea for a movie…ever…there is no middle ground here.

And that’s all the theatrical animated releases before the ol’ end-o-days. Overall thoughts? …I’m actually pretty pumped! If this was my last year of animated goodness, we have some great variety in styles (hand drawn, CG, and stop-motion are all accounted for.) And on top of that, we also have a surprising balance between new and old (as in re-releases, remakes or just plane sequels.) There’s plenty of animated goodies I’m looking forward to before the apocalypse for sure! So I’m just gonna bringe on these forthcoming animated treats, and enjoy the apocalyptic ride. Bring it on, 2012!

Happy New Year folks!

- Moo 

The Muppets (A Review)

WARNING: This review is being written by an insanely huge fan of The Muppets, so I’m already kind of biased. That being said, it’s clear that this movie was aimed at crazy Muppet fans like myself, so everything kind of works out. 

Yes, The Muppets. That wonderful gang of fur and felt are back after 12 years without a movie. And after much online love in the form of viral videos, trailer parodies, and other goodies, the true next Muppet movie is here. So how is it? Does this movie have a true “Rainbow Connection?” Or should you be “Movin’ Right Along.” (Muppet fans see what I did there? Wocka wocka!)

The plot fits perfectly for how long The Muppets have been out of the limelight. Basically sometime ago the Muppets split up, and now it’s up to Gary (Jason Segel,) Mary (Amy Adams,) and Gary’s brother Walter (a new Muppet/superfan of the Muppets) to work with Kermit to reunite the old gang and raise enough money to save their theatre before the evil tycoon, Tex Richman (Chris Cooper,) tears down the theatre to drill for oil. The “get the gang back together” story has been done before, but it works so well here because…well….it’s the Muppets! And that comes with what you’d might expect from the Muppets! Tons of forth wall breaking jokes, vaudevillian type slapstick, celebrity cameos up the wazoo, and emotional songs that know exactly how to tug on the heartstrings. It’s hard really to go into too much detail without spoiling some of the jokes, but there were some great moments with some of the new songs, written by one half of Flight of the Conchords, Bret McKenzie, and an extended cameo by Jack Black. 

But of course, the true stars are The Muppets themselves, and the plot makes it so they’re in a situation where they flourish. It’s back to the basics: a bunch of crazy weirdos trying their best to put on a show, only this time the steaks are much higher. I felt a unique blend of excitement, nervousness and nostalgia going into the third act that I don’t think I’ve ever felt from a movie before. 

That being said, let’s call this movie out for what it truly is: Muppet fan servis. There are countless references and in jokes from past Muppet works, specifically to the Jim Henson years of The Muppet Show and the first Muppet movie. Hell! Even the choice of Muppets to get screen time was very specific, choosing not to have newer fan favorite characters like Pepe the King Prawn to have much screen time, instead bringing back characters that haven’t had time to shine in years! Characters like Marvin Suggs and Uncle Deadly!

Yes! Uncle Deadly! This guy! Obscure, yes. Awesome? Double yes.

The point being this was written by a rabid Muppet fan (good ol’ Jason Segel) for rabid Muppet fans. Hell! Even the new Muppet, Walter, is a rabid Muppet fan himself! So of course we’re going to immediately love him.

All in all, the bigger fan of the Muppets you are, I feel the more you’ll love this movie. And if you’re not a fan of the Muppets? Well…you’re reading the wrong review then. I’m also really curious to see how kids will react to this movie; kids who have never even seen a Muppet movie before! I hope it manages to capture the same wonder and fun that I experienced as a child. So go see this movie already! It’s pure concentrated Muppety fun!

Welcome back Muppets. It’s about damn time! 

5/5

- Moo

Green Lantern: The Animated Series (Pilot Review)

It’s really hard for me not to be emotionally tied to the success or failure of this franchise. I suppose a little context is needed: I’m a huge fan of superhero comics. One of my favorite books as both a kid, and now as an adult has to beGreen Lantern. I always wished that the property would expand beyond the comic books, but sadly the travesty that was the 2011 Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern movie taught me to be careful what I wish for. But lo and behold! Mayhaps this cloud has a silver lining after all…

When Tim Burton’s Batman film was released in 1989, Warner Brothers made an animated series to be released alongside the feature to further expose the character to the world and increase the character’s already incredible popularity. The show, produced by Bruce Timm, was simply called Batman: The Animated Series, and it was a massive critical and commercial hit. Personally speaking, it’s probably the best superhero cartoon ever produced, and I dare even call it one of the best animated series of all time. (Totally high praise. I know.) The success of that series led to numerous other DC cartoons, includingSuperman: The Animated Series and Justice League. All were tied in continuity wise with each other and were produced by Timm, making what fans affectionally call the “Timmverse.” Now with Green Lantern arguably more popular now than he ever has been, it only seemed logical to release an animated series of his very own, entitled Green Lantern: The Animated Series. So how is it? Is it as good as the Batman epiosdes of yesteryear, or is it worse than the live action movie?

…ok, I’ll save you some time with that last question. It’s better than the movie, but that’s not really hard to do.

I suppose I have to address the elephant in the room first. This is the first Bruce Timm/DC animated project that is fully done in CG. I don’t really know why. Maybe it’s cheeper to do CG than traditional animation, or maybe they wanted a more “modern” look. It doesn’t really matter why they used it, cause either way it’s here to stay. And I hate it. I wish I didn’t, but to me this art style looks either one of two ways: ugly or boring. Which is odd, cause you can clearly tell that the characters are still designed in that signature Bruce Timm angular, geometric style that I loved so much in previous shows. I guess it just shows that there certainly are strengths and weaknesses in both CG and traditional animation, and what works in one doesn’t always work in the other. It’s incredible how in 2D this art style looks bold and dynamic, yet in CG it looks flat and lifeless.

This is the same criticism I have with the current CG Star Wars: The Clone Wars animated series, in which they adapted Genndy Tartakovsky’s character design from the other (and frankly, better) animated series, which was 2D. I see nothing wrong with stylized human characters in CG, but unless you have a high level of detail on par with The Incredibles (which I’m sure would cost much, much more,) the characters will just look too plain and dull. The shininess of the character models doesn’t help either. I want to feel like I’m watching a show about super-powered space cops, but I feel like I’m watching a show about action figures that think they are super-powered space cops. And let’s be honest, Buzz Lightyear did that already.

Ok, ok. Enough raggin’ about the art style. Cause if the show has a solid script, I can at least look past that and enjoy the show on some level. With that said, the hour long pilot episode of the show, entitled Beware My Power, is…not bad. It’s not at the same level of quality as past DC cartoons yet, but it definitely has some potential. Our hero, Hal Jordan, is perfectly characterized here, displaying both his cocky atitude and his hard pressed stubbornness in full force. Also, one of my favorite characters, the tough as nails Kilowog, looks to be a central character in the series, (thankfully making up for his lack of screen time in the feature film.) They even planted the seeds for some very interesting backstory with Kilowog revolving around the tragedy that happened with his home planet.

However, even with the story, they made some very interesting, somewhat questionable, decisions. For one, this show clearly is built on a complete overarching plot. While some of Timm’s past DC works have an underlying, ongoing plot (Justice League comes to mind) most of the episodes were singular “one and done” adventures. It’s by no means a bad thing, but it is different than what I was expecting. Time will tell if it will pay off. I also don’t know if this series is tied into the “Timmverse” at all ( being the only DC show done in CG,) but I sure hope it is. How awesome would it be for Hal Jordan to eventually meet up with other cosmic DC characters like Lobo, the New Gods, or even Superman?

Speaking of over arching plot, now might be a good time to introduce the overarching villains of the show. The franchises’ main over arching villain, Sinestero, looks to be absent from this series in any form, possibly cause the movie wanted to have first dibs on the character if they ever decide (God forbid) to do a sequel, so instead we have the Red Lanterns. Looks like it’s time for MORE CONTEXT!

The Red Lanterns are still a relatively new group of villains in the Green Lantern comics. They are a rage-fueled version of the Green Lantern Corp, who are characterized as being violent and vengeful beasts. In the comics, the Red Lanters mostly act like mindless monsters except for their leader, Atrocitus, who has a personal vendetta against the Green Lanterns. The biggest change made is that all Red Lanterns now have the ability to think, talk and reason with each other clearly. They are also substantially less violent than their comic counterparts; they don’t even do their signature move of vomiting a napalm-like blood (yeah, comics are both weird and badass.) This does make the concept of “rage incarnate” villains feel a little neutered by comparison. I understand that some changes had to be made to make the show “kid friendly,” but without being mindless, angry monsters the Red Lanterns feel much more generic as villains. They don’t really have that spark that makes them unique. But again, it might be too early to judge. The writers might have something planed with the villains, particularly Atrocitus, that could be very entertaining.

All in all, the pilot wasn’t bad. I know that doesn’t sound like a glowing recommendation, but it does look like a show that has room to grow. There are some odd choices put into place so far (the choice to go CG being the biggest of the bunch,) but if you look past that, there might end up being a good show here. Only time will tell if Timm and his team will take advantage of the wealth of great stories and characters that DC’s history has to offer. I can only hope that this will be a good introduction to the Green Lantern universe for new audiences and hopefully new fans. It’s too early to say, but I’ll be watching closely and hoping the best.

No evil shall escape my sight.

- Moo

Puss in Boots (A Review)

Oh Puss in Boots! You are in an interesting position, aren’t you? You’re a spin-off of the Shrek franchise, which in my eye (for better or for worse) represents Dreamworks Animation as a whole (kind of like how Toy Story is the embodiment of Pixar.) But after 3 progressively worse sequels, and multiple shorts and holiday specials (Shrek the Halls? ugh…) the franchise is looking a little stale at this point. The only logical next step was to have a character spin off from the main franchise in hopes that it might bring a breath of fresh air to the company’s flagship fairy tale franchise. Enter Antonio Banderas reprising his role as the ever charming Puss in Boots, now in his own feature film.

It’s no surprise to say that after this Shrek overload, many people, including myself, have gotten a serious case of franchise fatigue. So does this adorable swashbuckler have enough substance to pull us back into their fairy tale littered world?

Probably the first thing to mention is that the movie isn’t a laugh out loud riot, and it clearly doesn’t mean to be. It’s not to say that it isn’t funny; the character of Puss is still his awesome mix of suave machismo meet cutesy adorableness, but that’s mostly at the beginning of the movie, and a little bit at the end. Most of the time this is a straight up action/adventure flick. That’s not a bad thing, but it does make the film feel slightly bi-polar, not really knowing if it wants to be funny or serious. A great example is my personal favorite segment of the movie, where we see Puss’ childhood growing up with Humpty Dumpty (played with earnest feeling by Zach Galifianakis.) Everything about the segment is great, and it shows some really dramatic moments, but before and after the flashback we have Puss’ new partner for the movie, Kitty Softpaws (a “meh” performance by Salma Hayek,) undermining the story in an attempt to get a small laugh in before and after the extended ”serious” part of the movie. The character’s disinterest (which I’m sure is supposed to be played as a joke) before and after the segment just doesn’t fit with the tone they’re going for in this part of the movie, and as a result it kind of ruins that nice dramatic moment we just had.

For the new characters, it does kind of feel like this film got the “left over” fairy tale characters that the Shrek franchise hasn’t already used, but they definitely made the most of it. The real issue here is the story, which is fun, but I can’t help but nitpick a lot about it. In the film Puss teams up with his ex-friend Humpty and new partner Kitty in a quest to get the magic beans from the “Jack and the Beanstalk” tale, which leads them to a castle in sky where they find a goose that lays golden eggs. There are plenty of good things in this tale, such as Puss’ quest to reclaim his honour. The fight and action scenes are a blast to watch. The art design for the giant’s castle in the sky is breathtaking. But for all this eye candy, the subsense of the story is lacking. Without revealing too much, there’s a twist in the third act that doesn’t make all that much sense, followed by a quick twist back for the final battle. Again, it’s like this movie wants to do something serious, but they’re afraid to stray too far from their formula. 

What it all boils down to is Puss in Boots is a good movie. But with a little more polishing and bolder story decisions could have been a great movie. I always thought Puss would make for a good spin-off character as he never was all that essential to the plot in Shrek movies to begin with (let’s face it, even though he had some of the biggest laughs in the Shrek franchise, he could have been easily taken out of the movies and the plot would have been the same.) Sadly, this movie is pulled between wanting to do a comedy or an adventure instead of finding a happy harmony of the two. And even the jokes get a little tiring after a while, reusing gags over and over again (Kitty stealing from Puss without Puss realizing was funny the first time…and only the first time…) And be prepared for A LOT of cat jokes and puns, of which I kind of got tired of near the end of this 90 minute feature. However, if you are a cat person, be prepared to fall completely in love with every gag and joke in this movie. 

After growing more and more tired of the Shrek franchise, I was pleased that this movie didn’t continue the downward trend in quality of those movies. However, after viewing Puss in Boots I still can’t shake the feeling that there were a lot of missed opportunities here. There’s lots of little things holding it back, almost as if it was afraid to try something new. And they really shouldn’t be! New is what they need! The bombardment of Shrek sequels have gotten so old, stale and crunchy. I’d love something new! And I almost got it with this spin-off, but at the end of the day we still end up with a very “Dreamworksy” animated movie here. One that has tired jokes, and that always has to end with a pop song and a dance montage. Always.

2.5/5

- Moo

Top 5 Animated Moustaches

Well, November has crept up once again. And what does that mean? Well gents, it means it’s time to grow out a moustache for Movember! For those not in the know, Movember is when gents grow a moustache during the month of November to raise money and create awareness for mens health, mostly focusing on prostate cancer. It’s a worthy cause to grow out the ol’ upper lip, but many guys are hessitent. Well, that’s what I’m here for!

To attempt to inspire more folks to grow out some striking facial hair, I present to you my list of the top five moustaches to grace an animated character! If this don’t inspire you, nothing will! So let’s see who made the list, eh?

5) Captain Hook

The flamboyant Captain may not know a thing about capturing/killing children, but does he ever know a thing or two about moustaches! Look at that sucker! It’s pointing straight up! It’s more expressive and sinister looking than his eyebrows! This gravity defying stache puts Salvador Dali to shame. 

4) Ned Flanders

Stupid sexy Flanders and his stupid sexy moustache. This neighborino’s thick push-broom moustache is such a part of this character, it’s hard to think of one without the other. Truly, he was made for his moustache. Plus, this do-gooder does a great job in reminding us that moustaches not only look good on sinners, but saints as well.

3) Dr. Robotnick 

As photoed here accepting his degree in kick-ass moustachology. More specifically, I’m picking the Robotnick from the inexplicably insane Adventure of Sonic the Hedgehog cartoon, as this Robotnick stache was more manic disheveled. Just like a mad sciences moustache should be. 

2) Snidely Whiplash

So, you wanna be a villain? You want to tie hapless damesels to railroad tracks on a near daily basis? Well then, you best follow Mr. Whiplash’s footsteps and grow one of these curly suckers. Because, honestly, what’s the use of doing despicable villainy if you don’t have a proper moustache to twirl while doing so, ‘miright?

1) Yosemite Sam

It must be tough to be Yosemite Sam. He’s a high-tempered, gunslinging shorty who constantly get outwitted by a rabbit. But hey! When you have a moustache that is more than two thirds your own hight, you must be doing something right with your life. Kudos Yosemite. At least in this category, you came out on top. 

- Moo