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

Frozen (A Review)

Gosh darn, Disney!! You do not know how to market your own shit!!

This movie isn't about the snowman...if you can believe it...

I was all set to hate on this movie. I had a whole "Disney doesn't know what they're doing no more" rant prepared and everything! The previews looked dumb, the characters looked bland, the tone felt like it was trying way to hard to be "hip" (that's what the kids are saying nowadays, right? "Hip?") I just had a bad feeling about Frozen. Hell, even with the one word adjective title, it felt like I've seen all this before. I even referred to Frozen as "Tangled on ice" for the longest time leading up to this film. Well, as it turns out Disney still knows what they're doing... but Disney's marketing department doesn't know how to market this movie at all. Which is weird, cause you'd think this would be an easy sell. It's a classic Disney formula, involving huge influences from the "Broadway sensibility" that the 90s "Disney renaissance" era brought to animation, but with some awesome twists and turns that make Frozen stand out on it's own and actually ends up being a truly unique fairy tale flick. In other words: DON'T TRUST THE PREVIEWS GUYS! THIS FILM IS ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD GUYS! REALLY!

Elsa also gets a sweet ice dress that shows off her legs... damn grrrl!

The film is loosely adapted in typical Disney fashion (in other words, incredibly loosely) from the Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale The Snow Queen. In Frozen, the plot follows the characters of Anna and Elsa, two sisters who are princesses of the kingdom of Arendelle. The older sister, Elsa, is born with mysterious powers to create ice and snow. One day while playing with Anna as a child, Elsa accidentally strikes Anna in the head with her magic. The King and Queen are able to save Anna's life, but as a result they had to remove any memories of her sister's power, and keep the two sisters separate until Elsa can controls her powers. Unfortunately (and since this is a Disney movie) the parents die in a storm, leading to Elsa to become the queen. At Elsa's coronation she looses control of her ice abilities, takes off into the isolation of the mountains, and covers the kingdom in an eternal winter. This leaves Anna to go on a Wizard of Oz-like quest, meeting up with fun side characters along the way, to eventually try to meet and talk to her sister and hopefully find a way to bring back summer.

What could possibly go wrong! ...oh yeah....ice powers...

And that's only the first act! The script does a great job introducing all of this backstory in a entertaining way. But more importantly, it in no way feels forced. What's even more impressive is that once Anna starts playing the "Dorothy" role in their quest, things still don't go as predictably as you might think from a Disney flick. It's not a typical fantasy quest, as there's no dragon to slay, no evil kingdom, no big baddy at the end. There's just two sisters trying to patch things up between them.

And there in is the biggest change to the Disney formula: this is a story about two sisters. That's kind of a big deal. (And not just cause Disney can add not one, but two more entries into their highly profitable "Disney Princess" lineup.) It's amazing because the focal point for this whole story isn't about finding romance. In a Disney princess movie! It's not about romance! That is just crazy!! I mean, there is love interests in there, and they play a part in the plot, but it really takes a back seat to the true focus of this story. This film is about family. The familial love is what pushes the story forward, and the complex sister relationship is something that is not only not seen in a Disney animated feature, it's a relationship that isn't really prevalent in Hollywood movies in general. So kudos on that call Disney. Ya did good.

Professor X recruits Elsa in the Frozen 2...hopefully...

That leads me to talk about my favorite part of the film: Elsa. Oh man, do I love this character. It's wonderful to get a Disney character who is not good, not evil, just a confused shade of grey. She's far and wide the most interesting personality in this film as she's in a position where she wants to be a good sister and ruler of the kingdom, but bad things happen because of her and her uncontrollable powers. She lives in a world that hates and fears her (just like the X-Men!) and she doesn't even know how to stop what she's doing (just like the X-Men!) It's a coming of age super-power metaphor for puberty (just like....ah, you get it...) In fact, as Elsa finally lets loose her powers during her big power song "Let It Go," you can really feel her happiness and freedom in what is probably the best musical number in the film both thanks to the jaw dropping effects animation of Elsa building her ice castle, and the singing power of Broadway star Idina Menzel (who you may know as Elphaba from Wicked....wow, just clueing in that there's a lot of Wizard of Oz similarities going on in this film...neat.)

Oh yeah. And by the way, this is a musical. Surprise! Didn't know it was a musical because the previews didn't even mention this fact? Well...yeah! This is a musical. In fact, music is a huge part of this film. Kind of a big thing to sweep under the rug, Disney marketing! And maybe if you embraced it, more people would be inclined to see this frickin' film! Because, surprise-surprise, the songs are pretty awesome. But whatever, Disney marketing, I'm sure you know what you're doing. ...aaaanyway...

Did someone ask for an EPIC SONG CUE?!

The music is terrific. Much like 90s Disney films employed Broadway familiar employees of the time, here we're treated with some fun musical numbers with a very modern sensibility. Along with getting Wicked flashbacks from Idina Menzel's performance, the songs are penned from Robert Lopez, known for his comedic writing from Avenue Q and The Book of Mormon. And while of course writing for a Disney movie means no raunchy or inappropriate comedy like in those musicals, there's just a huge sense of fun, excitement and at times epic scale to the musical numbers. They're big, loud, exuberant and the centrepieces for all the major plot points. And in my opinion, that's exactly what I want from my Disney flick.

They got different hair! ....that's...somethin'...right?

Now, you might think I've pulled a complete 180 degrees on my opinion of this movie compared to my opinion of its previews, and truth be told, that's not entirely the case. I was in awe with the amazing background designs (especially Elsa's ice castle,) but the character designs...meeeh. There's really no denying the character designs play it a little on the safe side, in that the style is very similar to Tangled. Which wouldn't be a bad thing, but I felt at least in Tangled we got more of a variation between characters, with more unique personalities just from the designs. Elsa and Anna's faces have only tiny variations between that of Rapunzel's (and each other's for that matter.) And while I enjoyed the moose character, Sven, acting like a dog, there's no denying that he was trying to fill that animal sidekick role that the horse in Tangled already did so well (as well as having a much more unique personality.) All in all, most human characters I think could have been designed more interestingly, or with a dash more creativity. True it's a safe design choice, and it's not that bad, but I just kinda wish they'd push the envelope design-wise a bit more.

Graduate of the Lindsay Bluth school of dance 

On the animation side, it's looking good, but I think could've been better. There's a couple of standout character animation performances, one of which being the charmingly clumsy Anna, whose movements are absolutely beaming with personality. Other characters I kinda wished for more animation to convey more of a personality, such as the lead males, Kristoff and Hans (not bad animation mind you, just a little bland.) Then way on the other hand, there's this random Duke character, who is waaaay over the top and cartoony. It seemed like this character was forced in order to get some comic relief in there with his quick pace and awkwardly spastic movements. I know he was trying to be funny, but this character's cartoony animation didn't really fit in with the other, more realistically, animated human characters. But with that said....the effects! Oh man! The effect animation on this flick is just frickin' amazing. The snow looks amazing, and you can really tell they did tests and research on the stuff to make sure this icy wonderland looked brilliant.

Damn it snowman...you've warmed my icy heart...

Now I know what you're thinking: "you're almost finished your review, and you didn't even mention the snowman!" Yes, the snowman. Olaf. That oddly designed, obvious comedic relief that Disney has been forcing down people's throats as the main icon in their ad campaign for this movie. I thought I'd talk about Olaf last because, in many ways, he kind of embodies perfectly how I felt about this film. Going in it felt like he was forced. Really forced. Like Disney said, "you're going to watch this snowman...and you're going to love him...LOVE HIM DAMN IT!!" And I was all set to "stick it to The Man." I was totally going to reject this false snow icon! Here I thought I was gonna hate the snowman, but upon seeing him...damn it. I kinda love him. True, sometimes his antics were a little irritating, but mostly I found him charming, funny, and even a little heartwarming. And that, in and of itself, is how I see Frozen as a whole: charming, funny and even a little heartwarming. I admit that, like the townspeople who judged Elsa harshly because of her powers, so too did I judge this movie before I saw it. So please, ignore how Disney markets this movie. Ignore the fact that they're awkwardly trying to hide Disney's musical roots, or how they're not showing that this is a unique story about two estranged sisters. Just go see it for yourself and be the judge. For me, it was a great example of classic Disney storytelling tackling a new type of fairy tale for a new audience in a new age.

I guess that'll teach me to judge a snowman before I get to know him.

4/5

- Moo

Monsters University (A Review)

Wowie! It's been a while!

Oh yeah. The character design department must've had fun!

It's been 12 years since the original Monsters, Inc., which was the 4th feature produced by Pixar in 2001. It was about the time when Pixar was really hitting their stride as a studio and right before the insane boom Pixar had with Finding Nemo. And even though the characters were charming and the film did well (pretty much becoming instant classic with both kids and adults) there really wasn't any need for a sequel. Not only did they finish all of the main character's story arcs, but it also solved the world's great energy problems in a fun and satisfying way. So the only logical way to bring back Mike and Sully to the big screen would be through a prequel. And so we take our main characters back to their college days, before they were top employees at Monsters, Inc., and when they were unknown students at Monsters University.

Mike's wisely at the forefront this time around.

For those not in the know, our two main characters are James P. Sullivan (aka Sully) and Mike Wazowski (John Goodman and Billy Crystal) who meet for the first time while attending school to learn how to become scarers. Scarers are monsters who enter children's rooms and scare them because they need those children's screams to power their way of life (wow, it's kinda a weird concept now that I've actually written it all down like that, but whatever. It works.) The tricky part is because this is a prequel, we already know exactly how it's all going to end. That said the film does a commendable job at keeping me guessing on how it's going to get there by having these characters start off in such a different places during Monsters University comparatively to the first movie (personality and relationship wise.) While Sully was definitely the heart and focus of Monsters, Inc., it's clear Monsters University is all about Mikey. Here Mike is an enthusiastic nerd with big dreams of becoming a scarer despite not being all that scary himself, and Sully is a lazy jock-like jerk who forgoes hard work and coasts through his classes mostly relying on his family's reputation and his natural talents.

Oh shit...just look at him! Something bad's gonna happen to this guy...

The two start off hating each other, so the film is all about how they grow to eventually become the inseparable duo we know from Monsters, Inc. It's great fun to see these two interact with each other in a new and interesting way. Not to spoil too much, but their rivalry is not only the cause of the film's major conflict, but it grows to a point where if they don't at least cooperate together, neither of them will get what they want. And once the movie ends and we get to familiar territory, it all felt like everything tied together nicely, and every piece of the puzzle finally landed in the right place. Even Randel, the villain from Monsters, Inc. voiced by Steve Buscemi, got a quick little backstory, and while they could have found a way for him to be more involved in the overarching story of this film, it was still a joy to see how he got to be so villinous.

The brothers of Oozma Kappa!

It's pretty much impossible not to compare this movie to Monsters, Inc., so let me get this out there right now: no, this movie isn't as good as Monsters, Inc., but it is really good in it's own right. Monsters, Inc. had a lot of unique things going for it that this movie just can't have because it is a prequel. Things such as the stakes being much higher in the original and the clever themes and parallels to real world energy problems. That and the "adorable factor" brought on by the human child Boo couldn't possibly be featured in this movie (due to her not even being born yet,) so don't expect any of that, which is a shame because she was one of the most memorable parts of the first movie. But you know what Monsters University is? It's fun. Hands down fun. It's a smaller, personal tale, but it's a fun one that has plenty of clever jokes for both adults and kids, and memorable characters and moments. The college setting allows for the writers to work in tons of references to college focused comedies like Animal House and Revenge of the Nerds. And it checks off all the college movie stereotypes in fun and wonderfully designed new monsters, such as the stuffy, no-nonsense dean (played by Hellen Mirren as some millipede/dragon hybrid) and the preppy, jerky frat-boy (played with wonderful ego from Nathan Fillion.) But the best gems are the new characters featured in Sully and Mike's fraternity "Oozma Kappa," which features an abundance of memorable moments from the charming "losers on campus." My favorite being Art, a newage philosophy major monster played by Charlie Day, who doesn't contribute anything of relevance to the plot, but has some great oneliners and his design is so much fun and different compared to the rest of the cast (he's like a fuzzy, purple slinky with a face! Brilliant!) Close second is Joel Murray's character, Don; a mature student whose optimistic attitude would almost put Ned Flanders to shame. Really the characters are why you come to see this movie; they're crazy fun in both their appearance  their acting, animation and their writing.

So is this Pixar's deepest film? Definitely not. Even with a very poignant 3rd act and a surprisingly dramatic monologue from Billy Crystal's Mike, its themes don't nearly resonate as deeply as something like Wall-E, Up, Ratatouille, the Toy Story franchise, or even Monsters, Inc. But is it one of Pixar's funniest films? Well... actually, probably. It's up there! Director Dan Scanlon doesn't have many productions under his belt, but he really managed to make this a creatively fun feature with some genuinely hilarious visual humour and even some much needed heart to this story. So if you want a fun time, something to just take your mind off and watch some enjoyable animation, this is definitely a good one to see. And while it's not as great as Pixar in it's heyday  it's definitely a step up from what they've been producing in recent years.

And at the very least, hey! At least it's not another Cars sequel!

...ugh...

4/5

- Moo

Brave (A Review)

If yew had the chance to change yewr fate, woudjya?

I feel kinda bad for Pixar. It's tough to be on top. With an amazing run of movies, a couple of which have cemented their place in cinema history, the expectations of them are insanely high. I think that's why everyone was a little bit taken aback last summer when Cars 2 rolled out. It was the first Pixar movie most people could look at and say, "y'know, that wasn't very good." Especially when you consider the amazing slew of movies that came just before that (Toy Story 3, Up, and Wall-E.) With that in mind, people want everything from Brave. They want it to be the end all, be all, Pixar film. Back to form. Back on top! And now that it's here I can proudly report to you all that Brave is...good. Yes, it's good. Brave is a good movie. Is it another instant classic that will once again be some of the best storytelling Hollywood has to offer? No. But it's good. I understand being simply "good" to some people is a disappointment, but read on and you'll see there's plenty to love in this feature, as well as some choices that, in my opinion, don't quite pay off. Not to mention a huge bait and switch by Pixar that may prove to be the film's undoing.


First of all, let's start with the best part of Brave, the visuals. Holy hell, to say this movie is a feast for the eyes is an understatement. It's a 10 course meal and an after dinner mint for your eyes. After this movie your eyes will never go hungry again. Taken place in medieval Scotland, Pixar once again pushes it's rendering techniques to a whole new level, showing some amazing vistas of the Scottish highlands. Graphic nerds will go ga-ga over some of the beautiful details in the textures, as well as the amazing physics on the gorgeously untamed red curls of Merida (our main character.) And the animation is once again top notch. Every character moves in such unique ways. Every little nuance in the movements is perfectly planned out, giving memorable quirks and an abundance of personality to this cast of characters.

The royal family: I love em all!

Speaking of the characters, I love them. Every character in the movie, I loved. There was something about their chemistry, and the way they all were presented that just gave every character an enjoyable performance (with only some reservations about a witch character, who at points seems like she was in the wrong movie.) Merida's family took front and center: the loving yet overbearing mother Queen Elinor (played by Emma Thompson,) the rambunctious yet kind hearted father King Fergus (played by Billy Connolly,) and three minuscule, mischief-making, mute triplets who provided a bulk of the movie's visual and slap-slick humour. Speaking of humour special mention should go out to the three feuding clan leaders and their respective hopeful suitor's for the hand of Princess Merida. While not overall that important to the story, the clans of Dingwall, MacGuffin and MacIntosh (I see what you did there Pixar) definitely gave the best laughs of the movie. 


But I've yet to mention specifically about our main character, Merida (played by Kelly MacDonald.) True, she's a pretty big cliche in the respect that she's a princess longing for more, and desires freedom from her royal duties, but Pixar does its best to give her such a twist in her personality to make her more then just a "girls can kick ass too" character. She's a bit of a goof. She loves a good laugh. She can be undignified, yet charming. And all these characteristics are strengthened even more when she interacts with the other characters, such as her father. On the ball, Merida and her family feel and act like real people. It's skillfully acted in both the voices and in the animation, and they're able to get some great emotion from the performances. Something tells me if these characters were inserted into a more interesting plot, this would be a grade A movie. And yet...

This gorgeous promotional art doesn't accurately portray the plot...but it looks nice!

Ok, now we come down to the elephant in the room: the plot. Or rather, the misleading plot. While I won't spoil anything in this review, I will say that the trailers don't showcase an event that happens at the beginning of the 2nd act of the movie, and this huge event is what brings about the rest of the movie's plot. Most of the times I like being surprised by not knowing the true nature of a movie's plot, but in this case the plot transformed what I believed was to be an epic adventure on a grand scale to a very small story about the importance of family...and that's kinda lame. It's a shame too, because we're already in such an aforementioned beautiful and epic setting that it just screams for a larger scale story. It's like expecting Lord of the Rings, and instead getting a movie where hobbits never leave The Shire and have breakfast, or something. The potential to do a story on a grander scale is there, it's just never really taken advantage of and that's a shame. I mean, it is possible to have a film about the importance of family and still make it epic. Hell, Pixar already did it. It was called The Incredibles. And it was awesome.

Sadly, this picture more accurately portrays the plot

So for a moment let's ignore that the adventurous character of Merida is not used to her fullest potential. And let's ignore the fact that this is not the sprawling epic that Pixar advertised to us. Removed from our expectations, does this film's plot still hold up as a good movie? The answer is a resounding...kinda. And again, this is hard to explain without exposing the movie's massive twist, but I'll do my best. Long story short, the plot we get feels very safe. Critics have said that this is Pixar's take on a Disney princess story, which isn't 100% true. While Merida does show a lot of the same characteristics and desires as a standard Disney princess has (all be it with a very Pixar-ish way of portraying the character,) this film is not a lot of things Disney princess movies are. It's not a musical, it's not based on a well known fairytale, and most of all it's not a love story (thank God.) It can, however, be perfectly compared to another Disney animated movie that is not a princess tale at all...but again even saying the name of this movie would spoil Brave's secret plot twist. Sooo...ugh! Damn it Pixar! See how hard it is to talk about your movie?!

Ok, fine! Last thing I'll say about the movie's plot, and hopefully you'll get what I'm saying. The movie shares less to do with The Little Mermaid and more to do with Freaky Friday. That's right, the live action teen comedy where the mother and daughter switch bodies and come to better understand each other through this magical happenstance. The focus in Brave is clearly the relationship between daughter and mother. And honestly, that's not a bad idea, and I like having the focus on two female leads for a change, but they just don't make it terribly exciting. Hell, one of the major climaxes of the film is Merida giving a speech while her mother watches on. What doesn't help the matter is the fact that we don't really have a true villain in this film. Most of the conflict arises from a series of character's misunderstandings, which doesn't do the best job of ramping up the drama. True, there is an antagonistic element in the feared "demon bear" Mordu (who is skillfully designed to be a wonderfully terrifying beast,) but he's much more of a force of nature then a true villain for our mother/daughter duo, and in that respect only poses a physical challenge rather then providing a true conflict for our characters to overcome. 

Badass archery. It's so in right now.

The first thing I said once I got out of the theatre seeing Brave was "that was different," and it really is, but not really in a positive way. There are elements from Disney films, and tropes from Pixar's past, but they both come together to make a film that doesn't feel like either studio's work. It's a weird Frankenstein of a film that doesn't hit the highs it was aiming for, but it's still a commendable effort. And honestly, if it wasn't for the amazing execution that comes with a Pixar movie in terms of acting, animation, and visual fidelity, this could have been easily a straight up bad movie. But lucky for us, it's not. It's just good. And that's alright. Maybe it's time to realize that the folks at Pixar aren't the invincible Gods we make them out to be, sitting on Mount Olympus manufacturing animated films into pure gold. We should face the fact that not every Pixar film will be gold. Some like Brave will be silver, and some will be "Cars 2" bronze (especially with the prequel, Monster University, coming up as their next feature. Honestly, one can only get so excited over the prospect of a prequel.) Maybe then we won't be so disappointed when a just plain ol' good movie like Brave comes out. Either way, Brave, while not what is expected, could have been much worse in less capable hands, and still rightfully deserves paying a trip to visit the highlands and these wonderfully enduring characters.

3.5/5

- Moo

Tron: Uprising (First Impressions)

Welcome back to The Grid.

Ahhh, Tron! Is there anything quite as geeky as Tron? Well...ok maybe ReBoot, but apart from that, the 1982 film Tron is perhaps the pinnacle of geeky genre movies. There's lots of reasons for this. It was a great pioneer for computer graphics. It's a complex metaphor set in a personified version of a computer's mainframe. It makes reference to primitive arcade games, yet makes them cyberpunk and badass. But probably the reason most nerds connect with the franchise, and indeed why I seem to enjoy it as well, is because even though it's a property owned by perhaps the most powerful company in the world (no, not Apple, I'm talking about Disney) it still feels very much like the underdog franchise. It was panned by critics and sold bellow what was expected, but we don't care! We still like it, and no one can tell us otherwise. There's this beer from Nova Scotia called Alexander Keith's whose slogan is "those who like it, like it a lot." And that's Tron in a nutshell. It's a cult film in every sense of the word. And yet somehow, someway, one of those cult members worked their way up the ladder at Disney and proclaimed, "hey you guys! Remember Tron? Yeah, Tron! Let's do another one of those!" And boom! In 2010 we finally got a sequel in the form of Tron Legacy...and of course it got panned by critics and sold bellow expected. Whoops! C'est la vie! Ah whatever, I liked that one too. And apparently so did enough people because it must have sold at least enough tickets to spawn an animated series. Yes, the metaphorical light-cycle keeps on cyclin' as we have more Tron goodies from the house of mouse in the form of a 10 part miniseries, Tron: Uprising. Could this franchise finally be getting the love and attention it deserves? Is this a sign of good things to happen on The Grid? ...like hell would I know! I don't work at Disney. But they are throwing us niche Tron fans a bone here, so the least we can do is watch the series and be grateful there's any new Tron at all. So I watched the first episode and hoped for the best.

Very cool design work here.

The first thing I need to point out about Tron: Uprising is how it looks, which is amazing. The world of Tron has always been, and will always be, it's own distinctive style and Uprising continues that tradition. The darkest of darks mixed with the whitest of whites with streaks of blue and red light is a simple, yet striking art style that you simply can't see anywhere else other than in the Tron universe. But aside from the general aesthetics that come with Tron, there's something unique of this series that deserves to be pointed out. Much like how the 1982 and 2010 were unique in it's styles, bringing about another level of graphic fidelity for live action film, I feel that's what Tron: Uprising is doing in the world of televised animation. While the backgrounds (and the soundtrack for that matter) is definitely rooted more in 2010 film, the design of the characters are something you don't see in the standard animated series. Designed by Robert Valley, the characters all have a distinct face, most being very tall and slender with sharp shadows. Immediately it stands apart from every other action show on TV. The whole package together is so striking and unique. The closest thing I can compare it to is Aeon Fluxx, and even that isn't totally accurate.

Quick! While it's still, soak up that design folks! Soak it up!!

How the show is animated is a bit of a anomaly as well. I read in an interview that this series is a mix of 2D and 3D animation. What was animated with what, I could only make an educated guess (pretty sure the faces are 2D while the bodies and vehicles are 3D) but what's important is, again, it's a style I haven't seen before. Does it work as well as the design? ...eeeh....kinda. In big action scenes, things look amazing. The fights and the chases all look smooth and the style really gets to shine. And also when things are perfectly still you can really soak up the design (I mean, just look at these screen shots!) But where things begin to break down is in the subtel acting. You know, dialog heavy scenes with very little movement. For some reason when the characters have to act in these scenes they seem a bit clunky, or stiff, or they move not quite right. It didn't totally pull me out of the experience, but it is something worth mentioning, and maybe it's something that will improve as the series progresses.

Oh yeah. Dat Tron...

But everyone already knew that Tron looks awesome, that was never the issue. What the critics did bash it for was its focus of flash over substance. In other words, it looks pretty but the plot sucks. While I don't think the films deserved quite the criticism they got (I thought Legacy wasn't a perfect film, but I did enjoy the plot more than most reviewers did) I do somewhat see their point. Does Uprising continue this tradition as well? Well, with only part one out of ten released so far it's hard to say for sure. The miniseries will take place between Tron and Tron Legacy. As shown in the pilot, Beck's Beginning, it will follow a young mechanic program named Beck (played by Elijah Wood) who has taken it upon himself to disguise himself as the fallen hero Tron and start a rebellion against the dictatorial forces of Clu (Tron Legacy's antagonist) under the command of General Tesler (a new antagonist for the series) as they attempt to control all of The Grid. So far it looks like a basic hero's journey of a young dude fighting back against an evil force, gets trained by an old vet and eventually realizes his potential. Knowing what the status quo will be, since I've seen Tron Legacy, I feel like not much will come as a surprise to me in the forthcoming episodes, but who knows! Maybe there'll be a couple of twists coming up that I won't see coming. All in due time, I suppose. But if you're a Tron fan, you'll have lots to love here. Having the main character be a mechanic is a perfect way to showcase all these wicked light-based vehicles, and even the original actor of Tron, Bruce Boxleitner, makes a return to the character.

What I love is the seriousness and dryness in which the plot is delivered. It's taking itself very seriously, and while there's nothing unsafe for children to watch, the tone of the show is much more mature then the standard animated action show you'd see on TV today. Which, if you ask me, is a wonderful jump forward in terms of western mainstream animated content. It's one step closer to having animated shows be seen as more then just kid's stuff, which is definitely commendable.

Geometric shapes never looked so ominous.

So the question remains, should I recommend this series to anyone? Well, I'm once again thinking of that beer slogan, "those who like it, like it a lot." If you liked the tone and the plot from the previous films, then I have a feeling you'll like this too. If you didn't....welll...at least you got a lot of pretty colours to look at, right? And if you've never seen anything to do with Tron before? I think Uprising is a pretty good jumping on point. At the end of the day, it really is something different and, in some ways, new. And when something is trying something new and interesting, the least you could do is keep an eye on it, because who knows! That might be the innovator for years to come. So good luck Tron: Uprising! I look forward to returning to The Grid and seeing where this will all lead.

Recommended!

- Moo

The Pirates! Band of Misfits (A Review)

Yup...they're pirates alright!

Aardman Animations: where to begin? When you think of quality stop motion animation, you think of these fine British blokes. Their Wallace & Gromit series is a critical and commercial smash, and their fabulous film Chicken Run might possibly be one of my favorite movies of all time...so in that regard The Pirates! Band of Misfits (aside from also having an irritating exclamation point in the middle of it's title) has a lot to live up to. Does it reach that benchmark set by it's predecessors? Short answer, no. Long answer, no but only cause what came before it was really, really good. Longer answer: well just read the rest of the review, pal.

The film follows a pirate captain cleverly named....er....The Pirate Captain (played by Hugh Grant) and his titular band of misfit pirates. The Pirate Captain, who's much too cheery to be a cut-through on the high seas, attempts to win the coveted pirate of the year competition after years and years of sucking at being a pirate. The twist here (and it really is a huge plot point that wasn't even hinted at in the trailers, so turn away now if'n ye care not for spoilers) is that they meet up with a young, lovesick Charles Darwin (surprisingly played by David Tennant, who I think should do more voice work in the future.) Darwin wants to use The Pirate Captain's pet dodo bird to win a fancy science competition and woo the pirate hating Queen Victoria (Imedla Staunton.) The plot sounds a little convoluted because...well...it is. But we'll get back to that in a bit.

Right now let's start with the good: this film looks awesome. It's classic Aardman character design, with their classic insane amount of detail in each scene. The animation is charming and impressive, especially in a chase scene (something Aardman studios seem to excel at from past features) midway in the film that starts at the top of a mansion and ends up on the city streets and mostly takes place in a bathtub. That sequence alone is worth the price of admission if you ask me. It's not only very creative, but masterfully animated.

However, noticeable modern shortcuts do rear their heads, both in animation and in music. There's a notable amount of added CG elements, mostly with water and other special effects which, as a stop motion purist, I cry foul. But what can you do? Aardman has successfully dipped their toe in the CG waters with fully CG flicks like Flushed Away and Arthur Christmas, so it's not like their CG division is going anywhere. And yes, animating this much spot-motion water would be really, really really, really hard/impossible. But you can't deny that even though it takes an insane amount of work compared to the compter generated route, practical effect will always be more interesting to watch and have more character then digitally added ones. Especially on a stop-motion feature like this where the GC doesn't quite match the clay art-style. But maybe I'm just being a little bit too curmudgeonly old fashioned, so I'll just move along from this issue.

Yes, water's pretty impossible to animate in stop-motion. You win this round movie.

What personally irks me a bit more is this film's liberal use of modern music. It's one thing to have present day speech and current jokes in a period setting, but for some reason if there's more then one modern rock song in a movie that takes place in a classical setting it just pulls me out of the experience. And I'm sorry, just sticking in the Flight of the Conchords song "I'm Not Crying" during a sad montage might work if you didn't know the song existed beforehand, but if you do, it just feels a little lazy.

It's Victoria Day Weekend here in Canada! Celebrate by killing a pirate!

None of these points are deal breakers for me though. I'm definitely picking at nits here, so let's dip right into the thick of this movie and talk about the characters. Hugh Grant: he's awesome. He steals the show as The Pirate Captain, bringing a loveable, ridiculous buffoonery to our central protagonist. That's both good and bad. On the good we have this awesome and loveable character fully ready for hilarity and goofy pirate gags, and on the bad he totally outshines any and all other characters in the film. The only other characters that can hope to compete is the over the top madness of Queen Victoria with her inexplicable rage-filled pirate prejudice, and possibly Charles Darwin's monkey butler (who happens to have some of the best gags of the film.) Darwin himself is decent and serves the plot well, so there's really not much to complain about there. What I do have to complain about is every other side character. The other pirates competing for pirate of the year? Bland and forgettable. One gag ponies who serve as obstacles with faces for our main protagonist. The Pirate Captain's crew? Bland and forgettable. While they all have their own visual quirks (a guy with gout, an albino, and my personal favorite, a woman in a fake beard) none of them really have any stand out personality defining character moments except for The Pirate Captain's second in command (played by Martin Freeman) with his bromance with the captain. Other then that, the titular band of misfits didn't really do anything interesting or impacting...at all.

Speaking of not interesting, let's talk about their pet dodo bird. Sweet Jimmy Crickets, this bird was dull, and that's kind of a big problem. Actually, this unlikely character is the perfect example of this movie's shortcomings. Let's for a moment compare the bird from Pirates! Band of Misfits (named Polly, by the way) to Kevin, the bird from Pixar's Up.

The fight of the feathered MacGuffins!!

Both are flightless birds who serves as the main MacGuffin that both the bad guys and the good guys want to get their grubby little paws on. The deference is I cared about the outcome of Kevin when I didn't give two shits about Polly. Why? Because the acting with Kevin was so likeable. She was a character with her own personality and we, as an audience, fell in love with Kevin just as the characters did. On the other hand, we're told that Polly is the beloved mascot of the pirate ship and they all adore her. But being told we're supposed to love someone isn't enough to rouse an emotional response. Polly shows no real character, no real motivations, and is really just a dumb clueless bird. Which could be funny if it was played up or if most of the plot didn't revolve around her. But they didn't play it up, and the plot does revolve around her. When Polly is in peril, I really just don't care about her. And there in lies the major problem I have with the plot.

A band of misfits they are! But don't get attached, the movie's not about them.

As the plot goes on, we're rushed from one location to another and the main goals of the characters also change quite frequently from scene to scene. It all gets a little unfocused. Thematically, we're supposed to remember the overarching goal of The Pirate Captain winning the pirate of the year competition is what's driving all this action, but sadly the goal of keeping the Pirate Captain's ego afloat doesn't make much of an intriguing investment for an audience member. So emotionally we're supposed to remember deep down it's the Pirate Captain's connection with his beloved crew that is the important motivation for driving the action, but that also is hard when his crew (including the dull dodo) hasn't really made any connection to us, the audience. As a result, by the time we reach the story's climax there doesn't seem like there's very much as stake, which is the last thing you want to be thinking during the third act of one's movie.

Truth be told, I hate to harp on this movie. And despite my ramblings, it may surprise you that I did enjoy this film quite a bit. There were so many good jokes (and good clean jokes at that, which is so much harder to write,) the visual humour was spot on, and the gags all hit their targets. I just feel with a little more heart and soul between the characters (especially from the captain's crew, and not just his bland second in command) this movie could have been up there with Wallace & Gromit levels of awesomeness.

Hugh Grant as The Pirate Captain: hopefully we'll see him again.

The Pirates! Band of Misfits is a misleading title, as it deals very little with the titular band of misfits. In fact, in the UK the title is The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists, and while that title is certainly odder (are arguably less marketable) than the US version, it does more accurately convey what we're going to see on the big screen. Actually, in a weird way this movie kind of feels like a sequel to a hypothetical better movie. There's so many characters that they don't spend time developing, other characters the movie assumes we already are invested in, and there's numerous mentions of bigger (possibly better) adventures this crew has been on. Aardman has gone on record staying they would like to continue this series, which would explain the odd placement of punctuation in the film's title. And frankly, I would kind of like a sequel! It would give us an even better chance to get acquainted with these characters who, I felt, didn't quite live up to their potential the first time. I think these characters would benefit even more from the episodical nature of a TV show more, but hay! Stop-motion takes a while, and a TV show would probably work their animators to death (or at least work them until their social lives were ruined.) So I say huzzah to this film! She may not be perfect, or be as memorable as her older stop-motion siblings, but this little misfit is still good enough to see with your family for a round of hardy laughs.

3/5

- Moo

The Legend of Korra (First Impressions)

The legend continues...

I have to admit, once upon a time I totally dismissed Avatar: The Last Airbender before I even watched a whole episode. But really, can you blame me? An American cartoon borrowing crazy heavily from anime during a point when crappy faux anime was clogging up Saturday mornings may have caused me to already have doubts. Then you tell me it was done by Nickelodeon, a cartoon company best known for jokes involving slime, goo, or some other gross-out humour, and you may get why my expectations were so low for this show. So you can imagine how my expectations were thoroughly dashed once my friend actually forced me to watch the first couple episodes. Quite simply, I fell in love.  The adventures of Avatar Aang and his quest to learn all the elements to defeat an evil dictator was epic, fun and skillfully crafted to create many memorable characters and moments. The animation, the voice work, the music, the backgrounds, the humour, the choreography: all of the elements came together (pun intended) to make one of the biggest breaths of fresh air in a long time for action cartoons. And one of the best things about the series? It ended. Unlike many other western cartoons (and western television in general, actually) it didn't continue until it was unprofitable and stale. There was a set beginning, middle and end, and it all was so skillfully planned and paced. But of course since the show got so popular, Nickelodeon couldn't let go of such a hot property. So how in the world do you follow such a great show?

...with a horrible live-action movie by M. Night Shyamalan, of course!

Curse you Shyamalamadingdong!!

But ignoring that mess (and I believe that's just what Avatar: The Last Airbender creators Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko did) it was only a matter of time before we revisited this amazing world. And luckily that's just what we get in this sequel series, The Legend of Korra (now dropping the "Avatar" title. Thanks for nothing, James Cameron.) Taking place 70 years after the original show, The Legend of Korra feels like a wonderful jumping on point for newcomers, but for veteran fans of the show it feels just like like coming home to family. 

Korra: Badass in training

Thus far I've only seen the first two episodes: Welcome to Republic City and A Leif in the Wind. What I've noticed most about these two episodes is that it does something all good sequels should do; it should seem familiar, yet different. And familiarity shouldn't be limited to characters and setting, but in theme and tone as well. While there are many references to old character and plot points for fans, the series wisely chose to focus on the new characters such as Korra and the airbender Tenzin (Aang's son, who now has a quirky, energetic and ever growing family.) Actually, so far only one character from the original show is even present. And honestly, that's all that's needed because these new characters are so likeable and have so many ties with the old cast of characters (both actually and thematically) that they are instantly a cast I'm invested in.

Pro bending: another new addition to the world of Avatar

What I'm mostly happy to say is that this series still has the same feel of the old series, just slightly older and more mature and also (mostly) taking place in a completely new setting. There's still excellent character moments, wonderfully choreographed fights and even some oddball slapstick humour, but it's not just a rehash of the same plot with different characters. While the original series had Avatar Aang traveling all over the globe, the issues that Korra faces in this new series are much more centralized on one big city. Instead of fighting wars against nations, Korra has to fight crime and corruption. It's something new that the series hasn't tackled, and I can only imagine how things will progress. Even some of the world's style has evolved with the flow of time between shows. Having an apparent industrial revolution talking place in the past 70 years brings about a slew of new stylistic choices to the show such as having technology like radios and cars. Again, familiar because it's in the same world we know and love, but different with the progression of the world's technology.

The start of this series, in my opinion, couldn't have gone better artistically. Much like the show's tone, the art direction has only grown and matured over time, bringing to this series an even greater amount of detail in the art and animation. Quality voice actors have been thoughtfully brought in and casted (something I can't say for every Nickelodeon production.) And the music is still top notch, even having some sort of "Chinese jazz" being played in some of the city's segments. Very cool stuff indeed.

H'oh yeah. This is one good lookin' show

All in all, these two episodes left me wanting more and thinking about what's to come, which is exactly what good episodic storytelling should do. If you're an Avatar: The Last Airbender fan, I don't need to tell you to watch this. Heck, chances are you already have. But if you're new to the series, or in need of some refreshing and creative action/adventure animation, you'd be pretty hard pressed to find a show better than this one. It's a great jumping on point for new watchers, and hopefully it'll hook them enough to also go back and watch the wonder that is the original series as well. Welcome back Avatar! I greatly look forward to the adventures to come!

Highly recommended!

- Moo