Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Frozen (I) (2013)
3/10
Is it truly as good a "The Lion King"?
11 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Frozen is one the more frustrating movie's I've seen in a long while.

I never wanted to like a movie more then Frozen. Everything seemed set for a true master piece of beautiful story telling, classic characters and unforgettable musical numbers. Unfortunately what we got was a story that tried to hard for its own good to be clever. Glaring character inconsistency and plot holes that snowballed up until nothing any of the characters did made any sense at all. And lackluster song writing that has no idea what it wants to be. We get everything from an African style chant, to an a Celtic sounding number, to what sounds like a country music balled by Carrie Underwood.

Many critics and fans alike have called Frozen the best Disney film sense "Beauty and the Beast", "The Little Mermaid" and even "The Lion King" Is it truly as good as these classics? No. Not even close. Frozen isn't even in the same Galaxy as "The Lion King".

The story follows two young princesses, Anna and Elsa. Anna is completely normal and only longs for true love, and Elsa who is Well...not so much. She as the ability to manipulate and create ice. Both sisters have spent the better part of a decade on apostate sides of Elsa's locked door do to an icy accident, a rock trolls completely worthless advice and the worst parental guidance imaginable. On her coronation day, after Elsa comes of age to be crowned queen, she accidentally looses control of her powers and flees into the wood and builds an ice castle to sulk unaware that her fear as manifested itself into an internal winter that threatens the entire kingdom. Anna now must go into the wilderness to find her sister and convince her to put an end to the weather. The side characters that surround our two princesses during this journey are all, for the most expendable to the plot. The character Hans should have never existed and is only present for a big twist at the end that completely negates his characters personality in the first two thirds of the movie. The character Kristoff could have been dropped all together and it would have changed the ultimate out come very little.  Olaf, a walking talking Snow man is the only side character that really needs to be here and is arguably the films main marketing draw. The film is literally humorless until he shows up a full hour into the movie. He gets is own nifty song about how he only longs for Summer, but doesn't know the consequences... It's funny because he's a snow man... but after that he's pretty much sidelined to quirky one liners and sight gags.  Now we come to the music. Supposedly The best since "The Lion King"!

There's five songs in "The Lion King with a running time of 88 minutes.

There are nine different musical numbers in "Frozen", at least two never should have made it passed the editing room, and with a running time of 102 minutes, almost a full half hour is dedicated to musical numbers leaving a brisk hour and ten minutes to tell the story. 5 songs take place in the first half hour alone. It is perfectly okay to donate so much time to your songs as long they are fun, classy and help move the story and develop the characters. Frozen's Songs does very little of that.

Here we get clumsy lyrics like "I don't know if I'm elated or gassy but I'm somewhere in that zone"

To

"Is it the way that he runs scared? Or that he's socially impaired? Or that he only likes to tinkle in the woods?"

Yeah... classy! I guess one could argue that "The Lion King" has its moments of goofy bathroom style lyrics as far as Pumba's flatulent related back story goes. But I refuse to except that as a legitimate argument as long as "Fixer Upper" still exists in our society. This song will forever by a black stain on Disney's musical legacy.

The exception, of course, is "Let it go", the only song that feels like true effort was put into it. Idina Manzel sells the heck out of it, even though I never thought her voice really matched her character model. (Being more then 20 years her characters senior) But even that song falls flat do to the writers refusal to allow Elsa to fully embrace her new found self worth and freedom she has so passionately been singing about. The next time we see Elsa she's the same scared, weak, volatile character she was before she belted out her "Girl Power" song.  Plot inconsistency abound! For example. When Anna finds Elsa in her ice castle Elsa tells Anna that she ran away in order to protect her and everyone else from her powers. But when Anna presses the matter Elsa, in what appears to be a very deliberate act, creates a giant ice monster to attack Anna and Kristoff.  Way to protect, Elsa! Also, Elsa doesn't seem to know that she's cursed her kingdom with eternal winter, despite all the land being covered in two foot of snow in the middle if Summer. Could she not look out the front door of her castle and see?

Then there's the Rock Smurfs. Oh my god the rock Smurfs! Clearly a by product of the writers getting yellow with envy over the success of the minions in "Despicable Me"

The best part of this movie by far is it's visuals. The movie is absolutely gorgeous to behold. But ice candy alone can not save a film who's heart clearly froze somewhere in its creation.
10 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
I thought Hollywood had graduated from firing 60 shots out of a pair of six shooter without reloading!
4 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
"Less is more." "A little goes a long way." Apparently two fraises that don't exist in the Hollywood summer movie dictionary. And with the likes of "Man of steel," "World War Z," and "White house down" Movies seem to be taking greater pleasure in waving a 200 + million dollar budget in our faces and screaming "Look what we can do!" And the Lone Ranger is no exception... To long by about 40 minutes, most of the films time is taken with two massive action sequences that, like Berry Peppers six shooters, just refuse to run out of ammo. Both taking place on run away trains (Perfect for a new theme ride at Disney Land.) Which, now that I think about, is probably the only reason this movie exists. because it sure wasn't to tell an engaging, original story with interesting characters. Johnny Depp as Tonto (That figures) is pretty much just doing what he knows how to do. play an off the wall character with crazy hair... Pretty much every single scene with Depp is played for laughs, and I can already hear the politically correct having a conniption over it. Armmie Hammer is... well, the Politically correct. A white guy who hates Violence and in turn hates guns, and in turn refuses to kill anyone, and even when he does decide to forgo that reasoning, the film wont allow him too. (Yawn) The movie hints at supernatural element,(Curse of the Black Pearl sort of thing)but never does anything with it. All in all it's a perfect case of what happens when a film has to much money for its own good, and a director who's trying way to hard to copy his previous successes. Bloated, Loud and annoying is what you get. And with this years "pacific Rim," "Wolverine," and "R.i.p.d." (AKA "Men in Black" rip off), still in the pipe, it doesn't look like we're in for a change any time soon.
14 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
World War Z (2013)
6/10
If you've seen the trailer you've seen the movie
25 June 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I've listed that this review contains spoilers, but I haven't included anything that the trailer hasn't already given away.

And the that's my main problem with "World War Z" The Trailer. If you've seen the trailer you've seen the movie. It literally shows everything that happens in the movie completely destroying any suspense that might have been had. "World War Z" isn't a conventional movie with a flowing plot line that builds to a dramatic conclusion. It's more like a bunch of individual parts laid out in a not so very straight line, and strung together loosely by a single character. I don't have much of a problem with that, or the facts the Zombies aren't of the undead kind, slow moving kind like they were in the source novel. But rather the rabid, sprinting, quick turning kind like in "28 days later" Brad Pit is good and takes the roll seriously. The CGi is top notch, and the movie is well made. The problem I had is that I new exactly what was going to happen, before it happened, because they showed it in the stupid trailer. Literally, every single cool action shot that's in the movie they showed in the trailer. Every single plot point. Even the dialog scenes. I knew the jest of what was going to be said because they showed the important parts in the trailer! I kept waiting for the extended version but it never came. There's no suspense. (I know there's Zombies on the plane and that Brad Pitt blows a hole in the side sucking them all out, crashing the plane, because they show it in the trailer!) That's just one example of a long list of scenes that you totally know what's fixing to happen because, well... You've seen it already. This is one movie I wish I could have gone in completely blank. Not having read the book, not having seen the trailer, and I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more.
94 out of 179 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Could have been so much more.
28 March 2012
Warning: Spoilers
As I was pulling out of the drive in after watching "The Hunger Games" I noticed a young girl stand up on her pick-nick blanket and shout to the stars, "That was the best movie ever!" And I tended to agree with her. But as I drove home, Listening to my brother praise what they had just saw, I realized I was not participating in the praise. Because a dark negativity was building up in the back of my mind... "What was wrong with this movie? Why did I not enjoy as much as every one else?" Then it hit me... "Because I read the books." I did consider myself caught up in the hype when i hurded "The Hunger Games" was going be a movie, but I should have known that i didn't stand hope of being satisfied. This Movie could have been so much more.

there's nothing wrong with the actors, aside from JL being a bit to old for the part, all the performances are strong.

And Then there's the camera work. Oh, that Camera work. Who ever filmed this movie definitely had Attention deficit disorder. It look like it was filmed by a ten year old girl playing hopscotch.

But that's not what erked me the most. Lets start from the beginning.

There's no hunger in the hunger games. Everyone (exspecialy Katniss) looks plump and healthy. Making the bread toss scene, where in the book Petta throws a near death, starving Katniss a loaf of burnt bread, completely without meaning.

A complete lack of brutality on the Governments part. In the book the Governemnt is this evil, Vile state that will execute anyone at the mear hint of rebellion. But in the movie, when district 11 breaks out in protest of the games, what do you think the Government does? Massecre them all with machine gun fire? No. they send in the Riot police and blast them with water canons and beat them with sticks. which, correct me if I'm wrong, is what we do today? And the one character that could have given a glimpse of the Governments ruthlessness (The Avox Girls) is cut completely. We are given no reason why we should fear this government.

Now we come to the Games themselves. None of these kids look like they're about to enter a cage match to the death. at the beginning of the games when they rise up out of the ground, they all stand there poised like they are about to take place in a fifty yard dash where at the end the winner gets a cookie. there's nothing on these kids faces that suggest any sort of fear that many of them might be dead in a matter of moments.

And it just gets worse from there. The careers, the most trained and prepared members of the tributes, skip and giggle through the woods with no sense of danger. It feels like a high school easter egg hunt.

Katina's is made to be far to capable. She finds water, hatches plans, and traps food with little or no effort.

Katniss and Rue's relationship is barely given time to mature before Rue meats her fate. And Katniss and Peeta love efforts are miss handled, mainly do to some unnecessary changes. It's not even worth a "let's just be friends" scene at the end.

Over all, I felt Thresh was the moist interesting character and he's only on screen for about five seconds. The Movie is hit or miss as far as doing the books justice and for those who would say "you need to review the movie on is own Maurits" well... This movie would not be doing the victory dance it's doing if it weren't for the books.

6/10 for getting it a little more then half right.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed