Lady's Choice: Top Dino Movies!

Guess who's taking over!

I cannot stop thinking about dinosaurs! Brian and I went to see Jurassic World opening weekend, and now I want to ride a motorcycle with a pack of velociraptors. This isn't a huge surprise for me though. I've been a huge fan of dinosaurs since I was little and checked out all of the dino books from the public library. I used to be able to name all of the dinosaurs that they showed in the original Jurassic Park.

So with with Jurassic World dominating the box office this weekend, I thought that I'd give my top 5 dinosaur movies. This was actually harder than I originally thought. There are a lot of bad dinosaur movies out, most I don't even want to see, so those don't get counted
. Now, I also am not counting movies like Godzilla because I consider them firmly in the kaiju or monster movie category. So without further a do:


5) We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story (1993)

Now, about half the people that I have mentioned this movie to have never seen it or even heard of it. In fact, after the first time I saw it, I wasn't entirely sure if I hadn't dreamt it. This animated movie (based on the children's book by the same name) is in some ways if Jurassic Park didn't end in death and closure. Rex (guess what dinosaur he is) and a hand full of other dinosaurs are brought to the future by Captain Neweyes. He's force fed Brain Cereal that transforms him from ferocious, pre-historic killer to a lovable guy who is just looking to have a good time. Everyone is transported to the future, a.k.a. 1993 New York City, to bring wonder to children. They are given some rules, including staying away from Professor Screweyes who wants to reverse the dinos back to their terrifying states to scare children. Add into the mix two kids, Louie and Cecilia, who are both in need of some friends, and you have a 72 minute dinosaur adventure.

4) Dinosaur (2000)

Now, I know for a fact that Brian is not a fan of this 2000 Disney movie. I, on the other hand, really do like this movie.  Due to a series of events an Iguanadon egg finds its way to an island that is inhabited by lemurs, who adopt the baby Iguanadon and name him Aladar. Years later, Aladar and his family have to escape a meteor by heading to the mainland. Once there, they quickly learn that they need a herd to  survive. Aladar meets Neera who is the sister of the herd leader Kron as they are heading to the herd's mating grounds. Kron is all about survival of the fittest, including letting members of the herd die to the horror of Aladar. I'm pretty sure you can see where this movie is going. I think that this movie, while not Disney's best, is still a good watch for the family and even have it as part of my movie collection.

3) Jurassic World (2015)

I saw Jurassic World opening night with Brian and a friend. We had to sit in the front rows of the theater to watch it, but it was so totally worth it. I wanted a dinosaur leaving that movie. Brian's got the full review of the movie for you, so I will try to keep this brief. Jurassic World is the sequel to the first Jurassic Park. As far as I can tell, this movie ignores the other sequels, which (spoiler alert) will not be making this list at all. This movie still brought up the question of whether humans should be messing around with dinosaur DNA but without rehashing it in the same exact way. The park is up and working with 20+ species of dinosaurs including velociraptors. I think they learned some lessons from the first attempt. For example, the raptors are kept away from visitors because they are considered too dangerous. That's where Chris Pratt's character steps in. He was brought in when the raptors where hatched, imprinted on him, and have been trying to train them to follow commands from him. The investors want bigger attractions to increase attendants and profits, thus leading to the genetically modified Indominus Rex. This movie is full of the scares of being chased by dinosaurs but also those touching moments that make you think of the dinosaurs as more than just "scary monsters." I can't wait to see this movie again.

2) The Land Before Time (1988)

This is the last animated movie on the list. From the animation to the script to the music, the movie had just the right balance of wonder, adventure, and little bit of fright. I can't remember a time when my family didn't own The Land Before Time, or as my sister called them: "The Littlefoot Movies." This movie is at heart a kids movie from the simplification of the names of the dinosaurs (Long Neck, Three Horn, Spike Tail, etc.) to stating the moral and the epilogue at the end of the movie. Little Foot, the little Long Neck, is traveling with his mother and grandparents to the Great Valley, a place of abundance and no predators (Sharp Teeth). He wants to make friends with others but is told that different kinds of herds stick to their own kind. After the death of his mother by a T-Rex and a cataclysmic earthquake, Little Foot has to make his way to the Great Valley. Along the way, he makes friends with other young dinosaurs, and they have to work together to make it past the obsticales in their way to make it to the Great Valley. Brian and I quote this movie often. I can't imagine not showing The Land Before Time to my children.

1) Jurassic Park (1993)

If you were wondering where Jurassic Park was on my list, you've found it. Yep. My top dinosaur movie is the original Jurassic Park. While I didn't see this one until it was out on VHS (I was like 3 when it hit the theaters), I remember my grandmother worrying about if it would give me nightmares. It didn't. It sparked my love afair with dinosaurs. I love the mix of different visual effects in the movie. Your eyes never get to seeing one giving this movie a lot of visual longevity. All of the sound effects combined with the amazing soundtrack make for an emmersive experience. All of the actors give spectacular performances, making me actually feel the excitement of first seeing the dinosaurs to the terror of running from them. This movie is the standard for live action dinosaur movies. As for the following two sequels, don't bother with them. They aren't any where near as good. Watch Jurassic Park and jump straight to Jurassic World.

BONUS!!!
There is another dinosaur movie coming to theaters later this year from Disney, and that is The Good Dinosaur. A young dinosaur named Arlo lives in a world that was never struck by astroid that killed all the dinosaurs. Arlo gets swept away in a river and has to find his way back home. On the way, he finds a little human boy and names him Spot. Its being released on November 15, 2015, and I can't wait to see it.

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

Lady's Choice: Favorite Superhero Movies!

Guess who's taking over!

Hello, everyone! If you don't know who it could possibly be, then you might want to go back and read a few of Brian's posts. I'm Becky, and I am taking over....well every now and again. Brian will still be doing articles on my behalf, but since I'm done with school for the summer, I'll do a few. This series is basically about whatever I want. And with Avengers: Age of Ultron out for about a month now, I though I'd start off with some of my favorite superhero movies!

Now, some full disclosure is probably needed. I am a Marvel fangirl for the most part. I do love some DC; however, when compared to how much a like, Marvel wins. That's a topic for another day. I am going to do a "Top 10 List" with no actually ranking. I'm including animated and live action, newer and older. But these are all incredible watches.

Let's start this off with some honorable mentions (a.k.a. Top 22)

• Batman Forever (1995)
• X-Men: First Class(2011)
• Thor (2011)
• Man of Steel (2013)
• Justice League: Throne of Atlantis (2015)
• X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
• Green Lantern (2011)
• Justice League: Flashpoint Paradox (2013)
• Batman Begins (2005)
• The Amazing Spiderman 2 (2014)
• Megamind (2010)
• X-Men (200)

Now on to the top ten! (Reminder: They are not ranked.)

The Incredibles (2004)

If you haven't read any previous posts involving me, then it be known that I am a huge Disney and Pixar fan. Sometimes The Incredibles is forgotten by people for Finding Nemo or Toy Story, which is sad. This movie is more than just about a super family. It is about being comfortable in your own skin and with the world around you. Bob Parr (Mr. Incredible) is a grown man becoming more comfortable with who he was and who he has become with being a husband and father. Helen Parr (Elastigirl) has to come to terms with being a superhero and a mother. All three of the kids, Violet, Dash, and Jack-Jack, are having to learn to embrace the balance of being super and having a secret identity, though Jack-Jack not so much. The supporting cast is also incredible from the family's best bud Fro-Zone to the world famous fashion designer to the superheroes Edna Mode.

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

When it comes to passions aside from movies, history is probably top of the list. This is probably one of the reason I went ga-ga over the first Captain America movie (and yes it is not real history). It also helps that it is treated as a historical drama before it is a superhero movie. All of the actors are also on point, from Tommy Lee Jones to our main man himself Chris Evans. Chris was not a new comer to superhero movies when he took up the iconic shield. However, from start to end I only saw him as Captain America, not the Human Torch (Fantastic Four - 2005). Brian has already reviewed this movie if you want his point of view. I love so much about this movie from Steve's progression from a simple boy from Brooklyn to the hero who defeats Hydra and being willing to sacrifice everything in order to do so. As usual with Marvel movies, the dialogue is just as good as the action sequences. There was a love interest but it didn't dominate the movie. As with a lot of other superhero origin stories, Steve has to deal with the fact that he is no longer a "normal" person, that he has responsibility. Visually it is also stunning. The attention to detail is great. Combine everything, the visuals, the script, the acting, the special effects, and it makes for one of the best superhero movies. 

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Yes, another Marvel movie. I promise that not all the movies are Marvel based. Thor: The Dark World is more along the lines of a "fallout" movie. We see what the god of thunder has been up to since returning to Asgard with Loki. We see how his interactions with Asgardians and other worlds has matured and become less like those of a spoiled boy and more like that of a leader. He and Jane just can't be kept apart. She's put in danger while looking for Thor, so Thor does his best to try and protect her. We also see a different side of Loki. Now I was never a Loki fan when it came to the comics. However, from the first Thor movie through this one, my love of this Loki has grown. A good part of that is how well Tom Hiddleston portrays Thor's half brother. The other part has to be all of the changes that Loki goes through from movie to movie, particularly the humanizing emotions portrayed in Dark World. The main villain was wasted, but that did not make a huge difference to me. 

Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

Uga-Chaka. Uga-Chaka. Guardians of the Galaxy is that movie that I can watch over and over and over again. In the long run it fits in with all of the Earth based movie, but I think a huge part of its draw is just how different it is from all of the other Marvel movies and franchises. Guardians has an amazing soundtrack with both Starlord's mix tape and the score for the movie. Between the talking tree and raccoon duo (neither of which I could tell who was doing the voice work for them ) to the wrestler turned big-screen actor portraying Drax, the cast of characters was completely left field. I honestly think the script was written kind of like the Captain America script with it being a superhero movie second. This time though the dialogue lends me to think that it was written as a comedy first. The visuals are breathtaking and work well with the story. Overall, this was one of my favorite movies of 2014. 

The Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

What can I say about this movie that Brian hasn't already. It was amazing. I loved the inclusion of Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch and Vision. The best part of this movie wasn't the action sequences. The interactions between the Avengers themselves as well as the other character. The party scene towards the beginning of the movie is one of Marvel's best so far. I laughed so hard the entire time including during Stan Lee's cameo and the competition to left Thor's hammer. Ultron was cool and definitely a threat, but I felt like this movie was more about good friends learning more about each other and where they would go from here. Hawkeye also played a much bigger part which made me extremely happy. Overall, it's an extremely good movie but I'm already looking forward to Ant-Man later this summer.

Batman: Assault on Arkham (2014)

And DC makes its first appearance on my top 10. I will definitely give DC this: its animated movies are spectacular. Assault on Arkham was the first one to grab my attention. I am a huge Harley Quinn fan. I grew up watching Batman: The Animated Series on TV and loved her and the Joker. When I saw this at the video rental store, I grabbed it off the shelf so fast that Brian knew we'd be watching it the moment we got home. In fact, Brian reviewed this movie that week as one of his Diamond in the Rough posts. This movie is wonderfully drawn and voice acted and it excels where DC tends to: the villains. This rag-tag group known as the Suicide Squad shows the variety of villains that are present in the DC universes. Though out the movie, you only really know Deadshot's true motives and come to questions everyone else's motives. Batman doesn't actually make an appearance until a good way into the movie, making it more of a Suicide Squad movie rather than a Batman movie.

The Avengers (2012)

This is movie is where I started to see a trend in Marvel movies: it isn't all about the action. Yes, the action sequences are done really well, but the strength of the movie lies in the overall story and the characters themselves. While all of the actors give really good performances, Tom Hiddleston as Loki and Clark Gregg as Agent Coulson are probably the two that stand out. Hiddleston/Loki found a huge fangirl following after this movie that wasn't really present after Thor. Gregg/Coulson had been present in most of the previous movies leading to this superhero team up. He was Captain's biggest fan and became the uniting force behind the team. The dialogue in the movie has some extremely memorable moments. A personal favorite of mine is when Iron Man and Thor are fighting over Loki in the woods. Iron Man: "Doth mother know you weareth her drapes?" There is a reason that it resonated so well with audiences worldwide.

Big Hero 6 (2014)

Technically this is a Marvel property, but I'm classifying it as a Disney movie since it was made by Disney. Big Hero 6 is somewhat about a team becoming superheroes. Mostly it is a story about Hiro Hamada and dealing with the loss of his brother Tadashi. Baymax's role in the whole movie is to be Hiro caretaker. He becomes a superhero to help Hiro's emotional state but ends up becoming his best friend. This movie was about family and striving to be more than you currently are. Big Hero 6 follows its Marvel roots with being about Hiro and his friends' journey first and being superheroes second. All the members of the team become superheroes to help Hiro then stay to help others. While I am hesitant for a sequel to Big Hero 6, I wouldn't be entirely opposed to it either.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Batman Begins made my honorable mentions list, and The Dark Knight has made it here onto my top 10 list. This movie is dark and pushes Batman to the point of breaking. Performances were all good with the best being Heather Ledger as the Joker and Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon. As I have said before, I'm a huge fan of DC villains, and Harley Quinn and Joker are my favorite Batman villains. Harley doesn't make an appearance in this movie, but the Joker lives up to his reputation of being Batman's #1 villain. Ledger put everything into what ended up being his last performance. He puts this edge on Joker that made him all that more compelling, especially with having others make the choices of who will live and who will die. My only hope is that the Joker in the Suicide Squad can live up to this high standard.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

To round out the list, Captain America: The Winter Soldier. This was Brian's #1 of Phase 2 (not including Ant-Man which isn't out yet). Above everything else, this movie feels like a natural progression for Steve Rogers. He's been S.H.I.E.L.D.'s go to guy for awhile, but remember that Steve's a soldier not a spy. His actions lead to bringing down what S.H.I.E.L.D. has become, but he doesn't do it alone. Every person within this movie has to make the same choice that Rogers has to make: who am I and where do I stand? Again, Marvel made this a superhero movie with great dialogue, great visuals, great costumes, great sound, etc. I think they also threw in a bit of a spy movie. Rogers and Black Widow being tracked down reminds me of chase scenes that I have seen in the Bourne movies or the Bond series. I am doing the impatience dance to see what comes next for the Cap' in the upcoming movies. 

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

Trailer Park: The Force Awakens Teaser Trailer #2

In which I discuss the latest movie trailers.

Now this is what a trailer should be.  It doesn't spoil itself or over sell its premise.  It's terse, to the point and thoroughly awesome.  It knows exactly what it is and how to sell itself to an extremely eager audience.  Check it out here:

It's amazing how everything that I want out of a trailer - or at least a trailer for the latest movie in an established franchise - can usually be taken care of in about 90 seconds.  The Force Awakens is no exception.  We got iconic callbacks to the original trilogy, a measured look some fan favorite characters and a few quick action clips to round things out.  We were already sold on the idea of another Star Wars, all this did was remind us of why.

After seeing the trailer, I'm convinced more than ever that The Force Awakens is going to be a loose adaptation of Heir to the Empire.  Sure, Carrie Fischer's a bit too old to be pregnant, so that particular subplot's out of the running.  And sure, it's been a bit too long since Return of the Jedi for Luke to be struggling with the nuts and bolts of reestablishing the Jedi Order, let alone Obiwan becoming "one with the Force" (his ghost passing on to whatever afterlife awaits him).

Strip away the subplots and time frame, and you're left with a perfectly viable story for a latter-day Star Wars.  After being forced into hiding at the far end of the Galaxy, the Imperial Remnant, led by master strategist Grand Admiral Thawn, resurfaces to bring the rest of the Galaxy into the Imperial fold.  His secret weapon is the deranged clone of a long-dead Jedi Master, whose powers perfectly compliment his own martial prowess.

The big question that the trailer leaves us with is who Luke is talking to in his dramatic voice over.  It's clearly somebody gifted in the Force, which leaves us with several possibilities to choose from.  Given all of the film's apparent ties to Heir to the Empire, it very well could be Mara Jade - "the Emperor's Hand" - who was driven from a position of power and influence within the Empire to the dregs of the Galaxy after the Emperor's death.  This may be a glimpse into one of his many confrontations with Jade over the course of the trilogy, in which he urges her to abandon her hatred and lust for vengeance.

Given all the time that's elapsed since Return of the Jedi, however, he could be talking to one of the Solo twins.  It can't be glossed over just how family-oriented Luke's words were: "the Force is strong in my family.  My father has it.  I have it.  My sister has it.  You have that power too."  And given how prominently the children factor into the later Star Wars novels, having the older generation pass the torch to the younger one is ripe with cinematic and franchise possibilities.

Jaina Solo - known as "the sword of the Jedi" for her prowess in battle - features prominently in many of the Expanded Universe novels.  The girl that keeps cropping up in these teaser trailers (see above image) fits the bill pretty well.  She's the right age, wearing the appropriate Jedi-styled tunic and seems to be holding her own in all the action.

Jacen Solo is a grimmer matter entirely, as he eventually becomes Darth Caedus.  Considering how a large part of the Thawn narrative was Master C'baoth trying to lure Luke and the newborn Solo twins to the dark side, it would be a perfectly natural progression to pass off that portion of the narrative to Jacen: streamlining his fall to the dark side by joining it with C'baoth's scheming.  The film, then, could feature the lure of C'baoth's teachings compared to the harder moral path of a Jedi.

The final option is, of course, Ben Skywalker: Luke and Mara's Jedi son.  While he also features prominently in the Legacy era novels, and would fit into the implicit blood ties of Luke's speech, he's a far less likely candidate.  For him to work, either Mara is already a part of the Star Wars narrative at this time of the movie or Ben is simply too young to factor into the movie all that much.

It's amazing how, even after only 90-odd seconds of footage, it's immediately obvious that this is a J.J. Abrams movie.  While we weren't subjected to the excessive lens flair he seems so fond of, the opening sequence is an extreme wide angle tracking shot of a vehicle speeding across the desert.  It starts to pass a downed X-Wing in the foreground before we see an even more impressive Imperial Star Destroyer looming behind it in the background.

This immediately calls to mind the Kirk's arrival to the spaceport to begin his Starfleet training.  He races across a dirt road on his bike - fields in the foreground, Starfleet buildings in the background - before coming up to the docks looming in front of him.  Just compare the above image with the following:

Needless to say, I'm stoked for this movie.  It has a proven sci-fi director who has not only brought the original trilogy's cast back into the fold for another round, but has made a point to do as much in-camera as possible: physical sets, makeup and puppetry to bring the aliens to life, even the new R2 droid from the first trailer is a physical prop.  They have so far done everything right, and I can promise you that I'll be the first one in line to see this.

So what did you think of the new Force Awakens teaser trailer?  Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

Throwback Thursday: Into the Woods

In which I revisit old articles from Filmquisition and Unreality.

I have probably been looking forward to Into the Woods for much longer than most movie-goers, if only because I had the fortune of seeing the stage-play upon which it was based beforehand.  It was a lively, intelligent and surprisingly meta-fictitious musical that owed more to the older fairy tale traditions than to the Disnified, G-rated versions that grew to be the standard with middle class Americans in the mid-Twentieth Century.

And while it certainly went darker than it needed to, that was part of its charm – the stories were old enough as to be new again: tonally different from anything I had ever experienced, but filled with the familiar conflicts and characters that had defined my childhood.  Surely Disney, whose sanitized adaptations the play was actively working against, could not do justice to Into the Woods.

The weird thing is, though, that Disney was the perfect choice to tackle this particular musical at this particular time.  In an attempt to stay relevant and profitable in the Twenty-First Century, Disney has had to come to terms with its own identity in a very critical way.  Enchanted openly mocked the simplistic tropes and familiar characters of Disney’s near-century of feature-length filmmaking.

Maleficent is a feminist reconstruction of one of its most seminal “princess” movies – whose central premise is that everything that you know about Sleeping Beauty is wrong.  Even Frozen, Disney’s most universally celebrated animated film since The Lion King, meta-fictively engages its own narrative – bringing into question why anybody in their right mind would marry somebody that they just met.

Given Disney’s eagerness to challenge the caste of films that defined the last seventy-seven years of its history, Into the Woods was the ideal story for them to adapt: a fun, pithy musical populated with crippled step-sisters, unfaithful princes and a widowed giantess seeking to avenge her husband’s murder (or, at best, manslaughter).  It’s a story in which no character is innocent, no matter how young or well-intentioned, and a witch’s decision to sacrifice a dim-witted boy to a grieving goliath is as near a thing to justice as the narrative can deliver.

Happy endings, even marginally pleasant ones, are too much to wish for.  The best that the characters can manage is to pick up the pieces and carry on as best as they can.  Until now, Disney had just been reacting against the dressings of its narratives.  Into the Woods challenges their very heart.

I’m actually surprised how much Into the Woods was able to get away with while still keeping a PG rating.  Little Red Riding Hood’s story is emblematic of this: obvious not the simple “search and rescue” story that it is typically billed as – with a conveniently-placed woodsman (or baker) showing up to save the day – but a story of a young girl’s forcible sexual awakening by a predatory stalker.  The Wolf’s song, “Hello, Little Girl,” uncomfortably plays out like an older man luring a young girl to him with promises of fun, while Red’s retrospection, “I Know Things Now,” presents a young woman who, despite disliking the peril she was in, has come to terms with the feelings of excitement that they produced.

Both Jack and Cinderella are struck (in Jack’s case repeatedly) in the head by family members.  There is obvious infidelity between two of the protagonists: implicitly sex, potentially rape.  After a lusty male sexually advances on a happened-upon female, who continually rejects his advances with definite and repeated “Nos,” he corners her into a tree and kisses her.

When the film cuts back to this scene, the man pulls away and thanks her, leading to the woman singing a song about her conflicted feelings concerning what happened and the man being confronted by his betrayed wife  By all rights, given its distinctly adult subject matter and the dark tone of the film’s final third, it should have easily warranted a PG-13 rating (but that would have kept families with young children from buying 3+ tickets a piece).

The film never wallows in some of its more unpleasant happenings.  The nuances of Red’s story will easily escape the film’s younger audiences (like the sexual humor in Shrek).  Jack’s and Cinderella’s beatings are neither severe nor frequent enough to draw too much attention, and in Jack’s case, delivered at the hands of a loving (if sometimes overbearing) mother, they come off more as adolescent reprimands than child abuse.

And that infidelity in the woods?  The way in which the scene is handled, it could just have easily been one unwelcome kiss as something more invasive (and I am willing to bet that more people than not will interpret it as the former).

Despite the darker implications of its narrative, Into the Woods is a remarkably entertaining and impeccably made film.  The cast is excellent and – not withstanding my mixed feelings about Lilla Crawford – are all remarkably talented singers.  The choreography for “Agony” – featuring two princes trying to one-up in the tradition of Avenue Q‘s “It Sucks to Be You” – is easily the most hilarious thing I’ve seen in any movie this (last?) year, even if not including the song’s reprise in the film’s final act was an unbearable mistake.

In fact, the only things that the film suffers from – “Agony’s reprise aside – come directly from the stage play.  The final third of the film falls short of the first two-thirds’ quality, and really should have been fleshed out or cut entirely.  In this age where Mockingjay, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows are each broken into two films, where The Hobbit warrants three and The Stand is set to be divided into fourths, I am honestly surprised that Disney didn’t instead opt to end the film “happily ever after” when all of the protagonists’ stories resolve 90 minutes into the movie and make the entire second half of the play into an additional 90 minute film.

It is also disappointing that, after setting up that the giantess is still a person – despite destroying a great deal of the kingdom in her quest for revenge against Jack – and that sometimes bad things happen to good people (concerning Jack’s mother), that the film ultimately resolves itself through a violent, us-vs-them climax.  They don’t talk to the Giantess about what happened.  Jack doesn’t apologize for what he did.  They play things out in the exact manner that the narrative had, until that moment, been guiding the film away from.

When all is said and done, however, Into the Woods ranks among my favorite films of the year.  It treats its audience, young and old alike, like adults that are fully capable of working through the characters and themes that it develops over two hours.  While not without its problems, it is easily the most memorable musical not named Frozen to come out in years and is a definite must-see for anybody looking to have a fun time at the movies in January.

Rating: 8.5/10

Buy on BluRay: Yes

So what do you think about Disney's new meta-textual approach to storytelling?  Share yout thoughts in the comment section below.

 Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

From the Vault: Maleficent

In which I review a movie from my collection.

I can't help but wonder if I'm cheating with this week's From the Vault.  I actually do own the revisionist Disney remake in question.  I only saw it this weekend, however, because while visiting my parents for Easter, it just so happened to be their Netflix DVD for the week.  But since Ghostbusters hasn't arrived in the mail yet, I'll have to make due this week with being technically correct.

When Maleficent - the strongest and most beautiful of the moorland faeries - befriends the human Stefan, it appears to be the first step toward repairing the warring kingdoms' strained relations.  But when Stefan's ambitions cause him to cut off her wings in the dead of night and present them to the dying king, he makes a powerful and, above all, vengeful enemy.  And although she curses his only daughter to suffer an eternal, death-like sleep, she ends up loving the child instead: unable to reverse the doom that she placed upon her.

In the vein of Grendel and Wicked, Maleficent is a feminist retelling of a familiar story from the villain's point of view.  It's hard to say why, exactly, Maleficent is so highly regarded among Disney villains.  It's more than Sleeping Beauty's uniquely flat art style, more than than the character's timelessly wicked iconography.  It's even more than the fact that she transformed into a dragon in what is easily Disney's most perfectly realized animated climax.

If I had to put my finger on exactly what makes Maleficent so beloved among Disneyphiles, I would put forward that it has to do with her total commitment to the bit.  She's not just evil: she is all-consumingly evil.  She's not just petty: she's absolutely malicious.

Whereas a lesser villain would have simply killed Aurora where she lay in the cradle, Maleficent wanted her parents - and by extension, the kingdom - to suffer.  Her curse wasn't just the princess' eternal slumber, but the inevitable certainty of it.  She didn't just keep Phillip from saving his true love, but rubs his nose in his failure.  When you square off against Maleficent, you're not just fighting the witch, but "all the powers of Hell."

To remake the film and set her as its chief protagonist begs the question of how you make such an unrepentantly vile character sympathetic while still staying true to her villainous roots.  As it turns out, it's all just a matter of context.  While her reimagined back story as the warrior princess of the fae is a bit overly elaborate for my tastes, it does succeed at setting her up less as of an outright villain as it does an vengeful victim.

What I have always found most interesting about this film is that subtextual readings of Maleficent's mutilation seem to be strictly divided along gender lines.  Women generally seem to draw a parallel between her pinioning and forced mastectomies: focusing the social repercussions of removing a highly visible part of her anatomy.  Men, however, aware of Stefan drugging her and having his way with her body while she sleeps, tend to identify her story most closely with date rape.  This last interpretation actually frames the rest of the narrative as a rape revenge story in the Disneyfied vein of movies like I Spit on Your Grave (which is probably an article's worth of topic all by itself).

Moving beyond its uncomfortable subtext, the narrative plays out a lot like Frozen: both in its sly condemnation of "love at first sight" and its indifference toward the alleged importance of romantic love as a whole.  Despite having met only in passing, Sleeping Beauty rouses Aurora from her slumber with his true love's kiss, because they were simply meant to be together.  When repeated in Maleficent, it doesn't work, reminding us of the superficiality of their previous interactions.

It's Maleficent's love that wakes Aurora this time around: the very same woman who cursed her in the first place.  In the context of this particular narrative, however, she is the only person who makes any sense doing so.  With her mother dead, father insane and "aunts" hopelessly clueless, there's only Maleficent: the shadow that stood behind her her entire life, watching out for and looking after her despite her worst intentions.

Consider, however, the actual wording of the curse.  The film established when Maleficent attempted to unweave her spell that technical language woven into the enchantment was as important as the magic itself:

The princess shall indeed grow in grace and beauty, loved by all who meet her, but before the sun sets on her sixteenth birthday, she will prick her finger on the spindle of a spinning wheel and fall into a sleep like death: a sleep from which she shall never awaken [ except] by true love's kiss.

A condition of the spell she wove - doubtless intended only to be a poetic extension of the previous gifts of Beauty and Grace - was that she would be loved by all who meet her.  While this doubtless means that the prince's love was true, I would have to imagine that true love's kiss is a reciprocal affection.  Aurora was certainly enticed by the handsome young prince, but could hardly have loved him by then.  But Maleficent, under the glamour of her own spell, fell in love with the "beasty" and Aurora, though her naivete and fascination, fell in love with her.

Although its added back story is needlessly excessive, there's hardly anything that Maleficent can be faulted with.  The production design is excellent, the feminist core of the story is well-crafted and Angelina Jolie is so absurdly perfect in her role that it's a wonder they actually managed to cast her in it at all.  The resulting film is surprisingly nuanced for a Summer blockbuster and makes for an interesting companion piece to Enchanted, Frozen and Into the Woods.

Rating:  7.5/10

Buy on BluRay:  As long as you're not too defensive of the animated classic.

So what's your favorite version of the story of Sleeping Beauty (Disney or otherwise)?  Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

Extra, Extra!: Meet Disney's Newest Princess

In which I report on the latest in entertainment news.

Disney hasn't shied away from diversifying their Princess lineups in recent years.  The Princess and the Frog's Tiana was the company's first Black princess.  Sofia the First debuted Elena, the company's first Latina princess.  Coming in 2016 is Moana, whose title character will be the company's first Polynesian princess.

Although we only have rough details to go on at the moment, the movie will be set approximately 2000 years ago in the South Pacific.  The teenaged Moana will sail from island to island in her attempt to complete her "ancestor's quest."  Along the way, she will team up with Maui - a legendary demi-god - a potbelly pig and the Tiki god Moke Moke.

I'm actually pretty stoked about this movie.  The concept art is not only phenomenal, but apparently betrays the fact that it won't be digitally animated.  The story is like a Disney-fied cross between Whale Rider and The Legend of Zelda, and I'm always for increased diversity in movies (and especially kids movies).  The only thing that has me scratching my head is the inclusion of the pig, but that's so classic Disney that it's afforded a free pass at this point.

As good as 3-D animation tends to look, the over-saturation of kids movies with it has left me somewhat blase about the medium.  I've long argued that Disney and Pixar should be more strictly branded: with Pixar focusing on 3-D animation and Disney focusing on traditional 2-D animation.  And while The Princess and the Frog gave me hope that they would go in this direction, Tangled, Frozen and Big Hero 6 all suggested otherwise.

The movie is obviously too soon into production - with too little known about it at this point - to make any kind of sweeping predictions about it, based on the concept art that Disney's provided, it does appear to be a more traditionally animated film: breaking up the animated landscape with something so old that it's refreshing.  I can only hope that Disney will continue to explore options for traditional animation in the 21st century: at least when it fits the story that they're trying to tell.

So what are you looking forward to seeing in Disney's upcoming Moana?  Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

Unreality Companion: Cinderella (1950)

In which I expand on the content from my weekly Unrealitymag.com article.

As you might imagine, Cinderella was never my favorite Disney movie growing up.  I had nothing against to, but it really didn't speak to my demographic: boys.  When it really comes down to it, Cinderella was female wish fulfilment involving an overworked girl who gets a night off, a nice outfit and gets to go to a dance with the boy that she likes.  That kind of story just doesn't appeal to a little boy who'd rather watch The Lion King or Dragon Ball Z.

But I'm not that little boy anymore.  I'm more open to traditionally "girly" things that I was as a child.  After all, I loved the new Cinderella movie that hit theaters last week (my Unreality article this week), so why should I still be so standoffish toward this one?  What's the real difference between the two movies when you really get down to it?

Narratively, there's not much to separate the two movies.  In the wake of her father's death, a kind-hearted young girl is turned into a slave in her own home by her mean-spirited stepmother and stepsisters.  When cruelly denied the opportunity to go to a ball at the palace, her fairy godmother uses magic to transform her ragged clothes into a spectacular gown and her animal friends into her escorts for the evening.  Forewarned that the magic would only last until midnight, she was forced to hurriedly flee from the ball, leaving a glass slipper as the only clue to her identity, resulting in a widespread manhunt for the mysterious maiden who stole the heart of the prince.

As you can see, I can use the exact same summary for both films and absolutely nothing is out of place.  The stories are identical, but the manners in which they're told are fundamentally different.  Cinderella (2015) is a historical drama: complete with bribes, political back dealings and an emphasis on matters of the state over matters of the heart (my favorite line being "lose heart and gain wisdom").  Cinderella (1950), however, is a pure, unadulterated fairy tail: complete with a storybook opening and all the magic that mid-century Disney could provide.

While the updated version's charms will most likely be lost on its youngest viewers (who in all honesty just want to see a princess in a pretty dress marry the prince), the animated version is perfect for that exact demographic.  It's brightly colored, briskly paced and prefers to keep the focus on the fun animal antics and supernatural enchantment rather than the behind the scenes wheeling and dealing of a pressed monarchy and the doldrum life of an abused stepsister.  The emphasis is placed on plot, rather than character, and that should suit children just fine.

Rather than singling out Cinderella's mistreatment, Disney opted to keep the story light and cut away to the happy antics of Cinderella's talking animal friends.  Instead of showing the titular character struggling through her chores, they show mice and birds while they sing and sew.  Jaq and Gus slink through the walls to secure ribbons for the dress.  And their attempts to free Cinderella from the attic when the Archduke comes to call with the missing glass slipper are oddly reminiscent of Prince Charming's rescue of Sleeping Beauty.

Now that's not to say that the animated version is all sunshine and happiness, just that Disney knew well enough to keep the camera where the action was.  Cinderella's attempts to get into the carriage with her step family are shockingly brutal, even by today's standards.  The sisters viciously slash at and savage, and watching the protagonist half-naked and understandably hysterical almost made me think that I was watching a different kind of movie altogether.  But the appearance of the fairy godmother immediately following that incident, with her rhyming dialog and up-tempo singing, keeps it from getting too dark for children.

When everything is said and done, Cinderella is a textbook Disney movie.  It has a prince, a princess, a conniving villain, memorable songs and a happy ending with just the right amount of magic thrown into the mix.  Although I personally think that it pales against the Kenneth Branagh version, it holds up remarkably well on its own merits and is aimed at slightly younger viewers.  There is a reason why it's been the go-to Cinderella for the last 65 years.

Rating:  7/10

Worth Buying:  Yes, especially if you have children.

So which version of Cinderella is your favorite?  Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.

Extra, Extra!: Tron 3 Officially on Its Way to a Theater Near You

In which I report on the latest in entertainment news.

There's really no hiding the fact that I'm a big Tron fan.  Despite its dodgy special effects, the original 1982 film holds up remarkably well today.  And despite the lukewarm reception that critics gave the sequel, it honestly held its own remarkably well with far younger and better known franchises.  In the same year as Toy Story 3, Iron Man 2, Alice in Wonderland, Eclipse, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, Inception, Despicable Me, Shrek Forever After, How to Train Your Dragon and Tangled, Tron Legacy finished in twelfth place at the box office.

And it's really should come as no surprise why it did so well.  The original film's premise - of being transported into a three-dimensional world within the programming of a computer - came at a time where home computers were entirely unheard of and the mechanics of such devices (and the clever in-jokes and references that pervaded the film) were largely lost on audiences at the time.  It was even dismissed for special effects consideration at the Academy Awards because the voting body thought that they had "cheated by using computers."

Today, however, it's a stretch to find a person, let alone a household, who doesn't own a computer, tablet or smart phone.  Computers are an integral part of our daily lives, and Tron was waiting in the wing to capitalize on that cultural phenomenon.

Beyond simply being popular, Tron Legacy was actually good.  It traced that fine line between referential to the original without being derivative of it: of being something decidedly modern while still having the original's retro vibe.  It didn't shy away from the religious subtext of the first film, nor from its incessant corniness.  It knew exactly what it wanted to be and the public responded remarkably well to it.

It should really come as no surprise, then, that Disney has announced that a third installment is currently in the works for the Tron franchise.  Although details are scarce at the moment, we do know that Tron Legacy's director - Joseph Kosinski - will be returning to helm the new film and that principle photography is currently scheduled to begin in the beginning of October, implicitly for a 2016 release date.

Both Garret Hedlund (Sam Flynn) and Bruce Boxleitner (Alan Bradley / Tron) are scheduled to return in their respective roles.  The only question mark in the cast is if Olivia Wilde will return has Quorra: the manifested program who Sam brought into the "real" world at the end of Legacy.  I would also be interested to see if we are going to get a next-gen Clu as the villain - reprised by the singular Jeff Bridges - or if the series is heading in a new direction entirely.

Regardless of how they decide to proceed with it, I am stoked about revisiting the world of Tron and exploring the possibilities that the setting has to offer.  I will be sure to keep you updated on new information as it becomes available.

So what are your thoughts on Disney's plans to start filming Tron 3?  Share your thoughts on the matter in the comment section below.

Join the Filmquisition on Twitter (@Filmquisition) or by subscribing to this blog.