Beauty and the Beast 2017

Beauty and the Beast ~ This is yet another of Disney's unnecessary live action remakes.  I don't see the point of these honestly, unless of course they are told from a different point of view entirely like Maleficent, or completely different as in the Tim Burton Alice films.  While Cinderella did answer some questions from the animated feature (as does this one), I found it ultimately dismal, and what could have been the best part of The Jungle Book was left on the cutting room floor (Scarlet Johansson's "Trust in Me").

I was very wary of the new Beauty and the Beast.  Not only was the original an Oscar nominated and winning classic of Disney's new animation age, it could have been decidedly difficult to animate.  In fact, the scenes I had seen in previews of the castle objects come to life, like Lumiere and Cogsworth, did not impress me. 

The casting worried me as well.  Hermione Granger? I'm not saying that Emma Watson is typecast but she would have to go a long way to make me believe she is anyone but Hermione, and as hard as she tries here, Emma never comes off as anything but playacting as Belle.  Honestly all of the roles are very solidly in most of our minds from the animated feature, it's hard to envision anyone else in those spots. 

The animated objects in the original are charming cartoons but here the CGI versions come off as a bit creepy, just to the left of Tim Burton.  We love those cartoon characters but the new ones are impressive yet cold and inhuman.  Similarly the music is also impersonal and feels very much like artificial or karaoke covers. 

Don't get me wrong, the live action Beauty and the Beast is a good movie, heck, it might even be a great movie for those who have never seen the classic original, but for me, the best it will ever be is a pale and ill wrought imitation.  Worth seeing only for the curious and the hardcore Disney fan only.

Deadpool

I didn't want to see this movie. I don't like this character. But I have to confess, against all odds, I kinda liked the movie.

To me, this Rob Liefield parody of DC's Deathstroke (Wade Wilson/Slade Wilson, Deadpool/Deathstroke, get it?) is not only silly, but the incessant violence and obnoxiousness of a hyperactive Ambush Bug represents several of the things I dislike about comics. More than that I think it bothers me that so many folks love Deadpool and the Punisher over more traditional heroes. I'm an old man, I'm stepping off my soapbox, get off my lawn. I just don't like Deadpool. In the comics.

As I said, I kinda enjoyed the movie. No, I really enjoyed the movie. I loved the irreverent credits, the opening fight scene, and even the merc with a mouth's incessant fourth wall breaking monologue. Yeah, I dug it, even when it took itself seriously, and even when it actually was a serious superhero movie, and it did accidentally slip into that gown from time to time.

I loved the fight scenes, even the messy ones. Teenage Negasonic Warhead (I love the Monster Magnet song but this was my introduction to the character) and the fully CGI Colossus were fun sidekicks and reminders that Deadpool is in fact part of the X-Men universe. Colossus comes across very well for CGI.

Ryan Reynolds has a lot of fun doing this and it shows. He makes the movie more often than not. Leslie Uggams is a hoot as well. I would see the sequel just for more of Reynolds as Deadpool. Yeah, for real, bring it on.

Arrow S04 E15: Taken

Since watching the short animated series on CW Seed, I have been wondering how they would show Vixen's powers in live-action. When Oliver calls on her to help locate Damien Darhk, I guess we'll find out.

First things first, we get diversions. Felicity is in therapy trying to relearn to walk now that the yet-to-be Mr. Terrific magic technology has been implanted in her spine. And then there's some of the usual nonsense from Flashback Island, and then just when we thought we were never going to get to the point, you know, live-action Vixen, they throw the real curve.

Darhk comes out of the shadows and confronts Oliver and Felicity, and basically tells Oliver to drop out of the mayoral race or his son William gets it. And as usual, Felicity is the last to know, only just engaged and in need of marriage counseling. When Samantha, William's mom shows up, it gets obviously worse. I find it ironic and hilarious that Oliver keeps saying he's changed when he obviously hasn't. Actions not words, Ollie, actions not words.

Seeking help for this dilemma, Diggle suggests John Constantine, but Oliver counters that he's in Hell - literally in Hell. Perhaps that answers the questions I had about going to him for help with Thea a few episodes back, but will we see him again? Perhaps a resolution to this Hell thing? Or maybe an explanation to how Oliver even knows this?

Then Vixen's name comes up. No words are spoken but the looks on the faces of Team Arrow, especially after the Constantine in Hell comment, convey the same thought - "what the heck, something else you're keeping from us???"

Cut to Detroit, bad guys on the run, with a growling unseen force in pursuit. Soon Vixen, portrayed by Megalyn Ann Echikunwoke, the same actress who voiced her in the CW Seed animated series, makes her appearance. She's perfect, and the CGI effect to show her powers is amazing. I couldn't ask for a better comics to TV, or animated to live-action transition.

Vixen mixed in with Team Arrow fairly well, although it seemed like she and Laurel knew each other. Have they met? I loved Oliver's comment about his 'animated encounter' with Vixen last year. To find William, Vixen uses one of the boy's favorite toys, a Flash action figure. Mari jokes to Oliver about not telling Barry. Is everyone so fast and loose with secret identities? Couldn't Samantha just put two and two together and realize the cop she met, Barry, is the Flash? And what was with Mari's disappearing and reappearing lipstick?

Speaking of secret identities, how is it that after several close encounters with both Oliver Queen and the Green Arrow (tricks aside), and all that hocus pocus at his disposal, Darhk isn't sure Oliver is Arrow? It's obvious.

I did like the first fight between Darhk and Vixen and Green Arrow. Speedy had some rather cool stunts this time. The end bit with William seemed both sad and a little too convenient. Felicity on the other hand has had enough of Oliver's crap. There's a momentary miracle of her legs finally kicking in, and she uses them to walk away. Good on her.

For my other reviews of the entire "Arrow" series, click here. And if you'd like to discuss this episode and anything else in the Arrowverse, please join the Arrow Discussion Group on Facebook.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes ~ I have talked about my love for the Planet of the Apes movies before, actually more than once. And while Rise of the Planet of the Apes, the second attempt to reboot the series was a pleasant and superior surprise, I still had some reservations. I shouldn't have worried at all. Dawn is even better than Rise.

If you know the saga of the Planet of the Apes, you know that Rise and Dawn are covering old territory. We already know the history, we know what happens, and that's the danger of any prequels. And even though the movies in the original series, Conquest and Battle, are by far the most inferior, and provide the basis for Rise and Dawn, I have much praise for Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.

Once again, Andy Serkis and the CGI portraying Caesar, the first leader of the Apes, are the stars over and above anyone or anything else in this flick. Gary Oldman is wasted for the five to ten minutes he appears, Keri Russell continues to age badly, and Kirk Acevedo is a master of playing the same character in every project he's in. Harsh, yes, but those are the only bad things about this movie. The rest is near perfect.

The opening, outside the establishing narration of a world a decade after the last film, is without traditional dialogue. The Apes live in peace in their own home, speaking in a combination of simple pantomime and crude American Sign Language. Caesar himself only speaks aloud once man intrudes on their idyllic life, but don't be fooled, the other apes speak as well. And these apes, CGI and otherwise, out-act the human players.

There is no black and white, or good and evil here. It's man vs. ape, it's true, but factions within each group are at war as well. This tale of trust and war and family is set against another amazing score by my favorite composer Michael Giacchino. He hits all the right notes for the appropriate emotional impact. I've already gotten the soundtrack from iTunes I was so impressed.

Whether you're a fan of either Planet of the Apes franchise, or not, this entry is highly recommended. I can't wait for 2017's War of the Planet of the Apes.

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Yesterday I talked about re-watching the first Avengers film before seeing the new one. Today I'm tackling Avengers: Age of Ultron. Be warned right here right now, there will be spoilers.

Wow. When I walked out of the theater I saw a text from friend, fellow South Jersey Writer, and fellow Biff Bam Popper, Jim Knipp. He'd also seen the movie last night and wanted to know what I thought of it. I had to ponder the answer for a moment, then I typed back, "I didn't hate it."

I didn't hate it. I also didn't love it. I'm not even sure I liked it. In choosing Ultron as the antagonist, writer/director Joss Whedon must have known he was starting off on a bad foot. As I talked about in my article about Ultron over at BBP yesterday, without Hank Pym, there really is no Ultron. Without that creepy Oedipal complex and family connection to the Avengers, Ultron is completely interchangeable for any killer robot, and thus loses his charm and uniqueness.

So right out the gate, Whedon is already off-book by having Tony Stark and Bruce Banner create Ultron. Joss seems determined to stay off book, from the Hulk/Black Widow romance to Hawkeye's family to the almost complete ignorance of the "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." television series and events, it's like he wants to build his own continuity outside of the established Marvel Cinematic Universe. He's not just off-book, he's off the rails.

What it results in is an uneven film, a badly structured story, a disappointing film for comic book fans, and believe it or not, a boring film for action fans. There are multiple holes in the plot, illogical motivations, and probably many deleted scenes we'll have to wait for home release to see, but as is, this was unsatisfactory.

Let's start with S.H.I.E.L.D. Much has been made of Joss Whedon's comments regarding "Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.," but the facts are that not only is his brother a showrunner, but Joss is also a co-creator and executive producer on the show. His comments about the show invalidating his first Avengers movie can only be taken so far, and yet, the events of that TV series are both ignored and avoided in the new film. S.H.I.E.L.D., for all intents and purposes, no longer exists. This is a serious break in the continuity of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. One could probably get their fill of No-Prizes explaining away how it does fit, but it doesn't fit well.

Spinning off of the S.H.I.E.L.D. issue is the presence of Hawkeye's family. In the comics the Black Widow is not just a close friend and partner, she's a former lover of Hawkeye. More than that, Bobbi Morse AKA Mockingbird, a prominent character on the "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." TV series, and soon to be star of her own spin-off, is Hawkeye's ex-wife, lover, and partner in the comics. On the show, a source of drama revolves around her working with her ex-husband Hunter, a character that doesn't exist in the comics.

Now don't get me wrong, I like the idea of movie Hawkeye having a wife and kids, and I'm a big Linda Cardellini fan. Whedon is obviously one of those fans who doesn't like Hawkeye, and dismisses him as just a guy with a bow and arrow. I'm sorry, just my opinion, but if you don't like Hawkeye, you just don't know Hawkeye. He is one of the most effective, most resourceful, and one of my favorite Avengers. And that's one of the biggest problems with movie Hawkeye not being comics Hawkeye.

The wife and kids goes against the comics history of the character, but it lends not only some background, but also some grounding and humanity to character. We understand him and care about him more. And of course it's always nice to see more of Jeremy Renner on the screen. And as far as comics vs. film continuity goes, perhaps Hawkeye and Mockingbird just haven't met yet.

Similarly the Hulk/Widow connection is a fiction of the films rather than the comics, however it's one I don't mind. While clunky at times, the party especially, it works, and succeeds in developing both characters. And except for the one bit where our only female Avenger is the captured damsel in distress (I hated this so much), this relationship, and the performances of Scarlett Johansson and Mark Ruffalo, is one of the best features of the film.

Speaking of the Hulk, the CGI effects were far superior this time than last. The Hulk resembles Ruffalo, has more emotion in his facial expressions, and moves nearly flawlessly with the live actors. Ultron on the other hand is terrible on that point. I was creeped out every time his lips moved, his eyes blinked, or had any facial motion. He looked like a badly formed Muppet. I wish his face had been unmoving metal, and they had kept the terrifying George Perez visage from the comics. That's the real Ultron. James Spader was a good choice for the voice, but every time the CGI Ultron physically spoke I was taken out of the film.

Paul Bettany's Vision was well worth the price of admission though I wonder why it was so hard not to make him look like he does in the comics. I found his design (I hated his head) unappealing to say the least. His actions - from his interaction with the Scarlet Witch (there is one look between the two when he rescues her at the end that is perfection) to his fighting style to his final confrontation with Ultron - were all wonderful. There should have been more Vision. Speaking of more, I loved seeing War Machine and the Falcon, but where was the Falcon in the final battle? He should have been there.

Some folks might poo-poo this one as set up for future movies, but I loved the bit with Andy Serkis as Ulysses Klaw (they spell it Klaue, but we all know it's Klaw). Over and above Ultron, Klaw was an engaging adversary here, and I would have loved if not an appearance by Prince T'Challa, at least a mention. I guess I'll have to wait until Captain America: Civil War or Black Panther for that…

I have to make a confession. I have never liked Quicksilver. And it's not just that he's a third-rate Flash, he's also just a complete jerk, always has been, always will be. Pietro has always been too overprotective of his sister Wanda, an annoying wet blanket for everyone else, and when he freaked out about his sister's relationship with the Vision - he was borderline, if not dead-on, racist. Quicksilver, as far as I'm concerned, sucks.

What is fascinating however, is that much like Hawkeye, film Quicksilver -whether it's here in this movie, or over in X-Men: Days of Future Past - is sooo not comics Quicksilver. The films have made Pietro cool. I find it amusing that Joss Whedon, infamously noted for killing his characters, has found a way to solve the problem of Quicksilver being so annoying… he just got rid of him.

I'm glad Whedon simplified the Scarlet Witch's powers, even if one of them was merely a plot device to reveal secrets from the Avengers' pasts. I wish there had been more of that, and it was nice to see Hayley Atwell's Agent Carter if for only a few seconds. I would have liked to have seen more of the Red Room from Widow's flashbacks as it might have clarified the connections to the "Agent Carter" TV series.

Speaking of women, I was very disappointed to find no Pepper Potts or Jane Foster in the film. They were sorely missed, and the women we had were sorely used. I struck up a conversation with a gentleman while waiting in line who was wearing a Black Widow t-shirt. We talked about the lack of merchandise with female heroes, and women around us, many wearing Avengers t-shirts chimed in as well. To paraphrase Field of Dreams, if you make it, they will buy it. Are you paying attention, Marvel/Disney?

As far as Avengers: Age of Ultron goes, I was not thrilled with it. I did not leave the theater charged up and anxious to see it again as I did with the original movie. I left feeling empty and disappointed. With the knowledge that I would be seeing it again Sunday night with The Bride, I seriously wondered if I really wanted to see it again, and I think that says volumes.

Princess of Mars

Princess of Mars ~ As The Asylum is always wont to do when there is a big blockbuster movie coming out, or in this case, a potential big blockbuster movie, they make their own low budget knock off. They are usually laughable and sometimes entertaining reworkings or rewordings of the real thing. In the case of John Carter, they did something different, they went old school and cannibalized the original source material - Edgar Rice Burroughs' public domain "Princess of Mars."

The Asylum's Princess of Mars stars hunky Antonio Sabato Jr. as John Carter and, wait for it, Traci Lords as Dejah Thoris. Surprisingly, as bad as it might sound, it's not bad. It is neither as brilliant or beautiful as Disney's big budget John Carter, nor would it be deserving of the treatment that film received from the narrow minded uneducated critics. I'm being harsh, but I thought John Carter was fantastic, and the film was savaged unnecessarily.

This version of the story suffers from its budget and sometimes corny special effects but actually follows the plot relatively well. Carter is updated as an American soldier in present day Afghanistan, and even that's not too bad. The special effects prevent the Tharks from being fully realized and the CGI is shaky elsewhere, but even so, it works. I ended up liking this interpretation more than I wanted to.

The charismatic Sabato is not only more than adequate as Carter, he's more than capable, and dare I say it, just as good as Taylor Kitsch. I like him here, even with his tattoos and one-liners, Antonio Sabato Jr. is a good choice for John Carter of Mars. The Asylum works with the SyFy a lot, so if they wanted to launch a JCoM series with Sabato in the lead, I would be down. As a matter of fact, it would rock. Get to work in that, okay?

If Sabato is a bit stiff in places, he's freaking Marlon Brando compared to Traci Lords as Dejah Thoris. In appearance, she's neither brunette nor copper skinned, and I hate to say this - she looks old. Don't get me wrong, not yet fifty, Traci Lords is a beautiful woman, but she looks a bit too world weary and aged for this part. And her acting... wow, it's just not good, it would be bad for a grade school stage play. She's been better in other things, but here... let's just say Traci Lords is no Dejah Thoris.

I have to admit to digging this flick, and unlike a lot of what The Asylum churns out, it's actually pretty good. Granted, it's neither the film John Carter nor the book "A Princess of Mars," but it does what it does well. If you're a fan, check it out.

Rio 2

Rio 2 ~ Other than being very colorful, having some great Brazilian carnivale music, and explaining exactly what was going on in Angry Birds Rio, the first Rio didn't do much for me. If I remember correctly, I may have even dozed off during it. While the sequel has its faults, I think it was a bit better.

This time I think I got some of the subtext, intended or unintended, of Rio. This is a 1930s musical. It's got everything - stars, dance numbers, songs, romance, comedy, chase sequences, action, lots of subplots, and even a bit of action - it's the perfect 1930s musical. You can even see the casting, an all-star cast, fitting into a modern version of that style. The bits by Bruno Mars, Janelle Monae, and Kristen Chenoweth steal the show. On that subtext, I really loved this.

As a movie however, like I said, it's got faults. There are dozens of characters, and at least a half-dozen subplots, not to mention the tiresome preaching about saving the rain forest and how bad man is. There are so many characters I gave up trying to keep track of them about halfway through. The subplots are spaced so far apart I sometimes forgot what was going on. The writers need to watch some HBO to learn quick cutting between scenes.

The kids will probably love it. If I ever get back to Angry Birds Rio, I might like it a bit more, but I probably won't see it again. I will buy the soundtrack though, I can't get enough Janelle Monae. And if you can't either, be warned, she gets about thirty seconds in this flick, as opposed to the soundtrack.

Marvel's Iron Man & Hulk: Heroes United

Marvel's Iron Man & Hulk: Heroes United ~ This was a nice surprise to find on Netflix, a new Marvel animated film. I was even more excited by the opening credits sequence filled with Silver Age-y art and design. When the feature actually started however, I was disappointed. It is very blocky ugly computer animation, the type of which would make the MTV "Spider-Man: The New Animated Series" or Nick's teenage "Iron Man: Armored Adventures" show look positively pretty. No wonder I hadn't heard of this. Even Marvel must be ashamed of it.

I'm really not sure what to make of the neon version of the movie Abomination, it's just bizarre. Is he wearing armor, or is that his skin? Speaking of armor, the Hulkbuster armor is featured early, possibly to cash in on its brief cameo in Iron Man Three or rumored appearance in Avengers Age of Ultron. Speaking of Avengers, both Adrian Pasdar and Fred Tatasciore (sadly with some sort of new voice modulation) reprise their voices as Iron Man and Hulk from "Avengers Assemble."

After Hulk and Abomination tag team for a bit, get captured by Hydra scientists who create a living energy weapon, Iron Man shows up and, shades of the Silver Age, picks a fight with the Hulk. It's weird, especially after it's established they're friends. The energy weapon unites the two as it attacks them. It doesn't have a humanoid form at first, but my first thought was Zzzax, and I was right.

I had to wonder about the redesign of Zzzax. Why not put this ugly CGI they're using to good use? With computer animation they could bring to life a character that in the two-dimensional comic book medium was usually just a human shaped lightning bolt. It could look great, but they chose differently, and sadly.

With Hulk blinded and Iron Man's armor non-functional, the two have to depend on each other. I suppose it's a lesson in cooperation for the kids this animated feature seems to have been made for. Besides Zzzax they also have to contend with shadowy Wendigos. Hmmm, I thought they were white and there was only one, but what do I know?

Another thing is did Tony Stark make a killing at a SHIELD yard sale post-Captain America The Winter Soldier? Suddenly he's got his own helicarrier, a fleet of jets, and a battalion of mandroids. What's up with that? I also really dislike the idea of Hulk needing armor. I guess we know, despite the overabundance of Hulk villains, who the real star of this cartoon is.

Don't let Netflix cut off the end credits or you'll miss the lead-in to what I assume is the next CGI feature starring Iron Man and Captain America vs. the Red Skull. This was an okay distraction. I would have rather had traditional animation and maybe more thought in the plot and dialogue.

Rise of the Guardians

Rise of the Guardians ~ This is a fun animated adventure that I actually enjoyed quite a bit. It's sort of like there's a Justice League of mythical beings who protect the children of Earth - Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Sandman, and the Tooth Fairy. When the Boogeyman, Pitch Black, rears up to change the status quo for the more evil and nightmarish, these Guardians are called together, but must take in a new member, the reluctant Jack Frost.

There is great voice work here as well as interesting takes and personalities on the different Guardians. Hugh Jackman, being chief among the voicers, is extremely good. Jude Law as the villain, and Alec Baldwin's Russian Santa Claus are also good. Very entertaining, I wish I'd caught it in theaters so I could have seen it on the big screen.

Guardians strikes me at many levels being similar to the Rankin/Bass holiday specials of my youth. Here are tales of Santa, the Easter Bunny, etc. for a new generation, and just as believable as they were back then. You'll leave this movie feeling refreshed and filled with hope, and not just a little childlike wonder. This is how a Superman movie should leave you. Maybe we can hijack those writers for the next chapter in that franchise.

Rise of the Guardians was a breath of fresh air and good entertainment for the whole family, recommended.

Beware the Batman

I approach this new Batman series with both trepidation and resentment. We're getting this series as not only a replacement for the old "Brave and the Bold" series, which gave us an intriguing and entertaining new direction for the character, but also a replacement for the much loved, and inexplicably ended "Green Lantern" and "Young Justice." I would have much rather had either of these series back, or a JLA spin-off from the later than anything else Cartoon Network is offering lately, especially the superdeformed mutilation called "Teen Titans Go!" or this newest version of Batman.

"Beware the Batman" is a bit of an oddity, with, in my opinion, very little to like. The animation is CGI style like the aforementioned Green Lantern series, and there seems to be very little reason to have it done in this method. There are no wild scifi elements that this style would benefit. Batman's head is odd and his whole costume has a wet, almost slimy, vinyl rubber look.

It is also quite violent. I was surprised at how violent, and I'm pretty desensitized to that sort of thing, especially when it comes to superheroes and cartoons. This is also a very different concept for Batman. He is, once again (groan), early in his career and therefore inexperienced. Why can't we have the confident and competent Batman? That's the one we like, not the bumbling amateur.

I said this was a new concept, well, young and dumb isn't what I was talking about. Alfred is very different. More than a butler, he is an Australian ex-spy who looks like cross between Lex Luthor and Vin Diesel. It's an intriguing idea, but I don't like it.

Also in the way of change, I understand that the standard rogues gallery is being jettisoned for this new series. I think this is a very odd decision as Batman's bizarre enemies are as much a part of his popularity as everything else. In the opener, he fights the very strange Grant Morrison creations, Professor Pyg and Mr. Toad. I was not impressed.

Also featured in the episode were a non- Mr. Terrific Michael Holt and a decidedly pre-Metamorpho Simon Stagg. Was this just for the Easter egg name drop then? Let's face it, Mr. Terrific and Metamorpho are what makes these characters interesting, without them, why use them?

I'm giving this series a wait and see option. I haven't really decided yet. It could go either way after watching just one episode, but I really don't know.

I did however like the DC Nation short featuring the Tarantino-esque Aeon Flux style retro Wonder Woman short. Can't wait to see more. Instead of another Batman, why not a series based on this, of one of the other better shorts like Amethyst, Sword of the Atom, Plastic Man, or Thunder and Lightning? Or if you insist on Batman, how about Batman of Shanghai?

Epic

Epic ~ The previews for this flick made it look amazing, with a stunning sense of wonder and discovery. They showed a young girl suddenly discovering a whole new world right under her nose, a battle between good and evil fought by tiny leaf men two inches tall.

You see the leaf men immediately in the movie. I couldn't help but think this movie might have fared better under a veil if secrecy, sort of like what Disney did with Brave. Let the audience experience the sense of wonder and discovery along with our protagonist, like The Wizard of Oz, allow the magic to be seen simultaneously through the heroine's and audience's eyes.

That aside, the film has a stunning voice cast, including Colin Farrell, Christoph Waltz, Steven Tyler, Amanda Seyfried, Chris O'Dowd, Beyonce, and Pitbull, all putting in great performances. I was really blown away by the voice work, in some portions of the movie, keeping it afloat where the story was failing.

Speak of the devil, the story was horribly predictable and telegraphed early on. Again, this is something else that might have been helped by holding back some in the previews. I was also saddened by a less than memorable score by Danny Elfman, that made me wonder if the man has list his touch.

The Bride and I saw this opening night in 2D as opposed to 3D, hoping to save a few bucks. It appeared flat and fuzzy, and I was assured there were no projection problems. I thought it looked drab, compared to previews (in 3D) I had seen. Perhaps this is one of those films, like Life of Pi, that just needs to be seen in 3D.

All in all, this is a good flick for the little kids, although I wish there hadn't been so many in the ten o'clock showing we were at. You're better off waiting for the home release however.

Oz the Great and Powerful

Oz the Great and Powerful ~ Let's see, what the rules again? Wait an hour after eating before swimming. Don't get involved in a land war in Asia. You can't put too much water in a nuclear reactor. Don't pull on Superman's cape. And never make sequels (or prequels) to beloved classic films.

I saw this movie weeks ago, weeks and weeks ago. I am still conflicted over whether I liked it or not. It was the second film I saw at the new Marlton 8 theater so the accommodations were fantastic, I couldn't have been more comfortable had I been in my own home. But why did I have, still have such a problem with it?

Oz is a beautiful film. It takes full advantage of CGI and the 3D effects available to the cutting edge of that technology. Here, we have an Oz that both boggles the mind, but brings L. Frank Baum's imagination to life. It is fantastic, and gorgeous. Props to director Sam Raimi for bringing the unimaginable to our eyes.

The casting, especially that of James Franco and Mila Kunis, while problematic, is fitting. Franco is smarmy, and perpetually playing (or maybe living) the part he played in "Freaks and Geeks." He is a stoner, and even here, as the eventual wizard of Oz, if he took a second to take a toke, I don't think anyone would bat an eye. This time, it works for the part, because his character is a slimy sort, not to say stoners are slimy, but Franco's is. Bottom line, he's believable.

Kunis, in my mind, has never grown from her role in "That '70s Show." Oh, she's been good in stuff, and been quite believable, but like Keanu Reeves saying "Whoa," she is always a second away from breaking character and waiting for the canned laughter after a sitcom punchline. I just can't shake it. Here, she completely fits as pre- and post-Wicked Witch of the West, and is awesome in her passive-aggressive power hungry and clingy psycho ex-girlfriend role. Zach Braff, a traditionally sitcom actor on the other hand is equally awesome as the comedy relief flying monkey, a true highlight of the film.

Sounds like I liked the flick, doesn't it? The problem comes with its prequel status. It tries so hard to emulate MGM's classic The Wizard of Oz. All of the cues are there, except for the music of course. It begins in black and white and goes to color after the twister. There are numerous winks and nods to the original film. And every time it happens, I got a strong "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town" vibe.

Remember the Rankin/Bass Christmas special "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town"? Fred Astaire plays a mailman telling a group of children the secret origins of ol' Kris Kringle. Every time he hits a prime power point of his origin, one of the kids says, "That's why he comes on Christmas Eve" or "That's where the flying reindeer came from." That what happens in Oz, and every time we see the hints to the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, the Cowardly Lion, the glowing head illusion, etc. it pulls us out of the story.

If it wasn't for those little nudge-nudge-wink-wink moments, this would be a great flick, as great as the underrated sequel, Return to Oz of a few years back. And that's why I'm so conflicted. I liked it, but then again, I didn't. It's still in theaters, so definitely give it a viewing for yourself, and see what you think.

Jack the Giant Slayer

Jack the Giant Slayer ~ Fairy tales are hot in Hollywood right now. Whether it's the two Snow White flicks last year, Hansel and Gretel with guns a few weeks back, or the hit TV series "Grimm" and "Once Upon a Time," or even the Fables comic books - fairy tales are big business. Now it's Jack's turn.

This weekend, The Bride and I saw Jack the Giant Slayer at the fabulously remodeled AMC Marlton 8 Theatre, and it wasn't just the great reclining lounger seats that made for a great movie experience - the flick was pretty good too. The big budget CGI send up of the 'Jack and the Beanstalk' story had adventure, horror, romance, and even comedy. I might go so far as to say it reminded me a bit of The Princess Bride. Now let me be clear, it's no Princess Bride, but it had all the hallmarks.

Bryan Singer's take on 'Jack and the Beanstalk' is filled with CGI giants all in need of serious dental care and repair, and a fabulous cast of character actors. Ian McShane from "Deadwood" is excellent as the King, and Ewan McGregor as the protagonist who's not the hero of this story is terrific. However, the leads are only adequate and the actors behind the CGI giants are pretty much unrecognizable. This doesn't stop the flick from being enjoyable, despite the story's simplicity and predictability. There are surprises, and that helps.

This is a great popcorn flick, moves quickly, never bores, and was the perfect film to test out a terrific new theater. Thumbs up all around.