"Little Women" is a Timeless, Witty Adaptation of the Beloved Novel

By: Keaton Marcus

85/100 “sweet”

It's been a solid 25 years since the last well-received adaptation of Mary Louise Alcott's beloved book, but the streak shall go on no more! Director Greta Gerwig's take on "Little Women" is surprisingly excellent, flourishing with an exceptionally chosen cast, beautifully done cinematography, and wonderful set design. The reboot is not only as heartwarming as audiences have come to expect, but it also happens to be excruciatingly emotional. Right, when you identify the picture as the happy-go-lucky Christmas movie, it happens to stab you directly in the heart, and immediately, the cinema is mourning with the characters. Gerwig's deft direction, Saorise Ronan's flawless lead performance, and a pitch-perfect mix of humor and drama make it one of the best films of the year. Sure, it isn't the film of 2019, but it's without a doubt one of the most timely achievements of the 365 days.

If you've read the book, or seen any one of the four adaptations, you know the story by heart. "Little Women," tells the tale of four sisters living together in the aftermath of the Civil War. In the house, it's all women, with their father off fighting, and the mother, Marmee (a superb Laura Dern), staying to care for the girls. There's Meg (Emma Watson restrained, but solid), Amy (a quirky, and loveable Florence Pugh), Beth (Eliza Scanlen) and the troublemaker; Jo (Saorise Ronan in her next brilliant role). The former three have yet to marry, while the fourth seems to be too content with her free life to do so. Jo is a writer and is hoping to get her many short stories published in newspapers, trying to inject her passion into a world that rejects females in nearly every respect. It's truly a brilliant premise, simple, yet full of life.

What maddens Aunt March (an enjoyable Meryl Streep) are the chosen paths the four sisters have embarked upon. She's all about marrying rich and living the rest of your life under a man. This is while Meg and Amy are in desire of truly loving somebody, and Jo is refusing to marry at all. Nevertheless, it’s still Ronan who steals the show. The chemistry with co-star Timothèè Chalamet (who plays Laurie terrifically) or the heartfelt portrayal of being there for siblings still doesn't overcome Ronan's impeccable outing. Yes, the cinematography, light-fingered direction, and screenplay will still not beat out the lead performance. And that's how a film should go, believe it, or not. After nabbing roles in both "Lady Bird", "Loving Vincent" and "Mary, Queen of Scotts", Ronan may have just become the "it" girl of the decade.

Despite being a little overshadowed by how excellent the cast was, Gerwig is truly the mastermind behind this production. Her creative mind, and a distinct knack for wit and ambition make this the film for the ages. It's remarkably the next-gen "Little Women", but still happens to be set in the 1860s. While Gerwig never lets the feminine feel of it fade away, both genders will more than likely be thoroughly engaged to the given adaptation, and let go of all the squabblings of "chick flicks". Running at about 137 minutes, this period piece clocks just right and leaves more than enough time to mix romance, drama and laughs into one bulky melting pot of a movie. See it for any one of the three themes above, but genuinely, you'll cherish the movie in general.

The final opinion is: Greta Gerwig's "Little Women" is a timeless adaptation that features worthy performances, heartwarming emotion and an abundance of wit and fresh ideas...$PLURGE IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening: 16.7M

Domestic Total: 108M

Worldwide Total: 205.9M

Little Women

By Quinn Marcus

(2019)

AGE: 12+

85% SWEET

So What's The Story?

Little Women is a coming of age story based upon the novel by Louisa May Alcott. Four sisters wait desperately in their house for the return of their father from the civil war as they explore their artistic talents as a family. Little Women is the ultimate film about love, trust, following your passion and loyalty. Is It Worth Your While? I believe the film should be seen by all who look to be inspired and be given the courage to follow their dreams. First of all, we have the directing by Greta Gerwig, director of Lady Bird (no score yet). The grace and stylish directing stood out in the crowded field of coming of age dramas. The cast seemed to work fluently and efficiently with the director's encouraging talent. Next, we have the cinematography. Personally, the cinematography had a huge emotional impact on me. It was so beautiful, and the set design that went with it was realistic and full of effort. It completed scenes in such a way that left a positive mark on 2019's camera work. Third, we have the script and story. The script relied on a great story that led to a faithful, dramatic and slightly funny script. Overall, with great directing, gorgeous cinematography and the entire crew's talent, Little Women adds to the pile of great 2019 films.

How Was The Cast?

The cast of Little Women was one of the best ensembles of 2019. First, we have Saoirse Ronan as Jo March. As the leading role, playing an intensely crafted character is a hard job to carry out. Saoirse Ronan does it right, she provides levels of emotion that are rare to find in some young actors today. Second, we have Emma Watson as Meg March. Playing one of the most developed characters in the story that goes from wanting to be rich to eventually understand the value of having nothing but love to keep you afloat. Emma Watson has always been a great actress and should continue being apart of great films whenever she can. Third, we have Florence Pugh as Amy March. Her character is as conflicted as everyone in the story, feeling as if she's been under Jo's shadow for a while. Florence Pugh's take on this character is funny, emotional and proof of another powerhouse performance in the movie. Fourth and finally, we have Eliza Scanlen as Beth March. A relatively new actress with only nine credits on IMDb, but a promising young actress. Given her honest, real and deliberately impactful performance.

Aging 'Loyalty'

Little Women includes some tragic scenes, one main character dies of Scarlett Fever, people are rejected and are seen in tears. There is kissing and some flirting. However, there are scenes of kindness and it's rewarding. For instance when the four sisters give up their Christmas feast to a very poor family and are then given a new feast from Mr. Laurence. The characters are all good role models and are there for each other no matter what. Overall I recommend this movie for young teens and up.

"Frozen II" is an Uneven, but Dazzling and Sweeping Journey Into the Unknown

By: Keaton Marcus

70/100 “sweet/sour”

One thing sequels have proved to me was: a second movie can rarely live up to its predecessor's cards but can play the hell out of the ones it possesses. That's what "Frozen II" takes advantage of, sure, it isn't as deftly good as the original, but it is undeniably a solid, above-average movie. Not just the comedic aspects, but the animation is thrillingly breathtaking, and depicts Disney, once again, as the first choice for most magnificent visual effects whether it’s "Avengers: Endgame" or "Moana". The laughs are clever, and it's frequently entertaining, though like every film, it does have its issues. Occasionally, the plotting doesn't click, the ending disappoints, and the entire set-up plays like a Christmas ad. Yes, it's obligatory to dock off points for the minute bits and pieces that don't quite work, but overall, "Frozen II" makes for a competent, enjoyable sequel.

I know you may not believe it, but now six years in the future, we are back in Arendelle. As the eventful town is settling in for Autumn, Elsa (Idina Menzel with birds for a voice) begins to hear peculiar voices in a sing-song. These sounds lead her into an enchanted forest (is there a magical forest in every kid's movie?) where she unexpectedly wakens beings dubbed "The Elemental Spirits". These spirits, Fire, Water, Earth and Air reign chaos on Arendelle, utterly destroying the seaside town. This forces the rest of the gang, Anna (Kristen Bell delivering quirkiness, and laughs), Olaf (a truly hilarious performance by Josh Gad) and Kristoff (Jonathon Groff feeling dreamy) to evacuate along with the people to find a solution.

I do give directors Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee notable credit for differing the storytelling from its predecessor, but it ends a little uneven. What I was anticipating the most about a "Frozen" sequel was the feeling of how it would honor the vastness that the first film covered. And it did, in a way; but not quite in the depiction audiences we were hoping for. Usually, movie-goers should be content with Olaf retelling the whole first film comically (it's a brilliant scene), and beautiful visuals, but it can't help but be a tad underwhelming. Come on, elemental spirits, that's all Mr. Buck and Ms. Lee could think of? After the breathtaking, adorable take on sisterhood its former was, all "Frozen II" could put its back upon was diverging from the path? That's when the soundtrack saves the movie.

Composer Christophe Beck added a few more songs in the mix, and one of them does make the shortlist of some of the best music in animation ever. I was mildly entertained by Kristoff's stand-alone love tune "Lost in the Woods" (compliments to the reindeer), or Olaf's take on maturity dubbed "When I am Older", but the real shining star was Queen Elsa's magnificent ballad. Heading to you"re local multiplex to see "Frozen II", you were wondering about what song could match its predecessor's Oscar-winning "Let it Go". That piece is most definitely Idina Menzel's breathtaking "Into the Unknown", portraying Elsa's journey outside of Arendelle. Combine haunting sirens with Menzel's excellent voice, and you have Disney's new big hit. The cinema now has visuals, a stunning soundtrack, and some brilliant voice-actors. Ya, there's the flaw of the deftly makeshift storyline, but that's the main factor that must be excused for enjoyment.

The final opinion is: Despite the notable shortcomings compared to its predecessor, "Frozen II" is an entertaining-enough journey into the unknown with laughs, a sweeping soundtrack and intense visual effects...$TREAM IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Frozen II

(2019)

AGE: 6+

70% SWEET/SOUR

So What's The Story?

Set after the events of Frozen, the kingdom of Arendelle is in peace. This all changes when Elsa keeps hearing a mysterious sound that relates to Arendelle's past with a tribe that lives in a long-forgotten enchanted land. Suddenly the spirits that once roamed this enchanted land were awoken by Elsa's powers. Arendelle is no longer safe, and the only thing stopping Arendelle from collapse is Anna, Olaf, Kristoff, Elsa and Sven finding the source of Elsa's powers by embarking on a quest into the enchanted land.

Is It Worth Your While?

Whilst its nothing special, Frozen 2 still manages to provide a dazzling spectacle that fans will love. First of all, we have the directing by Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee both directors of Frozen (80% sweet). The directors seemed to help the actors throughout the film as much as they would for a live-action feature. Plus their cooperation for the two films seemed to work a second time around, together they crafted a worthy, yet a slightly worse sequel. Next, we have the animation. I thought that the animation of the film was even more stunning than the previous one. Now, this may just be because of the six-year time of advancement they had to work with, but it still looked great. The film was colorful enough to dazzle anyone from the average toddler to a full-grown man. Third, we have the script and story. The story may have not had the meaningful impact of its predecessor, but fun twists and even a few good jokes are what kept the film up. The music was decently written and partially entertaining. In my opinion, the "Into the unknown" song was the best for its dramatic beat and lyric. Overall, a good pair of directors and story makers, dazzling animation and a good script are what made the film a decent sequel.

How Was The Cast?

Like the first film, the cast was all entertaining and all had great voices. First, we have Kristen Bell as Anna. Energetic and suitable to her character are what made Kristen Bell great for the first film and this one. Second, we have Idina Menzel as Elsa. An incredible voice and talent is all that is needed to be said about her. Third, we have Josh Gad as Olaf. Josh Gad has proved himself to be a hysterical actor over the years, and Olaf being one of his best characters, was not wasted in the film. His scene where he explains the entire plot of Frozen was genius and his new song about growing up was also great. Fourth and finally, we have Jonathan Groff as Kristoff. He finally got a song! Although his new song may have been cheesy, it managed to use that to its advantage. The lyrics were completely ridiculous, but it seemed like Jonathan did not care, he was just ready to entertain the audience.

Aging "Arendelle"

Frozen 2 has some action and peril but is overall a lighter adaption to the original. There are elements of teamwork and a ton of laughter. Overall toddlers and up should love the film.

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil

By Quinn Marcus

(2019)

AGE: 12+

70% SWEET/SOUR

So What's The Story?

Five years after the events of Maleficent took place. The creatures of the Moors are finally living in peace. Soon, Price Philip asks Aurora to marry her. Forcing Aurora and Maleficent to attend a dinner celebration at Prince Philip's castle where they meet the king and queen. This was all apart of the wicked Queen Ingrith's plan to keep Aurora in the human world and to kill Maleficent. She only partially succeeds. Maleficent is found by her own kind who takes her in and shows her their world. As Aurora tries to find Maleficent and the queen's plan for war is underway Maleficent must decide to attack or to make peace with the humans of Ulstead.

Is It Worth Your While?

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is another surprisingly decent Disney film this year. Although it does not create enough reasons to establish its own existence, it is worth the trip to the big screen. Before I begin I would like to start by saying that this was the first film that I had seen alone in the cinema. Because of this, I noticed the difference between being alone and having friends or family with you. When I was alone getting into my seat, I noticed the audience's little conversations that they were having. Whether it was business or how they thought the film was gonna be, it was nice to hear them. During the trailer of Last Christmas, a few people sang the song. Most of all though, after the film the audience clapped which showed me that audiences love the film. That was something that deeply influenced my review. Although it's great to have friends with you, they talk a little too much during the movie. When I'm hanging with my brother or Papa, it's awesome but I worry about what they will think of the film. However, when I was alone, it was my own opinion influenced by the audience's reactions. It's great to have a group with you but the experience that I had alone was definitely something new and great. First of all, we have the directing by Joachim Ronning. Director of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (30% sour). A change-up of the director gave me a huge sense of some difference between the original (55% sour) and this one. For starters, the action scenes are directed beautifully. The cast worked well together and was well picked. Plus some comedy which was added was a good addition to the film that blended well with the otherwise meh story. Next, we have the special effects. Like the original, the effects were dazzling, colorful and well made. The final battle was nothing short of eye-popping and some shots were even beautiful. Third, we have the script and story. I thought that these two things together tried to express some sort of message but never really succeeded. As well as this, the natural generic formula of Disney remakes was stained all over Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. Story of the classic, with a few twists that sometimes work. However, they did attempt to make this a little more fun than the original and tried to more deeply express the characters. Overall, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil had good directing, stunning visuals but a script and story that rely on the generic Disney remake formula too much.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Maleficent: Mistress of Evil commits to this flawed but not doomed film. First of all, we have Angelina Jolie as Maleficent. Being the only amazing thing in the original besides visuals. Angelina Jolie continues to bring the iconic Disney character to life with a funny and dramatic performance as the leading role. Next, we have Elle Fanning as Aurora. Her performance improved from the original film. She seemed more focused and worked a little better with the cast as well. Although she still seemed too jumpy at times she provided a solid performance. Third, we have Harris Dickinson as Prince Philip. A change-up from the original's Brenton Thwaites as Prince Philip. Harris Dickinson provides a somewhat robotic but generally agreeable performance in the movie. He never really seemed to change his tone and the rest of the cast seemed annoyed whenever he acted. Fourth and finally, we have Michelle Pfeiffer as Queen Ingrid. She was a solid villain, scary in a darkly comedic way and a good addition to the film getting a sufficient amount of screentime.

Aging 'The Moors'

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil has some dark themes and might be a little too intense for younger children. Fairies die, there is a huge moderately violent final battle at the end. Two men are seen killed by trees. However there is a positive uniting two different kinds of people type of message. Which may or may not be acquired by the targeted audience. Overall I recommend this film for tweens and up.

AD ASTRA

(2019)

AGE: 13+

70% SWEET/SOUR

So What's the Story?

Set in the near future… Ad Astra is about astronaut Roy McBride, son of the legendary astronaut Clifford McBride. Clifford had undergone an expedition in space called ‘The Lima Project’ to find extra terrestrial life beyond our solar system, the mission would last for years. The members of ‘The Lima Project’ never came back. Years later a new global disaster begins known as “The Surge.” Roy, now a man has also become an astronaut and is assigned to join a crew of men and women to find ‘The Lima Project’s’ ship and destroy it. Emotional, intense, dark. If these are the things you are looking for in a space film, this is the one for you.

Is It Worth Your While?

Ad Astra aspires to be the space epic of 2019, but production values and a game Brad Pitt are the only things keeping this movie going, now here are my reasons. First of all, directing by James Gray, director of 'The Lost City Of Z' (no score yet), really liked to see Brad Pitt walking down dark hallways in slow motion. I mean I get it, we all would love to see an epic actor looking dramatic, but who cares. To add on to that Brad Pitt's left side of the face was also a very popular subject that the director wanted to cover. I guess Brad Pitt just has a good side. Also, that narration filled me with so much boredom, I fell asleep for a few minutes. Now don't get me wrong, Brad Pitt's voice was actually kind of relaxing, but him talking about his father again and again was unnecessary. However, some scenes were directed very well, the opening satellite tower scene was amazing, the moon battle was great, and then there was the crazy monkey scene which made no sense at all. Next, we have the special effects. Outer space looked amazing, the planets, the ships, the stars all looked incredibly realistic. Also, the no sound in space thing made it very logical. Because in space, there is no sound, so it was replaced by a fantastic soundtrack. Third, we have the script and story. Boring but occasionally interesting, the script and story captured my attention sometimes and made me fall asleep others. There were also too many plot points, he's dealing with his wife, his dad, the mission, staying focused and having his psychology evaluation approved. It was all too much. Overall, Ad Astra benefits from an occasionally interesting story and impressive production value but suffers from a slow story and repetition.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Ad Astra did a solid job. First, we have Brad Pitt as Roy McBride. Amazing as always, Brad Pitt truly shined in this movie regardless of the narration. He was dramatic, robot-like to support his overall character and seemed to work with the cast perfectly. Next, we have Tommy Lee Jones as Clifford McBride. Although having a weird character to play, Tommy Lee Jones finds a way to make that character work performing with pure passion and raw emotion. Third, we have Donald Sutherland as Thomas Pruitt. He was wasted, not given enough screen time which his character deserved. It was almost like, they tried to find a way to get him out of the movie just so they could focus on Brad Pitt.

Aging 'The Surge'

Ad Astra has some bloody scenes, Astronauts are killed. Roy and Clifford have an intense relationship, there is some mild violence. Roy goes a little crazy whilst being on a long voyage. However, Roy eventually learns to become a better person after learning a few lessons during his travels, overall I recommend this film to teens and up.

The Lion King

By Quinn Marcus

(2019) 

AGE: 8+

70% sweet/sour

So What’s the Story?

Based off of the 1994 Disney classic, comes the story of a young lion named Simba. Who, after witnessing the murder of his father Mufasa is forced to leave the kingdom and never return by his uncle Scar. Out in the wilderness Simba discovers new friends and learns the true meaning of the great responsibility given to him.

Is It Worth Your While?

Like most disney live action reboots the films never exceed the decent territory, but if this had been a bit better than it was, it would have proved it wrong, now here are my reasons. First we have the directing by Jon Favreau director of ‘Iron Man’ (90% sweet), ‘Iron Man 2’ (62% sweet/sour) and ‘The Jungle Book’ (2016, 67% sweet/sour). Was pretty good. Some shots that he made were beautifully executed, but some shots such as the final battle sequence was so close to the animals that all you saw were blurry silhouettes of animals running around off and on the screen. In short, that scene could have been done better, the middle of the film he directs exceedingly well working with a script that is different from the original for those moments. So for the directing, I give a B. Next we have the special effects. Blending well with most of the cinematography, the animals and landscape designs are realistic and all out incredible. So for the special effects, I give an A. Third we have the script. I thought that the script in the middle was one of the things that caught my eye. The script of the beginning and end was practically the same as the original, but they made the middle funnier and more energetic. So for the script, I give a B+

Fourth, I thought that the story was all too familiar in parts of the film, but it invented its own fun and dark atmosphere that gave the story some power. Most of the songs were done well, but the song ‘Be Prepared’ was completely thrown away and a waist of a great scene. So for the story, I give a B.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in ‘The Lion King’ were a perfect choice for their characters. First we have Donald Glover as Simba. Being a singer, Donald Glover’s voice was good for Simba, and acting wise, he did pretty well in the time that he had onscreen. Next we have Beyoncé as Nala. Also a singer she did a great job with Donald Glover on singing ‘Can You Feel The Love Tonight’ and the new song ‘Spirit’ which was a fine addition to the film. Overall these two leads had exceptional chemistry together. Third we have Seth Rogen as Pumbaa. Him and Billy Eichner were an incredible comedic duo providing most of the laughs and entertainment to the film. Fourth and finally we have Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar. Almost making his character as devious and cunning as the original, The new version of Scar was nothing but evil, but the lack of the full version of ‘Be Prepared’ gave him less value.

Aging ‘The King’

‘The Lion King’ was much darker than the original, but the comedy was created on a whole other level. Making it balanced. Some blood is shown, the Young Simba and Nala are put in danger many times. Mufasa is pushed off a cliff by his own brother and seen dead on the ground. Some settings are intense and dark. However the whole film teaches lessons of courage and responsibility. Overall the film is made for kids and up.

"The Lion King" is a Musical, and Visual Treat With a Lack of Originality

By: Keaton Marcus

63/100 “sweet/sour”

Eventually, amidst all the Disney remakes, whether their assured or not, the growing studio decided to reboot "The Lion King" with state-of-the-art photorealistic technology and an ensemble voice cast. The musical soundtrack and Timon and Pumbaa steal the show, and can frequently distract audiences from the lack of originality exhibited so fiercely by the original. Jon Favreau, who earned his bones with Disney directing the remake of "The Jungle Book" in 2016, surrenders excellent detail with the visual effects, but can't seem to deliver the same spark as the 1994 box office hit did. So while the 260M production budget was almost completely worth it, audiences still deserved a little better. For audiences anticipating to see the likes of Beyonce, Donald Glover, and even James Earl Jones voice the live-action reboot, the music itself might be enough. However, for fans of the original film that want to see something new, something that hasn't already happened, it's a hard pass.

This retake of the Disney classic does have almost everything money can buy today, looking fantastic on the outside, but not digging deep enough on the inside. Donald Glover and Beyonce have considerable chemistry when it comes to the musical numbers, the big one being "Can You Feel the Love Tonight?", but screenwriter Jeff Nathanson can't seem to find the same groove outside the soundtrack (that he had nothing to do with). However, when all seems lost, Pumbaa and Timon, voiced by Seth Rogen and Billy Eichner come and save the day (well, mostly) with comedic relief. One thing the retake tackles the original for is the energy and laughs put into the CGI'd warthog and meerkat, who also bring splendor to "Hakuna Matata" once again. More importantly, audiences will get to listen to the releasing deep voice of James Earl Jones returning to play Mufasa, Simba's dad. While the script's dramatic elements have no compare to Jones' default performance, nostalgia will be passed on.

The plot, similarly to 1994 original, revolves around Scar (Chiwetel Ejiofor) attempting to murder his king brother, Mufasa (James Earl Jones) so that he will become the ruler of the animal kingdom. The Shakespearean overtones work, with jealousy becoming a key part of it, but Ejiofor is no Jeremy Irons. This is a major issue, not only does Ejiofor not live up to his predecessor, but audiences are not nearly as entertained with villainy. Continuing predictably, Simba goes and decides to live with Pumbaa and Timon (the best bits in the film), and then the film leads on to the final battle between Scar and Simba. The epicness of the final moments is wonderfully ambitious, and it ends extremely entertaining if only the entire film was that.

The soundtrack is almost identical to the original film, but what this remake get's right is the immense feeling of nostalgia and chills. Right from the beginning, when "The Circle of Life" began, audiences already knew they were in for a musical treat. Furthermore, the powerful "I Just Can't-Wait to Be King" and "Hakuna Matata" both soar high with visual splendor, incredible voice acting and a good sense of boldness that the non-musical part of the film seldom achieved. One bit of originality that I would give credit to the live-action remake is Beyonce's new song, titled "Searching At the Stars" which gives new life to the film, and diverts from the same old songs played in the original animated film. Right before the spark, we come to adult Simba and Nala's duet, "Can You Feel the Love Tonight?" which already is a powerful romantic song, but Glover and Beyonce have wonderfully synched voices that deliver the right power to the song. Yes, the music is something to take pride in, and I wouldn't be surprised if Beyonce's new addition wins an Oscar later this year, and the pure force of the soundtrack is just enough to prowl the theater away from the same old same old type plotting.

The final verdict is: Disney's remake of "The Lion King" lacks originality or a compelling screenplay--but the photorealistic special effects, the musical soundtrack, and lot’s of Favreau's signature comedic bits shine in an otherwise mixed bag of a film...STREAM IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening Weekend: 191.7m

Domestic Total: 510.6m (still in release)

Worldwide Total: 1.508 billion (still in release)

Related Films:

Aladdin (2019), 70/100 “sweet/sour”

Beauty and the Beast (2017), 60/100 “sweet/sour”

The Jungle Book (2016), 65/100 “sweet/sour”

"Toy Story 4" is a Delicious, Heartwarming, and Visually Impressive Animated Treat

By: Keaton Marcus

80/100 “sweet”

The spectacular, charming animated franchise has done it again, with world-building, unique characters, and more, and more lifelike animation every film. Additionally, "Toy Story 4" consists of the original, beloved cast, lead by an easily charismatic Tom Hanks. It's emotional, and the funniest "Toy Story" picture to date--you"ll laugh, cry and get stabbed in the metaphorical heart, knowing that this might be the last time you"ll see Woody, Buzz, and the gang on the big screen. Still, audiences will be satisfied to know that the fourth installment went out with a bang, not a whimper. Maybe the plot is a little bit of a rehash of the previous films, but isn't that the case with all animated films? Literally, in my opinion, at least, the basic template of animated entertainment is to divert the kids with a harmless 90 minutes. The "Toy Story" series does that, and so much more, including dragging the older audiences in with the youngsters, providing meaningful and engaging characters, along with an all-star cast.

Despite the original installments of the franchise, no, the supposedly concluding flick is not all about Woody's adventures--in fact, Hanks' cowboy might be considered a supporting persona. Number four tells the story of a whatzit dubbed Forky, created by an enthusiastic kindergartener named Bonnie to become her new favorite "toy". When I put the word in quotations, I absolutely mean it. He's a cheaply made spork with pipe-cleaner arms, a Play-Doh constructed mouth, and googly eyes. Simple, and downright hysterical. Soon after Forky is made, the audience learns that Bonnie cannot live without her creation. However, Forky has other plans, including calling himself "trash", and acting suicidal for the next hour in the film. Yes, Woody, for half the time is trying to save Forky from destroying himself--and say what you may, it works wildly. Bonnie's "toy" finally manages to jump out the window, leading the gang to an amusement park. There, they find a menacing antique store filled with evil dummies ( "The Shining" soundtrack), and they"re terrifying leader named Gabby Gabby who currently has a broken voice box. To sum it up easier: Woody can't seem to find a child and decides to help Forky achieve his former destiny with Bonnie.

While Tom Hanks has had steady hits such as "Sully" (78% "sweet"), and "The Post" (80% "sweet"), the "Toy Story" series has always been his biggest in the film business. Not only has it kept him a consistent box office winner, but he's been kept as one of the most popular voice actors for the kids. Since 1995, he's been voicing a rootin-tootin cowboy named Woody. It's our most fond project of the actor. Hanks has always brought the charm and committed performance to the toy, outpacing many other voice actors with both styles, and laughs. The script by Andrew Stanton in this sequel is just brilliant, clearly the most hysterical, and witty since the original film came out almost 25 years ago. It"ll be sad to see the hat-donned toy figure be gone, after being in a major part of all our lives for more than two decades.

While Hanks brings the laughs home for one last stroll, it's really the supporting cast that's in need of recognition. When Woody is busy trying to escape the almost haunted antique store, Buzz (a charming Tim Allen) meets to furry friends. One's a stuffed duck (a gleaming Keegan-Michael Key), and a stuffed rabbit, who is voiced by another adorably funny outing by comedian, and horror filmmaker Jordan Peele. Otherwise, Keanu Reeves even gets his moments of the spotlight in the film voicing stunt figure Duke Caboom. It actually might ring disturbingly for people to see Reeves go from splitting heads in "John Wick: Chapter 3", to a PG-rated children's picture about talking toys.

The final verdict is: "Toy Story 4" delivers plenty of laughs, beautiful animation, and buckets of fun in the franchise's latest (and maybe last) outing with a side of delicious performances from both the leads and the supporting cast. An enjoyable sequel for all-ages...$PLURGE IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening Weekend: 120.9m

Domestic Total: 426.7m (still in release)

Worldwide Total: 1.031 billion (still in release)

Related Films:

Toy Story 3, 80/100 “sweet”

Minions, 55/100 “sweet”

How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World, 80/100 “sweet”

The Secret Life of Pets 2

By Quinn Marcus

(2019)

AGE: 5+

40% SOUR

So What’s the Story?

Continuing the story off of the 2016 hit, ‘The Secret Life of Pets’. ‘The Secret Life of Pets 2’ explores the themes of having a child in the house, and what it takes to take care of it. Max will learn how to be brave, Gidget must rescue a squeaky toy from a room full of cats, and Snowball will find his inner superhero working with a dog named Daisy to rescue an abused tiger from a circus.

Is It Worth Your While?

'The Secret Life of Pets 2' is a funny, yet bland and shallow distraction for kids between the ages of 5 and 7, now here are my reasons. First of all, we have the directing by Chris Renaud director of 'Despicable Me' (85% sweet), 'Despicable Me 2' (80% sweet), and 'The Secret Life of Pets' (68% sweet/sour). Co-Directing we have Jonathan del Val whose only directed project just happens to be this. The directing in the film was rushed, confusing and all over the place. When the film is introduced, it all seems like a ride worth going on, but the moment Max and Duke leave for the farm, it turns into chaos. Two animals are doing one thing, the other few another, until the point where you can't take it anymore. The original was balanced, focused, and was able to stay on one storyline instead of expanding on a bunch of different ones and spending very little time on each. It is like they tried to pack too much into the very little time they had. So for the directing, I give a D-. Next, we have the animation. I thought that the animation was cute, colorful, and will entertain and distract kids from the big picture. So for the animation, I give a B+. Third, we have the script and story. The gags of the script were funny, I'll give them that, but besides the laughs, the whole thing just did not work. The message that they tried to show throughout the film, did not show throughout the film. In the end, Max gives a whole emotional speech that indicated what the message was, however, that was not what the story was about. The story was too crazy to even provide the slightest bit of the themes that they were attempting to cover. So for the script and story, I give a D+. Overall, 'The Secret Life of Pets 2' is a colorful distraction for kids and a horrible mess to anyone older.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in 'The Secret Life of Pets 2' was pretty mixed. First, we have Kevin Hart as Snowball. He was probably the most entertaining of the film providing laughs in every scene he did, its to bad that in perhaps all of the scenes that he did, he yelled at least 30 times. Next, we have Jenny Slate as Gidget. Just like her character, she was jumpy, funny and perfect for the part, providing solid chemistry between the cast members. Third, we have Patton Oswalt as Max. As a replacement off of the original's actor for Max, Louis C.K. he was fine, but for some reason, not the main character. If you did not notice, he is the actor who plays Remy in 'Ratatouille' (90% sweet), so he has worked with animation before, and in this, he had a solid animated voice. Fourth, and finally, we had a surprise appearance from Harrison Ford, who was completely wasted in the movie, he had a serious yet funny character, but they gave him a script that ruined it.

Aging 'Pets'

'The Secret Life of Pets 2' has colorful animation, funny characters, a weak but distractible storyline which is sure to entertain children. There is some animal abuse to a tiger, and a gun is pointed to a dogs head, but overall the film should be fine for kids ages 5 and up.

"The Secret Life of Pets 2" Cute, Cuddly, and Strictly for Children

By: Keaton Marcus

55/100 “sour”

The thing about animated films, or even children targeted pictures in general, is that their mass-produced, all claiming to be the original one. Well, it requires a lot of digging to find the right pic, and there are many kids and family tagged films that work, and then the majority don't. "The Secret Life of Pets 2" isn't a terrible film, but it's one of those distractions, one of those rip-offs that may get your children entertained, but it's a waste of time. However, this sequel does have the right template, if a basic template for a run-of-the-mill animated picture. The 80 million productions have bright animation, gags, and easy-to-follow plot lines, there's just nothing else, no heart, or ambition. The voice cast is talented, and there's plenty of adorable shout-outs, but it's lost of the soul of the original film.

Coming back to the whole easy-to-follow plot lines idea and all, "The Secret Life of Pets 2" actually never lives up to that individual criteria. You"ll see what I mean. Max (voiced suitably by Patton Oswalt) and Duke (Eric Stonestreet) are living happily with Katie, their owner. However, when Katie means a portly man named Chuck, they have a child called Liam--after that, everything changes. Meanwhile, Snowball (voiced energetically by Kevin Hart) has taken in his superhero identity, dubbed Captain Snowball by himself. Max and Duke are then told that they're going on a road trip to the countryside for a quick visit. The two buds meet a big and husky dog named Rooster (a grumpy, old Harrison Ford) who then teaches Max how to be tough like him, "how to find my inner rooster" Max calls it. Back in the city, Captain Snowball meets a dog named Katie (a salty Tiffany Haddish) who tells him that they must go save a tiger from an abusive, Russian circus led by Sergei (Nick Kroll with an accent).

I told you, just those two plot lines are a little too complicated to follow, and there's more. Rooster's advice isn't enough to entertain the audiences, so we head back to the city once again for another subplot. This time following the Pomeranian dog dubbed Gidget voiced by Jenny Slate. Max has trusted his furry pal in watching his squeaky toy Busy Bee. However, when Gidget loses the cutie in a house full of cats--she goes to overweight feline Chloe (Lake Bell) for help. Some parts work in this doggy-cat duo, but overall, this additional narrative still feels unnecessary. Overall really, the plot lines are just too intricate for the younger audiences--and you"ve lost the adults' limited attention span by the moment they change characters.

The first film in this couplet had the fresh idea of the whole what are your pets doing when you are away shenanigan, in the sequel, they differ up the storytelling well enough, but it never hits the right bars frequently enough, only sporadically. If you're a five-year-old kid, begging to see an 86-minute colorful diversion be my guest--but anyone maturer may not be in for the same doggy treat. However, mentioned a couple of times before, this sequel does have enough, if not a sufficient amount of excellent scenes. A remarkably hysterical instant is when Max is taken to the vet's office cause of his scratching issue. Directors Chris Renaud and Jonathon del Val expertly focus on the little narratives of each animal in the uncomfortable waiting room. Another is Snowball, who Kevin Hart brings to the spotlight of the picture as one of the main characters. Hart and Haddish have terrific chemistry, and that's all you need, despite the ludicrous sub-plot their involved in. So yes, "The Secret Life of Pets 2" does have its moments, but those sporadic pieces are only occasionally enough to bog the chaotic subplots and the lack of new narrative tricks.

The final opinion is: "The Secret Life of Pets 2" has enough colorful gags, and a talented voice-cast suitable for younger audiences, but its turbulent storytelling and its lack of narrative strength limit the film to a mildly entertaining sequel...$KIP IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening Weekend: 46.6m

Domestic Total: 157.4m (still in release)

Worldwide Total: 413.3m (still in release)

Disney's "Aladdin" Reboot Features Dazzling Visuals, Music, and a CGI'd Genie

By: Keaton Marcus

70/100 “sweet/sour”

The ads didn't work out for you, or trolls think Will Smith's Genie looks cheesy--well forget the teaser trailers, and prepare yourself for a swashbuckling fun adventure full of enjoyable musical numbers, dazzling visual effects, and a fresh, young cast filled with chemistry. Yes, it's long, occasionally laughable--and maybe a little unnecessary--but audiences, especially the younger ones have much to dive into. Smith's Genie works, the film is full of laughs and the remainder of the leading cast, especially Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott's banter as Aladdin and Jasmine, work like a charm. The faithfulness to the animated counterpart, released in 1992--is up to the task, and while the live-action imagining may never match to the classic--it really never needs to, if you're there to have fun with yourself, this "Aladdin" reboot will give you everything you need.

The new film has occasional differences, but generally, filmmaker Guy Ritchie follows the basic storyline of the original, and what made it so fun. At the beginning of the stuffed picture, we see Aladdin, with his monkey, Abu (now CGI'd) stealing all sorts of jewels--they exchange some banter, the cuteness of the creature especially stands out. Then, however, the street-thief meets the princess in disguise, Jasmine--immediately the two have a connection. From there its all chemistry between a fantastic Massoud and a spunky Scott. In one of the first numbers, "One Jump Ahead" (from the original), Aladdin swings through the dusty streets of Agrabah with grace, while singing the catchy song with gusto--he's an acrobat, and it's very fun to watch, no matter how laughable. Of course, the villain, Jafar shows up here and there, tempting Aladdin to fetch the lamp from the "tiger-cave" of sorts--and then, well tricking him. The lamp, containing the wise-cracking Genie, and the cave hiding the titular magic carpet. Lost by now? Well, the plotting is a little much, you may scratch your head here and there, but usually--not much thinking is required. Instead of longing for love, Jasmine desires to be Sultan--and forget the sexist rules of the kingdom--this plot twist gives the story a touch of feminism, but not too much to make you cringe. The few changes generally work.

We must talk more about the songs. Composer Alan Menken captures all of the numbers from the original, "A Whole New World" which has Aladdin and Jasmine going on a magic carpet ride, and Naomi Scott's voice will win over audiences. The music department also does not forget the likes of "Arabian Nights", (opening theme), "Friend Like Me" (a classic, this time sang by Will Smith, instead of Robin Williams)--Additionally, we see many more, including a new song titled "Speechless" which gives actress Naomi Scott a thrillingly written solo, and another chance to showcase her beautiful, proud voice that topples the stereotypical original princess. The three main characters, Smith's Genie, Massoud's Aladdin and Scott's Jasmine all flow with the dazzling music, and it's more than enough to get the audiences to sing along.

Another vital thing about the film is Will Smith's live-action Genie. Does it work? (yes) Is it much too uncomfortable? (occasionally) And can he sing? (hell yes). It may be hard for some to compare the rebooted variant to the classic, very fun Robin Williams' animated counterpart--but for most, the jokey, irresponsible CGI take is enough for the pleasure of the younger ones. Also, mentioned before, the actor gets his share of music, including "Friend Like Me" and "Arabian Nights", both cheesy, and ludicrous, but oh, so appealing. Smith also shines in many clever scenes, including a lavish party, where he instructs Aladdin on how to talk to the princess, using all sorts magic to make the "fake prince" dance and be charming. Furthermore, he also has winning chemistry with Jasmine's handmaiden, Dalia (played by a fantastic Nasim Pedrad)--who he falls in love with (there is no notable servant in the original). Smith has not done a blockbuster in a while, and he's back, awoken after years.

There are things that don't work, as there are in many Disney live-action reboots. First off, the villain, Jafar--disappoints. Played by Turkish actor Marwan Kenzari, this live-action imagining of the iconic antagonist may be more charming, handsome and more appealing than his curved-nose animated original--but the looks have nothing on the poor writing for the character, and over-the-top performance. On the bright side, he's not the face of the film, and generally--the cast performs very well surprisingly. So while the villain rarely works, and the storytelling is a little over-complicated, it's still all good, family-friendly fun.

The final verdict is: Disney's live-action "Aladdin" reboot is occasionally over-stuffed, and a bit too lengthy--but, generally, the excitement-filled children's picture delivers a terrific cast, dazzling special effects and musical numbers full of enjoyable songs...$TREAM IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening Weekend: 91.5m

Domestic Total: 355.5m

Worldwide Total: 1.050 billion

Aladdin

By Quinn Marcus

(2019)

AGE: 9+

75% SWEET

So What’s the Story?

Based off of the 1992 Disney animated tale of Aladdin comes the story of a street rat, a princess and a lamp. Jafar, an advisor to the Sultan, seeks the power to take over countries, and make Agrabah the strongest that there is. Meanwhile, a street rat named Aladdin meets princess Jasmine and after forming an unquestionable connection, Aladdin decides that he must meet her again. Which he almost does. Jafar then realizes that to only get true power, you must get the lamp, but the cave of wonders will only let “the diamond in the rough” go through. That’s when Jafar meets Aladdin, well kidnaps actually. He makes aladdin get the lamp throwing him into an adventure that he never asked for.

Is It Worth Your While?

This is a rare Disney live action remake that actually works, providing enough magic and fun to keep you watching, but it’s not perfect. Now here are my reasons. First of all, the directing by Guy Ritchie, director of the Robert Downey Jr. adaptations of Sherlock Holmes. Was clunky at times, but was overall smooth and fun. There is one scene where Aladdin (now prince Ali) wants to impress the princess his way at a party, but the Genie using some hand work makes him do the most over the top dance moves of all time. The way it’s done is genius and hysterical. So for the directing, I give an A. Next I thought that the special effects were dazzling, energetic and full of life. The ending may have gone a bit overboard with that, but it still worked out to be a visual treat for all ages. So for that, I give the visuals a B+. Third I thought that the story was handled with care, however it didn’t change much from the animated version which did not have a great story. Making it seem like a story that you should care about, but ultimately was just okay. So for the story, I give a C+. Next I thought that the script was over the top at times, but overall funny and written with skill and passion. Giving the film a certain flair that not many disney films have. So for the script, I give a B. Overall, Aladdin’s dazzling visuals, skillful directing and a passionate script can’t cloud out the story’s flaw’s, but are enough to keep you thoroughly entertained, even in the two hour run time.

How Was the Cast?

The cast in Aladdin did a great job with everything in the movie, and seemed to have fun with it to. First we have Will Smith as Genie/Mariner. Will Smith is probably the most amazing of the movie. He really gets into character and is just really fun to watch, so anything you’ve read or heard about a blue Will Smith, don’t pay attention to it, because he will give you the time of your life. Next we have Mena Massoud as Aladdin. Being the main role of the movie, I thought that he could do much better, but he still brings the character to life with those epic dance moves. Third we have Naomi Scott as Jasmine. She has an amazing singing voice and was perfect for the role of Jasmine, and going from playing the Pink Ranger in the 2017 Power Rangers movie (30% sour) I have to say, that was a big improvement. Fourth and finally we have Marwan Kenzari as Jafar. He could have had a more devious and cunning performance whilst playing the villain. Making him one of the weaker actors, but was fine for the amount of screen time he had.

Aging ‘The Lamp’

Like all Disney live action remakes, Aladdin has amped up visuals, that include nothing but colors the whole way through, the ending might be a little frightening for younger children. There is occasional flirting, and kissing. There is a message to be learned in the film about having your voice heard. Overall, aladdin is pretty much just a visual treat for fans of the original and newcomer’s alike.

"See You Yesterday" is a Inventive Sci-Fi Flick With Some Compelling Drama

By: Keaton Marcus

85/100 “sweet”

An innovative and thought-provoking sci-fi picture as well as a reasonably emotional drama, Spike Lee produced "See You Yesterday" is an astonishing time-traveling themed flick with an engaging premise. Generally, films in similar genres focus on the action sequences, or maybe the flashy special effects. However, this quieter and surprising Netflix movie brings both the ideas as well as the genre tropes. Clocking in at only 87 minutes, this fast-paced picture ends at the correct timing, which so many other pictures in the genre have failed to do. Its also expertly executed by the first-time director-writer Stefon Bristol, who films a concise, fun and entertaining romp which earns a spot in the list of notable features this year. With 80's style visuals, compelling first-time performances, excellent direction as well as a considerable throw-back type style, "See You Yesterday" succeeds on almost every level.

As for the premise, think "Back to the Future" but more of a present-day type affair. High school best buds, as well as scientific prodigies C.J. and Sebastian, have created back-packs that enable time-travel over the Summer holidays. However, when a police officer wrongly accuses C.J.'s older brother of robbing a bank and shoots him fatally, the two teens decide to travel back to yesterday to save him from the abusive cops. However, twists along the way lead them to several dangerous attempts to save her late brother Calvin, and they face the unbeatable challenge of not giving up. Yep, it's fast, fun and relatable. The plot not only deals with oppressive cops but also with racism and depression. The sci-fi feature not only provides some popcorn worthy entertainment, and fantastical elements, but its approach to real-world situations is what makes it remarkable. Go to hell big-budget sci-fi pics.

When the themes get a little too heavy, or the narrative gets a wee nerdy, audiences are wholly saved by the superheroes that are the cast. Led by the expertly paired Eden Duncan-Smith and Dantè Crichlow who both have refreshingly new faces. They have brilliant chemistry as their well-written and deeply constructed characters C.J. and Sebastian who deliver the laughs, as well as sheer emotion. They're so immeasurable that they remind me of the 80's gangs in "E.T." or even "The Goonies", whimsical, and full of banter. Besides that enjoyable throwback, for a couple of new kids to the Hollywood business, its fascinating to see the teens outpace so many experienced adults in the film. The script doesn't falter once and is also written by director Stefon Bristol who successfully transfers typical teen behavior on to the screen with unimaginable abandon. "See You Yesterday" also remarkably sets up a sequel with a good old fashioned cliffhanger, no more spoilers, but you"ll be left wanting more.

The final opinion is: "See You Yesterday" not only brings some fast-paced, entertaining and fun sci-fi moments--it delivers more than enough compelling, and emotional real-world issues, making for an exceptional debut for writer-director Stefon Bristol...$PLURGE IT

By: Keaton Marcus

There is no box office info because the film provided is produced by Netflix, released for streaming only.

"Pokèmon Detective Pikachu" is a Marvel of Cuteness, Featuring an Adorable Ryan Reynolds

By: Keaton Marcus

60/100 “sweet/sour”

After the three-hour long "Avengers: Endgame", "Pokemon Detective Pikachu", is the 100-minute, marvel of cuteness that we needed to cleanse our palates. The film is based on the massive hit video game and is also the first sprouted live-action-ish installment to the dreary "Pokèmon" film franchise, and the best. It might not be compelling in any way, and occasionally, things get messy--but younger viewers, die-hard fans and maybe even some outliers are likely to enjoy the fun adventure featuring the brilliant Ryan Reynolds as the title character. Also, in terms of video-game adaptations (mentioned before), the previous installments make "Pikachu" seem like the "Godfather" for kids. The titular character and beloved Pokèmon is partnered with Tim Goodman (Justice Smith), combining a kid-friendly mystery to a solid, enjoyable buddy-cop film. Overall, this long-awaited, big-budgeted adaptation scores with the references, youngsters and fans--you"ll likely "aww", laugh--and well, be overwhelmed at the extremely overcomplicated plotting.

The plot and story are simple, well...not really. Basically, Tim Goodman (Smith) is living a quiet life as an employee in an insurance company, at least until he hears that his father has passed in an accident. Tim travels to Ryme City, a place where humans and Pokèmon live in harmony to pack up his father's apartment--that's when he, and the audience meet the wisecracking, rosy-cheeked fluffball, Pikachu (voiced excellently by Ryan Reynolds) sneaking around in his dad's place. That's when the mystery starts, Pikachu (who is his father's Pokèmon partner) claims that he survived the crash, but then an underused Bill Nighy tells us he died and was blasted by the lab-created Mewtew--yes, by now, the audiences should be scratching their heads--how do they fit a plot of this magnitude in about 100 minutes, well its all over the place. Fans and kids forgive it, and you might--but director Rob Letterman should have gone with a more easy-going, light-headed storyline. Still, who the heck cares, the film is a blast.

What "Detective Pikachu" gets really right, is the impressive character animation, and dazzling special effects--and Pikachu looks very true to the show. When fellow video-game adaptation, "Sonic The Hedgehog" released its first teaser trailer recently, fans on social media, and the internet alike--collectively bombed the look at the titular character--"his nose is too pointy", "his teeth are too big", forcing director Jeff Fowler to redesign the character. That's a problem that "Detective Pikachu" passes straight by--how, well by investing time and money into the CGI effects--tagged with a very expensive 150M budget, the special effects are occasionally overused, but effective. The creative set pieces and the delightful cuteness of Ryme City are also likely to appeal to fans of the game, and the very realistic character design on the title character is astonishing--a thing most video-game adaptations do not get right.

Ryan Reynolds mentioned earlier in the review, does a fantastic job at the role of Pikachu. While we're all disappointed that Reynolds may not have dropped any F-bombs, as he did in the R-rated "Deadpool", the kid-friendly film still gives the character a hysterically clever caffeine "addiction", plenty of laughs and immediate chemistry with the surrounding cast. Pikachu is also just adorable, yes, he has the sarcastic voice of a jack-ass, but his fluffy persona is impossible to resist--really, what I'm trying to say is, you're going to be resisting the urge to run up to the screen and try to hug the furry "ball". There is plenty of entertaining moments given to the wisecracking fur-ball--including when Pikachu and Tim stumble into an illegal Pokèmon battle, where he is forced to fight a drugged Charizard and forgets how to use his powers, and claims he "can't do it in front of people, look away, everybody"--otherwise, Mr. Mime even gets a cameo and a scene with Pikachu--which will appeal to the fans. If you aren't a total geek-out for the franchise, just go see it for Ryan Reynolds' terrific performance.

The final verdict is: “Detective Pikachu” delivers laughs here and there, and delivers a brilliant performance by Ryan Reynolds as the iconic character, the video-game adaptation never stretches it’s promising premise as far as it should…$TREAM IT

Box Office Info:

Opening Weekend: 54.3m

Domestic Total: 144.1m

Worldwide Total: 431.6m

"The Lego Movie 2" Has Same Talented Cast, lackluster Storyline

By: Keaton Marcus

65/100 “sweet/sour”

"The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part" brings back the original characters and dazzling animation--albeit at an occasionally disappointing return--the humor is top-notch, but the plot and cleverness of the original are somewhat lost. It is no question that main voice actors Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, and Will Arnett shine in the animated sequel--and the imagination and ideas have no limit; but the messy, almost chaotic execution makes "The Second Part" like a fun, though exhausting theme park ride that never quite works--however, considering it was made for the younger kids, the sheer cuteness of the film is a suitable, but not really successful diversion that lets the flaws slide--in some cases.

Back in 2014, we were unmistakably not thinking that a film called "The Lego Movie" would become a critical, and box office phenomenon that became a true modern classic for the younger audiences--clever, dazzling and boasting a solid voice-cast. The film even sprouted a franchise, including "The Lego Batman Movie" which debuted in 2017, almost catching up to the godlike original, and "The Lego Ninjago Movie" which is notoriously the worst in an actually decent franchise. "The Second Part" never lives up to the expectations set from the original, and really--not everything is "awesome" anymore. There are certainly better-animated films to stream on a fun family movie night, but the sequel does play out as a passable film that may or may not convince the kids to watch for almost two hours.

Comedic actor Chris Pratt returns to the sequel to play the iconic character Emmet, who has now earned his spot in the titular roles of animated films; the actor boasts enough humor and clever writing to half-heartedly fend off its flaws. Pratt has acted in westerns such as "The Magnificent Seven", to massive epic hits such as "Jurassic World" and "Guardians of the Galaxy"; and despite the ranging quality, there is no stopping his natural charm, wit and fantastic charisma with the remainder of the cast. In "The Second Part", his performance is one of the very few things holding the film up and is best the movie has to offer. What can I say, the actor is blatantly hilarious, and I mean laugh-out-loud type funny--one of the better comedians of the 21st century. The screenplay, mentioned before--is almost as intelligent, and hysterical as the original, showing off many funny jokes that are chock-full of heart and humor. While the flaws keep it very far from being a "good" movie, for a big family with little kids, Chris Pratt is enough.

The sequel also brings many new characters to the table, and generally, the other cast members are just as strong as the leading man. However, actress Elizabeth Banks returns to the leading female role Lucy aka Wyldstyle--truly, I liked Banks much more in the original--but the tougher, more badass side of Lucy in the sequel is almost as charming--overall, while not as firm, Banks does justice to the role. Otherwise, the remainder is really A-list for an animated film--actor Will Arnett returns as Batman, and actually, he is way more convincing than Ben Affleck in "Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice" or "Justice League". Actress Tiffany Haddish is a recent addition to the explosion of characters rolling at you the entire time--she plays a queen called Watevra Wa'Nabi who rules the planet Duplo (created in the live-action world by Finn's sister Bianca) also led by general Mayhem (Stephanie Beatriz). The really hysterical "characters" of planet Duplo have turned the once peaceful Bricksburg into a dystopian wasteland called Apoclaypseburg--the people living there have gone "dark" and "brooding", and are straight out of "Mad Max: Fury Road"--well, in a kid-friendly version (jokes, pratfalls etc.).

The final verdict is: "The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part" boasts solid performances from its charming voice-cast, plenty of ideas and delivering more of dazzling animation--even though the messy plot, story development, and characters never seem as strong as the original...$TREAM IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening: 34.1M

Domestic Total: 105.8M

Worldwide Total: 192.3M

"The Hidden World" Concludes the Trilogy With Dazzling Animation, and Compelling Lead Performances

By: Keaton Marcus

80/100 “sweet”

Director Dean DeBlois concludes his successful "Dragons" trilogy with "The Hidden World", the end outcome is more than satisfying, fantastic; The principal thing to observe regarding the third installment is the 3D animation, just unbelievable, sporting an expensive budget, "The Hidden World" proves a giant step ahead for animated films; While the animated pic can't help but be less of an accomplishment than its two predecessors, it stands on its own as another solid kid flick, despite its familiar storyline and lack of character depth.

After the events of Drago Bloodfist in the previous film, Berk is now at peace, with dragons and humans living in harmony; But when a new villain arrives, a dragon hunter known as Grimmel who threatens to kidnap and kill all the dragons starts trapping the creatures; Hiccup, the new chief along with his friends Toothless the dragon, and Astrid must keep their dragons safe and take down the new approaching conflict.

One of the best and most clever things about the film is Toothless's courtship with a new dragon, dubbed a Light Fury by Astrid (America Ferrera), who the banterful dragon attains while taking a trek in the forest. In the explosive trailer--and other advertisements, the main tease was that Toothless--found a "girlfriend" which is bound to spark--in the kid's minds as funny, and surprisingly the many scenes consisting of the "Light" and "Night" fury are hysterical and outshine the film's dazzling animation occasionally; To add to the fun, Toothless does a "mating" dance of some sort which provides many more laughs to get out of the audiences. These scenes that focus on the dragons leave us guessing that DeBlois, the brilliant filmmaker who created this world decided to make the highlight of the film about Toothless, and his dragons, also making us think that it was about time that Toothless gets "his own film"; And while it is still primarily about Hiccup stopping Grimmel, the satisfying ending explains that the film was generally dedicated to the dragons.

The cast is still as talented as ever--featuring Jay Baruchel and America Ferrera reprising their main characters, Hiccup, and Astrid, while veteran Cate Blanchett plays Hiccup's mother Vulca, introduced in the previous installment; And other supporting members include comedic actor Jonah Hill as Snotloat, and even a couple memorable flashbacks of Gerard Butler voice acting Hiccup's dad, who perished in the last film. The company is not just top-notch, the script is just as compelling as their strong, emotional performances amidst the "Lord of the Rings" type action.

The final verdict is: "How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World" concludes the trilogy with dazzling animation, strong performances, laughs and more than enough emotion to distract audiences from the familiar storytelling...$PLURGE IT

By: Keaton Marcus

Box Office Info:

Opening: 55M

Domestic Total: 160.7M

Worldwide Total: 521.7M

How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World

How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World

By Quinn Marcus

(2019)

AGE: 6+

80% SWEET

Intro

From Universal Studios comes the 3rd installment to the How To Train Your Dragon Franchise. In which Berk lives in peace, continuing to free dragons from trappers and taking down there ships. But soon they are forced to leave Berk when a new threat arises. Grimmel, killer of every other night fury and leader of the dragon trappers. All he needs to do to complete his job, is to kill Toothless. Hiccup and the rest of Berk go on an adventure to find new worlds and maybe another night fury.

Is It Worth Your While?

This franchise has really blown me away in every basic bit of the criteria involved to make a great animated film, and although this one may not have met all of them, it wasn’t a dissapointment, now here are my reasons. First of all I thought that directing by David Deblois, director and writer of all the How To Train Your Dragon films did another great job, he combined a mix of creativity and a lighter and more happy premise to make a good film. Although to some people, happier may not work with the franchise’s dark and intense ideas, it was cool to try something new. Next I thought that the animation was beyond superb, the franchise advances its technology with every movie that it makes and makes it brighter, more lifelike and overall a ton of fun, but this one, I have to say, pulled it off big time. Third I thought that the storyline was not nearly as emotionally powerful as the second or first but still provided some creative ideas. They brought new worlds, new dragons, a new villain all the things that you should expect from this kind of movie. Fourth I thought that the script could at times be a little ridiculous but still provided enough jokes to keep you going. Overall I thought that How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World may not live up to the previous two but still had its qualities.

How was the Cast?

The cast in How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World did not disappoint. First we have Jay Baruchel as Hiccup. In each of these movies he always provides a nerdy, fun and emotional performance adding up to be the right person for the role. Next we have America Ferrera as Astrid. Playing the more serious character she does a good job with all of the other cast members and has a great animated voice for the role overall these two leads continue to surprise with their outstanding performances. Next we have F. Murray Abraham as Grimmel. Playing the new villain is a hard task, however Abraham pulls it off adding a creepy voice for the role, to go with the frightening character. Fourth and finally we have Jonah Hill as Snotlout. Continuing to pull off this funny character, with a few more added jokes comes Jonah Hill, providing the most humor and light into the movie.

Aging ‘Berk’

How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World has some mild violence, emotion and frightening characters. However this film provides the most humor and dazzling colors of any other film giving the ultimate experience to a child as old as six.