Movie 49: The Princess and the Frog

October 10, 2014October 10, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

When Princess and the Frog came out I was so excited! A Disney princess movie and hand drawn animation and a musical!!! It had been since Mulan that a non-Pixar Disney movie had really moved me so we are talking over a decade!

I also thought it was cool there was an African American princess; although, a side of me wondered if it was stunt casting but I hoped it would be like Mulan and be a great story with a non-Caucasian leading lady. So full of enthusiasm I went to the theater and walked out underwhelmed.

Was I too excited? Expectations too high? I don’t think so because the next year I’d see Tangled and be borderline obsessed with it but I may have been a little harder on it than I should because it was more middle-of-the-road than perfect. Don’t know.

At the time I felt it was too cluttered. Too many side characters. Too much going on that it became kind of boring (kind of like you get to know so many people you don’t really know anyone). Also I felt like every character was shouting at me all the time. All the songs were big and shouty and the dialogue too.

So now 5 years later what did I think? Well, I was nicer in a lot of ways but it still has some of the same issues. A mixed bag, but overall, I liked it better this go-around.

Production-

In 2004 Disney announced Home on the Range was going to be their last hand drawn animated film. I remember hearing that when I came home from my mission and feeling so sad it was all over. However, in 2006 when John Lasseter came on board he reversed that decision, and they started work on the Princess and the Frog.

New animators had to be hired and the department rebuilt and Ron Clements and John Musker from Aladdin, Hercules and Treasure Planet were brought back to helm the new film.

I was hoping in the audio commentary the directors would elaborate on why they wanted an African American heroine for this particular project but they didn’t. I guess they just did which is neat. They did say that Oprah was pitched early storyboards and was so excited she ended up speaking the voice of Eudora, Tiana’s mother.

From the beginning there was controversy. They had to change her name from Maddy because of slave connotations and her job became a waitress after a maid was deemed derogatory. People even had issues with New Orleans being the setting because of the treatment of African- Americans during Hurricane Katrina…(geesh!).

But they changed it around and it took 4 years to complete with hand drawn backdrops, characters, everything and it looks gorgeous.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Their goal in writing Princess and the Frog was to create a ‘princess movie for people who don’t like Princess movies’. The Prince is poor and powerless. Tiana is a uber-hard worker who’s dream is to own a restaurant not find her Prince so in those ways it is very unique.

The voice cast is all excellent. In addition to Oprah, Anika Noni Rose plays Tiana, Bruno Campos is Prince Naveen, Keith David as Dr Facilier, Jon Goodman as Big Daddy and Jennifer Cody as Charlotte. The music is done by Randy Newman and Musker and Clements said they picked him because ‘he is Americana’. There are 2 good songs in the movie but the rest are kind of so-so.

I still think they are kind of shouty and I’m a jazz fan. If it were me I would have gotten Harry Connick Jr to do the music because he is New Orleans and is fabulous at doing soundtracks. Still, Newman’s music isn’t terrible but most of the songs I can’t even remember.

The Story-

The story starts with Tiana and Charlotte as little girls hearing the story of The Frog Prince. Charlotte is my favorite character in the movie. So funny in every scene even when she is little. I think she is one of the most likable rich characters ever in a movie. Charlotte is a dreamer and wants her prince where Tiana is a realist and will work instead of wish for her dream. Tiana works very hard at 2 jobs and finds out she has enough for the down-payment on her dream spot for her restaurant. Tiana is an extremely likable character and I love the example of hard work for little girls. We also get my favorite song as Tiana excitedly announces ‘she’s almost there’.

Again, the animation is gorgeous

Charlotte finds out she is going to be the princess of Mardi Gras parade and that a prince is coming for the event. We then get introduced to the foppish Prince Naveen and his manservant Lawrence. I’m not sure if Naveen is ever quite worthy of Tiana but I guess hard to know since he’s a frog for half the movie. naveen and girls They meet shadowman Dr Facilier who is a voodoo witch doctor and this is where I start to have problems. Dr Facilier is very well drawn and Friends on the Other Side is very well animated. I also get the links between New Orleans and voodoo.

Nevertheless, I am still uncomfortable with this movie’s embrace of the occult and demonic. I recognize that is my own personal religious convictions and others may not see a problem but I’d be lying if I said it didn’t make me uncomfortable. I just avoid things like ouijia boards or tarot cards. But like I said it is a very well done number.

Prince Naveen becomes a frog and through a long drawn out sequence at a ball he thinks Tiana is a princess and asks for a kiss (if I explain every detail in this movie we will be here forever). Initially repulsed she agrees hoping to get money out of the deal. But since Tiana is not really a prince and just playing the part for Charlotte she also get’s turned into a frog. Then we get the next segment of the movie where I started to get more of that cluttered feeling back in 2009.

Tiana and Naveen go on a road trip of sorts to find Mama Odie who can change them back. Along the way we meet a redneck fly named Ray, and Louis a jazz playing alligator along with other creatures, chases and races.

I wish there was a little more dialogue between Tiana and Naveen in these scenes and less of the music but still a lot for a Disney movie. No instant love here!

At the same time you have a plotline of Dr Facilier needing Naveen’s blood in order to keep Lawrence looking like Naveen so he can marry Charlotte and become King of Mardi Gras (or something like that). It get’s very complicated!

Along the way there is a funeral and a wedding and it is nice our happily ever after is post-wedding when Tiana gets her restaurant.

That’s the best I can do to explain it.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

I clearly have mixed feelings. I still think it is a little cluttered and the music for the most part is shouty and I don’t like the voodoo occult elements. That said it looks gorgeous.

All of the animation is a joy to watch. It’s positive and teaches a great lesson on hard work and the right kind of dreams.

I also like It introduces an actual culture to kids as opposed to a vague European land like most Princess movies. A culture right here in America, which is great.

All the voicecast is superb (better than the music deserves to be honest). It’s cheerful and upbeat and I enjoyed watching it even with my misgivings. (I actually watched it 3 times for this review!).

I still haven’t decided if it is one I would want my little girls to see but for older kids who can understand the use of voodoo as a storytelling device it should be fine.

That said, it would be fun to watch and then go to New Orleans Square, order beignets and gumbo.

A lot of people claim racism as the reason Princess and the Frog didn’t do better (it did ok but not the mammoth hit of say Beauty and the Beast or Frozen) but I think most people had high expectations like I did which it did not quite meet.

This go-around I had lower expectations so I enjoyed it more. (I should probably always have low expectations for movies but it had been a freakin decade!!). The story is very convoluted and complicated but it does teach a nice message and like I said it looks stunning.

It’s certainly a huge step up from the dreck I’ve been watching so I’m inclined to be forgiving!

Overall Grade- C+

Tangled up next and I’ll give you a hint, I like it!!!

Content, Content, Content

October 7, 2014October 11, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

This is another post where my thoughts are all jumbled up but I will do my best to form them into a coherent argument.

Lately watching all these movies I’ve been wondering about the effect of media on children. I come from a strict conservative Mormon background and we try very carefully to avoid anything that is not uplifting and will lead us to sinful behaviors. Most people in my faith have a ‘no R rated movie’ rule but with my lack of faith in the MPAA I have a ‘research and know what I’m getting into rule’. I summed it up here:

http://smilingldsgirl.com/2014/04/30/how-to-be-mormon-and-like-movies/

But for kids most of us have higher standards than adult content and appropriately so. Little kids have impressionable minds and I’ve told you several experiences I had at the movies which were not positive in terms of content- watching Rescuers and Return to Oz. My parents were very careful with what we were allowed to watch and for long stretches we didn’t have TV at all. It wasn’t always out of objectionable content but if it didn’t do anything for our imaginations or creativity than my Mom wouldn’t allow it. For example, we were not allowed to watch Saved by the Bell because my Mom thought it was stupid.

However, sometimes I think we can worry too much and think kids are too impressionable and fragile.

For example, some claim Ariel is a bad example and don’t want their daughters to be influenced by her selfish attitude. The first time I heard this I was shocked. It had honestly never occurred to me that Ariel was anything but admirable and there is no girl who sang Part of Your World more than I did. I saw her positive traits- her steadfastness, her boldness, her courage. I saw she was willing to go against her father and strike out on her own, make her own path. I don’t see how any of these traits or qualities taught me a bad lesson and while I was certainly a brat, like any kid, never could it have been blamed on Ariel’s negative influence. Kids are smarter than that. They aren’t just robots who immediately mimic every positive and negative attribute they see.

Plus, with good parenting (and this is key) those positive traits can be emphasized so just like with me the negative one’s aren’t really noticed or focused on.

In my experience most Mormons do not watch The Simpsons. For some reason it has a particular stain on it that other equally off-color shows do not but my parents were ok with it. Why? Because my brother and I had and have nothing in common (although oddly both of our favorite movies is Up!). Especially back then but we both liked The Simpsons. As parents you have to pick your battles and The Simpsons is well written, it’s smart (most of the great movies I was introduced to through homages on The Simpsons, same with a lot of philosophy and political ideas) and in the end it is about a family who does love each other.

Take a look at this scene. A kid could learn a ton about elections, candidates, the press, voting, voter apathy, campaign promises, advertising etc. Plus, it makes me laugh, which is usually the best way to learn.

So just like I never learned to be selfish from Ariel, I never learned to be rude or slovenly from the Simpsons.

So, how do you know when something is a good influence or bad?

I’m not a parent so I would love to hear the opinions of my readers who are, but I have a hunch. You watch your kids!!! Try your best to prevent obviously damaging material and allow them to make some choices based on information you provide to them. Then watch them. If scary movies are causing nightmares than put a stop to it. If a girl is becoming a primadonna from princess movies than take a break.

But if there is a movie like Harry Potter and it is teaching good things than maybe the witchcraft and sorcery isn’t a big deal? Maybe false feminism in Frozen isn’t going to hurt your daughter singing Let It Go around the house?

My friend was just telling me her daughter loves Pocahontas and watches it over and over again. While that is no doubt annoying for any movie especially one I’m not crazy for, her girl is going to be fine. Maybe she likes it for the bright colors? Maybe for the music? Maybe for the animals and nature? There are a ton of perfectly valid and good reasons to watch Pocahontas (again I really don’t care for the film) and the negative one’s can be discussed and dealt with. The kids will usually be alright if we try our hardest to raise good people.

Study after study has shown no link between violence and video games. Does that make violence ok for children? No but it should also reassure parents that content is not the end all factor in determining behavior of your kids. It’s just not that simple.

Some people I know in the blogosphere are worried Frozen has a ‘gay agenda’ and that Let It Go is a gay anthem. Unless they happen to be gay or have gay parents I guarantee you 99% of girls are not thinking about homosexuality when enjoying that movie. They are thinking about whatever in their life is frustrating them. And if it does start them wondering than you have a conversation and you discuss the issue from your perspective. I’ve read the blogs making these claims on Frozen and find them to be quite silly. If you start with a thesis ‘Frozen is a gay agenda film’ or ‘Frozen is anti-feminist’ or ‘Frozen is pro-feminist’ than you will probably find ‘evidence’ to back it up, that doesn’t make it true. It’s a story and just like a good story it can be interpreted any number of ways by the viewer. Our kids will have their own interpretation and that’s a good thing.

Calm down and be a parent and let your kids be kids. Let them have their own choices and tastes. See what inspires them creatively and then monitor negative behaviors appropriately. Your job as a parent is not to mold your children into perfect Mormons or Christians or feminists or whatever. Your job is to present your kids with options and explanations and see where life takes them.

At least that’s what this single girl in Utah thinks! 😉

Oh and what bothers me about the instant love trope is not that it is going to teach false messages about womanhood or relationships but how it hurts the stories and gives me nothing I can relate too. To me it is frustrating when I see film after film with stale, boring female characters. When you have a movie like The Jungle Book, with only one female character (2 including the elephant) and she is used only as a love robot I don’t have any characters I can relate too so I disengage a little bit from the story. It’s a story problem more than a message problem. I saw The Jungle Book many times growing up and it did not taint me with it’s simplistic view on women. It just could have been better so it got an A instead of an A+.

Movie 48: Bolt

October 6, 2014October 6, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Sometimes there are movies which are not exactly bad but a week after you’ve seen them you can’t remember anything about them, or that you even saw them at all. Bolt is kind of that movie.

There’s nothing wrong with Bolt. I had a pleasant experience watching it but if I wasn’t taking notes I would be able to tell you very little about it just minutes after seeing it. Bolt is like the movie equivalent of fast food- tastes pretty good but no nutritional value.

Production-

Bolt was first created by Chris Sanders, the writer of Lilo and Stitch. However, at the beginning of production his script was swapped out and Chris Williams, the co-director was brought on board.

They made Bolt in only 18 months as opposed to 4 years and John Lasseter from Pixar was involved in rewrites just like Meet the Robinsons.

The voice-cast includes John Travolta, Susie Essman, and Miley Cyrus (if you are thinking you hate Miley she is fine in this).

They developed 2 new technologies for the 3D in the Bolt and it was nominated for Best Animated film but lost to WALL-E (duh!)

The Story-

Here’s a trailer

The biggest problem with this movie is it is too long. Most Disney movies are around 75 minutes. This is 96 and you feel those extra minutes.

Especially at the beginning where we get a scene from Bolt and Penny’s TV show that goes on forever. 25 minutes!! It just starts to get ridiculous after a while.

I know we aren’t supposed to take a movie like this seriously but there are aspects which are tough to believe even in this setting. The idea is Bolt is the star of a TV show where he literally believes he is responsible for saving the world. They keep him sheltered and feed him this lie so he can be a ‘method acting’ dog. Evidently this show has a budget bigger than The Avengers destroying a dozen cars and a helicopter in the first scenes. .

The director claims they never do reshoots and evidently shoot in chronological order so the dog doesn’t know it isn’t real. Insane. Even for TV they would never do that. Especially because Bolt zooms through streets, overpasses and everything else. Plus in filming the shots he has full access to his super powers which would be added by special effects later. He thinks he really has a super bark. He thinks he has laser eyes. He wouldn’t have any idea of those things because they are all added by special effects departments.

But again, not a realistic picture but it was pretty far-fetched thing to swallow. There is so much twisting to make the plot work as opposed to the Toy Story movies which aside from the alive toys and the scene at the end deal with a less strained setting (big moments are birthday party, pizza place, neighbors house, moving truck etc).

Again totally overthinking it but it goes on for so long my mind wandered.

Because the plot requires it, Bolt gets lost and he meets pigeons, a hamster in a ball named Rhino and a cat named Mittens. The animals are very cute and attractively drawn.

Mittens is basically the Woody character from Toy Story (with a little Mr Potato Head thrown in) who is trying to convince Bolt he is a dog, not an action star. (this film feels very Pixar derivative…). It takes an hour before we finally get the scene where Mitten tells Bolt ‘you are not a super hero’ which is so close to ‘you are a toy! You are a child’s play thing. You’re an action figure’. Toy Story had so much more flair at the scene.

Penny’s agent is a real jerk in Bolt. He is constantly telling her to ‘put a pin in it’ making him one of the more unlikable non-villains in a Disney movie.

Just like any road trip movie they have various adventures and travel montages including a stop over in Vegas. There’s one moment where Mittens gives an almost identical speech to Jesse from Toy Story 2 about her person left her except without near the effect. Unlike Sid in Toy Story, there is no real villain, no sense of true peril but just one stop after another.

It uses a lot of road trip cliches but the whole time it is pleasant and fun. It is just too long. There are especially too many chase sequences with trains, cars, on foot etc. They got predictable after a bit.

Mittens does have some good lines that got some chuckles from me.

Like I said, a lot of Pixar jabs but my favorite was from the pigeon when he is pitching a script says ‘Man, don’t freak out. This is how you blew it with Nemo’. That was a good line.

Eventually Bolt makes it back to Penny alive and all is well in the world.

There really isn’t a lot more story than that .

Movie Review-

I think kids will enjoy this movie. That said, I’m equally sure they will have no recollection of it a year from now. Tell that to kids still talking about Frozen all these months later but nevertheless it is harmless fluff.

The animation looks nice, the voice cast is good (even Miley she is fine). the music is an after thought.

The biggest problem is it’s just too long. 96 minutes is too much for this type of movie. There isn’t enough substance to the story and it drags in each section of the film

If you want to see a kids movie with a humorous take on Hollywood try Big Fat Liar. It is a fun movie where kids take on a lying studio exec played by Paul Giamatti. It has a faster pace and the humor is way more on point.

But like I said there is nothing bad in the movie. It’s harmless and will entertain kids and has some nice messages about friendship and loyalty . I would have no problem watching it with my kids; although there are so many other choices which will inspire them more.

Overall Grade- C-

We are nearing the finish line! Some of these next one’s I like a lot so I will try my best to not be defensive to the haters and cynics! I will try!

49- Princess and the Frog

50- Tangled

51- Winnie the Pooh

52- Wreck it Ralph.

53- Frozen

54- Big Hero 6

Which one is your favorite? Mine is Tangled with Frozen a strong second. I’m excited to see Princess and the Frog and Wreck it Ralph because my previous viewings I was not a big fan. We will see!

Consider the Audience

October 6, 2014October 6, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

As I’ve been watching all these Disney movies a thought has struck me which I want to present to all of you. When is a movie just not made for me? What responsibility does a movie have to please a general audience verses a niche group?

On first glance it seems like there are movies that entertain every demographic. Pixar films are often brought up. However, even their movies have typically pleased some audiences more than others. For instance, Toy Story 3 was universally praised by critics and most audiences, but my nieces found the ending with the incinerator to be too upsetting. They didn’t like it at all.

So should they have taken the incinerator scene out because it upset my nieces? Well, that depends who they are making a movie for? As my nieces were a secondary audience, not the primary the scene stays and is actually a very profound, tense and exciting moment for most viewers.

This invites lots of interesting questions. In fact, my thoughts are very scattered on the topic and I’m struggling to focus them in a coherent way.

Here’s some points to consider:

Small audiences need and deserve stories for them.

Let’s face it. We live in a world where movies are the predominant storytelling device of our age. More so than books and I still think more so than TV, especially for children. So imagine how difficult is to be say 3 or 4 and hear about all the exciting movies your brothers and sisters get to see. Things like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings that are not appropriate for your age group. Even most Disney movies are not made for the smallest kids.

That’s what makes it nice when movies are made for these toddler to preschool age audience. For example, the Barbie movies, Tinker Bell movies are made for girls 3-7 and for that demographic they are made very well. I haven’t seen all of them but the one’s I have were engaging and very well done. Now a 50 year old movie critic could tear them apart but they aren’t made for him, so who cares? (I’d give boy examples but I only have nieces so don’t know any). I think it is great girls have their own franchises and films to get excited about and learn from. That’s great!

An even more narrow audience for movies is the toddler age. Part of this is because 1-3 aged children can’t sit for the length of a movie. This is one reason I loved the 2011 Winnie the Pooh movie. I don’t want to give away my review but it is a rare Hollywood movie made for very small children. First of all, it is extremely short. It has simple ideas and plot but lovingly told. Even the other Winnie the Pooh movies I have seen are too scary and usually too long for toddlers. It uses repetition and is friendly and happy, which toddlers love. The music is hummable and sweet.

I can’t even think of other movies for toddlers, which are even made, and even fewer that are made well (Curious George movie was a good one that gets a lot of flack from those outside its intended audience). Most entertainment for toddlers is television (and I don’t think toddlers should spend much time in front of the TV if any but most parents need a moment or two for a break. Let’s be honest!). Should these shows worry about being entertaining to teenage boys or 2o year old college students? No. That’s not their audience!

Another example of a narrow audience is religious films . With the affordability of digital film-making, movies can be made for a smaller audience and still be profitable. This gives us movies like the evangelical films of Kirk Cameron or the Mormon films made for my faith.

Should someone making a Mormon film worry about pleasing an Evangelical or an Atheist? No, that isn’t their audience. Any movie who tried to make all religious groups happy would have a tall order. It could be done with good writing but there is something nice about having a movie made, telling a story just from my religious perspective. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

Now is an audience an excuse to making a bad film? No. If anything you should put more effort into telling a story for your smaller audience. It should be even better than the average Hollywood schlock because you have a more narrow window of people to appeal too. That’s why I hate when people say ‘it’s for kids’ as if that somehow means it is stupid. The best kids movies inspire their creativity and imagination. The best Mormon films make me want to be a better person (and I’ll be honest I’m not the biggest fan of most of them).

It angers me when I can tell filmmakers of any genre are being lazy. Your audience, no matter how narrow, deserve a good effort. (For the record, I feel the same way about Michael Bay movies. His audiences deserve more of an effort to make a good film). I should be able to walk away from a movie and say ‘well, that didn’t work for me but I can see who they were trying to reach and how some could enjoy it’.

Another problem we can have is when a movie doesn’t understand its audience.

Hunchback of Notre Dame is a perfect example. Even its defenders usually admit it is a mature film not for small children. But the studio still wanted it to be for small children and their families so they threw in kidlike violence and humor which ruined the movie. It’s way too dark for these kids and the immature moments are off-putting for adults. It makes it a tonal mess and a frustrating experience. If they had just said ‘you know what . This movie is for adults’ like Pans Labyrinth or even the later Harry Potter films it would have been a favorite of mine. As it is I just can’t endorse it. Trying to appeal to the wrong audience, or too many audiences, ruined the film.

We can also have films who have a main and secondary audience. This is what Pixar does well. Children are the primary audience with parents being the secondary. This makes sense since both are usually at the theater watching (a lot of the age specific films I listed above are direct to DVD which is probably the best way to appeal to some audiences). What I personally hate is when the secondary audience sullies the primary, or takes over the tone and feel of the film. This was my issue with the Shrek movies . Instead of a few jokes, the innuendo is so strong the films feel vulgar to me. I honestly hate them.

So, the priority is making a good movie but in order for that to happen filmmakers must ask themselves ‘who is my audience?’ and we as filmgoers need to be willing to say ‘this just isn’t made for me’. It’s not bad for a film to be made for toddlers or any other demographic. That is very good because they can participate with us in this great storytelling device of the movies.

All audiences deserve quality and to have movies made for them to enjoy.

Movie 47: Meet the Robinsons

October 5, 2014October 5, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

The last few nights of movie viewing have been rough going…I try to be kind and positive on my reviews but I would be lying if I didn’t say how much I disliked Brother Bear, Chicken Little and Home on the Range. Treasure Planet was fine but kind of dry. The reviews don’t have any meaning if they are all vanilla and you never either love or hate something.

But it’s tough when there is a stretch of bad reviews. Start to feel like a jerk! I want to like them! Really I do.

Fortunately we get a break from the dreck with Disney’s strange but entertaining 47th animated classic Meet the Robinsons. This is not a masterpiece but as pop entertainment it is creative and bizarre and I liked it.

The Production-

There isn’t a ton to say on production but that Pixar was officially purchased by Disney during the making of the movie, which is why John Lasseter became a producer on the film.

In fact, he saw an early screening and didn’t think the villain was scary enough so he changed it and evidently 60% was changed and retooled. It has the feel of a movie that is a bit overwrought and maybe retooled a bit too much but it still works.

It is also of note because it was the first Disney movie to be released in digital 3D that is so common now.

The movie has a bit of a Simpsons feel with broad humor and bright colors and even has Danny Elfman as the composer of the score (who wrote the Simpsons theme). It’s not as good as the Simpsons or as funny but I would bet it is a creative influence.

The soundtrack has songs by Jamie Cullum, Rob Thomas, They Might be Giants and others and it is very good. Probably Disney’s best pop song soundtrack. (At least it is a step up from The Spice Girls in Chicken Little…)

The voicecast is universally strong and huge (shows how many characters are in the story). Steve Anderson voices 3 parts including the Bowler Hat Guy, Ethan Sandler 5 including Doris. Tom Kenny, Tom Selleck, Laurie Metcalf, Angela Bassett, Harland Williams all provide voices.

The Story-

This movie is impossible to describe without being a huge spoiler for those who haven’t seen it.

Basically it’s kind of Back to the Future meets The Incredibles meets strangeness.

A little kid named Lewis is an orphan who likes to invent things (kind of like Doc Brown as an orphan kid). He even keeps his roommate up all hours of the night with his inventions.

His inventions prevent him from being adopted, so he decides he wants to get to know his mother using a memory scanner he has invented. He then meets a strange boy named Wilbur

Wilbur is looking for a man with a bowler hat who has stolen a time machine. This sends Lewis on quite the journey! The Bowler Hat man is a very good and creepily drawn villain. You will never guess who the Bowler Hat man really is. Or at least I didn’t. It’s very clever!

Lewis and Wilbur meet the Robinson family and I don’t want to give the surprises away but there is a dinosaur and several other inventions. It’s a nutty movie.

At times it gets a little cluttered and convoluted but basically it’s about how Lewis gets to understand his mother, his own potential and the importance of family.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

I don’t want to oversell Meet the Robinsons because it has big problems. It throws a lot at the screen and at a certain point it becomes exhausting, but I’d rather have that than a lazy predictable entry like Brother Bear. Just my personal preference I suppose.

I’m not sure every plot point works out and the writing could be sharper, creating more compelling characters but what we get isn’t bad. In fact, I think it is pretty good.

It’s certainly bright and colorful and the story definitely surprised me. The villain is very well done and like I said caught me off guard. The big reveals work and overall I was charmed by it.

It might be a little hard for kids to keep track of everything and I wish there were a few more laughs but I think enough is there to entertain kids and it’s maybe even more suited to teens.

We do also get some really nice messages about family, being yourself, and getting adequate amounts of sleep each night…!

It’s certainly a huge step up from Chicken Little. That’s for sure. It’s no Pixar. I mean Pixar came out with Rataouille in 2007 and who can compete with that?… (was a weird year for animation because the Bee movie also came out which is a strange mixed bag like Meet the Robinsons).

So looking for some odd and colorful entertainment? Give Meet the Robinsons a shot.

Overall Grade- C

Movie 46: Chicken Little

October 4, 2014October 4, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

I couldn’t sleep last night and so I put on Chicken Little. I’d love to say that it gave me less nightmares but holy freaking “are you kidding me Disney?”

There is literally one thing I liked in this movie- Chicken Little is kind of a cute design.

I hate doing negative reviews. I’m not trying to dog on films. I have done my best to be positive but I didn’t like this movie at all. It makes me want to go back and be nicer to The Aristocats…

Chicken Little is Disney’s first 3D completely computer animated film. They were trying to compete with Pixar and Dreamworks (especially Dreamworks with this one).

And boy did it fail. It is the lowest rated movie on rotten tomatoes in the entire Disney Canon.

The Story-

I don’t want this review to be super mean spirited but that would be appropriate given the tone of this movie.

Basically the story is Chicken Little see’s the sky is falling and he warns the town. They panic (why would a town panic if a little kid said something like that. Is he like the Dali Lama of the town? Why not just ignore the brat?).

Everyone hates him for getting them worked up including his father. And this father is an awful character. He hates his son. That’s his complete purpose in the story- to be embarrassed and ashamed of his son and to communicate the shame quite clearly repeatedly.

He is the villain of the movie but it doesn’t seem to get that. I guess it thinks the aliens are the villain or maybe the town? I have no idea. But the father is so terrible to his son. He literally hangs his head in shame and tries to deny knowledge of said son in front of the the whole town! Why doesn’t he ask one question of his son? Maybe try to see why he persists with stories that are causing him such harm? Surely there is a reason.

So Chicken (I guess that’s his first name) goes to school and hopes to please his father. There we get introduced to his troop of loser friends.

They all have names that are supposed to be funny if you are 5 like the fish out of water is named Fish Out of Water, or the duckling is named Ugly Duckling. Or this is really funny the giant pig is named Runt of the Litter… Ha, ha, ha, ha…

There’s also scenes where we see supposed ‘sight gags’. This is a joke in the background which is meant to be subtly funny and they can be. The Simpsons uses them all the time (a theater sign or name of a store could be funny in the background) . In chicken Little they have a guy using a goat to clip his lawn. Ha, ha, ha, ha. That’s not funny.

Or we get a fish driving around in a fish car.

What will he do to get out of the fish car? Roger Ebert once said ‘a car has never made a movie funny’ and that is so true. Props of any kind are not inherently funny. It’s what the comic or movie does with said prop that makes (or doesn’t make) the joke. When it doesn’t work it is just confusing. Why are they doing that?

So we get a long painful dodge ball scene and then Chicken decides to join the baseball team (and we haven’t had any reference to the sky falling for some time) because his father was the big hero. He trains and the big game comes with every tired big game cliche ever included in a baseball movie. It makes Casey at Bat from Make Mine Music look subtle… And yet everything had been so awful for the poor cluck I wanted him to have his moment. But even that is ruined and made more an achievement of luck than any kind of real accomplishment from Chicken Little.

The other thing I wonder about is why aren’t there any other chickens? I mean I assume they are all vegetarians in this movie so why aren’t there lots of chickens and they are roughly around the same size. Surely there would be other chicken close to CL’s size but wouldn’t that be a problem given his name is Chicken?

But I’m way overthinking this movie, way overthinking…

So CL is the hero after the game, even to his dear old Dad. But then he see’s the sky falling again. Turns out they are aliens who can replicate the earth with the tiles of their spaceship. Should CL risk telling the town again after his new found fame? Again, why does anyone care about this one little kid in their town? I mean for a character who is repeatedly ignored at school, the adults sure care what he thinks and says.

But the people panic and come but the aliens are invisible again with the tiles so Dad is shamed again and everyone hates CL but his 3 friends. I mean the people in this town are really mean. But the aliens have left a stowaway baby alien. The alien design is pretty unique.. I will give it that.

So then we get our 3rd part of the movie where everyone realizes CL was telling the truth but the aliens are attacking to get their baby back. People get zapped, Dad and CL reconcile way too easily and it turns out the aliens aren’t really bad guys but just misunderstood cool dudes (groan…). Plus, the music during this scene is REM’s ‘It’s the End of the World as We Know It’. Is that supposed to be funny? Don’t get me wrong. I love the song but I HATE IT when movies tell you how to feel and nothing does that more than that kind of music cue.

So now CL is the hero and the story is over.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

Want a point by point 17 minute rehashing of why this movie is an ‘animated atrocity’ check out this video from Animation Atrocities youtube series.

. Major language warning but he is right!

I might be willing to give this movie a pass as junk but it is so mean-spirited. It will do nothing for your kids imagination or creativity. The story is awful and it will make them fear being alone not standing up for yourself. Basically CL only gets love once he is proven right. That’s a great lesson for kids. The Dad says he loves him regardless- hogwash. Say that when you were hiding your face in shame as your son tried to defend himself. It teaches the opposite of acceptance. That people will be judgmental unless you are 100% perfect.

But all of that wouldn’t matter much if it was clever. Instead it is so lazy and didn’t even make me laugh. Not one time and believe me it tries A LOT!

Roger Ebert once said about a film “this movie was not preferable to 1 hour and 45 minutes of looking at a blank wall”

There you go. That’s Chicken Little. I would rather stare at a blank wall for 81 minutes. In fact, I may go and do that for a bit.

Overall Grade- F I’m calling it. Worse than Dinosaur. I agree with Rotten Tomatoes. Worst movie in Canon.

Oh and I almost forgot- there is an entire verse of a Spice Girls song sung by a character which I guess is supposed to be funny? Just cringe inducing to me.

Oh and a strange reference to Indiana Jones at the beginning. Why have one image of a human in the movie? And Indiana Jones? It doesn’t make sense.

Movie 45: Home on the Range

October 4, 2014October 4, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

Gather round kids. Let me tell you a tale of the fearsome outlaw who almost took down Sheriff Disney and his entire 2D team…

Yes that’s right. It’s time to talk about Home on the Range. The movie which for 5 years would be blamed for shutting down the Disney 2D hand drawn animation department. Then Princess and the Frog came out and all was right again in the world…

So, is it worthy of the hate? Pretty much yes. I liked some of the animation and the music was entertaining but the rest was a mess.

Production-

There is basically no production information out there on this movie and sorry guys I was not about to watch it twice with audio commentary…I love you but not that much.

So, instead of talking about the process and ideas let me just make a couple comments.

First, this movie cost $110 million dollars to make. That seems impossible. Where did the money go? As a point of contrast in 2002 an underrated film, The Wild Thornberry’s Movie, came out (which I should have featured in my non-Disney animation I like). That movie is set in Africa, has great music, a cast as well-known as Home on the Range and it cost 35 million. I defy anyone to make the argument Wild Thornberry’s Movie looks nearly 3 times cheaper to make than Home on the Range . Seriously what the heck Disney?

35 million

110 million?

But I’m not critiquing the budget. It just makes a girl wonder. Could this be like the ‘we know it is going to be terrible movie’ like in The Producers? I mean watch the movie and tell me that is not a possibility. In any case, I find it very hard to believe anyone was actually trying to make a good movie here.

The other production point I’d like to bring up is another example of the complete ineptitude of the MPAA. Home on the Range gets a PG rating! And you want to know why? Because a line Roseann cow says about her utters being ‘real, don’t stare’. That line is somehow worthy of a PG when burning a family alive in a house and singing about lust, rape and murder gets a G for Hunchback? That makes no sense. A cows utters are more offensive to the MPAA than a family almost being burned alive! Let that sink in…

I can’t say it enough don’t listen to the ratings. They are worthless! Do your research and decide for yourself if the movie is for you and your children.

It’s what you get from having an organization police and rate itself. Unbelievable.

The only other production note is it looks a lot like Pecos Bill from Melody Time (1948) which I gave a B+ to and enjoy much more than this). I even wonder if they used some of the red rock backgrounds from Pecos Bill for this movie. It wouldn’t be above the Disney team to do so. They certainly didn’t improve upon 1948 imagery.

From Pecos Bill

From Home on the Range.

The Story-

As I describe this story I want to remind you- this is the studio who made turning into a llama funny and endearing. Good writing can make any story, no matter how formulaic or strange good. Look at Babe, one of my favorite children’s films of all time. It is about a barnyard in peril but it has such heart and the script is so well written. Here we get nothing new except for a little yodeling.

Basically a cow voiced by Roseann Barr (yes you read right…who thought that was a good idea?) is sold to The Patch O’Heaven farm where all animals are treated like the family. She is an award winning cow who’s master has to sell her because his entire 500 cow fleet has been stolen. She joins 2 other cows, one a cliche of new age niceness voiced by the always great Jennifer Tilly, and proper prim hat wearing Mrs Calloway voiced by Judi Dench (yes Dame Judi Dench is in this thing). Wouldn’t it make more sense for the show cow to be voiced by the Brit? Wouldn’t it make sense for the new girl to be all prim and proper?

Well, the farm owner is Mrs Pearl and she is completely forgettable. (Again think of Babe and how much you love Farmer Hoggett by the end of that movie…). She is behind on her payments and the sheriff is going to auction off the property (how many times have we seen that plot? The whole ‘we have to save the farm, or the orphanage or civic center etc’…snoozefest).

And if things are so bad why does Pearl have the money to buy a prize winning cow and couldn’t she sell it? I get she has attachments to the other animals but she literally just got Maggie (Roseanne Cow). That makes no sense.

But here I am trying to apply sense to a movie about cows saving the day (again can be done well, look at Babe).

There is a nice song sung by KD Lang about the farm.

So off our cows go to save the farm and they have an embarrassing scene in a saloon and then meet Buck a high dreaming horse who wants to be a sheriff (think of Maximus in Tangled. He does the Sheriff horse thing so much better without saying one word). Buck is voiced by Cuba Gooding Jr in an annoying performance, which is obviously trying to be Chris Rock in Madagascar and Eddie Murphy in Shrek and Mulan. It fails. Plus, he is in the movie kind of erratically.

At least to me, it is not funny to have a horse ninja chop a bunch of outlaws. How would he even know how to do that? Why not have him be great with a gun? In a world where horses can fight that makes more sense or a lasso would have been cool. Again Maximus is so much more subtle and funny.

And there is Rico who Buck wants to work with who is an obvious parody of Clint Eastwood but do the kids even know who that is or what it is paying homage too? I hope not because Clint Eastwood westerns are really violent and why not get Clint to do the voice? That would have been entertaining to the adults at least.

He is in the movie sporadically also. Not enough to understand what he is doing or care. Think in the Jungle Book we get very little time with Kaaa but it is enough to find him chilling and to understand who he is as a character.

I will add there are also a lot of toddler level jokes which have also been done with a lot more humor and effect in other films. Things like burping pigs aren’t funny to me…

So, the cows get given to a Chinese man in a strange scene with subtitles and our villain finally comes named Alameda Slim who is obese- how hilarious he’s named slim and is fat! Ha, ha, ha…that’s what goes as humor in this movie!

He is voiced by Randy Quaid and he has the most unusal super power I’ve ever heard of. He can hypnotize cows with his magic yodeling… Again, anything can be good with good writing but this is pushing it.

He has hypnotized herds all over the valley and then when the ranches are destitute like Roseann Cow’s ranch he buys them at auction using the most obvious disguise I’ve ever seen.

In order to buy this scheme you would have to assume that every ranch hand is a complete moron. Plus, cows are big and yet he has them all in a cave. 500 bovines in a cave…that is some cave.

That said, the yodel song was animated pretty well. It’s a copy of Pink Elephants on Parade and Heffalumps and Woozles but since that was a long time ago I’ll let it slide.

The music in general in the movie is pretty good. Alan Menken did the melodies and then there are country/pop stars like KD Lang and Tim McGraw who sing.

I particularly liked Alan Menken’s Aaron Copelanish score. That man can do anything

So basically the last half of Home on the Range is the cows chasing Slim around. At one point they end up on a bad CGI train until they catch him, and spoiler alert win back the farm. Oh and Rico is a double agent but we haven’t gotten to know him, so I really didn’t care.

Movie Review/Conclusion-

home on the range 3 — There is some nice southwest animation although the characters are rough to look at.

So, basically this one is a skip. The humor is sophomoric and unoriginal. The storyline is so predicable. The yodeling was an interesting twist but aside from the one song nothing interesting is really done with it.

The backgrounds are pretty and I liked the music but that’s about it. My advice get Melody TIme and watch Pecos Bill. If you do, you will see Roy Rodgers and hear a Western Tale how it is supposed to be told.

Overall Grade- D- (I give it a hair up on Brother Bear because at least I liked the music in this and I did think it was pretty at spots and thought the yodel song was marginally clever but they both suck)

Disney you are killing me here!!!! And just think this was the era of Pixar glory! The Incredibles came out this year for goodness sake! Sigh…

Movie 44: Brother Bear

October 3, 2014October 3, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

I’ll just give a warning before reading this review. If you like Brother Bear you probably don’t want to read further because I did not. It had such potential but everything about it was a failure. So, if reading a review of someone who dislikes something you like is an unpleasant experience for you than STOP READING NOW!

In 2003 I went on a mission for my church so for 2 years I didn’t see any movies and with new movies coming out when I came home I never really got to play catch up. Sure I watched the 3rd Harry Potter movie, The Incredibles and Return of the King but that was about it in the 2003-2005 era. If one had a bad reputation I skipped it and moved on. Brother Bear was one of those films and I hate to say it but I’m glad I did.

I’m sorry guys but this movie stinks.

Literally every choice I would have advised them to reconsider. Everything from the yogi bearish 2D characters on top of the deep canvas which looked strange, the odd voice cast, the underwhelming songs, the uber-predictable story, the painful attempts at humor and the incredibly unlikable lead character made it a very unpleasant experience. Honestly I’m struggling to find anything I like about this one.

bears8 — Just look at the way these characters look? It’s enough for me to know the movie is not for me. I would rather watch episodes of the Gummy Bears and notice our lead character scowling as he does the whole movie...

Unfortunately I’m not the most witty writer in the world (at least I can admit it unlike the writers of this movie…) but my friend over at Disney Movie Year wrote a very funny review of Brother Bear. He liked it about as much I did…

https://disneymovieyear.wordpress.com/2014/09/29/week-44-brother-bear/

The Production-

It is obvious from the start of the movie Brother Bear tries to recycle themes, characters even whole scenes from Lion King, Pocahontas, Tarzan, Treasure Planet, and more. One article I read (information was fairly sparse on this one) said

“Michael Eisner informed the animation department that he wanted a movie about bears. What about bears? The fact that they are readily marketable, in Stepakoff’s estimation. Various ideas were kicked around – “bear King Lear”, “bear Antigone”, none of which came to fruition, surprisingly.

I mean, by God, if “the CEO wants to sell teddy bears” isn’t going to inspire writers to do their best work, what on Earth possibly could? (http://antagonie.blogspot.com/2009/12/disney-animation-well-and-truly-im-on.html)

Well said but even a commercial cash grab can turn out interesting as Disney has proven many times (think Robin Hood) but the choices they made are so strange.

Movie Review/Conclusion

brother_bear_09-1 — **I wish I could get rid of the cartoonish bears and just look at pretty Alaska… I mean look at the bear with the bangs? It looks so strange**

Everything in the movie looked odd to me. The way the characters are designed on top of the Deep Canvas background always felt off. Also the voice casting never seemed to fit.

The songs are super lame and who thinks ‘Intuit bear story’ and then ‘I’ll hire Tina Turner’? I don’t get it? That makes no sense? There were so many strange choices like that.

The story is so predictable. Every time it took the obvious turn I groaned at the screen. And the sentimental moments are not earned by the characters. I don’t believe the journey they are on or even understand why it is completely necessary. I mean does every teenager who mouths off and acts in anger get turned into a bear in the world of this story? Even if you accept his punishment, I saw no change or growth and the events on their road trip are so obvious and so predictable they bored me to the point I kept checking the time left on the netflix stream….It wouldn’t speed up but seemed to have a half an hour left for 3 hours….

Just bad choices all around. The dialogue is awful. The script feels childish and a lot of times we are introduced to characters and then we never hear form them again. Something usually isn’t funny if we have just met a character. Honestly the script left me aghast at it’s stupidity. I expect better from Disney! (No wonder this only has 32% on Rotten tomatoes…)

For example, there is a line in the movie where the two moose are playing ‘I spy’ and they go back and forth spying things and I kept waiting for the joke. There was no joke!! It was just a 2 minute bit of dialogue playing I spy and I guess that’s supposed to be funny? And I guess talking ‘Canadian’ and saying hosier a lot is also supposed to be funny? It certainly didn’t make me laugh.

There were so many befuddling moments like that? Why attempt to treat the Intuit culture so carefully at the beginning and then have modern voices speaking the way modern teens would speak? That was so distracting. There’s one scene where some billygoats who are introduced and forgotten about in like 2 minutes, say shut up 7 times. Is that supposed to be funny characters saying shut up a lot?

bears5 — **Again look at the banged bear. Doesn’t that just look so badly designed?**

Aladdin could get away with modern voiced characters because there was no attempt to be authentic to Arabic culture. Same with Hercules.

The other huge problem is the lead character is so unlikable. I started to watch after a while (I was so bored) to see when we finally get a smile from Kenai. Literally 1 hr 2 minutes before a smile. He is so winy and for things that don’t seem so bad. It’s not like they are stuck in terrible weather or life is miserable? And at the beginning, so he got a love totem? Is that really such a shameful thing? What a cliche for the male character to hate love and kindness. Groan…It seemed so immature for someone having been officially made a man to be continually harping on it.

bear — **Kenai the most unlikable Disney hero I’ve seen so far that’s for sure. Get used to this facial expression you are going to see a lot of it.**

He is either angry, bitter, or complaining the whole movie. This made his transformation at the end completely unbelievable. The relationship between Koda and Kenai doesn’t feel earned as he goes from hating him to loving him in literally one conversation and musical montage. I realize Tarzan kind of does this but the montage shows weeks of interaction and sharing. This is literally a song and them frolicking in the woods. There’s no sense of time elapsing or growth of characters. And even when he finally smiles he is still kind of a grump. I don’t know when I’ve disliked a lead character more in any movie, Disney or not ..

bears3 — **look how weird these bears look especially the one on the left. They all look very out of place and off putting**

I could keep going but really this movie sucks. I think Bongo is a better bear movie…

I’m sorry if I offend people who like it but I thought every choice they made was wrong. Even the pretty scenery was ruined by the Saturday morning cartoons they placed on top of it. And that’s an insult to Saturday morning cartoons…

I’ll say it again but I really thought this movie sucked and it had such potential, so I’m not inclined to be easy on it. Badly done!

Overall Grade- F

Just to show I’m not alone on this one Rotten tomatoes bottom 2 is Brother Bear and Chicken Little of the Disney Canon. They are the only 2 movies in the 30 percentages (which is pretty amazing when you think about it). Nearly every other Disney movie is pretty close to being fresh. I don’t think any other studio could say that. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/guides/best_disney_animated_movies/

Movie 42: Lilo and Stitch

October 1, 2014October 1, 2014 | Rachel's Reviews

There probably is not a movie I am more personally divided on in the Disney Canon than Lilo and Stitch. About half I LOVE and the other half not as much… I guess you could say I love the Lilo but not as crazy about the Stitch.

The Production-

As much as I enjoy the big epic Disney movies like Frozen I also love the smaller, more intimate pictures like Lilo and Stitch.

In fact, after 3 or 4 commercial disappointments they decided to embrace the Dumbo strategy. Back in the late 1930s Disney had 2 financial ambitious failures in Fantasia and Pinocchio. Bambi was also full of delays and expenses. Walt decided to pull a few animators and make a simple, easy to draw but likable film and they came up with Dumbo.

Dumbo had watercolor backgrounds instead of the layers like Bambi and the characters were relatively simple and appealing. The strategy worked and Dumbo was a big hit.

Lilo and Stitch followed this strategy all the way down to the stunning watercolor backgrounds.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Looking for an easy to execute idea Disney turned inward and animator Chris Sanders pitched a book he had drawn in the 80s about a girl who adopts the world’s meanest alien.

The animators liked the idea and decided on Kaua’i Hawaii as the setting because of the spirit of family, its visibility from space, culture, music and it had never been done before in an animated film.

They do a great job not just showing the lush paradise of Hawaii but also the poverty and harder sides. It feels like a place people actually live.

small town hawaii — I love this small town Hawaii feel. It nails how it actually looks

The adult actors are all lesser known (more cost cutting) except for Ving Rhames as Cobra Bubbles. Many of the cast like Tia Carrere and Jason Scott Lee who play Nani and David are Hawaiian.

Another cost cutting measure was using traditional Hawaiian songs and Elvis numbers which made the soundtrack easy to put together and had minimal recording. I guess because I love Hawaiian music and Elvis I LOVE the soundtrack!

There’s a personal reason I respond to the Hawaiian setting and culture in the film. In 2007 I was starting to come out of a very dark period. There was a time when I felt I had lost the ability to feel happiness. Then I made big changes in my life in early 2007 but hadn’t made the tough decision to quit my job.

That summer my girlfriends and I went to Hawaii and had the most amazing trip. It was an awakening for me. I realized I could be happy. That life was beautiful and lush. I called my Dad the night before we were leaving and cried my eyes out. The idea of leaving such happiness made me so sad. I realized I needed to quit my job and create a happy life for myself.

I guess you could say the ohana spirit moved me and made me a better person.

I’ve been back three times since then and each time I leave feeling renewed and happy. Watching Lilo and Stitch with its music, surfing, watercolor mountains, hula and everything else brings back those memories which are always close to my heart (I need to get back!)

The intro really captures the ohana magic

It was also the first Disney classic to be nominated for Best Animated Film at the Oscars but lost out to Spirited Away (who wouldn’t lose to that masterpiece?)

The Story-

So let’s continue on this vein by talking about the things in the story that best show the Hawaii I love. Lilo and Stitch is about 2 sisters, Lilo and Nani who’s parents have passed on and are forced to try and make their ‘broken family’ work.

These scenes between the two sisters are perfect. I wouldn’t change them one bit.

Here they are arguing like all sisters do, but I so relate to Nani because I was the older sister carrying for a sister and a brother who were 16 and 18 years younger than me. I get how she was feeling

And then this scene is perfect too. This felt like a real sisterly moment.

The prayer at the end of it just breaks my heart and is one of the few prayers in Disney films. Again wouldn’t change a thing.

I love that Lilo is a weird little girl. She has a strange doll and doesn’t get along with the other little girls. She tries to feed sandwiches to fish and is just a strange kid- like all kids! (especially a kid who has experienced recent trauma).

I also love this is a Disney movie about a little girl. That is actually pretty rare. Most Disney movies are about adolescent girls like Ariel, Belle, Pocahontas etc. I love that little girls have a little girl in a Disney film they can relate too and feel a little less alone in their strangeness.

Unfortunately there are problems for Nani and a social worker is concerned about her problems keeping a job and the stress of carrying for Lilo. He’s not a bad guy- just doing his job, but the threat of the ‘ohana’ being taken away is palatable throughout the movie. Not so much it is depressing but a real fear propelling the story forward.

Now we get to the part I don’t like…

Nani decides to let Lilo adopt a dog. At the shelter the find a weird creature who Lilo names Stitch:

We have seen earilier in the film that Stitch is an alien genetic mutation created by a mad scientist alien for world domination.

I’m sorry but I just don’t like the look of any of the aliens. Stitch looks like a cockroach, which I guess is appropriate for Hawaii but it was so unpleasant to look at (I hate cockroaches btw!). And he is so awful. Everything else in the movie is so sweet and tender having this maniac alien thrown in hurt the tone and I couldn’t wait for him to get off the screen.

The other aliens are all modeled off of sea creatures and they don’t look much better and are kind of boring. I kept wanting it to be done with the alien story and get back to the sisters. This movie should have been simple like The Fox and the Hound but it decided to pay homage to ET. The problem is ET was kind of cute and aside from frogs and resees pieces he didn’t really hurt anything. Plus, Elliott’s family is not in crisis like Lilo’s so it feels like too much for Stitch to destroy their house (literally), make Nani loose multiple jobs and more.

I don’t know how you have enough story without the Stitch but maybe just tone him down a little bit or make him a little bit cuter. Make him something good to the family not another struggle. Hmmm

I did like Lilo teaching Stitch how to dance like Elvis and hula.

The ending drags a bit and it could have been 10 minutes shorter (or follow the example of Dumbo and make it 62 minutes!). I don’t want to give everything away but there is some fun action and the spaceships are pretty cool.

We do get a nice moment where even Stitch learns he has found his ‘little and broken family’ (that gets me every time!).

And we get a little Elvis which is tons of fun.

Movie Review/Conclusion

So like I said I have mixed feelings about Lilo and Stitch. I wish I could excise all the Stitch stuff out and just make it about the sisters. I loved their relationship. I loved the Hawaiian culture. I loved the watercolor look. I loved the music both Hawaiian and Elvis. I love the focus on families and ohana, and I love that Lilo is a little girl not an adolescent who behaves like a little girl.

I still think Stitch is one of the ugliest animated creatures ever created and the scenes with all the aliens drag. I found myself itching to get back to the sisters. It was so much more compelling. Unfortunately this is a large part of the movie so it is a problem.

It makes giving a grade very difficult .

I guess I’m going to treat it like Bambi. When Bambi works it works so well but when it doesn’t I’m not invested. I gave Bambi a B- so

Overall Grade- B-