Good evening friends, and family! Hope you’re all having a fun week so far, and are ready for yet another weekend, especially with the Super Bowl happening. Anyway, tonight, like with my last review, we are talking about yet another Disney film that was released when the 2000s first began. Unlike last time, however, we are going to discuss what may yet be one of Disney’s better offerings. Oh, and not just that, but we’ll also be tackling a Disney film that was released during a year when Disney DID NOT seem to be afraid to come out with stories that, while still for kids to enjoy, seemed to go a little more towards the adult side of the spectrum. And this wouldn’t be the only time in the year 2000, when that would happen, as we had what seemed to be more mature films from Disney like The Kid, Remember The Titans, Whispers: An Elephant’s Tale, and, heck, some could possibly argue that maybe Dinosaur may have been a little more for adults than for kids as well. But I suppose that last one could be up for debate. Anyway, tonight, let’s talk about one of the better Disney films, from the year 2000, and starring Bruce Willis, Emily Mortimer, Spencer Breslin, and Jean Smart, to name a few celebrities. Presenting a review for the one and only, The Kid!

Plot: A 40-year-old businessman named Russ Duritz (Bruce Willis) seems to be enjoying a care-free life, but also act selfish, and cruel towards others as well. But one day, when his past comes back to visit him in the form of his 8-year-old self (Spencer Breslin), can Russ learn, and remember why he turned out the way that he did, and change for the better in the end?

Now, much like quite a few family films that I watched as a kid, or even a teen, The Kid was a movie that I really enjoyed in my younger years. However, after rewatching The Kid for the first time in maybe several years, it’s surprising by how much more great this film is. To begin, there’s the music by Marc Shaiman. Okay, I didn’t realize that his musical works included works like the Sister Act movies, George Of The Jungle, or evening the more recent Mary Poppins Returns. Well, with The Kid, he doesn’t disappoint with this film. He seems to add this jazzy flare to this particular movie. Next, there’s the characters. Wow, each of these characters really stand out, including the ones that don’t get all that much screen time. What’s even more interesting is that there aren’t necessarily any real heroes (or heroes fighting bad guys, or something like that), or villains in this movie. Instead, what we have is just characters, who are either teaching themselves, or other people important lessons, standing up for others, or even learning important life lessons from a child’s, or even an adult’s perspective. Not only that, but for some of these characters, especially the main ones, you really seem to sympathize with them, and truly understand where they’re coming from, even when it comes to the more self-centered characters in this movie. Because of this, the movie also ends up teaching us, the audience, that we shouldn’t be too quick to judge people’s hearts, and/or even their motives. Yes, of course we need to stand up for what’s right, and watch out for those people who are constantly doing things that are wrong. Still, at the same time, people can take away some lessons from this film like not being too quick to judge others before you get know them, or those kinds of lessons. All to say, it just comes to show that when it came to live-action Disney movies even back then, Disney knew how to make characters with layers to their personalities. Well, of course, even back then, there were some animated characters in Disney, especially when it came to the protagonists, that had some complexity to their characters. Still, it’s safe to say that in more recent years, Disney has finally learned that they can make complex characters with both their good, and bad guys even in their animated films. For those of you who saw animated films like Zootopia, Moana, or even Frozen, we seem to know that already. So yeah, it’s definitely great to know that Disney has seemed to realize that they can make their characters more complex in both their animated, and live-action films, and not be more lenient in either of those areas. In addition to all of this, The Kid helps balance the more serious tone of this film with some spot-on comedy. Yeah, the script is fantastic when it comes to the more comedic lines of this film. Heck, even Bruce Willis does a brilliant job of bringing out his comedic side after starring in mostly action films. Yeah, isn’t it interesting how actors like Bruce Willis, Vin Diesel, or even Arnold Schwarzenegger go from starting from these buff action movies, to being in more comedic roles in family films like The Kid, Jingle All The Way, or even The Pacifier, for instance? Oh, and let’s not forget the relationship between Russ, and Amy, who is played by Emily Mortimer. The relationship is handled well, and seems to show one of the more realistic sides of romantic relationships. And that’s as far as I’ll go with saying that. One final thing to mention in regards to The Kid is that even though kids, and teens will likely enjoy this film for it’s comedy, slapstick, and humorous moments, adults will enjoy the movie for those reasons, but also for additional reasons as well. What adults will probably enjoy, in addition to those reasons that kids will enjoy this film, is that adults will enjoy the more adult aspects of this film as well. Adults will enjoy the mature direction that this film that it takes. The reason being is because adults will probably have gone through some of the experiences that our main characters go through in this film, and appreciate this film more as a result.

And that’s my review for The Kid. It is a very unique film for Disney in terms of storytelling, a great script, and some of the most memorable characters in Disney’s history. Also, the acting is superb, the story is well told, and there are some really good lessons to learn from this film. If you haven’t seen this underrated film from Disney, this is yet another one that I would recommend to you all. You’d be surprised by how good it is. In fact, after seeing this film, you may find yourself thinking that it probably could have been made by any other studio, like Universal, Columbia Pictures, it one of those studios. Still, as we know, Disney decided to take the reins for this film, and make it in the end. So yeah, that’s all the more reason to see it, and hopefully really enjoy it.

Final Grade: A+

Ladies & gentlemen, you know how a couple years ago, I reviewed a couple Disney “sequels” from that smaller Disney subsidiary company called Disney Toon Studios? Well, tonight, we are going to be diving into that film library again. The reason why is because we are going to be talking about one of the very first direct-to-video sequels to be released around the early 2000s. It is one that was from my childhood, and remember liking quite a bit. Watching it again years later, is it as good as I remembered? You shall find out shortly! For now, let’s talk about The Little Mermaid 2: Return To The Sea.

Plot: Sometime after Prince Eric (Rob Paulsen), and Ariel (Jodi Benson) get married, they now have a daughter named Melody (Tara Strong), and celebrate her birth. But the celebration is interrupted when Ursula’s sister, Morgana (Pat Carroll) attempts to harm Melody, and attain King Triton’s (Kenneth Mars) magical trident. Now seeing Morgana as a threat to humans, and mer people, Eric, and Ariel now decide to build a wall around the coast of Eric’s kingdom, and keep Melody safe until Morgana is found, and defeated. Even if it may take time, will King Triton, and his subjects ever find Morgana, and vanquish her for good?

Originally, I had no intention of rewatching this film again anytime soon. However, I changed my mind, and decided to go ahead, and do so for a couple reasons. One was that I had not reviewed a movie that I had put any lower than an A, or even B in a long time. So, I wanted to see if I, or anyone else could have the guts to review something that one could have a mixed, if not fully negative reaction to. Anyway, the second reason was that I’m planning to rewatch another direct-to-video sequel in celebration of a certain TV show, that the DTV sequel is linked to, turning five years old recently, and see how it, and maybe even Little Mermaid 2 compare to each other.

With all that said, how is The Little Mermaid 2: Return To The Sea after watching it years later? Watching it again, it’s sadly not as great as I thought years ago. I mean certain aspects of the story are somewhat interesting, don’t get me wrong. However, The Little Mermaid 2: Return To The Sea is overall not all that good. For one, there’s the animation more often than not. Oh yes, the backgrounds in the animation are nice to look at, whether it be the ocean, sunsets, or the ice around the Antarctica-like area, for example. Other than those few aspects, however, the animation can feel a little too choppy when it comes to the character movements. Okay, maybe that’s not the case entirely, but it certainly seems to be most of the time. Additionally, there’s the whole deal about Ursula having a sister. None of us recall hearing about Ursula having a sibling in the original Little Mermaid film, do we? So yeah, that is a plot hole that can be rather bothersome. Come on! Why doesn’t Morgana show up to help Ursula in the first film? Was she absent, and/or on a big long vacation, while Ursula was left to do the work of destroying King Triton, and his mer folk kingdom? We don’t know for sure either in The Little Mermaid 1, or The Little Mermaid 2. Truth be told, this was not the only direct-to-video sequel that had major plot holes like this. Let’s think about it! In this sequel, Ursula had this evil sister that we knew nothing of until this sequel. Then, Lion King 2 had this thing where Zira, and her evil lion pride were somehow connected to Scar, Lady & The Tramp 2 had this deal about Tramp having this former friendship with a villainous junkyard dog named Buster, and I’m sure the list could go on, but won’t for the sake of not dragging on. Anyway, there’s the characters. Okay, Ariel, and Eric’s daughter, Melody, and to an extent, Morgana, are probably the only somewhat interesting characters that this film have to offer. Aside from then, however, none of them really seem to stand out. I mean except for maybe King Triton, none of the older characters that were in the original Disney film seem to be as interesting, or as memorable this time around. Ariel especially seems to turn into this more strict, and cliched parent that seems to think that hiding the truth about why she, and Eric won’t let her journey into the sea in this case. Oh, and there’s Morgana’s henchmen, consisting of a shark, and two manta rays. Yeah, let’s just say that you’ll find yourself liking the eels, or even Ursula herself better than these villains. What’s more is that none of the creatures, or people that Melody comes across throughout this sequel seem to stand out, or be likable, or memorable. Of course that may be because this sequel is a great example of an animated that may have been way more fast paced than it should have been. You got me! As for the songs, wow, they are forgettable as all get out. Sure, there were one, if not two, that seemed to stand out. In general, however, the songs sounded like something that maybe belonged in a kid’s show that airs on TV in the morning, or something like that. Also, the sequel, overall, can be a little too repetitive of the 1989 Classic Disney film. Now, I know what you’re all thinking! “But Matt,” you may say, “the 2019 live-action/CGI remake of The Lion King kept most of the same parts from the 1994 Disney animated version of that film. Why is this any different?” Yes, the 2019 remake of The Lion King did have many of the same scenes of the original 1994 animated film, The Lion King. However, the difference in that case is that the newer Lion King, while having many of the same revered scenes, at least added some scenes that helped make the remake good. Also, those characters were fleshed out more, and some of the newer dialogue helped make up for what dialogue was not there that was in that original film. Hopefully, that clarified that argument!

Nevertheless, there are at least a couple good things that make this film somewhat entertaining. For one, even if Melody can act rather whiny at times, she does act strong, independent, and courageous. Not only that, but she’s good at sensing when either if her parents are hiding something from her, or when something doesn’t sound right. Oh, and it was great to have some of the original voice cast back, be it Jodi Benson as Ariel, Kenneth Mars as King Triton, or Samuel E. Wright as Sebastian, for example. Oh, and how about having Pat Carroll back as well, even if she’s voicing a different villain, instead of Ursula? The climax towards the end, even if a little short, is also a good example of a good moment in a not so great film. Truth be told, that’s probably one of the very rare to few moments that you might find yourself wanting to watch again, and again with this film I’d say you had Disney+, or something like that, and you just wanted to skip to that scene.

Well folks, that’s my review for The Little Mermaid 2: Return To The Sea. It just comes to show that especially in the 2000s, Disney Toon Studios should have maybe just stuck with TV shows, and not made many of these direct-to-video sequels. Granted, there were a few gems in this library, especially from the 1990s, like the two Aladdin sequels, or The Lion King 2: Simba’s Pride, that were most likely good (though those should probably be rewatched soon to be sure, eh?). The Little Mermaid 2: Return To The Sea is a good example of why the direct-to-video sequels didn’t seem to work all too well, especially when the 2000s. Well, thank God that once 2006 rolled around, and John Lasseter took over even Walt Disney Animation, he said no to future direct-to-video sequels being made, even though the Tinker Bell movies would still be made. I would say that if you haven’t heard of, or seen this sequel, just act like 1989’s The Little Mermaid is a stand alone film, and like this sequel doesn’t exist. Sure the sequel has a few good moments. Still, it’s overall not all that good. Well, hopefully, should I rewatch something like the Aladdin sequels, or Lion King 2 in the near future, I, or anyone else has a better reaction to those than with Little Mermaid 2, you know?

Final Grade: D+

Alright everyone! Tonight, we are reviewing yet another film. Unlike last night, where we dived into the world of superheroes, we are now going to dive into more realism by going into historical fiction. Set a few years after the Civil War, and based on a novel of the same name by Paulette Jiles, the movie that we are reviewing tonight is called News Of The World.

Plot: Set in the year 1870, a few years after the infamous Civil War came to an end, a Civil War veteran named Captain Jefferson Kyle Kidd travels mostly around northern Texas to read, and tell the local news to the people in each of the towns that he travels to. During one of these travels, he comes across a young girl named Johanna/Cicada (Helena Zengel), who spent time with Native Americans after losing her parents. He then decides to take her with, and return her to where the rest of her family lives. Will he succeed in finding her family in the end?

Wow, this is such a great film! Yes, this film can probably have a True Grit sort of feel, minus some of the main characters seeking revenge against their enemies. Okay, I’m not saying that it’s the same plot, but News Of The World can possibly feel a little similar to True Grit at some points. In addition to this, the acting is just great. Not only do main characters that are played Tom Hanks, and Helena Zengel (who is surprisingly a German actress) work well off of each other, but the other cast members really know how to portray their respective characters. I mean we’re talking about how any of those who play any criminals, or outlaws, for example, know how to act like those types of characters really well. Same goes for say anyone playing any of the soldiers, you name it. In addition to all of this, there is surprisingly a very good score by James Newton Howard. I mean when it comes to him composing music for films, he seems to capture the music that played during certain periods, modern times, or even in fantasy settings, be it films like Vertical Limit, Hidalgo, RV, or even Disney films like Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and Treasure Planet. I mean, he may not be quite Hans Zimmer level when scoring films, but he certainly has this way of engaging the audience with his musical score. News Of The World is no exception. Quite honestly, I’m curious to see how his music is with the upcoming Disney film Raya & The Last Dragon, assuming that film actually does hit theaters, and Disney+ this March. But I digress! The cinematography is also really good. So much so that while watching this film, it almost seems to feel like you’re traveling in the Old West, especially Texas, without actually being there in person. Okay, that might sound hard to explain, but you should hopefully know what I mean once you likely see this film. Another positive in this film is that it does a fantastic job of showing how difficult life was back then, whether it be dealing with bandits, working harder to find food, certain forms of travel, and things like that. Honestly, after seeing films like News Of The World, people may find themselves truly appreciating how much easier it seems to be to work for food, being able to travel to different places much easier, and in a more rapid amount of time, and things like that.

The only area where this film could have probably been slightly better would be that Johanna’s backstory could have likely been explored a little more, and she, and Jefferson Kidd could have perhaps spent some time with some of the Native Americans that she spent time with before being rescued by Kidd. Maybe that’s nitpicking, but maybe it’s not. Feel free to share your input in regards to that! Finally, the movie teaches some valuable lessons about not giving up hope even when things may seem, or actually be difficult.

And that’s my review for News Of The World. What can I say? This is yet another winner once again. News Of The World most certainly needs to get some nominations at the Oscars, if not win some. It has great acting, really good music, mostly thought out characters, and, of course, excellent scenery. Not only that, but having people like Tom Hanks in this movie seems to make this film all the more enjoyable. Movies like this one, Forrest Gump, or even A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood, for example, are examples of why nearly every movie with Tom Hanks seems to be a hit. Finally, this movie seems to teach some very valuable lessons. Definitely try to see News Of The World if you haven’t yet. It is yet another just-see. Once again, it’s also big screen worthy, and one that should definitely be one of those films that draws crowds back into theaters.

Final Grade: A

Good evening everyone! Welcome to yet another session of movie reviewing! Tonight, we are going to be talking about one of the more recent films to get released in theaters for the first time in a long while. Not only that, but it is one of the very first films that was released by Warner Bros., as well as in a line of films that are made by the company that are getting released over the course of this year, if not also the years after, to be released in both theaters, and on HBO Max. Presenting the very sequel to it’s 2017 predecessor, Wonder Woman 1984.

Plot: Set in the year 1984, years after Diana Prince (aka Wonder Woman, and played by Gal Gadot), and her boyfriend Steve Trevor (Chris Pine) helped the American soldiers win WWII, Wonder Woman now faces a new threat. The threat comes in the form of a businessman named Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal), who steals a magical stone called the Dreamstone. He begins to use this stone to grant wishes to anyone, and causing negative consequences as a result. Because of this, it is up to Wonder Woman, Steve, and new friend Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig) to thwart Lord’s plans to grant unnecessary wishes, and put an end to the chaos that he begins to create once and for all.

Now, as I’m sure we are aware, this film was supposed to come out back in June of this past year, but got delayed first to October, and then finally to Christmas Day of this past year. Now, the question is, “Was it worth the wait one way, or the other in the end?” For the most part, yes. However, unlike the first film that came out in 2017, and was practically a masterpiece, this sequel seemed to fall short of it. Oh yes, it’s still very good, but this film probably could have improved in a few areas. First of all, there were points in time where some of the characters were lacking development for themselves. Not only that, but there were times, where there could have maybe been slightly better foreshadowing for certain character arcs, as well as certain events that were to occur. Yes, there was some of that foreshadowing in there. It just could have been better. It’s shocking that this ended up being the case for a film that’s two, and a half hours long. Could this be a result of certain action sequences, or even some scenes period seeming to drag a little longer than they should have in the end? Most likely! Well, in addition to this, there were some plot holes that were scattered throughout this film as well, especially around the middle to end. And another thing! You know how in the first Wonder Woman movie, you seem to really feel the good versus evil battle? Here, however, we don’t seem to really feel that battle as much. Yes, we still have that feel to a degree. It’s just that it seemed to be handled better in the first movie from 2017. One other flaw that’s worth noting is that the end may have felt a little too rushed. I mean before the credits, along the mid-credits scene occurred, the ending itself could have probably been expanded upon in order for certain events, relationships, and things like that to be built up a little better. We’re talking maybe an extra five to ten minutes, give or take.

But now with those things out of the way, what are the things that make this movie good, if any? Well, for one, there is the score by Hans Zimmer. Wow, especially in the beginning of this film, he makes a really good soundtrack. I mean his score throughout this film is good too. However, with the beginning in particular, it’s almost like the music seems to have a feel for say the music from 2009’s Avatar, or some film like that. Now about some of the character building. As I mentioned before, some of the character buildup could have definitely been a little better than they were in the end. However, that doesn’t mean that most of them, especially the main ones, didn’t had any at all. In fact, most of them still do stand out to a degree, even if they could have done a somewhat better job in that regard. In addition to these, the costume designs are also really spectacular, including a new design for the main character, Diana Prince/Wonder Woman. What’s more is that there are times where you could likely want to watch this film in 3D, if those theater sections of movie theaters still do exist. So much so that you might wish that there was a Wonder Woman attraction if some kind at either Universal Studios, or even at a Warner Bros. amusement park, if that were to ever exist. There was also some really excellent creativity with some of the story, some of the new moves that were made by characters like Wonder Woman, and things like that. Chris Pine, and Gal Gadot also have some really good chemistry with their respective characters onscreen. The rest of the acting is great too. Sure, there was some acting from one, or two of the characters that could have been tweaked to a degree. However, besides that, the acting was phenomenal. There are also some good takeaways from this film as well. First off, there’s the lesson that we cannot always have what we wish for in life. I heard someone once say that, and I quote, “Not getting what you want can be a blessing.” Now yes, that may feel frustrating when we don’t always get certain things that we want in life. However, when that happens, then I guess the best thing to do is to realize that it may be for the better in some cases, eh? Also, going along the lines of this is that this movie dies an excellent job of teaching kids, and adults alike, that we need to learn to sacrifice our personal desires if it means fighting for what’s right, and the greater good being the ultimate result. Okay, that may not make sense immediately, but it likely will in time. Anyway, the point being that there are times where this film is really good at portraying that message.

And that’s my review for Wonder Woman 1984. Sure, it probably won’t go down as a newer Classic in the newer DC Universe film library like the first film did. Still, even if this movie has more flaws than the first film, there’s still heart to some of the characters, the story does a great job with expanding more often than not, and there are some potentially interesting lessons to learn from this film. Again, much like Croods 2, if you can see this film in theaters instead of just on HBO Max, then make it a point to. That is unless movie theaters by your area are still on lockdown. However, if that is not the case for some of you, definitely go to the theater to see this one. Wonder Woman 1984 is yet another example of why going to the theater to see movies proves to be a much better experience than just watching it on HBO Max on a smaller television screen.

Final Grade: B

Good evening everyone! I hope you all have had a wonderful New Year thus far, and that you all continue to have a blessed one. Today, we are going to review a family film that I wasn’t originally planning to watch, and review until maybe a few months from now, when it likely hits home video, or watch On Demand. However, because of the fact that movie theaters that were located near me had reopened, and this film was playing at most of those theaters, I decided to go ahead and see it IN THEATERS. So here we are, seven to eight years after it’s predecessor’s release, with it’s sequel, Croods: A New Age.

Plot: After a long while since the Croods family (Grug (Nicholas Cage), Ugga (Catherine Keener), Gran (Cloris Leachman), Eep (Emma Stone), Thunk (Clark Duke), and Sandy (Kailey Crawford)) left their cave home, and have been traveling with Guy (Ryan Reynolds), they suddenly stumble upon a new home, and a new family, by the last name of Betterman, consisting of Phil (Peter Dinklage), Hope (Leslie Mann), and their daughter, Dawn (Kelly Marie Tran), who was an old friend of Guy’s. Having a strong dislike for the Croods, and determined to see Guy marry Dawn instead of Eep, the Bettermans make every attempt to get rid of the Croods for good. But when unexpected surprises occur for both families that force the two families to work together, can the two families set aside their differences, and navigate through the unexpected obstacles that await them?

Now, after some, if not all of you saw me rank the first film in the high B grade range, you may be wondering, “Did the sequel improve from the The Croods 1?” Well, it did. True, this isn’t quite an A+ film. However, when compared to some of DreamWorks recent works like Trolls: World Tour, this movie is quite a few steps up from that. In fact, if the Academy were to choose between Trolls: World Tour, or Croods: A New Age, as to which of those should be nominated for Best Animated Feature, it is this one that should be nominated, if not win that Oscar. Of course, I’m not going to say whether or not Croods: A New Age should win yet, as I still have yet to watch movies like Disney/Pixar’s Soul, and hearing plenty of great things about that one. So, I’ll reserve my judgment call on that at least for now. So, what makes this film one of DreamWorks better animated films in recent years? Well, for one, the animation seems to be a step up from that of the first film. Oh, and get this! The character animation seems to be well-crafted this time around. A very notable example is how some of the creatures seem to have a design of animation, and the design of Muppet, or Sesame Street characters mixed in together. Oh, is that hard to believe? Well, all the more reason to see this film, and you’ll probably know what I mean. Anyway, not only is all of that the case, but there seems to be more depth with the characters this time around. So much so that you seem to care for them, and sympathize with them more than you might have in the first movie. What’s more is that some, if not all, of them seem to be more relatable in one capacity, or another. Also, Croods: A New Age May have similar themes, and messages to movies like the 2018 Disney film, Wreck-It-Ralph 2: Ralph Breaks The Internet. One of the main differences this time around is that this film DOES NOT seem to either unintentionally, or intentionally teach kids, or adults that it’s okay to be selfish, and have whatever you want in life. Nevertheless, Croods: A New Age does an excellent job of teaching great lessons like how it’s good for parents to love them, but also to let them live their own lives when it’s appropriate to do so. Additionally, the story seems to be better paced, which is likely more than one could have probably said about the first film. Okay, that’s not to say that the first film, The Croods, wasn’t fairly well paced at points. Still, The Croods might have felt a little too fast paced at points. But I digress. The world building seems to have a little more creativity with the worlds, some of the creatures, and other areas this time around. The film also seems to have a little more heart to it than it’s predecessor. And another thing! Croods: A New Age seems to have a very good balance of comedy, action, and of course mostly good character development.

However, there were a couple areas, where this film could have gone through a final draft, or two. To begin, there were times when this sequel seemed to act a little much like Trolls: World Tour. For instance, instead of there being a good musical score in really tense moments, a random rock song would be thrown in. It’s like, “Come on!” Okay, that may not have always been the case in this movie, but it seemed strange whenever something like that did occur, you know? The other thing is that there were times when some of the characters were making decisions without giving an explanation, or reason, for some of their actions. Okay, I get that maybe the writers might have been trying to just throw in certain twists, or something like that. Still, I’m not sure that it always worked, you know?

And that’s my review for Croods: A New Age. Sure, this film might have had a couple flaws. Still, one could maybe call this sequel a beautiful mess, since it was mostly good. Nearly everything is a step up, from better developed characters, better animation, more creativity, and other good qualities too. Truth be told, if theaters are open near your location, and ticket prices are reasonably priced, Croods: A New Age is one of those animated films that you should really try to go to the theater to see first, if at all possible. Considering that Trolls: World Tour didn’t seem to be quite as big screen worthy back in April of last year, that seems to say a lot for Croods: A New Age. But most importantly, you’ll most likely have a fun time watching this film in theaters, and possibly even seeing some fun trailers to go along with it, before the feature begins. See this film for yourselves, and see what you think!

Final Grade: A-

Good afternoon ladies & gentlemen! I want to start things off by saying that I hope you all had a wonderful Christmas yesterday, and Christmas Eve a couple days before. Second, today, we are going back into the world of Disney/Pixar once again. This time, we will be talking about one in the library that was released during the time that Disney/Pixar became the King/Queen of animation. Not only that, but at this point in time, computer animation was becoming more popular, while 2D hand-drawn animation slowly, but surely became less popular, and was starting to slowly, but surely die out. Not to mention that Disney/Pixar films would more often than not win the Oscar for Best Animated Feature. Today’s Disney/Pixar film is a perfect example of all of this being the case. Presenting you all, the first 3D animated film to gross over $300 million domestically (of course some of us are aware that 1994’s Lion King was the first hand-drawn to pull this off unexpectedly), Finding Nemo.

Plot: An overprotective clownfish named Marlin (Albert Brooks), and his son Nemo (Alexander Gould) live in an anemone in the Great Barrier Reef after Marlin’s wife Coral (Elizabeth Perkins), and all of Marlin and Coral’s kids, except Nemo, are massacred by a barracuda. One day, an argument occurs between Marlin, and Nemo occurs that causes Nemo to swim into dangerous territory, and get captured by scuba divers. Unable to catch up to the boat that Nemo was taken in, Marlin must then make a brave journey to Sydney, Australia, where Nemo has gone. With the help some colorful new friends, including a blue tang named Dory (Ellen Degeneres), and three vegetarian sharks (voiced by Barry Humphries, Eric Bana, and Bruce Spence respectively), will Marlin succeed in rescuing Nemo, and bringing him back to the ocean once and for all?

Much like with 3D films like Shrek, Ice Age, and some of those films, while I liked Finding Nemo, I was very frustrated that these films were talked about more than hand-drawn films like Treasure Planet, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, or, to a lesser degree, even Brother Bear. in fact, part of me was rooting for Brother Bear to win just so that a hand-drawn film from Disney could win. Well, as we may know, Finding Nemo took home the Oscar, and I felt a little disappointed. But keep in mind that this was when I was 15 1/2, soon to be 16 years old. So now, let’s talk about Finding Nemo with all of that stuff that I mentioned not being in play at this point in time.

Everyone, I was very surprised with the result this time around. In fact, if you haven’t seen this movie yet, this is most definitely a must-see. First off, the characters are so memorable from beginning to end. First off, the fish, and even some of the main pelicans, have distinct, human like personalities of their own. Okay, they act like normal creatures, don’t get me wrong. However, they have real emotions like happiness, fear, excitement, and things like that. Not only that, but people are most likely going to relate to any of these characters in one way, or another, whether that be Marlin, Gill, the leader of the Fish Tank Gang, Bruce, and his vegetarian shark comrades, or any other character in this movie. Despite some of these characters not getting as much screen time as others, they manage to still stand out, and be remembered as much as those characters that this story revolves around. Which, that begs a question that could be up for debate, “How is it that that seems to be the case for films like 2003’s Finding Nemo, or 2016’s Zootopia, while other films seem to sometimes struggle to find that balance?” I don’t know, that just sounds like something to think about, you know? What’s more is that some of the character arcs, be it some of the main characters, as well as there supporting characters as well, are handled surprisingly well too. It’s a miracle that the writers could pull that off in this film’s running time of 100 minutes. Next, there’s the score by Thomas Newman. First off, we need to give the executives at Disney/Pixar credit for finally using a composer that wasn’t Randy Newman, for once. How interesting that it was Randy’s cousin, Thomas Newman, that we got this time around. I was surprised to find that he composed music in live-action movies before this film, and after. So how was his music in Finding Nemo? Truth be told, he did a better job here than in films like 2000’s Pay It Forward. It’s almost Thomas seemed to bring something more fresh, and new that may, or may not have been seen, or heard in Disney/Pixar’s films before this one. His music is fanciful, and really helps to pull at your heartstrings, and get you engaged into the movie even more. He has this gift of mixing piano, as well as maybe other instruments in the film in such a beautiful way. Now, do I have anything against Randy Newman? No! In fact, he has made a variety of excellent musical scores for the films in this library that he composed for. Still, if he was used in everything that was Disney/Pixar, be it even Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, Up, or films like those, how do we know that people would have continued the films that Disney/Pixar has produced up to this present point, you know? In addition to all this, Finding Nemo seems to have this special ability of keeping the audience really engaged in this film. This may seem a little more true than some of Pixar’s other films before, and after it. For instance, as you watch this film, you may find yourself wanting the movie to magically suck into the world of Finding Nemo, and going on the adventures with Marlin, and Dory, whether that be wrestling with angler fish, riding on the East Australian Current with Crush, and his herd of sea turtles, or things like that. Now, I’m sure that other Disney/Pixar films have made people have similar feelings to one degree, or another too. It’s just that Finding Nemo seems to have that feeling even more. Another thing to mention is that the end credits are designed differently than Pixar’s films before this one. If you haven’t watched the credits for this film, definitely watch the credits after the movie is over. You won’t regret it. Finally, the film helps to teach us how we need to draw a line between protecting others, and being overprotective of those that we love. Not only that, but the movie does also teach an important lesson about not using others for selfish gain at certain points too. Such important lessons to learn, that’s for sure.

And that’s my review for Finding Nemo. Looking back, is it understandable as to why Finding was really popular? Very much so. With a Disney/Pixar film that’s only a hundred minutes, there is so much to unpack in this film. Also, Finding Nemo has an incredible amount of heart, and soul in it’s story, characters, animation, and all the other areas of this film. Nowadays, I’m actually sort of laughing at myself for thinking it strange that Finding Nemo won the Oscar for Best Animated Feature. In all honesty, Finding Nemo is a film that deserves to be watched by everyone in any, and every age group. It has excellent messages, well-written characters, and other great qualities going for it. There’s no doubt that Finding Nemo deserved to have a 99% on Rotten Tomatoes. So, it’s a great thing that most critics, and audiences alike enjoyed this film.

Final Grade: A+

Good evening everyone! First off, I want to wish you all a merry Christmas. Hope that you all have enjoyed today, and had a merry holiday today. Second, tonight, we are reviewing a rather underrated Disney/Pixar film that was released just a couple years after Disney/Pixar came out with Toy Story, and computer animation was still a newer form of animation in the mainstream media. Why this particular Disney/Pixar isn’t talked about as much as others in that film library, I’m not sure. Well, let’s all talk about Ant Island, and it’s civilization that consists of ants that are in involved in Disney/Pixar’s A Bug’s Life, which was released twenty-two years ago, in 1998.

Plot: A colony of ants on an island, called Ant Island, gather different foods in their land for a colony of grasshoppers, led by the tyrannical Hopper (Kevin Spacey). But when certain mishaps occur that prevent the grasshoppers from having their “offering,” Hopper orders that their order of food be doubled. Seeing as this may starve the ant colony in the end, an ant named Flik (Dave Foley) decides to be the first ant to leave the island in an attempt to find some bigger, and hopefully friendlier bugs to rid them of Hopper, and his army of grasshoppers once and for all. Atta (Julia Louis-Dreyfus), the Princess of Ant Island, her mother (Phyllis Diller), and the Royal Council agree to this decision. With that being the case, can Flik find the bugs that he, and his colony need to exile the grasshoppers from the ant’s lives for good?

Now, I watched this film quite a few times as a kid. However, unlike movies like Mulan, and Quest For Camelot, I didn’t watch this one as frequently going into the 2000s, and on. In fact, this is a film that I have rewatched for the first time in years. Now, for me to talk about how A Bug’s Life turned out so many years later! I must say that, for the most part, this is a really good film. The only thing that seems to keep this film from a perfect score would be that there were one, or two lines that could potentially sound awkward, if not cringeworthy. Sure, those moments may go over most kid’s heads. Still, it wouldn’t be surprising if some adults were bothered by those one, or two moments.

Besides that, however, this film is really well done. Granted, some people might like other Disney/Pixar films like Toy Story, Finding Nemo, or some of those films a little more. Nevertheless, Disney/Pixar showed that even when their studio was newer to the world of animation, they knew how to make a story that’s inventive, imaginative, and very heartfelt. It almost makes you wonder if maybe Disney/Pixar took notes with how Disney made their animated films in their earlier films such as Snow White & The Seven Dwarfs, Pinnochio, Dumbo, and some of those films, and then took it a step further with their films. Even if that wasn’t the case, films like Toy Story, and A Bug’s Life show that that could have easily been the case.

With that said, what makes A Bug’s Life worthwhile? First off, even if this film may have been loosely based off an Aesop’s Fables story by the name of The Ant & The Grasshopper, the story seems to be it’s own film in terms of being more it’s own thing. The acting is also top notch. I was surprised by some of the people that were cast for these characters. In addition to Dave Foley as the main character, you have some other voice actors, and actresses, that I was surprised to find in this film. For instance, who would have guessed that Hayden Panetierre, who was also in Disney films like Dinosaur, and Remember The Titans, was in this film, voicing Princess Atta’s younger sister, Dot? I was also surprised to find that Denis Leary was in this film as the ladybug, Francis. There’s also Kevin Spacey, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, David Hyde Pierce, Madeline Kahn, John Ratzenberger, and evening Brad Garrett, who’s seemed to play some interesting roles over the years in both Disney, and non-Disney films. Also, unlike the DreamWorks film, Antz (which was released almost a couple months before A Bug’s Life), A Bug’s Life doesn’t have cuss words, and doesn’t seem to drag the story much, if at all. Sure, it may feel slow at times, but only because it’s supposed to. It’s like this. If some of us needed to slow down to either help someone, hear an important speech from an import person, or something like that, then so be it! All to say, A Bug’s Life seems to have that kind of feeling. When the film needs to stop to take a breath in order to develop it’s story, characters, and things like that, it does so to near perfection. Speaking of the characters, they all stand out so well, particularly the ones that this film needs to shine the light on. First off, how many of us couldn’t relate to characters like Flik, or maybe even Princess Atta from time to time? As for the rest of the cast, they all stand out so well. For a movie’s that’s around an hour, and a half long, that says a lot, especially with this movie that has quite a few side characters. Oh, and that reminds me, the side characters really stand out, and are really likable. In fact, if you like Snow White & The Seven Dwarfs, or even some of the side characters from Atlantis: The Lost Empire, you’ll most definitely find these side characters memorable too. Next, there’s the jokes! Now yes, a lot of these jokes can be more for the adults than for kids. However, kids are bound to love the jokes, and belly laugh at certain ones too. Still, one can easily be amazed by how adults will love the jokes, and laugh really, really hard at them too. Not to mention that the jokes may be more appropriate than say some of the jokes in DreamWork’s Antz. Of course, I still have yet to rewatch Antz to make a better judgment on that. I guess we’ll see. The music by Randy Newman is also fantastic. Now, for those of us who are hardcore Disney, and/or animation fans, some of us may recall that Disney/Pixar used Randy Newman rather frequently until 2003’s Finding Nemo, when the company would still use him, but also start using other composers as well. But I digress. Newman’s song, “The Time Of Your Life,” is very catchy as well. In addition to this, the movie does great tackling the idea that new ideas may not always be bad ideas, especially when those ideas may be in the best interest of others around us. Also, there’s the whole thing about how people must be willing to stand up to tyranny when necessary. Yes, the characters in this movie are bug’s and not people, but you hopefully still get my point. Lastly, the animation seemed to progress little by little with films like this one, and others that would follow A Bug’s Life, and Toy Story.

Well everyone, that concludes my review for A Bug’s Life. Looking back, do I think that this film should have had a sequel, like a lot of other Disney/Pixar films have gotten over the years? part of me actually wished that had been the case years ago. In fact, supposedly there was supposed to be a sequel to this movie that was scrapped. Who knows? Maybe there will be a sequel around four to five decades from when the original A Bug’s Life was released. You know, like how Mary Poppins got an unexpected sequel over fifty years after it’s release with Mary Poppins Returns. I’ll just say this, though. If a sequel to A Bug’s Life is made in the end, be sure to wait until you have a really good follow-up. However, if this remains a stand alone film for good, then so be it! With that said, A Bug’s Life is creative, charming, and knows how to have the right type of comedy. If you haven’t seen this film, definitely make it a point to. Also, know that if you consider yourself a Disney/Pixar fan, you will truly feel that way even more after you watch this film. So there you have it!

Final Grade: A

Good afternoon everyone, and welcome back to this blog once again, consisting of reviewing mostly movies, as well as some other material that’s media related once in a while. Today, we are going to be reviewing a Christmas-themed film that I had not originally planned to review. In fact, I had actually planned to review the more popular Home Alone, and it’s sequel, in celebration of at least the former film’s 30th anniversary. Who knows? If not this year, then maybe I could still review those this year, or just save them for next year, or the year after. That shall be played by ear. Anyway, instead of those, I decided for us to dive into a film that not nearly as many people have seemed to talk about all that much. Not to mention that, much like some other films that I reviewed over this year, also was released in 1998, just a few weeks before that year came to a close. With that said, let’s talk about the movie that was released on Friday, December 11th, 1998, the one, and only Jack Frost.

Plot: Set in Medford, Colorado, a young hockey player named Charlie Frost (Joseph Cross) decides to not play hockey anymore, as well as begins to isolate himself from his friends when his father, Jack Frost (Michael Keaton), passes away from an unexpected car crash. But one night, just a year later, Charlie builds a snowman, and puts his dad’s old hat on the new snowman. Following that, Charlie plays his father’s old harmonica, unintentionally making his father come back to life in the snowman that he just built. As Charlie, and his father, Jack, begin to bond again, can Jack convince Charlie to play hockey again, and get on with his life before he returns to the afterlife?

Surprisingly, I didn’t see this film right away when it came out in December 1998. In fact, what happened was that Debbie, my aunt, and I were thinking of a movie to see that was playing at one of the dollar theaters around the Denver area. Long story short, we decided on seeing Jack Frost, when it was still playing at the dollar theater back around spring of 1999. If I recall, even if we liked it to one degree, or another, we agreed that the concept of someone coming temporarily back to life as a snowman might have been a little weird. For me, I was still fine with the film, as my family still rented it on video, and watched it a couple times then.

After rewatching this film again after so many years, is it even remotely as good as I thought? Well, let me put it to you guys this way. Sure, a man coming back to life as a snowman wouldn’t happen in real life. Then again, neither would a man going down a chimney, into an area that would turn into a fireplace (The Santa Clause), or a human being raised by elves, or even talking to CGI characters that live in the North Pole (Elf). With that said, if there are in fact those people who saw this film, and didn’t like it simply because of a human coming back to life as a snowman wouldn’t one might as well not like The Santa Clause, or Elf, or Christmas films like those for the fantasy elements in those movies? Well, that’s just something to think about, that’s all.

Anyway, there are a few area where 109&’s Jack Frost could have likely improved. First off, there were one, or two scenes that may have come close to being a little too mature for kids. Thankfully, the camera did pan away before those one, or two scenes came close to being cringeworthy. Still, it wouldn’t be surprising if kids were to ask their parents about those scenes, and parents basically told their kids to ask them again when they’re older. In addition to this, there were some characters that seemed not have much personality in this film, and seemed to be more one-note, and were in the film just for the sake of being in the film. Truthfully, for those of you who saw a movie like the 2001 Disney film, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and thought some of the characters there were one-note, and jaded, you may like the characters in there better than at least the few characters in Jack Frost that seemed rather under developed. Finally, there were also one, or two characters, whose development over the course of this movie, seemed a little too rushed, and could have been handled a little better. Okay, the time constraints with family films like this are understandable. Still, is it too much to ask for maybe an additional 10-15 minutes for some of the character growth to be a little better?

Now, with these few flaws, is this film bad? Definitely not! As a matter of fact, Jack Frost seems to be one of those films that, like Disney films like Treasure Planet, and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, is good, but underrated when it comes to the Christmas movie world. Sure, in this case, this movie’s good elements seem to thrive a little more from some of the lessons that this film seems to provide. But more on that fairly soon. Besides a a couple characters not being developed 100%, most of the other characters, whether it be Charlie, his parents, and most of the other characters, are very likable. Not only are they really likable, but they’re also realistic, and you can sympathize with them. Overall, the movie also does an excellent job of showing that when people go through difficult times in their lives, have this tendency of turning into something that they’re not. Okay, maybe not everyone does that, but it certainly seems like many people do. That said, this film does an excellent job of portraying that. Next, Trevor Rabin does a really good job with his musical score. This especially seems true when making really good music around the middle, and towards the end of the film. Additionally, the movie, Jack Frost, does a really good job of balancing out the comedy with the more tragic moments that occur in this film. It’s like with the 1999 Disney film, Tarzan. Now, for those of us who saw that Disney movie, many of us can agree that even if that film was very sad at some points, it also did an equally good job of inserting comedic moments that worked cleverly, as opposed to being forced, yes? Well, all to say, the same can be said with this 1998 Warner Bros. film, Jack Frost. Yes, the more funny scenes may be in the beginning of the film, but there are also some funny, and light-hearted times around the middle, and towards the end as well. Also, how could you not like the scenery of Medford, Colorado in this film? Quite honestly, I had forgotten that this movie took place in any part of Colorado, period. Maybe I’m sounding biased for living in Colorado, but still. Anyway, as mentioned before, there are some valuable lessons to take away from watching this film. First off, there’s the lesson about how we can’t let hardships in our lives change who God created us to be. Okay, this may not necessarily be a Christian film, but a lesson like that still applies. Next, there’s the lesson about how we need to learn to balance family life, and the life involving having to work. Yes, we do need to work, and learn to provide for ourselves, as well as others. However, the movie does an excellent job of showing how we need to make the people in our lives a priority more so, you know? Finally, there is the lesson of how long we should grieve for certain people that we have lost in our lives. Yes, of course when we lose say a parent, or a friend of ours, or any relative, we do need to take time to grieve for them? That said, the question that we should ask ourselves is how long we grieve for those people that we lost before moving on with our lives. Yeah, definitely a good question to ask ourselves, that’s for sure. Oh, and there’s one more thing worth mentioning. Scenes like the ending, and a few others can be really, really heart felt, and possibly make your heart, and emotions melt like snow (pun intended).

And that’s my review for the 1998 Warner Bros. movie, Jack Frost. After watching this film again, one should say that you might not like it quite as much as say other Christmas movies like A Christmas Story, Home Alone, Elf, or movies like those. At the same time, however, Jack Frost didn’t deserve to only be given 19% on Rotten Tomatoes by professional critics. COME ON! A movie like the musical Cats (which came out last year) deserved a 19% more so than this Jack Frost film. Okay, Cats was an average film at best, but still. Anyway, Jack Frost seems to be one of those underappreciated movies that most definitely deserves more recognition. True, this film may not quite be in the A range, but it comes close. Despite having a couple flaws, more people should see Jack Frost. I would say make it a point to see this film when you can. Sure, there are some elements that are fantasy, and not realistic. However, there are some valuable things to think about after seeing this film. Well, watch Jack Frost for yourselves, and see what you think!

Final Grade: B+

Hi everyone! First off, I want to say that I hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving last weekend. Second, for those of you who had been following my blog as of earlier this year, you know how one of my reviews was for a non-Disney film by the name of The Swan Princess, which was released back in 1994? Well, tonight, we review yet another one of the “Disney knock-offs” (again, a group of non-Disney films that were released back in the 1990s, when the Disney Renaissance occurred). This time around, we are going to talk about one that, unlike The Swan Princess, did not become popular enough to spawn a franchise of sequels, and ended up just being a standalone film as a result. Also, on a side note, this film, along with Paulie, and The Horse Whisperer (all three of of which came out back in 1998) were some my most anticipated films to either watch for the first time, or rewatch for the first time in a long while. Released by Warner Bros. back in 1998, the movie is Quest For Camelot. Now, before we talk about the plot, and any positives, or negatives about Quest For Camelot, I have a mini story to tell in regards to this film. For those of you who are friends with me on Facebook, you may recall that I posted a picture of my VHS copy of the movie, and wished Quest For Camelot, along with Touchstone Pictures The Horse Whisperer, a happy 22nd anniversary, yes? That is especially because of the fact that a newer Warner Bros. animated film by the name of Scoob had come out on the same day that both films would turn twenty-two years old, May 15th. Well, because of this, I had originally planned to especially see Quest For Camelot again sometime between May, and July. However, long story short, I got caught up in in watching all of the James Bond movies due to the newest film being announced to come out soon (now set for April of next year). Along the way, however, I came up with an idea. Since both Sean Connery, and Pierce Brosnan played James Bond at different points in the film series, as well as play the role of King Arthur in First Knight, and Quest For Camelot respectively, why not make First Knight my 400th review, rewatch, and review Quest For Camelot shortly after that, as well as try to finally see, and review The Horse Whisperer shortly before then as well? Well, fast forward to towards the end of this year, and here we are with me finally seeing The Horse Whisperer, as well rewatching First Knight, and Quest For Camelot before 2020 officially comes to a close. Anyway, let’s move on!

Plot: A young female teenager named Kayley (Jessalyn Gilsig for speaking, and Andrea Corr for singing) dreams of becoming a Knight after seeing that her late father, Sir Lionel (Gabriel Byrne) was one, as well as heard of the good ideals that Camelot, and it’s citizens stand for. She may yet have her chance when the legendary sword, Excalibur gets stolen, is lost in a place called the Forbidden Forest along the way, as well as the fact that Ruber (Gary Oldman), a former Knight of Camelot, who was exiled after attempting to assassinate Camelot’s King Arthur (Pierce Brosnan speaking, Steve Perry singing) ten years before, returns from banishment with an army, hell-bent on claiming Excalibur for themselves, overthrowing Arthur, and claiming the kingdom of Camelot for themselves. With the help of new friends, such as a blind squire named Garrett (Cary Elwes speaking, Bryan White singing), a silver-winged falcon named Ayden (Frank Welker), and a two-headed dragon named Devon and Cornwall (Eric Idle, and Don Rickles play both the speaking and vocal roles for this comedic duo), can they, together, overcome all odds to save Excalibur, and save Camelot before Ruber, and his new army carry out their diabolical scheme?

Now, before we get into the meat of this review, I have an additional story to tell. I can surprisingly still vividly recall the very first time that I saw the teaser trailer for Quest For Camelot. What happened was my Mom, and I at least saw The Little Mermaid back when that was re-released in theaters back in November 1997 (six months before Quest For Camelot would be released in May of the following year). Anyway, when we saw that movie, a couple of the trailers that we saw were for A Bug’s Life (which was also a first time that we saw that trailer), Quest For Camelot, and a couple other movies. I can also recall a lot of things from the Quest For Camelot trailer, such as the drums beating during the intro of the song, “United We Stand,” a Griffin flying away from Camelot with Excalibur, with fiery arrows on his tail, as well as bits of the film’s other songs playing, like “On My Father’s Wings,” “If I Didn’t Have You,” Looking Through Your Eyes,” & “I Stand Alone.” After first seeing the trailer, I have to confess that, unlike a lot of people, strangely enough, I was very hyped for this film. I say unlike a lot of people, since the film seemed to only gross a domestic gross of $22-23 million in the US, and Canada, and a total of around $38-39 million worldwide, which seems to prove that not many other people were stoked about this movie. Anyway, my family, and I finally saw it when it came out in May 1998. I have to admit that after first seeing it in theaters, and then several times on video months later, I really loved this film. Heck, I also recall rewatching this film again back in the spring of 2004, if I recall correctly, during my last year of homeschooling, when my Mom, and I read about Stonehenge (which was the place where the Sword Excalibur was pulled from IN THE MOVIE), and learning about cities in England called Devon and Cornwall. It made me want to rewatch Quest For Camelot again.

Now, I have finally rewatched Quest For Camelot again as of recently. I’ll be honest, I am still surprised with the mostly positive outcome. Why I say mostly positive outcome, you may ask? Well, because Quest For Camelot does seem to fall short in a couple areas. First off, while most of the acting is good, the one actor who could have improved was Gary Oldman, who played Ruber. Okay, allow me to clarify! He wasn’t exactly a bad actor, but he could have most definitely improved. I mean when you compare Oldman to say Ben Cross, who played Malagant in 1995’s First Knight, there’s no doubt that Gary Oldman could have maybe taken some acting lessons from him. Seeing as not a lot of people seemed to like Gary Oldman’s acting for this film, or the live-action Lost In Space (which was released in the same year as this one), at least his acting most definitely improved over the years, as evidenced when he would return to voice a peacock villain named Lord Shen in 2011’s Kung Fu Panda 2. Not to mention that Ruber’s sidekick Griffin, who could be very much like say Maleficent’s raven in Disney’s Sleeping Beauty, but much more menacing, and multi-dimensional, could possibly serve as a better villain, than Ruber himself. Yeah, when people may find themselves liking the villain sidekicks more than the villain him/herself, that might be a bit of a problem, yes? Anyhow, the other flaw was that some of the CGI could have blended better with the animation of this film. This especially is true when you compare the CGI of Ruber’s mechanical army to say the ogre that was made of rock, and stone in this film. Just comes to show that some of the animation in this movie might have been a little ahead of it’s time.

Other than those aspects, Warner Bros. Quest For Camelot is most definitely better than many people seem to give it credit for. In fact, when compared to most of the other non-Disney cartoons that came out at least in the early 1990s, like Rock-A-Doodle, Pebble & The Penguin, or even Swan Princess, all of which were lucky enough to make around $5-10 million, if not lower, Quest For Camelot seems to miraculously stand out on it’s own. Sure, it’s not quite Prince Of Egypt, Anastasia, or Iron Giant good, per se, but still. Anyway, one of the benefits of Quest For Camelot is that even if Quest For Camelot does seem to share similarities to 1995’s First Knight, such as both movies having a villain that used to be a Knight in Camelot, and a male protagonist that had a tragic story, for instance, there are some areas where this film can go newer. For instance, having a female dream of being a Knight, that may have been inaccurate to what life was actually like in England during the Middle Ages. Still, it does sound like an interesting new concept, wouldn’t you say? Anyway, the animation is also very good too. Granted, it may not be Disney, or even Dreamworks quality great, but even so. Now, about the comedic relief characters like Devon & Cornwall. Are they as memorable as say certain side characters from certain well-known Disney films? Not quite! Still, this movie gives them some very hilarious lines of their own. Also, there’s this comedic villain sidekick named Bladebeak, who’s played by Jaleel White. If you liked say Kronk from The Emperor’s New Groove, chances are you’ll also come to love, and adore Bladebeak as well. He has some very entertaining moments too. This movie, as a whole, is also very funny at unexpected moments. Overall, the side characters, especially Devon and Cornwall, should be given more credit than they’ve seemed to have gotten over the past twenty plus years. Oh, and let’s take a moment to talk about some of the non-talking animals. Even if some of them don’t speak, they do an excellent job of expressing emotion, while also acting realistic in an animated film like this one as well. Now, about the characters overall, they are all very well-developed too. Our main characters, Kayley, and Garrett especially grow, and mature as characters as this story progresses. Not only that, but people may find Garrett’s blindness to be a very interesting element for this film. Same may go for Kayley’s determination to not give up on her dreams as well. People may also like the relationship with Kayley, and Garrett. It works unbelievably. Oh, and as you watch this film, and see what kinds of things that Garrett is able to do with his blindness, that can spark some intriguing discussions about what blind people can surprisingly do despite their blindness. As for the songs, like the ones that I mentioned earlier, a good majority of them, even if they may not be remembered by many, most of them all stand out on their own too, like “On My Father’s Wings,” “The Prayer,” and songs like those. The only one that was just okay was the villain song, “Ruber.” Finally, the movie teaches a couple very good lessons. First off, there’s the lesson about how people with disabilities should not let their setbacks keep them from achieving their goals in the end. The other lesson is that even if certain leaders, or places that are set on good ideals may be destroyed, those ideals are most likely to live on. Oh, and it’s great to have the idea of the Sword Excalibur representing all that is good, and right in the world.

And that’s my review for 1998’s Quest For Camelot. Sure, it may not be up there with movies like First Knight, or excellent non-Disney animated films like Anastasia, The Prince Of Egypt, or The Iron Giant. Still, because of this movie getting overshadowed by movies such as The Horse Whisperer, and Mulan later on, Quest seemed to unfavorably be compared to movies like those. Not to mention that the dislikes seemed to outweigh the likes for this film from the general public. It’s sad that this movie doesn’t seem to be talked about all that much because of that. Overall, if you want to watch an animated film that is most likely superior to non-Disney films from the 1990’s like Rock-A-Doodle, or The Swan Princess, or even mediocre Disney movies from the 2000s, like Home On The Range, Chicken Little, or possibly even Brother Bear (although that one has quite a few good things in it too), then that’s all the more reason to check our Quest For Camelot. Also, even if you saw this film as a kid, and didn’t like it, I’d say that this is one of those times that you should give it another chance as an adult. You may yet find yourself appreciating it more as an adult than you might have as a kid. Well, definitely try to see Quest For Camelot either for the first time ever, or the first time in a long while. It’s most certainly worth seeing.

Final Grade: A-

Ladies and gents, friends, and family, tonight, we leave the 300s, and now enter into the 400s. As I’m sure some of you may know, when I’ve resides milestones like 200, 300, 350, or a movie review like those, I’ve tried to watch, or rewatch a film that is important either for me personally, or important in the film industry. Tonight’s review is a more personal one for me, as this specific film was the very first PG-13 rated film that I saw in theaters, and possibly even first PG-13 film period. Surprisingly, I was only seven years old when it came out, and I saw it. Yeah, how often have you heard of kids seeing more adult films at such a young age? Rhetorical, I suppose. Anyway, tonight, let’s talk about what was most likely my very first introduction to PG-13 rated movies, as well as me hearing about actors like Sean Connery, Ben Cross, and Richard Gere, and actress Julia Ormond for probably the very first time ever. The one, and only First Knight, from 1995!

Plot: After winning many battles over the years, and now feeling at peace, King Arthur (Sean Connery) of Camelot desires to take a Queen to rule with him. So he chooses Lady Guinevere (Julia Ormond) as his wife. But peace is not to last long, as the villainous Prince Malagant (Ben Cross), along with a group of former knights, who betrayed King Arthur a while back, plot a coup against Arthur, and his kingdom in an attempt to gain Camelot for themselves. With the help of his new Queen, his army of loyal knights, as well as a newer knight named Sir Lancelot (Richard Gere), will Arthur be able to stand up against Malagant, and his men, and protect the ideals of Camelot?

Now, as a kid, and teenager, I always enjoyed this film. I will also say that Sean Connery became one of my favorite actors after seeing this movie. Also, I didn’t mind rewatching this film quite a few times even on video when I was a kid. After watching this film for the very first time in a long while, does this film hold up even today? Amazingly, it actually does! In fact, I’d say even more so after rewatching it again this last weekend. First of all, if you’re interested in learning about what life was like in medieval times, First Knight could bring in a little education about that. For one, I was surprised to find that there were crosses embroidered into the front of castles, and maybe even other sections of castles that were built back in medieval days. Not only that, but it’s also interesting how say, if you’re in a sword fight that you might want to win, you want to think of your opponent’s weak spots in order to defeat that person. Sort of sounds similar to say trying to win a game of chess, or something like that, does it not? There are also some aspects of First Knight that could apply to modern day times as well. For example, there’s the whole deal about deciding to marry someone for the wrong reasons. As some of us may know, some people may decide to get married to someone either for political reasons, the marriage was arranged, a person may be trying to prove that he/she can grow up, or some reason like those, as opposed to getting married because the man loves the woman, or the woman truly loves the man. Which begs the question, is it safe to say that these may be some of the reasons that not nearly as many marriages, especially in America, are successful in the long run as people would like them to be? Well, it’s definitely a question to think about, that’s for certain! One other thing that should be worth noting in regards to that is how people should learn to make decisions based on what may truly be the right decision, as opposed to making choices just because others are pressuring you to make them, or something like that. Okay, that’s not to say that people shouldn’t take advice from others. Of course they should. So where does one draw that line in regards to that whole deal, one may be wondering? Yeah, that’s definitely something to think about, for sure! Anyway, the movie also has this great symbolism of good against evil as well. I mean here you have King Arthur, who helped begin the good ideals of Camelot that included the good qualities of love, mercy, grace, justice, serving the needs of others, and things like those. Then you have villains like Malagant who, in time, decided to betray those ideals, as well as some of the light choosing to follow his lead, and basically say that self is more important than others around you. Not to mention that it’s an excellent parallel to how the devil, and the fallen angels (now called demons) decided to betray God, and the angles in Heaven back in the beginning of time. Oh, and how about King Arthur, and the good knights wearing blue, and silver armor, while Malagant, and his men wear black, and darker armor to represent the their dark side!?! Hence, the whole deal about good versus evil! In addition to all of this, it is super amazing how much of God, and the things of God are incorporated into this film. I’m not sure how much of that was the case with movies that were released back in the 1990s, or even shortly before, or after. However, one thing’s for sure! We need to go back to having movies like this one, and others like it again. Jerry Goldsmith also provides the score for this film. Not only does his music help provide the emotions during key moments of this film, but he has possibly one of the best musical compositions when it comes especially to the climax of this film. An additional element that makes First Knight really great is that this movie has a magnificent amount of character development. Not only is this true for the main villain, Malagant, but also for the main good characters, such as King Arthur, Guinevere, and Sir Lancelot. Not only are they developed to the best of their respective abilities, but some of their actions show that they are NOT “perfect” characters, but have flaws, and are human just as much as we the people in real life are. However, it comes to show that even if the good guys make mistakes, at least they know to ultimately do what’s right in the end. Oh, and speaking of which, that’s one final great thing to talk about in regards to First Knight. Another other outstanding element about the film is how even when it may not have felt easy to do so, any of the good characters are willing to humble themselves, and do what’s right in the end. Wow, and isn’t it interesting how even Disney would come out a year later with their version of a classic story in 1996, by the name of The Hunchback Of Notre Dame, in which certain protagonists would end up being put in those kinds of positions, where they would do what’s right no matter how easy, or difficult that may have been. Albeit for different reasons than for some of the cases with First Knight, but even so! Not to mention that that movie was also set in Medieval times as well! So how about that! A second to last thing to consider, especially at a specific scene in this film, is that even if we might feel like there isn’t a reason to live anymore, God has a reason for us to live longer than we might anticipate, and for a good reason. Sure, we might not see the bigger picture of why that may be at first. Still, even if it takes a long while for us to know why that may be, then we can likely discover the reason(s) in the end. Finally, First Knight has what may be some of the most memorable lines in this film. One of the best lines in this film is when a character says that, and I most likely quote, “Even if the walls of Camelot were to burn down, Camelot, and it’s ideals, will still live in us.” Now, I’m sure that the person who said that said it not just because of the fact that Camelot, even in this film, stood for good ideals, but also because the character in this film was undoubtedly a Christ follower in this film as well. Plus, it’s a great comparison to how even if churches in America, or even anywhere in the world, were closed down, those of us who choose to have faith in Jesus Christ can, and must continue to hold onto our faith in Him.

And that’s my review for the 1995 Columbia Pictures film, First Knight. Wow, after seeing this film for the first time in what may have most likely been years, I am surprised by how much more I enjoyed it this time around. Looking back, would I say that I enjoyed First Knight even as a kid? Well, even if I did like it back then, I would say that there were more aspects about the film that I came to enjoy about it’s during this rewatch. The characters stand out extremely well, there’s a superb amount of symbolism in this film, and there are plenty of aspects of this movie to think about from a Christian perspective. Yes, Christians will probably end up enjoying First Knight more so than non-Christians. Still, hopefully non-Christians will come to like this film, and maybe see God through not only coming across His Word, and reading it, but also through this film, and movies like it. Also, if you want to see a film with some top notch acting, then that’s another reason to see this film. If you haven’t seen First Knight yet, I would highly recommend that you do so ASAP. It is one of those movies, like say Prince Of Egypt, or the Lord Of The Rings trilogy, or movies like those, that truly stands out from many of your other typical movies. So thanks for checking out this film review, and see you in the next one, and others to come!

Final Grade: A+

P.S. Happy 25th anniversary to Columbia Pictures’ First Knight!