Hercules (1997) - 8 stars out of 10

Hercules (1997) - 8 stars out of 10

“Hercules” has the catchy music, epic story, and flawless animation that we have come to expect from the Disney Renaissance.  While all of these attributes are similar to the other Renaissance films, “Hercules” remains unique with its gospel music style and sinister-yet-comical villain.  You wouldn't think that Greek mythology and southern gospel music would be a good match, but it is the perfect medium for the narration of this film.  The animation of the Muses as artwork on Greek vases and statues that come to life allows them to interact with the actions onscreen while remaining unseen by the characters.  The music isn't as memorable as "The Lion King" but it has a few great songs that are underrated in the scheme of Disney songs (particularly "Go the Distance" and the double time in "Zero to Hero").  My favorite song is “(I Won’t Say) I’m In Love” with its 1960's female doowop style and excellent interpretation by Susan Egan.  It is a stylistic departure from the gospel pieces but it works because of the similar female harmonies.  The film has the great balance of storytelling and comedy that we expect from the Disney Renaissance.  It is full of great ancient puns ("Somebody call IX-I-I!") and the symbolic use of color for visual storytelling.  It is easy to see the contrast between characters as well as the transformation of Hercules through the glow of the gods, average color of the mortals, and the faded color of the dead.  One of the most impressive visual aspects of the film is the Hydra sequence.  It is a revolutionary example of early CGI, requiring 13 animators to work for nearly a year-and-a-half to create this vivid 4-minute battle.  I still remember the surprise and fear that I felt as a preteen when I first saw the boundary-pushing graphic content of Hercules repeatedly chopping off the Hydra heads.  The film goes to a very dark place with this story of betrayal and death; still, James Woods’ lighthearted portrayal of Hades helps the film to avoid the depressing tone of “Hunchback.”  Hades is a great comedic villain, complete with one-liners and sarcastic glances at the camera.  The animation of this character perfectly matches James Woods' quirky interpretation.  You would expect the star of the film to be the titular Hercules but I find him to be rather unmemorable in comparison with the spotlight-stealing Hades.  Woods creates a Jekyl and Hyde effect that makes us want to be his friend until he suddenly becomes scary.  Even then, he is the comic relief instead of the serious and scary (and seriously scary) villains of “Sleeping Beauty” and “Hunchback.”  Other memorable performances include Danny DeVito as Phil, Rip Torn as Zeus, and Jim Cummins in a brief cameo as Nessus.  I kind of wanted him to reappear later in the story, but the cameo-like nature of his scene makes it a great Disney Easter Egg.  While “Hercules” is often forgotten in the conversation about films like “Aladdin” and “The Lion King,” it is worth revisiting as long as you don’t mind a very loose interpretation of Greek mythology, 

[Pictured: The Hydra sequence is one of the best battle sequences in any Disney movie]

Steamboat Willie (1928) - 8 stars out of 10

Steamboat Willie (1928) - 8 stars out of 10

“I only hope that we don't lose sight of one thing - that it was all started by a mouse.”  These humble words from Walt Disney have grown into an anthem for anybody who is trying to turn their dream into a reality.  Disney's quote continues to resonate today because he risked everything on the early cartoons that helped to form the vision for his entertainment empire.  "Steamboat Willie" is an incredible achievement for its time.  It was the first successful fully synchronized sound cartoon and, while it is tough to grasp the quality of older cartoons when you look at modern animation, this seemingly simplistic cartoon was revolutionary.  Walt provided all of the voices for the characters and worked through a process of trial and error to properly sync the sound.  Most people believe this to be the first film to feature Mickey Mouse, though that distinction actually belongs to “Plane Crazy” which was created a year earlier.  When this silent film failed to impress test audiences, Walt decided to complete “Steamboat Willie” (which used synchronized sound) and release it first to make Mickey into a star.  All of this happened after Charles Mintz took the rights to Oswald the Lucky Rabbit.  The cartoon is a series of simple situations and musical moments that occur as Mickey sails down a river.  The story is punctuated by clever sightgags like using a guitar-eating goat as a phonograph and Pete spitting chewing tobacco to ring a bell.  In addition to being Mickey’s debut, this film was also the first appearance of Minnie Mouse and is a great example of animation by Disney legend Ub Iwerks.  In the grand scheme of things, we would all be more entertained by modern Mickey cartoons; however, "Steamboat Willie" is an important chapter in the story of Disney animation and something that should always be treasured by fans of Disney's feature-length animated output.

Steamboat Willie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBgghnQF6E4

[Pictured: Minnie Mouse decides to use a goat as a phonograph after he eats her guitar and she sees music notes falling out of his mouth.  How can Mickey help but smile along?  These are the moments that make us love Walt Disney's films.]

Girl on a Bicycle - 5 stars out of 10

Girl on a Bicycle - 5 stars out of 10

"Girl on a Bicycle" is a cute international romantic comedy that strikes a good balance between situational comedy and cheesy romantic moments.  The story is formulaic but I was legitimately interested to see how the it would resolve itself.  Even with a musical score that you might expect from a Lifetime Original Movie, the film's quality supersedes that of a typical low-budget indie film.  I wouldn't hand out any Oscars to these leads, but I greatly enjoyed the performances of Nora Tschirner, Vincenzo Amato, and Louise Monot.  They formed impressive chemistry with one another and individually brought a lot of gumption to their characters.  Also, if you enjoy accents, then this is the movie for you!  The setting captures the essence of Paris and the decision to have a French, German, and Italian lead speaking in their native tongue and accent makes the film unique.  There are some eye-rolling moments and much of the story is unrealistic; still, it is all worth it for that scene on the airplane where Tschirner steals out hearts.  "Girl on a Bicycle" isn't my favorite chick flick (in fact, it probably belongs in the "guilty pleasure" genre) but it provides a nice break from the next flavor-of-the-month Nicholas Sparks adaptation.

[Pictured: The movie is cheesy but you can't help but love its characters]

The Jungle Book (2016) - 10 stars out of 10

The Jungle Book (2016) - 10 stars out of 10

Disney’s most recent live-action remake of a beloved animated features is incredible.  I was skeptical when I first heard of another attempt to bring “The Jungle Book” to a live setting; after all, the 1994 version was very unmemorable with its animals that do not speak, the attempt to make it appear that Mowgli interacted with the animals without them ever actually being on screen at the same time, and the complete ignorance of Kipling’s original story.  It was one thing to flesh out the “Cinderella” story with a deeper backstory and a human cast, but the complexity of how to portray the animals made this film seem like another idea.  Luckily, this film is a perfect blend of live action, CGI, and motion capture.  There are few moments in the film where you remember that none of the animals actually exist.  A Best Visual Effects Oscar nomination seems inevitable.  From the terror of Shere Kahn to the cuteness of Grey Brother, these animals are capable of a wide array of emotions.  The story is darker and more complex than the 1967 animated film but the realism is tempered with comic relief and a series of morals.  Interestingly, the story reflects a shift in perspective toward nature over the past 100 years.  Rather than being something to be overcome, nature is now something to be protected.  The main flaw of the film is that it is too long and complex for younger kids.  Even though the content is entirely family friendly, I would not recommend this for children under the age of 8.  Still, I find it to be an awesome film for adults and a great introduction to dramatic film for kids.  When you initially look at the cast list, you have to wonder if all of the star power will be a distraction from the visual representations of each voice. With the exception of Christopher Walken (whose King Louie is purposely designed to look like and remind us of him, perhaps as a nod to the original Louie being reminiscent of Louis Prima), the talented voice actors enhance each character through the emotions deeply rooted in their voices.  Bill Murray as Baloo, Ben Kingsley as Bagheera, Idris Elba as Shere Khan, Lupita Nyong’o as Raksha, Giancarlo Esposito as Akela, and Scarlett Johansson with an inspired female interpretation of Kaa - could it possibly get any better than that?  Most importantly, Neel Sethi is perfectly cast as Mowgli.  He embodies both the physical characteristics that we associate with the animated version of Mowgli as well as the heart, curiosity, and gumption requires by the character.  It is impossible to tell which stunts are real and which ones are animated, but the final product is stunning.  His interactions with the characters are seamless and it is easy to see that he beat out thousands of other children for this role.  I believe that people would have left the theater disappointed without the inclusion of "The Bare Necessities" and "I Wan'na Be Like You," but the musical numbers felt a bit out of place.  I understand that director Jon Favreau did not want to turn this film into a musical.  However, I believe that a film requires three songs in order for musical numbers to feel like they belong in a film and any less takes away their flow within the story.  The songs created great moments of nostalgia but perhaps they should have included some of Scarlett Johansson's version of "Trust in Me" that occurred during the closing credits.  I love that they including the musical theme from the animated film at the beginning and end of this remake as it sets the tone of Disney Magic for the entire film.  The emotive musical score by John Debney enhances several key moments in the film that brought me to tears.  This latest iteration of “The Jungle Book” should be the final one because it will be nearly impossible to improve upon the realism that this film has brought to Kipling’s powerful tale of family and friendship.

[Pictured: The realism of this film makes it a masterpiece]

Clear and Present Danger - 5 stars out of 10

Clear and Present Danger - 5 stars out of 10

“Clear and Present Danger” feels very vanilla to me.  I guess that Tom Clancy stories just aren't my thing.  I have always had an interest in spy movies, particularly the “Mission: Impossible” series, but Clancy’s stories have more emphasis on politics than on the missions and that’s where they lose me.  I love a great political thriller and I love a great spy movie, but the Jack Ryan movies are somewhere in the middle.  They put me to sleep (particularly "The Hunt for Red October") and I find my attention waning, regardless of how interesting the plot may be.  This is no reflection of the impeccable acting of Harrison Ford, Willem Dafoe, Henry Czerny (Kittridge from "M:I"), and James Earl Jones as they properly portray every emotion of their characters.  The fault is in the story that focuses around the Colombian drug cartel, which is such an overused stereotype, and the long transitions between action scenes that continually slow the pace.  I do have to compliment the script on subtly painting the president as a sleazebag.  Rather than portraying him as a bad guy from the start, the story makes us question whether we agree with him or hate his actions for the majority of the film.  I wouldn’t say that “Clear and Present Danger” is a bad film.  It doesn’t do much for me but fans of political stories will probably enjoy it.

[Pictured: It may be worth watching just for the "You're going down with me" scene]

Inglourious Basterds (2009) - 8 stars out of 10

Inglourious Basterds (2009) - 8 stars out of 10

“Inglourious Basterds” is exactly what you would expect from a Quentin Tarantino war film.  It is a genre-bending, historically inaccurate look at WWII and it is surprisingly lighthearted (at times).  When I first watched this in 2009, I did not understand Tarantino’s films and found the splitting of the story into lengthy chapters (which effectively leaves particular characters out of the film for extended periods of time) to be frustrating.  Now that I have become more familiar with his work, I appreciate the film’s unique style and unconventional dialogue.  The story is fascinating and feels authentic because of the amount of dialogue in German, French, and Italian.  As in "Kill Bill," I appreciate that Tarantino always gives a reason for foreign characters to speak in English and uses a smooth transition to do so.  There was significantly less violence in this movie than other Tarantino films (ironic due to this being a war movie), but as a result the violent scenes have a huge impact.  The thing that makes this film so memorable is its acting.  This was the film that put Christoph Waltz on my radar and he was absolutely deserving of his Best Supporting Actor Oscar.  He always creates the most interesting portrayal of a bad guy, making them a personable character that you would want to hang out with while also exuding a passive-aggressive sinister quality.  Mélanie Laurent is an incredible young actress (only 26 in this film) and steals the spotlight during her interactions with Waltz and Daniel Brühl.  Diane Kruger is amazing as usual even though her screentime is limited and Brad Pitt brings great depth to his character.  The movie does have its disturbing moments that include scalping Nazis, carving swastikas into peoples’ foreheads, bashing in heads with a baseball bat, and the infamous scene where Tarantino legitimately chokes Kruger onscreen to guarantee the scene’s realism; however, it is much easier to avert your eyes from these moments than in the director’s other films.  “Inglourious Basterds” is full of blood, language, and graphic violence.  As long as you are prepared for those things, it tells an excellent story that makes it worth watching.  I believe that it falls short of “Kill Bill,” “Django,” and “Hateful Eight,” but that doesn’t make the film any less enjoyable to watch (if you can use the word "enjoyable" in regards to a film like this).

[Pictured: Christoph Waltz is one of my favorite bad guys ever, and Brad Pitt offsets him by creating a lighthearted mood throughout the film]

Hush (2016) - 8 stars out of 10

Hush (2016) - 8 stars out of 10

“Hush” is an interesting take on the slasher film genre.  Rather than frightening the audience with a series of graphic murders, this film frightens its audience through anticipation and suspense.  This indie-film-meets-classic-horror combination will keep your heart pounding from start to finish.  The entire movie is dark, as any moment that may seem pleasant is overshadowed by the stalker that is moving around behind the deaf main character.  It is simply a never-ending series of suspenseful moments.  While a lot of horror films give you a fear of being shot or a fear of being stabbed, this one creates a fear of being deaf.  The writers create one of the most helpless situations imaginable and exploit it.  The narrative of the story is impressive as it gains our attention and quickly creates connections to a character who cannot speak.  It quickly engages us in a mystery but if you want answers at the end, this is not your movie.  The story’s lack of clarification reminds me of J.J. Abrams’ Mystery Box theory, in which discovering what is inside of “the box” is always less exciting than the mystery of what could be in inside.  It doesn’t matter who the murderer is or why he is there.  What matters is his psychological rejection of morality and the resulting situation.  So much of the film is disturbing because of the murderer’s seemingly random selection of this victim.  Moreover, he inflicts psychological torture on her by frightening her until she can no longer handle being trapped.  There is very little blood for the first hour of the movie.  And then the entire movie busts open and things get completely out of control!  There is no big twist because the story doesn't need one; it is frightening enough in its very concept.  I didn't know if director Mike Flannigan could ever reach the same level of creativity and suspense that he attained with "Oculus," but he has proven himself by generating the same amount of psychological terror, only in a very different way.  Every minute of the film is well-acted with Kate Siegel telling most of her story through facial expressions and body language as well as John Gallagher Jr.’s merciless game of cat and mouse.  In an homage to "Torn Curtain," the film emphasizes the human will to live and the amount of brute human strength necessary to kill someone with your bare hands.  Those are the moments where these actors transcend the screen and become so real that it is uncomfortable to watch (particularly the part with her hand…)  “Hush” succeeds because it goes beyond the blood and makes a statement about the psychology of murderers.  If you want answers, you aren’t going to get them.  But if you want suspense, this film will fulfill your quota for the next two months.

[Pictured: This story comes up with the creepiest ways to exploit the inability to hear]