Peter Pan and Wendy

Director: David Lowery
Starring: Jude Law, Alexander Molony, Ever Anderson, Yara Shahidi, Alyssa Wapanatâhk, Joshua Pickering, Jacobi Jupe, Molly Parker, Alan Tudyk, Jim Gaffigan
Running Time: 109 min.
Rating: PG

★★½ (out of ★★★★) 

With a traffic jam of live-action adaptations based on their classic animated films hitting screens, it was inevitable Disney would need to prioritize. So that Peter and Wendy went straight to streaming speaks volumes about where it ranks on the studio's agenda. Continuously remade, rebooted and sequeled over the decades, there aren't many creative avenues left to explore in J. M. Barrie's source material. If it dropping on Disney Plus wasn't a red flag, then a poorly received trailer did the trick, with many already jumping to criticize the effects and dark cinematography. Fortunately, what this has going for it is director David Lowery, whose Pete's Dragon proved an accomplished filmmaker is capable of sliding their vision into a highly commercialized family product.

Lowery (who co-wrote the script with Toby Halbrooks) isn't as successful this time around, and while it's not the disaster you've heard, the outcome is still uneven. Clocking in at a bearable length, for everything that works, you'd have little trouble finding something else that doesn't. The good news is that after a somewhat clunky start, there is an attempt to add some depth to the Hook character and his connection to Pan. But whether that novel approach does enough to sufficiently distinguish this from previous takes is debatable.

In London, Wendy (Ever Anderson) spends her last night at home playing with younger brothers John (Joshua Pickering) and Michael (Jacobi Jupe) before preparing to leave for boarding school the next day. Dreading her departure and not wanting to grow up, she's visited by Peter Pan (Alexander Molony) and his pint-sized fairy companion Tinker Bell (Yara Shahidi), who invite the three children to fly to Neverland, a magical island where Wendy will seemingly get her wish. 

Upon their arrival, the kids are attacked by a pirate ship commandeered by the evil Captain Hook (Jude Law), who vows revenge on Peter for cutting off his hand. After joining forces with Tiger Lily (Alyssa Wapanatâhk) and the Lost Boys to battle Hook, the complicated relationship between him and Peter is revealed, setting the two sworn enemies on course for another battle in their ongoing feud. As Wendy witnesses this, she slowly comes to the realization that her reluctance to face adulthood could carry unexpectedly negative consequences.

At first, the film does check off the usual boxes those even slightly aware of the story will recognize. To its credit, that's done quickly, but there are points where you wonder how effective an entryway this is for younger viewers getting their first exposure to Peter Pan, assuming that's even the project's goal. You usually don't hire a director like Lowery without plans to put a serious-minded, nostalgic spin on this, as we've hit a turning point where these adaptations aren't geared toward kids, but older audiences who grew up watching the originals. The screenplay does almost seem to be working under the assumption that everyone knows the tale inside and out, at least until it takes a fairly significant detour in fleshing out Hook's psychological motivations.

Wendy's relationship with her brothers and parents (played by Molly Parker and Alan Tudyk) are given no more than a few scenes before the action shifts to Neverland. It's all sort of flat until Jude Law's entertaining Hook arrives on the scene, playing the sleazy captain as if he's auditioning to replace Johnny Depp in the next Pirates of the Caribbean sequel. Things gets progressively better the more Wendy interacts with her new friends and Hook and Pan dredge up their messy past. The latter is a big change, but in the case of a familiar story beaten into the ground, any alteration feels welcome and this one actually plays pretty well. Any change to a beloved text is usually met with immediate backlash, but adding an extra dimension to Hook is hardly a crime when this desperately needs something to set it apart.

There's definitely an effort to be more inclusive, with the Lost Boys adding girls, people of color and a mentally handicapped member. That's fine, but nothing's done to give us greater insight into these supporting players than in previous iterations. A really likable Yara Shahidi makes for an emotive Tinkerbell, endlessly expressive in her facial reactions and body language, while Alyssa Wapanatâhk's Tiger Lily is depicted stronger and more respectively this time around. In addressing valid criticisms an indigenous character was treated insensitively in previous adaptations, this at least bothers to get it right, with the actress making a brief but memorable impression as the brave warrior. As Peter and Wendy, Alexander Molony and Ever Anderson don't have much chemistry together, but still fair well, especially since the film isn't contingent on any of the performances so much as the spectacle of a story that's been reheated countless times now.

Lowery has a good handle on what he wants to convey, and despite some occasionally spotty CGI, the production design and visual aesthetic is impressive, if thankfully not quite as dark as it looked in the trailer. He may have been creatively handcuffed a little more on this one, but it's not a debacle, as his style still finds a way in during some bigger moments. Peter Pan and Wendy tries to put a slightly different spin on the material, only to falter by not adding much to what was already there. It's become an all too familiar complaint for those tired of Disney reimaginings safely recycling beloved catalogue classics with increased frequency, but mixed results.            

Cruella

Director: Craig Gillespie
Starring: Emma Stone, Emma Thompson, Joel Fry, Paul Walter Houser, Tipper Seifert-Cleveland, Emily Beecham, Kirby Howell-Baptiste, Mark Strong, John McCrea, Kayvan Novak, Jamie Demetriou
Running Time: 134 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

It's understandable that a certain amount of cynicism would accompany the release of Disney's Cruella, their latest attempt to repackage another one of their classic animated properties as a live-action adaptation. While they've traveled this road before with 101 Dalmations in 1996 and its sequel four years later, those predated the company's recent realization they could mine their entire catalog for a new generation unbothered by frequent complaints they're shamelessly cashing in on the past at the expense of creativity. Whether it's Cinderella (twice), Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King, or more recently, Mulan, results have been decidely mixed, most succeeding only in promoting a greater appreciation for the originals, which is probably still fine with Disney. 

Part fairy tale, Part supervillain origin story, part The Devil Wears Prada, director Craig Gillespie's take on Disney's most nororious dog hater doesn't deserve mention alongside those aforementioned reboot experiments mainly because there actually seems to be a definitive reason for its existence. It's worthwhile not only for adding something new to the mythos, but having more vision, style and purpose than most of what they've released in recent years. Taking place in kind of this heightened, hyper reality, it looks and feels tonally different from their usual fare, displaying far more ambition than anyone could have reasonably expected when the project was announced.

Comparisons could be made to 2019's Joker, until stopping to realize it still manages to be an entirely satisfying family movie that doesn't look out of place next to Disney's biggest hits. And that's a major accomplishment considering dalmations literally murder a woman in the opening minutes. It's crazy and audacious, but the key is in recalibrating this eventual villain as an anti-hero rising up against a system holding her down. Dana Fox and Tony McNamara's inventively tight script pushes back on the idea that Cruella de Vil is someone to root against or delusional in her beliefs. She's basically right about everything, and watching Emma Stone navigate that while battling an inescapable nastiness bubbling up inside is really something to behold. This, along with an inspired premise and frenetic pacing make its 134 minutes feel more like 30, demonstrating the potential benefits of repurposing classic characters to more strongly resonate with contemporary audiences. 

As a young child, Estella (Tipper Seifert-Cleveland) is a talented artist with an eye for fashion and a mean streak matched only by the white streak covering half her hair. After school fighting prompts mom Catherine (Emily Beecham) to remove her and relocate to London, she stops at a posh upper-class party to ask a mysterious woman for financial help. But when Estella's antics accidentally attract the attention of three ferocious dalmations, her mother is pushed off a balcony to her death. Orphaned and guilt-ridden, we flash forward to the height of the 70's fashion craze in London as a now young adult Estella (Stone) and pick-pocket friends Jasper (Joel Fry) and Horace (Paul Walter Houser) get by with thievery before she lands a janitorial job at the Liberty department store. 

With Estella's dreams of a career in fashion design quickly fading with each toilet she cleans, a chance encounter with legendary, but ice cold haute couture design chief, the Baroness (Emma Thompson) leads to an apprenticeship at her prestigious firm. But as the talented nwecomer rises up the ranks as the Baroness' go-to underling, she makes a shocking discovery about her abusive boss' relationship to her birth mother, leading Estella to plot revenge and introduce the fashion world to her outrageously diabolical alter-ego, Cruella.    

None of this would be worth doing if not for the surprisingly fresh, modern take on Cruella, who's placed against a backdrop and colorful punk aesthetic perfectly suited to the material. But before the narrative even gets there, the prologue focusing on a young, troublemaking Estella provides an effective entry point, at times resembling a rock biopic more than your typical Disney outing. Of course, some cartoonish bells and whistles are still present, but Gillespie incorporates those in better than anyone else in his position has, keeping the focus where it belongs as we follow this little hellraiser on her journey. 

Seifort-Cleveland plays the misbehaving Estella with moxie and heart, immediately getting us on her side despite the character's bratty behavior, then eventually because of it when we realize what she's truly going through. It might be the most overlooked, underappreciated performance in how it sets the stage for what Stone will do later, with both working as mirrors for the other in ways you rarely see when two actors play the same character at different ages. 

It's a seamless transition when Stone's bespeckled, but determined Estella begins ingratiating herself into London's fashion scene and falls under the wing of Emma Thompson's Baroness. Given its context, Thompson's turn is just as effective as Meryl Streep's, whose Miranda Priestly had to at least partially serve as some kind of inspiration for this. She walks all over Estella until the power dynamic of their initially imbalanced relationship is considerably altered by a major development.

The ensuing feud that escalates when the two Emmas face off is where the movie really finds its voice. And it's a loud one, complete with numerous musical montages and music video-style cutting that goes way over-the-top, but intentionally so. Everyone from The Stones to The Doors to Blondie to Queen are all over the soundtrack, but the movie gets away with it since everything fits the action and setting of the story like a glove. That's only bolstered by Nicolas Karakatsanis' cinematography and some wild costume designs by Oscar winner Jenny Beaven that doesn't just compliment the proceedings, but plays as integral a part in the story as any single character, if not more so.

All these elements converge to make the character of Cruella seem more like a counter-culture badass and social disruptor than just a formidable challenger to the Baroness' fashion throne. Stone plays Cruella as Estella's lastest design, carefully cultivated to hurt and humiliate Baroness, but matched by her quieter Estella scenes as a mousy busybody trying to protect her cover. This leads to a Clark Kent-Superman dynamic hinging on whether the two can continue co-existing, a hook the film's able to retain right up until its final minutes. Keeping the childhood trauma in the front of our minds, Stone gives an already unfairly overlooked, award-caliber performance made all the more remarkable by the fact that she's pulling double duty the whole time. In playing a character playing a character, the actress is consistently add layers of complexity and nuance to what could have been a live-action caricature, all within the tight confines of a big budget family vehicle.

Speculation as what this would look like if it wasn't a Disney film, or maybe had an 'R' rating instead of its already unexpected 'PG-13,' seems inevitable. Could it have gone further if commercial concerns weren't such an issue and there wasn't a product or franchise to push? Maybe, but to some degree Gillespie deserves even more credit for not only creatively delivering with those guardrails in place, but using them to his advantage in crafting an original story freed from any noticeable concessions. In doing that, Cruella pulls off a tricky balancing act, boldly reconciling art and commerce in a style its title character would unquestionably appreciate. 

Jungle Cruise

Director: Juame Collet-Serra
Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Emily Blunt, Edgar Ramirez, Jack Whitehall, Jesse Plemons, Paul Giamatti
Running Time: 127 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)
 
It's hard not to have a conflicted internal dialogue regarding Dwayne Johnson's on-screen career, which seems to grow by leaps and bounds with each new release. In case you haven't heard, he gets paid a lot of money to star in some very big movies that make serious bank and audiences seem to really enjoy. While some are undeniably better than others, it wouldn't be irrational to categorize all of them as pure escapism or entertainment with a capital "E." And that's not a dig. His projects may have little sustaining nutritional value but he has the charismatic ability to basically pull off anything, making you wonder whether he should attempt some seriously challenging material instead of continuing to elevate lesser mainstream movies that more desperately need him.

Maybe that pivot will eventually come for Johnson, but for now we're kidding ourselves if we think he's going to stop making movies like Jungle Cruise. He knows his audience, cleverly blazing a career path even the biggest stars would be envious of. In other words, if it aint broke, don't fix it. For now. This one's more of the same and pretty disposable, sharing much in common with the Disney theme park attraction on which it's based, genuinely feeling like a movie adapted from a ride. It's occasionally funny, the performances are enjoyably hammy and there's a lot happening. In fact, so much is going on that for a while I actually just started to tune out, only making a rebound of sorts toward the final act. It's a mess, though not an agressively offensive one, improved greatly by two winning leads who deserve better, but remain undeniably great together. 

After a flashback to 1556 shows a Spanish conquistador-led trek to South America in search of the mystical Tears of the Moon healing tree, Dr. Lily Houghton's (Emily Blunt) research on it is presented by her brother MacGregor (Jack Whitehall) to the Royal Society of London in 1918. Despite the siblings' claims that the tree's healing flowers can revolutionize medicine and cure disease are met with skepticism and derision, Lily steals an arrowhead artifact she believes is key to discovering its whereabouts. With that and an ancient map in hand, Lily and MacGregor arrive in Brazil as she recruits cheap jungle cruise skipper Frank Wolff (Johnson) to take them down the Amazon. 

Upon stealing his boat back from his scuzzy boss Nilo Nemolato (Paul Giamatti) Frank heads down the river with the Houghtons, unaware they're being followed by a German sub commandeered by the conniving Prince Joachim (Jesse Plemons), who's desperately seeking the Tree for his own fame and fortune. With Lily unsure she can trust the cocky Frank, he views her as a humorless, pampered princess. Even if there's a lot more to both, they'll have little choice but to co-exist to survive this trip, if they want to reap the benefits of the elusive Tears of the Moon.

Sticking strictly to the Disney playbook, anyone expecting to be dazzled by plot twists and suprises or taken aback by its unexpected edginess will be disappointed. Co-writers Michael Green, Glenn Ficara and John Requa actually bring more narrative nuance to the brief flashbacks involving Frank's backstory and that of Edgar Ramirez's embattled Spanish conquistador than a lot of main arc involving the hunt for the Tree. Most of the mission revolves around slapstick silliness and the mustache-twirling Prince's cat-and-mouse game with the Houghtons and Frank. Thankfully, none of this is completely unbearable, in no small part due to the chemistry between Johnson and Blunt, with the former having some real fun with the character's one-liners and cheesy puns throughout. 

With Johnson's overconfident con man taking center stage, it's been somewhat overlooked just how good Blunt is opposite him, showcasing some excellent comedic timing and physical chops in over-the-top sight gags they could have easily fallen flat with less game actress in the part. If there's a drawback, it's that the pair bounce off each other so naturally that their relationship seems almost asexual, strangely lacking any romantic sparks to the point that they seem more like siblings than Blunt and Whitehall do. Of course, this doesn't entirely fall on them, as bringing heated chemistry to a family film based on a kids' park ride probably wasn't high on Disney's priority list, nor should it be. 

Plemons isn't exactly miscast in the Prince Joaquim role since he's played more than his fair share of villains, but it's still odd watching him play one this over-the-top. He's compulsively watchable in a scenery-chewing kind of way, occasionally making you wonder if he stepped in after Chistoph Waltz passed on what plays like one of his trademark parts. As a sidekick character, Jack Whitewall is more entertainingly endearing than you'd expect given MacGregor was probably intended as more of a one-dimensional, snobby irritant. 

The real star might be composer James Newton Howard's clever reworking of Metallica's "Nothing Else Matters" as the backdrop to what's by far the best sequence in the entire film, where Frank's origin story is revealed in full. Skillfully constructed, exciting and well shot, you'll wish the whole film were as absorbing as these five minutes, offering up substantial proof there was potential to be mined from at least part of this premise. And it's not that the rest looks bad per se, just very artificial and effects heavy. At certain points many shots have this enticing, picaresque quality to them, until you realize it only looks nice in the superficial way you'd expect to appreciate in a Thomas Kincaid painting. And the less said about Frank's pet tiger the better, as it's about time to call a moratorium on CGI animals if this is the best they can do.

The African Queen this isn't, but it doesn't need to be, even as it deliberately draws upon the 1951 film as a blueprint, along with some added inspiration from the Indiana Jones franchise (mostly Crystal Skull though). At just over two hours it isn't a total slog and reliable action director Juame Collet-Serra keeps the story moving at a fast enough clip that you can imagine families losing themselves in all the bells and whistles, as intended. But many more will have little difficulty filing Jungle Cruise under "not my thing," acknowledging its obvious strengths while recognizing it's nothing we haven't seen before.

The Mandalorian (Season 2)

Creator: Jon Favreau
Starring: Pedro Pascal, Giancarlo Esposito, Gina Carano, Carl Weathers, Ming-Na Wen, Temuera Morrison, Katee Sackhoff, Rosario Dawson, Mark Hamill,Timothy Olyphant, Bill Burr, Mercedes Varnado
Original Airdate: 2020

**The Following Review Contains Major Spoilers For The Second Season of 'The Mandalorian' **

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

While not among those disappointed by the frequently maligned big screen Star Wars sequels, it's still hard to deny Disney was always walking a thin line with them, regardless of the result. It's tricky balancing the needs of a notoriously cranky adult fanbase desperate for their nostalgia fix with the desires of kids and more casual watchers clammoring for fresh content. What we got was a battle of wills, wherein an unspoken compromise had to be reached where there could be certain callbacks and a reliance on classic, iconic characters just so long as it was in service of newer faces and more forward-looking stories. 

Even if Disney fared much better than they've been credited for in their efforts, it can't be ignored that neither contingent of fans walked away completely fulfilled. If returning the franchise to its heyday of the late 70's and early 80's by reigniting the feelings that sorrounded the original trilogy was already a tall order, using it to effectively lay the groundwork for Star Wars' future would be close to impossible.

So how did creator Jon Favreau, with his only mildly anticipated Disney Plus series The Mandalorian, manage to do again for this franchise what J.J. Abrams, Rian Johnson and even George Lucas himself at one point couldn't? You have to think he first probably recognized just how burnt out even the saga's biggest supporters had become after an inundation of big screen content that left everyone wanting a break. If all the sequels and spin-offs were universally beloved that would be one thing, but with wildly mixed notices, something had to change to justify this besides receipts or it wouldn't last.

The best received spin-off, 2016's Rogue One, worked because it felt as if it had temporarily released us from the shackles of this mythology, demonstrating that there's plenty of fringe universe yet to be tapped (through novelizations, games and the animated series), featuring fresh characters and missions unencumbered by baggage or expectations. And to balance things out, the film also marked until now what had been Disney's most successful use of a classic character with Vader's sensational corridor rampage, showcasing him at the peak of his powers in way that completely complimented the plot. 

When the pilot episode of The Mandalorian premiered in November of last year, Favreau revealed the magic ingredient."The Child" (AKA "Baby Yoda") In wisely withholding the reveal in all the show's pre-release promotional advertising, fans were reminded what it's like to be surprised, as lone Mandalorian Bounty Hunter Din Djarin (Pedro Pascal) looks inside the floating carriage to discover the "asset" he's been hired to protect exceeded our highest expectations, causing hearts to grow about ten sizes that day. And that was it. 

Taking place five years after the events of Return of the Jedi, the series debuted as the perfect blend of familiar and new, using the remnants of a beloved but somewhat still mysterious character in Yoda to posit the theory that there could be others like him. And it's accompanied by a lot of possibilities when one of them is a scared, occasionally mischievous, but adorable alien baby of about 50 years-old. Even while partially digitized, the creation harkens a return to the realistic, practical effects and puppetry that defined the original films, while also revisiting one of the series' most prevalent themes of parentage and fatherhood on an even deeper level.

As just the starting point for an initial season that Favreau and producer Dave Filoni spared no creative expense on, Mando begrudgingly protects the Child, who has yet to master his Jedi Force powers, even as his gift could become a curse if exploited by others. That's the intention of a dangerous Moff Gideon (Giancarlo Esposito) who's attempting to restore order to the Galaxy after the fall of the Empire, eyeing this force-wielding baby as his path to do it. 

If the show had been mildly, but unfairly criticized for anything during its first season, it was for settling into a procedural format during which Mando, with Child in tow, would embark on missions of the week with or for various characters. These weekly adventures were frequently transactional, featuring an exchange wherein Mando would reluctantly work with someone who couldn't be completely trusted in order to gain something he needs. 

Some of these forty-minute weekly missions were undeniably better than others, but the world and character building that took place in all of them proved essential in getting to the Season 2 end game, retroactively resulting in an even stronger set of episodes than its inaugural season. And this format comes as a relief for returning the franchise to its roots as a space Western while temporarily shelving that "big picture" blueprint, supressing concerns about how everything and everyone will fit into some larger plan fans will complain about. If a weight was lifted by first making the show good and then taking it from there, it's still kind of astounding all the small and even considerably more substantial details Favreau gets right. Whether that's a soaring Ludwig Göransson score that's up there with anything John Williams has previously done, or the storyboard artwork incorporated into the closing credits.  

What was clear late in the first season, but comes into even sharper focus here, is that Mando's strict, unwavering commitment to upholding a rigid code is cracking as his attachment to the Child grows, now seeking out a Jedi in hopes of returning the little one to his home, wherever that may be. The story heads in the direction we assumed it probably would and while an eventual showdown with Moff Gideon and his Darksaber surely looms, the path there is accompanied by more thrills than expected, along with some unpredictable bumps along the road. After enlisting the help of Mandelorian warriors Bo-Katan (Katee Sackoff, reprising her Star Wars: Clone Wars role) and Koska Reeves (Mercedes "Sasha Banks" Varnado) to locate this Jedi, Mando briefly reunites with Cara Dune (Gina Carano) and Greef Karga (Carl Weathers) before heading forest planet of Corvus in the series' most revealing episode, the Filoni-directed "Chapter 13: The Jedi."

In introducing Ahsoka Tano (a pefectly cast Rosario Dawson) into the live action canon, a bomb is dropped in terms of the Child's background that actually gives at least one of the prequels a reason for existing, while revealing his given name. That Favreau manages to escape disappointing everyone with this reveal is noteworthy since it couldn't have been easy with expectations running so feverishly high. Grogu. Short, simple and sounds very Star Wars-like. That's all you can ask for. It fits him. Supposedly, Favreau already knew it very early on in the first season and it just became a matter of when to pull the trigger, a decision made that much harder when Baby Yoda became a worldwide sensation. But the Band-Aid had to be ripped off at some point and this sure went down a lot easier than anticipated. 

Ahsoka can't train Grogu since he's just too attached to Mando and she senses fear in him, the first hint that his egg eating, cookie stealing shenanigans may not have been as cute and innocent as it appeared, suggesting the possibility we may have another little Anakin on our hands, tempted by the dark side of the Force. But all hope isn't lost since she knows of a Jedi who can train him. Maybe. And with that comes the season's big mystery. Who is it? The possibilities should seem limited, yet are kind of endless when you start running through all the candidates. 

Thanks to Ahsoka, Mando's comes into possesion of a Beskar steel spear we know he'll need, and against whom. The indelible image of a meditative Grogu sorrounded by an energy field reaching out for a connection at Tython's seeing stone eventually makes him a sitting duck for Gideon's Dark Troopers, giant black Transformer-looking droids that make the human-occupied Stormtroopers look like Ewoks. While the undeniable tragedy of the Robert Rodriguez-directed "Chapter 14: The Tragedy" is Grogu's kidnapping, the destruction of the Razor Crest ship at the hands of Gideon could easily compete with it given it's well-earned status as the franchise's most identifiable transport since the Millenium Falcon. 

As far as surprises go, the return of Fennec Shand (Ming-Na Wen) after being left for dead in the desert in last seaon's "Chapter 5: The Gunslinger" an expected, but welcome, especially considering who's with her. In another great example of how Favreau just "gets it," he knows that bringing back Boba Fett (Temuera Morrison) after his sarlacc demise in Return of the Jedi is a no-brainer, because, why not?  If you could bother explaining away Emperor Palpatine's resurrection, this is almost downright logical. And why wouldn't you take the opportunity to do something more substantial with a seemingly minor character who became a major fan favorite by standing silently in a cool uniform for two movies? Now, with a detailed backstory and sense of importance that isn't merely speculative, we get what we always wanted.

Slightly older and more weathered, Boba demands his father and grandfather's armor back from an unwilling Mando, who got it from Mos Pelgo Marshal Cobb Vanth (Timothy Olyphant) in "Chapter 9: The Marshal." And so another one of the series' famous trades leads to Jabba's former bounty hunter once again donning the helmet and armor to help Mando kick some Stormtrooper ass. After being programmed for disappointment for so long, it's almost surreal to see such a bold creative choice pay off this well, both in concept and execution. And it's unlikely anyone could claim they ever expected to see Boba Fett take a tornado DDT from Sasha Banks.

Arriving well-prepared with the help of Boba, Fennec, Dune, Bo-Katan and Koska to save Grogu ("Chapter 16: The Rescue"), Mando's  showdown with Moff Gideon carries an anticipation unmatched by any recent Star Wars battle, largely because of the stakes. Darksaber vs. Beskar Spear. It has to be acknowledged that Giancarlo Esposito's performance during this episode represents his best work of the series, alternating between pure, unadulterated evil and a maniacal glee, gloating at knowing a key detail concerning the power of the Darksaber that will undoubtedly carry into next season.

With an entire fleet of Dark Troopers for the group to fight off, the arrival of that sole X-Wing carries an overwhelming sense of importance the second we see it pull up, signifying the arrival of our mystery Jedi. And it's him. They actually did it. 

Before we even see the hood, the green saber or the glove, we know it's Luke Skywalker because, of course, it had to be. In trying to come up with all the reasons this couldn't work, we ignored the one obvious explanation why it does. Yoda trained Luke and now student must become master and train Grogu, who deserves the most important character in the Star Wars canon clearing his schedule. The kid's earned it.  

Anyone other than Luke would feel second-rate, and however anyone feels about his treatment in The Last Jedi, it takes only a minute or two before it's erased from our minds as he effortlessly slays Dark Troopers left and right in a chills-inducing sequence that brilliantly calls back to his father's aforementioned Rogue One appearance. With his hand on the monitor, Grogu looks on in wonder, as we once did, transfixed with the same sense of childlike amazement experienced during the original trilogy, but rarely felt again since. Until now.

"Open the door." And with those words speculation ends which incarnation of Luke we'd see and, more importantly, how. With Hamill now too old to play the character five years post-ROTJ, would Favreau recast the role with another actor (Sebastian Stan was speculated), or instead go the equally risky route of relying on the same de-aging technology that was used for Carrie Fisher's Princess Leia and Peter Cushing's Grand Moff Tarkin in Rogue One, and briefly for Luke and Leia in The Rise of Skywalker flashbacks? 

In going for the CG option, we're reminded there's still a long way to go before it can be reliably used without issues, but the digitized Hamill is a massive improvement over the the Fisher effort, and about equal to Cushing. But the more noteworthy achievement might be that we hardly care, with the narrative context overshadowing any perceived technological deficiencies. So, even if George Lucas would probably endorse the decision (for all the wrong reasons), this does stand as one of its better uses.

Luke's appearance only enhances the central storyline of Mando having to temporarily part with his son. And, yes, it definitely feels okay to refer to Grogu as his child because he's been that for a while,  and even more so during the course of this season. One of the toughest sells of the show was always going to be having it revolve around a masked protagonist, limiting any actor who would have to convey everything through voice and body language. Not only has Pedro Pascal debunked those fears, he's completely conveyed the bond Mando and Grogu share through this helmet, adjusting accordingly on the very few occasions it's come off and we've seen his face. 

The first removal of Mando's helmet occurred in the Season 1 finale ("Chapter 8: The Redemption") with the IG-11 droid taking it off to treat his injuries, and again this season in "Chapter 15: The Believer" when he and Mayfeld (Bill Burr) go undercover to obtain the coordinates to Gideon's cruiser and a facial scan forces him to remove it. Of course, this is a big deal because if the first time was a necessity, this one's a choice, or rather a sacrifice he makes for the Child. 

At the start of the series we couldn't imagine the inflexible, unemotional Mando doing something like that, but through great storytelling and acting on Pascal's part, we've reached the point where he's now voluntarily removing the helmet so his son can touch his face and say goodbye, if just temporarily. To call it the most powerful moment in this season or even the series as a whole feels like selling it short, as it's tough to recall the franchise coming close to a peak like this within the past thirty years. It also serves a great parallel to Luke removing the helmet off of his injured father at the end of Return of the Jedi. 

Of course any resistance from Grogu to go with Luke is tempered by not just by Mando's blessing, but the presence of R2-D2, joined at the hip with Luke, just as we remembered him at the end of ROTJ. These are how classic characters can be used to service the stories of newer ones without getting it in the way. From a timeline perspective it also perfectly fits, as Luke's exact whereabouts shortly after the conclusion of Episode VI were wide open and largely unestablished.

The big question now is what exactly happens with the future of the series. Will Grogu go on hiatus while he trains with Luke or could we actually see it? The latter seems far-fetched given technological hurdles, so it could be a situation where we have a flash-forward to whenever that's completed, posing another huge creative risk in having to age the Child. But there can be too much of a good thing and overexposing an insanely successful character can be just as damaging, which is why Favreau and Filoni deserve tons of credit for bringing this season's story arc to its logical conclusion, regardless of the creative challenges it'll probably present. 

In successfully shifting the series from becoming the Baby Yoda show into something far more encompassing, there's a good chance Favreau and Filoni are prepared to handle what's next. The show's still titled The Mandalorian so it's a good bet it will continue to follow Mando's adventures and Grogu will return in due time. Aside from the fact he's printing too much money not too, he basically rivals both peak Luke and Yoda in importance at this point.

As the the The Book of Boba Fett post-credit sequence further solidifies, there's going to be an onslaught of new shows, spin-offs and features arriving over the next few years if the franchise can withstand it this time. But even as someone who thinks Disney's done a fantastic job since acquiring the property from Lucas, I'm skeptical of the Marvel-like direction they're taking it, bombarding fans with cross-over content that could be very hit-or-miss. 

If there's a silver lining in this approach, it's that the franchise now has a much stronger foundation on which to build thanks to this series. It may seem hyperbolic to credit one person with "saving" an entire franchise, but that's undeniably what Jon Favreau did with The Mandalorian, giving credence to those suggestions that he and Grogu deserve their own statue beside Walt and Mickey at Disney theme parks. And now we can at least feel safer knowing that any future Star Wars project going through the pipeline will likely have his input or involvement.

Million Dollar Arm

Director: Craig Gillespie
Starring: Jon Hamm, Aasif Mandvi, Suraj Sharma, Madhur Mittal, Bill Paxton, Lake Bell, Alan Arkin, Pitobash Tripathy, Rey Maualuga
Running Time: 124 min.
Rating: PG

★★★ (out of ★★★★) 

It's entirely possible you've seen or heard Disney's Million Dollar Arm being described as "Jerry Maguire meets Slumdog Millionaire." While that's understandable, a better comparison might be to feel-good throwback sports movies such as The Rookie, Miracle, Remember The Titans, Invincible, and yes, maybe even The Blind Side. Of course, the big worry going into something that wears its heart this proudly on its sleeve is that it will come off too syrupy or more closely resembling a Hallmark movie of the week than a legitimate entry in the sports film genre. I can't claim this completely avoids that, but it's smart and enjoyable enough to make us fondly remember when these types of pictures were released regularly and the public actually went out of their way to see them. Lately, it appears they're having a bit of of a resurgence, as this, along with the slightly more cerebral Draft Day, deserves mention alongside the better ones. It's also well anchored by an actor few would expect to see in a Disney project, marking a highly anticipated big screen transition with his first leading role.

Big shot Los Angeles based sports agent J.B. Bernstein (Jon Hamm) has recently fallen on tough times, having gone out on his own with partner Ash (Aasif Mandvi) to form their own fledgling agency. A dearth of clients and a failure to sign star football player Popo Vanuatu (Rey Maualuga) have left them bleeding money and in search of a game-changing idea. That idea comes to J.B. one night when flipping channels between cricket and Britain's Got Talent. Identifying an untapped market for baseball in India, J.B. comes up with the plan of holding a talent competition there called "Million Dollar Arm," in which contestants are scored on the speed and accuracy of their pitches, with the two winners receiving prize money and a trip to the U.S. to be trained as major league prospects.

But when eventual winners Rinku Singh (Life of Pi's Suraj Sharma) and Dinesh Patel (Slumdog Millionaire's Madhur Mittal) are flown to America to train with USC pitching coach Tom House (Bill Paxton), J. B. realizes he has a near impossible task ahead of him in both preparing them for the big leagues and helping them adjust to their new surroundings. With his business continuing to tank, he skirts responsibility on the latter, leaving his chatty tenant Brenda (Lake Bell) as their only moral support. With the deadline to have them ready fast approaching, J.B. may have to start realigning his personal and professional priorities, for both his sake and that of these kids.

Having limited familiarity with the true story from which Tom McCarthy's script is based, it's hard to say just how far it veers from the facts, but there was never really a moment where I was shaking my head with incredulity at the unfolding events. The movie wisely doesn't try to pretend these young guys are superstars in the making who happen to be "discovered" via the competition. They can basically throw a couple of wild pitches at a little over 80 miles per hour and that's it. They're pretty terrible and actually remain so throughout the film, seemingly struggling to grasp basic mechanics even as they put in as much effort as can reasonably be asked of them. This is a relief since it's apparent early on that this will achieve its PG Disney movie status with tone and presentation rather than concocting an unrealistic fantasy out of a true story.

Everything is sanitized, but not insultingly so, deserving credit for not ignoring the fact that these two kids are being taken from poverty and will experience extreme culture shock upon their arrival. Some of these moments are played for laughs (not knowing how an elevator works) while others (a party gone bad) are treated a little more seriously, with director Craig Gillespie skillfully alternating between the two. The meat of the story is not only Rinku and Dinesh learning to come into their own and succeed in an unfamiliar world, but J.B. morally evolving enough to actually think about some other than himself and his company's bottom line. These are obvious messages, but well delivered nonetheless. And for those wondering, J.B's extreme narcissism, womanizing and somewhat similar profession do invite modern day Don Draper comparisons. There's just no way around it, which isn't necessarily such a bad thing for the film.

Hamm has always seemed like a movie star despite only appearing primarily on TV, and that charismatic  quality is only magnified by the very essence of the character he plays on Mad Men. With that series winding down, the notion that he'd be making the jump was already a foregone conclusion so we may as well just prepare ourselves for the inevitability that none of the material he's given moving forward will contain the depth and complexity we've been spoiled with over the past 8 years. We get one of the better scenarios here, with leading role that plays to his strengths as a performer, while giving moviegoers who haven't seen the show a good inkling of why he's a big deal. Hamm can probaly do this in his sleep, but it's a credit to him that he doesn't and finds ways to constantly keep us interested in his character's rather obvious arc.

One actor who actually does give a performance in his sleep is Alan Arkin,who plays a grumpy, aging major league scout constantly dozing off during try-outs. Considering how often he's been sleeping through this grumpy old man role lately it was nice to see him just go ahead and literally make it official. But his presence only belies the fact that this cast is deceptively stacked with talent, as both Sharma and Patel are extremely likable in the face of mostly unfounded criticism about this being another Hollywood story of a white guy coming to the rescue. They mostly prevent that hijacking each time they're on screen. While Lake Bell's Brenda is blatantly being set up as the quirky, free-spirited love interest for Hamm's character, it's hard coming up with another actress who would have been as enjoyable a fit. She makes it something and isn't underutilized, despite the standard girlfriend role being more than a few levels lower than she deserves. Amit Rohan steals some scenes as the kids' interpreter, working as comic relief that's more amusing than irritating, at least when taken in small doses.

Interestingly enough, ESPN's polarizing Bill Simmons is listed as a producer on the project and as much as it looked from its trailer like the kind of movie he would mock on his podcast, it isn't. And he does know sports films, so his involvement, no matter how limited, could have only been a plus from where I sit. Despite sharing a setting, an actor and even a composer (A.R. Rahman) with Slumdog Millionaire, it didn't really remind me of that as much as it did of the story behind the making of it, with poverty-stricken kids being uprooted from their home country and being thrown into the fast-paced lifestyle of America without preparation. It's still mostly mainstream fluff,  but it's good fluff that gets little things right and doesn't insult our intelligence. Disney has this uplifting sports movie formula down pat, but it's a rare case where predictability can be somewhat comforting.

John Carter

Director: Andrew Stanton
Starring: Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins, Samantha Morton, Mark Strong, Willem Dafoe, Mark Strong, Thomas Haden Church, Ciaran Hinds, Dominic West, Bryan Cranston, Daryl Sabara
Running Time: 132 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

I really don't care how much money a movie makes or what it costs to make it, though it seems many in the media do, holding it up as a testament to its creative worth. Of course, it's nice for the people involved and the studio releasing it when their project cleans up at the box office, but just because an expensively made movie is a financial flop doesn't make it an artistic failure. Any more than it's necessarily a success if it rakes in the dough. In this era of sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, Twilights, Transformers and Marvel movies, just about the only argument that can be made in favor of a relationship between quality and cost is an inverse one. Yet somehow, Disney's John Carter, a fun, spectacularly silly throwback adventure that has its heart in the right place has become this symbol of Hollywood greed and corporate avarice because it didn't recoup its high price tag. Really guys? You're gonna attack THIS?

Far from the Waterworld-sized debacle it's been touted as, JC is actually an intelligently told fantasy fable featuring a likable protagonist, an incredibly strong female lead and great visual scope. It's also a bit of a mess, albeit a fascinating one. The plot's too convoluted with about three or four different timelines and villains, and a more streamlined screenplay would have resolved some lingering issues, but that's the extent of it. Its worst crime just may have been being based on Tarzan author Edgar Rice Burroughs' 100 year-old series of stories that inspired the likes Star Wars, Superman, Flash Gordan and Avatar, but arriving onscreen last, unintentionally making it look and feel derivative when it's just late. With just a little tweaking, this really could have been a huge deal. And with his first foray into live action, longtime Pixar director Andrew Stanton certainly does a smoother job fleshing out a world and navigating intraplanetary politics than Lucas did with his prequels, as faint as that praise may seem. But it isn't faint, as more sci-fi adventures could stand to be as fun as this.    

After a brief, poorly placed prologue on Barsoom (A.K.A. Mars) that plays as a strange cross between Return of the Jedi and 300, we're informed of the death of John Carter (Taylor Kitsch) of Virginia, a Confederate Civil war Captain who left nephew Edgar Rice Burroughs (Daryl Sabara) a diary explaining the circumstances that eventually lead to his death. It flashes back years earlier to the Arizona territory where Union Colonel Powell (Bryan Cranston in a blonde wig and colonial garb!) arrests him, but he escapes, leading them both to a cave where Carter is confronted by a Martian Thern named Matai Shang (Mark Strong) and transported--via a mysterious medallion--to Barsoom, where he's discovered by a Green Martian Tharks and their leader Tars Tarkas (Willem Dafoe). With his new ability to jump incredible heights and perform superhuman feats, Carter's unwillingly thrust into the middle of a bitter feud between rival cities Helium and Zodanga, with the evil Sab Than (Dominic West) plotting to end their war by marrying the headstrong Princess of Helium, scientist Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins). Rescued by Carter, she promises to get him home and with the help of Tarkas' daughter, Sola (Samantha Morton) and a lizard dog named Woola as they embark on a treacherous journey across the Red Planet.

While the plot's way too complicated and at times unfocused, but for a film of this scale it's surprisingly deep, with the meat and bones of the story working really well and clear care put toward character development. Despite seeming to take a library's worth of Burrough's stories (supposedly it's mostly adapted from just one, The Princess of Mars) and attempting to jam it into a single overplotted feature, it's a shock this isn't harder to follow. I'm usually no fan of extensive CGI and think it's criminally overused, if not outright ineffective in most films, but the effects here are fairly realistic-looking.Yes, the entire budget is right up there for everyone to see on the screen, but at least desert vistas actually look like desert vistas. I hesitate in describing the Tharks as resembling Jar Jar Binks (which they kind of do) since they're more crisply rendered with a mixture of CGI, motion capture, and make-up, and not nearly as annoying, possessing identifiable traits that serve the narrative. Lizard dog Woola looks so real you'll want to take him home, while the pair of giant white apes Carter tangles with in a gladiatorial showdown recall the monstrous wompa Luke faced off against in The Empire Strikes Back.

The story does lull and lag in places (particularly the middle portion) while spinning off in a few different, sometimes problematic directions, but there was never a moment when I didn't care about what was happening or lost interest Carter or Dejah's predicament. Taylor Kitsch is solid as the lead, if kind of a blank. Then again, a blank hero is called for in this situation. This isn't the kind of movie that rises or falls with his performance so trying to pin the imaginary "blame" on him is pointless since any actor could have been plugged into the role with the same result. Whether he should have taken it is a different discussion altogether, but I'm glad he did regardless of the fallout because at least it's a start. He'll survive this and hopefully move on to edgier work, which is where his strength more likely lies. But all things considered, he did really well. Parts as memorable as Tim Riggins on Friday Night Lights don't come around every day on the big or small screen, so we may have to wait a while for him to find something comparable.

As tanned, tribal tattooed warrior princess Dejah, Lynn Collins is a real find in her first leading role. After co-starring in a handful of smaller, underseen projects without really registering much, she sure registers here. Her character is strong, beautiful, independent and intelligent, representing exactly the kind of lead female role we need more of in adventure movies. Collins is more than up to the task, never making her feel like a damsel in distress. If there were any justice she'd be a huge star off the back of this film. Instead, being in her mid-thirties, she may not even be given another opportunity at this level again. That's a shame and a sentence I should never have to type, but a chilly reminder of how Hollywood works. Give Disney credit for casting a mature woman in a woman's role instead of a kid in hopes of reeling in teen audiences. Now doing THAT would have been greedy, not to mention detrimental to the film.

If John Carter's guilty of anything it's over-ambition both in terms of visual design, and in telling a more involved story than was necessary. Not much of a crime from where I sit. That overreaching is especially evident in convoluted, twist-laden ending, which takes a bit to come into focus, but pays off in a satisfying finish. Much like Disney' unfairly maligned Tron: Legacy, it's a family film, but PG-13 and not made exclusively to sell toys. It's closer to an old school sweeping sword-and-sandals fantasy epic than a superhero movie. Of course, no one knew what it was. But Stanton did, and his slavish devotion to the source material is a creative plus that alienated confused audiences unfamiliar with "John Carter From Mars," but found it difficult to get psyched for a film simply titled, "John Carter." Knowing how it concludes, the title change does actually make sense, working best under the assumption they'll be a sequel. Barring a sudden resurgence on DVD, that seems unlikely, but not out of the realm of possibility. I wouldn't mind seeing one, or revisiting this because at least it dares to be different. It mostly succeeds. With untested stars and an ambitious story, John Carter takes chances. And when movies like that stop being made, then we're really screwed.

My Thoughts On The New "At The Movies" Show

Gene Siskel must be rolling over in his grave right about now. For those who believe intelligent film criticism in this country is on the verge of extinction, you’re case just got a whole lot stronger. I finally got the opportunity and displeasure to watch the brand new, re-launched At The Movies, the long-running syndicated movie review show originated by Siskel and Roger Ebert in 1986.

When Gene tragically passed away in 1999, Chicago Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper was selected as his replacement (as if anyone could actually “replace” him). Roeper wasn’t well received at all by film buffs, but I think that resentment stemmed more from frustration that Gene was gone than there being anything wrong with the selection. While it was a far cry from the dynamic duo of Siskel & Ebert, it worked just fine and as time went on they they developed good chemistry together.

Ebert’s health struggles over the past few years led to the announcement that he would be retiring from the show to concentrate on his writing, which led to a revolving door of co-hosts like The New York Times’ A.O. Scott, and The Chicago Tribune’s Michael Phillips (both of whom were excellent). Phillips was named the permanent replacement, at least until Disney announced they couldn’t come to terms with Roeper on a new contract and would be axing Phillips as well because they were completely overhauling the show. It’s never really been the same since Siskel’s death (and REALLY wasn’t the same after Ebert left) but I still recorded it each week and respected Roeper and Phillips’ intelligent observations and analysis on recent films, even if I didn’t always agree. Replacing them seemed pointless and then when I heard the new direction the show was heading I really started to worry.

It was announced that starting on September 6 Ben Lyons and Ben Mankiewicz would be taking over as co-hosts. Lyons I was familiar with through his work as an entertainment reporter on E! but Mankiewicz, a Sirius Satellite radio and Turner Classic Movies host, I knew virtually nothing about. What these guys have in common is that they’re both more known for their bloodlines than any meaningful contributions to film criticism. Lyons, is the son of longtime New York WNBC TV quote whore, I mean film critic, Jeffrey Lyons, whose glowing blurbs you’ve probably seen splashed across print ads for middling movies over the years. The apple apparently doesn’t fall far from the tree as last year the younger Lyons declared Will Smith’s I Am Legend “THE GREATEST FILM EVER MADE.”
If Mankiewicz’s name rings a bell that’s because he’s the grandson of screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz, who co-wrote a little movie called Citizen Kane with Orson Welles. While I felt obligated to mention it, if their connections helped them get this job I have absolutely no problem with that. Stuff like that happens all the time in and I commend them for taking advantage of the opportunity presented to them. Anyone would. Or they could have gotten this based on their own merits and nothing more. I have no idea. It’s irrelevant. They both seem like good guys who I’m sure are doing the best they can under thankless conditions and I would never personally attack them. This isn't their fault. That said, this show is a complete disaster and the two hosts were made to look like fools. I can only hope the Disney executives are wrong about the kind of review show the casual moviegoer in this country wants to see. If they’re not, I’m officially scared.

Cosmetically, the show looks horrible, as they did away with the very practical and inviting movie theater atmosphere the set had from the beginning and replaced it with bright colors and a design that recalls a 1970’s college public access television studio. If Lyons and Mankiewicz have anything insightful to say about the films they’re reviewing we’d never know it because both are obviously either reading from a TelePrompter or cue cards. Their eyes barely connect with the camera as they rush through bullet points briefly re-capping each film and telling us whether we should see it. That’s great, except I always watched this show not to find out what movie to see but to get a lively, intelligent debate about film and I bet more viewers than Disney thinks watched for the same reason.
Even on its worst days one of the best qualities of At The Movies was that it always felt like we were eavesdropping on a discussion about film between two friends (or sometimes enemies) talking about what they felt worked or didn’t. This new format just arrogantly assumes no one has the attention span for that anymore, wanting useless information and sound bites spat out at them as quickly as possible. On last week’s show they reviewed Surfer, Dude starring Matthew McConaughey and I’d say both hated the film, but using the word “hate” would falsely imply there was any kind of emotion behind their comments. Sure, neither liked it, but I have no idea why. Not surprisingly, the movie does look awful so you’d figure anyone would have a laundry list of reasons why it doesn’t work, but we weren’t given much outside of “bad” and “not funny.”Say what you want about Roeper but he always backed up his opinions with solid reasoning and he never lacked passion. Just ask Eli Roth.

I was alarmed when I first heard Lyons was selected as a co-host but the one thing he had going for him (at least from what I saw in his appearances on E!) was that he seemed like a reasonably cool, laid back guy you could sit around and shoot the breeze with about movies. So what do the producers do? They dress him like a schoolboy and have him stiffly recites sound bites. The humorless Mankiewicz fares slightly better, but not much, and I couldn’t help laughing when they returned from the break and he was standing behind what looked like a kitchen counter. I was waiting for him to prepare Lyons a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. It’s the producers’ obligation to make these guys look credible. They might (or might not) have a wealth of film knowledge to share, but we’ll never know if they continue along this route.

The centerpiece of the half hour is a train wreck of a segment known as “The Critics’ Round Up,” where three critics are featured on the program via satellite to review one film. It’s obvious they’re going for that same annoying “expert panel” approach you’ve seen used to death on Fox News and CNN. Pointless, especially when you consider the film in question was The Women. The two Bens probably could have handled it. Even worse, they factor in all 5 “opinions” in the needlessly complicated rating system. I understand the Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down was abandoned out of respect to Ebert but they desperately need to find something better than See It/Skip It/Rent It. If you think I'm exaggerating how bad this is check out the show's official site where you can see clips.

The Disney executives seem to think by bringing in younger hosts and turning this into an entertainment program like The Insider or Access Hollywood they’ll reach a more desirable demographic. What a joke. This is a syndicated program and enough people have problems just trying to figure out when it’s on because of all the time shifts and preemptions due to baseball games and other events. The only audience there is for a show like this, and who would have gone out of their way to find it, are hardcore film buffs (who they’ve just managed to completely alienate). As for the rumors that Ebert approved this new direction, I’ll choose to ignore them if you don’t mind.

Siskel & Ebert had a rough start in ’86 so I’ll give this time, but that’s more out of necessity since there are no outlets to get film reviews anymore outside of the internet. Speaking of which, I could name many of those online critics I’d rather see hosting this show (a few of which are probably reading this right now).

I think what’s happened here represents a larger shift in our culture over the past few years. Serious film criticism is dying as the need for television executives to appeal to the instant gratification demands of the MTV/Facebook generation increases. That’s not meant to be an insult and the last thing we need is old, out of touch film snobs giving us an oral dissertation for 30 minutes either. Change is good, but it can’t be without purpose. There’s no denying the show was stagnant and needed some kind of an overhaul but this wasn’t the way to go. The new At The Movies should at least be able to find a fair balance between art and entertainment. If it does that Disney will get the ratings it wants and those who love film will be winners because of it. Unfortunately, until it’s able to do that there’s little reason to watch.

WALL-E

Director: Andrew Stanton
Starring: Ben Burtt, Elissa Knight, Fred Willard, Jeff Garlin, John Ratzenberger, Sigourney Weaver
Running Time: 97 min.
Rating: G

**** (out of ****)

Disney/Pixar have topped themselves… again. Except this time they’ve REALLY topped themselves. Last year I thought Ratatouille was great but Wall-E destroys it, and easily trumps every other Pixar film ever released. Not only is it a staggering visual accomplishment, a moving love story, and an intelligent social commentary, but it’s also a breathtaking work of science fiction.

It checks every box, covers every genre and calling it 2008’s best film so far would be a massive understatement. All those rumors you’ve heard about how great it is are true, but to classify it as animated in any way, shape or form, would do it a great disservice.

With Ratatouille, Pixar took a huge step toward creating more sophisticated animation and having the writing material to match. That huge step has evolved into a giant leap with a movie that's practically a Spielbergian achievement. And I mean the ‘80’s Spielberg. He tried to tackle a similar dystopian fantasy earlier in the decade with A.I. but fell short. Now comes that film he was trying to make.

It may seem strange that after seeing a Pixar release I’d feel the urge to compare it to such classics as Star Wars, Blade Runner, E.T. and 2001: A Space Odyssey but that’s just the kind of feeling this evokes. That’s no coincidence though since throughout its running time it directly references those works, but make no mistake, Andrew Stanton’s film is very much a masterpiece on its own terms. I’d love to say that Pixar isn’t capable of better, but now I’ve learned to just not say anything and expect the unexpected from them. But it is safe to say this is one of the most magical films in a very, very long time and if it doesn’t move you then I don’t know what will.
It’s the 2100’s and WALL-E (short for Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth- Class) is the last robot of its kind inhabiting what we used to call our home planet, now so overrun with waste and pollution that it can’t support human life. A major corporation, Buy n’ Large, (headed by Fred Willard in a cameo role) has managed to preserve the human race by shipping everyone off in executive spaceships where they’ve remained for centuries. They’ve also gotten really overweight and lazy, being waited on by robots all day and night without doing or learning a thing for themselves. WALL-E arranges the trash on Earth into neat towers and through 700 years of isolation has developed certain rituals, as well as a very distinct and endearing personality.

While not acting as the planet’s trash compactor he keeps himself entertained by playing with his Rubik’s Cube and watching a scratchy old videotape of Hello, Dolly! to which he knows all the songs. When the largest of those executive spaceships, the Axiom, lands he encounters the pod-like EVE (Extra-terrestrial Vegetation Evaluator) sent to Earth to look for signs of plant life. Its pretty much love at first sight, at least for WALL-E and what unfolds is surprisingly one of the most effective and touching romances to be captured on film in years.

You’ve probably heard a lot already about the first 40 minutes and how it’s a silent movie. Stanton relies on bleeps, blurps, eye movements and robotic gestures to convey the robot’s feelings and tell the story. There’s never any doubt as to what he’s feeling or what’s going on and you could probably count about 50 different emotions this robot shows in his eyes alone. Not a word is spoken, but action and visuals tell the entire story.
I hate using hyperbole, but it’s called for here. This is truly the most fully realized animation in Disney’s storied history and the first half hour of this film is as awe-inspiring an experience as you’re likely to witness all year on a movie screen. It helps that WALL-E, part Charlie Chaplin, part R2D2, is the most adorable onscreen creation since E.T. All the details of his personality and how they’re conveyed onscreen are amazing, like when he shakes uncontrollably and collapses himself into a box to hide when he’s frightened. We recognize his quirks, relate and empathize with him as if he were real, and the story becomes that much more involving because of it.

A certain sadness and isolation engulfs the opening of this movie the likes of which you haven’t seen in a Pixar or Disney film. 2001 is an obvious influence and the first half of the picture feels very much like a Kubrick film crossed with a Buster Keaton-era sensibility. Gone are the bright, vibrant colors we’ve been used to in Disney films and replacing it are dark brown hues and rust, visual details that recall Star Wars: Episode IV. Supposedly, Oscar nominated cinematographer Roger Deakins was brought on as a visual consultant to make sure the images could look exactly how they would in real life. Do they ever.

Without spoiling anything I’ll say that in the second hour the film goes in a completely different, but equally brilliant direction, turning into a mind-blowing space adventure. It also turns into an emotionally relevant satire that features some superb voice work from Jeff Garlin as the seemingly dim-witted but good-hearted Captain of the Axiom. He'll prove he’s nothing at all like any of his predecessors.

Some talking heads in the media have complained about this second section of the film, which only proves that people can complain and be offended by just about anything these days. The issues (involving the abuse of our environment and our dumbed down mass consumerist culture) cut very deep, but they’re NOT political, as they’d want you to believe. But they are brilliantly ingrained into the fabric of the story with such subtle perfection that if you wanted to shut your brain off and just enjoy it as a family film, you could easily.

The kids won’t pick up on those deeper issues, which is fine, because they’ll be so mesmerized with Wall-E, EVE and their adventures that they won’t care or notice. When they’re older the film can then take on twice as much meaning as they see the importance that was buried underneath the fun and visual treats.

I hesitate categorizing this film as either adult or children’s fare because that would imply that one of those two groups would somehow feel shut out watching it. It has to be viewed as playing in the same ballpark as something like The Wizard of Oz or E.T., family films that transcend all ages and genres. If I had to pick though, I’d say adults would take more out of it because they would fully appreciate the two different levels it’s working on.

When the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences created the Best Animated Feature category in 2001 I thought in the back of my mind that it wasn’t a good idea. I considered the possibility that an animated film could come along that breaks all barriers and the Academy could justify not nominating it for Best Picture because of this new category. Now I really worry those fears will come to pass and WALL-E will have to settle for what may as well be considered the light heavyweight championship of the Oscars.
That, combined with the fact it was released in the dreaded first half of the year, creates a nightmare scenario for its Best Picture chances. I’ve whined and complained for a while that the Oscar season is too short and should include films released throughout the ENTIRE YEAR and this is the best evidence why.

I can practically guarantee there won’t be five movies better than WALL-E this year and if there is, well then, that’s frightening. This deserves to compete with the big boys for Best Picture and Disney owes it to themselves as a company and to moviegoers worldwide who love this film to pour every resource they have into its Oscar campaign. They owe it to the late, great Walt Disney whose entire vision of what movies should be is encapsulated in every single one of the 97 minutes of WALL-E. All I can do now is cross my fingers and hope that this can hold on and we don't have a repeat of last year when Academy voters engulfed themselves in art house depression.

I’ve heard and read many calling this one of the greatest motion pictures they’ve ever seen and while I don’t have the guts to make such a statement yet, as a hardcore science fiction fan, this film means  a lot. It wears many influences and homages, yet never feels like a rip-off because the story is so completely original. At the end of the screening I attended there was a lot of applause and even some tears.

One particular scene induced emotions in me I didn’t think I was capable of having watching an animated feature. When it ended I knew I saw a four-star film but it didn’t really hit me until maybe about 6 hours later that I saw a four-star film of the highest caliber. Or more accurately, a work of art. WALL-E is a special experience and a groundbreaking film that will be appreciated and loved for decades to come.