capybarus

As of 2024, this is one of the three feature length animated adaptations of Irish mythology in a similar style. We watched all of them prior to rating and writing reviews. Yet, story-wise, Song of the Sea is the weakest of them (even though we actually watched it while vacationing on the Wild Atlantic Way in Ireland and went on an island with a lighthouse). I don't understand why it has a high rating. The Secret of Kells and Wolfwalkers (the other too) are head above this. Let me explain why. Irish mythology in the original format (think Yeats) is very gruesome, illogical from modern perspective, and intricate in terms of Celtic names and multitude of characters. While both The Secret of Kells and Wolfwakers did a great job by focusing on a small number of mythological elements and adapted the narrative into coherent stories that make sense in modern times, Song of the Sea has failed by essentially just dropping the old mythical characters into modernity without any effort to adapt their narrative. It has too many characters that evolve too drastically through the story and have illogical motivations and unjustifiable changes in behaviors. The movie refers to the characters using Celtic names and it takes half a movie to figure out who is who. Then the characters change their behaviors and the whole sense of the story continues to be lost. Without going into spoilers the story doesn't explain some of the original motivations at the end and, thus, everything remains nonsensical. Watch Song of the Sea, if you must, for the animation only.

I am a parent of a fairly young child diagnosed with ADHD and had a lot to relate while watching kids and families with same behaviors and struggles that I deal with on daily basis, however this documentary is non-consequential and exhibits ADHD itself. The narrative keeps jumping between candid snippets from various families, encouraging statements from various medical and psychology experts, interview snippets from celebrities, and even bold suppositions about historical figures with ADHD (although I am pretty sure ADHD diagnosis didn't exist in the times of Einsteins and Teslas or that someone scientifically went back to their medical files and derived a modern diagnosis, so just with these references the movie dilutes the credibility). The result is a hodgepodge of ADHD-related tidbits, most of which are already known to any parent with ADHD child. The movie fails to elaborate on any of them in depth to make the documentary effort meaningful. I suspect it maybe even a medication commercial cleverly disguised as a documentary. Most experts on the record, who at the start of the movie sympathize with ADHD and create an air of trustworthiness, then say in the middle of the movie in a chorus that medicating kids is a great (and surely safe) treatment option. The only other treatment option shown is therapy. The reason why even with blatant product placement for medications I am not even sure what is the point of the movie is due to a lot of points remaining disconnected and unclear in the process of switching the narrations. What was the period of observation for the families and is there a credible trend that kids get better self-control with age? What treatment options did all of the families in the movie seek and what worked and what didn't? Are all the celebrities being interviewed officially diagnosed with ADHD or do they only think they are? How did the selected celebrities actually put their ADHD to use (besides viewers just guessing based on the business they represent or having to do separate research)? If medications are truly so great, why is there a troubling tendency of many teens using them to gain better grades at school (which the movie actually admits)? At best there are partial and non-conclusive hints, like one family describing their struggle using two specific medications, another family that used therapy saying they didn't do meds, and one family maybe using meds (kid shown taken meds, but not mentioned specifically) and no info about other families or what other options have the families explored along the way. Anyway, giving the documentary 5/10 for just the reassurance that there are a lot of kids out there with same symptoms and that the amount of family support and love can make a big difference.

It is true that the documentary presents an equally balanced set of perspectives on shark activity around Cape Cod. The whole film, however, is a rotation of perspectives delivered by local residents and activists. There is zero attempt to provide any independent or scientifically verified context even though marine biologists get the air time that is only used to capture their affection for marine wildlife... This is not a kind of movie that should leave you pondering the ambiguity, but this is what this movie does. I still enjoyed watching it because Cape Cod is a part of my family's history, but I wish the movie included something more concrete rather than just people's opinions. At least they could have been more definitive on the size of seal population (is it extraordinary large after all or not?) or do sharks or seals have anything to do with changing fish species based on actual scientific evidence? But, no, the movie stops at just telling us there are plenty of seals, less fish, and more sharks (but no more violent shark interactions since 2018). Well, we already knew that even without a documentary...