Director: Pierre Coffin, Chris Renaud Starring: voices of Steve Carell, Jason Segel, Russell Brand, Miranda Cosgrove Running Time: 1 hour, 35 minutes Theatrical Release: July 9, 2010 Shop for Despicable Me Merchandise

Plot Summary

In a happy suburban neighborhood surrounded by white picket fences with flowering rose bushes, sits a black house with a dead lawn. Unbeknownst to the neighbors, hidden beneath this home is a vast secret hideout. Surrounded by a small army of minions, we discover Gru (voiced by Steve Carell), planning the biggest heist in the history of the world. He is going to steal the moon (Yes, the moon!) in Universal’s new 3-D CGI feature, “Despicable Me.” (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

It’s intriguing how deceiving movie trailers (previews) can be. So far this year, three of the less impressive trailers – for How To Train Your Dragon, Toy Story 3, and Despicable Me – have turned out to represent some of the best animated movies to come along in awhile (and some of the best movies this year, period). The most recent, the awkwardly titled Despicable Me (I’d love to hear a little child try to pronounce this one) didn’t look super promising from its hit-and-miss advertisements. However, the truth is quite the opposite as Despicable Me easily joins the aforementioned titles as some of the most fun you’ll have at the movie theater with the family this year.

Despicable Me takes a devious, dark-souled character with aspirations for being the world’s greatest villain named Gru, and teams him with three quirky orphan girls who he meets one day while they’re out trying to sell cookies to raise money for their orphanage. When Gru gets the inspiration to use them to help his dastardly plans of stealing the moon, he finds parenthood an unlikely kink in his ingenious plan. This was one theme that the trailers didn’t divulge in great detail, but it’s quite a huge plot element — the potential greatest villain in the world suddenly finds himself a father — and it stirs up emotions within him he never knew he had. The film then touches on his own childhood a little bit, giving the audience some insight into why Gru may be up to his no-good trickery. But with most of his “evil” ways, we see that he really isn’t all that good at being bad, and this becomes an important lesson in the story that redeems the potentially dark thematics that the title and premise might suggest.

And that lighter tone can be attributed greatly to the ensemble of little yellow overall-suited minions that accompany Gru in his quest. The minions can probably most closely be compared to the three-eyed little green aliens from Toy Story, but are given a lot more character and personality individually. They do, however, cause a lot of mischief, some that might be imitated by children — like poking each other, punching each other in the arm hard, or, in the worst case, photocopying their butts and giggling at the print-out. Still, everything from their look to their voices make all of their scenes highlights of the film. But to Steve Carell’s credit, the comedian does an absolutely fantastic job voicing the lead, Gru. Carell gives the pseudo-super-villain a quirky and believable European accent that makes the character sinister and lovable sometimes simultaneously. Carell puts his usual spunk into the performance and even though it seldom sounds like him, fans of his will still be able to locate the actor’s voice beneath the guise of the accent. Julie Andrews does a nice job as Gru’s mom, while crude comedian Russell Brand (he just starred in the R-rated Get Him To The Greek) is sufficient as Dr. Nefario. Miranda Cosgrove heads up the oldest of the three orphan girls, while little Elsie Fisher voices the smallest orphan, Agnes, who’s positively adorable every time she shows up or says something. Between Agnes, the minions, and Carell as Gru, these ingredients alone help make this a strong and fun film.

Really, the only downside to Despicable Me, in any form, is in the chief villain Vector. He’s supposed to be a big, goofy nerd, but he’s usually more irritating than funny (The “Oh yeaaaah!” that he says in the trailer isn’t funny then, and it isn’t funny by the fourth or fifth time he says it in the movie). Perhaps this is mostly due to Jason Segel (who is most known for crude comedies like Forgetting Sarah Marshall or I Love You Man) and his vocal performance of the character, as he plays up the nerdy angle, but Vector isn’t one of those villains you love to hate; you’re likely to just hate him.

Ultimately, Despicable Me is very much a pro-family film that injects a lot of heart – unexpectedly, even – into an outrageously silly and therefore fun movie. Despite the dismal title, heart and fun abound in Illumination Entertainment’s freshman release, Despicable Me. It’s fun, it’s silly, and it just might tug at your heartstrings.

Director: Lee Unkrich Starring: voices of Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Joan Cusack, Michael Keaton, Ned Beatty Running Time: 1 hour, 43 minutes Theatrical Release: June 18, 2010  Shop for Toy Story Merchandise

Plot Summary

Toy Story 3 welcomes Woody (voice of Tom Hanks), Buzz (voice of Tim Allen) and the whole gang back to the big screen as Andy prepares to depart for college and his loyal toys find themselves in… day care! These untamed tots with their sticky little fingers do not play nice, so it’s all for one and one for all as plans for the great escape get underway. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

It’s kind of amazing to ponder the fact that the very first Pixar animated film, as well as the very first Toy Story film, landed fifteen years ago in 1995. The year debuted a new series and film studio that would capture the hearts of children and film fans for a decade and a half. The success of the endearing tale about toys that come to life when humans aren’t watching them spawned the arguably even better sequel in 1999, and the legacy of the Toy Story characters and franchise was made greater. Since then, a third chapter in the toys’ story was attempted at least once before by Disney – actually without Pixar’s team, even! – but thankfully, the original animation studio wouldn’t let the film be made by just anybody and eleven years after the last sequel, we finally are given the long awaited Toy Story 3.

It’s no secret that anticipation is high for a second sequel. Any child who loved either of the first two is eleven years older and the franchise will hold special nostalgia for them. In addition to those already in love with the characters, Toy Story 3 is armed and ready to win over an entirely new generation of Buzz and Woody fans – even to some children of the fans of the original film! But like any memorable trilogy in film history, Pixar takes Toy Story out with a rousing, climactic, and amazingly emotional finish. With each film, the set pieces and action, and even humor have been boosted, and Toy Story 3 wraps it all up in a nice little bow. Whether or not this really is the toys’ last ride remains to be seen, but Pixar doesn’t seem to be nearly as cash hungry as DreamWorks to just sloppily force out one Toy Story movie after another – as DW has done with Shrek – so they might actually do well to let this be it.

When Toy Story 3 begins, time has passed about as much for the characters as it has for the fans of the films. While the toys themselves don’t look as though they’ve shown a ton of aging or wear, we’ve found that Andy has graduated high school and is about to leave for college, his mom has aged accordingly, and even the family dog is old and having trouble getting around. Anyone who’s followed the Story may start to feel the growing pains of passing time as much as these characters do. The toys haven’t been played with in years and when they find themselves in a daycare surrounded by children, [most] of the toys have some renewed hope. But as can be expected, things are not all that they seem to be at Sunnyside Daycare, and Andy’s toys find themselves to be prisoners in their new home. Toy Story 3 is primarily about family, friendship, and growing older, and the plot ends up becoming much like an escape or prison break adventure. It’s also the most thematically heavy of the trilogy, which is not only its strength but possibly its only weakness. Some of the film’s events border on going too overboard with where the toys find themselves, which also leads to some moments that are so unbelievably emotional, you’re likely to be baffled as to how in the world we can care so stinkin’ much for fictional inanimate plastic figurines (and we DO!). But because Toy Story 3 possesses ample amounts of heart and sentiment, it won’t be a Story that fans of the franchise will soon forget.

It’s fun to follow Woody, Buzz and their friends on the adventures they experience throughout this trilogy, and it’s surreal to see them all together for a much different outing. Because the plot focuses a great deal on the prospect of them being discarded and trying to break out from the Daycare, there are quite a few dark, heavy, and even creepy scenes. The two creepiest characters include a worn out one-droopy-eyed baby doll that only coos like an infant (which is a little reminiscent of the doll head from the first film) and a cymbal monkey that screams and is only shown in dimly lit settings. While these moments aren’t quite as ominous or unsettling as some found in other animated films, they’re still likely to give some kids the willies, while other children still may even just have a hard time seeing their favorite toys go through some pretty intense stuff. The aforementioned overtly emotional, potentially over-the-top intense sequence is also so harrowing, it’s almost shocking that the studio let the story go there (i.e. taking our little toys to such dark and dangerous situations). There were a few moments I half-expected to have turned out to be imagined by a child or be a dream sequence because of how unexpected and fantastical they become. At the same time, it’s impressive to realize how Pixar can even make their audience care this much!

The potentially objectionable content of Toy Story 3 is limited to some brief, slightly borderline rude humor (mainly the flirtatious behavior between Ken and Barbie, or Ken’s awkward flamboyance), and a great deal of action, toy-related kinds of violence. But several scenes do threaten the very existence of Andy’s toys and include dark, menacingly lit villains which take the film to some pretty intense levels at times. It’s enough to want to consider when it comes to bringing the littler ones.

If you’re wondering whether to see this in 2D or 3D, we did see this in 3D and I found that, while it looks pretty and offered a neat effect at times, it was completely unneeded for the film and its plot. In fact, I got so used to the effect it brought to the look of the movie that it was very easy to even forget it was supposed to be 3D at all. Thankfully, Pixar did NOT gratuitously take advantage of the 3D technology to just feed the gimmick, so it probably won’t make a huge difference whether this is viewed in 2D or 3D.

When all is said and done, Pixar Animation Studios is still batting a thousand, delivering yet another solid feature film to the big screen. It may take another couple viewings to make the call whether it bests its predecessors, but for now, Toy Story 3 is a very funny, welcomed addition to a beloved franchise that will be as difficult to see conclude here as it is for Andy to choose the future of his famed childhood toys.

Director: Mike Mitchell Starring: voices of Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, Cameron Diaz, Antonio Banderas Running Time: 1 hour, 33 minutes Theatrical Release: May 21, 2010 Shop for Shrek Merchandise

Plot Summary

After challenging an evil dragon, rescuing a beautiful princess and saving your in-laws’ kingdom, what’s an ogre to do? Well, if you’re Shrek, you suddenly wind up a domesticated family man. Instead of scaring villagers away like he used to, a reluctant Shrek now agrees to autograph pitch forks. What’s happened to this ogre’s roar? Longing for the days when he felt like a “real ogre,” Shrek is duped into signing a pact with the smooth-talking dealmaker, Rumpelstiltskin. Shrek suddenly finds himself in a twisted, alternate version of Far Far Away, where ogres are hunted, Rumpelstiltskin is king and Shrek and Fiona have never met. Now, it’s up to Shrek to undo all he’s done in the hopes of saving his friends, restoring his world and reclaiming his one True Love. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

It’s no secret that since the success of Shrek 2 in 2004, the series has gone down hill. Because of the first sequel’s smash hit status, the studio had talked about the possibility of eight – count ‘em – eight more Shrek films. While that sounded excessive, it was understood that if each film could deliver like the first two did, the series would be a welcomed franchise. However, when Shrek The Third was served in 2007, the film not only seemed to fall unwanted upon Shrek-ed out moviegoers, but the film itself was widely viewed as a disappointment, and the series came to a screeching halt. The talk of multiple sequels quieted, while plans for the fourth had already been underway. By the time buzz began to build for the fourth installment, promotion for the film began to center on the idea that this movie would indeed be Shrek’s final chapter. What had begun as a beloved series has somehow become sort of an exhausted trend.

To properly prepare for watching Shrek Forever After, I rewatched the previous films in one evening. The story has a good progression and maturation of the character of Shrek, but the best of the bunch is still easily the first sequel, Shrek 2. That film took what people loved about the first film, shook it up and made it even more fantastical. It introduced Antonio Banderas’ beloved Puss In Boots as well as Fiona’s parents – voiced by Julie Andrews and John Cleese (how awesome is that?!). Shrek The Third was the beginning of the end. It didn’t feel very much like the previous films, and it sort of approached the story from the misguided mind set that “bigger is better.” And sadly, that is not the case. Yet, while they tried to throw the kitchen sink into the third film, the Shrek series had begun to lose its gusto. Shrek himself was becoming domesticated, losing the elements of his character that made people fall in love with him in the first place. Plus, part of what made the Shrek films so much fun was the dynamic between Shrek and Donkey (wonderfully voiced by Eddie Murphy). With Shrek The Third and Shrek Forever After, that dynamic is horribly missing or diminished and the films suffer because of it. The other major problem is the change in directors in the later two sequels. The first two films were co-directed by Andrew Adamson, while the latest two were handed over to completely different teams. The end result certainly shows it.

Shrek Forever After picks up less than a year after where Shrek The Third left off. Shrek is starting to feel suffocated by his domesticated lifestyle and is tired of the monotony of parenthood and his star status in the kingdom. He merely wishes to live life as an ogre again. This is where Rumpelstiltskin comes in. The series throws out the reality that Rumpelstiltskin appeared as a scrawny, entirely different character in Shrek The Third, and expects no one to notice this and accept the fact that this little weasel has been lurking in the background of the story since the events of the first Shrek. It’s not a major continuity error, but it’s really one of the only significant continuity errors in the four-film series. Upon making a deal with the devil (so to speak), Shrek follows in the footsteps of George Bailey for a sort of It’s A Wonderful Life meets Back To The Future 2 – experiencing what life would have been like if the events of the first film never even happened, and he experiences an alternate reality. Of course, in this tale, it’s no angel trying to make him realize how much worth is in his life, instead we have a villain that threaten’s Shrek’s very existence.

The movie has a completely different feel out of the gate. For one, it’s much, much darker – even darker than the third film. Also, as we watch Shrek struggle a domesticated life as a husband and father, it no longer feels like a Shrek film. And when his world is turned upside down, not even the alternate Far Far Away feels like a Shrek film. In an attempt to be fresh and new, somehow Fiona became some sort of barbarian ogre outlaw while a large race of more-hideous-than-the-next-guy horde of ogres that for some reason exist just because Shrek didn’t save the princess and don’t exist if he did? While the idea of Donkey never knowing Shrek or Puss somehow becoming Fiona’s pet and therefore being fat and lazy (a fat, orange, lazy cat… Garfield, anyone?) sounds rather humorous on paper, in the context of the Shrek series, I would think fans would want to see their favorite characters in action one more time as themselves and not as almost entirely different characters. The premise has its moments, but ultimately, it’s pretty humorless and all-around disappointing. I found myself waiting for the story to become more fun or exciting, but I felt like I had seen most of this movie already in the trailer. The trailer offered almost all of the film’s funniest moments, and I didn’t find the trailer all that funny to begin with. In the first movie, Shrek is a grumpy ogre who has to deal with circumstances beyond his control. He has an unlikely partnership with a talkative Donkey and entertainment ensues. In Shrek Forever After, Shrek is a ultimately a sad, lovable big guy going through some sort of mid-life crisis, forced to try to find a way to get his life back to the way it was before he met Rumple. These just don’t feel like the same characters.

The content of Shrek Forever After is the most mild of all the Shrek films. Because Shrek is now a big green warm fuzzy teddy bear, most of his attitude and sass is gone. The only language in the film – a “h*ll” and a use of the “a” word – are both uttered by Donkey, with both either coming out very quick or a bit obscured by Donkey’s delivery. There is a little bit of crude humor, but most of it is especially mild compared to the previous films. We see what looks like a feminine male witch who makes eyes towards Fiona’s father (who is repulsed by this), while a male ogre named Cookie acts pretty flamboyant. A few minor comments are also made – like, for example, Donkey starts picking up a scent and saying it smells “delicious” and Shrek, thinking Donkey is talking about Fiona, scolds him for talking about his wife that way (really, Donkey is smelling and describing food). The film has some violence – mostly nonlethal action violence and the throwing of knives and axes, but nothing outrageously violent.

All in all, Shrek Forever After successfully wraps up the series in a neat little bow, but does it in a pretty bizarre and lackluster way. This hardly feels like the same Shrek we fell in love with nearly a decade ago. While some can say Shrek matured over the course of the series, the fact remains that the ingredients that made the franchise start out so strongly died with the conclusion of the second film. Switching directors halfway through the four films certainly took its toll on the third and fourth chapters (and an inexperienced writer for this one doesn’t help either). Shrek Forever After was helmed, curiously, by Mike Mitchell, whose credits include the atrocious Surviving Christmas and the adult-themed Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo. Whatever made the studio pick Mitchell to finish off a beloved family series is beyond me. Diehard Shrek fans may just be content enough getting one more outing with some of their favorite characters, but considering how many changes have taken place and how much little time we get with the actual characters we love here, even they are likely to be disappointed. Shrek Forever After is entertaining enough, but for anyone wishing for the enchantment from the first two films will be sorely disappointed. The series probably should have ended six years ago. If a fifth film somehow finds its way into production, let’s all hope DreamWorks goes back to the drawing board and returns the series to what worked in the first place.

Director: Dean DeBlois, Chris Sanders Starring: voices of Jay Baruchel, Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson, America Ferrera, Jonah Hill Running Time: 1 hour, 38 minutes Theatrical Release: March 26, 2010 Shop for How to Train Your Dragon Merchandise

Plot Summary

Meet Hiccup Horrendous Haddock III, heir of the Viking chiefdom, but a boy with one very big problem: a hero he is not. “How to Train Your Dragon” is the riotous story of Hiccup’s quest to hunt down the fiercest dragon, bring it into submission, and – hopefully – pass his initiation. Instead, he ends up with the smallest, most ornery dragon – it’s even toothless! Thus begins the hijinx of the world’s most lovable, unlikely hero and a most reluctant “beast.” Packed with energetic drawings and plenty of action, this boisterous tale is just right for fantasy fans or anyone with a spirit of adventure. Based on the book by Cressida Cowell. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

Ever since its debut, DreamWorks Animation has had to ride the coattails of Disney and Pixar, being compared to the successful animation studios with every project. As Pixar churns out favorite after favorite among critics and movie goers alike, DreamWorks’ productions – for the most part – have still managed to find their way into the hearts of many film fans. Still, certain projects like 2008′s Kung Fu Panda for example, have upped the ante a bit, while the studio will probably forever be associated with the hit-or-miss Shrek franchise as well. But this year, the oddly titled How To Train Your Dragon (but it’s based on a book) just may change everything for the animation studio.

One thing that DreamWorks has missed as a whole has been the grand, epic scale and feel that Pixar and Disney have been able to achieve. Up was saturated to overflowing with heart, and heart is something DreamWorks seems to only dabble in, while placing its focus on entertainment. And oftentimes, DreamWorks won’t shy away from crass humor or even toying with mild profanities, to the point of riding the line of being child-friendly at all. Enter How To Train Your Dragon. The story focuses on a teenage pseudo-viking who is trying to find his place among his people. Named Hiccup, the boy is an inventor of sorts who feels like he’s missing out on the viking heroism of fighting fearsome dragons, and while trying to prove his worth, he knocks one of the most legendary of dragons out of the sky — the Night Fury. He tracks down the dragon in hopes to slay it and prove he’s worthy of his viking kind, but realizes he doesn’t have the guts to do it. Hiccup soon befriends the Night Fury, naming him “Toothless,” and his view of the fierce beasts is forever changed. The story is filled with action, humor, and breathtaking visuals — something that the 3D elements actually beefs up a little bit (but isn’t entirely necessary). When we are treated to some sequences of soaring through the sky, it really adds to the magestic feel the filmmakers are trying to portray.

And it’s partly the visuals that give the picture a grandiose, epic feel (not the added 3D feature, that is). The big, “epic” visuals are a bit reminiscent of the recent phenomenon that was Avatar, but in a much more family-oriented fantastical way. There’s an element to How To Train Your Dragon that sort of harkens back to the 80′s fantasy features. A lot of the vikings are “larger than life” while the teenage characters ground the story enough for the audience. And those characters are teenage enough without alienating adults or even younger kids. Hiccup makes a great central underdog, while his peers are obnoxious enough to be foes but charming enough to become inevitable friends. Gerard Butler revisits the world of dragons (anyone remember him in Reign Of Fire with Christian Bale?), but this time as the quintessential viking. Some of the first scenes to really display the incredible animation detail involve his character Stoick alongside Gobber (voiced wonderfully by late night personality Craig Ferguson) conversing in a moonlit room. And to add to the impressiveness of the film’s animation, the DreamWorks team even matched Butler’s unique speech pattern perfectly, right down to matching the way his mouth moves when he speaks in real life! It’s elements like that – the attention to little details – that help strengthen an already impressive production.

There’s plenty of action to accompany the humor in How To Train Your Dragon as well. The dragons range from pretty intense and menacing to cute and lovable. The greatest amount of attention is put into the main dragon, Toothless, and it’s really difficult not to find your heart won over by this creature. The writers and animation team load him up with a wealth of personality, so it’s hard not to get wrapped up in the story and characters. There are some tense family elements between Hiccup and his father, but it’s nothing that gets too overwhelming. However, the film’s biggest issue may be the intensity of the dragons and some of the action sequences. A lot of the dragons can be pretty intimidating and monstrous – particularly for younger children. So I wouldn’t run out to this one thinking it’s fun for the whole family. The rating specifies “scary images” for a pretty good reason.

However, the “mild language” wasn’t necessarily as bad as it sounds. Astrid says “son of a…” and finished it with the name of some kind of creature, while Stoick comments at one point that “all hell will break loose.” Other than those two instances, it didn’t seem like any other language was used (otherwise their Scottish accents made it difficult to tell). Lastly, there is some violence – like dragons spitting fire at characters, carrying off livestock for food, and a behemoth of a creature attacking vikings. We also see dragons kept in captivity,

[[Visit blog to check out this spoiler]]

There is also lots of talk about killing dragons and Gobber shares a story about how he lost his hand and his foot to dragons (he has a peg leg and a hook for a hand). But out of all the violence, I was actually surprised there didn’t appear to be any focus on actually visually killing dragons or vikings. It’s mostly talked about in past tense or intent, but never seen. So I was surprised there weren’t random killings of characters left and right or significant dragon death sequences or anything – even shown off screen. There seemed to be a lot more lethal violence in Kung Fu Panda, like when Tai Lung escapes for example, and I was pleasantly surprised to see DreamWorks avoided included anything remotely like that here (which makes it a little more kid friendly and eases up the intensity of how menacing the dragons and vikings can be).

I was really impressed with what DreamWorks brought to the table with How To Train Your Dragon. It’s exciting, unique, and captivating from start to finish. The voice acting is solid and the animation is top notch. I’d love to see the studio crank out more productions of this quality. I even enjoyed it a lot more than last year’s Pixar effort, Up, and the impressive but ultimately overrated Avatar. If it weren’t for the fact Toy Story 3 is releasing in just a few short months, I’d jump to stating that this is likely to be the best animated movie of the year. But regardless, it’s seems pretty safe to say it’s a must-see!

Director: David Bowers Starring: voices of Freddie Highmore, Nicolas Cage, Donald Sutherland, Kristen Bell Running Time: 1 hour, 34 minutes Theatrical Release: October 23, 2009 Shop for Astro Boy Merchandise

Plot Summary

Set in futuristic Metro City, “Astro Boy” is about a young robot with incredible powers created by a brilliant scientist. Powered by positive “blue” energy, “Astro Boy” is endowed with super strength, x-ray vision, unbelievable speed and the ability to fly. Embarking on a journey in search of acceptance, Astro Boy learns the joys and emotions of being human, and gains the strength to embrace his destiny. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

As we scramble to put our spin on several movies that released around the time we were prepping our web site, Astro Boy is the latest to be reviewed. If you are among the many folks I’ve come across who think that Astro Boy just randomly appeared from nowhere and is just another kid’s movie character, think again. Born out of comics (manga), the Astro Boy character is older than you and is as iconic in Japan as Mickey Mouse is in the U.S. (plus he has cool hair). So how does the legendary 2D Astro Boy transition into the wildly popular 3D genre of animated films back here in the states? Well, it’s sort of a mixed bag.

And by “mixed bag,” I truly mean that the movie’s storyline and some environmental touches are pretty much borrowed from various pieces of existing cinema (I know, I know…that’s Hollywood, right)? But really, you can make correlations to the following: The Jetsons, Pinocchio, The Matrix, Wall-E, Futurama, and I am sure there are more. I am not bashing the movie’s intent, in fact these may be purposeful inclusions into the storyline in paying homage to other sci-fi/fantasy works, however, I can certainly say there is not much originality throughout the movie as a result.

If you can get past all of the obvious influences, what is truly terrific about the tale are the various moments of conflict. There are some pretty heavy themes throughout. Beginning with a strained father/son relationship and cycling through to a desire for Astro to figure out his “place” in the world. Not wanting to give up too many details, I will just say that there are some sad plot elements which may affect any little ones watching. But these real-life issues are feelings most of us have dealt with at some point, and being put in a situation to empathize with the characters definitely enriches the story.

The presentation of Astro Boy consists of colorful and sharp animation, especially scenes that take place in Metro City (the fictional floating cyber society flanked by a mountain). The great architectural design really brings out what Metro City was intended to be — gorgeous and vibrant (if not a little posh and snooty). In contrast, but just as impressively represented, is the surface beneath the hovering Metro City. The surface is a sprawling junk heap of robot parts discarded after the bots are used for menial chores by Metro residents. So the atmosphere is very well done, as are the character models. From Astro Boy himself to the various servant robots throughout the film, it’s easy to see the amount of detail that went into creating this futuristic existence.

Not many movies are considered to be perfect and Astro Boy certainly has a few set-backs, but if I were to pitch the Astro Boy experience, it would be like this: If you are a fan of top-notch artwork, think having robots handling your day-to-day tasks is a welcome improvement, ever felt like you didn’t fit in, are sick of pretty princesses and would rather see a heroic male with jet blasters and laser cannons…then Astro Boy just may be the perfect movie for you. Remember, robots are our friends.

Director: Ron Clements, John Musker Starring: voices of Anika Noni Rose, Bruno Campos, Keith David, Oprah Winfrey Running Time: 1 hour, 37 minutes Theatrical Release: December 11, 2009 Shop for Princess and the Frog Merchandise

Plot Summary

Walt Disney Animation Studios presents the musical “The Princess and the Frog,” an animated comedy set in the great city of New Orleans. From the creators of “The Little Mermaid” and “Aladdin” comes a modern twist on a classic tale, featuring a beautiful girl named Tiana (Anika Noni Rose), a frog prince who desperately wants to be human again, and a fateful kiss that leads them both on a hilarious adventure through the mystical bayous of Louisiana. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

A little late to the party with our review of Disney’s much-talked-about return to a classic hand-drawn style that has since taken a back seat to full-on CG storytelling. But what a better time to delve into a movie set in festive New Orleans, and featuring the studios’ first African-American princess. Here we are celebrating Black History Month, the Saints are just a few weeks removed from appearing in — and winning — their first ever Super Bowl, and this past Tuesday marked the annual Mardi Gras celebration made popular by residents of N’awlins. So when I finally had a moment to view The Princess and the Frog, suffice it to say I was certainly in the right frame of mind for a jazz-fueled adventure. But would my giddy mood be enough to get me through what amounts to just an updated take on an old fairy tale? In a word, youbetcha! (ok, so it’s not really a word…but neither is N’awlins and I used that already).

It took all of three minutes for me to realize this story was going to have a huge amount of heart and depth. The first few sequences establish main character young Tiana and her family as working-class dreamers with an understanding that dreams do in fact come true, but not without hard work. These principles were mainly set forth by Tiana’s father (James) who longed to one day own a highly-frequented restaurant in New Orleans. Tiana inherited her father’s passion for cooking at a young age and wanted to share in her father’s goal to own a successful establishment. Young Tiana would wish upon the evening star while holding a photo of an eatery scribbled with the words “Tiana’s Place.”

[[Visit blog to check out this spoiler]]

An older Tiana literally worked day and night (working as a waitress for Cal’s in the evening and Duke’s in the morning) trying to save up enough money to purchase property to open up the restaurant. It was a breath of fresh air to see such a strong message in a Disney movie about achieving goals through hard work. No magic wands or fairy dust. What you accomplish in life is mainly up to you. This work ethic would become even more pronounced when Tiana meets Prince Naveen who had quite the opposite upbringing. Not wanting to give away too many plot details, I really just want to lament Disney for its foray into a very hopeful, but realistic storyline. Nearly every character along the way has their own wants and wishes, but in surprising fashion there are some mild to heavy circumstances. Certain events within the film may need to be explained to the younger ones.

Do not let my explanation of the underlying themes dissuade you from seeing this movie with your family. Make no mistake, Princess and the Frog is a triumphant return to glory for Disney easily on par with predecessors The Little Mermaid and Aladdin. The classic art style is actually a fresh look these days. After being bombarded with 3D this and Blu-ray that, it’s kinda cool to go back to a “simpler” time. It’s the equivalent of hitting up a corner lemonade stand on a Sunday afternoon. Pure nostalgia.

The colorful cast of characters introduced throughout is yet another classic Disney hallmark, right down to the all-important eccentric villain Dr. Facilier. You will love Louis the gator, Raymond the firefly and many other minor players. The chemistry between all of the personalities result in a big gumbo pot boiling over with witty and heartfelt dialog. But perhaps the most compelling character is the city in which the story takes place. As mentioned earlier, New Orleans is the backdrop for this tale — set in the 1920s — and it just about hits every one of the viewers’ senses. From the soulful jazz music pouring through the streets — a result of one of the best overall soundtracks — to the region-specific foods served up such as beignet and gumbo, New Orleans is replicated in its full stereotypical glory.

Overall, The Princess and the Frog captures the American working spirit coupled with dreaming big in a style which includes some real-life circumstances. It is a magnificent movie with firm messages about defining what is important to one’s self, and overcoming setbacks in order to achieve personal goals. Very inspirational. If you have not yet seen the film, I suggest you gather the family and take in one of the all-time Disney greats as the DVD/Blu-ray release date is set for March 16.

Also see – DTW Blu-ray/DVD Review: The Princess and the Frog

Director: Shane Acker Starring: voices of Elijah Wood, Crispin Glover, Martin Landau, John C. Reilly Running Time: 1 hour, 19 minutes Theatrical Release: September 9, 2009 Shop for 9 Merchandise

Plot Summary

“9″ stars Elijah Wood, John C. Reilly, Jennifer Connelly, Martin Landau, Christopher Plummer and Crispin Glover and features the music of Danny Elfman. When “9″ (“The Lord of the Ring’s” Elijah Wood) first comes to life, he finds himself in a post-apocalyptic world. All humans are gone, and it is only by chance that he discovers a small community of others like him taking refuge from fearsome machines that roam the earth intent on their extinction. Despite being the neophyte of the group, 9 convinces the others that hiding will do them no good. They must take the offensive if they are to survive, and they must discover why the machines want to destroy them in the first place. As they’ll soon come to learn, the very future of civilization may depend on them. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

9 is a feature film born out of director Shane Acker’s 2005 student award-winning animated short by the same title. Acker’s 9 caught the attention of one Tim Burton and, along with Timur Bekmambetov, produced the big screen version of Acker’s post-apocalyptic tale. As such, it should not come as a surprise that the gorgeously morbid visual backdrop for the film is quite easily its most outstanding quality. Within this “steampunk” style adventure, you will immediately immerse yourself in the desolate world in which main character, 9, awakens after being “breathed” to life by a scientist.

[[Visit blog to check out this spoiler]]

I truly appreciated the distinct “ragdoll” look of 9 himself and the other characters he met along the way. Although they all look the same — aside from certain differentiating quirks — and do not have actual names (the beings are just numbered 1 through 9), I found myself heavily connected to the feelings of each individual as the story unfolded. With each moment of peril, more and more of each characters’ traits are revealed in a logical format.

Which leads me to the actual story content. The formula may have been just a bit too logical. Streamlined. Certainly not the type of straight-laced yarn I would have expected from a film with such unique and powerful visual charm. I spent most of my time viewing the movie just waiting for that one moment…a signature moment in the film which would suck me in beyond visual-appeal alone. Unfortunately, for me, this never happened.

Regarding content for children, parents, just keep in mind that 9 is rated PG-13. The film features a dark and gritty atmosphere in which several potentially frightening monsters prowl. However, use your judgement based on what your children usually watch. 9 is the same type of fare offered up by titles such as The Nightmare Before Christmas and Coraline. So if those movies currently reside in your media library, then by all means, 9 will be a welcome addition for the family.

Overall, 9 is a title that shouldn’t be missed. Especially by those who appreciate the darker side of animation as opposed to standard bright and splashy family entertainment. As mentioned, the visuals absolutely carry this film, and in a rarity, those merits alone make 9 a worthy flick. If the story were a bit more compelling, this would be a no-doubt-about-it classic.

Director: Wes Anderson Starring: voices of George Clooney, Bill Murray, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman, Willem Dafoe Running Time: 1 hour, 27 minutes Theatrical Release: November 25, 2009 Shop for Fantastic Mr. Fox Merchandise

Plot Summary

“Fantastic Mr. Fox” is visionary director Wes Anderson’s first animated film, utilizing classic handmade stop motion techniques to tell the story of the best selling children’s book by Roald Dahl (author of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and James and the Giant Peach). (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

It’s a surprise, to me at least, for an indie film director to decide to leave a string of oddball, R-rated films and chase after adapting a 1970 childrens book into a stop-motion animated PG-rated film. But that’s exactly what Wes Anderson, best known for his films Rushmore, The Life Acquatic, and The Royal Tenenbaums, has done. From the opening credits of Fantastic Mr. Fox, it’s no question that you’re watching a Wes Anderson film, and the director treats this picture like any other one of his films – with the dramatic closeups, unsual camera angles or framing, and odd character behavior. Fantastic Mr. Fox is as off-beat as any other one of Anderson’s films, but it’s quite easily his best.

All of Anderson’s films (four of which I’ve seen – all in an edited, more sterile form by my own preference – for better or worse) have an approach that is undeniably an acquired taste. There’s a quirky humor style that Anderson embraces and embellishes that is welcomed by many indie film buffs but not so easily digestible by the pop film culture audience. I must fall into the latter category as the only film I’ve enjoyed by Anderson’s was the wacky Life Acquatic (again, in edited form), which still felt a bit too off-beat for my usual tastes. Fantastic Mr. Fox fares best of all of his work, possibly due to the source material, coupled with the fact it’s presented in a uniquely done stop-motion animation style. The end result is as entertaining to watch as it is to take in. Each character – from the animals to the humans – are interesting in design and character traits, and it’s these kinds of details that work to the film’s benefit.

Still, when a film so off-beat and against the norm (but typical for this director) becomes so heavily lauded by the majority of film critics, you kind of go into viewing such a film with high expectations. And while my expectations may have been a bit unattainable, it’s still easy enough for me to grasp Fantastic Mr. Fox as a whole, stack it up against the widespread praise given towards the movie, and wonder what is SO extraodinarily different (or better?) than most other animated films? Sure, there isn’t a single other animated film like this out there, but if you know Anderson’s work, this one follows suit perfectly. While his other live action films have always been adult-oriented in nature, this orientation even carries over a bit into Anderson’s first all-animation PG-film. For example, instead of there being lots of profanity as might usually be found in some of Anderson’s work, the director makes up for it with substitute profanity. Oddly enough, where a character might usually use any number of profanities – including the “f” word – the characters in Fantastic Mr. Fox quite regularly, and simply, substitute the word “cuss” in place of it. They might say, for example, “What the cuss was I thinking?” instead of something much more profane. Even though it’s not the actual word, you often get the idea what they would normally say there, and so it feels a bit harsh or out of place for such a film. Also, at first it seemed like a clever idea, but by the film’s end, so many characters do this, and so often, that it feels over-used and a bit tired. But the very fact that Anderson even chooses to go this route with the dialog kind of cements the realization that Fantastic Mr. Fox isn’t really a kids film.

Sure, Fantastic Mr. Fox involves a central family of characters who are personified foxes who wear clothes, and, yes, other characters include badgers, rabbits, possums, and the like, but the plot involves stealing, drinking, smoking, and ruthless farmers trying to kill and wipe out the food pilfering animals. Fantastic Mr. Fox is about as edgy as you might expect a Wes Anderson animated film to be, and with there even being some pretty creepy-to-frightening scenes for young ones, it’s just not really a suitable family film. And that’s not even mentioning the slower pace of the film that is likely to lull the younger ones to sleep in their seats (or make them too antsy to sit through its just-under 90-minute running time). So the question is raised: just who is this animated PG film targeted to? Sadly, the opening weekend holiday box office take of just 10 million relates that this may be the very problem with it.

But all this isn’t to say that Fantastic Mr. Fox is a bad film. By this point in the review, I’m sure you’re wondering why on earth I gave the film rather positive marks. Truth is, Anderson has put together a fine looking and rather fun heist film. Casting George Clooney in the role of Mr. Fox is quite inspired, considering Fox feels like a sort of scheming Cary Grant character and Clooney clearly has emulated Grant’s style more than once before (see Leatherheads especially). And with Clooney having previously played the role of heist mastermind Danny Ocean in Ocean’s 11 and its two sequels, Mr. Fox doesn’t stray too far from George’s comfort zone. The film brings up some interesting themes in the story that include children feeling like they can’t measure up to their peers and parents needing to encourage their children and not hold such high expectations for them. Team that with some silly, out of left field humor and indie-style directing and you have one bizarre animated film. Fans of Anderson’s work are likely to enjoy this one the most, while those who kind of like to play it safe and usually only enjoy the blockbuster popcorn entertainment may want to skip this one.

Aside from the “cuss” substitute profanity, there are some violent scenes that include an animal getting its tail shot off (we see the dismembered tail a few times, as well as the animal’s bandaged up wound), an animal scratches another animal’s face during a serious argument, and there are other instances that involve a rabid dog, sinister-looking farmers shooting relentlessly at their animal victims (with intent to kill, of course), and a creepy rat (appropriately voiced by the equally creepy Willem Dafoe) who weilds a switch blade and threatens our heroes a few times.

Fantastic Mr. Fox is certainly one of the more unique animated films to be released this year. Indie film director Wes Anderson transfers his quirky adult filmmaking style into stop-motion form and it actually works for the most part. While this style will indeed limit the film’s audience, it’s rather evident that Anderson was only concerned with making a film for his fans and older viewers alike than making a film for a wider audience. With that in mind, Fantastic Mr. Fox is a fun little film, but not one for the young ones, and not your usual family fair.

Mark says…

Upon viewing Fantastic Mr. Fox, I was caught up in the unconventional style put forth by director Wes Anderson. As John mentioned above, this is right in line with Anderson’s previous efforts, but seeing his vision play out in animated form immediately sets “Mr. Fox” apart from the usual animated storytelling process. You know you are not watching your standard kiddie flick. I enjoyed the adventure quite tremendously as it began unfolding, but I could not quite target what exactly about the film that I appreciated. (other than the fact it was, well, different).

Now being several hours removed from my viewing, everything is sort of hitting me all at once. This movie stays with you. Although you may not know exactly how to feel at first, soon after, you will be taking mental inventory of all the whimsical details and deadpan dialog strewn throughout.

Without revealing too many plot details, I will just mention a few aspects I appreciated highly. First and foremost, for me, was the soundtrack and most importantly its timely implementation. Tracks by The Rolling Stones, Beach Boys and Alexandre Desplat all perfectly compliment Mr. Fox and his crew’s capers. But one song in particular by Jarvis Crocker (Petey’s Song) had my toes a tappin’ and brought on tears from laughter. It was ridiculously catchy and it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that it makes it onto my “Walk-Sonic” for when I have a few people over for some “cidar.”

Another sticking point with me were the various original inclusions by Anderson to help shape the culture of the film. For example, the “kids” compete in a schoolyard game called Whack-Bat — a fictional sport made up by Anderson himself — which seems to be a combination of baseball and cricket, played with a flaming pine cone. The intricacies involved in the creation of this pastime, which essentially is just a tiny portion of the film, goes a long way toward giving Fantastic Mr. Fox its uniqueness. There are a number of these little touches throughout. Another example is a superhero named “White Cape.” Mr. Fox’s son, Ash (voiced by Jason Schwartzman) has posters of the hero in his room and can be seen reading this comic book. White Cape was created by Anderson and storyboard artist, Christian De Vita as a heroic idol of Ash’s. (as the young boy dons a white cape in the film, acting out his inner hero). I can really go on and on about the massive amounts of detail. From various products — such as Mrs. Bean’s Famous Nutmeg Ginger Apple Snaps, of which chef Mario Batali made a recipe for — to Mr. Fox’s slick wardrobe. But I will leave those discoveries up to you.

As far as actual story content there are some very adult themes (as John pointed out in his review), but nothing that your child shouldn’t be able to watch (in the company of an adult). The animation is jaw-droppingly meticulous and children will enjoy the colorful characters. However, Fantastic Mr. Fox is tailor-made for an adult cult following.

Director: Jorge Blanco Starring: voices of Dwayne Johnson, Justin Long, Jessica Biel, Seann William Scott, Gary Oldman Running Time: 1 hour, 31 minutes Theatrical Release: November 20, 2009 Shop for Planet 51 Merchandise

Plot Summary

Animated sci-fi tale set on “Planet 51,” whose inhabitants live in fear of an alien invasion. Their paranoia is realized when astronaut Capt. Charles “Chuck” Baker arrives from Earth. Befriended by a young resident, the astronaut has to avoid capture in order to recover his spaceship and return home. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

For a good portion of 2009, moviegoers have been seeing teasers and trailers for a unique animated experience called Planet 51. The most popular teaser shows a fully-suited United States astronaut as he lands on a foreign planet and plants an American flag into the ground. When he looks around him, he sees that the entire alien planet is functioning like a human one, except that the inhabitants are green alien creatures. Most of the promos for the film don’t give too many details away, which leaves the actual viewing of Planet 51 to be mostly a surprise. The end result is an entertaining feature film for nearly all ages.

What’s really fun about Planet 51, which I didn’t know until I was actually in the theater watching the movie play out, is that the film is shot entirely from the perspective of the alien planet… which resides in a sort of 1950′s era. A present-day American astronaut then “invades” their planet and what unfolds is sort of a mix of The Day The Earth Stood Still and War Of The Worlds, only backwards. The young aliens of the planet are mostly obsessed with visitors from another planet – obviously human-like aliens that might come and invade their planet. The film’s central alien is a teenage boy named Lem, voiced by Justin Long (Galaxy Quest, Die Hard 4, those Mac Vs. PC commercials), who feels like everything is starting to go right in life… that is, until the “alien” shows up. All mayhem indeed breaks loose when U.S. astronaut Chuck Baker (voiced by Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson) arrives. And he’s quite the pompous and arrogant goof you might not entirely expect him to be. To assist Chuck is a miniature land rover that acts like a cross between a pet dog and WALL-E, who steals many of the scenes its in, despite frequently bringing to mind the Pixar film that features said titular robot.

The idea alone of turning Planet 51 itself into a human-like planet sounds like fun, but setting it in our 1950′s era really opens things up for a whole mess of opportunities and even pop culture references to come into play. Chuck is not only caught off guard by such an alien race, but the fact that they’re all stuck in the 50′s. From the classic style monster movies the aliens love to watch, to the town square (which seems to bear an appearance inspired by Back To The Future) to the very idea of alien conspiracies and Area 51 paranoia of the 50′s. And when Chuck is thrust into the mix, he can’t help but make random and direct references to The Terminator or even Star Wars. There are all kinds of fun and clever little nods and references sprinkled throughout Planet 51, which is liable to entertain adults just as much as the younger audience it targets. But there’s an element to the approach of the film that, because it relies so heavily on reminding us of familiar alien and monster lore that Planet 51 feels at times more like it’s one big spoof or homage than its own standalone story. And it isn’t really the downfall of the film – since I do often enjoy cleverly placed cultural references – but there are moments where the film just feels a bit flat or underdone.

And that feeling is entirely not due to its visual quality. Although the film is done by first-time director Jorge Blanco and two co-directors, the animation itself is breathtaking. Planet 51 looks beautiful from start to finish. The only time things seemed slightly off is when Chuck – the human – would speak. Sometimes his words more clearly didn’t naturally match his lips, but overall, from the backgrounds to the fluid motion of the characters and surroundings, Planet 51′s animation is first-rate. It’s certainly an impressive production.

The content of Planet 51 may be its most questionable aspect. More than just a couple times does the content venture into the suggestive arena, offering some jokes that are a bit off-color at best. From the opening scene where two teens are “parking” at a lookout point and share a kiss, to a carefully timed use of the phrase “What the… duck?!” and even a couple gags that involve butt plugs and suppositories, Planet 51 skates on thin ice when it comes to rude and crude humor. The majority of the most offensive gags are likely go over the kids’ heads, but still it felt strange to see some of the jokes that worked their way into the film. It gave it all a slightly more adult feel – especially partnered with older cultural references that children just wouldn’t understand – and it’s a good chance that such a feel is what dampened its quality a bit.

In the end, Planet 51 is a good animated family film, but not without its faults. Those looking for the random humor of Cloudy With a Chance Of Meatballs or the family charm of a Pixar film, will be disappointed that Planet 51 tries to be many different films in one and ultimately loses a bit of its own personality in the process. It’s still a worthwhile and fun piece of entertainment that encourages its audience (once again) to embrace those around you that are different than you… just don’t expect it to be anything more.

Also see – DTW Blu-ray/DVD Review: Planet 51

Mark says…

John’s analysis was spot-on. I don’t have much to offer in the way of a drastic differing opinion, however there are a few elements I wish to discuss. First off, right out of the chute, Planet 51 suffers from its timing. In a year that has seen some of the most impressive animated feature films to date — establishing a record for Oscar contending animation — this under assuming tale inevitably takes a back seat to heavy hitters (with heavy storylines) such as Pixar’s Up and Coraline. Although Planet 51 itself is among the films in the mix for an academy award, it certainly does not compare in terms of engrossing content.

Too much time is spent on insignificant characters in peculiarly placed situations. Rather than spending time fleshing out the main players — whom we never get to the point of caring too much about — the director felt the need to insert a random scene of a mail carrier, with no bearing on the story whatsoever, attempting to out-wit an alien dog. And Lem’s love interest, Neera (voiced by Jessica Biel) was overshadowed by an annoyingly trite hippy-like protester named Glar. I realize he was meant to be irritating (mission accomplished), but he also succeeded in completely wiping away any kind of connection audiences should have had for Neera and her potential relationship with Lem. These types of tactics rendered the story relatively heartless.

Despite several flaws, Planet 51 will most certainly be a hit with its target audience. The children will love the visuals and will absolutely fall in love with dog-like robot, Rover. Sure they may not understand the overdone homage to classic sci fi or some of the borderline crude humor, but that’s the beauty of children…they are not jaded like us adults trying to nitpick a movie intended for kids. So feel free to take the little ones to your local cinema for a flick you can completely take in while on cruise control — which is sometimes a welcome experience.

Director: Robert Zemeckis Starring: voices of Jim Carrey, Gary Oldman, Bob Hoskins, Cary Elwes, Robin Wright Penn Running Time: 1 hour, 36 minutes Theatrical Release: November 6, 2009 Shop for A Christmas Carol Merchandise

Plot Summary

“Disney’s A Christmas Carol,” a multi-sensory thrill ride re-envisioned by Academy Award®-winning filmmaker Robert Zemeckis, captures the fantastical essence of the classic Dickens tale in a groundbreaking 3-D motion picture event. Ebenezer Scrooge (Jim Carrey) begins the Christmas holiday with his usual miserly contempt, barking at his faithful clerk (Gary Oldman) and his cheery nephew (Colin Firth). But when the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Yet to Come take him on an eye-opening journey revealing truths Old Scrooge is reluctant to face, he must open his heart to undo years of ill will before it’s too late. (from MovieWeb.com)

Film Review

It’s risky business to attempt to create a new version of the classic beloved Christmas tale, A Christmas Carol. The Charles Dickens story has been made into so many different renditions over the years (Hollywood even churned out a version of the story into a non-Christmas romantic comedy called Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past earlier this year). But the 2009 update from Disney of A Christmas Carol is helmed by Robert Zemeckis, who is most known for his works Forrest Gump, Back To The Future, and Who Framed Roger Rabbit. In 2004, Zemeckis produced his first ever all-CGI animated motion capture film, The Polar Express. The Christmas story, which was all about believing in Santa Claus, was created entirely using motion capture animation. Zemeckis then went on to create the crude Beowulf in 2007 with A Christmas Carol being his next undertaking. For the central role of Ebenezer Scrooge, Zemeckis and company have enlisted the aid of comedian Jim Carrey, who also provides the voice and performance capturing for the three ghosts that visit Scrooge on Christmas night. The end result?

It’s a bit tough to top the 1951 version of the classic story, Scrooge, which starred the phenomenal Alastair Sim in the title role. But Jim Carrey actually manages to channel some of the best traits of Sim’s take on the character, while injecting just enough of his own personality to give it a different feel. This version also utilizes some of the story’s best dialog and moments that help make the story such a moving and memorable one. Many previous renditions of the tale have spent much time developing Scrooge’s past, but 2009′s A Christmas Carol sacrifices some of the back story details to make room for whimsical moments to lighten the mood. I suppose it’s fine, since the scenes that do develop character and story are handled with great care. But Zemeckis gives his version of Christmas Carol a very dark and creepy telling. From our introduction to the ghost of Marley who literally jumps out at the audience, to the ghastly dismissal of the Ghost of Christmas Present and introduction of The Ghost of Christmas Future, there are many borderline horrific moments that will likely scare the Scrooge out of any little miser. Sadly, Zemeckis’ take on A Christmas Carol isn’t entirely a family-friendly one. It’s likely to give young ones some serious nightmares.

The only real content worthy of alarm is how creepy and scary some of the film’s moments are. When we meet Marley, we find his creepy glowing ghostly face in place of Scrooge’s door knocker. And when it suddenly spits the knocker out of its mouth, sending tooth fragments into the air, you know you’re likely in for a spooky story. Scrooge’s more formal meeting with Marley that follows is very tensely and slowly built up with spooky sounds and camera angles. Then Marley himself is a creepy fellow. At one point, he tears his jaw accidentally, causing it to flop in a gruesome fashion. It’s then played for laughs to lighten the moment, but it’s still unmistakably a rough one. Shortly thereafter, we see a sea of tormented souls outside Scrooge’s window in a scene meant to shock. Things don’t turn super grim again until we find The Ghost of Christmas Present making his exit… strangely decomposing before our eyes down to a skeleton before disintegrating away like dust. The Ghost of Christmas Future then lunges at the screen and we see many more intense moments, including Scrooge’s final encounter with his intended fate. It all adds to the emotional impact of Scrooge’s supernatural journey, however, and it makes the glorious redemptive ending seem all that more cheery and bright in contrast.

In fact, Robert Zemeckis does do the Christmas season a great service in incorporating classic Christmas carol tunes into Alan Silvestri’s score, and maintaining references to God, albeit often subtle, throughout the story. There’s even a prominent focus on the symbol of the cross atop a church during one of the scenic shots that adds to the genuine Christmas feel of the film. In the end, Disney’s A Christmas Carol is still probably one of the most “Christmasy” modern holiday films to come along in awhile.

With 3D becoming the hottest thing to hit theaters since stadium-style seating, it’s partly a shame that Disney’s A Christmas Carol has to fall victim to it. Now, before you get me wrong about the movie’s 3D quality, it really has nothing to do with how the film looks in 3D and everything to do with how the movie takes advantage of the 3D technology. The actual 3D animation is fantastic – possibly the best I’ve ever seen on screen. The animation is crystal clear and the 3D never seems anything but genuine. But Zemeckis milks the film for what it’s worth in its 3D capabilities, specifically using Scrooge’s traveling through the past, present, and future as a ride for the audience. We follow him as he soars through the air and over rooftops, to even being shot high into the sky by the Ghost of Christmas Past and chased through the streets of London by the Ghost of Christmas Future on a horse and carriage. It’s to the point where it begins to feel excessive before the film’s end, and it starts to feel a bit out of place for this kind of classic story and overdone. It does work well in 3D, but it probably will just seem all the more unnecessary in 2D (particularly when that will be the primary viewing format when it hits home video). Other than the overuse of zipping through the sky, the 3D effects are beautiful – particularly when it’s snowing on screen – and it adds a little additional whimsy to the holiday story.

When all is said and done, Disney’s A Christmas Carol is an instant classic! The cast all did an excellent job with their parts and the film even uses many of the voice actors’ likenesses in their animated forms. While the story and its delivery is much too dark for young audiences (especially in 3D when the ghosts literally jump out at you at times), and there are a few classic previous film moments that felt were missed here, the redemptive quality of the story of Ebenezer Scrooge is retained in Robert Zemeckis’ telling of Dickens’ tale, and the movie wonderfully captures the Christmas spirit. I look forward to revisiting this one each Christmas season to come.

Buy advance tickets to Disney’s A Christmas Carol and get points for posters, DVDs and more!