Search
Search results
Bingo ABC: phonics nursery rhyme song for kids with karaoke games
Games and Education
App
Bring music and joy for the whole family with Bingo Song! Cute interactions, a catchy tune, and...
Romanian TV+
News and Entertainment
App
Romanian TV+ is an app for checking Romanian TV schedules anytime, anywhere. Track your favorite...
Market Monitor for Team Fortress 2
Games and Finance
App
SALE! - 50% OFF FOR A LIMITED TIME! GET IT NOW! Market Monitor for Team Fortress 2 allows you to...
Geographical & Archive
Travel and Magazines & Newspapers
App
** RGS members wanting free app access will need to download the separate "Geographical Magazine"...
Nella The Princess Knight
Education and Games
App
Help Nella and her friends on their courageous adventures; shoot arrows to help the lost birds find...
Pepi Super Stores
Education and Games
App
Welcome to Pepi Super Stores — the most amazing stores on the planet! Join our characters and...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Turning Red (2022) in Movies
Mar 7, 2022
The digital animation geniuses at Pixar are back with “Turning Red” and it marks a departure for the studio known for the “Toy Story” and “Cars”, franchises.
Set in 1990s Toronto, the film centers around 8th grader Mei (Rosalie Chiang), who considers herself an adult at 13 and eagerly applies herself to school when she is not helping her family tour business at a local Temple or hanging with her friends.
Life comes crashing to a halt when after a traumatic day of embarrassment; Mei awakens in the form of a large Red Panda. In a panic, Mei attempts to hide her situation which causes her over-protective mother to assume it is Puberty related and that her hormones are kicking in.
Mei desperately wants to get her life back to normal and learns that as long as she is calm her Panda is under control. However, this proves to be harder than expected and soon Mei learns that the Panda is the result of a family bloodline but there is a way to end it during a Lunar ceremony in a couple of weeks.
Chaos soon follows as Mei struggles with her situation and must find a way to cope with the changes that are going on and make some very important decisions about her life and her future.
The film is a difficult one to review for me as never having been a teenage girl dealing with puberty, raging estrogen, and the issues that go with it. That being said the film struggles to find a balance as it tacks on the capers of Mei in Panda form without being overly funny or charming and keeps the focus on Teen Angst, puberty-related issues and becoming an adult.
The film lacks the interesting characters, charm, and appeal that have set the foundation for so many Pixar films and it is surprising that a company that can elicit a range of emotions in an animated short fail to really connect with their latest feature. There were some amusing parts but the film as a whole was rather dull and lacked much in the way of humor and was very predictable.
The decision to put the film directly on Disney+ as the studio’s recent “Soul” and “Luca” was raised some controversy but in the end, I do believe it was the right decision as “Turning Red” is not likely to be a film that draws people to the cinema beyond the opening weekend.
It is a film that is a bold step for the company, but one that lacks the charm and humor of previous films as not everyone is going to want to sit through a feature-length film on teenage angst and dealing with changing bodies and the emotional turmoil that follows. However, the target audience is likely to connect with the characters and it will be interesting to see what the reaction to the film is long-term.
3 stars out of 5
“Turning Red” will debut on Disney+ on March 11th
Set in 1990s Toronto, the film centers around 8th grader Mei (Rosalie Chiang), who considers herself an adult at 13 and eagerly applies herself to school when she is not helping her family tour business at a local Temple or hanging with her friends.
Life comes crashing to a halt when after a traumatic day of embarrassment; Mei awakens in the form of a large Red Panda. In a panic, Mei attempts to hide her situation which causes her over-protective mother to assume it is Puberty related and that her hormones are kicking in.
Mei desperately wants to get her life back to normal and learns that as long as she is calm her Panda is under control. However, this proves to be harder than expected and soon Mei learns that the Panda is the result of a family bloodline but there is a way to end it during a Lunar ceremony in a couple of weeks.
Chaos soon follows as Mei struggles with her situation and must find a way to cope with the changes that are going on and make some very important decisions about her life and her future.
The film is a difficult one to review for me as never having been a teenage girl dealing with puberty, raging estrogen, and the issues that go with it. That being said the film struggles to find a balance as it tacks on the capers of Mei in Panda form without being overly funny or charming and keeps the focus on Teen Angst, puberty-related issues and becoming an adult.
The film lacks the interesting characters, charm, and appeal that have set the foundation for so many Pixar films and it is surprising that a company that can elicit a range of emotions in an animated short fail to really connect with their latest feature. There were some amusing parts but the film as a whole was rather dull and lacked much in the way of humor and was very predictable.
The decision to put the film directly on Disney+ as the studio’s recent “Soul” and “Luca” was raised some controversy but in the end, I do believe it was the right decision as “Turning Red” is not likely to be a film that draws people to the cinema beyond the opening weekend.
It is a film that is a bold step for the company, but one that lacks the charm and humor of previous films as not everyone is going to want to sit through a feature-length film on teenage angst and dealing with changing bodies and the emotional turmoil that follows. However, the target audience is likely to connect with the characters and it will be interesting to see what the reaction to the film is long-term.
3 stars out of 5
“Turning Red” will debut on Disney+ on March 11th
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Tail as old as Kline.
With the Disney marketing machine in full swing, its hard to separate the hype from the movie reality in this latest live-action remake of one of their classic animated features from 1991. If you are lucky enough to have children you will know that each child tends to have “their” Disney feature: for my second daughter (then 4) that film would be “Beauty and the Beast”. With a VHS video tape worn down to the substrate, this is a film I know every line of dialogue to (“I’m especially good at expectorating”). So seeing this movie was always going to be a wander down Nostalgia Avenue and a left turn into Emotion Crescent, regardless of how good a film it was. And so it proved.
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Taking no chances with a beloved formula, most of the film is an almost exact frame-for-frame recreation of the original, with the odd diversion which, in the main, is to slot in new songs by original composer Alan Menken with Tim Rice lyrics. For, unlike “La La Land” this is a proper musical lover’s musical with songs dropping in regularly throughout the running time.
Which brings us to Emma Watson’s Belle. I’ve seen review comments that she ‘dials it in’ with a humourless and souless portrayal of the iconic bookworm. I can’t fathom what film those people were watching! I found Watson to be utterly mesmerising, confident and delightful with a fine (though possibly auto-tuned) singing voice. Her ‘Sound of Music’ moment (you’ll know the one) brought tears to my eyes. There are moments when her acting is highly reminiscent of Hermione Grainger, but this is about as crass a criticism as saying that Harrison Ford has done his “Knock it Off” snarl again.
I even felt that the somewhat dodgy bestiality/Stockholm-syndrome thing, inherent in the plot, was deftly handled by her. Curiously (and I feel guilty for even thinking this) the only part I felt slightly icky about was the age difference evident in the final kiss between Watson (now 27) and the transformed beast (sorry if this is a TERRIBLE spoiler for you!) played by Dan Stevens (“Downton Abbey”): even though with Stevens being only 35 this is only 8 years! I think the problem here is that it is still difficult for me to decouple the modern feminist woman that is Watson from the picture of the young Hermione as a schoolgirl in her first term at Hogwarts. (I know this is terrible typecasting, and definitely my bad, but that’s the way it is).
Stevens himself is fine as the cursed prince, albeit that most of his scenes are behind the CGI-created wet-rug that is the beast. Similarly, most of the supporting stars (Ewan McGregor as Lumière, Ian McKellen as Cogsworth, Emma Thompson as Mrs Potts and an almost unrecognisable Stanley Tucci as the maestro Cadenza) are similarly confined to voice parts for the majority of the film. Kevin Kline is great as the supremely huggable Maurice. But the performances that really shine though are those of Luke Evans (“The Girl on the Train“) as the odiously boorish Gaston and Josh Gad (Olaf in “Frozen”) as his hilariously adoring sidekick LeFou. Much has been made of the gay Disney angle to this element of the story, most of which is arrant homophobic nonsense since the scenes are pretty innocuous. In fact the most adventurous ‘non-heterosexual’ aspect of the film, and a scene that raises by far the biggest laugh, relates to a completely different character.
Most of the songs delivered in the film are OK without, in my view, surpassing the versions in the original. Only Dan Steven’s dramatic new song “Evermore”- as one of the few really new ‘full-length’ songs in the film – has ‘Oscar nomination’ written all over it. However, the film eschews the ‘live-filming’ approach to song production featured in recent musicals like “La La Land” and “Les Miserables”, with some degree of lip-sync evident. Whilst I understand that ‘imperfection’ is not a “Disney thing”, I found that lack of risk-taking a bit of a disappointment.
The makers of the original “Beauty and the Beast” would I’m sure have been bowled over by the quality of the special effects on show here. However, that was in 1991 and it is now 2017, when “The Jungle Book” has set the bar for CGI effects. By today’s standards, the special effects here are mediocre at best. I wondered at first if some of the dodgy green-screen work was delivered that way to make it seem more “cartoony”, but I doubt that – – why bother? More irritatingly, the animated chattels in the castle, especially the candlestick Lumière, are seriously unconvincing. Mrs Potts, the teapot, and her son Chip, the cup, are rendered as flat and two-dimensional. There should have been no shortage of money to thrown at the effects with a reported budget of $160 million. Where has the Disney magic gone?
The film also seems to be rendered primarily for a 3D showing (I saw it in 2D). I say this because some of the panning shots (notably one around the library) to me just ended up as an unimpressive blur of mediocrity. Most odd.
The director is Bill Condon responsible for the modestly well-respected but low-key “Dreamgirls” and “Mr Holmes” but also the much derided “Breaking Dawn” end to the “Twilight” series. As such this seems to have been quite a risk that Disney took with such a high profile property, and I would have been intrigued to see what a more innovative director like Chazelle or Iñárritu would have done with it.
However, despite my reservations it is bound to be a MONSTER hit in every sense of the word, and kids aged 5 to 10 will, I predict, absolutely adore it (be warned that kids under 5 may be seriously scared by some of the darker scenes, especially the two wolf-attacks). For a younger age group, I would rate it as an easy FFFFF. As an adult viewer, given that I have viewed it through the rosy tint of my nostalgia-glasses (unfortunately you cannot hire these at the cinema if you haven’t brought your own!), this was an enjoyable watch. Despite my (more than expected!) slew of criticisms above my rating is still….
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (2019) in Movies
Mar 3, 2019
Solid Film For a Solid Trilogy
In this third installment, Hiccup is trying to find a home for all the dragons the community keeps bringing in while Toothless come across a dragon that he can’t seem to stay away from.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 5
It wasn’t like I didn’t like the characters as I would probably score this category for the previous two films much higher. I think my biggest concern was the cohesiveness between the characters. It felt like everyone was off doing their own thing and there wasn’t much of a connection like there was in the past two films. Maybe I was missing something, but I didn’t feel the connection I was hoping to between Hiccup and his mom. Sure she had been missing from his life for the majority of his childhood, but I feel like an opportunity was missed here to bring them closer.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
This series has been known for its stunning visuals to date and the third installment doesn’t disappoint. There’s so much attention to detail, especially as it pertains to the dragons. There are a countless number of dragons, each with their own abilities, size, and strength. it’s cool watching them take flight in numbers through the clouds and over the ocean.
Conflict: 10
Those who are coming to be entertained won’t be disappointed with the amount of action in the movie. From its hot start and onwards, you can expect plenty of hand-to-hand combat, dragon battles, and narrow getaways. The way the air dynamics are used is something that has been perfected since the first movie and keeps getting better. The conflict was aided greatly by a solid villain with some pretty creepy dragons.
Genre: 8
It’s hard for the third movie in a trilogy to receive a perfect score from a genre standpoint. While this movie does bring some of its own flare to the animated genre, there is a bit of it that feels like more of the same. Not a bad thing, but I would be looking for a little bit more to score this higher.
Memorability: 9
Pace: 10
Never really a dull moment as the story is handled consistently and properly throughout. My nephew needed to go to the bathroom somewhere in the middle of the film and there was action happening even as I was walking him down and back up the stairs. The plot development is not overdone and cuts right back into conflict when necessary.
Plot: 10
No issues here. Basic and straightforward, but enough to build a story on. They found a way to bring the series to a fitting ending.
Resolution: 10
Very fitting and touching ending for this series. It was exactly what I could have hoped for and then some. The type of ending (a la Toy Story 3) that made me sorry to see the series go.
Overall: 92
How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World gets off to a decent start then does nothing but build momentum throughout. While it didn’t wow me with originality, it most certainly entertained me and that, to me, is largely what a good movie is all about. You and your kids wlll love it.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
Characters: 5
It wasn’t like I didn’t like the characters as I would probably score this category for the previous two films much higher. I think my biggest concern was the cohesiveness between the characters. It felt like everyone was off doing their own thing and there wasn’t much of a connection like there was in the past two films. Maybe I was missing something, but I didn’t feel the connection I was hoping to between Hiccup and his mom. Sure she had been missing from his life for the majority of his childhood, but I feel like an opportunity was missed here to bring them closer.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
This series has been known for its stunning visuals to date and the third installment doesn’t disappoint. There’s so much attention to detail, especially as it pertains to the dragons. There are a countless number of dragons, each with their own abilities, size, and strength. it’s cool watching them take flight in numbers through the clouds and over the ocean.
Conflict: 10
Those who are coming to be entertained won’t be disappointed with the amount of action in the movie. From its hot start and onwards, you can expect plenty of hand-to-hand combat, dragon battles, and narrow getaways. The way the air dynamics are used is something that has been perfected since the first movie and keeps getting better. The conflict was aided greatly by a solid villain with some pretty creepy dragons.
Genre: 8
It’s hard for the third movie in a trilogy to receive a perfect score from a genre standpoint. While this movie does bring some of its own flare to the animated genre, there is a bit of it that feels like more of the same. Not a bad thing, but I would be looking for a little bit more to score this higher.
Memorability: 9
Pace: 10
Never really a dull moment as the story is handled consistently and properly throughout. My nephew needed to go to the bathroom somewhere in the middle of the film and there was action happening even as I was walking him down and back up the stairs. The plot development is not overdone and cuts right back into conflict when necessary.
Plot: 10
No issues here. Basic and straightforward, but enough to build a story on. They found a way to bring the series to a fitting ending.
Resolution: 10
Very fitting and touching ending for this series. It was exactly what I could have hoped for and then some. The type of ending (a la Toy Story 3) that made me sorry to see the series go.
Overall: 92
How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World gets off to a decent start then does nothing but build momentum throughout. While it didn’t wow me with originality, it most certainly entertained me and that, to me, is largely what a good movie is all about. You and your kids wlll love it.