Search
Search results
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) in Movies
Oct 6, 2018
Still the "Fairest of Them All"
It's always a fear of mine when I go back to visit a beloved film of mine - especially a film that was beloved to me in my childhood. Will it hold up? Is it as good as I remember it? Will the re-visitation tarnish the precious memory of this film that I have?
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
I am happy to report that, upon a fresh viewing of the first full length animated film every, that I can still declare SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS "the fairest of them all".
Made in 1937, by the visionary Walt Disney, this film defies the odds - many calling it "Walt's Folly". No one had attempted a full length animated film before and the skeptics were many, but what Walt knew is that he had all the standard elements of a good story - a heroine we can root for, an evil villain, some comic characters that can help us laugh (and cry) and, more importantly, he had the skillful craftsmen of the Walt Disney Studios that can pull off such a feat.
And...pull it off they did! This film is gorgeous and lush to look at. Upon this viewing, I was drawn to the background, and the edges of the frame, marveling at the detail that was interwoven into each, hand drawn imagery - giving this tapestry a lushness and thickness heretofore unseen on the screen.
As for the story of the film - and the film itself - Disney was smart enough to know that "less is more". The film is compact - running a relatively quick 83 minutes - this was a two-fold solution. (1) It helped move the film along at a sprightly pace, never once resting or losing energy and (2) this means that the artists only had to draw what was necessary for this streamlined story.
The music, of course, is wonderful and important part of this film. This was one of the first movie musicals, and was the first film to release a Soundtrack Album. From "Some Day My Prince Will Come" to "I'm Wishing" to "Heigh-Ho" and "Whistle While You Work", the songs moved the story forward and added depth to the characters portrayed on the screen.
If you haven't caught this film in awhile, I heartily recommend you check it out - it works for young and old alike. A good film to share with children of today, to show them what lush, hand drawn animation looks like. Come for the fun of the Dwarfs and the Villainy of the Evil Queen, stay for the richness of the tapestry and the attention to detail that a true classic film portrays.
Letter Grade: A+
10 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
Next Month: WRECK-IT RALPH and (of course) the sequel RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET (coming to theaters in November).
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated The Kingdom in Books
Oct 17, 2019
“Where Happily Ever After is not just a promise, but a rule”
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) in Movies
Mar 5, 2020
Start-to-Finish Entertainment!
Princess Snow White finds herself on the run from her evil stepmother the Queen when the Queen finds out that Snow White is the prettiest girl in the land. First released in 1937, I’ve gotta say this movie still holds up today! Snow holds it down as the first Disney princess to grace the big screen.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
There’s some serious conflict going down in the castle and we come to learn that within the first ten minutes. The Queen is a real threat and we immediately come to worry about innocent Snow White who just wants to sing and be merry all day. I was immediately whisked away to this other place and time and I was excited for the journey.
Characters: 10
Still some of the best characters in film history. Having seven dwarfs with different personalities was genius! Sleepy was my dude! And there’s just something about Snow that really captivates me. She has a pure soul that inspires everyone around her, even the animals.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 9
Between the dwarfs, the fun musical numbers, and that cackling Queen, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs kept me entertained from start to finish. Disney is a victim of its own success, however, as there are other animated movies I felt entertained me a wee bit more. That being said, this is a movie that could still capture and hold a kid’s attention today.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Gets off to a pretty quick start and holds your attention from there. Even the songs aren’t wasted as they segment into the next important plot piece. The movie is a perfect example of rising conflict, then bringing the audience down for just long enough before hitting them again.
Plot: 8
My gripe with the movie’s plot is pretty small, but just enough to annoy me. I felt like the Queen went through A LOT of trouble just to turn into that witch only to give Snow an apple. At that point, if you want to kill her so bad, just make it happen right then! Classic case of a movie overthinking things and trying to be creative for the sake of being creative. Again, it’s small but too noticeable not to bring up.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 93
It always impresses me when classic films hold up today. I can imagine some of the older crowd might be offended by that just as if I might be offended if some young punk in 2035 is watching Jurassic Park and says, “Wow, this film is still solid to this day!” I get it, but I can’t help but admire a movie that is (as of this writing) eighty-three years old! Bananas. Disney came out of the gates swinging and hasn’t looked back since.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 10
There’s some serious conflict going down in the castle and we come to learn that within the first ten minutes. The Queen is a real threat and we immediately come to worry about innocent Snow White who just wants to sing and be merry all day. I was immediately whisked away to this other place and time and I was excited for the journey.
Characters: 10
Still some of the best characters in film history. Having seven dwarfs with different personalities was genius! Sleepy was my dude! And there’s just something about Snow that really captivates me. She has a pure soul that inspires everyone around her, even the animals.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 8
Entertainment Value: 9
Between the dwarfs, the fun musical numbers, and that cackling Queen, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs kept me entertained from start to finish. Disney is a victim of its own success, however, as there are other animated movies I felt entertained me a wee bit more. That being said, this is a movie that could still capture and hold a kid’s attention today.
Memorability: 8
Pace: 10
Gets off to a pretty quick start and holds your attention from there. Even the songs aren’t wasted as they segment into the next important plot piece. The movie is a perfect example of rising conflict, then bringing the audience down for just long enough before hitting them again.
Plot: 8
My gripe with the movie’s plot is pretty small, but just enough to annoy me. I felt like the Queen went through A LOT of trouble just to turn into that witch only to give Snow an apple. At that point, if you want to kill her so bad, just make it happen right then! Classic case of a movie overthinking things and trying to be creative for the sake of being creative. Again, it’s small but too noticeable not to bring up.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 93
It always impresses me when classic films hold up today. I can imagine some of the older crowd might be offended by that just as if I might be offended if some young punk in 2035 is watching Jurassic Park and says, “Wow, this film is still solid to this day!” I get it, but I can’t help but admire a movie that is (as of this writing) eighty-three years old! Bananas. Disney came out of the gates swinging and hasn’t looked back since.
Lottie disney bookworm (1056 KP) rated The Kingdom in Books
Sep 20, 2020
“Where Happily Ever After is not just a promise, but a rule”
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
I mean with a tag line like that you can’t not be drawn in by this book! If that doesn’t grab you then the gorgeous cover art will.
Once you get past the wonderful aesthetics; the ‘Disney x Westworld x Big Little Lies’ reality that Jess Rothenberg conjures is sure to captivate you. Rothenberg manages to describe her Kingdom in such minute detail without it seeming contrite: the brazen references to meet and greets, monorails and “the park” are like catnip to a Disney geek like myself; whilst the proclamation from the outset that a crime has occurred appeals to the (slightly) more mature side of this 32 year old bookworm.
The Kingdom is a magical place where dreams come true: or is it? The star attractions: the princesses; are beautiful, perfect, always say the right thing and…are Artificial Intelligence. Their sophisticated technology, wireless signals and encyclopaedic knowledge ensure the princesses are as perfect as possible but it quickly becomes apparent that the princesses are, in fact, prisoners: constantly under surveillance, tracked by GPS implants in their wrists and strapped to their beds at “downtime”.
Ana is our princess and storyteller, opening her world to the reader and introducing us to her “sisters”, “mother” and “father” as well as those who have slightly less favourable views towards the AI, or Fantasists as they are known. There is no doubt that Ana is advanced in comparison to other Fantasists that we meet: she is aware of the park’s wireless blind spots and admits she becomes weary of some songs, unruly children and fathers with wandering eyes. Ironically, Ana is a profoundly human character with whom the reader immediately allies themselves with. Despite clearly being a suspect in the ongoing murder trial, I can’t see any reader convicting Ana. On the contrary, it is a real testament to Jess Rothenberg’s writing that the reader identifies with the Fantasists over and above every human character in her novel. Even Owen, the main human character, is never entirely trustworthy and does not reveal his intentions readily.
The format of The Kingdom is unlike anything else out there at the moment, in my opinion. The mix of prose, advertisements, interviews, trial transcripts and even apps allow our Fantasist to tell her story but also allows the reader to meet personnel and witness events that Ana would never see. This aspect is crucial to the murder mystery vibe of The Kingdom and Rothenberg leaves the reader guessing right to the very end and begging for a sequel.
Rothenberg’s kingdom is quick to show its murkier, thornier side. Those who question their surroundings are made an example of; nature is manipulated for entertainment and nothing is what it seems. If you haven’t guessed by now, I absolutely adored this book. It had me gripped from beginning to end. If you read one Disney book this year- read this one!
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Beauty and the Beast (2017) in Movies
Jul 12, 2019
Whenever I was asked who my favorite Disney prince was, I’d answer, without hesitation, “The Beast.”
Friends would look at me askance and ask, “The Beast? Really?”
And I’d simply reply, “Have you not seen his library?”
I also claim Belle as my favorite Disney princess. As a bookworm, Beauty and the Beast gave me a princess I could relate to. Sure, I had just graduated from high school the year before the animated film – not really the demographic Disney was catering to. But when I first watched Belle’s introductory scene, as she made her way through the village with her nose buried in a book while the townfolk sang of her “odd” behavior, I felt l the corners of my lips rise on their own, in a smile of recognition.
Sure, it also may have been because of the clever lyrics of the late Howard Ashman and the wondrous melodies of Alan Menken in that first song alone, but Belle quickly me over not only with her joy for stories and spirit of adventure, but also with her brave spirit.
Beauty and the Beast is a fairy tale told many times over and Disney’s live-action version follows the animated classic closely with some variation and additional scenes and few more songs. Like the animated film, it’s sweepingly romantic and just as enchanting. What the audience may struggle with is that Emma Watson’s Belle is not as…well, animated as the animated Belle. She brings a solemnity to the role, and as singing talent goes, while she is no Paige O’Hara, she can sing.
Luke Evans makes a menacingly handsome Gaston and his big number, with his sidekick LeFou (Josh Gad) is an entertaining high point that cements Gaston’s position as my favorite villain. Dan Stevens brought a bit more humanity to Beast, and with a heartbreaking song of his own, his despair is more keenly felt in this movie. But I have to admit, I prefer Josh Groban’s version of Beast’s solo, which you do get to hear if you sit through the credits.
Lumière the candelabra and Cogsworth the clock were brought to life with great voice work Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen, respectively. Emma Thompson voiced Mrs. Potts perfectly. I don’t know if it was her voice, the theme song or the ballroom dance scene that provoked an overwhelming sense of nostalgia, but the captivating combination literally brought tears to my eyes. Kevin Kline, who played Belle’s father, Maurice, Stanley Tucci, and Broadway great Audra McDonald round out a solid supporting cast.
As a huge fan of the 1991 Beauty and the Beast, I didn’t believe a live-action version could improve on the beloved, timeless classic. But just like with the animated film, it was truly the songs that made the movie, and the music does it again for the live-action film, making it a memorable, magical treat for young and old alike.
Friends would look at me askance and ask, “The Beast? Really?”
And I’d simply reply, “Have you not seen his library?”
I also claim Belle as my favorite Disney princess. As a bookworm, Beauty and the Beast gave me a princess I could relate to. Sure, I had just graduated from high school the year before the animated film – not really the demographic Disney was catering to. But when I first watched Belle’s introductory scene, as she made her way through the village with her nose buried in a book while the townfolk sang of her “odd” behavior, I felt l the corners of my lips rise on their own, in a smile of recognition.
Sure, it also may have been because of the clever lyrics of the late Howard Ashman and the wondrous melodies of Alan Menken in that first song alone, but Belle quickly me over not only with her joy for stories and spirit of adventure, but also with her brave spirit.
Beauty and the Beast is a fairy tale told many times over and Disney’s live-action version follows the animated classic closely with some variation and additional scenes and few more songs. Like the animated film, it’s sweepingly romantic and just as enchanting. What the audience may struggle with is that Emma Watson’s Belle is not as…well, animated as the animated Belle. She brings a solemnity to the role, and as singing talent goes, while she is no Paige O’Hara, she can sing.
Luke Evans makes a menacingly handsome Gaston and his big number, with his sidekick LeFou (Josh Gad) is an entertaining high point that cements Gaston’s position as my favorite villain. Dan Stevens brought a bit more humanity to Beast, and with a heartbreaking song of his own, his despair is more keenly felt in this movie. But I have to admit, I prefer Josh Groban’s version of Beast’s solo, which you do get to hear if you sit through the credits.
Lumière the candelabra and Cogsworth the clock were brought to life with great voice work Ewan McGregor and Ian McKellen, respectively. Emma Thompson voiced Mrs. Potts perfectly. I don’t know if it was her voice, the theme song or the ballroom dance scene that provoked an overwhelming sense of nostalgia, but the captivating combination literally brought tears to my eyes. Kevin Kline, who played Belle’s father, Maurice, Stanley Tucci, and Broadway great Audra McDonald round out a solid supporting cast.
As a huge fan of the 1991 Beauty and the Beast, I didn’t believe a live-action version could improve on the beloved, timeless classic. But just like with the animated film, it was truly the songs that made the movie, and the music does it again for the live-action film, making it a memorable, magical treat for young and old alike.
Star Wars: Rivals™
Games and Entertainment
7.5
Rate It
App
Fast-paced, competitive shooter set in the Star Wars™ universe! Confront your rivals in the first...
Caitlin Ann Cherniak (85 KP) rated Pete's Dragon (2016) in Movies
Oct 4, 2018
CGI (2 more)
Acting choice
Interesting twist to a retelling
Plot? Dragon being real or save the environment? (2 more)
Who's the bad guy?
Where was Pete the whole dang time?
Letterboxd review: https://letterboxd.com/caitcher/film/petes-dragon-2016/
First impressions video:
When I first saw this movie two years ago, I thought it was okay at best. There were plenty of good things about it, but there are the downsides that kinda take over.
The first thing I noticed was the plot. I haven't seen the original movie, but considering this was Disney in the 70's, it looked charming as Disney should. But because this is a live-action retelling, we can't have that luxury. I didn't ask for Pete's Dragon to do much. I just asked for it to be a good movie. However, throughout the entire time, I think this movie didn't know what it wanted to be about either. Did it wanna be the ripoff of a 90's "save the environment" flick or did it actually wanna be like the original involving Pete's actual existence? Hence why I called this movie a pancake to my family after coming home from seeing it. It constantly flips on the cooking pan, and it won't stop.
But what are the good things after my bad things "rant." First of all, I really liked how Pete got along with the main family, especially the daughter. It was an adorable relationship and all of the actors'...well, acting was the way it should've been. The soundtrack was also pretty decent, despite the fact that this retelling was not a musical. Lastly, the CGI on Pete actually made him look adorable and scary at the same time considering the tone of the film, which worked in its favor.
If you want more details, feel free to click on my other review links at the top of this review.
First impressions video:
When I first saw this movie two years ago, I thought it was okay at best. There were plenty of good things about it, but there are the downsides that kinda take over.
The first thing I noticed was the plot. I haven't seen the original movie, but considering this was Disney in the 70's, it looked charming as Disney should. But because this is a live-action retelling, we can't have that luxury. I didn't ask for Pete's Dragon to do much. I just asked for it to be a good movie. However, throughout the entire time, I think this movie didn't know what it wanted to be about either. Did it wanna be the ripoff of a 90's "save the environment" flick or did it actually wanna be like the original involving Pete's actual existence? Hence why I called this movie a pancake to my family after coming home from seeing it. It constantly flips on the cooking pan, and it won't stop.
But what are the good things after my bad things "rant." First of all, I really liked how Pete got along with the main family, especially the daughter. It was an adorable relationship and all of the actors'...well, acting was the way it should've been. The soundtrack was also pretty decent, despite the fact that this retelling was not a musical. Lastly, the CGI on Pete actually made him look adorable and scary at the same time considering the tone of the film, which worked in its favor.
If you want more details, feel free to click on my other review links at the top of this review.
David McK (3540 KP) rated Thrawn (Star Wars: Thrawn #1) in Books
Jan 28, 2019
I think therte may have been other Star Wars books prior to [a:Timothy Zahn|12479|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1215545810p2/12479.jpg]'s 'Heir to the Empire' trilogy, but I believe all those were set during (or prior to) the events of the movies, with Zahn holding the position of being the first author to be licensed to extend the story beyond the end of 'Return of the Jedi', and thus to kickstart the whole Extended Universe (or EU) of the Star Wars stories prior to the abolition of the same when Disnay acquired Luasfilm.
The three novels in that series - [b:Heir to the Empire|216443|Heir to the Empire (Star Wars The Thrawn Trilogy #1)|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1398253847s/216443.jpg|1133995], [b:Dark Force Rising|216442|Dark Force Rising|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1451092000s/216442.jpg|463790] and [b:The Last Command|216422|The Last Command|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1451092026s/216422.jpg|397139] - set a VERY high bar for the subsequent novels to reach, mainly due to who would become a fan favourite character: that of Grand Admiral Thrawn. Thrawn's past, however, was only ever hinted at in those stories.
When Disney acquired Lucasfilm (and did away with the old EU, renaming them Legends), they did state, however, that they would 'cherry-pick' the best parts for inclusion in the Disney Star Wars canon: a promise they kept when Thrawn appeared as one of the key villains in the third season of the animated TV show 'Star Wars: Rebels'. And, in this, Zahn once again returns to perhaps his most famous creation, filling in (some of) the blans about his early days in the Imperial Navy.
However, this does not concentrate solely on Thrawn himself, but on a couple of other ancillary characters to him (no Rukh or the Noghri, yet), including Ariahdne Pryce - another Imperial from that TV show (and the sections of the novel dealing wih her of which, I found, to be the least interesting).
The three novels in that series - [b:Heir to the Empire|216443|Heir to the Empire (Star Wars The Thrawn Trilogy #1)|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1398253847s/216443.jpg|1133995], [b:Dark Force Rising|216442|Dark Force Rising|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1451092000s/216442.jpg|463790] and [b:The Last Command|216422|The Last Command|Timothy Zahn|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1451092026s/216422.jpg|397139] - set a VERY high bar for the subsequent novels to reach, mainly due to who would become a fan favourite character: that of Grand Admiral Thrawn. Thrawn's past, however, was only ever hinted at in those stories.
When Disney acquired Lucasfilm (and did away with the old EU, renaming them Legends), they did state, however, that they would 'cherry-pick' the best parts for inclusion in the Disney Star Wars canon: a promise they kept when Thrawn appeared as one of the key villains in the third season of the animated TV show 'Star Wars: Rebels'. And, in this, Zahn once again returns to perhaps his most famous creation, filling in (some of) the blans about his early days in the Imperial Navy.
However, this does not concentrate solely on Thrawn himself, but on a couple of other ancillary characters to him (no Rukh or the Noghri, yet), including Ariahdne Pryce - another Imperial from that TV show (and the sections of the novel dealing wih her of which, I found, to be the least interesting).
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Mar 1, 2020
Listen. This might be controversial, but I LOVED this film. I remember when it first came out and I was unsure about whether or not I wanted to see it in theaters because critics were all over it and so upset - it seemed like a letdown.
So it finally came out on Disney+ and I have kind of been putting it off - along with the live-action Aladdin. I am so happy that I waited, but I really did love this film. The main comment I saw from critics was the lack of emotion or animation in the faces of the animals and truthfully I didn't mind it, nor was it something I was actively searching for. I thought that the lines were so powerfully delivered that the emotion was there, regardless.
The one downside of this film were some of the lines. I felt like they were unnecessary or just bad. Like when Simba confronts the hyenas and Scar attacks him and Nala says, "Lions, attack!" I just felt like that was bad. I feel like a roar would've done it or no line at all and just the action. That's the example that is most prominent in my head after finishing the film but I know I felt it in other spots too. The other downside, I felt, was this disconnect in chemistry between Donald Glover and Beyonce. It felt obvious - to me at least - that they recorded separately. I didn't feel like that love I know it's supposed to be.
I promise as much as I'm talking about things I didn't like, I really did love this film. Seth Rogan and Billy Eichner were the best throughout the whole film. They always made me laugh and when they started singing Be Our Guest? I died. I thought that was great.
I loved this cast. I love Jon Favreau as a creator. I love this story. I love Disney. I love this film. I don't think anyone will ever change my mind.
So it finally came out on Disney+ and I have kind of been putting it off - along with the live-action Aladdin. I am so happy that I waited, but I really did love this film. The main comment I saw from critics was the lack of emotion or animation in the faces of the animals and truthfully I didn't mind it, nor was it something I was actively searching for. I thought that the lines were so powerfully delivered that the emotion was there, regardless.
The one downside of this film were some of the lines. I felt like they were unnecessary or just bad. Like when Simba confronts the hyenas and Scar attacks him and Nala says, "Lions, attack!" I just felt like that was bad. I feel like a roar would've done it or no line at all and just the action. That's the example that is most prominent in my head after finishing the film but I know I felt it in other spots too. The other downside, I felt, was this disconnect in chemistry between Donald Glover and Beyonce. It felt obvious - to me at least - that they recorded separately. I didn't feel like that love I know it's supposed to be.
I promise as much as I'm talking about things I didn't like, I really did love this film. Seth Rogan and Billy Eichner were the best throughout the whole film. They always made me laugh and when they started singing Be Our Guest? I died. I thought that was great.
I loved this cast. I love Jon Favreau as a creator. I love this story. I love Disney. I love this film. I don't think anyone will ever change my mind.
Sarah (7799 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 31, 2019
Lacking in heart
The Lion King is one of my all time favourite Disney films, so I approached this 'live action' remake with a lot of trepidation, and I'm afraid to say I was right to be worried.
Visually it looks stunning, which shouldn't really be a surprise as it has been brought to us by the same guys that did The Jungle Book. However I'm afraid the visuals are pretty much all this film has going for it. This film is virtually a carbon copy of the original animation but with all of the heart, soul and humour taken out of it. The problem with these Disney live action remakes is they're unnecessary and stuck in a difficult position - differ too much from the original and people hate it, but sticking too close to the original and it begs the question as to why not just watch the original? It's more difficult for The Lion King as it's gone from being cartoon animation to CGI animation and apart from looking more natural, that's the only real difference.
They've lost virtually all of the magic that made the original great in the first place. The humour either falls flat due to the poor execution, or has been removed and replaced with something much less witty and funny. I mean, where was dress in drag & do the hula?! I dont think the voice cast helps. Other than Chiwetel Ejiofor and of course James Earl Jones, the rest of the voice cast just seemed ridiculously out of place and ill fitting with the film. I cringed every time I heard Zazu as Jon Oliver is definitely no Rowan Atkinson! And dont even get me started on Beyonce. We really didnt need her horrific versions of songs thrown in too. Although the rest of the songs did at least make the rest of the film more bearable.
Altogether despite the stunning CGI, this is a very poor copy of the original and definitely one I wont be watching again - just stick to the original.
Visually it looks stunning, which shouldn't really be a surprise as it has been brought to us by the same guys that did The Jungle Book. However I'm afraid the visuals are pretty much all this film has going for it. This film is virtually a carbon copy of the original animation but with all of the heart, soul and humour taken out of it. The problem with these Disney live action remakes is they're unnecessary and stuck in a difficult position - differ too much from the original and people hate it, but sticking too close to the original and it begs the question as to why not just watch the original? It's more difficult for The Lion King as it's gone from being cartoon animation to CGI animation and apart from looking more natural, that's the only real difference.
They've lost virtually all of the magic that made the original great in the first place. The humour either falls flat due to the poor execution, or has been removed and replaced with something much less witty and funny. I mean, where was dress in drag & do the hula?! I dont think the voice cast helps. Other than Chiwetel Ejiofor and of course James Earl Jones, the rest of the voice cast just seemed ridiculously out of place and ill fitting with the film. I cringed every time I heard Zazu as Jon Oliver is definitely no Rowan Atkinson! And dont even get me started on Beyonce. We really didnt need her horrific versions of songs thrown in too. Although the rest of the songs did at least make the rest of the film more bearable.
Altogether despite the stunning CGI, this is a very poor copy of the original and definitely one I wont be watching again - just stick to the original.