Film Reviews - AvPGalaxy's Own Critics!

[Hubbs]

Will you be diving into Treat Williams' substitution adventures?

Maybe.


Green Street 3: Never Back Down (2013)

Was there need for a third film in this dreary franchise? the bigger question is how on earth they got Scott Adkins in it?!. I guess if you like violent rumbles between large groups of moronic football 'fans' then you might get a kick outta this. Of course I use the word fans in a very loose sense as we all know its about footie hooligans.

The plot is merely a replay of the first two films, more excuses for cockney battles in the street. But wait! no its not! its actually about one young hooligan getting killed and his brother comes back to London to sort it out. When I say sort it out...I mean find the culprits and beat the shit outta them with his hooligan buddies (his firm), so yes actually it is the same.

So as Adkins is the main character here you may have already guessed that martial arts will be involved...and you'd be right. Although its not a full on martial arts fest as you'd expect from Adkins, its still mainly a large old school ruck but with the added extra of the odd martial arts moves. Clearly they have tried to incorporate both styles and alter the plot, we find out that the world of hoodlum fighting has become more organised and turned into an underground tournament with no rules. It appears the thugs have upgraded their skills with more precision squabbling, actually turning away from booze and becoming lean fit fighting machines.

This is all well and good but it kinda removes the whole gritty footie fan battling aspect that made the very first film reasonably fun to watch (aside from seeing Wood getting his head kicked in). Now you simply have yet another fight tournament flick with semi muscular blokes doing martial arts, the perfect vehicle for Adkins and obviously tailored around him. Its good they have tried to come up with a fresh idea here but firstly...it ruins the premise of the franchise and secondly, why make a third film anyway only to change it completely?.

I still can't quite fathom out why Adkins agreed to make this when its clear to see its a low budget go nowhere flick. This film doesn't even have a wiki page so far! that's how unknown it is!. The main problem with the film aside from poor acting and hokey cockney accents is the fact the fights aren't even that good, too obvious basically, you can see the punches and kicks aren't connecting. Had the fights actually looked good then you could forgive all the rest as fighting is the name of the game bottom line. Unfortunately its all pretty bad truth be told, a football hooligan film without any actual footie hooliganism, not that I'm condoning footie hooliganism of course but that's what you expect here dagnabbit.

3/10

[Hubbs]

DodgeBall: A True Underdog Story (2004)

Probably one of the most underrated 'sports' or fun games you can play which I haven't done since I was in school. I have no idea if there are any actual proper dodgeball leagues/competitions like in this film but I think there should be.

As for this film, well the title says it all really, its an underdog story where the underdogs emerge victorious against all odds, the end. This film doesn't try to be anything other than what it clearly is, a complete dumbass of a film with 'in your face' laugh out loud moments. Nothing here is clever or particulary original its just childish toilet humour utilising every trick in the book to get a giggle, no stone left unturned.

The cast is a mixture of some Frat pack members and good character actors who all take the opportunity to let loose and just play it to the extreme. Good old Ben Stiller has to be the main attraction here as the narcissistic gym owner with a Vidal Sassoon hair style. I did also enjoy the satirical take on flashy modern day gyms filled with overly tanned models who merely like to look at themselves whilst 'getting fit'.

Stephen Root rehashes his 'Office Space' character to great effect, Alan Tudyk is a pirate, why? no idea but its amusing and Vince Vaughn simply plays the same regular Joe character he always does but he does it well doesn't he. There are many other funny performances here and quite a lot of cameos, too many to mention but none of them ever undermine the films comedy. Kinda funny seeing Lance Armstrong going on about his Tour De France victories though, ouch!.

The whole idea here is so basic its amazing they got it off the ground really. Chock full of cheap laughs, naughty visual gags, lots of crotch slapstick, cheesy lines, weight jokes and pratfalls, the film does feel very infantile at times but at others it can be very funny indeed. Its not really about the plot for all intense and purposes, you just watch to see Vaughn, Stiller and co act the fool and crack hokey lines. Its all about the hammy acting and rude visual tomfoolery but the bonus is its a good little feel good flick too.

Yeah you know what will happen, you know the slimy slow witted Stiller will get his comeuppance in the end, there aren't any surprises here. You know exactly what you're paying for with this and you get it, like I say the film doesn't pretend to be anything else other than a stupid comedy much like 'Dumb and Dumber' or other frat pack flicks.

Upped to the max deliberately with daft spoof-like moments for optimal belly laughs and finishing off with the all too common parody of the classic coming from behind victory. Its admittedly a bit of a one joke flick for sure but you don't need to look into it that much, its just an easy going fun entertaining hour and a half.

7.5/10

[KiramidHead]

"Thank you, Chuck Norris."

"No Peter, Thank you."

[Hubbs]

Missing In Action (1984)

Chuck's first main franchise and one of his classic actioners. Only two years after the release of 'First Blood' you can see where this idea main have spawned from eh. In fact a script by James Cameron intended for the Rambo franchise was the inspiration for this very film so there. But since then this film itself has been copied many times, the ever popular one man army with a big gun.

The mission, Chuck only just got back from Nam where he was held prisoner by some nasty Vietnamese. Once back in the States he realises there are still US POW's MIA back in Nam, so what does he do?. Well he packs up and goes back into the danger zone to find them of course. Isn't there a chance he might get killed or recaptured you say? pfft! Chuck Norris laughs in the face of danger, he tweaks the nipples of fear, he curses politely at those who stand against him.

So I'll leave the extremely obvious Rambo similarities aside and just give my views on the action. Well it takes time to get there that's for damn sure, a long time. There is much build up and deliberation as Chuck works out what he's gonna do and how he will do it. Takes him ages to find his old army buddy for a start, not sure why that guy was such a big secret with the locals but there you go.

Once we do hit the action its...well OK I guess. Dare I say its identical to 'Delta Force' in the sense that you never see any blood, violence, squib hits (not many) etc...I've mentioned before how Chuck's films tend to be like A-Team episodes haven't I, well its deja vu again. Now I'm not saying its bad because its not, its reasonable fun watching Norris run around gunning men down, but its hella tame.

What I love about this film is the horrendous editing and feeble accuracy by everyone involved shooting a gun. So many times you get a shot of someone firing a machine gun (bad guys), just standing there and firing continuously at an enemy yet they never hit a thing!. You don't see any bullet hits, no sound of bullet hits, no ricochets nothing, they just stand there firing blankly and never running out of ammo, its quite amusing. All the while the other person is doing the exact same thing haha both firing continuously at each other yet nothing is happening around them, doesn't matter how close they are or how well hidden they are, classic.

It really is a low rent Rambo, gotta say it, Rambo minus any blood, violence and real tension. Norris just waltzes in and terminates everyone without even bothering to aim much, whilst the enemy couldn't hit a barn door right in front of their face, glorious!. Bottom line that's what you watch it for, the classic hokey action which so many films homage and have spoofed ('Hot Shots 2').

Chuck wins the day, was it ever in question? no, he doesn't even get a scratch bless him. The explosions are grand, chop-socky fighting and the action sequences are as corny as a corn on the cob...but its still fun to watch I can't deny. The minute I saw Chuck rise from beneath the murky river waters brandishing his huge M60 machine gun clad in those classic army fatigues with head band...I knew it had all been worth while.

7/10

Missing In Action 2: The Beginning (1985)

Well if that title doesn't tell you all you need to know I don't know what will. Both of these films were filmed at the same time, back to back, but for some odd reason the powers that be decided to release the sequel first then this film as a sequel prequel. Why exactly I don't know as it makes no sense whatsoever, I don't think there were any issues so why muddle things is a mystery.

This film simply tales the tale of how 'Braddock' got captured and held captive in Nam before breaking out and getting to the point we see him in 'Missing In Action'. Its all very straight forward and like the other film, very by the numbers step by step action flick fluff.

Mind you this film is slightly more adult than the first film. Most of the plot takes part within the POW camp and shows us some mildly nasty stuff. The odd bit of torture, beatings, mock executions, real executions, torment, getting burned alive with flame throwers etc...it is a bit harrowing in a semi-harrowing kind of way. Nothing that will make you lose sleep, its not a dramatic epic true to life event flick, but its based on the reality of real Nam POW camps and does offer a touch of emotion.

The evil sadistic POW camp leader is nicely portrayed by Soon Tek-Oh. Much like Drago in 'Delta Force 2' this film is saved by his smooth villainous ways, his almost charming tone of speech, wry smile and merciless manner. His henchmen soldiers are all your standard Vietnam war types if I can say that, they just appear very stereotypical to look at I guess. Same can be said for Chuck's boys, militant and loud mouthed yanks with blonde hair, blue eyes and the token black guy (who dies). As for Norris...well its business as usual with the headband, Uzi and his lumberjack looks. He says little and acts badly while doing it, but we don't ask that of Norris do we, we just want him to grunt stare and kill bad guys tamely.

The film looks better than the first that's for sure but I'm starting to get bored of bamboo huts within green South East Asian jungles. Still we are given some more explosions, bigger ones this time and a more interesting array of deaths for various military personnel good and bad. Its still fun as we see Chuck wear down the evil Colonel and survive his torture tricks. It is more realistic than the previous film but overall it does also feel a bit of an excuse just to see Chuck take out an entire camp of bad guys...again.

Still its on par with the original film in my opinion, the more adult approach is welcome adding some tension, the corniness of the first film has been cut back. Its also funny and hackneyed that when this film was made it was common practice that the goodie black guys all get killed off whilst most of the blue eyed white guys survive to fight another day, old movie cliches huh.

7/10

[Hubbs]

Zoolander (2001)

This was the first film to really introduce me to Will Ferrell back in the day, its hard to think when this film came out he wasn't a big name star. Twas also the first time I saw Ben Stiller's dad on the big screen, or anywhere really, I hadn't yet discovered the joys of 'The King of Queens'.

This entire film plays out like an early Sacha Baron Cohen flick ('Bruno') but much much tamer. A very deliberate spoof and parody of the fashion/model world that is grotesque, bloated, narcissistic and embarrassing. Alongside Stiller and Owen Wilson is fellow frat pack member Vince Vaughn in an early cameo role and many many other big name stars hamming it up...or so we're led to believe.

Of course this being a film about modelling and fashion there has to be real patriots of this exclusive world involved, and there are plenty. All the big glamorous names you can think of that are connected to this vomit inducing scene are hauled out in front of the camera to show us their parody acting chops. Thing is I'm not entirely sure some of them understood they were being put in a film, I highly doubt they caught on that their lives were being poked fun at (mocked) and they were contributing towards the laughs. Just another day in the glitzy limelight for them.

I wouldn't say the humour was particularly clever, witty or sharp. Its most definitely amusing seeing Stiller and Wilson going overboard as two self obsessed male models, the clip montages at the award ceremony, their own unique dialect and visual expressions plus the 'walk off'...some great mockery going on there. Unfortunately it doesn't quite hold up for the run time in my opinion, the early golden moments dry up quickly as do the ideas.

The plot is daft of course but that doesn't matter really, its just a chance to have a pop at this ridiculous industry, maybe open some insider eyes perhaps. It all feels like your typical SNL sketch that has been stretched out but a little better than their usual fare. Its all very predictable childish and silly but that's the idea so there's no need to think into it. The only good thing about the film for me was the main lead duo and their excellent self indulgent portrayals, everything else is so so.

I totally forgot how hot Jovovich is in this film with her strict dominatrix attire, plus talk about a desperate attempt to kick start your career Billy Zane!. Why exactly are you in this?.

6/10

[Hubbs]

Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)

Six years after the original smash hit and Dante comes along with this newish sequel. The intro to the film is an animated Looney Tunes segment with Bugs and Daffy which is meant to hint at the wackiness you were about to see, not good.

The plot this time is virtually the same deal as before but this time its set in New York and within a huge futuristic skyscraper, well for the time anyway. Of course the other reason for this sequel was mainly to do everything over again with much better effects and creature puppetry. Now I'm all for this no doubt but at least they could of gone for a fresher storyline.

There are many problems with this sequel which is a shame as the effects are indeed much better (although the original films were damn good). It starts off OK with good continuity seeing old Mr Wing again in his little shop with 'Gizmo'. Unsure if the first film setting of this Chinatown location was in New York though, I always kinda thought it was San Francisco for some reason. Anyway it makes sense that the old man dies and Gizmo is left alone in the world, not too sure about the fact they bulldoze the little store before clearing it though.

Eventually the film sticks to its new location for the action within this skyscraper. I still find it funny that this huge building would have its own animal testing floor filled with various animals of all shapes and sizes. Also the fact it appears to have lots of shops and eating establishments along with filming studios and its own TV cable network! all this with office areas higher up where lots of desk jockeys work feverishly to look good for the big boss 'Clamp'. Obviously its all just setups for the Gremlin action to come but it really seems quite odd that this building has everything in it as if it were a mall when its suppose to be a place of business and work.

I guess the main issues begin when the Gremlin mayhem kicks off. It all starts out fine and relatively sensible if lighter in tone, but it just gets ludicrous. The first thing that hits you straight in the face is the horrendous slapstick schlock that Dante gets the creatures to do, the first film had it but it was set within a dark tone, this film is virtually a cartoon (as laid out for you by Bugs n Daffy at the start). I really enjoyed the different ideas they used with the Gremlins...a bat hybrid, a spider, an electric poltergeist-like Gremlin, an intelligent Gremlin, a Gremlin made up of vegetables and naturally the obligatory female Gremlin. But the whole thing came off like 'The Muppet Show', albeit Muppets with a more sadistic crazy edge.

The female Gremlin was clearly a play or rip off from 'Miss Piggy' if you ask me, right down to the awful little musical number where she/it appears in a very 'Muppet-esque/Piggy' way from beneath a huge self portrait picture.

The other thing that irked me was the hideous self parodies/meta-references of the franchise and others. A cringeworthy self indulgent sequence where a movie critic is giving the original film a bad review and is then attacked by Gremlins, the bat hybrid Gremlin flies out of the building crashing through a wall leaving the famous Batman logo as a hole, some Gremlins where anti-Gizmo t-shirts and there is a Gremlin logo on the cable network when it goes down. And finally there's the sequence midway where the film actually stops as if Gremlins had invaded the cinema where you the audience were watching. We then get an embarrassing cameo with Hulk Hogan breaking the fourth wall, did it really have to go that far Dante?.

The inclusion of Dick Miller's character and his wife felt very forced too, not only that but I'm pretty sure they were killed off in the first film. There was no reason for them to be in this film other than some visual recognition from the first, a simple link. The whole notion that those two characters were suppose to stay with 'Peltzer' and 'Kate' in their small apartment is so stupid, and why would they be visiting them anyway??. These people weren't that close in the first film, just neighbourhood folk.

Plus I noticed Dante literately cast everyone he has ever worked with in this film, even Rick Ducommun and Henry Gibson get some screen time here. Amazing cast of character actors and cameos in this film.

Gotta ask but why is it everytime Gizmo get wets and produces new Mogwai they always turn out evil?. How come none ever turn out nice like Giz? you'd think they would genetically be like Gizmo. I didn't really like the new goofy Gremlins, it just felt like The Three Stooges and was just dumb, the various cartoon sound effects didn't help either. I know the film was suppose to be lighter but Jesus those new Gremlins were annoying, the two evil none insane Gremlins were nice and errr...evil, but again they didn't really look too different, the effects guys didn't wanna move away from the mohawk look did they sheesh!.

All the Gremlins look fantastic in this new film I must say, the detail and animatronic puppet work is astoundingly good from the realistic skin colour and patterns to every small snarling facial movement. There are also some nice effects using stop motion and bluescreen which are obvious but do still hold up quite well, it all shows how well these effects can work. It might be most costly sure but I think everyone would agree its worth it in the end, the final result looks awesome especially with the vast numbers of Gremlins on display this time. Beats the f**ck outta CGI I can tell you.

I want to like this film but its hard. The idea is reasonable giving us a wider range of Gremlins with new designs and more havoc, which is what you wanted really, but they dumbed it down too much. A lighter version is not a problem but the self referential jokes and small nonsensical plotless sequences felt more like a collection of sketches from a TV show (the 'Phantom of the Opera' Gremlin sequence). It makes the whole film feel like a spoof when its not really meant to be, not to that degree anyway, and the fact that the female Gremlin survives simply makes a mockery of films finale, who cares.

I love the creature effects and there are still some really nice moments of Gremlin gore and horror which hint at what could of been. Unfortunately it just gets lost in a sea of zany childish wackiness that doesn't really appeal to adults, fans of the original or kids because its still a bit too scary for them, so really it has no decent target audience.

5.5/10

[Hubbs]

Dollman (1991)

There is something about this B-movie that I like, its hard to pinpoint as the film is so ridiculous and belongs in the cartoon realm. I guess its the quaint 'Twilight Zone' charm of the plot and the cheesy yet fun effects mixed with some great hammy acting.

Pyun regular Thomerson gives his best 'Dirty Harry' performance here as 'Brick Bardo' (great name) complete with silly shades and a long trench coat. His gritty strong voice barking out silly dialog left right n centre to the wonderfully cliched baddies and gang members lead by a young over the top JE Haley.

This film does seem to have a cult following (nowadays, upon release no) and its easy to see why as its highly enjoyable with its highly nonsensical premise. Classic lead character, terrific bad guys and brilliantly bad effects, Pyun's best film along side 'Cyborg' which I'm sure came as a shock to him.

8/10



Dollman vs. Demonic Toys (1993)

Suppose to have been the first 'vs' film made so really this film is a ground breaker if we are honest about it. Its a very silly premise of course and the back story behind it is muddled. Basically this is the sequel to 'Bad Channels' 'Dollman' and 'Demonic Toys' all at once which in itself is pretty impressive and unique, but alas they screwed up the continuity badly by making 'Nurse Ginger' as the sidekick from 'Bad Channels' when it should of been 'Bunny'.

That aside this is actually good fun and continues the cult craziness of the previous films with the added bonus of Thomerson back as Dollman. Most of the film is filled with flashbacks unfortunately which does take up time and seeing as the film is only one hour!! you can tell they struggled to fill out the plot.

Effects wise its about on par with the other films accept this time we have life size Demonic Toys going up against 'Brick' which don't look too bad really. The fact they are real or stop motion makes all the difference which would be lost using CGI. Its actually the big in your face models and puppets that make this film enjoyable, utterly farcical but fun, kinda like a fairground ride in the funhouse.

You could almost say its a low budget modern day Harryhausen homage flick...almost. Gotta give kudos for imagination, absurdity and the balls to actually make something so zany.

6.5/10

[Hubbs]

Space Jam (1996)

Not too sure why this film is called Space Jam but I guess it sounds kinda cool doesn't it. Despite the fact the film stars all the Warner Bros Looney Tunes characters the whole thing is really all about Michael Jordan. A fictional account of a small segment in his career if you will.

So if you haven't already guessed the film is also all about basketball, this makes me wonder if the film was as much of a hit here in the UK as it inevitably was in the US. Obviously the Looney Tunes characters had a lot to do with the appeal for many as the film serves as more of an animated adventure rather than a true basketball feature. That being said it does give plenty for both sides of this spectrum.

Should I really have a go at the plot? this is after all a cartoon of sorts. Basically MJ must do battle on the court against some aliens who want him to be their slave within their intergalactic theme park. Thing is these crafty aliens have pinched the talents of fellow NBA All-Stars Muggsy Bogues, Larry Johnson, Shawn Bradly, Pat Ewing and Charles Barkley (what about John Stockton or Scottie Pippen?). So end of the day its Michael Jordan vs a selection of other NBA players, guess who wins? I wonder what the films trying to say?.

As far as an animated flick goes this is a fun time, its bright bold and colourful, there's plenty of toon action, the usual visual gags, in-jokes, sly homages etc...and of course the WB roster is always good see. The problems I have is the fact the animation is nowhere near as good as the classic original toons of Chuck Jones and co naturally...and they never will be ever again. The voice talent is nowhere near as good as Mel Blanc and co...and they never will be again. Plus of course they mix in CGI with hand drawn animation which kinda works in places but looks awful in others.

I think the worst voice work going in this film must be the attempt at 'Pepe Le Pew'. Wasn't a fan of the stereotypical female version of Bugs either, wasn't required, was just added for the young female audience and felt totally out of place. On the other hand the baddie alien characters weren't too bad if a little bland, they became more interesting in massive monster mode of course. I think if I were Bradly I might have been upset my animated alter ego was made out to be a slow towering numbskull. Using Danny Devito as the chief alien badguy was a smart move, again his character wasn't overly intriguing and kinda standard in design but it worked.

The actual basketball game is good fun even though you'd think it wouldn't be. Its certainly looney, has some slick moments, a nice 'Pulp Fiction' homage, the gag about Michael's special drink is cute, its fun watching the lofty NBA Stars trying to act and Bill Murray adds some much needed fizz for adults. You know what happens in the end, its no surprise, luckily it is a good ride getting there. Definitely an unexpected hit straight outta left field.

6.5/10

[Hubbs]

The Haunted Mansion (2003)

Ah 2003, the start of Disney's major theme park ride adaptations into the movies...not counting a few earlier nondescript flicks and 'Mission to Mars' which I never realised was a theme park adaptation. If you think about this premise you could be forgiven for thinking it would turn out crap, especially with Eddie Murphy involved. And you wouldn't be far wrong on that one point, the casting of Murphy and his 'family' members in this film was a terrible choice.

The reason being they all stick out like a sore thumb in the story, they all look totally out of place and none can act too well. The film has been turned into a Murphy vehicle and the film suffers for it, it feels forced, his family in the film feel forced and fake, the silly humour and annoying dialog from Murphy feels forced and its all in there simply for Murphy, awful decision.

That aside the rest of the film is actually pretty sweet. The plot has been cleverly turned into a romantic ghost tale where upon the mansions owner is seeking his one true love whom he lost centuries ago. Of course his true love is Murphy's living wife so a battle of supernatural proportions ensues as Murphy must stop this aristocratic spook floating off with his wife.

What works is the extra casting of the main ghost servants and their master within the mansion. Stamp is perfect as the stiff upper lipped butler with a dark secret, Wallace Shawn is perfect as the quirky sidekick footman ghost, Tilly is surprisingly good as the crystal ball gypsy spirit and Nathaniel Parker plays the noble British toff manor owner to a tee complete with thick dark locks. Not too sure how these ghosts work though, at times they can't or don't seem to interact with the living, then all of a sudden they can touch and pick things up.

Its all very cliched and hammy of course being based on a stereotypical haunted house attraction but that's fine, you expect that. In fact they capture that atmosphere perfectly, the whole eccentric Disney ambiance coupled with an eerie fanciful glow. Indeed the film does work better if you have actually been on the attraction at Disney World. There are many many little homages to the ride throughout the film from visual references to dialog, some sequences showing identical sections from the attraction. It does sounds kinda tacky but it really works nicely and gives you a pleasant ghostly trip down memory lane.

I really liked how the ghosts become 'more dead' visually the further from the mansion they are. So once outside all the ghosts have a really cool supernatural blue glow or aura which looks quite striking. I liked the graveyard and how it housed many of the ghosts from the attraction including the three famous hitchhiker spooks. As said I also liked the replication of sets from the attraction too, the hallway of portraits being the main one easily. One thing I didn't like was the swamp set New Orleans look for the mansion, not my personal cup of tea, I prefer the Liberty Square Dutch Gothic design from Disney World's Magic Kingdom.

But how did that ghostly horse drawn hearse crash through the walls of the mansion complete with Murphy and co inside?. How would ghosts be able to knock through walls when they are...errr ghosts. And how on earth would living people be able to go through the wall with the ghosts??.

On the whole the film does look really good and clearly a lot of thought and craftsmanship went into making the visuals realistic. Its really nice (and amazingly surprising) that they actually constructed the mansion instead of relying on CGI. The interiors and props all benefit from genuine craftsmanship too which really sets the mood, for all you 'Nightmare Before Christmas'/Addams Family/Munster lovers out there (like me) you'll love it.

This is a film you really really really really did expect to be utter utter utter tripe...but its not!. Its actually a really decent looking light-hearted supernatural ride just like the real attraction. The homages are great for folk who have been to the attraction but for those who haven't they just come across as neat spooky visual candy. As I said the only let down is Murphy and co as the endangered mortal family, well mainly Murphy. His tomfoolery lets down the quite decent performances of the supernatural cast.

6.5/10

[TheLoneSpoon]

I like how it's basically just Hubbs posting in here for this entire page. 

[Hubbs]

Treasure Planet (2002)

Avast ye scurvy space lubbers!. I just recently watched this on Bluray (1080p), holy shit it looks good! and bare in mind this film is twelve years old now. I recall when this was released and boy was it destroyed by the critics, really panned, but I can't understand why, this is only the second time I've seen this since the cinema and I loved it.

The idea of sticking this classic 18th Century set adventure into the sci-fi realm is actually a sweet one, I'm surprised it has not happened before. The whole concept really does fit the space adventurer aspect nicely but of course there are some bits n pieces that don't add up. Like why on earth would all spacecraft in the far distant unknown future be built around centuries old galleon designs by humankind? and are those ships actually made of wood??!!. Why would these ships require sails? and how come no one (mainly humans) dies from exposure to deep space? there isn't anything to protect anyone accept a gravity force field. Kinda odd seeing a young 'Hawkins' high up on the ships rope ladders with the space winds blowing through his hair.

Are all buildings in this future made of wood?! can there be that much wood left? why are various alien species wearing centuries old human attire? all aliens speak the human language of English? are they actually using rope on these ships!!? ROPE! and there doesn't appear to be many humans left now I think of it...just Hawkins and his mum or so it seems. I could go on but at some point you gotta let it go, its Treasure Island in space with aliens and robots, its just suppose to be visual fun and it is by gum!.

Silly absurd nonsensical plot issues aside the whole aged steampunk/historic aesthetic look is really pleasing to the eye. Some of the space sequences really do look gorgeous, a cosmic ballet indeed. Of course the film is dated which means dated CGI is evident throughout, some obvious and some not so. Its nothing too horrendous and is tolerable. Some of the best looking CGI is easily the crescent moon shaped spaceport which borders suspiciously on Mos Eisley. Where as some of the worst CGI would be the huge whale-like space creatures and the rather over the top finale on treasure planet.

The characters are a fair bunch and fairly enjoyable to watch. Old 'Long John' has been crafted into a half alien half Terminator style cyborg which is curious. Sounds stupid but it actually plays out OK and looks pretty good. Jim is your standard rebellious scruff of a boy who also strangely looks familiar to 'John Connor' from 'T2', I think there is some definite influence there. The rest of the crew are satisfactory but nothing amazing, obligatory insectoid type guy, 'Star Wars Cantina' type alien, floating blob, Cat-like female, one eyed alien etc...bog standard alien designs really, possible homages I guess.

I must confess to not liking Martin Short's characterisation of robot B.E.N. with his insanely loud grating voice. The way this character is portrayed as a robot gone mad is just annoying and kinda old. The kind of role you'd give to Robin Williams and his annoying crazy loudness. The only voice I did like was Murray's Irish take on Long John which does give that nice olde worlde touch, you get a good sense of the character with this, a good sense of history.

There are tonnes of problems with this film that just don't add up at all, the idea of a space set pirate film works but also doesn't. I do think they just abandoned a lot of sense simply because its an animated Disney movie for kids and it simply wouldn't matter. True it doesn't matter, it is just an enjoyable fantasy romp for kids, but at the same time it would have been nice to address some of the silliness. After all everyone of all ages will watch it and while it does look awesome with some lovely creativity and imagination, the silliness sticks out like a giraffe at a polar bears only club.

6.5/10

[Dovahkiin]

From the last movie you watched thread. With a small edit.

Frozen

Spoiler

This movie was absolutely outstanding. It is the epitome of what a Disney movie should be. The animation was utterly charming, vibrant and pleasing to the eye. The comedy was golden, having me in stitches on at least three occasions. I'm also happy to say that this Disney movie completely avoided many of the classic "Disney Movie" Cliches. But the best component of the movie was the outstanding musical numbers. The best one in my opinion is embedded below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moSFlvxnbgk#ws

Idina Menzel was absolutely stunning in her vocal performance. I am already a fan of her performance of Elphaba in Wicked. This movie, all in all, is one of the best if not The Best animated movie I have ever seen.

9.5/10

[close]

[Hubbs]

From the last movie you watched thread. With a small edit.

Frozen

Spoiler

This movie was absolutely outstanding. It is the epitome of what a Disney movie should be. The animation was utterly charming, vibrant and pleasing to the eye. The comedy was golden, having me in stitches on at least three occasions. I'm also happy to say that this Disney movie completely avoided many of the classic "Disney Movie" Cliches. But the best component of the movie was the outstanding musical numbers. The best one in my opinion is embedded below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moSFlvxnbgk#ws

Idina Menzel was absolutely stunning in her vocal performance. I am already a fan of her performance of Elphaba in Wicked. This movie, all in all, is one of the best if not The Best animated movie I have ever seen.

9.5/10

[close]

Best Disney film I last saw was Treasure Planet, recommended

[Dovahkiin]

From the last movie you watched thread. With a small edit.

Frozen

Spoiler

This movie was absolutely outstanding. It is the epitome of what a Disney movie should be. The animation was utterly charming, vibrant and pleasing to the eye. The comedy was golden, having me in stitches on at least three occasions. I'm also happy to say that this Disney movie completely avoided many of the classic "Disney Movie" Cliches. But the best component of the movie was the outstanding musical numbers. The best one in my opinion is embedded below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moSFlvxnbgk#ws

Idina Menzel was absolutely stunning in her vocal performance. I am already a fan of her performance of Elphaba in Wicked. This movie, all in all, is one of the best if not The Best animated movie I have ever seen.

9.5/10

[close]

Best Disney film I last saw was Treasure Planet, recommended

I liked treasure planet alright. But in my own opinion, Frozen blows it completely out of the water...as well as most other animated movies I've ever seen.

[Hubbs]

From the last movie you watched thread. With a small edit.

Frozen

Spoiler

This movie was absolutely outstanding. It is the epitome of what a Disney movie should be. The animation was utterly charming, vibrant and pleasing to the eye. The comedy was golden, having me in stitches on at least three occasions. I'm also happy to say that this Disney movie completely avoided many of the classic "Disney Movie" Cliches. But the best component of the movie was the outstanding musical numbers. The best one in my opinion is embedded below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moSFlvxnbgk#ws

Idina Menzel was absolutely stunning in her vocal performance. I am already a fan of her performance of Elphaba in Wicked. This movie, all in all, is one of the best if not The Best animated movie I have ever seen.

9.5/10

[close]

Best Disney film I last saw was Treasure Planet, recommended

I liked treasure planet alright. But in my own opinion, Frozen blows it completely out of the water...as well as most other animated movies I've ever seen.

Must see this.