Toy Story 3 (and Pixar in general)

Finding a consistently good film studio in modern day Hollywood is like opening up a garbage bin in the lower-class section of Berlin and finding ratatouille. The vast majority of film-makers these days are money-seeking monsters whose only desire is to obtain a large pay-packet and a large collection of fancy cars. You give them a script with a few explosions, sexy characters and a lot of awkward flirtation, then as quick as a bug's life it's made into a feature film. Pixar, however put all their effort into what's important. They'll spend years toying with stories until it's perfect, and after that they'll put all their effort into making that story come to life. They're not afraid to be different, either. If someone gave one of those mindless dong heads from the rest of Hollywood a Pixar script they'd say, "He's up the wall, 'e is!" The point here is that Pixar is incredible and almost everyone else is *. 

There are very few people in the world who can make a third instalment in a series and make it as well as the first two. Yep, you guessed it. Those few people mainly consists of the staff at Pixar. 

Somehow they have successfully come up with another completely original story line. This should come as no surprise, seeing as Pixar do that all the time. Their scripts are consistently amazing. They are even capable of inserting so much story, life, entertainment and character development into a script with very little dialogue. There are people who don't like films like that for such a reason, but I'm not sure they're opinion should be counted. This is an approximate, but true quote: "I watched Wall-E and I thought it was alright, but than afterwards I thought, 'Hang on a second...there was almost no talking in it'". This was presented as a reason for not liking the film, representing unintelligence. The only other argument against the film I have heard is: "Because it's sh*t", representing extreme unintelligence. 

The first Toy Story was quite an adventure, in that it showed us a place we had never seen before, which included the house that the toys live in, (and the next door neighbour). This sense of adventure really enhanced the story, and made it even more extraordinary. The second one took us around the city, expanding the territory and making giving us even more incredible adventure. The third one doesn't travel too far, but the Sunnyside Day Care Centre is quite a detailed and fun place to explore, making it possibly the best adventure yet. This is even greater when it becomes an escape-style film. The adventure aspect to a film really gives it a sense of excitement, and Pixar really know how to pull that off. 

Another of the greatest aspects of the movie would have to be the humour and drama. We already know that the movie is satisfyingly exciting and beautifully animated, (not that it matters so much, as Pixar could make a good film using only three various of the colour brown. Drawn with crayons). The drama doesn't kick in straight away, (though there are points quite common in the film that call upon your softer side), but when it gets into it, it really gets into it. There was one moment not long before the end that really summed up how close these toys are and indeed the essence of human relationships, (using toys!), and honestly was incredibly powerful. And on top of all that is the humour that Pixar is so famous for. The film is hilarious throughout. In fact, the beginning of the film is quite spectacular in how funny it is; quite literally one of the strongest openings to a film I have ever seen. 

But the things that make the Toy Story films so utterly spectacular are the characters. They're loveable and hilarious and the sort that you really enjoy spending time watching. They and their relationships with each other are really the essence of the film and it's pulled off so well. Everything in the film that is funny is doubled by the strength of the characters, and same with everything that is sad or in some way powerful. And the voices are really just perfect. Pixar are known for choosing the best voice rather than the most famous, but somehow, with Toy Story, they chose both at the same time. 

Ultimately, this is one of those films where everything just comes together. The script, direction and animation team all worked as one to make something exciting, hilarious and moving. There is really no reason that this film should not match the Best Picture nomination that Up also got last year. Personally, (looking at what they have released so far this year), I would not be a tad disappointed if this was the film that finally won that coveted award for Pixar. And, although I don't know if it would be pushing my luck or going over the top, I would be willing to beg pixar to make a fourth...one day...

Shrek Goes Fourth

It is the simple Truth that most studios feel that it is pretty much necessary to create as many sequels to a successful film as physically possible. I love the Shrek characters, and personally it is probably the sort of film that I, myself, would probably revisit on a number of occasions. It is filled with characters that are ultimately loveable and/or quite funny, and a great premise for satire. 

I would not, however, make a sequel like Shrek Goes Fourth. 

I was up to date on the critical reaction to this film weeks before I went to see it, (only doing so because there has been nothing better in my isolated area for the past month or so), so I was not expecting anything spectacular. I was, however, hoping that the movie would be as funny as the first two, (and indeed even the Third). I was hoping that the characters would be as entertaining as they had always been. 

I was rather disappointed on both of these levels, (plus all the other levels, though I knew I would be). It certainly had some satisfyingly funny moments, but most of the jokes presented were simple and not entirely intelligent. The character of Shrek wasn't even quite there. At some point in the movie he loses his character a little and becomes the average comedy actor. It's a mixture of not adding anything new to the character since the first movie or two, and taking away some of what it already had. 

All the supporting characters were generally what created most of the funniest parts of the films. Most prominently is Donkey, and Puss in Boots, whose relationship with Shrek and each other is always entertaining to watch. This means that the writers decided to sacrifice a lot of the fun when they chose to set almost the entire film in a time that the relationships between these characters DO NOT EXIST! Both characters still have their moments, but they really could have had a lot more. 

The Shrek films generally put a lot of effort into the relationship between Shrek and Fiona as physically possible. In this one, they have not changed, except for the fact that the relationship wasn't particularly touching, nor believable. Again, it had a couple of moments, but apart from that the whole aspect of the movie was unspectacular, (not to mention Shrek's attempts at wooing her made me actually look away from the screen a few times. I'm sure this awkward effect is what they were aiming for...sometimes awkward is just awkward). 

Na matter what you may say, the story is an incredibly important factor in any film. The story in this one is a bucket o' shizz. I'm sure it's creative and different in it's own way, but I still find it to be quite incredibly dull. And what an ending! The best thing about the ending is when the little fat kid talks. Apart from that, it's what you knew was going to happen from the moment you read the first three words of the blurb, and it's not even particularly emotional. I was still sitting there hoping something better was going to happen before the credits rolled, but nay, nothing presented itself. 

But I've seen worse. At least it was kind of worth my while. I wish I'd got a discount, though. 

The Book of Eli

One thing that is common with common day films that contain a strong Christian theme is that, when they get into the 'Christianness', it tends to get really quite cheesy. I, myself, am a Christian, but even I can see that they often put forward their beliefs without consideration for those who might want to see a bit of justification for the said beliefs (generally atheists). Probably the main reason that this irritates people is that it is always the same cliched things that are being said, rather than anything new. The writers also tend to write the Christian aspect into the script with little or no consideration as to how it might fit into the overall movie, or making sure it stays out of the way of (or, if possible, strengthen) the story.

'The Book of Eli' is a film with a strong Christian message, and seemingly told from a Christian perspective. This aspect actually blends in nicely with the story. There are certainly a few moments where it comes across as cheesy, but compared to what you'll usually see, the film is not likely to induce a cringe with these aspects.

"So," begins an interested listener, "You say it is a good film?"

No, you ignorant twerp. The film was ultimately very disappointing.

This could be taken as a compliment of sorts, as I would not have found it such if there was no potential in it. Indeed the film is original and the storyline itself is quite impressive. There is also a twist at the end that made me raise my eyebrows because there was really some inventiveness behind it. It stars Denzel Washinton, who is awesome (and it is probably him who makes the Christian message sound cool rather than cringe-worthy). Unfortunately, there are also a number of things that drag it down beyond forgiveness:

The most prominent thing that lasts throughout is that the dialogue is largely either cliche or unbelievable. The only times this fault is forgivable is when it is delivered by someone like Denzel, but most of the smaller roles delivered the poorly penned lines with little conviction. Often times the lines are over-dramatic. Over-dramaticness can be incredibly awesome, but it can also be done badly, and unfortunately it was done with little care here.

There were a lot of things that should have been kept out or replaced, as a lot of the scenes sometimes either went too long or didn't really need to be there. It could be that the directors needed to spend a bit more time on some of the scenes, and made them make more sense or have more meaning. The ending went a little too long after the little twist, where it should have ended very quickly, and the last half-minute was quite awfully cliched.

On the upside, the scenery is nice. Not spectacular, but does not disappoint. Being post-apocalyptic it needs awesome scenery and cinematography, and it at least does a reasonable job of both these things. Not overly brilliant, but worth a mention.

There isn't much action in the film, but the little that it does contain is reasonably well-done. Again, not something you'll remember a week after seeing it, but certainly nice looking sequences. There aren't many shots in these parts, so it isn't confusing, and you see the whole thing happening. Although there is a moment where they throw a bomb out the window and it land a little to the side of the car. The next shot you can't see the bomb, but the area that the bomb landed is basically visible. When it ticks over, the car it was next to explodes rather than the bomb. Curious.

Overall, this film would have been substantially better with a few more drafts of the script (and maybe someone else to aid with the dialogue), more care, effort and time from the direction, and maybe a bit better casting. I would not object to the creators making more films, because it is most likely that they will improve with practice. It proves that a Christian perspective is capable of being implanted into a film without being flippin' mindless. Denzel Washington looks cool in sunglasses.

'Kick-Ass' Punches Face! (And Kicks Rear Area)

One thing that is of the utmost importance when you are looking for a quality product is originality and new ideas. This doesn't always mean that the entire premise, style, characters, etc. of a film has to be completely original necessarily...it could simply mean that it has a new twist on something, original characters, previously unreached emotional heights, you get the idea! (Although it is nonetheless preferable that it is original in as many areas as physically possible).

Apart from this, the original idea should be interesting/clever/entertaining/useful. Imagine a new and completely original book on workplace safety! It has completely original ideas, but they range from giving pages upon pages of never-before-seen mathematical figures as to how likely you are to cut your finger, to instructing an office worker never to insert a pencil into their eye. Interesting? No. Useful? No. Clever? Well...smart maybe, with all the maths stuff...but nothing really apart from that. Entertaining? Pretty much irrelevant to workplace safety, but I hope you get what I mean.

Workplace Safety is not the best example, but this theory can be related to just about anything. Imagine how absolutely terrible it would be if one of the recent most popular phenomenons in English literature was a romance novel about...oh, I don't know...a girl who falls in love with...a...vampire! And wouldn't it be crazy if the only original idea she could insert into the story was the fact that vampires sparkled occasionally! Sure you'll get legions of fans, but you could easily become the most hated author in the universe, even being bagged out in (undisclosed) blogs!

"But Man With Beard!" interrupts a previously silent listener. "Shut up!"

Too right, Rude Man, I wandered off topic (slightly). The reason, however, I brought it up was (apart from being an entirely relevant and important fact when it comes to films) Kick-Ass is a film that you will watch and feel that you have never seen before.

It starts off giving background information on the main character, and a bit on some of the side characters also. It sets up the fact that the centre character is someone who is completely and utterly average. There is nothing special about him, apart from the fact that he soon chooses to become a super-hero. We are constantly reminded of the fact that he is a 'real person' by the fact that he is utterly useless at anything to do with being a super-hero - except for his motivation.

For the duration of the film, we are offered a mix of comedy and action. It is, in sorts, the American 'Hot-Fuzz' of the super-hero genre in the way it satirises the genre. The major difference between the two movies (although not a fault to either) is that it is a little more serious. The comedy, although clever, is never in the way of the plot, and vice-versa. The action contained within the film is quite incredible, really. Apart from being well shot, a lot of them (especially those earlier in the film) had great, dramatic music over the top of it to really make the whole experience rather satisfying. They are certainly well shot, choreographed, and generally unpredictable. Also, (somehow perfectly mixed in so that it doesn't distract from the dramaticness or ultimateness of the action), these sequences are quite incredibly funny. Yeah, it's immoral to have an eleven-year-old girl brutally slaughtering people and saying the word c*nt, (and I am a man of strong morals), but flippin' 'eck it's funny!

One thing that impressed me the most is how well it portrayed the fact that the characters were real. Even the super-ninja girl was vulnerable at times! Kick-Ass himself gets beaten up a lot, and you often feel like he could be about to die. This makes for a relatively thrilling experience in that the character development is good enough that you genuinely care for him.

I will point out that it is based on a comic, but Matthew Vaughn and Jane Goldman did an excellent job of putting it onto a film script (although I have never read any of the comics so I have no idea how faithful it is). Matthew Vaughn does an excellent job of his direction, bringing it all together in a style that makes the film a fun experience. It is ultimately a worthwhile experience, and seeing as it was satisfying and entertaining for someone with high standards like me, it'll most certainly be fun and enjoyable for someone unintelligent and boring like yourself. (Not to be taken literally). (Mostly).

The Beginning

I was contemplating how I should start my blog. First, I decided I should begin with some sort of introduction...but then I thought, "No! That's how everyone tends to start their blog!" I then decided that I could do the opposite and begin with an outro...but then I thought, "No! People will believe it and never return to read your blog!" By this time, as you can imagine, I was becoming irritated with the picky responses my thoughts were providing and so came the decision to begin with naught but rambling. This idea was also criticised. In the end I just jotted down the thoughts you just read.

So in short, welcome to my lair. I plan to review films and talk (write) about similar issues. It may be that some of the films I review are ones that are no longer in cinemas. Flip, they may even be a few years old! The main thing is that I provide deep insights into the very core of film making, (I refuse to accept responsibility for a lack of such). Unfortunately, it is unlikely that I will see many films in cinema that I don't like, because I have limited money for reasons that may or may not be related to laziness.

I have also chosen to refrain from use of the word fuck.


It should be noted that I will not accept responsibilty for deaths related to the reading of this blog, in part due to the fact that it is illogical. Any life resulted from reading this blog is unusual.

I would appreciate it, also, if you chose to become a fan of me on facebook. Do not be confused, though, for it uses my real name rather than 'Man With Beard'.

And with this I announce the opening of this blog! I bid you all a good night and a Happy New Year!