Fanboy Cartoon Reviews

Redline will blow your doors off!

2012-01-18T20:16:00.000-05:00

Not that long ago I did a review for "5 centimeters per second". In that review I commended the film for having some of the most impressive visuals I'd seen from Japan in a long time. After watching Redline however, this compliment seems almost laughable. I don't say this as an insult to "5 centimeters per second", but rather because Redline (which is also Japanese) has the best traditional animation I've seen in the last decade.

The story of Redline is pretty simple, but at the same time kind of hard to explain. Basically there is a car race called Redline where the best drivers from various species pilot insanely tricked out vehicles to compete in a no-holds-bar battle to win the coveted tittle of champion. The location of this race can be on just about any world imaginable and it just so happens that this year's Redline is on Roboworld, a planet populated by militant cyborgs who want nothing to do with the popular sporting event and set out to stop Redline by any means necessary. Our main character is Sweet JP, a talented human driver who has been to jail for fixing races. The cause of this dishonest behavior however, is JP's best friend Frisbee, an alien race car designer who has gotten in over his head with a mafia syndicate. Rounding out the cast is another human driver, the beautiful woman Sonoshee. Though younger than most of the other competitors, Sonoshee is one of the most determined racers in the field, a quality JP cannot help but be attracted to.

In terms of a narrative, Redline is just nuts. There are so many outlandish characters (drawn from a variety of archetypes) and over the top action sequences that it would be very easy to get overwhelmed as a viewer. Yet the simple and straight forward nature of the movies three main characters (JP, Frisbee and Sonoshee) somehow keeps the whole movie from collapsing into an orgy of nonsensical craziness. It's this very recognizable story about a would be great racer (JP) and his lifelong engineering partner (Frisbee) that keeps the film grounded despite its insane setting. Couple this with the inspiration brought about by Sonoshee and you end up with a surprisingly engaging plot.

To give you some idea of what I mean, let's talk about the short - but very effective - flashbacks used in Redline. In these sequences we learn a lot about the movies three stars. We find out the motivation for JP to become a racer, the mean streets that JP and Frisbee grew up on as well as the origins of JP's affection for the ever driven Sonoshee. These brief glimpses into the simple motivations of JP, Frisbee and Sonoshee are the perfect counterbalance to the outrageous and slightly schizophrenic events that surround their participation in Redline.

That's not to say that Redline doesn't have any writing problems, because it does. For one thing, some of the foreshadowing is overly telegraphed, especially in regards to the necklace worn by Sonoshee. Additionally some of the craziness taking place durning the Redline race itself can be a little hard to follow with some of the events never really coming full circle. Then of course there's the lack of anything resembling a deeper message. While I personally found the story of Redline engrossing, I'll be the first to admit that there's nothing insightful or intelligent to be taken away from it. I wouldn't go as far as to say the movie is just "dumb fun" but I believe it fair to say that it's your eyes that will be getting a work out, not your brain.

When it's all put together though, I really liked the story of Redline. The characters are charming, the setting is outrageously fun and the visceral personalities of JP and company really help this movie work. True, there's no subtly or subtext to Redline, and while I openly praised the simplicity of characters like Frisbee I have to admit there's plenty of room for more characterization. Yet despite these shortcomings Redline still manages to work somehow. While not for everyone, I have a hard time imagining anyone outside of the most pretentious action-adventure animation fans not enjoying this story.

Something that all animation fans should enjoy are the visuals in Redline. With some of the boldest art direction I've seen in a long time, Redline manages to create a truly unique looking film, something we shouldn't take for granted considering how homogenized Japanese anime can get at times. In particular I loved the heavy black shadows used throughout the movie. Instead of using transparent shading to give characters volume and dimension, Redlines director Takeshi Koike went with a high contrast look that reminds me of something you would see in a black-and-white comic book, but with color. There's almost a European sensibility about it, but I can't point to any particular example to back that up. Regardless the art direction and styling found in Redline is amazing.

Besides the film's design, Redline also features expertly crafted traditional animation. Apparently this movie saw some delays during production, and while I don't know that the cause of this was the enormous number of hand drawings required to make the film (reportedly it took 100,000) I will say that the end result was definitely worth the wait. While taking for granted that the movement here is completely fluid, what impressed me most about Redline's animation was the way the artists could transition scenes of realism into exaggerated and stretched out moments of near surrealism (this usually happens when JP uses his car's boosters). Visually epic in scope and near perfect in execution, it is no wonder this film took seven years to complete.

Purely from an eye candy perspective, there are very few films that can top Redline. But while history has seen plenty of animated movies that look great only to then drop the ball in the story department, Redline also manages to tell an engaging - if somewhat shallow - tale about visceral characters competing in an outrageous race that makes Speed Racer look like a go-cart driver. So basically if you like car races, action-adventure or just want to see some mind blowing animation then you should check out Redline.

GI Joe the animated movie - Not my American heroes

2012-01-08T10:44:00.000-05:00

With huge success in both the TV animation and toy market, it should come as no surprise that an animated feature film staring everyones favorite action heros (and by everyone I mean adolescent boys) GI Joe was put into production in the mid 1980s. Released in 1987, GI Joe the Movie was originally supposed to appear in theaters. Unfortunately the poor box office returns from other films based on popular toy lines (namely Transformers and My Little Pony) led to a change in plans by Hasbro. Instead of being distributed into theaters, GI Joe the Movie was shown as a TV special and given a direct to video VHS release. Though it was intended to be a jumping off point for the next season in the series, the GI Joe film ended up being the last installment for this particular incarnation of the franchise; thus capping off one of the most successful action-adventure cartoons of the 1980s (Dic would actually bring back the GI Joe cartoon several years later, but most people consider the end of Sunbows run with the GI Joe movie to be the finale of the original series).

I remember watching this movie on TV as a kid, or at least half of it. I actually had to turn the film off because my baby sister was being put down for a nap and my parents didn't want her waking up. It would be an additional 13 years before I was finally able to rent a VHS copy of the film in my early 20s. Now, another 13 years have passed and here I am watching this story once again on DVD as the big finale to my complete GI Joe series footlocker set. In all that time, I have to admit I never really thought this movie was all that impressive. Sure the visuals were a big step up from the TV series, but the characters and story just don't do much for me; and while I understand what the creators of this film were trying to do, I just don't appreciate the way they did it.

The story behind GI Joe the Movie goes something like this. GI Joe has devised a new machine that could solve the worlds energy crisis (don't ask me why an elite combat squad created to fight Cobra is working on such a device, it's probably Obama's fault). This potentially world changing piece of technology is known as the Broadcast Energy Transmitter - or BET for short (yes, it has the same initials as Black Entertainment Television, I laughed too) - and is being tested somewhere in Antarctica or something (again, I have no idea why). As one would suspect, Cobra also wants this device, but not for the reasons you might think. Turns out Serpentor (Cobra's Emperor who usurped Cobra Commander as leader of the terrorist organization) has allied himself with an ancient civilization that despises the inorganic technology mankind has developed over the years. This race is known as Cobra-la and it is they who want the BET (snicker) for the purpose of energizing some spores they are planning to launch into space. Once hatched these spores will fall to earth and force mankind into a state of devolution so that Cobra-la can reclaim the planet for themselves. There's a little more to it than that, but I think you get the idea.

From a writing standpoint the GI Joe Movie is an interesting mix of both familiar and unfamiliar ideas. While Cobra's plan to steal the Broadcast Energy Transmitter and use it for nefarious purposes fits very well within the GI Joe formula, the overall objective to de-evolve mankind and destroy our civilization has never really been the goal of this terrorist organization. Cobra has always wanted to rule over mankind, not ruin it. Of course Cobra-la is the real driving force behind this apocalyptic plan, but I was still surprised at how quickly villains like Destro and the Baroness accepted the idea. Compounding the oddity of this plot was the obvious anime influence. Though I cannot say for certain, I really got the impression that Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind was a huge source of inspiration for this film, and I'm hard pressed to figure out why anyone would think that an environmentally based story like Nausicaa would serve as a good basis for a GI Joe movie. Still, given the number of doomsday scenarios presented by Cobra over the years, I can see why a new direction was necessary for the series. So I guess the unusual nature of this story - though somewhat distracting - was not necessarily a bad thing, and I'm willing to write it off as no harm no foul.

What is harmful to this story however, is the poor use of characters, specifically GI Joe characters. Taking a note from what they did with the Transformers movie, GI Joe's producers decided to use their animated film as a vehicle to introduce a new cast of characters to the series. So instead of getting healthy doses of Scarlett, Flint, Snake-eyes, Shipwreck etc. we get Falcon, Jinx, Tunnel Rat and of course Big Lob (I'll have more to say about Big Lob later). That's not to say that all the GI Joe mainstays got ignored. Duke gets a lot of screen time, as does Roadblock and the horrendous Sgt. Slaughter (who I never liked). Still, the crux of the story clearly revolves around Falcon (who is Duke's half brother) and the other new Joe recruits as well as Sgt. Slaughter's Renegades. The problem with this is that fans of the series (even young ones) would much rather watch a film where their favorite characters are the driving force behind the story. Instead the GI Joe movie not only pushes these characters into the background, it continues to follow the Transformers model and actually tries to kill one of them off! To be fair the character (spoiler alert) - who is Duke - doesn't actually die in the film, but if you watch the movie closely you will see that the story actually called for him to do so. Apparently the reason Hasbro reneged on the original plan to off Duke was the hugely negative fan reaction they got when they killed Optimus Prime in the aforementioned Transformers movie. To change this for GI Joe they added dialog (usually by offscreen characters) that makes it clear that Duke isn't actually dead, but instead in a comma (one from which he awakes, but not onscreen). If you watch the character reactions from this life or death scene however, it is very clear that Duke does indeed die.

To be clear, I do not take umbrage with the initial decision to kill Duke in the GI Joe movie. It's the reasons behind his unfulfilled demise that bother me. Duke isn't being killed because it's the right thing for the story you see, it's just a way for the company to kick out the old and bring in the new. Hasbro wanted to sell us new toys while at the same time ushering in a new direction for GI Joe. So to do this they thought it best to symbolically "kill" the old show by killing Duke, a decision that was decidedly corporate. Though the GI Joe cartoon is really nothing more than a long line of merchandise based decisions, seeing this cold corporate planning on display in a full fledged movie just didn't sit well with me (a reaction that was echoed by Transformers fans when Optimus Prime received the same treatment).

Making the situation worse was the sobering reality that continually adding new Joe members to the shows lineup was leading to some pretty ridiculous characters. Over the years GI Joe has had some ups and downs with regards to their new recruits. For every character that fit well within the series setting (for example Lady Jaye) there were characters that came across as ridiculous by contrast (Quick Kick). Unfortunately this trend only continued to worsen with the GI Joe movie. Characters like Jinx, Big Lob and Chuckles just didn't work all that well as Joes. Whether it's their less than military backgrounds, the egregiously cliched inspirations (gee Chuckles, you ever watch Miami Vice? You would love it.) or the horribly outlandish outfits of the characters, these new recruits come off looking like a band of circus performers rather than elite soldiers. Fortunately Falcon and Tunnel Rat do look more in line with what I expect from GI Joe members, however I still found Falcon (arguably the central character of the film) insufferable when on screen.

Why do I hate Falcon so much? Probably because he's the most selfish and irresponsible GI Joe solider - not named Shipwreck - I've ever seen. But while Shipwreck's less than stellar behavior was a source of comedic relief for the show, Falcon is actually supposed to be an officer with leadership potential. Yet here he is trying to impress a chick by taking her into a classified area, after which he allows fellow soldiers to be injured because he's absent from his post hitting on - once again - another woman. Now obviously the movie introduced these character flaws so that Falcon could over come them, thus maturing him into the man he's supposed to be. That kind of characterization however, just doesn't belong in any Joe leader. I mean, how does a guy like Falcon even get promoted to Lieutenant? During his court martial General Hawk makes it abundantly clear that Falcon's military record is rife with poor conduct and gross dereliction of duty. So why hasn't he been busted down to private yet, or discharged altogether? And what's up with the command structure at GI Joe anyway? Duke is only a sergeant, yet he's technically in command of officers? I may not be an expert on military rank but that just seems odd. Anyway, I have to admit my issues with Falcon are a little personal. Though characters like Duke and Flint are kind of carbon copy, cookie cutter hero types - with no real flaws to speak of - I prefer characters you can aspire to. These are supposed to be the military elite, the best of the best of the best. I expect to see over the top perfection from the guys calling the shots, I should be in awe of their stalwart dedication to duty. Instead I found myself looking at Falcon with disgust, both as a child and adult (I have similar issues with todays popular Ben 10 character, but that's a rant for another time).

Then of course there's Big Lob. As I previously mentioned there is no shortage of "ridiculous" GI Joe characters to be found in the 1980s. Of all of these, however, Big Lob is definitely worst. The reason I crown Mr. Lob with this dubious honor is that Big Lob is supposed to be a former basketball player turned Joe recruit. While this may not sound any worse than say Quick Kick being a stunt man turned GI Joe, you need to understand that Big Lob's entire skill set is based around his basketball abilities (so for example he throws grenades as if he were shooting a jump shot). Though that's pretty outrageous in and of itself, the funniest thing about Big Lob is that whenever he is in action he speaks in the third person and calls his own plays like a cliched sports announcer. Let me repeat that, Big Lob narrates all of his life or death struggles as if he were playing in a sporting event. Even worse the character constantly confuses his basketball metaphors with football plays, thus the entire idea - which was bad enough to begin with - is not even handled in a consistent way. Honestly, the only other character that even comes close to matching this level of obnoxious would be Quick Kick who - along with his stunt man background - does horrible celebrity impressions during the first season of GI Joe. Still, I have to give Big Lob the title of "Biggest Dud" when it comes to these GI Joe misfires. A conclusion that I believe Hasbro shared since they did not even release an action figure of the character during the 1980s.

Overall the writing of the GI Joe movie just doesn't work very well. Though the producers tried to rightfully up the stakes with the introduction of Cobra-la, this dramatic change to the GI Joe mythos felt strangely odd and perhaps a little too foreign for the franchise. Likewise, the blatantly corporate addition of new - and mostly bad - GI Joe characters like Falcon, Chuckles, Big Lob etc., did nothing to help the movies misguided premise. Compound this with the irreverent manner in which classic Joe characters like Duke where handled, and you have a story that lacks both substance and heart.

On a more positive note, the visuals from GI Joe the Movie are pretty good, in particular the film's intro. Set to some cheesy (but fun) music, the opening title sequence of this film features an attack by Cobra on the statue of Libirty. Naturally GI Joe is there to defend our favorite present from the French (than again the Louisiana Purchase was practically a gift in and of itself), and do so with some very feature film worthy animation. What's doubly nice about this is that the entire sequence uses plenty of fan favorite Joes (seriously, you get more Snake Eyes here than in the movie itself) and none of the newer, lamer Joes that make up the rest of the story.

Unfortunately, the occasionally excellent visuals found in the rest of the film can be somewhat sporadic. What I mean is that there is an obvious distinction between the "A" team animators - who did most of the action scenes - and the "B" team animators who did the more pedestrian scenes. While the overall look of the characters are consistent, I could immediately tell when the film switched between animation units and was disappointed that the movie wasn't done entirely by the better of the two. It's hard to say exactly why the "A" teams animation stood out so much, but off hand I would say that the staging was more unique, the color pallet appeared darker and I think the frames per second was a little higher. Of course it's entirely possible that this was a result of the film's switch to DTV as well. If the movie was only partially finished when this major change was made, I imagine that cuts to the animation budget would have been inevitable and thus inconsistent quality was introduced. I have no real knowledge regarding the movie's production however, so this is purely speculative.

Taken as a whole, I thought the visual side of GI Joe the Movie was solid, as long as you acknowledge the fact it was technically a DTV from the 1980s. Had the film been a theatrical release - like Transformers - I wouldn't be cutting it nearly as much slack and would have to hold it to a higher standard. And when you consider that GI Joe's cousin program Transformers featured some of the best feature film animation of the decade (I'm not kidding, the animation from Transformers the movie was masterful) I'm afraid GI Joe just wouldn't have been up to snuff. As it is however, I liked the overall look of the film and feel that it's the best part of the movie.

In terms of voice acting I really don't have all that much to say about GI Joe the Movie. All the regular actors and actresses from the TV series reprise their roles and do a decent enough job. Of course none of these individuals has a "big" name to splash across the opening credits, so the films producers got Don Johnson to be the movies headliner by voicing Falcon. Personally, I felt the addition of Johnson did nothing to help or hurt the film, though if I'm completely honest I was very aware that I was listening to Johnson and that can be a bad thing when watching animation. Other than that the only thing worth noting is the "one step forward, two steps back" situation regarding Serpentor's dialog. What I mean is that Serpentor had some really silly dialog during the second season of GI Joe. In particular there was his oft used phrase "This I command!!!" which was delivered with such over emphasis that one could not help but cringe. In the GI Joe movie, however, the characters voice actor (Richard Gautier) dials it down a notch and somehow delivers this same phrase in a more believable manner. Unfortunately, whatever gains achieved by this refined delivery where completely lost when Serpentor starts using his new battle cry "Cobra-la-la-la-la-la" (think Xena Warrior Princess). Anyway, I was neither impressed nor displeased with the voice over work in this film. Basically it was about what I expected, and it's pretty much par for the course when it comes to DTVs like this.

Musically I'm afraid that GI Joe the Movie was very lackluster. Outside of the cheesy opening song (which does have some charm) the rest of the film appears to just recycle the same score and musical cues from the television series. Once again, this may be a result of switching the films release from theatrical to DTV. Often times a movies soundtrack is one of the last things done, so if the production budget got cut then it's very possible that the films score suffered. Obviously this is just speculation on my part and I really don't know if this was the case or not. Regardless, the musical score from GI Joe the Movie lacks ambition and is far too generic to be memorable.

As is far too often the case, GI Joe the Movie is very average. The story was unimpressive (the characters even more so), the animation solid (at times even excellent ) and the voice acting/music gets by. The only people I would really recommend this film to are those who have fond memories of it, or people who are completists (like myself). Otherwise there just isn't anything here you need to bother with. If you are interested in picking up a copy however, you have two options. One: you can buy the Blu-ray/DVD combo or Two: you can just get the regular DVD. Personally, I went with the standard DVD since the movie was simply remastered and not restored. That means the picture quality - while good - is not nearly nice enough to warrant a hi-definition release. Additionally, both releases are in widescreen. This is important because the film has only ever been available in full screen (like all DTVs up until the turn of the century), so one of the best things about this new release is that fans can see the movie as it was originally animated.

5 Centimeters Per Second doesn't go the distance

2011-11-17T09:21:00.000-05:00

Recently I've been on a bit of a "slice of life" anime kick. While seeking out various films and series of the genre I came across "5 centimeters per second". Being that the movie was well reviewed on Amazon - and had even won some awards - I figured I would give it a chance. What I got was a visually amazing piece of work that sadly falls flat in the end.

The story of "5 centimeters per second" is basically the tale of unfulfilled love between two youngsters named Tōno and Akari. Their story is broken up into three chapters and begins in the couples pre-teen years and ends in young adulthood (probably early 20s). While spending a great deal of time together in their youth Tōno and Akari develop a strong bond with one another, a bond that turns into young love as the two prepare to enter junior high (though neither confesses this love to the other). Unfortunately these youngsters are separated when Tōno's family has to move and the two begin communicating through letters. For me to detail the story any further would ultimately spoil it, so I'll just say that this movie likes to spend a lot of time dwelling on the more heart wrenching aspects of love as well as the difficulty of moving on with life because of that.

While I enjoyed the first two chapters of "5 centimeters per second" immensely, it's the films third and final chapter that falls completely on its face. I don't say this out of some misguided American need for an "happily ever after" ending, but rather because the ending theme just isn't all that profound. I don't want to give anything away but when this film concluded the only real discernible message is "Stop living in the past, it's bad for you". While there is a lot of truth to this I don't think a full fledged animated feature is needed to get that point across, additionally I expect stories like this to be a little more insightful.

Unfortunately it's this somewhat deflating finale that keeps "5 centimeters per second" from truly succeeding. Though the film's buildup had me very curious as to what the stories final insights into love, life and the circumstances that come between the two might be, the movie just doesn't manage to say anything very meaningful. There's no payoff, no soul. Don't get me wrong the film tries very hard, and manages to be poignant in the process, but telling a sad story should not be mistaken for telling an honest one. Instead of profound and heart wrenching insights into modern relationships told with the wisdom and experience of time and reflection, "5 centimeters per second" concludes with a blunt and pragmatic message that reminds me of something a stern parent would say, like telling a kid to eat their vegetables.

Perhaps the problem lies with me though. With repeated viewings - or a more pretentious outlook - maybe I could recognize the stories deeper subtext regarding regret and the chances we never take, or that we should keep our hearts open even when the person we want is a million miles away, heck I may have just mistook what was meant to be a bittersweet ending as bleak and disenchanted. Regardless, if there is a deeper message to be found in "5 centimeters per second" the director needs to do a better job of bringing it to the surface. Of course it doesn't help that similar subject matter has been covered far more effectively in other anime films, most notably the late Satoshi Kon masterpiece Millennium Actress. Where "5 centimeters per second" ends somewhat abruptly with no sage thoughts to offer the viewer, Millennium Actress tells an equally poignant tale where unfulfilled desire leads to some insightful views on the importance of true love's ideal along with the chase to find it. Of course it's probably a little unfair of me to compare Makoto Shinkai (5 centimeters director) to Satoshi Kon (one of the best animation directors of his generation) but given the similarity in subject I feel that such a thing is both appropriate and inevitable.

Fortunately the visuals found in "5 centimeters per second" share none of the stories shortcomings. In short, this movie looks gorgeous. With incredibly detailed backgrounds, perfectly staged scenes and fluid animation, I can think of no way this film could look better. Though lacking in "flash" due to the limitations of the subject matter, "5 centimeters per second" is visually one of the strongest animated features to come out of Japan in recent years (the collected story was released as a feature in 2007). Despite the stories failings, fans of traditional animation should still enjoy this film for the visuals alone (I certainly did).

Overall I found "5 centimeters per second" to be a beautiful, but flawed movie. Though the stories first two chapters do an excellent job of conveying the intensity and heartache that can come with young love, the film's final chapter doesn't manage to capitalize on any of those strengths and ends with an audible thud. This is due in large part to the awkward amount of ambiguity contained in the story. Had this film had a more focused theme - like the aforementioned Millennium Actress - I think it would have helped greatly. Conversely if "5 centimeters per second" had actually used more ambiguity - like Sylvain Chomet's recent masterpiece "The Illusionist" - it would have allowed for a more interruptive viewing experience. Unfortunately this film falls somewhere in-between and its story is worse off because of it. Thankfully the animation found in "5 centimeters per second" is so good that fans of the medium should still enjoy watching it. Though I would not recommend the film as a buy, animation lovers should give it a rent (or people who enjoy tragic love stories).

The Powerpuff Girls movie - Sugar and Spice and nothing new

2011-09-18T12:18:00.000-04:00

The Powerpuff Girls was a great show. Conceived by the brilliant cartoon director Craig McCracken in 1998, this program was a must see for me; despite being a guy in his mid-20s. I wasn't the only fan either, the Powerpuff Girls was a huge hit for Cartoon Network and ran 78 episodes before its conclusion. The series was also a good fit for merchandise with tons of video games, backpacks, t-shirts and other paraphernalia being omnipresent throughout the US during its run. Being the biggest hit Cartoon Network had ever enjoyed up to that point, it was only natural that a theatrical film starring Blossom, Bubbles and Buttercup would be put into production.

Released in 2002 the Powerpuff Girls movie was a flop. The film barely managed to recover its production budget (11 million dollars) and only grossed 16 million dollars worldwide. Adding to this disappointment was the fact that the film itself received mostly lukewarm reviews and was quickly forgotten. As for me, well I didn't even bother to watch this movie when it was released in theaters; in fact I didn't even see it at all until a few days ago (almost 9 years after its release).

For anyone who doesn't know, the premise behind the Powerpuff Girls goes something like this. While mixing the formula for the perfect little girl (Sugar and Spice and everything Nice) Professor Utonium accidently added an extra ingredient to the concoction ... Chemical X. The result of this mysterious chemical was an explosion that birthed not only three perfect little girls, but three perfect little girls with superpowers. Powers that Blossom, Bubble and Buttercup now use to protect Townsville and its citizens. Thus the Powerpuff Girls were born.

Now I said before that I was a big fan of the Powerpuff Girls back when it was on the air. Yet with the release of the Powerpuff Girls movie I not only didn't bother to watch the film in theaters, I didn't even check it out on home video for almost a decade. I mention this because my lack of urgency with regards to viewing a movie based on a show I enjoyed isn't just an amusing contradiction; it's the end result of the film's greatest flaw. Put simply, this story is an unnecessary prequel. Set just moments before Professor Utonium's fateful accident, the Powerpuff Girls movie retells the origin of Blossom, Bubbles and Buttercup, and then shows us how they became Townsvilles most beloved superheroes. While this may seem like a good idea at first, the truth is any fan of the show already knows everything that is going to happen in the film; thus there was really no reason to be in a hurry to see it. I already know that JoJo is going to become Mojo JoJo, I already know that the people of Townsville will embrace the Powerpuff Girls, I already know ... well everything. And the things I don't know - like the origin of the girl’s names - really don't require a theatrical movie to be told. Ultimately this superfluous story may have worked fine as a TV special, but if you expect me (or others) to fork out cold hard cash to watch this, you had better bring something new to the table. Not just an obvious origin story with a little fan service and no surprises.

It's not all doom and gloom mind you. The film's pacing is solid, the humor is mostly funny (though occasionally labored) and the fan service mildly cute. But while the writing of the Powerpuff Girls movie itself isn't technically bad, it struggles greatly within its prequel boundaries and tries way too hard to be a belated introduction to the source material. One example can be found during the moment of enlightenment where Blossom, Bubbles and Buttercup realize that they can beat up their opponents to save the day. Though the movie wants us to get excited over the idea of the Powerpuff Girls embracing their powers, the story illustrates this point by having them punch and kick people (or monkeys in this case). While this was simply done as a way to marry the movies social conflict (the people of Townsville don't want the Powerpuff Girls to use their powers) to the girls behavior in the TV show (the Powerpuff Girls are always fighting crime with their fists), the scene can easily come across as "violence solves everything". Personally I didn't have all that much of a problem with the questionable way this plot point was driven home - and I have no issues with my own children watching the film (which they have done on numerous occasions) - but others criticized the Powerpuff Girls movie for being excessively violent. Had the movie not been a prequel, perhaps the story wouldn't have needed to show us the "origin" of Blossom, Bubbles and Buttercups ferocity; and maybe (just maybe) this controversy could have been avoided (though to be fair violence and the Powerpuff Girls do go hand-in-hand).

Other writing problems include the need for a slower buildup of friction between the people of Townsville and the Powerpuff Girls, as well as more exploration of secondary characters. These shortcomings culminate in a contrived climax where convenient changes of heart regarding the Powerpuff Girls take place so that the movie appears to segue into the original show. What I'm trying to say is that this story lacks the bold characterization, heart and story grandeur one desires from feature film animation; and the biggest reason for this is that the writers couldn't do anything that would go against their source material. This is not a poorly executed script; it's a poorly conceived script. It all comes back to the prequel thing. When you take a TV property like this and try to bring it to the big screen you need to up the stakes and push the story and characters to places they've never been. Instead the Powerpuff Girls movie handcuffs itself to the past, and tells us a story we mostly know while limiting itself to superficial character development that doesn't conflict with its TV origins. That's the problem with prequels like this, they don't offer anything new.

On a more positive note, the visuals in this film are fantastic. Though the TV show uses very simple designs, the Powerpuff Girls movie takes that streamlined look and polishes it beautifully for the big screen. Staging, layout and shading are all pushed farther than the TV show and look very feature film worthy. Don't get me wrong, the movie still retains all of the visual charm of its TV counterpart, it just looks a lot more refined. Complementing this excellent style is some amazing color design as well. From the more washed out and monochromatic scenes (usually meant to emphasize emotion) to the colorful battle sequences, this film's color pallet is perfect.

From an actual animation and action choreography perspective, the Powerpuff Girls - once again - impresses. Supervised by Genndy Tartakovsky (Dexter's Laboratory, Samurai Jack and Symbionic Titan) this movie benefits greatly from both the experience and "cool" factor Tartakovsky brings to animation. The film also manages to do something other - more realistic looking - animated features of this time couldn't. It perfectly merged computer generated images to traditional animation. Thanks to the heavily stylized and simple design work done on the Powerpuff Girls movie, CGI constructs like the giant mirrored ball and Mojo JoJo's doomsday machine fit naturally into their traditionally rendered surroundings; an achievement that we take for granted today, but was far too rare an occurrence in the early 2000s.

Overall I would have to say that the best thing about the Powerpuff Girls movie is its looks. The production and character designs are awesome, the color pallet inspired and the animation flawless. Had the story been better, I think this film could have potentially become a modern classic.

Voice acting and music are solid all around as well. While neither would be considered exceptional, I think the film does a good job of balancing both new and familiar sound. All the voice actors from the TV series reprise their roles in the film (or at least it sounds that way); and the music - while recognizable - has enough new beats to let the audience know this is more than just an average Powerpuff Girls story (I only wish the writers had gotten that same memo).

Taken as a whole, the Powerpuff Girls movie is just okay. While the visuals are everything I could have wanted - and the sound solid - the overly familiar story, predictable events and flat characters prevent this film from ever being anything special. From a DVD standpoint I'm afraid that - once again - I was very disappointed. Though I had no issues with the extras or packaging, the decision by Warner Bros. to use a pan and scan full screen version of the film was ridiculous. Sure, 4:3 TVs may have been the norm in 2002 (barely), but not including a widescreen option in the US is totally unacceptable (and yes, the film was animated in widescreen). This is doubly bad because - as I previously mentioned - the Powerpuff Girls movie has amazing staging and design; cutting away almost half of that fantastic artwork to give people a full frame video is just criminal. Anyway if you're a fan of the Powerpuff Girls then this movie is worth a watch; even if it's just to see the amazing visuals. As for younger viewers it might even be a good idea to start them out on this film before moving them on to the regular show (at least that's what I did with my kids).

Galaxy Rangers – 80’s action-adventure that doesn’t suck

2011-08-01T19:23:00.000-04:00

Over the last couple years I've re-watched a lot of the 80s action-adventure cartoons that I grew up with. In that time I've found myself occasionally crowning certain shows - like GI Joe and Dungeons and Dragons - the best of the worst. This is because the cartoons from that time period are horrible by today's standards, but some part of me still wants to ascertain which of those programs stood out as exceptional when compared to its peers. Now, after having watched all 65 episodes of Galaxy Rangers, I would like to declare that not only is this show one of the best of the worst, it's the bestest of the worst.

Premiering in 1986, Galaxy Rangers was not a big success here in America. Despite coming in at the height of the Toy/Cartoon merchandising craze that consumed my generation, Galaxy Rangers had a hard time finding a toy company to produce action figures for their show. This, along with the producers refusal to write cartoons based solely around introducing new toys, led to a lot of time slot shifting and eventual obscurity within the already over saturated action-adventure cartoon market. Interestingly enough, the same principles that made Galaxy Rangers a failure here in the US resulted in the show finding significant success overseas in countries like Germany (apparently European counties liked that the show wasn't a soulless merchandising machine, go figure). Personally, I remember liking this show a lot as a child. It had a good time slot (for a while anyway) on weekday afternoons, and I found myself enjoying the somewhat darker and more mature stories. Twenty-five years later - after watching every episode of Galaxy Rangers on DVD - I'm pleased to report that this show holds up amazingly well.

The story of Galaxy Rangers goes something like this. In the year 2086 two peaceful aliens came to Earth seeking our help. In return for this assistance they provided us with the plans for our first hyperdrive, thus mankind was finally able to open the door to the stars. To help maintain law and order throughout this new frontier, a group of unique individuals called the Galaxy Rangers was formed. Greatest among these brave men and women are four elite Rangers who have received "Series-5" enhancements. Their names are Zachary Foxx, Niko, Walter "Doc" Hartford and Shane Gooseman. Together, this team of courageous heroes must uphold the highest ideals of truth and justice while protecting mankind and its allies from the dangers of the universe.

The characters of the Galaxy Rangers themselves are a mishmash of archetypes and homages to various film personas. Zach is the stalwart leader of the group who likes to do things by the book. The creators of the show liken him to a John Wayne type commander, which makes sense even though the character looks nothing like Wayne. Visually speaking, Doc was obviously modeled after Lando Calrissian. The hair, mustache and general look of the character were clearly meant to invoke this comparison, but beyond that Doc is a lot more comedic than Lando (complete with eye rolling one-liners) and an expert in computers (something Lando never was). Niko falls into the somewhat overused archetype of "lone female of the group with psychic powers". While I thought this would limit Niko at first, I was pleased to find that the show's writers gave the character a decent amount of background, such as her passion for archeology. Gooseman ... well Goosman is pretty much just Clint Eastwood, both in appearance and attitude. He's got that wild, "play by my own rules" attitude made popular by Eastwood in a number of westerns and Dirty Harry movies, all of which were inspiration for the character. So obviously this isn't the most original cast of characters to ever make their way into a cartoon. But while the general appearance and personas of these heroes may come off a little cliché at first, they do grow on you and the writers provide some solid characterization as the series progresses.

That's actually one of the most impressive things about Galaxy Rangers, the writing. While most action-adventure cartoons from this time have very little good, a ton of average and far too many bad stories, the Galaxy Rangers had mostly good and even some great episodes by comparison. The biggest standouts would probably be "Galaxy Stranger" and "Psychocrpyt". Both of these stories featured emotion and character development rarely seen in other 1980s cartoons, especially "Psychocrypt" which I would consider on par with the quintessential Dungeons and Dragons episode "Dragons Graveyard". Though other installments lack this same writing excellence, Galaxy Rangers' lesser stories are still pretty good for their time. In fact I would say that at least 35-40 episodes in this series fall into the Good to Great range (the other 25 would be either average or poor). Of all the shows I've watched (ThunderCats, GI Joe, Defenders of the Earth, Transformers, C.O.P.S.) none of them even come close to having this kind of quality control. A fact that becomes even more impressive when you consider the whole show was done in an eleven month time span!

Another superior aspect of Galaxy Rangers was that the show had solid continuity and was consistent with its characters. Though the series was episodic, some of the characters had overriding storylines - like Gooseman's Super Trooper background or Zach's kidnapped wife - that carried over throughout the show. Character dynamics - such as the budding romance of Gooseman and Niko - are also well represented and consistent in presentation (unlike the confusing romance of Rick and Jedda from Defenders of the Earth). In short, this series had producers, writers and editors that cared; people with a sense of personal and professional pride lacking in far too many of their contemporaries.

Still, Galaxy Rangers did have its faults. For one thing the aforementioned storyline concerning Zach's kidnapped wife never gets resolved. This is doubly unfortunate since the show's best episode - Psychocrypt - does such a great job of conveying the tragedy of the situation. Then there were the stories that just plain sucked. From the shoehorned setup of "Showtime" (which featured circus slavery) to the horribly dated "Battle of the Bandits" (it was inspired by the music videos of a then young MTV) to the insanely surreal "Mothmoose" (that's right, it's an animal that's part moth and part moose ... I kid you not), Galaxy Rangers did churn out its fair share of crap. Fortunately, these stories were few and far between, and considering the overall excellence of the writing, they are forgivable.

It's also worth noting that Galaxy Rangers - like most action-adventure cartoons of that time - featured a number of episodes with "moral" messages. The bulk of these were actually environmental in origin, but others included ideas like not playing with guns. Unlike other shows of the 1980s, however, Galaxy Rangers actually does a good job of not forcing the moral into the story and rarely preached at their audience. This is a nice change of pace from the - all too often - heavy handed morals found in other programs like Captain Planet.

To say that I was impressed with the writing of Galaxy Rangers is kind of an understatement. The show had more attention to detail, character development and gumption than any other action-adventure program at that time. The fact that the show's creators actually respected their audience, and wanted to create a series they could be proud of is obvious, and the end result reflects that. True, the action-adventure standards we've come to enjoy today still make Galaxy Rangers look inferior, but this disparity in quality is not nearly as large, or frustrating as the other shows from my youth.

Visually speaking, Galaxy Rangers is - once again - a huge success. This is due in large part to the work of Japanese animation studio TMS. Turns out TMS was looking to get into the lucrative syndicated cartoon game that was so popular in the US back in 1986. So when Galaxy Ranger creator Robert Mandell came calling they jumped at the opportunity to animate the show. What's funny about this is that TMS had no idea what to expect from a mass-produced program like Galaxy Rangers. When Mandell and company would ask them to render unique aliens, environments and costuming in almost every episode, TMS didn't realize that other studios would have said no or looked for a compromise, they just did it. I'm sure this was huge burden for TMS, but the results are fantastic. Though the series had its fair share of recycled imagery, the overall variety found in Galaxy Rangers was astounding. Couple this with the beautifully detailed and fluid animation done by the studio's top artists, and you got one of the better (maybe the best) looking cartoons of the time.

Complementing the superior work of TMS was some of the best production design I've ever seen in a 1980s action-adventure show. Courtesy of Ray Shenusay, everything from the character to the weapons to the starship design looks phenomenal in this program. Given the quality - and cool factor - found in this show's hardware, it's hard to believe that toy companies weren't falling all over themselves to turn this stuff into toys.

Of course, given the large number of episodes produced - as well as the short timeframe in which they were created - not everything could look great. Like most studios TMS had A, B and C units for animation. The A unit was obviously amazing, but unfortunately the C unit was pretty awful. To be fair, the lackluster looking episodes of Galaxy Rangers really aren't any worse than the poorly animated episodes of ThunderCats, but that said, it's still a noticeable step down in quality. Fortunately, the producers of the Galaxy Rangers always requested that the best scripts be worked on by the A unit. That means stories like "Psychocrypt" and "Galaxy Stranger" not only have the best writing, they have the best animation as well. This may seem like common sense, but I've seen plenty of action-adventure shows from the 1980s ruin their best scripts with poor visuals, a mistake that was never made here.

Honestly, I could spend all day gushing over the visuals from Galaxy Ranger, but I'm guessing it would be best to spare you that. Sufficed to say, this show looks fantastic. The animation is mostly fluid, backgrounds are amazing and the design work is top notch. Yes, the production value of this program is still being graded on a curve due to the time period in which it was created. That said, the overall presentation of Galaxy Rangers is a cut above its peers and has nothing to be embarrassed about.

While not as strong in execution as the writing and animation, the voice acting in Galaxy Rangers is still decent. The main characters all sound good, though I did notice some stiff delivery from time to time. Secondary characters are unfortunately weaker with Robert Mandell's brother providing many of the voices. They're not bad mind you; it's just that Henry Mandell didn't have the range necessary to pull off what he was trying to do. Still, I thought the acting in this show was at, or above the standards of the time, and a far cry better than ThunderCats and C.O.P.S..

Rounding out my evaluation of Galaxy Rangers is the show's music. Normally the action-adventure cartoons of the 1980s would use a lot of recycled in-show music to set the tone for certain scenes. So, for example, whenever an episode of GI Joe would switch over to the Cobra villains the show would cue up the same Cobra "music" over and over. This repetitive use of an already limited musical score is one of the more frustrating things about cartoons from my youth, and I fully expected Galaxy Rangers to continue this pattern. So imagine my surprise when this series chose to purchase a music library of songs and then work them into the show. True, the program still had some pretty obvious repetition, but it also provided a lot of unique scores to go along with it. Don't get me wrong, Galaxy Rangers is no musical masterpiece, but much like the writing and animation, this show's creators went above and beyond the conventions of the time to create something far more ambitious and impressive.

I’ve never given a full recommendation to a 1980s action-adventure cartoon … and today will be no different. That said, I’m sorely tempted to do just that with the Galaxy Rangers. This show had excellent writing, beautiful animation and some of the best music you’ll find from a cartoon made during the Regan years. So if you’re a fan of 80s action-adventure cartoons – especially those with anime influence – you should definitely check out the Galaxy Rangers. All 65 episodes are collected in two wonderfully packaged sets, and feature some fun extras including commentaries and interviews. Hands down the best action-adventure cartoon of the decade.

Quest for Camelot gets lost along the way

2011-07-05T20:41:00.001-04:00

I've always loved the mythology of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table. Much like Greek Mythology, my first exposure to the subject was through popular films of the 1980s. In the case of the latter it was "Clash of the Titans" that captured my imagination. As for the former, it would be "Excalibur" that would spark my lifelong love for Arthur, Lancelot, Gawain, Galahad and the other knights of Camelot. After my introduction to the literary works that spawned these features, I found myself craving more films based in Arthurian legend. Well, like the old saying goes "Be careful what you wish for".

Quest for Camelot was an animated feature created by Warner Bros. in 1998. It was (sort of) based on the book "The King's Damsel" by Vera Chapman, and featured the singing talents of Céline Dion, Bryan White and others. Unfortunately, the respectable talent gathered for this film couldn't overcome its troubled production, and Quest for Camelot ended up being a commercial and critical failure.

As you can probably surmise from my opening statement, I was actually looking forward to Quest for Camelot back in the day. Though Disney's Hercules was a source of mixed emotions for me, I still enjoyed the studios animated take on Greek Mythology (despite its numerous liberties) and welcomed Warner Bros. venture into Arthurian lore. Sadly, the story - and characters - of Quest for Camelot were far too conventional and its themes far too shallow for the film to work.

The story of Quest for Camelot goes something like this. Kaylee is a happy young girl who wants nothing more than to follow in her father’s footsteps and become a knight of Camelot. Even after the death of her father - by the traitorous Sir Ruber - Kaylee continues to dream of the day she will be knighted, despite being stuck at home doing chores. Ten years later, everything changes when Ruber sends his griffin to steal Excalibur from Arthur, a task he partially succeeds in when the fabled sword is lost in the Forbidden Forest. Things only get worse when Ruber forces Kaylee's mother to hide his magically altered soldiers in her wagons so he can gain entry into Camelot undetected and storm the castle. Faced with this pending invasion, Kaylee makes the difficult choice to seek out Excalibur within the Forbidden Forest and return it to Arthur. Fortunately our young heroine finds help in the form of Garrett, a blind hermit who has uncanny survival skills and a silver winged falcon. Together these two would-be knights must brave numerous dangers and return Excalibur to Arthur before Ruber finds the sword himself and destroys Camelot.

In and of itself this story works fine as an animated feature vehicle. The journey to retrieve Excalibur for King Arthur before Ruber seizes control of both the sword and Camelot is all well and good. Unfortunately, the characters that make up this movie fail to draw the viewer into the story, and thus the plot neither engages nor interests its audience. Let's start with Kaylee. Kaylee is one of those "plucky" young heroines who's determined to prove herself by chasing her dreams and just so happens to fall in love along the way. Besides the fact that this was an incredibly overused archetype in animation during the 1990s; Kaylee doesn't really ever "prove" herself at all during her journey. Time and time again, Kaylee finds herself captured or in need of help to escape danger while rarely contributing anything of value to her comrades; her incompetence even gets Garrett hurt at one point in the story. It's only during the film's climax that Kaylee really does anything right; and even then it seems like her success stems more from serendipitous luck than it does actual skill or cleverness. Compare this to Disney's Mulan - which was released that very same year - and you'll see just how pathetic Kaylee really is. In Mulan you have a very naive girl disguised as a solider growing into a strong woman capable of holding her own against anyone, both intellectually and physically. It's Mulan who stops the Hun army, it's Mulan that comes up with a plan to save the Emperor of China, it's Mulan that takes down Shan Yu in one-on-one combat. By contrast, Kaylee just looks clueless and weak.

Garrett fares better thanks to his background as a blind hermit; but whatever characterization gained through these character traits is negated by the underdeveloped emotions created by them. What I mean is Garrett's handicap doesn't really hamper him all that much in the film, so his frustration and bitterness seem very misplaced when used. Had the story done more with Garrett's flashbacks - like showing how difficult it was for him to adjust to being blind at first, or reveal how others saw him as a burden - it could have really solidified the characters emotional state and driven home the film's theme of acceptance. Instead the story glosses over the subject and a lot of character building opportunities for both Garrett and Kaylee are lost.

Secondary characters are no better either. The two-headed dragon Devon and Corwall - as well as Bladebeak - are horribly contrived forms of comedic relief. Kaylee's mother is completely bland. Arthur and Merlin barley show up in the story. Even the film's villain Ruber lacks convincing motivation and shifts between silly and menacing far too often to be taken seriously. Basically, none of the characters in this story work in their current forms. That's not to say that they couldn't work - in fact I'm pretty sure a good rewrite of this story would fix many of the problems I've mentioned - but as it is now, Quest for Camelot's characters are a joke.

Additional writing issues include way too many pop-culture references to other movies, and a very forced romance between Kaylee and Garrett. In short, Quest for Camelot's writing is a hodgepodge mess of half-baked ideas and studio "tinkering". Instead of trying to tell their own story, the people running this film were clearly attempting to ape the Disney model without understanding it. The end result is a shallow, formulaic story bursting with fluff where there should be substance.

From a visual standpoint, Quest for Camelot has a number of problems as well. Though the film has some quality moments, much of the character design just doesn't work and the CGI can be downright awful at times. Take - for example - the design work done on many of the male characters in the movie. Outside of Ruber and his henchmen - who are hulking brutes - most of the men in this film have very awkward builds. Instead of looking nimble and strong, the knights of Camelot - as well as Arthur and Garrett - have large heads, thin waists and strangely proportioned hands and feet. The problem with this somewhat gangly appearance is that it prevents these heroes from ever looking very heroic. I'm not saying they should all be muscle-bound supermen mind you, just lay off the Popeye-esque forearms a little. Fortunately, the female character designs - while a little generic - don't repeat this mistake.

Another issue with the film's look can be found in the computer generated images. Given the time period in which this movie was created, one should expect to find some pretty bad CGI. That said the computer animated ogre in Quest for Camelot is one of the worst looking CGI constructs to ever grace a theatrically released animated feature. Completely different in style than its traditionally animated surroundings, this creature shatters the visual illusion necessary for animated films to work, and completely takes you out of the moment. Thankfully, the movies creators were more fastidious with the use of computer generated imagery throughout the rest of the film. Outside of the aforementioned ogre, only the CGI trapdoor at the end of the story looks out of place.

On a more positive note, the traditional animation in Quest for Camelot is mostly smooth and pleasing to watch; there are even some nice ideas like the revealing of Kaylee's face when Garrett touches it. I also liked the film's background design and execution. While the illustrations done for the environments in Quest for Camelot don't even come close to what Disney was doing at this time, they still manage to look feature film worthy, and have a nice Celtic feel appropriate to the story. The movie's color pallet, however, is a bit of a mixed bag. Some of the environments have a lush and vibrant color scheme that can be attractive at times. Unfortunately, these same backgrounds can also become over saturated and even garish on occasion.

Ultimately, I thought the visuals of Quest for Camelot - while occasionally good -looked inconsistent and rushed. Though I don't have any insider knowledge regarding the film's production, I think the movies creative staff would have benefited greatly from a stable, well thought out production plan. Instead, the visuals - much like the story - appear to be underdeveloped, uneven and hurried.

As for the films voice acting only Gary Oldman really stands out in a positive way. His portrayal of Ruber - though occasionally over the top - was very distinct and energetic; qualities that were sorely lacking in the stories other main characters. Performed by Jessalyn Gilsig and Cary Elwes, I found the voices of Kaylee and Garrett both mundane and forgettable. It's not that the actors were bad - because they weren't - they just didn't bring any energy to their roles, like they were just going through the motions. Given the problematic situation regarding the film's writing, these underwhelming performances do nothing to help Quest for Camelot.

Since this film - and many others - sought to imitate the Disney animated feature formula, it should also come as no surprise that Quest for Camelot has a plethora of songs. While I've never been a big fan of musicals, I must admit that a couple of these numbers actually work pretty well. My favorites would be "I Stand Alone" performed by Bryan White and "Looking Through Your Eyes". Both of these songs provide more characterization for Garrett and Kaylee than most of the film's lackluster dialog. Strangely enough, "The Prayer" - a song performed by Celine Dion and Andrea Bocelli during Kaylee's initial escape from Ruber - was nominated for an Academy Award, despite being incredibly misplaced in the film. I say this because the intensity of the chase onscreen feels like it should be set to an orchestra. Instead, we get a very soft and calming number that in no way matches the excitement, and desperation born from Kaylee's flight to freedom. Otherwise, I think the soundtrack to this movie holds up pretty well, despite - once again - falling well short of what Disney was doing at this same time.

When you put it all together, Quest for Camelot just isn't a very good movie. Though the music is mostly solid, the characters are either cliché or underdeveloped and the animation is sadly uneven. Obviously children won't have a problem with most of the issues I've detailed in this review, but I suspect older viewers will find themselves bored and uninterested with the film's story and execution. Given the plethora of quality animated family features from just the 1990s alone, I don't really see a single reason for anyone to bother with Quest for Camelot.

Superman Doomsday isn't the end of the world

2011-06-08T21:37:00.001-04:00

After the conclusion of Justice League Unlimited (in my opinion, one of the greatest action-adventure cartoons in television history), it was announced that Bruce Timm and company would start working on direct-to-video features starring the heroes of the DC universe. Personally, I was very excited by this, but at the same time I clearly didn't know what I was going to be getting. I thought that the DCAU (the DC Animated Universe containing Timm's original Batman, Superman, Batman Beyond and Justice League cartoons) might still be used, but transitioned into DTV format. Upon viewing the lines inaugural film Superman Doomsday, however, I quickly realized I was very wrong.

The story of Superman Doomsday is based on the original "Death of Superman" comic books, and subsequent "Rebirth of Superman" story line that came after. I've heard some people refer to these series as "graphic novels", they are not. This was an ongoing comic book story line that crossed over multiple titles with various writers and artists contributing, not a finite series with a single creative team like Watchmen. Anyway, the DTV version of this material (Superman Doomsday) does not seek to adapt directly from its source material, instead it cherry picks certain elements and creates a more streamlined - and coherent - narrative. Gone are the multiple Superman replacements (Steel, Cyborg Superman, Superboy and Eradicator) along with the crossovers into other character stories (Green Lantern). Instead, Bruce Timm and company take the "essence" of this bloated story and create something much more bite-sized and far less gimmicky. Does that make this DTV story good? Well, I wouldn't go that far, but I do believe this film is better than what most people give it credit for, even if it doesn't live up to the work that came before, and in some cases after it.

One of the first things you'll notice about Superman Doomsday is that it is decidedly PG-13. This is mostly a result of the implied violence used throughout the film. Though most of the onscreen action was intense, I wouldn't consider it graphic. The implied violence, however, was surprisingly nasty and was clearly meant to distance the film from its television predecessor. Personally, I don't have an issue with this, but I will say that a number of scenes in this movie felt gratuitous and unnecessary (Luthor killing Mercy, Doomsday snapping a deer’s neck). Though the transition to PG-13 was a successful one with Superman Doomsday, I think that the tone could have been handled a bit better. An occasionally lighter touch - for example - could have been very beneficial to this story.

Another example of Superman Doomsday trying a little too hard can be found in the melodramatic sequences involving Lois Lane. From her arguments with Superman regarding his level of commitment to their relationship (they are actually dating in this story), to her tearful breakdown with Martha in Smallville, you could really feel how badly the writers wanted this story to be mature. Unfortunately, these scenes all too often drag down the film's plot and give the movie an unwanted "chick flick" vibe (coincidently, this same problem would occur in the live action Superman Returns film as well). Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what the writers of Doomsday were trying to do. Hell, I'll even applaud the effort. I'm just saying that the end result - while not completely wrong - wasn't quite right, and the story feels a little labored because of it.

Then, of course, there are the obvious similarities between the DCAU Superman series and Superman Doomsday, similarities that make the later feel ... uninspired. Though some may deem it unfair to take a DTV set outside of the DCAU TV universe and shackle it with comparisons to said precursor, the truth is this movie has far too many familiarities to do otherwise. From the character designs - which are decidedly DCAU - to the choice of subject matter - which was already covered in the original Justice League series - Superman Doomsday just doesn't feel like a "new" story, more like a retread. I'm not sure why Bruce Timm chose to adapt material that had already been covered in one of his previous shows, or why he kept the character designs so familiar (though they were tweaked). Perhaps it was to ease the fans transition from TV to DTV, or maybe the lack of a strong visual style in the source material dictated it. Regardless, this was probably not the best decision. Sure, going with a popular character like Superman was a must, but I think a better, fresher, story and visual style could have been found to work with.

Overall, I think the story of Superman Doomsday manages to hold together pretty good though. As I've pointed out, the film's writing does show some growing pains with the move to PG-13, and the need to distance itself - both gently and forcibly - from the aforementioned DC cartoons preceding it. That said the story works within the context of its DTV format. The pacing is solid, the scope is correct and the plot points are properly introduced, developed and concluded without fail. Considering the very average source material being worked with here, I'm comfortable with the story developed for Superman Doomsday.

Visually speaking, I've already mentioned that this film's character designs are very similar - if ever so slightly different - in appearance to the ones found in the DC animated universe. Truth be told, this is probably the weakest visual element of the movie. Superman looks just like he did in the Justice League cartoons, only with more defined cheekbones. Lois is a little more "hip" and sexy, but outside of the tighter outfits and hair style, she still retains a lot of her DCAU appearance. Doomsday looks ... well he looks like Doomsday always looks, so nothing new there. And while the secondary characters designs of Lex Luthor, Jimmy Olsen and Mercy are strikingly different than their television counterparts, I'm afraid only Jimmy's is an improvement (both Luthor and Mercy's new designs are downgrades). This same sense of familiarity carries over to the rest of the world in Superman Doomsday as well. From the city of Metropolis, to the armed forces trying to stop Doomsday, to the on looking crowds, I just couldn't shake the feeling that I was watching a high end episode of Justice League Unlimited, not a film set in a completely different reality.

Fortunately, the actual animation in Superman Doomsday is superb. Movement is fluid, the staging is excellent and the action choreography epic. I was especially impressed with the fast paced battles between Superman and his various enemies. It's always nice to see the big blue Boy Scout go toe-to-toe with opponents who are his physical equal. The ensuing slugfests are just so grandiose and intense I can't help but love them. Thankfully, Bruce Timm's people always seem to deliver on the potential stemming from these choice matchups, and Superman Doomsday is no exception.

Though it suffers from some derivative design, Superman Doomsday is a good looking DTV. It may not be a visual masterpiece - and there are certainly better looking DTVs out there - but this film still has some solid execution. I was not disappointed with the movies visuals.

I was disappointed, however, with the voice acting of Superman Doomsday. In another attempt to distance itself from the DC television cartoons, the creators of Superman Doomsday chose to cast different actors for all of the main characters in the film. Sadly, every one of these performances was a step down from what fans were used to. By far the worst is Adam Baldwin as Superman. Though his work improves as the film goes on, I found Baldwin's powerless voice incredibly frustrating to listen to. The first 20 minutes or so of the movie are especially bad and quickly hi-light what a mistake the casting of Baldwin was. Other actors such as Anne Heche (Lois Lane) and James Masters (Lex Luthor) turn in better performances, but neither has the unique voice - or experience - of their predecessor (Clancey Brown and Dana Delany). Now it may seem like my displeasure with the acting choices of Superman Doomsday stems from my affection for the original TV actors, but I don't believe this to be the case. Admittedly, I was very taken aback the first time I watched this movie in 2007, but since then I've seen plenty of DTVs with different actors portraying these same characters. Yet, when I went and re-watched this film just last week, I still found Heche to be mediocre, Masters outmatched and Baldwin unbearable. Then again, maybe the visual similarity to the TV series has something to do with it, I don't know, either way I did not like the voice acting in this movie one iota.

Taken as a whole, I thought Superman Doomsday was a decent movie. Not good, not bad, just decent. Looking back over all the DC direct-to-video films from the last couple years, I think Doomsday falls somewhere in the middle. Better than the Jeph Loeb disasters Batman/Superman Public Enemies and Batman/Superman Apocalypse, but nowhere near as good as Batman Under the Red Hood or Wonder Woman. If you're a fan of the original Death of Superman story line, you might get turned off by all the liberties taken by this film. Since I wasn't a fan, however, I had no problems with the changes made by the Doomsday's writers. Sure, the story has problems - and honestly it's not all that interesting of a concept to begin with - but the plot and pacing work, the action is good and the production value is there. As long as you can get past the poor voice acting from the main character (and again, it does get better as the movie progresses) I would recommend Superman Doomsday as - at the very least - a rental.

FernGully the Last Rainforest - A black and white view of an important subject

2011-05-14T17:16:00.004-04:00

I'm just going to come right out and admit that I've never liked FernGully the Last Rainforest. Even back in 1992 - when the film was first released - I found the sanctimonious, black and white message incredibly insulting. It didn't help that Captain Planet - another heavy handed environmentalist cartoon - had already jaded me to many of the ideas being used in FernGully either. Now these comments probably make me sound like a nature hating, right wing prick. But that's the funny thing, I'm a conscientious liberal. That's right, I recycle every week, I replaced all the light bulbs in my house with energy efficient alternatives years ago and I think Al Gore is telling the truth about Global Warming! Yet I still hate FernGully, Captain Planet and James Cameron's Avatar for being dumbed down, one-sided pieces of propaganda.

Whew. Okay, with that little rant out of my system I would like to just step back and say that despite my obvious anger towards FernGully, I am going to do my best to write as fair a review as possible. After all, it's not the films overall message I disagree with, it's the way that message is delivered I found frustrating.

The story of FernGully starts with a recounting of an age long past when fairies and humans lived in harmony with nature. Unfortunately Hexxus, an evil creature personifying destruction and the pollution of nature, ended all that when he tried to burn down the magical forest housing this idyllic setting. Only by calling upon all the powers of nature was Magi (the fairy people’s sort of spiritual leader) able to trap Hexxus in a tree and save FernGully. Unfortunately, all the humans who once lived there fled during the chaos and now fairies believe humans to only be a myth. Cue the discontent and inquisitive fairy girl Crysta. Though in training to replace Magi, Crysta (much like Ariel of the Little Mermaid) wants to see the world above the canopy (a place no sane fairy dare venture) and would like nothing more than to meet one of these fabled humans. Eventually this happens when Crysta encounters Zak, a teenage boy helping clear cut the rainforest FernGully resides in (a fact Crysta fails to realize). Through a series of unfortunate events, Crysta is forced to shrink Zak down to fairy size to save his life. Before this happens, however, Zak accidently marks the tree Hexxus is trapped in for removal, a mistake that eventually leads to Hexxus' escape. Unable to return Zak to normal size, Crysta and her new human friend must seek the aid of Magi, all the while Hexxus' specter draws closer and closer to FernGully.

Being that the mythology of FernGully is so tightly connected to the films environmental themes, it's difficult to judge one without the other. That said, I don't think the story of FernGully's is horrible, just really, really, really, really, really contrived. Overly romanticized ideas like "living as one with nature", or the perfect balance found in nature and how harming any tree causes pain, is insanely idealized and unnecessarily biased. Meanwhile, the force threatening this environmental serenity is an evil, uncompromising plume of black smoke that wants nothing but destruction. This coercive message is fine for guilting kids into felling bad about deforestation, but in my opinion the subject is much more complex and deserving of intelligent and honest writing. Telling your audience (especially children) that carving your name in a tree is “bad” reeks of excessive tree-hugging hippy fanaticism. If, however, you were to focus on the destruction of ecosystems - and the need to preserve them - go for it. Just don't make the antagonist some mustache twirling cliché, maliciously trying to poison the environment. Put a more honest face on the problem and challenge the viewer to think for themselves.

For an example of what I'm talking about, I would like to just take a moment and mention my two favorite environmentally themed films; Wall-e and the Princess Mononoke. In Wall-e we are shown a future where our throw away culture has literally turned earth into a garbage dump, and humans have been forced to leave the planet while robots "clean up" the mess. Additionally, the connectivity brought about by technology has resulted in a complete disconnect in terms of human interaction. Now reliant upon machines for survival, humans have become overweight, lethargic and complacent. At the root of all this isn't some sinister evil force though. It's just a really successful company trying to give people what they want. Unfortunately, the careless means used to achieve this end has resulted in the near destruction of our planet, and the human spirit. Conversely, the Princess Mononoke doesn't depict a world where commercialism and technology have run amok. But instead creates an alternate reality - similar to our own - where animal and forest spirits roam the wild. With the advent of guns, however, the spirits of nature find their habitat under attack and set out to fight back against the humans responsible for this plight. What really makes this movie brilliant though, is that Hayao Miyazaki (the film's director) crafts a story where there are no villains, just people with different agendas. Tragically, these agendas can be very destructive and harmful to nature, but the people behind them are not really evil, with some actually being quite noble. This is intelligent filmmaking. The way that Wall-e and the Princess Mononoke caution their audience without preaching to them makes for thought provoking entertainment, not preachy propaganda. Admittedly, it would be unrealistic to expect every film promoting the environment to be as good as these masterpieces, but some subtext isn't all that much to ask either.

As for FernGully's characters, they're decidedly bland. Crysta is just too archetypical. Whether it be her relationship as apprentice to Magi, her need to challenge conventional thinking or her romance with Zak, Crysta comes across feeling very trite and overly familiar. Zak is ridiculously predictable and transparent with his path to enlightenment - as well as his affection for Crysta - being painfully cliché. Batty ... well he's the comedic relief that never manages to be funny. His back-story involves animal experimentation by humans (Batty is a bat), so naturally he's very distrustful of Zak while reinforcing the films theme that humans are evil. Other than that, Battys only purpose is to try and generate laughs, something he fails to do 99% of the time he's on screen.

It's not all bad though (even if I make it sound that way). The stories pacing and structure are solid. Plus I liked the world building, though it really needed some more fleshing out. With some better characters - and a lot less sermonizing - FernGully could have been a respectable little film. Instead, the writer oversimplifies the subject matter to myopic notions like "man cut down tree ... bad, noble savage living at one with nature ... good". Personally I find this kind of guilt inducing environmental dogma offensive, even if I'm sympathetic to the cause.

On a more positive note, the animation and overall production value of FernGully is pretty solid. While not on the same level as the Disney features being released during the early 1990s (this movie was released the same year as Disney's Beauty and the Beast), FernGully's visuals were definitely feature film worthy.

The animation itself is very fluid, and appears to be twenty-four frames per second. The design work on the natural, supernatural and even man-made elements from the movie is also quite nice. The character designs (much like the characters themselves) are a little on the bland side unfortunately. Still, the color palette - which was primarily made up of warm colors - looks very good on screen, and the backgrounds are well rendered.

In short, FernGully is a relatively pleasant film to look at. There's a nice Don Bluth sensibility - both in terms of the character and background styling - that I found very appropriate and appealing given the stories setting. Once again, the visuals fall short of being exceptional, with numerous studios doing far superior animation at this time. That said, the quality and craftsmanship put into this film is undeniable, and it looks like a lot of love went into creating it.

The actors working on FernGully all do a pretty decent job as well. The biggest name of the bunch is obviously Robin Williams, who does the voice of Batty. As one would expect, the character has all the energetic, fast talking cadence Williams brings to most of his comedic rolls. Unfortunately, none of the jokes - or even the improv - really hits the mark despite Williams’s best efforts. Other than that, the only thing that bugged me was the lack of Australian accents for characters like Zak. I mean the kid’s driver’s license actually says he's from Australia. Why not give him a "down under" accent? Maybe this was done to help make the film more universal to English speaking audiences, but I honestly see no reason for Zak to not speak like an Aussie.

Musically speaking, FernGully is pretty weak. Like Disney, this film uses a number of songs to illustrate the emotions, desires etc. of its characters. Unlike Disney, the songs for FernGully are either egregiously bad or completely forgettable. The worst - by far - was the Batty Rap. In a pathetic attempt to make the character seem "cool" and "hip", the film's creators actually have Batty rap about his experiences as a test subject for humans. The end result of this musical mishap is neither “fresh” nor "dope" however, just incredibly sad, kind of like a rapping granny ... but less funny.

Despite how important the subject matter is, I just can't bring myself to recommend FernGully the Last Rainforest. While the film has lots of good intentions, the story is in no way profound, eye-opening or thought provoking. Rather, the movie comes across as a sanctimonious, bleeding-heart piece of propaganda. That said, I must also admit that the things I find offensive about FernGully are not things everyone will take umbrage with. Some people like these types of stories. Heck, James Cameron's Avatar (a movie that was heavily influenced by FernGully) is the highest grossing film in history, despite being the most contrived and derivative environmental film I've seen in the last decade. So I guess the only real advice I can give (keeping in mind that I'm a no nothing cartoon geek) is to be aware of what you like. If you're a fan of Captain Planet and other rah-rah nature films, FernGully is right up your alley. If, however, you do not enjoy one-sided Hollywood features telling you how to feel, it's best to stay away.

Thundarr the Barbarian - Lords of Light, this is still a fun show.

2011-04-24T12:09:00.000-04:00

Have you ever asked yourself "What would happen if Conan the Barbarian was given a lightsaber and forced to fight evil in a post-apocalyptic future"? Who am I kidding, of course you have. Thankfully, the answer to this question can be found in the Ruby-Spears show Thundarr the Barbarian. Premiering in 1980, Thundarr the Barbarian was a half-hour long action-adventure program that took some of the more popular ideas of its time and merged them into a simple minded, yet enjoyable show.

I was definitely a fan of Thundarr back in the early 1980s. Naturally the biggest reason for this was the "Sunsword" wielded by Thundarr himself. Being a huge Star Wars fan, I pretty much fell in love with any weapon resembling a lightsaber back then, and this show took full advantage of that fandom. While only 21 episodes in length, Thundarr has still managed to keep himself relevant with channels like Cartoon Network and Boomerang airing repeats regularly. Now, some 30 years after its premiere, the entire series has been collected in a four-disc manufacture-on-demand DVD set available at the Warner Brothers Archive. Having had a chance to re-watch this childhood favorite for the first time in over a decade, I am pleased to say that Thundarr - though cheaply produced and completely devoid of substance - is still a very entertaining show.

There is no real overriding story to Thundarr the Barbarian, just the setup introduced in the show's title sequence. Basically, a runaway planet (I blame the parents) hurtled between the earth and the moon causing catastrophic destruction. The resulting natural disasters cast human civilization into ruin, and mankind was all but wiped out. Two-thousand years later, earth has been reborn as a strange and savage world where both super-science and sorcery now reign supreme. No longer the dominate life form of the planet, humans find themselves constantly under attack from evil forces that seek to either enslave or destroy them. Fortunately Thundarr and his companions - Ukla the Moc and Princess Ariel - have chosen to wander the desolate wastelands of earth and fight for truth and justice.

With a premise like that, it should be no surprise that Thundarr was an episodic cartoon series. The stories were all self contained and usually followed the same recognizable pattern. Thundarr, Ariel and Uklah ride out of the wilderness and discover a group of people (usually humans) being attacked/captured. Our heroes then intervene - with varying degrees of success - and eventually chase off the attackers. Realizing that the only way their new friends will ever be free of tyranny, Thundarr and his comrades then set out to rescue any captured victims and defeat the evil creature(s) responsible. Of course it would be an exaggeration for me to say that all of Thundarr's 21 episodes followed this same formula, but at the same time I wouldn't be all that far off either. Yet despite these paper thin plots, I found the repetitive storytelling in Thundarr strangely entertaining.

One of the reasons I liked this show's writing is because Thundarr - unlike the other action-adventure cartoons that followed it - doesn't dumb itself down for the audience. Sure, there's no substance to the story, or clever subtext with layered meanings, but at the same time there's also no "cute" animal sidekicks or public service morals either. Violence was tame of course, but nowhere near as bad as the other 1980's action-adventure programs. Additionally, the small number of episodes created for each of Thundarr's two seasons helps keep the series from becoming stale. In short, Thundarr the Barbarian doesn't wear out its welcome and rarely panders to its audience - or their parents - while trying to be something that it isn't. Cartoons like GI Joe, Transformers, He-Man and Thundercats would have been much better off had they been able to display a similar brand of integrity.

The show's characters - much like its plot - manage to be both one dimensional and fun at the same time. Thundarr himself is every bit the barbarian the show's title implies. He's loud, boastful and thinks every problem should be solved with either his sunsword or his fists. His flippant disregard of female opinions with a roll of the eyes while muttering "women” is also hilariously chauvinistic and backwards. Princess Ariel would be the beauty and brains of the outfit. Besides her good looks, the young sorceress possesses extensive knowledge and insight into the world prior to the "Great Cataclysm", and uses that information to both educate her companions and reward us - the audience - for knowing what is happening before the exposition kicks in. Ariel is also the obligatory magic user/supernaturally sensitive member of the group, an action-adventure tradition that has only grown over the years (seriously, just off the top of my head there's Ariel, Jedda from Defenders of the Earth, Niko from Galaxy Rangers, Cheetara from Thundercats, Tula from Pirates of Darkwater and - more recently - Gwen Tennyson from Ben 10). Ukla is a Chewbacca knockoff, both in appearance and purpose. He's incredibly big and strong, loses his temper easily and communicates with a series of strange growls. Ukla also serves up a good portion of the show's comedic relief by falling into funny situations resulting from his diminished intelligence, brutish strength or fear of water. As I said before, none of these characters have any depth or dimension to them. They take nothing away from their journeys, the interpersonal dynamics never change and the characters don't evolve as the series progresses. That said I never felt frustrated by Thundarr and his friends. The show's episodic format - along with the character's charm - helped me to just sit back and enjoy the ride.

Obviously there's nothing brilliant about Thundarr (whether it be the character, or his show). The cartoon was insanely formulaic and used convenient deus ex machinas far too often. The characters were similarly one dimensional and the stories completely devoid of substance. Compare this to the action-adventure standards that would come about in the early 1990s, and you would be justified in calling this show bad. Yet, when you consider the time period this show was created in - as well as the egregiously bad cartoons that would follow it - I can't help but cut Thundarr some slack. Though neither clever nor original, I still found this program both fun and easy to watch, like reading an old 1960s comic book.

Probably the biggest reason Thundarr succeeds, however, is the visuals. While the animation itself is very low budget - with minimal movement and recycled animation sequence being the norm - the background and production design for this series is phenomenal.

I mentioned before that watching Thundarr the Barbarian is like reading a good 1960s comic book. Well a big reason for this is because the bulk of the series design was done by the great Jack "King" Kirby. Now I'm not old enough to have enjoyed Jack's work when it was first published, but like any good comic fan, I spent much of my youth reading reprints and old torn up copies of Kirby's great runs on Fantastic Four, Captain America, The Avengers and X-Men. That being the case, it was an absolute treat to see all the great "Kirby Tech" (an endearing nickname given to the way Jack would render advanced technology) and character design work this legendary artist did for the various wizards, mutants and other creatures permeating the show. To be clear, the main character designs for Thundarr, Ariel and Uklah were NOT done by Kirby, but instead by Alex Toth. Toth was another veteran comic book artist, but while his work in that medium was impressive, he is best known for the Hanna-Barbera animation designs he did on shows like Space Ghost, Birdman, and the Herculoids. Like Kirby, Alex Toth was a master of his craft and it was a real pleasure to see his work on display here.

Besides the series design, Thundarr's backgrounds also provide a feast for the eyes rarely seen during this time. Being that the show was set in a post-apocalyptic future; crumbling cities, overgrown vegetation and overturned vehicles make up much of the show's landscape. This desolate, deteriorating reality is so well designed and rendered that it practically becomes a character all its own. True, the quality of these illustrations do vary - with some clearly showing their budgetary limitations - but the strength of the design always shines through, and the show looks great because of it.

Without question, the animation of Thundarr the Barbarian's is poor. Movement was sparse and stiff, there was a ton of recycled scenes (especially the ones where they're riding their horses) and animation glitches were not uncommon (keep an eye out for whenever Thundarr loses his sword hilt, you'll almost always see it show up on his wristband, even though it shouldn't be there). Still, the masterfully designed characters - and world - make this show's visuals a resounding success. Compared to the work coming out of Hanna-Barbera and even Warner Bros. at this time, I'm very impressed with the presentation and creative talent Ruby-Spears gave Thundarr.

Unfortunately, the voice acting in Thundarr is very much a product of its era. Outside of the solid work by Robert Ridgely (Thundarr) and Nelie Beliflower (Ariel), most of the voices in this show were either generic or repetitive (sometimes both). The villains were especially bad since many of them shared the same raspy, echoey voice found far too often in this genre. Equally bad was the in show music which was very recycled and unimpressive in its execution. So basically, the audio portion of Thundarr falls pretty flat. It's not horrible mind you, but doesn't rise above its peers and is often surpassed by them.

Thundarr the Barbarian is not a show I recommend for everyone. Unlike other cartoons of this time period, however, I do whole heartedly suggest that fans of the program pickup this MOD set. While many people have found themselves frustrated with the action-adventure shows of their youth, I think the potential for disappointment is far less likely here. The DVDs themselves are completely barebones - with absolutely zero extras - and the packaging/presentation is decidedly manufacture-on-demand. Still, the video quality is good - though clearly not restored - and the content more than makes up for the lack of extras.

Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman is better suited for primetime

2011-04-01T21:57:00.002-04:00

Of all the feature length Batman cartoons to take place within the DC Animated Universe, Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman is by far the least impressive. While on the surface this may appear to be a declaration of failure, the truth is Batman's DCAU films are just too good for Mystery of the Batwoman to live up to. There's Batman Mask of the Phantasm, considered by many (myself included) to be THE quintessential Batman movie, Batman Subzero, an amazingly touching film where the villain is practically the star, Batman/Superman World's Finest, the greatest cartoon superhero team-up ever (despite being a television crossover) and Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker, a beautifully animated DTV that somehow managed to resurrect the original Joker without being cheesy about it (truth be told, it's pretty darn twisted). Compared to these films, Mystery of the Batwoman just doesn't measure up with its unambitious story and TV quality animation. Even the involvement of Alan Burnett - the man responsible for writing Batman Mask of the Phantasm - isn't enough to make this film anything more than average.

The story of Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman is a simple enough one. Gotham city has a new crime fighter, and she's sporting the same symbol as the city's most famous vigilante Batman. With a reckless disregard for human life, this Batwoman is dead set on taking down the villainous trio of Rupert Thorne, Carlton Duquesne and the Penguin at any cost. Unhappy with the methods employed by this new "hero", Batman begins to investigate the identity of Batwoman while himself trying to stop the Penguin and his partners. Every time Batman thinks he's close to uncovering the truth about Batwoman, however, his suspect is cleared of involvement and the Dark Knight must start his investigation anew.

On a technical level, the story done by Alan Burnett for Mystery of the Batwoman is pretty well constructed. Burnett cleverly crafts a tale that keeps the audience guessing about the identity of Batwoman up until the third act where the big reveal finally takes place. Unfortunately, the actual impact of this unveiling just doesn't feel all that substantial. It's hard for me to discuss the reasons why this reveal doesn't work without spoiling the surprise, so I'll just say that this mystery - though well hidden - doesn't have the emotional impact that Batman Mask of the Phantasm had, even though Burnett was clearly trying to channel the success he had with that earlier story. Still, there's some nice subtly to the stories writing with lots of details becoming more obvious upon second viewing.

Unfortunately, the scope and emotion in this movie just doesn't feel DTV worthy. Between the unimpressive weapons manufacturing mcguffin and the poor characterization, I just don't see why this story warranted a feature film video release. One example of this can be found in Burnett's attempts to give back-story to the numerous suspects and new characters used in Mystery of the Batwoman. Though admirable in effort, far too many of these characters either end up being underdeveloped (Sonia) or uninteresting (Kathy). In fact, the only person I had any emotional sympathy for was Roxanne, everybody else felt like a cipher. Characters outside of the Batwoman mystery don't get any better either. The criminal team of Penguin, Thorne and Duquesne just isn't all that impressive, and their nefarious scheme to manufacture and smuggle hi-tech weapons is exceedingly generic. Even the latter inclusion of Bane into this story does little to help these lackluster antagonists. If this were just a two-part TV story, I wouldn't have a problem with the scope of this plot. But turning something like this into a feature length film doesn't feel appropriate. DTV stories need to be more visceral, the villains more threatening and characters more engaging. Such was not the case with Mystery of the Batwoman.

Another thing that bugged me was the awkwardly romantic conversation between Barbara Gordon (Batgirl) and Bruce Wayne (Batman) early in the film. Why was this even in the movie? Besides the fact that a Bruce and Barbara hookup is exceedingly creepy (after all she was dating Bruce's former ward Dick Grayson - the original Robin - in Batman Subzero), it serves no purpose to the rest of the story, and - given the movies ending - feels very out of place. Now, I'm guessing the reason this scene was included was to tie this movie into the Batman Beyond timeline (Bruce and Barbara are former lovers in that show ... which I find disturbing), and thus solidify the continuity between Batman the Animated Series, Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman and Batman Beyond. Though this would make sense, I still fell this exchange was an unnecessary interruption in the story (Barbara doesn't even show up throughout the rest of the film) and ultimately takes away from the character dynamics being created for the movie.

So clearly I had some issues with the writing of this film. A lot of these problems stem from an overabundance of characters, others from the scope of the plot and some are just personal (I have no idea why I'm so hung up on Batman and Batgirl's romance; I just can't stand it for some reason). All that said, I still admire a lot of the craftsmanship put into this story; the pacing is solid, the mystery is well hidden and the humor is pretty good. As I said before, this would have made a great two-part story for Batman the Animated Series, but it's not nearly meaty enough to warrant a DTV.

My avouchment that Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman is better suited for TV doesn't end with the story though. I also feel that the visuals in this film would look more at home in an animated series than they do on a direct-to-video feature. It's not that the film looks bad or anything (because it doesn't), it just isn't very theatrical. Compared to other Batman DTV's, and even the Batman/Superman TV crossover, the animation and staging found here looks very pedestrian. Though generally stronger than your average episode of Batman the Animated Series, I can remember numerous episodes from that same show with better visuals than Mystery of the Batwoman.

Another unimpressive area of the film would be in its design. Batwoman's silver costume just doesn't quite fit into the Batman universe, the hi-tech weapons are too sci-fi (like something out of Superman) and the backgrounds - though well rendered - lack ambition. This is doubly disappointing since the film was created in 2003 when DTV quality was supposed to be on the rise. Heck, Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker was released four years earlier and its character design and backgrounds were much stronger than this.

It's not that the visuals in Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman are bad, they're just not good enough to warrant their medium. Not only is the films animation eclipsed by all of the previous Batman DTVs, but also by numerous Batman the Animated Series episodes and plenty of other DTV features outside of the DCAU. Normally I wouldn't make such a fuss over a movie that technically looks solid, but when you're a part of the Batman franchise, expectations can run rather high.

Fortunately, the voice acting in Mystery of the Batwoman does live up to its predecessors. Being that the story takes place within the DC Animated Universe, almost all the voice actors from the original Batman cartoon showed up to reprise their roles. In fact, the only disappointment I had with the voice over work in this movie was with the Penguin. Instead of Paul Williams (the original voice actor for the Penguin) we got David Ogden Stiers, a significant step down in my opinion. To be fair, Stiers does give a pretty decent performance, but Williams had such a unique voice one cannot help but notice his absence. Other than that, this film's cast is excellent.

Musically I thought the score for Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman was pretty good too. It definitely had a sound all its own, and the Batwoman theme music was a nice touch. While I wouldn't rank it above the other Batman DTVs, the audio portion of this film holds its own rather nicely.

Taken as a whole, Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman is a decent film. The production value isn't what it should be considering when it was made, but the writing - while a tab unambitious - does have some nice touches and is well refined. When compared to the animated Batman features that came before it, however, this film comes up very wanting. Things like the animation, character selection, and story just scream TV, as does the full frame aspect ratio (which really should've been widescreen considering it was released post 2000). Additionally, the DVD itself has some compression issues, with banding occurring more than once during the course of the film. If you're a fan of Batman the Animated Series (or more specifically the New Batman Adventures), Mystery of the Batwoman is worth a watch (though I probably wouldn't recommend buying it). If, however, you are just looking for a really good animated Batman feature, I would suggest going with any of the aforementioned DTVs I listed throughout this review before bothering with Batwoman.

Greek tragedy. Hercules and Xena: The Battle for Mount Olympus.

2011-03-12T10:32:00.000-05:00

Hercules and Xena: The Battle for Mount Olympus is a movie I should have never watched. Not only is this 1998 film the worst direct-to-video feature I've ever seen (and I mean that), but I'm not even a fan of the original syndicated shows that spawned this ham-fisted cash grab.

Now, I don't begrudge fans their enjoyment of the popular 1990s programs Hercules: The Legendary Journeys and Xena: Warrior Princess, I just never found anything of worth in them. True, I have an affinity for Greek Mythology, but I just can't get past the cheesy humor, poor acting and laughable action that permeated these shows. That said, I'm always happy to see the fantasy genre find mainstream success, and the idea of taking Hercules - who has superhuman strength - and Xena - who has metahuman fighting skills - and putting them into animation (which lends itself well to that sort of action) is a good one. Unfortunately, the horrible execution of this worthwhile endeavor fails on every possible level, and what we're left with is a film so bad, it should be reclassified as a new form of corporal punishment.

Since any attempt I make to recount the plot of Hercules and Xena, would end up sounding incoherent, I'll simply forego the effort and give you incoherent highlights instead. In a nut shell, Hercules sets out on a quest to save his mother who's been "kidnapped" by Zeus, a jealous Hera frees the Titans from Tartarus with a powerful object called the Chronostone, Xena is forced to help fight the Titans when her sidekick Gabrielle gets turned into a giant bird and the gods of Olympus are transformed into woodland creatures when they fail to defeat Hera's Titans. The end result of all this tomfoolery is that Hercules and Xena must join forces, defeat the Titans themselves, and return the Chronostone to Zeus. Got all that? Good, now let me tell you why this story sucks so bad.

First off, the tone of this movie is far too childish. Obviously the cartoon was aimed at youngsters, but when you have two popular shows whose core audience is between 12-24 years of age, you might want to consider using a story that will appeal to people over the age of 4. That massive foundational mistake aside, the writing of this movie is horribly callow. The motivations are superficial, the characters simpleminded and the narrative one dimensional. Seriously, if Nickelodeon ever made Dora the Explorer: The Battle for Mount Olympus, it would probably look something like this.

Additional writing miscues include; an unnecessary apology by Xena to Gabrielle, a woefully misguided attempt to make Aphrodite into a hippy slacker, the complete absence of a dozen or more Greek Gods including Poseidon and Hades, an egregiously underpowered Ares (who Xena can beat up for some reason) and a line of dialog so bad, it's almost good. What is this baffling piece of awful, yet brilliant dialog you ask? Well, after Zeus is defeated by the Titans (and remember Zeus is supposed to be the proud king of all Greek Gods), he travels to the home of Hercules' mother, knocks on the door with as much dignity as he can muster, and gruffly proclaims "Open up. It's me ... Zeus". Now that may not be funny to read, but trust me, when spoken aloud in a cartoon setting, that phrase is one of the most unintentionally hilarious things you will ever hear.

Compounding the struggles of this film are a number of pacing problems as well. The stories second act in particular felt oddly climatic, with all the main characters coming together in one big fight. This led me to believe the film (i.e. nightmare) was coming to an end, but then things just fell apart and our heroes were forced to retreat. Another pacing problem occurs at the start of the third act when we are treated to back-to-back songs by the Titans and Xena. This was especially odd because outside of the opening credit song (which tells the basic story of Hercules and the Greek Gods) there was no singing for like 50 minutes in this movie. Then - out of nowhere - we get two completely unnecessary numbers which do nothing to advance the story. To be clear, I'm not upset that they included songs in this film. With everyone aping Disney's animated features at the time, I kind of expect it. But why did they play them one after another? Wouldn't it make more sense to spread out the music so that the film has some semblance of balance? I guess the movies producers weren't big on planning.

So if the writing of Hercules and Xena: The Battle for Mount Olympus is an unmitigated disaster, one would think the animation couldn't possibly be worse ... right? (sigh) Well it is. In fact, the visuals in this movie are so bad I will unequivocally declare that this is - by far - the worst looking DTV I've ever seen.

To start, the animation is decidedly cheap. Movement is sparse, the in-betweens are minimal and the staging awkward. Character designs are no better, with Zeus sporting ridiculously pedestrian attire (completely unbefitting a god), and the Titans looking egregiously generic. Then there's the backgrounds (oh god the backgrounds). Instead of creating the numerous settings of this film with paintings or even pen and ink illustrations, the producers of this movie used - what appear to be - pastel and color pencil backgrounds. These horribly under designed images are so poorly rendered it looks like a first year art student did them over the weekend to make a couple extra bucks. Take Olympus for example. This is supposed to be the home of the gods, a place of extravagance and grandeur. Yet the Olympus shown in Hercules and Xena is nothing more than an unassuming brown castle with an under decorated throne room. Of course, there is something to be said about using highly stylized and minimalist backgrounds correctly. Take Genndy Tartakovsky's show Samurai Jack, or even the old Looney Tunes as an example. These shows had very simplistic settings, but they were exceedingly creative and brilliant in design. The backgrounds in Hercules and Xena, however, are unimaginative, amateurish and completely unacceptable by comparison.

Honestly, the only word I can think to describe these movie visuals is cheap. No effort was put into the character designs past Xena and Hercules. The animation was obviously done on a less than shoe string budget. And the backgrounds are pure garbage. I don't know what kind of budget this film had, but judging from the final product it must have barely been six digits.

I mentioned earlier that there are three songs played during the course of this movie. The first one plays with the opening credits, and the other two run back-to-back at the start of the third act. Of these, the first and third songs would be considered passable. Neither is any good mind you, but at least they are competently written and performed. I'll even take it one step further and say that Lucy Lawless (who performs the Xena song) does an excellent job with her number. That said, whoever wrote the film's second song "We are the Titans" - is either a brilliant prankster, or the worst cartoon song writer in history. My favorite part was when the Titans would sing their chorus which includes the horribly funny verse "Boom Shaka Laka, Boom Shaka Laka, Boom". Not since the Rankin-Bass debacle "Return of the King" have I heard such an awful piece of music (BTW if you're curios, the "Return of the King" cartoon I'm referring to has a song titled "Where there's a whip, there's a way". I kid you not.). Anyway, the musical numbers in this movie do nothing to improve the already dismal situation brought about by the terrible story and animation.

On a less negative note, both Kevin Sorbo and Lucy Lawless do some decent voice acting in this film. Though nothing could save Hercules and Xena: The Battle for Mount Olympus from its own absurdly bad production, I'm glad the title actors tried their best. Unfortunately, the secondary characters - like Zeus - were voiced by actors completely unfit for the parts, and ultimately the films vocal performances are ruined because of it.

Taken as a whole, I don't think Hercules and Xena: The Battle for Mount Olympus managed to do one thing right. The story is terrible, both in tone and structure. The animation looks like it was done by a bunch of art school dropouts. The songs are poorly planned, with one of them being completely laughable. And whatever good came from the main character voice acting was roundly ruined by the secondary actors. I don't know how else I can say it, this is a very, very, very, very bad movie. In fact, the only thing good about it is the poster (shown along with this review). Had this film been able to deliver the excitement and promise found in this advertisement, we could have been looking at the start of a new animation franchise. Instead, Hercules and Xena turned out to be nothing more than a forgettable cash grab, a pathetic attempt to make a quick buck off the popularity of its title characters. Though it's available on DVD, this film should not be viewed by anyone, not even fans of the original shows. Sad when you consider how good a fit both of these franchises are for animation, what a waste.

Footnote: I find it very funny that the poster for this movie included the tag line "The REAL Hercules". This was an obvious attempt to distinguish the Kevin Sorbo version of this character from the Disney animated feature "Hercules" that was released in 1997. This makes me laugh for two reasons. One, Disney's animated Hercules - which was a theatrical release - is about a billion times better than the Hercules and Xena direct-to-video feature sporting this presumptuous statement. Two, there have been dozens of incarnations of the Hercules character in various medias over the years, and the very idea that Kevin Sorbo's Hercules is the only "Real" one is just arrogant and asinine.

All Star Superman rises to the occasion

2011-02-23T18:27:00.003-05:00

Adaptations can be a tricky thing when it comes to feature films, whether it be live action or animation. Selecting the right source material and figuring out how to capture the "essence" of that story onscreen - while at the same time cutting out anything extraneous - is an art unto itself, one that - more often than not - leads to unsatisfactory conclusions. Take, for example, the Ultimate Avengers movie by Marvel. Despite having excellent source material, this film was an absolute wreck and failed miserably on almost every level. Superman Doomsday was better, but considering how bloated and tepid the original story was, the best one could expect from this animated adaptation was mediocrity. Yet, it's not all doom and gloom. Personally I loved the DTV versions of both Batman: Under the Red Hood and Planet Hulk, stories that were adapted from existing comics. With such a mixed track record, however, I found myself very concerned for All Star Superman.

All Star Superman is an Eisner Award winning, 12-issue, series that teamed up "All Star" writer Grant Morrison with "All Star" artist Frank Quitely. To say the story is a masterpiece is almost an understatement. Expertly crafted on every level, All Star Superman chronicles the final great deeds performed by a dying Superman. With a perfect mix of emotion, action and intelligence, this is the ultimate love letter to the iconic Superman of the 1940's and 1950's. Obviously adapting such a universally praised series would be a tall order for any filmmaker, yet Bruce Timm and company have sought to do just that with their latest animated DTV, the conveniently titled All Star Superman.

I had a number of concerns coming into this film, but the greatest among them was the quasi-episodic format of the original All Star Superman comic book. Though the story has an overriding plot involving Lex Luthor, the bulk of the 12-issue series is made up of self contained stories. Taking these stories and creating a single narrative seemed like a very daunting task to me, one that I feared was impossible. Fortunately the film's writer, Dwayne McDuffie, understood this and focused his adaptation on the core elements of the story while sprinkling in as much of the stand alone plot points as he could. This will, of course, lead to a lot of fans and critics complaining about how their favorite parts of the source material were either glossed over or cut from the film entirely. But while this may be true, I feel that McDuffie did exactly what was needed. The truth is you can't include everything from the comic book, to try and do so would wreck the movies pacing and story structure. Starting with the core theme, however, and choosing the plot points that best support that theme, was the correct course of action. Better yet, McDuffie stayed very true to everything that was included in the film, so it's not like he took a bunch of liberties with the material, he just couldn't include it all.

Personally, I was very impressed by the animated story adaptation for All Star Superman. Only the Kryptonian Astronauts sequence felt out of place, and that was only slightly. Sure, the original story will always be better, but that shouldn't take away from what this movie did right. Overall, I think this is an excellent representation of the source material, and one of the best animated DTVs I've seen of late.

Visually speaking, All Star Superman looks superb. Given the unique art style of Frank Quitely, I was - once again - concerned that the animated version of this story would not be able to adapt successfully from the source material. Thankfully, the films creators were up to the challenge, and did an excellent job recreating Quitely's work in animation. True, they'll never get as close to the original artwork as one would like, but the movies animators - much like its writer - found a really good balance. I was especially impressed with the way All Star Superman captured the posture of characters like Clark Kent. Unlike other artists, Frank Quitely wanted to contrast Superman and Kent by making the latter a fumbling, disheveled slouch. Fortunately, the films creators understood how important this contrast was and kept the idea intact. In fact, the only complaint I had regarding the films style was that Lois Lane doesn't look enough like her comic book counterpart. I'm guessing this is because of the very odd way Quitely draws women's faces (some even accuse him of drawing ugly women), and the animators wanted to do something a little more traditional. Other than that, I thought the style of this movie matched its source material nicely.

On a technical level, the actual animation itself is admirable. Movement is always smooth; staging is solid and the action powerful. Admittedly, the fight choreography found here isn't as good as other DC direct-to-video features. For example, films like Batman: Under the Red Hood and Batman/Superman Apocalypse have much better action. But I suspect this is because All Star Superman was trying to stay true to its roots. Sure, Bruce Timm and crew could have come up with some amazing battle sequences, but doing so might have compromised the style of the film. Considering how hard the movies creators worked to keep All Star Superman in line with the source material, I won't hold this against them.

Overall, I loved the look of All Star Superman. The animation, backgrounds and design are all fantastic, and the CGI wasn't half bad either (especially by DTV standards). Though the film isn't visually groundbreaking in any way, it still ranks in the upper echelon of direct-to-video animated offerings.

Rounding out the impressive production of All Star Superman is some respectable voice acting. While I don't feel that any one person stood out in the cast, everybody turned in a solid performance. If I had one complaint it would be that some of the secondary character voices sounded the same (even though they were performed by different actors). Still, this was an incredibly small issue, and does absolutely nothing to hurt the film.

There will be those who feel that All Star Superman should have never been made into an animated feature. While I don't share this sentiment, I do understand the reasons behind it. Regardless of your personal feelings, however, All Star Superman is a really good movie. Though it may have had a couple small hiccups - and could never approach the brilliance of its source material - this film's story, animation and overall execution is both respectful and impressive. True, the title "All Star Superman" makes no sense being that the phrase "All Star" was in reference to the creative team of the original comic book (DC created their All Star line to compete with Marvel's Ultimate line). But that little oddity aside I really enjoyed this movie and give it a full recommendation. Home video options include a bare-bone DVD with no special features, a two-disc DVD with a featurette and sneak peak of Green Lantern: Emerald Knight and a Blu-ray edition containing numerous special features including a featurette, audio commentary, sneak peak at Green Lantern: Emerald Knight and virtual comic book.

Gen-13 - a lost film that needs to stay lost

2011-02-12T10:17:00.000-05:00

Gen-13 is a source of mixed emotions for me. Though I loved the original comic book in my late teens and early twenties, I now realize the story was ridiculously derivative and immature. The first Gen-13 mini-series was released at the same time I was finishing up high school and for some reason I found the inane story absolutely compelling. Maybe it was because the characters age was the same as my own, or perhaps the idea of trading mundane student life for superpowers and government conspiracies appealed to me, heck it could've just been Jeffery Scott Campbell's titillating artwork ... whatever the reason, I was hooked on the series after just one issue. Following its release, Gen-13 rocketed up the sales charts and become one of the most popular comic books on the market, before long an animated adaptation was in the works.

Produced by Buena Vista (Disney), Gen-13 the animated movie is based on the original five issue mini-series that started it all. Directed by Kevin Altieri (of Batman the Animated series fame) this planned DTV seemed to have everything going for it; popular source material, an experienced director and a good studio. Then ... nothing happened, the movie just never came out. According to Wikipedia, the reason Gen-13 never made it into stores was because DC acquired Wildstorm Studios (the publisher of the comic book) while the film was still in production. Being that Warner Brothers (the owner of DC) is a rival studio of Disney, the idea that the latter studio would be releasing a film starring the property of the former was an unappealing one for Buena Vista. So instead Disney shelved the movie and fans were left with nothing. Now, over ten years later, I've finally gotten to watch this lost film and I have to say ... it was in NO way worth the wait.

The story of Gen-13 begins with Caitlin Fairchild, an 18 year old college freshmen who doesn't "fit in". You see, Caitlin wears big glasses and doesn't dress well and is real smart and awkward and ... well let's just call her what she is, an archetypal bookworm. One day - out of the blue - Caitlin is offered a full scholarship to the government run program called Project Genesis. Realizing that her life at college is anything but desirable, Caitlin accepts the offer and quickly finds herself living at a secret military facility in the middle of the desert. Despite her surreal environment, Caitlin actually starts to fit in and even makes a couple of friends by the name of Roxy and Grunge. Like just about everything else in this story Roxy and Grunge are cliches. Roxy is the classic "tough chick" who always talks trash and tries to sneak a smoke. Grunge, on the other hand, is one of those typical "slacker surfers" who suffer from both mild retardation and bad hygiene. Along with Caitlin, this mismatched band of stereotypes soon discover the real goal of Project Genesis isn't to hand out college credit, but instead to find the children of super-powered soldiers and turn them Gen Active (basically that means turn on their powers). It all begins one night with Caitlin suffering a severe headache. While trying to make her way to the infirmary, Caitlin comes across an open door to a restricted area complete with a computer terminal revealing classified information about her father. Naturally(?) Roxy and Grunge stumble into the same room and before you know it the trio is discovered by the base's security. Her head now pounding uncontrollably, Caitlin becomes angry with the abusive guard who is threatening both her and her friends and decides to do something about the situation ... she punches him through a wall (actually I think it was glass, but whatever). After this display of superhuman strength, Caitlin realizes she has grown almost seven feet tall and her body ... well let's just say it "filled out". From there our story becomes one of escape as our heroes (Roxy and Grunge go Gen Active as well) try to flee Project Genesis and its evil wardens Ivana and Threshold (who himself is a Gen Active).

Surprisingly, the story of Gen-13 the animated movie doesn't stray all that far from the original comic book mini-series I enjoyed in my youth. The biggest change is probably the removal of two central characters from the source material; Burnout and Rainmaker. Though it's true that Caitlin, Roxy and Grunge received more focus in the original mini-series, I was disappointed with the exclusion of both Burnout and Rainmaker, even if they weren't instrumental to the story. That said, I can certainly understand why the films creators wanted to streamline the cast to just pivotal characters. Sadly, the focus gained from the absence of Burnout and Rainmaker does nothing to make this story more intelligent or classy.

When I say the writing of Gen-13 lacks intelligence, what I really mean is that the story is incredibly generic and overly familiar. Seriously, it's just a mishmash of tired ideas, settings and archetypes with no surprises and plenty of deja vu. Secret government experiments on soldiers, nefarious plots to unlock hidden superpowers, sadistic bad guys with their own agenda, cliche teenage superheroes ... my god, this story is so unoriginal it makes the latest NCIS show seem fresh by comparison. Even worse, the crass humor and gratuitous near nudity that may have appealed to me as a young man, now seems incredibly patronizing and unsophisticated. Fart jokes, swearing, vulgar hand gestures, steamy shower scenes, countless pantie shots and the ridiculous transformation of Caitlin into a fanboy wet dream, does nothing but expose Gen-13 for the lowbrow T&A that it is. Now these comments may seem a little prudish or even conservative in nature, but therein lays real kicker. I'm not a prude or a conservative! Yet, still I find the mindless writing of Gen-13 incredibly annoying and immature, not insulting per se, but definitely grating.

Exacerbating Gen-13's numerous problems is an excessively long run time. Clocking in at a staggering 90 minutes, this film takes way too long to tell a story with such little depth. In particular, the desert battle of Caitlin could have completely been cut from the film. Looking back at it now, I'm actually a little ashamed to admit that I - in my younger years - enjoyed Gen-13's tasteless antics and derivative story. Sure, most of us have enjoyed stories that pander to our less intelligent fantasies of youth (how else do you explain Twilight?), but I still have to judge this film on its own merits, and as an adult. That being the case, I'll just say that Gen-13 offers little to nothing of substance in the writing or storytelling department.

Visually speaking, Gen-13 looks ... well it looks terrible. Everything about this film - from the animation to the character designs - screams low budget DTV. I'll start with the character design. Stylistically, Gen-13 uses the popular "streamlined" look that Bruce Timm developed for Batman the Animated Series. Unlike Batman, however, Gen-13's characters appear to have been designed for a kids cartoon. Ironic when you consider that Batman's target demographic was children (yet the show was very visually mature) and Gen-13's audience was supposed to be teenagers. Anyway, the original artist of Gen-13 was Jeffery Scott Campbell, a very talented individual whose body of work is sadly small. Campbell's art was clearly based on the Jim Lee school of comic books, and despite his penchant for objectifying the female form, I was impressed with the detailed characters and environment that Campbell created. Absolutely none of this visual styling makes it into the animated adaptation of Gen-13 however. Where Campbell used curves the film used sharp edges, where Campbell emphasized detail the film went minimalist. In short, the source material and the movie look nothing alike. Of course, you can't expect to see a direct visual adaption of Campbell's style, but something along the lines of X-Men Evolution would have worked far better than the generic style used here.

The uninspired look of Gen-13's animated world also undermines any effort by the film's writers to establish a dark tone. While the movie has plenty of blood and violence, none of the sequences involving this subject matter feel right. This is because the look of the film is so childish and immature that scenes of death and destruction appear out of place in it. It would be like Dora the Explorer gaining psychic powers, then using them to blow up Diego's head. Unless you're trying to purposefully juxtaposition the extreme violence and innocent character appearance for comedic effect, it just doesn't work.

Besides my aversion to the film's visual style, Gen-13's designs just look lazy. Caitlin is supposed to be mousy and thin when the story starts, but in no way does she appear to be frail prior to her transformation. Heck, her body type doesn't even look all that different from any of the movies other female characters before going Gen Active. Then we have Threshold's hair. I know it may seem like an odd thing to complain about, but if you saw the laughable mane sported by this guy, you would understand why I had to call it out. All in all, I found the design work done on Gen-13 to be uninspired, inappropriate and apathetic.

As for the animation itself, it is decidedly cheap looking, even for a DTV. With boring staging, awkward movement and crappy fight choreography being the norm, I have a hard time believing anyone put much effort into Gen-13. Though I really don't know why this would be the case, I'd like to offer up two theories regarding the poor craftsmanship of the film. The first is simply that not enough money was put into Gen-13. If Wildstorm was trying to get a 90 minute movie made on a shoestring budget, then it is very possible that too many corners were cut and the end result was this. My second theory hinges on the sale of Wildstorm studios to DC. If indeed this film was still in the process of being made when the sale of Wildstorm went down, a lot of uncertainty regarding the productions future could've come about. In the end the film's creative staff may have just been "getting it done" instead of trying to craft something worthwhile. Of course I have no insider knowledge regarding Gen-13's production, so this is all just speculation. Regardless of the cause, the half-hearted effort being put into this movie was obvious, shocking when you consider Kevin Altieri was directing.

What's not so shocking is the abysmal voice acting of Gen-13. Outside of Mark Hamill's work on Threshold, none of the performances in this film worked. Caitlin's voice was droning, Lynch was off the mark and Grunge ... well let's just take a minute and talk about Grunge. Performed by Flea (that's right, the guitarist from Red Hot Chili Peppers), the voice of Grunge personifies every surfer stereotype I've come to hate. To give you some idea of what I'm talking about, imagine if Keanu Reeves' "Ted" character from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure had a child with Sean Penn's "Spicoli" character from Fast Times at Ridgemont High ... that's Grunge. Fortunately the film tries to keep Grunge's dialog minimal whenever possible. I'm guessing the producers edited out anything that wasn't completely necessary to help reduce the number of brain aneurisms brought on by Flea's egregious acting. Like I said before, the only voice acting in this film that holds water is Hamill's. Though his work on Threshold doesn't even approach his quintessential Joker performances from BTAS, it still holds up pretty well.

I had originally planned to comment on the lackluster musical score of Gen-13, but at this point I don't see the need. When it's all said and done this film is - simply put - a mess. Poorly written, cheaply animated and horribly acted, I can honestly say that I found nothing of worth in Gen-13. Even if you're a fan of the original comic book I would not recommend watching this film. Thankfully Gen-13 has never been released here in the US (a merciful act we should all be grateful for), so steering clear of it really isn't all that difficult.

Transformers - a surprisingly enduring franchise with so-so beginnings

2011-01-29T13:19:00.000-05:00

When you talk about Transformers these days everyone (understandably) assumes you're talking about the blockbuster movies from the last couple years. But before Michael Bay brought us humping dogs, racist ghetto robots, mechanical testicles and - of course - more humping dogs, there was actually a child friendly version of these famous robots in disguise. Premiering in 1984, the Transformers cartoon was an instant hit with children of my generation, and went on to sell millions of dollars worth of toys, comics and other paraphernalia. The show itself was awful of course (like most cartoons of the time), but despite its typically terrible origins the Transformers franchise continues to endure the fickle mistress that is pop culture better than any of its peers.

Growing up, Transformers was one of two shows that consumed the imagination of me and my friends (the other being GI Joe). I watched it every day after school, and probably saw most of - if not all of - the episodes as a kid. Of course, who could blame me? You had giant robots fighting other giant robots, and they could all transform into cars, trucks, airplanes, guns, cassette decks and even a microscope! For whatever reason, this fascination with shape changing mechanical warriors has endured the test of time surprisingly well. Besides the original Transformers cartoon - which lasted 98 episodes - there have been numerous reboots and re-imaginings of the franchise over the last 25 years. From the Michael Bay movies to Transformers Beast Machines to Transformers Armada to Transformers Animated and most recently Transformers Prime, there have been a half-dozen versions of Optimus Prime and pals ready to enlist new fans for parent company Hasbro. Still, it all started with that cartoon in 1984, and that's what I'm here to review. Or at least the first 65 episodes anyway (I'm saving the movie and the final 33 episodes for later).

Given the popularity of this series, I don't feel that an involved synopsis is necessary. Basically there's a planet called Cybertron where two factions of warring robots have been doing battle for millions of years. The good guys are referred to as Autobots and are led by Optimus Primes, the bad guys are Decepticons and their leader is Megatron. Given the enormous amount of natural resources necessary to wage this seemingly endless war, the planet Cybertron finally ran out of energy and groups of both Decepticons and Autobots were forced to leave their home in search of new fuel sources. While battling one another in space, these Transformers crash land on earth where they lay dormant for millions of years. Upon their reawakening, the Decepticons (in typical bully fashion) set out to steal earth's energy from us weak humans. At the same time Optimus Prime and the Autobots set out to protect humanity from Megatron and his evil cohorts.

Conceptually, this is a pretty solid idea for an 80s action-adventure cartoon. The parallels between our own energy crisis and the situation faced by the Transformers is surprisingly relevant for the time, and remains so today. Equally impressive is the fact that the whole premise behind Transformers was written around an existing toy line. For those who don't know, the Transformers started life as Japanese toys with no background story whatsoever. When Hasbro decided that they wanted to repackage these playthings for American consumers, they thought it would be best to create an overriding mythology to get kids interested, thus Transformers was born. Despite this solid premise, however, the overall writing for this series is about what you would expect from the time period, insulting to its audience and merchandise driven. I was especially amazed by the overwhelming number of new characters introduced during the initial 65 episodes in this series. Within just the first 13 installments you not only had a relatively large cast of Autobots and Decepticons to keep track of, but you got Dinobots, Insecticons, Starfire and then more Dinobots almost right away. After that things only got worse with Constructicons, Stunticons, Aerobots, Combaticons, Omega Supreme and plenty of other robots being shoved down your throat. This was - of course - a sales driven decision, and just one more example of how cartoons of this time were ultimately controlled by people whose passion was selling toys, and not telling good stories. Still, the fact that Transformers was probably the worst when it came to introducing new characters for the sake of merchandise (GI Joe would be a close second), this was not an uncommon practice, and I try to only compare properties of the 1980s to one another, and not to the current standard. So, with that said I'll move on and start discussing the writing of Transformers, as related to its peers.

I've reviewed a couple 1980s action-adventure cartoons, and one of the side effects of this (besides the massive loss of brain cells) is that I find myself saying the same things over and over. While this is personally frustrating, it's also unavoidable since most of these shows used the same writers and followed the same formula as their contemporaries. So, like GI Joe, Thundercats and others, the stories from Transformers have very little good, mostly bad and far too much ugly writing.

Let's start things off with the ugly. One obvious problem with Transformers is continuity. Early in the series all of the robots (Autobot and Decepticon) were able to fly, regardless of what vehicle/object they could transform into. As the show progressed, however, it was revealed that Autobots could fly, but not very well. Finally, by the time season two got going none of the Autobots could apparently fly unless they were capable of transforming into an airplane or spaceship. Basically, the writers just couldn't seem to collectively make up their minds about when Autobots could, and could not take to the air until they were half way through the series. Another example of bad continuity can be found in the building of the Dinobots. During season one Optimus Prime okays the creation of Dinobots, Transformers whose physical appearance and strength stems from the dinosaurs who roamed earth millions of years ago. Later, during season two, Megatron decides to create Stunticons, Decepticons who could transform into cars and thus challenge the Autobots domination of the roads. When it came time for Megatron to give the Stunticons life, however, he had to travel to Cybertron and petition Vector Sigma, a long dormant piece of mysterious technology to give his creations personalities (or souls I suppose). The reason for this is that all Transformers were given life by Vector Sigma, and without its help the Stunticons would never be anything except mindless automatons. Unfortunately, this little bit of mythology completely ignores the fact that the aforementioned Dinobots somehow received unique personalities without the aid of Vector Sigma. Like I said, inconsistent continuity.

Equally ugly were the episodes that just should've never been made (even by 1980s standards). Like GI Joe and Thundercats, Transformers has a handful of stories that are just so bad it's insulting to audiences of all ages. The worst offenders were City of Steel (a story were Optimus Prime is cut into pieces, and his body parts turned into weapons against the Autobots), Attack of the Autobots (which features the insanely overused plot device of mind control) and Kremzeek (an episode so surreal, I can't even describe it). I'll spare you any further details concerning the plots of these animated abominations, but take my word for it, these are some of the worst cartoons of the 1980s.

As for the "good" episodes of Transformers, I found that almost all of them had the same thing in common, they didn’t take place on earth. Though a little strange given the strength of the energy crisis premise, I found episodes like "The Search for Alpha Trion", and "The Secret Of Omega Supreme" far more enjoyable than any of the stories based around earth and the show's central themes. I can't say for sure, but I think that the writers of this series enjoyed doing stories set on alien worlds and plots delving into the history of the Transformers more than they liked the show's primary mythology. Of course, this could just be my own personal bias as well. Either way, I think this show was better suited for fantastical outer space science fiction than urban street gangs and worldwide car races.

Another positive thing about the writing of Transformers is that the violence - though hideously tame - did have more intensity than most of its contemporaries. This was apparently the result of the main characters being robots. For whatever reason, the idea of robots punching, kicking and shooting one another didn't bother censors - or parent watchdog groups - back in the 1980s, so the writers of Transformers were able to take things a little further than other cartoons of the time. Speaking of parent watchdog groups, I'm shocked (in a good way) that the episode Microbots slipped by these ever diligent and overprotective outfits. I say this because the second act of Microbots featured a group of Decepticons getting drunk on Energon Cubes (Energon is the fuel used by Transformers) and clearly stumbling around intoxicated before passing out! Though showing inebriated individuals was done in other 1980s action-adventure cartoons, the act was primarily reserved to show the negative consequences of drinking underage, or drinking and driving. Such was not the case here, so I guess the writers slipped one by, good for them.

At the end of the day though, the writing of Transformers was - more often than not - mediocre (which would be considered bad by today's standards). The stories had tons of bad science and logic gaps (how do the Autobots manage to drive almost anywhere in the world within a matter of minutes?), plenty of preachy PSAs (don't steal, be nice to others etc.) and a plethora of awful one-liners. I wish I could get excited - or even angry - about the work done by the writers of this show. The first 65 episodes are just so typical, however, I'm stuck with the meek acknowledgement that Transformers is simply "par for the course". It's kind of like the Ben 10 of the 1980s, haphazardly written, shamelessly geared at merchandising and lacking substance, yet somehow not completely evil.

Visually speaking, Transformers - once again - has some good points, bad points and a whole lot of in-between. On the positive side, a handful of episodes in this series looked really good. Notables include, Atlantis Arise, Microbots and Megatron's Master Plan. Each of these stories had some really impressive and ambitious animation, the kind I wish we saw more of during this time.

Another excellent aspect of Transformers would be the design work. I really liked how Cybertron was built entirely out of metal, with seemingly endless corridors and buildings stretching clear down into the bowels of the planet. Also impressive were the general Autobot and Decepticon designs done for the show. Though based on the Japanese toys, the actual animated versions of all the Transformers were changed a lot for the cartoon. True, they still resembled the toys themselves, but anyone who actually owned Megatron or Optimus Prime knows that the cartoon renditions of these characters looked a lot better than the toys themselves (to be fair the cartoons didn't actually have to transform in three-dimensions though). The thing I liked most about the design of Transformers, however, were the "classic" Cybertron Transformer designs. Characters like Alpha Trion, Aleta-1 and Devcon all had cylindrical styling and rounded corners that were fantastically alien and nothing like the boxy designs of the earth based Transformers. It was just so different looking (probably Japanese) and original I would have personally liked to seen more. Fortunately the remaining 33 episodes of Transformers - along with the movie - use this style a lot, so I have that to look forward to at least.

Negatively speaking, Transformers has more animation glitches than any action-adventure show I've ever seen. Things like the wrong character talking, or a character that wasn't supposed to be in a scene showing up in the background are omnipresent throughout the first 65 episodes. This usually happened with Transformers that were near identical in appearance to other robots in the show. For example, Starscream looks just like Thundercracker, the only real difference is the accent colors for each character. Given this similarity, it's very common to find scenes where the individual being shown was supposed to be Starscream, but the studio accidently used the color scheme for Thundercracker. Though I imagine it must have been very difficult for the producers and directors of these cartoons to keep track of this sort of thing - especially given the demanding schedule of the show - one cannot ignore the fact that Transformers has far too many of these animation mistakes.

Another issue I had with the visuals from this series was the background looping. Anybody who's ever watched the old Hanna-Barbera cartoons has probably noticed the way HB looped backgrounds while characters were walking, running or driving. This technique is used to save money and it involves having the same background go by over and over again. As you can probably imagine, this cost cutting trick was also popular in many of the action-adventure cartoon of the 1980's as well. Its effectiveness, however, varied depending on the execution. Sadly, the use of looping backgrounds in Transformers was not good. The biggest problem was that the beginning and end of the loop just didn't match up very often, thus the film appeared to "jump" every time the background began a new cycle. Though other shows of the time may have had the same problem, this issue was only exacerbated by the fact that a large percentage of the cast was made up of cars that spent a lot of time - shockingly enough - driving around in settings were backgrounds could easily be looped.

Poorly looped animation wasn't the only problem stemming from the Transformers general nature though. Radical shifts in scaling were also commonplace thanks to the Transformers ability to ... well, transform. I'll give you an example, Megatron (the leader of the Decepticons) is one of the larger robots in the show. He stands several stories tall, and very few of his minions can equal his stature. Yet, when Megatron transforms into a handgun, anyone of his soldiers could hold and fire him like a normal weapon. Now I'm no expert in physics, but even I know that a machine as large as Megatron can't just shirk himself down to an object 1/100th of his original size, not unless there's magic in those Energon Cubes they drink. This same problem shows up with characters like Astrotrain as well. Despite being the same general size as other Decepticons, Astrotrain could transform into a space shuttle and easily transport a number of his evil comrades with room to spare. Now, to be fair the producers of Transformers really didn't have many options outside of "magically" scaling robots. Since the characters in Transformers could change into such a wide variety of objects, making those objects exist in the same space with one another required a "leap of faith" by the audience. Unfortunately, this unusual variance in proportion - coupled with poorly executed cost cutting techniques and constant animation mistakes - take away greatly from anything Transformers did right visually.

When it's all said and done, the visuals from Transformers standup okay for the time period in which they were created. The show had a couple of standout episodes (though very few), and some of the styling and character design was pretty good. Sadly, the overall presentation of the series does suffer greatly thanks to the very nature of the show itself. I suppose it's a little ironic that the thing that has helped keep this franchise popular the last 25 years (transforming robots) is the same thing that made the execution of the original cartoon so frustrating and distracting.

In terms of Audio, Transformers has very solid voice acting. The show was recorded with an ensemble cast (which is a good thing), and veterans like Peter Cullen and Frank Welker gave distinct personalities to the characters they voiced. Cullen in particular was so iconic as Optimus Prime that Michael Bay was forced to cast the actor for the same role in his live action movies.

Musically speaking, Transformers was - at best - average. The opening theme was pretty weak, and the in show music was typically redundant and overused. The show also shared some music with its "cousin" program GI Joe (both shows were produced by the same outfits for Hasbro), so originality wasn't a strong point either. Interestingly enough, the considerable amount of "sharing" that took place between Transformers and GI Joe led to a pretty funny mistake in the Transformers episode "The Autobot Run". Every time this story went to commercial, the bumpers (that's the lead out and lead in sequences) used the GI Joe music with the Transformers animation. At first I was confused and had to rerun the commercial bumper, but upon further review this was indeed a production mistake, funny stuff.

If it sounds like I was disinterested when writing this review, that's because I was ... and for that I apologize. The truth is I've gotten a little burned out on the 1980s action-adventure shows, and I need to recharge my batteries with something a little less ... well, crappy. So for the foreseeable future I'm going to be watching cartoons that came before, or after 1980 (I'm actually watching some classic Popeye and Looney Tunes right now). As for Transformers, it's a decent 1980s action-adventure show. Though mostly average in execution, the show did have a couple bright spots, and the premise is one that continues to find new fans, even today. Still, the negative aspects of this cartoon are glaring, especially when viewed with older eyes. If you're a big fan of this show, pickup one of the slim pack sets and give it a watch. They’re pretty cheap and have some fun extras including: original commercials, PSAs and interviews. People who have never seen this show - or don't have a strong sense of nostalgia for it - should stay away, nothing about this show has aged well.

Treasure Planet is a decent little gem

2011-01-16T17:32:00.002-05:00

Though mostly remembered as another post 2000 Disney flop, Treasure Planet is actually a much better film than most people give it credit for. Released in 2002, Treasure Planet takes Louis Stevenson's classic tale of Treasure Island and adapts it into a science fiction adventure set in space. The film was directed by the solid team of Clements and Musker (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Hercules and The Princess Frog) and cost a whopping $140 million dollars to create. Sadly, Treasure Planet was unable to make back its production budget during the initial release (even with the world wide box office) and has been written off as just another Disney mistake.

I'm little ashamed to admit that I didn't even see this film in theaters when it was released in November of 2002. I had a lot going on at the time (buying a house, getting married ... you know, little things) and I was still feeling burned by the whole Titan A.E. and Atlantis fiascos from 2000 and 2001. Basically I just didn't see anything in Treasure Planet's advertising that made me think this story could succeed where other animated sci-fi features had failed in previous years. Upon its release on DVD in 2003, I decided to pick the movie up and see if its story was as bad as I feared. Much to my (pleasant) surprise however, Treasure Planet featured excellent animation, some superb character dynamics and a good (albeit not great) story.

Our movie begins with fifteen year old Jim Hawkins getting into trouble when the local authorities find him solar surfing through a restricted area. Upon his capture Jim is returned to the local inn run by his mother - whose name is Sarah - and is given a stern scolding for his repeated run-ins with the law. Shortly thereafter, a mysterious alien crashes on a nearby landing pad and Jim helps the mortally wounded stranger back to the inn. Once there the alien tells Jim, Sarah and family friend Dr. Delbert Doppler (he's an anthropomorphic, dog-like astronomer) to "beware the cyborg" and hands over a golden sphere to Jim before dying. Within moments a gang of pirate-like ruffians attack the inn forcing Jim, his mother and Delbert to flee the once peaceful establishment. After escaping to (what I presume is) Delbert's observatory, Jim unlocks the newly acquired golden sphere and discovers it's a holographic map leading to Treasure Planet, the fabled world where legendary pirate Captain Flint hid all of his treasure. Though difficult to convince at first, Sarah allows Jim to undertake an expedition with Delbert to follow the holo-map and see if it does indeed lead to Treasure Planet. In need of transportation, Delbert commissions a space vessel called the "RLS Legacy" and its commander Captain Amelia (she appears to be half cat and half human), to provide passage during their journey. Once aboard, Jim is relegated to "cabin boy" and put into the care/service of John Silver, a cyborg cook that Jim is initially skeptical of. So begins the journey to find Treasure Planet.

Taken at face value, the story of Treasure Planet isn't exactly overflowing with originality. It's based on a novel from 1883, and the formula of pirates riding the high seas while following a map to hidden treasure is a well worn one, even if the film is set in outer space. This decision to use outer space as a location was actually declared "gimmicky" by some critics, or at least the ones that wanted the story to stay closer to its origins (admittedly, I did sense a bit of old man "curmudgeon" from those critics). Personally I had no issues with the overall story - which made for a good adventure vehicle I thought - or its cosmic setting. Still, neither of these ideas really endeared the film to me when it was all said and done (which is one of the reasons I didn't go to theaters to watch it).

So why did I like Treasure Planet so much? Well, despite its derivative nature, Treasure Planet does one thing very, very well. It develops the father-son bond of Jim Hawkins and John Silver magnificently. The best example of this would be in the film's second act montage when we see a young Jim Hawkins being neglected, and eventually abandoned by his biological father. These somber moments are interrupted by scenes of Hawkins and Silver bonding over various chores and learning experiences aboard the "RLS Legacy". The result is a fantastic montage that quickly - and convincingly - establishes John Silver as a surrogate father to Jim, a role Silver finds himself conflicted over given his true intentions. This is the driving force of the film, without Hawkins and Silver's perfectly executed father-son relationship, the rest of this movie just wouldn't work. Luckily, directors Clements and Musker understood the importance of this character dynamic and nailed the execution.

The decision to focus on the dynamics of Hawkins and Silver does have its consequences however. Delbert - who appeared to be an important character during the films first act - all but disappears during the middle portion of the film. Even his reemergence in the third act doesn't quite bring about the characterization the story obviously wanted to give him. Still, the movie does manage to keep its secondary characters alive. While predictable, the bickering romance of Dr. Delbert and Captain Amelia does have its funny moments. The relationship is of the "opposites attract" variety, so while Amelia is a confident woman of action, Delbert is an awkward intellectual ... oh and he's a dog/human and she's a cat/human, so there's that too. Anyway, I liked the decision to hammer home the father-son relationship of Hawkins and Silver, even if it required secondary characters like Delbert to fade into the backgrounds at times. This is what good directors do, they figure out the stories main thrust and do what it takes to get it across.

Overall I think the story of Treasure Planet is good. The movie is well paced, the plot is nicely executed and the main character dynamics are awesome. When compared to the plot hole riddled Atlantis, the horrible characterization of Titan A.E., and the awful character dynamics of Sinbad Legend of the Seven Seas (all films released around the same time), this movie is great. By itself, Treasure Planet my not shine quite as bright, but it's still a good story.

As you would expect, the animation of Treasure Planet is excellent. Being a Disney film, it should come as no surprise that the traditional portion of this movie is expertly crafted and beautifully designed. Since it was created during the turn of the century, it should also come as no surprise that CGI was used extensively in the film. As I've mentioned in past reviews, the early days of CGI and traditional animation merging were a crap shoot. Some of the films did it well (Tarzan, The Iron Giant), others did it terribly (Sinbad, Titan A.E.). Overall I think Treasure Planet's creators did a good job of marrying the traditional animation and CGI imagery. There are some scenes where I felt the digitally rendered backgrounds lacked the detail of their hand drawn counterparts, but even at its worst I was never taken out of the moment. On a more positive note, the CGI used for John Silver's mechanical hand was awesome. Not only did the traditional and computer portions of the character blend seamlessly, the decision to use CGI for Silver's bionic prosthetic was completely appropriate and helped enhance the film in a tasteful way. I only wish other directors of the time had been this fastidious with their projects.

Besides the excellent animation, Treasure Planet also has some really nice design. The overall look of the film is very much inline with traditional pirate-colonial stories, the kind you would see in old movies and storybooks. Because the film is set in space, however, various objects and locations are "tweaked" in such a way that they reflect the sci-fi environment. Things like flintlock laser pistols and spacefaring sailboats make for a fun combination of classic and futuristic technology. Though not quite the animation milestone you would expect for $140 million dollars, Treasure Planet is still a very impressive looking movie all around.

When it came to voice acting I felt Treasure Planet's cast did a very good job overall. Nobody really stood out as exceptional, but all of my expectations were met. The film's music however, was a source of mixed emotions for me. On the one hand I thoroughly enjoyed the score of Treasure Planet. Beautifully composed with just the right amount of celtic influence necessary to evoke an "old world" sensibility, I thought that James Newton Howard nailed the sound of this film. On the other hand, Disney's decision to include two modern songs in the movie was ill-advised. Written and performed by John Rzeznik (of the Goo Goo Dolls), these two songs ended up dating Treasure Planet noticeably. Even worse, the song "I'm Still Here" is played during the aforementioned montage sequence involving Jim Hawkins, and takes away (ever so slightly) from the scenes impact. Though the inclusion of these numbers doesn't ruin the film in any significant way, I definitely felt their age during my latest viewing. If I could change just one thing about Treasure Planet, I would have Rzeznik's songs replaced with celtic scores similar to what Howard did throughout the rest of the film.

Treasure Planet will never be a Disney "classic". The film just doesn't have enough magic to be mentioned in the same breath as Beauty and the Beast or The Lion King. Make no mistake though, this is a good movie. On its own merits, Treasure Planet is a well executed story with excellent production value. Compared to most of the other animated features of the time however, its straight up awesome. In fact, I would rank Treasure Planet as the best post 2000 animated Disney feature after Lilo and Stitch. I won't go as far as to say you should run out and buy the 2003 DVD - which is still available since Disney never even bothered to put it in the "Vault" - but if you haven't seen Treasure Planet it's worth at least a rent (heck, you can probably catch it on the Disney channel for free).

Ultimate Avengers is ultimately abysmal

2011-01-01T12:16:00.001-05:00

When I first heard that Marvel was teaming up with Lionsgate to create animated DTVs of their popular comic book characters, I was cautiously optimistic. Though Marvel was inexperienced with direct to video productions, they had chosen good source material to adapt (Mark Millar and Bryan Hitche's "Ultimates" comic), and they had good road maps to follow with DCs existing DTV films. Upon the release of "Ultimate Avengers", however, I found myself disappointed by Marvels lack of effort, both with the stories adaptation and visual presentation. Still, I held out hope that things would get better and purchased "Ultimates Avengers 2" when it was released several months later. After watching this planned sequel I can definitely say that I wasn't disappointed again ... I was just pissed.

The story of "Ultimate Avengers" is really the story of Captain America (one of my favorite comic heroes). It begins in WW2 with Cap leading the assault on a Nazi military base. The purpose of this attack is to stop the Third Reich from launching a nuclear missile at the United States, unfortunately our hero is unable to stop the rocket from lifting off. With no other options available, Cap hitches a ride aboard this doomsday weapon and disarms the device in mid-air ... with a grenade. The resulting explosion hurls Cap into the Atlantic Ocean where he is subsequently frozen into ice for the next fifty plus years before being found by S.H.I.E.L.D. This is all well and good, and though it does take some liberties (Buckey isn't a superhero sidekick, there's no Baron Zemo and the Avengers don't find Cap) it doesn't stray all that far from the original 1940s story ... except for the aliens of course. Oh, did I forget to mention there were aliens? Apparently Hitler and his "master race" were receiving aid from an alien race known as the Chitauri. These generic looking extraterrestrials are led by a shapeshifting Chitauri by the name of Herr Kleiser, and I guess they want to take over earth, or steal vibranium, or something ... it's kind of hard to tell. Anyway, once Cap gets thawed out by S.H.I.E.L.D. he soon discovers that the Chitauri are still on earth doing ... something bad I guess. Our only chance of stopping these dastardly aliens is for Cap to form a team of super powered heroes called the Avengers to fight them.

The first Ultimate Avengers film is loosely based on the first thirteen issues of the "Ultimates" comic book. With a contemporary re-imagining of the Avengers origin - not to mention massive popularity - this selection of source material made perfect sense for Marvel. Unfortunately, the challenge of adapting this mature subject matter proved too great for the movies writers. The biggest problem was probably the decision to combine two different story arcs from the comic book and turn them into a single plot (the first arc was in issues 1-5, the second was in 6-9 and the third was 10-13). At a glance this may not seem like a bad idea, but when you take the alien centric third arc of Ultimates and infuse the first arc - which is mostly about Cap and the Hulk - with it, you get a very muddled narrative. One that loses a lot of its credibility because it introduces aliens far too quickly into the story. It all comes down to pacing. The comic book allows you to immerse yourself in the world of the Ultimates before it introduces Herr Kleiser and the Chitauri, an intentional decision that helps set the proper tone of the series. By contrast, it doesn't even take five minutes for aliens and spaceships to show up in Ultimate Avengers, thus the film takes on a completely different - and quite frankly silly - feel. Obviously the writers did this because using two separate story arcs in the same film wouldn't work as a single narrative. This is an understandable concern, but ignoring the source materials pacing was a huge mistake and ultimately the movie suffers greatly because of it.

Not helping matters is the fact that none of the Chitauri aliens seem all that scary. They're just too bland and expressionless to feel like a real threat, kind of like a Saturday morning cartoon. Don't get me wrong, the movie tries to make them look badass by blowing up space shuttles and killing army guards, but it just doesn't work. I'll have more to say about this when I get to the films visuals.

As I said earlier, Ultimate Avengers 2 was a planned sequel meant to tie up the hanging plot threads from the first film. The big difference between this story and its predecessor, however, is that Ultimate Avengers 2 was based solely on the previous movie, and not on any of the "Ultimates" comics. This then begs the question; does the writing of Ultimate Avengers 2 suffer because of the lack of strong source material, or does it benefit from the freedom of not having to adapt it? Well ... to be frank, this movie benefits about as much from an absence of source material as a boxer does from not wearing an athletic cup ... right before getting punched in the balls. In other words, the story of Ultimate Avengers 2 is worse off for it.

Continuing the alien invasion theme from the first movie, this film introduces us to the isolationist nation of Wakanda and its leader the Black Panther. Apparently the Chitauri have been trying to steal Wakanda's greatest natural resource - a giant Vibranium meteorite - for decades, and now the conflict has come to a head. Of course, this in no way explains why the Chitauri got involved with the Nazi's in WW2, or why they're just now stepping up efforts to take possession of the meteorite. But hey, who needs logic when you got the Black Panther? Anyway, this plot - while melodramatic - isn't terrible or anything, it's just boring. To find the real problem with Ultimate Avengers 2, you need look no further then the film's horrible characterization.

I mentioned before that the writers of Ultimate Avengers weren't up to the challenge of adapting the stories mature subject matter. Nowhere is this more prevalent then in the films characters. In the original Ultimates comic books Mark Millar took the strongest - and often darkest - attributes of all the different founding Avengers members and amplified them ten fold, thus we ended up with a cast of very flawed - and even despicable - heroes. Unfortunately, due to the intensity of this subject matter, the films writers chose to tone down these characteristics in the first movie, then they just crapped all over them in the second.

In the original world of the Ultimates, Hank Pym (Giant Man) is a bipolar disaster. Not only does he beat his wife Janet (Wasp) when he becomes frustrated, he's been doing it ever since they were in college. Worse, Janet's self-esteem is so low she constantly returns to her abusive spouse despite knowing he'll never change. Obviously these character traits lack heroism, so the writers of Ultimate Avengers try to tone things down a bit when adapting the story for film. In the first Ultimate Avengers movie Hank isn't a wife beater, he's just a jerk who talks too much. Meanwhile his wife Janet isn't portrayed as self-loathing, but simply loyal to a fault. I understand why the writers chose to do this, but to be honest, the dumbed down versions of Hank and Janet just aren't all that interesting. Similarly frustrating, the original Ultimates story has Tony Stark dying of a brain tumor. Faced with his impending demise, Tony begins to liquidate his assets and make the world a safer place as Iron Man ... all while drinking himself stupid of course. Here again the writers of Ultimate Avengers sought to alter the character in a way that made him seem a little less bleak. To do this they made Tony a non-dying playboy who moonlights as Iron Man, but doesn't like the idea of being a part of a team. To be clear, I didn't hate the changes to Giant Man, Wasp and Iron Man, I just felt they were misguided and generic. As I said earlier, it's more disappointing than terrible. The same cannot be said about Ultimate Avengers 2 however.

Now free of the source material, Ultimate Avengers 2 takes the already pared down versions of Giant Man and Iron man and tries to set them on a path to redemption. I don't want to say exactly what happens, but basically Hank and Tony selflessly sacrifice themselves in one of the most pathetic displays of contrived heroism I've ever seen. Now this may seem like a crass assessment of the situation, but after watching the road traveled by these characters (and knowing the road they should have traveled), I cannot help but get angry when I see something this uninspired (especially Iron Man's heroics, talk about slapped on). Oh, and did I mention Black Widow? I should probably do that. As much as I disagree with the adapted versions of Giant Man, Wasp and Iron Man, none of them sucked as bad as Black Widow. Beginning with the first film, the Black Widows only real role in both Ultimate Avengers stories is that of sympathetic ear. Seriously, she just goes around listening to peoples problems and gives them a hug if they need it. I'm not even going to complain about how far off base this is when compared to the source material, the fact that the Black Widow has been reduced to nothing more than a expository plot device is all the reason I need to throw a %$@* fit. Anyway, the first Ultimate Avengers film certainly wasn't good, but the excellence of the source material helped keep the characters from becoming a complete disaster. Lacking this guiding light, however, the characterization in Ultimate Avengers 2 becomes cliched, contrived and just plain awful. To be fair not all the characters in Ultimate Avengers were bad. Steve Rogers (Captain America) and Bruce Banner (Hulk) were actually pretty good in the first movie. Not so much in the second film mind you, but you take what you can get.

Misguided in its adaptation, and hampered by a mostly boring cast with uninspired characterization, the writing of the Ultimate Avengers duology just doesn't work. Had I been ignorant of the source material I probably wouldn't have been so upset after watching both films. That said, I have no doubt that my opinion of these movies would've still been extremely negative.

A lot of the problems experienced by Ultimate Avengers stem from the stories uneven tone as well. The film tries to take itself seriously while at the same time playing things safe, a problematic situation only exacerbated by the movies subpar visuals. Let's start with the movies technical missteps. Ultimate Avengers uses one of the ugliest shading techniques in the history of animation, soft shading. Instead of using the hard edged shading style found in most animated films, Avengers went with a soft, almost airbrushed edge. The result of this is that a lot of the characters and clothing lack the crisp lines and definition needed to give the film polish. This same mistake is repeated with soft hi-lights being used in many of the characters hair. I am not exaggerating when I say that there were times when the hi-lights used in this film looked like something an amateur did in photoshop, absolutely hideous. Then there's the color pallet. I'm not really sure how to describe it, but the colors used in Ultimate Avengers are so poorly chosen, designed and coordinated that it can actually become distracting at times. Basically, the whole thing comes off looking cheap and unprofessional, more like a poorly made Saturday morning cartoon than a mature themed DTV. Sadly, this isn't the end of Ultimate Avengers visual woes, far from it.

Keeping our unfortunate trend of poor craftsmanship alive, the design work done on Ultimate Avengers was abysmal. Outside of the character costumes (which were thankfully based on Bryan Hitches Ultimates art) the rest of clothing, costume and alien design in Ultimate Avengers was both uninspired and generic. Equally unimpressive were the vehicle designs (both terrestrial and extraterrestrial), and the hilariously disproportional guns used by characters like the Black Widow and Nick Fury. Overall, I just didn't see enough effort being put into any visual aspect of either movie. Besides the Hulk fight from the first film (which was actually ok), the rest of the execution in Ultimate Avengers looks decidedly half-assed.

The rest of the films production is pretty standard. I was neither impressed nor offended by the musical score or voice acting in Ultimate Avengers. Yes, there was room for improvement in both areas, but even if things had been better it wouldn't have saved either film. Not to sound trite or anything, but given all the other problems found in these movies I'm willing to write this off as "no harm no foul".

So it's pretty obvious that I didn't like Ultimate Avengers. Yes, a lot of my frustration stems from the affection I have for the source material, but I feel confident that this bias only amplified my displeasure, it wasn't the source of it. Sadly, being burned by these two films resulted in me ignoring subsequent Marvel DTV releases. I just couldn't imagine films like "Doctor Strange" and "Avengers Next" succeeding where Ultimate Avengers failed. Thankfully, Cartoon Network aired these movies soon after there release and I quickly realized that both films (as well as the Hulk Vs. and Planet Hulk) were excellent. So don't let the ineptitude of Ultimate Avengers dissuade you from checking out Marvels other DTV offerings, they got their act together now. Just make sure you stay away from this debacle.

Heavy Metal 2000 - No cult classic here

2010-12-11T11:19:00.000-05:00

Heavy Metal 2000 is a DTV sequel to - appropriately enough - Heavy Metal, the 1981 animated cult classic. Like the original film, Heavy Metal 2000 gives us lots of rocking music, plenty of violence and - of course - cartoon boobies. Unlike its predecessor, however, Heavy Metal 2000 fails to deliver its hardcore content in a way that entertains - or even amuses - the audience.

I was actually pretty stoked to watch this movie in 2000 (hey, that's the same year in the film's title ... what a coincidence). Though I wouldn't say I "loved" the original Heavy Metal, I certainly enjoyed it and welcomed the opportunity to see more mature themed science fiction-fantasy. Unfortunately Heavy Metal 2000's hideously poor execution prevents the film from succeeding on any level.

The story of Heavy Metal 2000 goes something like this. There was once a race of creatures called the Arakacians who created a fountain of immortality that allowed them to ravage the universe. Upon their defeat, however, the fountain was locked away and its key cast into deep space. Years later, the key is uncovered by some asteroid miners, one of whom touches the mysterious object and is driven insane by it. This man - whose name is Tyler - begins killing his fellow workers indiscriminately and eventually takes control of the mining vessel - as well as its crew - so that he can begin his quest to find the fountain of immortality. During his travels, Tyler comes across the planet of Eden (which really doesn't look like much of a paradise), home to a small settlement of people who - unbeknownst to them - have trace amounts of immortal water running through their veins. Having devised a way to distill this precious liquid from living organisms, Tyler lays waste to the peaceful settlement and either kills or kidnaps its populace so that they can be harvested. The only person to escape this fate is Julie, the film's obligatory bad ass hot chick who sets out on a journey to find Tyler and take revenge for her people. Obviously, this story lacks depth. That said, I won't condemn it because were talking about Heavy Metal. It isn't supposed to be intelligent or original, it's supposed to be violent, bloody and over sexed, all things that Heavy Metal 2000's creators understood. Unfortunately, what they didn't understand was how to make a good movie.

The first problem with Heavy Metal 2000 is that it foregoes its predecessors formula of using short stories in favor of a single narrative. Though I normally prefer my movies have a singular plot, the decision to move away from vignettes was a mistake in this case. One of the strengths of the original Heavy Metal was its variety. The film had noir, horror, comedy, fantasy and a variety of other genre combinations to enjoy. Even if you didn't like the story you were watching, that was ok because a completely different one would follow it. Had Heavy Metal 2000 continued this tradition, the film would have stood a much better chance of success. Instead Heavy Metal 2000 was based on a graphic novel titled "The Melting Pot" by Kevin Eastman, Simon Bisley and Eric Talbot. I've never read the source material for Heavy Metal 2000, so I honestly don't know how closely the film follows it. Regardless, the overall plot of this movie is pretty weak, but as I stated earlier that's ok. Heavy Metal isn't about intelligent or original storytelling, it's all about music, sex and violence, in other words it's supposed to be cool. Sadly, the use of both sex and violence (I'll save the music for later) in this film isn't just uncool, it all too often sucks.

I'll start with the violence. Heavy Metal 2000 delivers plenty of blood, beheadings, disembowelments and other general gore synonymous with the franchise. Unfortunately, these scenes don't really feel all that brutal or creative by todays standards. With the plethora of action and horror films now available, directors must work harder than ever if they want an audience to squirm, even in animation. Instead of doing this, however, Heavy Metal 2000 just kind of goes through the motions and the violence feels cold and distant because of it. Perhaps I've just become desensitized to such things, but outside of the gladiatorial lizard-man battle and Julie's final showdown with Tyler, I found most of the blood and guts in this film uninspired and boring. To be clear, I'm not saying this movie should be more violent - it's got plenty - I'm saying that it needs to be more creative with its use of it. Of course, a lot of the blame must go to the movies animators. These people clearly didn't have the creative vision necessary to bring a Heavy Metal film to life, and the pedestrian - albeit gory - violence is just a result of that.

Ok, before I go any further I just want to say that the next paragraph deals with the sexual content of Heavy Metal 2000. Normally I don't care for female exploitation in my entertainment, but with Heavy Metal one must accept such things without complaint, to do otherwise is just naive and pointless. Alright, so lets talk about sex baby! There's so much sex in this movie that ... wait a second, what do you mean there's no sex? Well, unlike the original Heavy Metal film - which had numerous sex scenes - Heavy Metal 2000 has none. There's plenty of nudity mind you, but nobody ends up doing the deed when it's all said and done. Now this isn't really a problem for me, but for guys who expect to see the same level of naughtiness in this film that they got in the original, you will be sorely disappointed. That little warning aside, I found most of the titillation in this movie either random or slapped on. It's like the writers were just reading over the script and said "We've gone five minutes without smut, better throw some in". Examples include the shower scene from the start of the film, the sex robot (whose only purpose was to set up a horrible one liner) and Julie's unwilling make-out session with some kind of river troll creature. None of these scenes had any purpose within the larger context of the story. Worse, their insertion into the film feels random and awkward. Once again, I don't have any issues with the subject matter being portrayed here, I just think the writers attempts to titillate are lazy.

Other problems related to Heavy Metal 2000's storytelling include the general dialog and flippant one liners. First off, the dialog is atrocious. I don't know if this is the same script as the graphic novel, or revised dialog done specifically for the movie. Regardless, it doesn't work at all when spoken aloud, most notably with the film's main character Julie. Almost all of her exchanges with the various other characters in this film are unbearable, especially when she's trying to act tough. Making matters worse is the fact that the one liners in this movie stink. Now I know there is a certain charm to cheesy one liners, but whatever that appeal is, this movie doesn't have it. I think the one that made me want to vomit most was the aforementioned sex robot one liner "Was it good for you?", Jesus Christ on a pogo stick that was awful. Seriously, was this a piece of fanfiction? I know that the graphic novel was done by a bunch of artists (two of which created the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles), but wasn't there a screen writer around to fix this? Anyway, I may not expect brilliant dialog or clever humor from Heavy Metal, but I do expect a certain level of professional pride and competence, neither of which I found here.

So, up to this point we have some uninteresting violence, inept attempts at erotica and terrible dialog. Not exactly a rousing start for this review, but the visual side of Heavy Metal 2000 can't be that bad ... right? Wrong, the animation in this movie ranges from generic, to amateurish. Say what you will about the low-budget animation in the first Heavy Metal movie, it had style. A visual flair that helped carry the film past its budgetary limitations. Such is not the case with Heavy Metal 2000. The overall look of this movie is so uninspired and generic, it's just sad. The only real effort I saw to make this movie look like Heavy Metal would have been with Tyler. You could see some attempt to give Tyler a distinct, almost caricature styled appearance. Unfortunately, these attempts fall woefully short of being successful because the animators don't take the exaggeration far enough. As I said before, the animation crew for Heavy Metal 2000 just didn't have the creative vision necessary to do this movie. There's supposed to be an indy type vibe with this franchise, an exaggerated style that visually matches the outrageous subject matter. Instead, Heavy Metal 2000 appears to be holding back, like it's afraid of going too far so it ends up looking like any other DTV film. More bloody and full of cartoon boobs sure, but otherwise indistinguishable from the rest of its cousins.

Then there's the CGI (oh god the CGI). Just about everything that could be done wrong with the computer animation in this film was done wrong. The overall look and execution is like something out of an internet video, the application was far too abundant and the merging of computer animation to traditional is awful. Now truth be told, there are plenty of other DTVs from this time with similar problems. Heck, one of my favorite movies from this era is Batman Subzero, and that thing had the ugliest CGI Batwing in history. So it is possible to make a good movie with bad computer animation. The problem with Heavy Metal 2000 isn't just one of poor quality though, the bigger issue at work here is the inability of the films creators to show restraint with its use. Examples include numerous traditionally rendered buildings being burned by CGI fire, characters being knocked forward by CGI explosions and an Arakacian alien animated entirely in CG! What are you doing here guys? Why would you take a tool you clearly don't understand and use it everywhere, can't you see how terrible it looks? When it's all said and done the execution of Heavy Metal 2000's computer animation looks like something you would see in a YouTube clip, amateurish and unrestrained.

The voice acting of Heavy Metal 2000 is mostly middle of the row. The only standouts would be the performances given to the films two main characters, Julie and Tyler. Tyler is voiced by Michael Ironside, the veteran actor who gave life to Darkseid in Superman the Animated Series. With a wealth of experience - not to mention talent - Ironside manages to overcome the scripts hideous dialog and pulls off the roll of Tyler relatively well. Conversely, Julie Strain Eastman delivers an absolutely egregious performance as Julie. Known primarily for her rolls in B movies, Strain Eastman clearly has no talent for voice acting and only worsens the films already bad script. Being that she was married to Heavy Metal Editor and Chief Kevin Eastman at the time, many a disparaging remakes have been made about Mr. Eastman's obvious desire to tailor the films female lead around his wife. Given the unfortunate results of his misguided affections, I have to agree with these haters.

Musically speaking, Heavy Metal 2000 has - shockingly enough - a lot of metal music. It features songs by Coal Chamber, Apartment 26, Billy Idol, Monster Magnet, Pantera, System of a Down, Queens of the Stone Age and Puya. Now I'm not much of a heavy metal aficionado, but even I recognize these band names, and overall I think they complement the Heavy Metal franchise nicely. Truth be told, this is easily the films strongest attribute.

When it's all said and done, Heavy Metal 2000 just isn't worth your time. The film's plot is (justifiably) anemic, the violence is unremarkable and the sexual content tepid. Couple that with some horrible voice acting of awful dialog, and you got a pretty F'd up movie. Sure, the film has a good soundtrack, but you can always buy that separately and spare yourself this animated mishap. So I guess there just isn't any good reason to watch this flick. If you're looking for some animated Heavy Metal, stick with the original; if you're looking for some outrageous violence, checkout anime like Afro Samurai; and if all you want is some good cartoon titillation, I recommend the first six episodes of Stripperella (I'm serious. Kevin Altieri's work on the first six episodes of that show was great).

DC Showcase - If you don't already own them, these short stories are worth your time

2010-11-28T12:06:00.000-05:00

A while back it was announced that Warner Bros. Animation would create a series of animated shorts featuring some of the lesser known heroes of the DC Universe. The plan was to have a different short included on the two-disc and Blu-ray releases of Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths, Batman: Under the Red Hood and Batman/Superman Apocalypse. The reason for this was pretty obvious of course. By including these vignettes on the more expensive DVD and Blu-ray versions of their films - but not on the cheaper single-disc versions - Warner Bros. hoped to upsell buyers and increase their profit margin (which is a goal I have no problem with). That being said, I decided to stick with the cheaper DVD releases and forego these short stories, even though I really wanted to watch them. Why, you ask? Because I was pretty darn sure that Warner Bros. would repurpose this content into a standalone DTV I could buy for far less money than upgrading to the Blu-ray or two-disc DVD versions of the films mentioned above. Heck, I thought they might even throw some new content into the collection if I was lucky. Well, it turns out I was right (for once) and DC Showcase - which collects all three, previously released, shorts and includes a new 22 minute Shazam story - is now available for purchase.

Now before I go any further with this review, let me just say that anybody who already owns these DC Showcase shorts should not pay full price for this DVD. A single - 22 minute - story about Shazam, Black Adam and Superman is not worthy of a full price purchase by itself (after all you already have the other shorts). If, however, you do not own any of these stories, you're getting over an hours worth of new content, so it's actually a pretty decent deal.

Alright, so the four short stories featured on this DVD are: Superman/Shazam: The Return of Black Adam, The Spectre, Green Arrow and Jonah Hex. Being that none of these stories is feature length, I think it would be easiest to talk about each individually.

Let's start with Shazam. This 22 minute story (by far the longest of the collection) is awesome. The story begins with Black Adam's return to earth after 5,000 years of banishment. Upon his arrival, Black Adam seeks out Billy Batson, a young orphan who has somehow retained his innocence despite being a child of the streets. Unbeknownst to Billy, he has been chosen by the wizard Shazam to receive great power so that he can become the protector of humanity, a fate Black Adam intends to prevent by pre-emptively killing the boy. Fortunately Superman is there to help protect Billy as he learns of his mission and assumes the role of Captain Marvel. Obviously, the short running time of this story requires that the plot move at a fast pace. Luckily, the writer does a good job of getting us set up early on so that we can dig into some fantastic action throughout the rest of the film. Besides the beautiful animation and excellent fight choreography, the thing that really impressed me about this shorts visuals was the use of slow motion. Given the inherent difficulties of doing slow motion in animation, I was really amazed by some of the great action shots done in Superman/Shazam. Expertly crafted from start to finish, this story is tied with Green Arrow as my favorite in the set.

Next up is DC's most prolific source of supernatural punishment, The Spectre. Set in 1970s Hollywood, this story is all about murder and vengeance. Though not an especially mysterious - or original - story, the thing that makes this short work so well is the look and sound. Perfectly executed in a retro style, both the music and sound from The Spectre feel like they're from a 1970s murder mystery film. Complementing this superb audio is animation that not only looks good, but also looks aged with intentional dust and scratches being added throughout the story. A fantastic homage to 1970s cinema, The Spectre is another solid addition to this collection.

The third installment to DC Showcase is Green Arrow. I'll be honest, I've never been a big fan of Green Arrow. It's not that I dislike the character or anything, I've just never been all that interested in him and I wasn't really all that excited to see his short. So imagine my surprise when I finished this story and thought to myself "Wow, that was as good as Superman/Shazam!". While picking up his girlfriend (Black Canary) from the airport, Green Arrow soon finds himself protecting a pre-teen princess from multiple assassins who have targeted her for execution. It's a lot like Die Hard I guess, but with more arrows. Anyway, this is a great short. The animation is excellent, the staging, settings, choreography fantastic and the ending ... perfect.

The last - and in my opinion least impressive - short in this set is Jonah Hex. The story basically revolves around a female prostitute/tavern owner who tricks men flush with cash into coming up to her room with the promise of a good time, but kills and robs them instead. Eventually, Jonah comes looking for one of these men - who has a bounty on his head - and soon finds himself squaring off with the aforementioned prostitute and her cronies. It's not a bad story by any means, but when compared to the other three of the set it just doesn't feel all that special. That said, the animation in this installment is good and the directing (all the shorts are directed by Joaquim Dos Santos) solid.

So there you have it. DC Showcase my not be the most substancial DTV release to come out of Warner Bros. Animation, but it still gets the job done nicely. Personally, I hope to see more of these short stories by Bruce Timm and company. It's obvious we won't be getting full fledged animated features starring characters like the Atom anytime soon, so bite sized films like this are as good as it gets. Once again, I must emphasize that people who already own The Spectre, Green Arrow and Jonah Hex shorts from previous DVD releases should not buy this at full price, doing so would be a rip-off in my mind. Additionally, I would advise most consumers to purchase the single-disc version of the film. I just don't feel that an overly expensive Blu-ray is necessary considering the amount of content you're given (if you really want to see it on Blu-ray, rent it).

ThunderCats season one - probably not a good as you remember

2010-11-11T19:10:00.000-05:00

There were a lot of action-adventure cartoons made during the 1980s (and I mean a lot), some were successful, others fell to the wayside. Amidst this plethora of animated entertainment a few shows rose up and achieved not only financial success, but a certain degree of nostalgic immortality. ThunderCats is one such show.

Premiering in 1985, ThunderCats ran an astounding 130 episodes before it's conclusion in 1990. Despite its massive popularity, I never got to see much of the ThunderCats during its initial run (that means I have no nostalgia for it). I wanted to watch of course (what young boy wouldn't?), but the show fell into a difficult time slot for me and I was never able to get home from school fast enough to catch it. Years later, after my graduation from high-school, ThunderCats reappeared on Cartoon Network's Toonami block and I was excited to see what I had missed in my youth. Unfortunately I had not yet realized how bad 1980s action-adventure cartoons were and was instantly turned off by the childish stories and hideous voice acting. Now, more than ten years later, I can finally say that I've seen ThunderCats, having endured the first 65 episodes (season one) of the classic action-adventure series on DVD. I say "endured" because despite its visual excellence, ThunderCats features rarely good, often bad, but mostly average stories throughout its first season.

The story of the ThunderCats begins with a group of anthropomorphic cats fleeing their doomed planet of Thundera and traveling to a new homeworld. While escaping this Krypton-esque situation, the ThunderCats are attacked by a band of bloodthirsty Mutants from the planet Plun-Darr. These ruthless marauders destroy nearly all of the escaping vessels from Thundera, the exception being a ship carrying the Thundercat nobility, including future Lord of the ThunderCats, Lion-O. Once this Mutant assault is repelled, our small group of refugees realize they cannot reach their new home due to the damage sustained by their ship during the battle, instead they must venture to "Third Earth" a planet that will take many more years to reach than their previous destination. With no other options available the ThunderCats - which include the aforementioned Lion-O (young boy destined to lead the ThunderCats), Tygra (science guy), Cheetara (female speedster), Panthro (engineer and inventor), Snarf (Lino-O's nursemaid), WilyKit and WilyKat (twin troublemakers) - go into stasis sleep while Jaga (Lion-O's mentor) pilots the ship to their new home. Years later our heroes arrive at their destination relatively unscathed, unfortunately Jaga has died of old age while piloting the vast distance to Third Earth, and Lion-O soon discovers that he has grown into a man while in stasis (thus you have a child's mind in an adult's body). Before the shock of this unexpected development can wear off, Lion-O and his comrades - none of which have aged at all - are attacked by Mutants ... again. Naturally the ThunderCats are more than a match for these bumbling villains and quickly drive them off, what they don't realize however, is that an even greater force of evil - Mumm-Ra the Ever Living - is watching their every move and plans to take the ThunderCats most prized possession - the Sword of Omens (which contains the Eye of Thundera) - for himself. Can the ThunderCats thwart Mumm-Ra's dastardly plans? Will Third Earth prove to be a good home for our heroes? Can Lion-O mentally grow into adulthood before his first prostate exam? Only time will tell.

The writing on 1980s action-adventure cartoons is notoriously bad, so it should come as no surprise that ThunderCats suffers from many of the pitfalls found in similar shows of this era. Whether it's the tame action (the kind where people aren't even allowed to punch one another), the overabundance of exposition (please Lion-O, tell me what you're doing again, I can't remember), the awful "moral lessons" (many of which don't make sense within the context of the story) or the dime store philosophy (Wow Tygra, you're so deep and insightful), the writing of ThunderCats is typical for the time. While these "average" stories make up the bulk of season one's 65 episodes, there were occasions where the writing did exceed its mediocre boundaries, a couple times for the better, but far too often for the worse.

Let’s start things off on a positive note. Leonard Starr does a great job when writing the ThunderCats. With his fantastic attention to detail - as well as his respect for the audience - Starr is the kind of writer all action-adventure cartoons should have. To find an example why, you need look no further then the quintessential ThunderCats story "The Anointment of Lion-O". In this five-part story arc Lion-O has to prove his worthiness as Lord of the ThunderCats by besting all the other ThunderCats at what they do best (strength, speed, cunning etc). While facing Tygra, Lion-O discovers that his opponent has the ability to create illusions using his mind, something that we had never seen the character do prior to this episode. Most writers wouldn't even bother to explain this new power, after all this is just a show for kids. Starr goes the extra mile here, however, and reveals that the mental energy required to create these illusions takes a great deal of time and effort to store up, so much so that Tygra has been saving his mental energy for months just so that he could use it during Lion-O's trial. This respect for both the intelligence of the audience and the shows continuity, make Starr the best writer on ThunderCats by far. Though not quite on the same level as Michael Reaves (from Dungeons and Dragons) Leonard Starr definitely deserves recognition for going above and beyond what was expected from action-adventure writers of the time.

Unfortunately, where Leonard Starr sought to raise the bar for ThunderCats, other writers like William Overgard simply churned out egregious and even insulting stories for the show. Two examples of this can be found in Overgard's Mandora: Evil Chaser duology. Featuring a laughable female heroine by the name of Mandora, these two stories paired Lion-O with the galactic "Evils Chaser" (or cop) in an obvious attempt to create a spinoff series. Some highlights from this include Mandora defeating an escaped prisoner with soap (amazingly enough this scene is actually worse than it sounds), Mandora and Lion-O conversing in the vacuum of space (I had no idea that the wind could blow through your hair without atmosphere) and robot space pirates (do I really need to make a joke here?). Another hideous episode would be "The Terror of Hammerhand" (written by Ron Goulart and Julian P. Gardner). In what can only be described as surreal, this story had unicorns, monster trees, giant birds and viking pirates that repeat everything three times, Three Times, THREE TIMES (yes, it's that annoying)!!! Now bad stories like this are not a rare thing when it comes to 1980's cartoons, and they're certainly not exclusive to ThunderCats (there was that time when the Defenders of the Earth got turned into animals by Dracula so he could put them in a circus, and the time Cobra Commander tried to carve his likeness into the moon, oh and the time that midget thieves hid themselves in an orphanage in C.O.P.S), but while these unabashedly awful episodes can be excused as an unfortunate byproduct of their time period, what cannot be excused is the poor storytelling found all too often in this show.

When I say bad storytelling, I'm actually talking about two different things. The first would be glaring plot holes born from an inconsistent timeline, the other would be lazy abuse of the three act story structure. So you may remember me mentioning that Lion-O starts this show as a young boy who physically grows into a man while in stasis sleep, thus a man child literally becomes Lord of the ThunderCats. This plot line is used continuously throughout the first twenty or so episodes as Lion-O struggles to mature his mind to fit his body. Then it just disappears, vanishing without a trace. Practically overnight Lion-O becomes a wise and introspective leader, just another adult like Panthro or Tygra. When WileyKit and WileyCat (both of whom are technically older than Lion-O) do something stupid, guess who's there to scold them for their youthful endeavors? That's right Lion-O. When something awe inspiring happens, guess who's there to put it into perspective? Once again, Lion-O. Other timeline inconsistencies include the appearance of various characters who knew both the ThunderCats and Mutants before either party came to Third Earth, yet none of these visitors act like much time has passed since the last time they saw them, or even look very old for that matter (which they would presumable be since many years passed while the ThunderCats and Mutants traveled to Third Earth). In truth these continuity hiccups probably didn't bother their intended audience very much, but I still found the whole thing rather frustrating.

Ok, so my complaints about inconsistent timeframes and dropped plot lines may be a little picky, but this next issue is very much a real problem. I'm no expert on three act story structure, but from what I understand the first act introduces the characters as well as the conflict of a story. With this set up out of the way, the stories main thrust then comes from the second act when characters undertake some sort of journey (internal, external etc) to resolve said conflict. Finally, the stories climax takes place during the third act and our conflict gets resolved bringing the story to an end. Almost all action-adventure cartoons - even the poorly written ones from the 1980s - adhere to this structure, ThunderCats was no exception. That said, what I discovered while watching season one of this show was that far too many episodes of ThunderCats (probably a quarter of them) abuse the second act of this formula in a truly shameful way. Here's how it goes down. The episode will start like a normal action-adventure show with our characters being established and our conflict (or premise) introduced. Skipping to the end the episode, our conflict is resolved (sometimes in a satisfactory way, other times not so much) and our heroes enjoy a cute epilogue. Both of these acts make relative sense and are pretty standard, what doesn't make sense is everything that happens in-between. Again and again I watched episodes of the ThunderCats where the second act was made up of completely random events. Now when I say random, I mean RANDOM. The characters would literally run around, encounter an obstacle, overcome it and start the process all over again until it was time to start the third act. None of these encounters had anything, ANYTHING, to do with the stories central theme or main conflict, they just filled time. This is supposed to be the meat of the story folks, the main thrust, not a loosely connected series of events barely bridging the first and third act. Where's the substance? Where's the struggle as it relates to the main story? I've watched some bad action-adventure stories in my time, but this ... this is just the height of laziness.

With the general writing out of the way I think now would be a good time to talk about the characters of ThunderCats. I've already mentioned the basic cast of heroes, but here they are again: Lion-O, Cheetara, Panthro, Tygra, Snarf, WileyKit and WileyKat. This is actually a pretty decent batch of characters, or it would be if the writers actually used anybody besides Lion-O and Snarf. The rest of the ThunderCats, while not absent from the show, don't really get any significant time dedicated to them, and this is a real shame. Sure, there are some basic character traits like Panthro's fear of fire-bats and Cheetara's sixth sense, but outside of these very superficial fears and abilities the show just doesn't dig nearly deep enough into these characters. What we needed were some interpersonal dynamics. Episodes dedicated to the friendships, rivalries and relationships of Cheetara, Panthro, Tygra and the Wiley twins, instead we got Snarf jammed down our throat time and time again. In case you don't know, Snarf is the "cute" animal like sidekick of the show. He basically provides comedic relief for the other characters by constantly being afraid and repeating his obnoxious catch phrase "Snarf" over and over. Why the writers of this show chose to reward this grating character with multiple episodes - specifically tailored to explore his personality - is beyond me (they probably thought that he was a fan favorite with kids or something). I don't need to see Snarf prove himself to the other ThunderCats (again), I need to see Tygra's reluctant acceptance of Lion-O as leader of the ThunderCats (I made the last part up, but you get what I'm saying). This really is a sad waste, if the writers of ThunderCats had spent more time utilizing and exploring their potentially rich cast I think that this show could have been much better.

Opposing our feline heroes are the villainous Mutants and their occasional ally Mumm-Ra the Ever Living. The Mutants - like the ThunderCats - are anthropomorphic creatures with various animalistic traits. There's the Mutant leader Slithe (who looks like a lizard), Jackalman (a Jackal), Monkian (a monkey) and Vultureman (a vulture). As far as villains go, this band of (mostly) incompetent individuals work well enough within the context of the show. Their constant bickering and backstabbing is a good contrast to the noble Code of Thundera and it helps emphasize the futility of selfishness and greed. The only problem I had with them was the lack of real motivation when battling the ThunderCats themselves. Seriously, outside of their underexplained desire to steal the Sword of Omens, the Mutants have no reason to even stay on Third Earth, let alone repeatedly get their tails whooped by Lion-O and his friends. There has to be richer worlds to plunder - preferably ones not inhabited by magical sword wielding cat people - why not go there? Ultimately this inexplicable obsession to acquire the ThunderCats mystical sword just doesn't add up. Unfortunately the show's primary villain, Mumm-Ra, fares no better in the motivational department.

All and all, I have to say that Mumm-Ra is the best villain in ThunderCats (the guy should really have a doctor check into his overactive saliva glands though). Besides being a genuine threat to the ThunderCats, Mumm-Ra's ability to shift forms between a withered old mummy and a super buff badass, makes for a lot of fun in the show. Additionally I liked how the writers gave Mumm-Ra an achilles heel for our heroes to exploit, in this case the only thing capable of defeating Mumm-Ra is the horror of his own reflection. Again, Mumm-Ra's motivation - like the Mutants - makes no real sense, and in many ways feel counterintuitive to the nature of the character. Before the ThunderCats showed up Mumm-Ra was just hanging out in his pyramid, sleeping in his sarcophagus and enjoying his golden years. Now he spends all his time concocting overly elaborate schemes to steal the Eye of Thundera, and slumming it with a bunch of low class Mutants. Mumm-Ra's an immortal being for heaven’s sake, not a petty thief. Even the cliched motivation of "taking over the world" would have been better than making the show's best villain a glorified kleptomaniac.

I can see how the premise of ThunderCats would be appealing to youngsters during the 1980s. Had I been able to watch the show at the time, I'm sure I would have fallen under its spell like so many others. Since this is not the case, however, I've got to say that there was nothing special about season one's writing. Outside of the superior work of Leonard Starr, the rest of the show was mostly mediocre, and all too often terrible. Poor story structure happens far too often, characters get over and underused terribly, motivations make no sense and plot holes abound. Basically ThunderCats is, at best, an averagely written show whose stories lack the excellence of Dungeons and Dragons, and the outrageous charm of GI Joe.

One area that ThunderCats takes a backseat to no-one, however, is visuals. Benefiting greatly from producers Rankin-Bass's regular collaborator Topcraft, ThunderCats features some of the best animation done during the 1980s action-adventure cartoon boom. The best episodes happen early on - most notably during the "Exodus" story line - with near fluid animation, gorgeous lighting effects and stellar backgrounds. The space battle between the Mutants and ThunderCats from the pilot episode was especially amazing. Of course this visual prowess does not carryover throughout all 65 episodes of the series. Like other shows of the time, various studios worked on ThunderCats. Some of these outfits - like Topcraft - did exceptional work, other studio's produced results that were far more lackluster. Still, when compared to other shows of the time, ThunderCats animation stands out as some of the best.

Another win for the ThunderCats would be in the design department. All of the main characters in the series, good and evil, look excellent and unique. You can see a little of the Rankin-Bass influence with some of the designs, especially Slithe, but that's ok because none of the regular cast members sport the infamous "bulbous nose" look seen in other Rankin-Bass productions. Equally good are the vehicle and technology designs used throughout the series. Specifically I liked the look of the Thunder Tank and Cats Lair (both of which made great toys I'm sure), as well as the Nose Diver and Sky Cutter vehicles. Unfortunately secondary character designs were far less impressive. From the generic looking "Warrior Maidens" to the freaky, Muffit styled "Ro-Bear Berbils", ThunderCats clearly didn't put the same effort into the semi-regular characters as they did into the core cast. That said, I don't feel that this diminishes the show in any significant way. Weaker secondary character designs were common practice on shows like this, and I'm only comparing ThunderCats to its peers anyway.

Now comes the hard part. While ThunderCats may be visually amazing, and the stories mostly average (though problematic), what isn't amazing - or even typical - was the show's voice acting. Featuring some of the worst performances in the history of action-adventure animation, the acting done on ThunderCats was abysmal, even by 1980s standards. Ultimately I would have to name Peter Newman and Lynn Lipton as the two worst offenders, especially given their awkward delivery and inability to emote. To say that Newman's Tygra sounded choppy and stiff is like saying Charles Manson has anger issue, though the statement is technically true, it fails to convey the proper magnitude of the situation. To give you some idea of how bad this delivery was, there was a time when I actually thought Tygra was dubbed by an asian actor, one who barely spoke english. But while Newman's work on Tygra was indeed terrible, I'll also say that the actor's portrayal of other characters is marginally better. Lipton, on the other hand, couldn't even muster one solitary good performance despite being the voice of every single female character in the show! Whether it's the odd enunciation of Cheetara (whose elongation of the letter "O" baffles me) or the hideous - almost old lady sounding - voice of Willa (leader of the Warrior Maidens), Lipton's ability to single handedly ruin just about every scene she was involved in was staggering.

It's not all bad mind you. Earl Hammond does some decent work on Mumm-Ra, and Earle Hyman's Panthro was pretty respectable. Overall though, I have to say that ThunderCats has some of the worst sounding characters of any action-adventure cartoon done in the 1980s (the only other show that comes close is C.O.P.S).

Having just declared the voice acting of ThunderCats to be irredeemably bad, I would like to step back and briefly mention the shows strongest feature. The ThunderCats title sequences is easily one of the best done in action-adventure history. Perfectly storyboarded and beautifully animated, this opening sequence never got old for me when I was watching the DVD sets. Complementing this visual splendor was the heart pounding theme music that - while short on lyrics - was infuriatingly catchy and 100% awesome. When fans of the ThunderCats talk about how great the show was, I bet you what they're really talking about is this opening.

Looking back over this (ridiculously long) review, I have to say that ThunderCats is a series of extremes. The show's title sequence and animation was extremely awesome, the show's voice acting and writing, however, was extremely bad. In short, ThunderCats isn't nearly as good as many fans remember. Obviously my lack of nostalgia for ThunderCats has hardened my opinion of the show more so than cartoons like GI Joe and Dungeons and Dragons. I can't really make any excuses for that, these things just kind of happen when you review really bad TV from your childhood. That said, I would still recommend that hardcore fans of ThunderCats checkout the first volume of this DVD set (it may be bad but it's still a far cry better than Defenders of the Earth or C.O.P.S.). If you can make it through all 33 episodes without feeling like your childhood has been violated, it might be worth picking up the rest of the series (don't pay more than $20 a set though). For what it's worth, the DVDs themselves are pretty well put together with decent packaging and a handful of special features (mostly interviews). Unfortunately they can take up some considerable room on your shelf. It's not terrible or anything, but I definitely would've preferred a foldout case, or even a slim pack to the three standard sized DVD cases found in each set.

Sinbad is so bad it should be a sin.

2010-10-28T19:37:00.003-04:00

Producer Jeffrey Katzenberg is a bit of a polarizing figure in animation. Some people credit him for the resurgence of Disney's feature film animation in the early 1990s, others condemn him for helping kill the medium in the early 2000s. Personally, I think Katzenberg is a consummate business man who would rather exploit tried-and-true formulas than tell a good story. In other words I think that Katzenberg's better movies succeeded in spite of him, not because of him. I mention this because Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas has all the formulaic earmarks of a Katzenberg production. From the contrived romance to the forced humor, Sinbad offered up nothing new for audiences, just the same old animated schtick Katzenberg had come to rely on at Dreamworks. When the film failed Katz declared that traditional animation was dead and that audiences were only interested in CGI films like Shrek. Of course the sad truth isn't that audiences stopped caring about traditional animation, they just stopped caring about derivative animation like Sinbad.

I would like to just take a minute and go on a bit of a rant about CGI versus traditional animation. Released in 2003 Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas garnered a mostly tepid response, both critically and finically. Following the failure of Fox's Titan A.E. (2000) and Disney's Atlantis (2001), Sinbad proved to be the "last straw" of sorts for traditional animation. Unfortunately many people mistook the death of this "Katzenberger" style of traditional animation as the death of the medium itself. While the signal being sent to Hollywood was "we want different stories, like Pixar", all they heard was "we want movies that look like Pixar", thus traditional animation was all but abandoned. Exacerbating the situation was the fact that CGI films were getting a finical boost from their choice of animation method (how else do you explain the success of Ice Age?). This is because average moviegoers mistook the "new and shiny" look of CGI for fresh storytelling, a misconception that did not last long. Once the novelty of CGI wore off studios started seeing revenue decline. Why? That's easy, because people got tired of seeing generic looking, crappy stories in CG, just like they got tired of seeing generic looking, crappy stories in traditional animation a decade prior. Good stories are the key to sustained success, if you give people good stories consistently (Pixar) you will be rewarded with loyalty, this goes for both CGI and traditionally animated films. If you give people bad stories however (Shrek 3), you'll see a huge dip in box office returns down the road (Shrek 4), regardless of the medium. So stop trying to trick people into watching your movies with the latest fad and focus on telling good stories with a unique vision, otherwise we're just going to repeat this cycle again with 3D (actually it's already happening so get ready for the inevitable backlash).

Alright, putting that incoherent rant aside, it's time to move on. The story of Sinbad goes ... well you know what? I don't feel like recounting the story of Sinbad so here are the basics. Sinbad is an infamous pirate who used to be best friends with a prince named Proteus. Proteus is engaged to a princess named Marina (arranged marriage), but Sinbad also loves Marina (oh crap). Our bad guy (or gal I guess) is Eris, Goddess of Chaos. Eris wants the "Book of Peace" - an ancient artifact housed in Proteus's kingdom - so she hires Sinbad to steal it. Sinbad changes his mind however and Eris is forced to step in and steal the book herself, framing Sinbad in the process. Once arrested Sinbad tries to explain that he was setup by Eris, but ultimately he is given the death sentence because no one believes him, no one except Proteus that is. Unable to standby and let his friend die, Proteus exercises his right of substitution and takes Sinbad’s punishment upon himself, including the forthcoming execution. The only way to save Proteus is for Sinbad to find and return the Book of Peace, a task he only has ten days to accomplish. Luckily Marina decides to come along and help Sinbad so that she can save her future husband. Sound good? Well it shouldn't because this story is about as interesting as a paint-by-numbers stop sign.

It's hard to know where to begin when discussing the problems with Sinbad's writing. I think I'll start with the characters comprising its Arthurian love triangle. Proteus is a ridiculously abused character. If you merged King Arthur and Duckie from Pretty in Pink, you would get Proteus. In fact, for the rest of this review I will be referring to Proteus as Arthur-Duckie. Arthur-Duckie is the consummate good guy, the one who always does the right thing, never takes anything or anyone for granted and believes in others, even when they don't believe in themselves. While these selfless attributes may seem admirable, the film abuses them in an absurdly cruel way by having the two people closest to Arthur-Duckie walk all over him like a doormat. Don't worry though, he's really understanding about it. The bride-to-be of Arthur-Duckie is Princess Marina. Marina is about a shallow character as I've ever seen in animation. Serving as the films Guinevere, Marina suffers from both cliche and superficial characterization. You see Marina has reservations about settling down and marrying the future king Arthur-Duckie, part of her wants to live a life of adventure on the open seas rather than deal with the daily burdens of being a queen. Unfortunately this message of "follow your heart" comes off as a childish flight of fantasy, the immature dreams of a spoiled rich girl who knows nothing about responsibility. This is a problem because Marina doesn't end up exhibiting any redeeming qualities, instead she just appears selfish and disloyal, hardly a heroine worth rooting for. Then there's our Lancelot, Sinbad. Sinbad and Arthur-Duckie used to be best friends, but ten years ago Sinbad got a look at Arthur-Duckie's betrothed, Marina, and fell instantly in love. Not wanting to suffer the heartache of seeing the two wed - or worse get in the way - Sinbad runs away and takes up a life of piracy. Despite his thieving ways Sinbad is still a good guy at heart though, he just tries to act tough and hide it so people won't notice. Too bad he doesn't have a good woman around to help him open up about his feelings, maybe then he could become the man he was always meant to be (gag). It doesn't take a geniuses to figure out where things go from there - heck this is about a contrived a romance as you'll ever see - but while this predictable love affair is certainly A problem for the film, it's not THE problem. The real problem with Sinbad's love triangle is that the whole film collapses around its hideous execution.

The reason that Sinbad's romance causes so much trouble is that the rest of the story (you know, that whole "Book of Peace" thing) exists solely as a vehicle for it to take place in. In other words the success of the films plot depends entirely on the execution of Sinbad and Mirana's love affair, it's the stories linchpin (the catastrophically defective linchpin). Besides the problems I've already listed (Marina's shallow motivations and Sinbad's cliched "bad boy with a heart of gold" persona) the biggest source of romantic failure in this film is banter. Remember how great those fights between Bruce Willis and Cybill Shepherd were on "Moon Lighting"? When they would stand toe-to-toe in the middle of the room yelling at one another then storm off and slam the doors to their respective offices, that was great. Well Sinbad tries to use that same sexual tension in its narrative, emphasis on the word "tries". Time and time again Sinbad ineptly dons the role of "obnoxious" and "chauvinistic" pirate determined to get the princesses goat, all the while Marina plays up her irritating "sassy princess" persona complete with the "how dare you" attitude seen in about a bazillion other movies. It's awful. I'm talking groan out loud - you have got to be kidding me - awful. Glaringly scripted and completely unnatural, just about all of the exchanges between Sinbad and Marina play out like a bad sitcom, all that's missing is a laugh track. In the end these pathetic attempts at bickering start a snowball affect beginning with the failure of the banter, then the failure of the romance, and ultimately the failure of the movie. It may seem like I'm putting too much emphasis on the relationship of these two characters, but as I said earlier the "Book of Peace" is just a MacGuffin, its only purpose is to further Sinbad and Marina's romance. When that keystone breaks the whole things comes crumbling down.

The rest of the films writing is so-so. Some of the exchanges are decent, I even laughed a couple times at the forced humor, but on a whole the film comes across as desperate. The writers just look like they're trying too hard, throwing joke after joke at us hoping that something will stick, not cool. Even Eris's motivational twist at the end of the film feels illogical and counterintuitive. Why would you concoct such an over-elaborate plot to throw Syracuse (Arthur-Duckie's kingdom) into chaos if you can send the whole world into chaos using the "Book of Peace"? That's like a poor person winning the mega-millions lottery, but only upgrading their trailer to a double wide. Anyway, when you get right down to it there's very little to salvage from this story, structurally speaking the pacing is solid, and the plot - for all its faults - is coherent, everything else is an absolute mess.

Visually I would describe Sinbad with three seemingly random words: beautiful, typical and awful. Let's start with the beautiful. The traditional animation in Sinbad is fantastic. From the fluid movement, to the excellent choreography, to the stunning backgrounds (especially Syracuse), Sinbad features expertly crafted 2D animation. Easily the best part of the movie, the only complaint I had regarding the traditional animation was that it looked like a typical Dreamworks film. What I mean by that is Dreamworks used the same basic look for all of its traditionally animated features, especially in regards to the characters. Having just re-watched "The Road to El Dorado" I was able to easily spot similarities in not only the character designs (which were obvious), but in the mannerisms and expressions of the characters as well. Though still beautiful, these visually repetitive renditions made Sinbad look a little inbred, something that rarely occurred at Disney. Still, this is a pretty picky complaint, overall Sinbad's hand drawn animation looked excellent and was the one bright spot in an otherwise ugly film.

So if the 2D animation is beautiful, yet typical, what would the visually awful portion of Sinbad be? Not surprisingly it's the CGI. Some people like to refer to Dreamworks traditional films as "tradigital". This is because the studio used a significant amount of digital imagery in its animated movies, even in scenes where it wasn't necessary. Though this is not a practice I normally approve of, I have to admit that Dreamworks did a good job of merging CGI and hand drawn animation in the past ... until Sinbad that is. Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas features some of the ugliest integration of CGI and traditional animation I've ever seen in feature films, the worst offender being a giant squid at the start of the movie. Early in the film Arthur-Duckie is transporting the "Book of Peace" to Syracuse via ship when he is boarded by Sinbad who's - of course - trying to steal the book away from his former friend. This awkward reunion gets cut short by Eris when she sends a giant squid to get the book for herself, thus forcing Arthur-Duckie and Sinbad to work together to fight the beast. From the moment that giant squid smashes his tentacle through the hull of that ship, you can tell this scene is going to be an absolute wreck.

Completely different in style, there was no way for this CGI monstrosity to blend into its traditionally animated surroundings, worse it doesn't even look like the computer animator tried. Part of me wonders if Katzenberg just told the directors to get it done and not worry about how it all turned out. Yes, that's some pretty harsh conjecture, but that's how bad this thing looks. The various monsters encountered later in the film do shape up a little better - though still not good - but it really doesn't matter because the movie gives such a bad impression at the start, you can't get over it. Several things about this irk me: 1) This movie was released in 2003, the art of integrating CGI and cell animation was not a new thing at this time 2) Dreamworks could have done a better job, heck they already did a better job in previous films like the aforementioned "Road to El Dorado" 3) Katzenberg looks like he just gave up on traditional animation by half-assing this aspect of the film, almost as if he wanted to sabotage Sinbad so that he could put an end to traditional animation. Am I being a little bitter here? Probably, but watching studios crap all over the admirable efforts of traditional animators with egregious CGI and formulaic storytelling pushes my buttons every time.

The voice acting from Sinbad neither offended, nor impressed me. Like most animated films of the time, Sinbad features a star studded cast including Brad Pitt (Sinbad), Catherine Zeta Jones (Marina) and Michelle Phifer (Eris). While each of these actors does a respectable job with their role, I didn't feel like anything unique or special was being brought to the table either. The hardest performances to judge are Pitt and Zeta Jones. Given how bad the movies romance is I'm tempted to include both of these actors in my - admittedly - harsh appraisal of the film. Yet when I really think about it I don't feel like they were the problem. Sure, Pitt and Zeta Jones could have had better chemistry, but truth be told their delivery of the films banter wasn't all that bad, it's the material that stunk. I think that if the writing had been better the characters would have worked fine with the voices as is, conversely I don't think that any actor alive could have kept this script from falling flat. Overall the voice acting and music from Sinbad do what they're supposed to, neither really stands out but they don't contribute to the films problems either.

Obviously I'm not recommending Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas. Though the traditional animation is good, even its light cannot escape the black hole of suck that is this film. Yes, I'm sure that children (and very simple minded adults) would find Sinbad an enjoyable ride, but this kind of pandering tripe represents everything that was wrong with traditionally animated feature films during the early 2000s. If you're looking for good, family friendly, animation that isn't rendered on a computer, then I recommend: The Iron Giant, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King, Mulan, Aladdin, Tarzan, anything directed by Hayao Miyazaki, and of course the classic Disney films. Heck I'll even recommend Dreamworks "Price of Egypt" and "The Road to El Dorado", just don't bother with Sinbad, it's better left forgotten.

My 25 favorite animated feature films

2010-10-16T14:27:00.006-04:00

Making lists has become a very popular thing to do these days, so I guess it's only natural that I'm finally putting together my own list of favorite animated feature films.

Before we begin I want to just make a couple of declarations, clarifications and caveats. First off, this list will only feature traditionally animated films (or at least movies that are mostly traditional), so no Pixar. I do this because (I feel) the look of traditional animation and CGI animation is so different that the experiences need to be judged with separate criteria, the same goes for stop motion animation. Additionally, this list is strictly MY favorites. This is not a list of "best" animated films, or most influential or successful, it's just a list of movies I love.

So with no further ado, here are my 25 favorite animated feature films.

25. The Simpsons Movie
For close to a decade the Simpsons was - by far - the best primetime animated sitcom in history. As the years passed, however, the show became so stale and repetitive that people began questioning whether americas favorite dysfunctional family was relevant - or even funny - anymore. This atmosphere of skepticism was only enhanced by the announcement that a Simpsons movie was finally going to hit theaters in 2007. Could Homer and company recapture the magic that made them a world wide phenomenon, or would they simply hack out a pathetic cash grab and put the final nail in the proverbial coffin of this once great franchise? Well, much to my relief The Simpsons Movie turned out to be a fantastic return to form, one that reminded me exactly why I loved these characters to begin with. I won't get into any plot details, but the thing that made this story work so well was the writers understanding of the Simpson family. Whether it's Homer's selfishness, or Bart's desperate pleas for attention through delinquency, or Lisa's environmental causes (not to mention her girlish desire for romance), or Marge's constant forgiveness, this movie captures all the visceral personality quirks of the Simpsons perfectly and enjoyably (heck, even Maggie gets her chance to shine).

24. Secret of Kells
This movie would have ranked higher on my list had the ending been as exciting and magical as the rest of the film. Instead it felt very rushed and un-empowered (to me anyways). Regardless, the Secret of Kells is a wonderful tale set in the ninth century, rich with Irish folklore. It's about a young boy named Brendan whose life ambition is to become a master illuminator, but to do so he must disobey his uncle - Abbot Cellach - who expects Brendan to follow in his footsteps and complete a giant wall to protect the Abbey of Kells from Vikings. This conflict is further enhanced when Brother Aidan arrives in Kells and takes Brendan under his wing as an apprentice.

23. Wonder Woman
Of all the action-adventure DTVs that have come out over the last 15 or so years, Wonder Woman is by far the best. Not only does this film have excellent animation (especially for a DTV), amazing action and a great story; it handles the tough subject of female empowerment in the most honest way I've ever seen. Directed by the fantastic Lauren Montgomery, Wonder Woman is a layered and intelligent DTV that remains the gold standard of the genre.

22. Millennium Actress
Directed by the late Satoshi Kon, Millennium Actress is a gorgeously animated movie that tells the life story of fictional actress Chiyoko Fujiwara by interweaving Chiyoko's journey to reunite with a long lost love into the various movie roles she played throughout her career. A beautifully poignant tale, Millennium Actress is a perfect example of how versatile a storytelling medium animation can be in the right hands.

21. Triplets of Belleville
French director Sylvain Chomet's 2003 movie Triplets of Belleville is a wonderfully offbeat film. Animated in a very retro - pen and ink - fashion this movie has tons of style and very little dialog. The story revolves around a tiny French woman named Madame Souza who must raise her grandson after his parents die. Unable to initially shake the boy from his depression, Madame Souza finally finds the key to getting Champion (that's her grandson's name) back on his feet, cycling. Years later, Champion is now a professional bicyclist competing in the Tour de France. Champion is unable to finish the race, however, and finds himself kidnapped by New York gangsters and taken to America. Determined to get her grandson back, Madame Souza travels to America herself and befriends the Triplets of Belleville, a group of three sisters who were once popular 1930s music hall singers. Together this mismatched band of rescuers set out to save Champion. Despite being a wonderful film, I cannot help but be disappointed with the way Triplets of Belleville horribly stereotyped Americans as fat, glutenous slobs. Yes, there is a sad truth to this stereotype (the US consumes egregious amounts of natural resources, our eating habits are terrible and obesity is one of our most serious problems) it ultimately feels mean spirited and resentful. Though it's meant as a caricature, I'm pretty sure Sylvain would be equally offended by a film depicting French people as unwashed, cowardly, arrogant, wine drinking, cheese eating frogs. That little rant aside, I love this film's artistic vision and charming characters.

20. Ponyo
Hayao Miyazaki's 2009 film Ponyo was almost perfect. Very loosely based on Hans Christian Andersen's "The Little Mermaid" story, Ponyo features a young - quasi-human - goldfish that falls in love with a boy named Sōsuke. Despite the disapproval of her father (who is some kind of scientist/magician), Ponyo eventually turns herself human and escapes to the surface world. Fantastically conceived and beautifully animated, the only flaw I found with Ponyo was that the final stage of Ponyo and Sōsuke's "trial" missed the mark. I don't want to give anything away, but I really wanted to see Sōsuke's loyalty tested by Ponyo's father, instead it all just played out like a big misunderstanding. Overall, this is a great movie though, and one that can be enjoyed by people of all ages.

19. The Secret of Nimh
This movie comes from a time (1982) when feature film animation was a little "darker" than it is now. Even Disney films like the Fox and the Hound and The Rescuers were far more moody than what audiences have come to expect. That said, this darker tone is perfectly suited for the subject matter of this Don Bluth masterpiece. Though set in our world, the story of the Secret of Nimh features anthropomorphic mice who live on a farm. One such mouse, Mrs. Brisby, is trying to move herself and her children from their current home - which is in the middle of a field - before plowing begins that spring. Unfortunately her youngest child has fallen ill and cannot leave the home, so Mrs. Brisby must seek the assistance of super intelligent rats led by the mysterious and mystical Nicodemus. Featuring amazing animation - and world building - the Secret of Nimh is Don Bluth's best directorial work.

18. Bambi
Do I really need to explain why this film is on my list? I thought not. Sufficed to say, Bambi is one of the most visually groundbreaking animated films ever created. Funny, tragic, inspiring an honest, this is one of Walt's greatest accomplishments.

17. Lady and the Tramp
Much like Bambi, I see no need for a plot synopsis with Lady and the Tramp. Gorgeous animation, idyllic backgrounds and a timeless story (not to mention a little risque), Lady and the Tramp literally could not be any better than what it is.

16. Mulan
While it'll never be as popular - or influential - as other Disney films, Mulan is still an excellent movie. The stories heroine is Mulan, a Chinese girl who pretends to be a man so that she can serve the military in her fathers place (her father has become too frail to serve himself). Featuring excellent music, attractively simple character design and lots of laughs (courtesy of Eddie Murphy), Mulan not only delivers in the entertainment department, it effectively drives home the great message that women are just as capable as men.

15. Paprika
Another amazing Satoshi Kon film. In this 2006 psychological thriller, a new device called the "DC mini" has been invented allowing people to insert themselves into dreams. Developed as a new form of psychotherapy, one of the Doctors working on the project has begun using the device to help people under the persona "Paprika". Before the DC Mini is approved by the government, however, three prototypes are stolen and mysterious deaths begin to occur. Upon investigation, Paprika is drawn further and further into a twisted dream world where reality and dreams begin to become one. Using all the tricks he developed in previous projects, I feel that Paprika is Satoshi Kon's best work. If you liked Inception you'll probably dig Paprika.

14. Tarzan
This movie is a visual feast. Basically you get some of the best traditional animation ever, seamless CGI integration (seriously, checkout those branch surfing scenes) and wonderful music. All wrapped together by a tight story that can actually pull at the heart strings when it wants. Like Mulan, this film may never be a classic, but it certainly is amazing.

13. Aladdin
Despite being a great film, there's actually some negativity one must acknowledge when talking about Aladdin. For one, people have accused the film of "borrowing" heavily in both look and feel from The Thief and the Cobbler, a movie that was plagued by years of on again, off again production. Secondly, Aladdin contains a great deal of pop-culture humor, something that many critics (and fans) dislike because it goes for "cheap" laughs and dates the film (seriously Robin Williams, my kids don't even know who Arsenio Hall is). Finally, very few people ever mention this, but the whole genie portion of Aladdin plays out very closely to another Disney film released only two years prior, Duck Tales Treasure of the Lost Lamp (give it a watch sometime and you'll see what I mean). All that said, I still believe that Aladdin is one impressive animated feature. Great story, great songs, great animation and great characters make this movie one of most beloved - and well rounded - Disney films ever made.

12. Ghost in the Shell
Though made in 1995, Ghost in the Shell is still an amazingly relevant piece of science fiction noir. Set in the year 2029, our primary protagonist is the cyborg officer Major Kusanagi, a member of the special police task force Section 9. While investigating the world renowned hacker "Puppet Master" Kusanagi begins to ponder her own existence as an artificial being,and soon discovers that the Puppet Master may hold the answer to her philosophical dilemma. While an excellent story with some unexpected twists, the thing that really sets Ghost in the Shell apart is its amazing visuals. Groundbreaking animation, insanely detailed backgrounds and some of the best action choreography ever put on film make Ghost in the Shell a definitive anime movie.

11. Peter Pan
It's hard for me to say exactly why I like this film so much. It isn't any one or two specific things I suppose ... it's everything. I love the look, the story, the voice acting, the pacing, the music and all the stuff in-between. Additionally, this is the last Disney film to feature all of Disney's Nine Old Men as directing animators, so in some ways it's the end of an era as well. Based on the J. M. Barrie story "Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up", Peter Pan is just great execution of a great concept, one that I can watch over and over again.

10. Sleeping Beauty
This film is just an amazing piece of art. Every time I watch Sleeping Beauty I'm blown away by the film's color styling and elaborate backgrounds. Artist Eyvind Earle not only designed all the fantastic settings of this movie, he painted the majority of them himself! Besides its visual prowess, Sleeping Beauty also has one of the best villains ever in Maleficent, and a prince that actually does something besides marry the princess (unlike those lazy princes from Snow White and Cinderella). Granted, it's not the most amazing story you'll ever see, but whatever shortcomings Sleeping Beauty may have are easily overcome by its unmatched artistry.

9. Castle in the Sky
Originally titled Laputa: Castle in the Sky, this movie may not be as highly praised as other Miyazaki films, but it's still an amazing piece of storytelling and one of my favorite animated features. The story of Laputa involves two youngsters named Sheeta and Pazu. After a somewhat unorthodox first meeting, these two heroes band together to uncover the location of Laputa, a castle that literally floats in the sky. To do this they must endure military agents, sky pirates and a giant robot capable of unbelievable amounts of destruction. As always the visuals in this Miyazaki film are brilliant (especially for a film from 1986) and the characters both charming and endearing. Simply put, this is adventure storytelling at its best.

8. Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind
Another entry courtesy of Hayao Miyazaki (and my list isn't even done yet). Nausicaa may not be the first film Miyazaki directed, but it certainly is his breakout film. Released in 1984 and written by Miyazaki himself, Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is set in a post apocalyptic future where toxic jungles now consume much of the planet's surface making it difficult for humans to survive. Our heroine is Nausicaa, a young princess who must find a way for people to coexist with the environment before the rash actions of others lead to the total annihilation of mankind. Though obviously environmental in origins, the story of Nausicaa is the kind that gets its message across without sounding like some PSA (I'm looking at you Fern Gully). Thought provoking and in many ways ahead of its time, Nausicca and the Valley of the Wind is a beautiful film with substance.

7. The Lion King
It's not the most original story, but what the Lion King lacks in originality it more than makes up for with execution. What blows me away the most about this film is the emotional impact you get from the characters performances. Whether it's the look in Mufasa's eyes when Scar betrays him, or the heart wrenching attempts by Simba to wake up his father, the Lion King gives you goosebumps time and time again. It doesn't hurt that the animation and music are some of the best ever by Disney either.

6. Batman Mask of the Phantasm
Outside of the medium of print, Batman Mask of the Phantasm is the quintessential Batman story. A fantastically clever plot (loosely based on Batman Year Two I think) with a brilliant twist, Mask of the Phantasm tells the story of a young Bruce Wayne unsure of his decision to fight crime after he falls in love, and a modern day Batman struggling to catch a killer with ties to that past. Compared to many of the other films on this list, the animation found in Batman is only average (I believe it was supposed to be a DTV but got a theatrical release once higher-ups saw how good it was). That said the climax of this film does sport some awesome action and impressive visuals. Honestly, I love this movie so much it should probably be illegal.

5. Akira
Where Hayao Miyazaki's films transcend the genre of anime, Katsuhiro Otomo's "Akira" defines it. Released in 1988 and based on Otomo's hit manga of the same name, Akira is - arguably - the most important piece of anime ever produced. Set in the futuristic city of Neo-Tokyo in the year 2019, Akira revolves around two friends named Kaneda and Testuo. Like other delinquent youths, these two orphans fight on motorbikes with other gangs in the streets of Neo-Tokyo. During one of these battles Testuo collides with an unusual looking child who has blue skin and psychic abilities. The result of this encounter is that Testuo gains near godlike powers. Powers that bring out the worst in Testuo and drive him insane. Torn between the desire to save his friend and the responsibility he feels to stop him, Kaneda finds himself fighting a battle that may decide the fate of all Neo-Tokyo. For me to say the animation in this movie looks "amazing" or "beautiful" is an understatement. Akria is - quite simply - one of the most technically impressive films in the history of traditional animation. Backgrounds are unbelievable, the biker fight scene from the start of the movie is mind blowing, Testuo's first flight, the battle of Kaneda and Testuo, the chase in the sewers ... words just can't describe the sheer level of awesome achieved in these scenes. It's been over two decades since Akira set the bar for anime, to date no one has been able to raise it.

4. Spirited Away
Winner of the 2001 best animated picture Oscar, Spirited Away is - in my opinion - Hayao Miyazaki's most charming film. When ten-year-old Chihiro and her parents set out to move to a new town they encounter an abandoned theme park in the middle of nowhere. While Chihiro explores the rundown park her parents begin gorging themselves on food from one of the local vendor stands. As night descends, Chihiro returns to find both her mother and father transformed into pigs and spirits wandering the streets. Now trapped in this bizarre world, Chihiro must go to work at the local bathhouse while trying to figure out a way to save her parents. As always, Miyazaki creates a wonderful world full of rich characters and beautiful visuals. This is easily the most recognizable Studio Ghibli film here in the US, and its success opened the door for all of Miyazaki's other films to be released here.

3. Beauty and the Beast
The first ever animated film to be nominated for the Best Picture Oscar, Beauty and the Beast is Disney magic at its best. Though it features an astounding assortment of songs, phenomenal animation and great romance (this from a guy who isn't a romantic), the thing I love most about this movie is its characterization. Seeing the Beast change from a spoiled, angry child into man capable of sacrifice and compassion (I love that last scene with Gaston) is one of the best character evolutions in the history of film (not just animation). Hands down my favorite animated Disney feature.

2. Princess Mononoke
If I had to describe this film in a single word it would be "epic". Epic animation, epic story, epic music ... epic everything. Directed by master filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki, Princess Mononoke is one of the most intelligent and thought provoking stories you'll find in animation (or film in general). The plot centers around Ashitaka, the last prince of the Emishi. While protecting his village from a giant boar spirit turned demon, Ashitaka's arm becomes infected with a cursed mark that will spread throughout his body and eventually kill him. Upon discovering that the boar's madness was caused by an iron bullet, the young prince sets out on a journey to the west to discover the weapon's origin. Like Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind before it, Princess Mononoke's plot is rooted heavily in environmentalism. Unlike Captain Planet and Fern Gully, however, Princess Mononoke doesn't present a black-and-white view of the subject. Instead of using the cliche "Man cut down trees, bad. Noble savage and nature, good" Miyazaki carefully constructs a story where there are no villains, just people with different agendas. Sadly, these agendas can be very destructive, but the people behind them are often quite noble and well intentioned. This is the brilliance of Princess Mononoke, the film doesn't try and preach at its audience or pass judgment on its subject, directors like James Cameron could learn a lot from this film (his movie Avatar is ungodly preachy). Epic in scope and perfect in execution, the Princess Mononoke is my favorite Hayao Miyazaki film.

1. The Iron Giant
In 1999 this movie was a flop. Released behind a poor marketing campaign, The Iron Giant came and went from theaters so fast that it might as well have never existed. I was working as the projectionist at a local second run theatre at the time and stayed late to watch the movie after building it on Thursday night. I was mildly interested in the story since it appeared to have science fiction origins, but my expectations were pretty low. About half way in I realized I was watching a masterpiece. Directed by two time Oscar winner Brad Bird (Incredibles, Ratatouille), The Iron Giant is a film that shows no fear when breaking from convention. Where other animation directors simply aped the Disney formula in the late 90s, Bird chose to tell a story that had no musical numbers, no princesses, no cute sidekicks and no romance. Instead of adapting some overly familiar fairy tale Bird based his film on a 1968 novel titled “The Iron Man” by Ted Hughes. Set in the year 1957 during the height of Mccarthyism and the Red Scare, The Iron Giant tells the story of Hogarth, a young boy who befriends a giant robot from outer space while trying to hide it from government agent Mansley. An amazingly touching film that captures a time in American history where fear dictated far too many of our actions (something we should remember these days), the Iron Giant is – simply put - Powerful. From a visual perspective, Brad Bird took no shortcuts while making this film either. Featuring a beautiful color pallet and some of the best CGI and traditional animation integration ever, this movie looks fantastic. Though it was not a finical success, The Iron Giant did go on to receive near universal critical praise and is now considered a modern classic. Without a doubt my favorite animated film.

Batman/Superman Apocalypse - I've seen worse ... barely

2010-10-04T19:13:00.005-04:00

When I first heard that DC was going to do another DTV of a Jeph Loeb Batman/Superman story, I was less than thrilled. Actually, that's a little generous, I was straight up pissed. With so many great comic stories yet to be adapted into DTV format, I felt frustrated with the current crop of modern story selections. Couple that with my familiarity of the hideously bad source material for Batman/Superman Apocalypse, and I just couldn't see how the movie would be any good. Now having watched the film, I've got to admit ... it's not horrible. It's still bad mind you, but nowhere near as bad as it's predecessor Batman/Superman Public Enemies, and certainly better than I expected.

The story of Batman/Superman Apocalypse revolves around Kara, Superman's long lost cousin and future Supergirl. Picking up after the destruction of the kryptonite asteroid in "Public Enemies", Kara crash lands in Gotham city and quickly finds herself possessed by powers she cannot control. Once subdued Superman takes the young girl under his wing and attempts to integrate her into everyday life. Batman on the other hand, sees Kara as a potential threat and makes no attempt to disguise his concerns. Meanwhile, Darkseid (ruler of the planet Apokolips) learns of Kara's arrival on earth and decides to kidnap her and brainwash the young Kryptonian into leading his honor guard (the Furies). Wonder Woman also gets involved thanks to the prophetic dreams of Harbinger, and brings Kara to Themyscira to keep her safe and train her to control her powers. Anyway, Kara eventually gets captured by Darkseid and taken to Apokolips where Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman and Big Barda must finally try and rescue her. If this plot sounds paper thin, that's because it is.

In terms of writing, the story of Batman/Superman Apocalypse has numerous problems. Let's start with the dropped plot point concerning Kara's identity. During the first act of the film Batman is clearly unconvinced that Kara is who she claims to be. This skepticism is reinforced - for both the Dark Knight and the audience - when Krypto (that's right, the Superdog) takes a very hostile attitude towards Kara in the Fortress of Solitude. Then ... nothing. The whole subplot about trusting Kara just disappears into an orgy of fights between Amazons, Doomsday clones, Furies and Darkseid. Don't get me wrong the action is great, but you can't just abandon plot points like this and think your story will work.

Another issue I had concerned the portrayal of Kara as a typical teenager during the shopping spree montage. Once Superman takes Kara to Metropolis for the first time (keep in mind this is her first exposure to human society outside of her crash landing) she immediately starts buying up trendy cloths like some character from a Bratz commercial. This makes absolutely no sense. Kara is an alien from Krypton, a society nothing like earth. Wouldn't she be more confused and lost than anything? Hell, there are people from our own planet freaked out by western civilization, I have a hard time believing Kara would gorge herself on it like some fanboy with a bag of Doritos. Ultimately, this depiction of Kara feels like some middle aged mans cliched view of teenage girls and the story is cheapened because of it.

Though this shallow depiction of Kara early in the film does subside later in the story, she never really finds any depth. An attempt is made to show her as sad upon losing a friend, but the film never develops the relationship enough for us to emphasize with her. Her reluctance to embrace her powers and use them for good gets downplayed throughout most of the movie, so when she decides to become Supergirl it really doesn't have any weight. Lastly, the bitterness and anger Kara feels toward the people who keep telling her what's best for her gets completely negated by the Darkseid brainwashing. Basically, every shot this film takes at making Kara three dimensional misfires horribly and the character suffers as a result.

Then there's the overall story macguffin. Why does Darkseid want Kara to lead his honor guard so bad? I know he hates Superman - and it would be fun to take away the only living blood relative he has - but somehow that just doesn't feel meaty enough. The whole thing just seems ... random. Like someone threw together a story with as many "hot chicks" and "heavyweight fights" as possible so the person illustrating the story could cut loose. Oh wait, that's exactly what happened. You see, Michael Turner was a very popular artist back in the early 2000s (Sadly he lost his battle with cancer in 2008. He was only 37 years old.), but he had never worked for any of the mainstream comic companies like Marvel and DC. When DC finally snagged Turner to do a short stint on Batman/Superman in 2004, they decided to make the most of the opportunity and gave the penciller a story he could really sink his teeth into. Unfortunately this turned out to be the comic book equivalent of Transformer Revenge of the Fallen, all flash and no substance. In the end we were left with some pretty pictures and little else.

So, with its numerous flaws - including a story that's about as substantial as a Kleenex tissue - why is it I didn't absolutely hate this film? Well there are a several reasons actually. For one, the humor works rather well. I chuckled numerous times throughout the story, and even laughed once or twice (and they weren't laughs of disgust!). Secondly, the action is amazing. Yes, I know it sounds hypocritical of me to both praise and damn this movie for having so much action; but while I would have liked to see a story with more substance, I can't help but admire the amazing fight choreography Warner Premiere is doing these days. Lastly, the biggest reason I didn't hate this movie was because the writer who adapted the story had the common sense to remove the egregious des deux machina Jeph Loeb wrote into the source material. Originally, the final showdown with Darkseid began with Kara being "killed" by Darkseid's Omega Beams. This led to a bunch of angry yelling about how much "spunk" the girl had, as well as some woefully deep reminiscing by Superman on the life of Kara. Then it turns out she's alive! How you ask? Well as luck would have it, Superman, Batman and the rest of Kara's new friends knew exactly what Darkseid was going to do and faked her death by teleporting her away at the last second! Brilliant ... no wait, I meant to say lame. This is exactly the kind of writing that has turned Jeph Loeb from one of the best writers in comics into one of the worst. Thankfully, the screen writer for this film saw how incredibly stupid and unnecessary this plot device was and removed it entirely from the story (now if they could've only done the same thing with that retarded Batman/Superman robot from Public Enemies, I might have actually liked the film a little). Anyway, the story for Batman/Superman Apocalypse is definitely not good. Knowing how bad it could have been however, I actually found myself giving the screenwriter a little leeway. Not exactly resounding praise I know, but considering the source material I decided to cut the movie a break.

As one would expect, the animation in Batman/Superman Apocalypse is impressive (or at least the traditional stuff was, the CGI was pretty weak). Based on the excellent art of Michael Turner, I thought the overall look of this film was solid, albeit not great (Turner's art is far too "sketchy" to adapt accurately in animation). I was definitely impressed with the way the animators captured the eyes in particular. Turner had a very distinct way of drawing women's eyes and this movie captures it perfectly. One criticism I did have however, was with the exploitative depiction of women in the film (Big Barda covered only by a towel, naked Supergirl running around Gotham city). Though this stems from Turner's own work (he was both celebrated as, and denounced as a "Hot Chick" artist) I can't help but feel that the "cheesecake" factor was a little overblown in this movie. Still, this is nothing new to comic books - or entertainment in general for that matter - so I'll cut the sanctimonious crap and move on.

I've already mentioned the amazing fight choreography found in this film, but the point definitely bears repeating. Every time I think that Warner Brothers animation (Warner Premiere) has reached the absolute pinnacle of action perfection, they find ways to improve upon it. Seriously, almost all of the battles in this film have mind blowing staging and choreography, especially the battle between Wonder Woman, Big Barda and the Furies, words cannot describe the level of awesome achieved in that scene. In the end, Batman/Superman Apocalypse lived up to - and in some cases exceeded - my visual expectations, a feat I try to not take for granted.

I don't have anything to say about the film's music, but the voice acting is worth noting because it - once again - reunites actors Kevin Conroy (Batman) and Tim Daly (Superman). For me, these two performers (especially Conroy) define Batman and Superman, and it's always a pleasure to hear them reprise these roles. Summer Glau (Kara/Supergirl), Susan Eisenberg (Wonder Woman) and Andre Bragher (Darkseid) all turn in solid performances as well.

I wish I could say this movie was good - or even decent for that matter - but the truth is my less than hateful views on this film stem from lowered expectations. It's not that the movie's story did anything right (because it didn't), it just wasn't as bad as the source material, and I (for some strange reason) feel grateful for that. In the end I would probably rank this movie in the lower third of DC DTV films. Better than Public Enemies and almost as good as Doomsday, but no where near as good as New Frontier, JLA Earth 2 etc. If you're looking for an animated action/adventure movie with some meat on its bones, Batman/Superman Apocalypse is not it. If however, you are looking for a beat-em-up action/adventure DTV with tons of action and a story that doesn't require any thought, it's a perfect match. Though I'm not going to recommend this film as a buy, the movie is worth renting as no brainer entertainment (if that's what you're looking for).

Turok, Son of Stone(face)

2010-09-18T17:01:00.002-04:00

Real quick. When I say "native americans" what's the first thing that comes to mind? If your answer was "dinosaurs" then you're either a hardcore creationist, or you just finished watching Turok, Son of Stone. Based on the Gold Key comic book character from the 1960s, Turok answers the age old question "Who would win in a fight between Geronimo and a T-rex?" (something we've all spent sleepless nights pondering). All kidding aside though, this DTV actually surprised me, first by not sucking, secondly because it was exceptionally violent.

Released in 2008, I was initially skeptical of turning Turok into an animated film. Not only is the franchise unproven, but the concept of stranded humans having to survive in a land of prehistoric creatures has become ... well its gotten tired and corny (or as the native americans call it, maizey). I was also concerned that the story would try and incorporate some of the video game and Valiant comic book ideas like exploding arrows and hi-tech bows, concepts that just don't appeal to me. So I steered clear of the film for about two years never willing to go out of my way to see it. Eventually the chance to buy Turok at a ridiculously low price came about and I finally decided to give it a shot. Fortunately for me the story of Turok stayed closer to its 1960s roots - and far away from the aforementioned video game stuff - while at the same time delving deeper than just the obvious theme of "man versus beast". It's actually more "man versus man", with a little "man versus himself" thrown in for good measure.

The story of Turok is a little difficult to explain so I'm going to try and summarize the basic conflicts of the film instead. At the start of the movie we are introduced to a teenage Turok who - along with his brother - is frolicking peacefully by a stream and trying to catch the eye of a young woman named Catori. This innocent scene is interrupted by three warriors from another tribe who - upon orders from their chief - attack the youngsters. Despite his youth, Turok's inborn "killer instinct" is awoken during the life or death struggle and he kills not only the opposing warriors, but their chief as well. Unfortunately the blood-lust from this battle also leads Turok to grievously wound his own brother, a crime for which he is banished. Sixteen years later Chichak - the son of the chief killed by Turok - has gathered together a large war party to attack Turok's former tribe and thus enact vengeance for his fathers death. Leading Turok's people is his brother - who went on to marry Catori and father a son Andar - but Chichak's superior numbers and equipment prove too much for them and they are destroyed. After that it becomes a chase by Turok and Andar to catch Chichak who has kidnapped Catori. Before long this pursuit leads to a standoff in a cave where all four participants stumble into a "lost world" full of ancient creatures who want nothing more than to eat them. And that's basically it, Turok and Chichak keep trying to kill each other, both find allies and lots of people die.

What I liked about the writing of Turok, Son of Stone was that the conflict from the first act of the film carries over throughout the rest of the story. I could have easily imaged the setup just leading to the "lost land" and an entirely new story of survival taking over. The fact that the animosity between Turok and Chichak is so intense that it continues to thrive - even when faced with unimaginable danger - was much more convincing than your average "let's set aside our differences for now" schtick seen so often in movies like this. I also enjoyed Turok's inner struggle with darkness. Being a natural born killer, Turok no longer feels worthy, or even able to live amongst other humans. Making matters worse is the fact that death and destruction seem to follow Turok wherever he goes.

Though both of these story elements do work nicely, there are some problems with them as well. For one thing the conflict between Chichak and Turok follows the same pattern in all three acts of the film. Again and again Chichak attacks those close to Turok in a manner that - by the end of the film - feels formulaic and repetitive. This was especially disappointing in the third act because the climax would have been much more effective had the writer chosen to add a little twist, something like Chichak's final assault stumbling into a trap set by his prey, or perhaps Turok stops Chichak before he can hurt anyone else for once. Instead the whole thing just plays out in a predictable bloodbath. As for Turok's "darkness" it may work well as an internal obstacle to overcome but it also makes him too outwardly stoic, so much so that the title "Son of Stone" should probably be changed to "Face of Stone". What I'm trying to say is that Turok needs a little warming up, just a couple of moments where we can see he's more than a killing machine - a smile here and there or a suppressed laugh - unfortunately he spends the whole film perpetually scowling at any and everything.

Overall I think the story for Turok, Son of Stone works relatively well. There are certainly flaws - and none of the themes are original or clever - but given the source material the movie exceeded my expectations. I also commend the decision to not shy away from blood, even if the film goes a little overboard with it. It's always frustrating to watch western produced animation try and tone down weapons and subject matter that are - by their own nature - violent so that they can get a PG (or even G) rating. Action-adventure cartoons from the 1980s were especially bad about this with shows featuring elite soldiers - who can't shoot anyone - and sword wielding cat-people - who can't cut anyone - being the norm. Sure, the brutality could've been less severe in Turok, but if you're going to get a mature rating you might as well go all-in.

The visuals of Turok are your standard DTV fare. Better than the average TV action-adventure cartoon, but not feature film quality. Still, the animation is smooth, character designs good and the backgrounds nicely detailed, so I wasn't disappointed with what I saw. While this production quality is certainly solid it unfortunately lacks ambition. Yes, the character designs look good, but they're also interchangeable with a dozen other action-adventure cartoons. This homogenized look is actually becoming a bit of a problem these days with far too many productions falling back on the streamlined style made popular by DC's superhero shows. Sure, it looks nice and it's safe, but if you want to really create something special you need to make your own mark.

As for the animation itself, my only complaint was with the use of slow motion. A large number of battle sequences - especially early on - used slow-mo to emphasize the action, unfortunately the effect doesn't really work all that well and whatever drama the film was trying to convey falls flat. True, slow motion is a difficult thing to do in animation, but that's why you need to apply it both carefully and sparingly, instead the film abuses it the same way live action films abuse bullet time effects. Outside of those two complaints I thought that Turok looked really good, though not as high end as some of the DC and Marvel titles, the film definitely meets the standards expected from modern day DTV releases. Not exactly resounding praise I know, but I'm taking a lot for granted when it comes to made for video animation these days, the fact that Turok's production quality can hold its own in such a competitive market is a good thing.

The voice acting and music from Turok, Son of Stone is respectable all around. Nothing really jumped out at me, positive or negative, so I'm not going to go into any real detail. Sufficed to say that, once again, Turok provides solid performances worthy of the both the medium and the genre they inhabit.

I know that it only sounds like I'm giving Turok passing marks here, but honestly that's more than I expected. I really thought the film's plot would be typically tame with subpar or even TV quality animation and I definitely didn't think it would have any teeth. Instead Turok gave me an engaging story, solid visuals and fully embraced its subject matter in a way that few do in western animation. Because the film held itself to a higher standard, I was forced to do the same (in a good way). Of course, if I'd I known that Curt Geda, Dan Riba and Tad Stone where involved with the film I would have watched it a long time ago. A very respectable movie all around, I would at least recommend that you rent Turok, Son of Stone (keeping in mind that it is a minimum PG-13 and very violent, so no children).

Cartoon parody lovers rejoice, you face the Tick!

2010-08-22T20:40:00.004-04:00

Satirical action-adventure cartoons have become relatively commonplace these days. Shows like Archer, the Venture Brothers, Sealab 2020, Titan Maximum and others continue to make a name for themselves by poking fun at the illogical, formulaic and ridiculous nature of the genre. Though these shows stand well enough on their own merits, these adult themed cartoons do owe a lot to the lampooning trailblazers who came before them, most notably The Tick.

The Tick was created by Ben Edlund and started life as an independently published comic book in 1988. The book featured an intellectually challenged protagonist called the Tick who - despite being well intentioned - was catastrophically clueless. This amusing parody of various superhero comics was further enhanced by the Tick's knack for causing massive amounts of property damage and his penchant for rambling, nonsensical speeches regarding life and the nature of good and evil. Due to the multimedia success of another independent comic - Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - people began approaching Edlund with the idea of bringing his big blue hero to animation in the late 80's and early 90's. Premiering in 1994 The Tick would go on to become a modest success running three seasons and 36 episodes before its end in 1996. Despite never becoming a merchandising juggernaut like TMNT, the Tick did maintain something the "heroes in a half-shell" couldn't, creative integrity. Amusingly bizarre, insanely clever and chock full of great characters, the Tick is one of the greatest cartoon superhero parodies ever made.

The fact that the Tick was able to stay true to his satirical roots wasn't an accident by any means. Creator Ben Edlund was not only very involved in the show, he was waist deep in it from beginning to end. Serving as both the primary writer and co-producer of the series, Edlund's tireless efforts to make the Tick work in animation are a big reason the show has aged as well as it has. As for the writing itself, it employees various forms of humor when poking fun of the superhero genre. From outlandish ideas like paleontologist Dinosaur Neil accidentally turning himself into a godzilla-like creature, to everyday concerns like Author (the Ticks sidekick) getting angry with the Tick for charging an overabundance of crime fighting equipment to his credit card, the show likes to explore both the practical and zany aspects of superhero life. Though Freakazoid would go on to be far zanier and Venture Bros. has mastered the art of applying everyday life to people who are anything but ordinary, I'm hard pressed to think of any cartoon that balances the two as well as the Tick. Having said all that, I must admit that the humor of the series doesn't produce enough "laugh out loud" moments, especially in the first season. I smiled a lot and chuckled quite a bit, but despite the hilarious premises I often found the jokes lacked a certain "punch" necessary to leave me in stitches. Seasons two and three are definitely better with some episodes like "Armless but not Harmless" and "Coach Fussell's Lament" hitting on all cylinders. Overall though I wish the show had made me laugh a little more.

One area the Tick doesn't come up short in is quality characters. The cast of this show is huge, amazing when you consider it was only 36 episodes in length. Some of my favorites include: the suave yet cowardly Die Fledermaus, rain-man sound alike Sewer Urchin, shoe throwing patriot American Maid, the maniacal Chairface Chippendale (whose head is literally a chair), the Mad Bomber what Bombs at Midnight and geriatric villain the Terror. All of these characters - and more - make wonderful parodies with subtle and not so subtle character quirks. Personally I thought American Maid was a riot. She's a strong, independent and capable woman who can take charge of dangerous situations and commands the respect of her peers. Yet she chooses the guise of a maid (which is neither patriotic or authoritative) and throws high-heeled shoes at her opponents, there's just something hilariously ironic about that. The enormous creativity and shear number of characters found in the Tick is staggering, outside of the Simpsons I can't think of any other show featuring a cast this large and unique.

Another unique - but mostly under appreciated - aspect of the Tick would be its attention to detail. Often times cartoons will say or do things in one story then completely ignore them in later episodes. Things like Peter Griffin losing his job in Family Guy but then having that same job in the very next episode (heck, the show even joked about the fact they were going to do it in the Black Knight story). This practice has become pretty standard but I've always felt it was a little lazy. By contrast the Tick not only respects its own continuity, the show goes the extra mile to bring back little easter eggs for loyal viewers to enjoy. One example can be found in season two when several heroes are forced to hitch a ride with El Seed's truck driving trees who escaped capture in season one. Another would be when the Tick travels into space in season two and Yank (an astronaut monkey who temporarily gained super intelligence in season one and was subsequently put in charge or NASA) is in the command center during lift off. The most impressive thing has to be the moon though. In season one Chairface Chippendale carves the first three letters of his name (CHA) into the moon with a giant laser, those same letters appear every time the moon is shown until the Tick uses explosives to fill-in the "C" early in season two. During that same episode however, the planet eating giant Omnipotus (a Galactus spoof) takes a large bite out of the moon to help curb his appetite, so now we have a big chunk missing from the moon with the letters "HA" still carved into it. While this is - in and of itself - very funny, what I find most impressive is how the series never fails to consistently show this lunar defacing throughout the remaining episodes, even at the end you can still see the letters "HA" right next to a big bite in the moon. Like I said, great attention to detail.

Visually the Tick was an excellent series, even if the animation was sometimes unspectacular. The show probably looked best early on with some episodes - like Dinosaur Neil - being exceptional. As the series moved along though, the animation became more pedestrian and less ambitious. Still, the character models were consistent and the movement fluid so I don't have anything really "bad" to say about it. Backgrounds are likewise pleasant, if not impressive.

On a more positive note, character designs from the Tick are great. Outside of Author and the Tick himself I don't know how many costumes stemmed from the comic book source material, but regardless I thought both the hero and villain designs had just the right amount of "whacky" necessary to support the show's tone. Overall the Tick's visuals have held up relatively well given the show's age (hard to believe its been 16 years), they're definitely better than Saban's 1990's shows (I'm looking at you X-men), but nowhere near as good as the Bruce Timm's Batman and Superman cartoons.

From a voice acting standpoint the Tick is nearly perfect. With a plethora of actors - almost as large as the cartoon cast itself - the show never fails to produce distinct voices for all of its characters. The most important of these is - of course - the Tick who receives the services of veteran actor Townsend Coleman. Coleman IS the Tick as far as I'm concerned, his ability to belt out heroic ultimatums, nonsensical metaphors and bizarre battle cries (Spoooooooon!) is unbeatable. Other talented veterans like Jim Cummings, Maurice LaMarche, Jess Harnell and Rob Paulsen get to strut their stuff as well. The one downside in this department is that some of the shows voices change during the course of the series. The only one that really bothered me was Author being that he's one of two main characters. Micky Dolenz (of Monkeys fame) provides the voice of Author in season one with Rob Paulsen taking over in seasons two and three. Though both actors do an excellent job, it bums me out to see the break in continuity, especially when the show took such pride in being consistent with its presentation. Still, the change took very little getting used to and doesn't really diminish the show.

The Tick is an easy recommendation. The show has aged exceptionally thanks to its immensely talented and dedicated creators, the characters continue to be brilliant - even some 16 years later - and the series helped pave the way for much of the great action-adventure satire we enjoy today. Both accessible and appropriate for all ages, the only people who shouldn't watch this series are people who hate any and everything to do with superheroes. Unfortunately the DVD releases for this show have some problems. Let's start with the obvious. Only the first two seasons of the Tick are available in the US (season three did not get released here for some reason) and they don't have any special features. Worse still, the season one set clearly had authoring problems because the video is not good, especially the Proto-clown episode which looked nothing short of awful. Even MORE worse is the fact that both seasons one and two are each missing an episode (apparently there were copyright issues) including the great Omnipotus story. I believe that the entire series was properly released in the UK, but that doesn't do North American residents much good. So if you want to take my advice and watch this show you'll probably be in for a little bit of a hassle, luckily the Tick is well worth the effort.

Tales of Earthsea - the folly of Ghibli and Goro

2010-08-08T10:51:00.003-04:00

I've always found legacy intriguing, or to be more specific, the struggle to live up to legacy. Whether it's a child trying to surpass the greatness of a parent, or a younger sibling seeking to eclipse an older brother or sister, for some reason I find the struggle to exceed ones predecessor riveting (even though I've never experienced it in my own life). Sometimes the story plays out in favor of the youth (Ken Griffey Jr. was a far better baseball player than his father Ken Griffey Sr.), other times the rivalry is a draw (Serena and Venus Williams are both great tennis players), more often than not though the struggle to live up to legacy ends in failure.

Hayao Miyazaki is a legendary filmmaker, if there were a Mount Rushmore of great animators Hayao Miyazaki would not only be one of the faces carved into it, his visage would be sitting right next to Walt Disney himself. Now imagine being Hayao's son Goro Miyazaki. For Goro to even attempt to work in the world of animation is a massive burden (which explains why he spent much of his life working as a landscape architect), the constant comparison to his father, good and bad, would make almost anybody uncomfortable and the desire to prove oneself inevitable. While working as a storyboard artist for Studio Ghibli's film Tales of Earthsea, Goro was unexpectedly offered the opportunity to direct the project. Given his lack of experience (Goro had never directed before) one would hope that Goro could see the folly of accepting such a difficult position, unfortunately he didn't.

Hayao Miyazaki was not pleased with his sons decision to helm Tales of Earthsea, he felt that Goro lacked the experience needed to make such an epic film and the two stopped speaking during production. Unfortunately for Goro his fathers concerns turned out to be correct as the film clearly exhibits numerous first time director struggles. This sentiment of inexperience would be echoed by numerous critics as Tales of Earthsea went on to receive very mixed reviews. At the end of the year the film was given the dubious honor of receiving Bunshun's Raspberry Award for "Worst Picture", Goro was also given the "Worst Director" Raspberry. Though Goro's linage undoubtedly played a large roll in the films excessive criticism, Tales of Earthsea ended up being exactly what Hayao feared, an ambitious but ultimately flawed movie directed by a man unprepared to shoulder such responsibility.

The story for Tales of Earthsea was loosely based on the Earthsea novels written by Ursula K. Le Guin. The films beginning is actually pretty engaging with the young Prince Arren - one of the stories main characters - committing a horrible crime and fleeing his kingdom. Now on the run, Arren crosses paths with Sparrowhawk, the Archmage of Earthsea who's trying to locate the source of Earthsea's imbalance (apparently the land is riddled with plague and pestilence). The two strangers soon find themselves traveling together and before long they arrive at Hortown, a city where slavery is legal and human life can be bought and sold. While wandering the city Arren encounters slavers trying to capture a girl his own age, Arren intervenes and saves the girl - whose name is Therru - but she isn't exactly grateful and scolds Arren for saying he doesn't care about life. Soon thereafter Sparrowhawk and Arren take up residence at a farm run by an old friend of Sparrowhawks, Teran. Guess who else lives on the farm? That's right Therru. About this time we are introduced to the films villain, the evil wizard Cob. Cob is obsessed with finding the secret to immortality and is responsible for much of the slavery found in Hortown, he also carries a pretty big grudge against Sparrowhawk. The rest of the movie deals with Arren and Therru's budding friendship, Arren's inner demons and, of course, the final confrontation with Cob. All in all it's not that bad of a story, it just not executed quite right.

The writing of Earthsea has its good and bad points. On the good side I liked the theme of mortality used throughout the film. As humans we are the only creatures on earth who are aware of our own eventual demise, naturally there is a lot of fear and desperation associated with that knowledge. Using this kind of relatable subject as motivation for Cob and Arren was a good call. Philosophical ideas about the gift of knowledge and being afraid to live your life to the fullest versus being afraid of death are also well used and bring the mortality theme full circle. Unfortunately the film confuses itself by introducing the idea of balance with nature. Not only does this subject take away from the movies central theme, it's been done far better by Hayao Miyazaki himself in films like the Princess Mononoke. What exactly are you trying to make here Goro, your movie or your father's movie?

This brings up another problem with the story, Sparrowhawks quest. Sparrowhawk is supposed to be investigating the imbalance of nature in Earthsea, but truth be told the film never really tells us what the hell that imbalance was. Did it have something to do with Cob? Was it related to the Dragons? Has the problem even been solved? I don't know, and that's not a good thing. Speaking of Dragons, Earthsea uses the mythical creatures several times but fails to properly convey their importance, this is especially bad when you consider the movies ending. Without giving anything away, I'll just say that having a climatic twist like the one found in this film needs a lot more setup, otherwise the whole thing comes off as random (which it does in this film). Ultimately the story of Earthsea is just too erratic and the narrative suffers for it. Some ideas are good, others are bad, some are underdeveloped, others are superfluous. In short, the film has some solid concepts but still falls into all the trappings you would expect from an inexperienced director who's trying too hard.

Though aesthetically pleasing (generally speaking) Tales of Earthsea also suffers numerous visual shortcomings. For one the character designs are just too Hayao Miyazaki. Yes, Studio Ghibli has a certain look and it would be unfair of me to call out Goro for something that is common practice. When I say the characters are "too Hayao Miyazaki" though I'm not just talking about the overall style, I'm saying that far too many of the characters look like they were pulled right out of a Hayao Miyazaki film. Cobs first officer, the man who tries to sell Arren narcotics, even the villainous Cob himself look near identical to characters from Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind, Princess Mononoke and Howl's Moving Castle. I have no idea if this was meant as an homage by Goro to his father, laziness or something else entirely, but given Goro's situation he would have been much better off avoiding anything that remotely resembled his fathers work. To be fair a lot of the blame for this has to go to Studio Ghibli, their misguided effort to push Goro into his fathers shoes was immensely foolish. You can't recreate the magic Hayao Miyazaki founded your studio with by slapping the name Miyazaki on a film and aping the style he uses, doing so was unfair to Goro and reeked of desperation.

Another problem with the films visuals is the lack of detail in Earthsea's backgrounds. Though Tales of Earthsea holds its own fine when compared to most animated movies, the fact that this is a Studio Ghibli production means a higher standard must be met. When you watch a Ghibli film - especially one that stylistically apes Hayao Miyazaki - you expect to be visually blown away. Backgrounds should be insanely detailed, cityscapes meticulous and landscapes epic. While Earthsea tries to live up to these expectation the film just doesn't quite get there. Take Hortown for example. The city is well designed but the brush strokes are just too broad and impressionistic, every time I expected to see a beautifully rendered window sill I got big blocks of color. Interior sections, like Cobs study, should have been jammed full of wizard-like clutter (beakers, books, jars), instead they're practically barren. If I thought this lack of eye-candy was a deliberate attempt to distance the film from Hayao Miyazaki I would be much more forgiving, given the character design situation however this is obviously not the case. This movie is clearly trying to evoke a Miyazaki sensibility and because of that the backgrounds should have been much more intricate and ambitious, instead the whole thing just looks like a lower budget cinematic clone of Hayao Miyazaki's work.

At this time I'm going to pull back and try to focus on some positive things about Tales of Earthsea, after all the movie isn't that bad and I didn't set out to write a damning review. One thing that Tales of Earthsea handles well is action. Battle sequences are all nicely staged, energetic and beautifully animated. CGI is also very good with various lighting effects actually enhancing the film instead of detracting from it. I already mentioned that the stories beginning is engaging but I feel that the point bares repeating. I don't want to reveal what happens, so lets just say that Prince Arren commits an unforgivable crime at the start of the story and flees his kingdom as a result of it. What I like about this is that the mystery behind Arren's motivation keeps you entrenched in the story. Though the possibility to simply dislike Arren exists, the film makes a point to not only show the princes darkness but his goodness as well. This duality keeps you interested in the character as you repeatedly ask yourself how someone with such a kind heart could possibly do something so deplorable. Unfortunately the resolution to this mystery is a little ambiguous and not particularly satisfying, but I still liked the idea and found myself riveted by it for a short while.

At the end of the day Tales of Earthsea is indeed a very flawed film. Does it deserve to be called "Worst movie of 2006"? No, I've seen plenty of animated films that are worse than this and I'm sure I'll come across more in the future. That said, I still think Studio Ghibli deserves admonishment for what happened with Earthsea. Putting an inexperienced director - one whose heritage is more of a burden than a blessing - in charge of an epic story that clearly needed a strong guiding hand was just plain stupid. The odds of Goro being able to usher in a new generation of Miyazaki classics is about as good as Seth Green playing NBA basketball, practically nonexistent. I know Ghibli is desperate to find its creative future, but throwing up hail marys like this isn't the answer. Luckily it looks like Ghibli may have finally found their guy with Hiromasa Yonebayashi, his upcoming film the Borrowers has incredible promise. As for Tales of Earthsea it will be getting a limited theatrical release here in the US in the summer of 2010, a DVD release will follow soon thereafter. Given the films numerous shortcomings I can't give Tales of Earthsea a full recommendation, if you love Ghibli movies then it's worth checking out, but if you're looking for the next great anime to hit the states, you won't find it here.

Pirates of Dark Water - Not a bad jitatin show

2010-07-26T19:44:00.008-04:00

The Pirates of Dark Water was a short lived action/adventure cartoon that premiered back in 1991. Despite its excellent mythology and interesting characters the show was plagued by delays, high costs and poor toy sales. Eventually it was cancelled after just 21 episodes. I remember watching the series when it was originally aired in the early 1990s, it wasn't my favorite cartoon but I thought it was creatively unique and tuned in often. Being a Hanna-Barbera production the show eventually re-aired on Cartoon Network and its spin off channel Boomerang in the mid 1990s. Though ultimately a bust, the Pirates of Dark Water did have its fans and eventually became a miniature cult hit as reruns aired regularly. Despite the best efforts of this loyal - but small - fan base however, the show has never been given a proper ending.

The story for Pirates of Dark Water takes place on the alien world of Mer. Besides its two moons, the most distinguishing characteristic of Mer would be the twenty different seas that comprise it. Scattered throughout these bodies of water are small islands where various intelligent life has developed. With so much water - and so little land - nautical travel is naturally the largest means of transportation. Unfortunately the planets oceans are being devoured by dark water. Dark water is a black, oil like substance that aggressively attacks anything it comes into contact with, including boats. Spreading like a cancer throughout the planet, its only a matter of time before all of Mer becomes enveloped in this deadly liquid. The worlds one hope lies in Ren, prince of Octopon. Together with his unlikely, but loyal crew of misfits, Ren must track down the 13 treasures of Rule. Only with their power can the Dark Dweller (the source of Dark Water) be destroyed and balance restored.

One of the Pirates of Dark Water's greatest strengths is the premise described above. Though not groundbreaking it is very well conceived and completely engaging, especially for an older action/adventure show. As for the writing itself, the series has its ups and downs, mostly due to shifts in tone. While some of the stories featured nefarious threats and a good balance of action and humor, other episodes were just so childish and immature they didn't even feel like they were a part of the same show. One particularly bad instance of this can be found in the episode "Little Leviathan". In the story Ren and his crew help a baby leviathan (who sounds just like Uni from Dungeons and Dragons) that has been caught in dark water. Once rescued the creature becomes smitten with its saviors and begins to follow them, comedic hijinks then ensue. Compare this to an episode like "The Dark Disciples" which featured a dark - almost "Thundarr the Barbarian" like story - and you'll see just how uneven the viewing experience was at times. Shifts in tone weren't isolated to just the stories either. Visually speaking, episodes like "The Little Leviathan" portrayed creatures as wide-eyed cartoonish scamps, like something out of a My Little Pony cartoon and nothing like the rest of the show (I'll have more to say about his later). I can't say for sure, but I believe the reason this happened was because the show fell into a bit of a middle world timing wise. Taking place after the horrendously tame 80's action/adventure cartoons but before Batman the Animated series, Pirates of Dark Water appears to have been pulled in two different directions. One was dumbed down and child friendly, the other darker and more serious. Still I really like the show's core story which was conceptually excellent and populated with great characters. Pirates of Dark Water had all the right ingredients, it just didn't always use them correctly.

Having just mentioned that Pirates of Dark Water features great characters, now seems like a good time to talk about the shows cast. Starting with the good guys we have Ren, Ioz, Tula and Niddler. Ren is the show's central character and he readily fits the "young hero on a quest to save the world" archetype. Though perhaps a little cliché, Ren does work nicely as both the voice of reason necessary to keep his crew together, as well as the driving force needed to keep them on task. But while I thought Ren was merely manageable, I found Ioz to be loads of fun. Gruff, pragmatic, treasure obsessed and an absolute chauvinist, Ioz can always be counted on to make greedy and inappropriate comments. Though these characteristics may seem negative, Ioz's failings provide a nice counterbalance to the noble nature of Ren and his quest, plus he's unflappably loyal. Tula is the lone female crew member and she is kind of a cross between Ioz and Ren. While she shares many of the core values of Ren she is more than willing to steal or even "betray" a couple comrades for her own purposes. There are only two actual betrayals by Tula - one at the beginning of the series and one at the end - and both times it's made very clear that Tula is either pretending to betray her crew mates or heavily conflicted about it. Still the fact that Tula's allegiance is so questionable makes her a very interesting character to watch. Tula does have a couple other roles in the show as well. One of these happens early in the series when Tula discovers that she is an ecomancer, a person capable of communing with nature and bending certain aspects of it to her will (kind of like a hippy wizard). The other is that she is a quasi love interest for Ren. Though the show never really gets too romantic (thankfully) it is clear that Ren and Tula are meant to play out the standard action/adventure romance seen so often in the genre. Niddler is the shows comedic relief. Unlike the rest of the crew Niddler is not human but instead a Monkeybird (basically a cross between and monkey and an bird, duh). When he's not flying people around from place to place, Niddler spends most his time complaining about how hungry he is or gorging on mengamellons, a monkeybirds favorite fruit. While I don't really care for Niddler I will admit that he makes a far better sidekick than your average action/adventure animal, plus he actually feels like a part of the team. Besides, he's not half as annoying as Snarf from the Thundercats.

From a villainous perspective, there are numerous antagonists in Pirates of Dark Water. That said, the only regulars worth mentioning are the Pirate Lord Bloth and his most persistent crony Conk. Conk is a very small man who excels at the art of surviving. No matter how dire the circumstance Conk always finds a way out, a good skill to have when you work for a ruthless pirate like Bloth. As for Bloth himself, he would be the physical antithesis of Conk. A massive man both in stature and girth (the guy is probably a foot taller than anyone else in the show) Bloth is as strong as an ox and has a very intimidating presence. Once again I like how the Pirates of Dark Water cast balances itself out. With Conk you have a very unimpressive and comical villain whose limited vocabulary is only matched by his limited intelligence. With Bloth however, you get a much more physically menacing and frighting opponent who speaks with an intelligent - almost british - accent, thus he appears more sophisticated than his lackeys. I have to say that while both Bloth and Conk may not be overly original, they still manage to be very interesting, something your average villain from the time period wasn't. It's this kind of depth that really sets Pirates of Dark Waters characters apart. The cast not only plays well off of one another they all have history, a past that you want to see explored. Too bad the show ended before we ever got to see it.

I mentioned earlier that Pirates of Dark Water never got a proper ending. I say this because - unlike other action/adventure shows of the time period - Pirates of Dark Water had a very finite goal built into its premise, finding the 13 treasures of Rule. Unfortunately only 8 of these treasures were found before the show's premature cancellation, therefore any viewer who invested interest into seeing Ren's quest completed left the show feeling unfulfilled. This is very unfortunate because the show clearly squandered numerous episodes with filler, episodes that could have been put to better use had the producers known that the series would only finish with twenty-one installments. Though frustrating, you can't really blame the studio or producers for this negative outcome. After all if the show had been successful, filler would have been needed to maximize its earning potential. As it stands though we are left hanging with no resolution whatsoever. A far too common occurrence in entertainment.

Visually the Pirates of Dark Water is both excellent and flawed in its execution. What I mean is that while the show has fantastic production design, on model characters and occasionally good animation, it also sports inconsistent creature design, poor choreography and awkward movement. Let's start with the production design. The world of Mer looks great. The warm color pallet - consisting mostly of reds and oranges - has a very unique and exotic feel about it. Characters also look nice, whether it's the beautiful gypsy-like appearance of Tula or the grotesque - almost fish-like - visage of Bloth, the design work for each character is spot on. But while the the world of Mer - and its inhabitants - feature a mature and appropriately alien appearance, the show would sometimes stray into "caricature land". On more than one occasion - the most obvious being the aforementioned "Little Leviathan" episode - Pirates of Dark Water would create silly, and/or childlike creatures with really big eyes and overly expressive mouths. This was in stark contrast to the more realistic and often fearsome looking creatures that inhabited the world of Mer, thus these one-off characters didn't feel like they belonged. Sadly, this inconsistent creature design mars otherwise excellent art direction and makes for an inconsistent viewing experience. Doubly frustrating is the fact that visual representations like this are exactly the kind of things that make people roll their eyes and spout off nonsense like "cartoons are just for kids". Pirates of Dark Water is the kind of show that's supposed to debunk that kind of talk, not reinforce it.

As for the animation itself, Pirates of Dark Water varies between mediocre and good. The first five episodes look solid (probably the best in the series) with a couple of scenes standing out as excellent (please keep in mind that I'm grading on a curve, this show does not come close to today's action/adventure standards). After that the animation became more mundane and awkward. Most of the fight choreography was stiff and unconvincing, things like running always looked awkward and a lot of the staging suffered from a lack of creativity. On the positive side the show maintained a consistent appearance. Even great shows like Batman the Animated series bore shifts in character models and animation styles depending on the studios that worked on them. Luckily Pirates of Dark Water was able to avoid this (for the most part anyway). Though I would have to rank Pirates of Dark Water as one of the better looking shows from its time period, most of the success stems from its design and not its animation (which really isn't that much better than other 80s action/adventure shows). If I had to choose a phrase to sum up my feelings about the show's visuals it would be "average execution of beautiful concepts".

In regards to voice acting Pirates of Dark Water had to navigate some tricky water. Rooted heavily in pirate culture, the show could have easily fell into various pirate clichés. I can just imagine heavily accented "aarrrs" and "iiiieee" being thrown around haphazardly - like some Scooby-Doo villain - while Bloth tells Ren to walk the plank (shudder). Thankfully none of these things happen, instead Pirates of Dark Water nails its voice casting perfectly and provides the actors with unique dialog designed exclusively for the show. I'll start with the actors. Just about all the main characters in Pirates of Dark Water feature superb voice work. George Newbern nails the youthful determination of Ren with ease. Jodi Benson sounds exactly how Tula appears, headstrong and sexy. Ioz was voiced by two different actors, Hector Elizondo in season one and Jim Cummings in season two. Surprisingly enough I didn't even notice the difference with both actors gruff portrayal of Ioz being spot on. Best of all would have to be Brock Peters work on Bloth though. With a maniacally twisted accent Peters really digs into his dialog with gusto and creates a villain that can be both scary or funny depending on what the situation calls for. Personally I think this is one of the best sounding action/adventure shows done prior to 1993.

Complementing the superb voice acting is some surprisingly creative dialog. Though not brilliantly written, the dialog from Pirates of Dark Water does feature some original expressions created specifically for the show. My favorites would have be the oft used "Noy Jitat" and its shorted version "Jitatin", I also liked "Jongo-longo". Besides just sounding cool these phrases serve as a subtle reminder that the world we're watching is an alien one, that and they allowed the characters to curse (after all they are pirates). This clever replacement of swear words is a trick used often in science fiction/fantasy shows, after all censors can't tell you something is vulgar if the word isn't even real.

The Pirates of Dark Water is one of those shows that possess great foundational elements, but not so great execution. While the core story, characters, production design and voice acting all shine brightly - even after 20 years - the animation and writing feel tarnished and dated. Couple this with the dissatisfaction born from an incomplete story and you can't help but feel frustrated. Yet what I truly want isn't a proper ending to this show, I want an entirely new series. With so many 80's cartoons getting rebooted as of late (upcoming GI Joe, Thundercats and Voltron) I would love to see Pirates of Dark Water get a fresh start. Something a little darker (but not too dark) with a more focused narrative and far less compromise. Now that Johnny Depp has made pirates popular again - and higher action/adventure standards are the norm - I feel that Pirates of Dark Water would stand a real chance of making a comeback, that or it could get cancelled prematurely again and piss-off a whole new generation of fans. Anyway if you would like to watch Pirates of Dark Water (and you should), you can pick up the 4-disc, manufacture on demand, set from the Warner Archive here. It contains all 21 episodes, but no special features or picture restoration. Still, this is - most likely - the best copy of the series currently in existence, so fans of the show should not hesitate to purchase.

The Maxx - more 1990s MTV goodness

2010-07-11T14:22:00.004-04:00

I've mentioned this before, but for the sake of those who don't know I'll do so again. I love MTV's off the wall animation from the 1990s. Much like Cartoon Network's Adult Swim imprint, MTV produced some really fantastic, mature and experimental animation back in the day. The Maxx is one such experiment. Based on Sam Keith's popular comic book, The Maxx is perhaps the most direct adaption of comic book source material ever, both in terms of visuals and story.

Sam Keith first published The Maxx in 1992 under the upstart banner of Image Comics. Image came about when superstar artists Jim Lee, Todd McFarlane, Rob Liefield, Marc Silvestri, Eric Larson and Jim Viatelo bolted from Marvel Comics in 1991. Once established they reached out to other popular creators and offered them the chance to publish their own books, Sam Keith was one such artist. Keith was probably best known for having drawn Wolverine in Marvel Comics Presents. Both celebrated and criticized for his unique art style - which led to off model renditions of popular characters - Keith was finally free to "cut loose" with The Maxx. Unlike most superhero comics, The Maxx delved deep into psychological and metaphysical subject matter, thus making it a perfect match for MTV's late night cartoon show "MTVs Oddities".

The premise of the Maxx goes something like this. Most of us inhabit two worlds, the real world where we are at the mercy of circumstance, and the world within, the unconscious safe place where we can escape. The Maxx shifts between these two worlds against his will. Here (the real world) he lives in a box inside of an alley. The only person who cares for him is a freelance social worker by the name of Julie Winters. But in the other world - Pangea - he rules the outback and is the protector of Julie, his jungle queen. Sounds pretty crazy huh? Well it is, but in a good way.

As you can probably discern from the description above, the writing of The Maxx is very ... unusual. Though The Maxx dresses up like a superhero the story isn't really about that, it's about the psychological condition of the show's characters. Not just the mental state of Maxx mind you, but Julie Winters and The Maxx (you could also include the teenage girl Sarah as well). This is some pretty intense subject matter when you get right down to it, issues like suicide, rape, guilt and repression are all major themes in the show's narrative. Though calling the series "dark" would be an oversimplification, it would certainly not be without merit. To put it bluntly, the show can really mess with your head.

Magnificently brooding and complex the series does suffer from one big problem however, it ended before the story had a chance to finish. Despite being only 13 episodes in length the show actually caught up to the comic books rather quickly, thus it was only able to cover the first eleven issues (the story arc would later finish in issue twenty). The hope was that they could get a second season and finish the story then, but ultimately MTV decided not to renew the series (apparently MTV made this choice before the first episode even aired). The result is that the final episode of the series really doesn't leave the viewers with enough concrete answers and many of the foreshadowed hints sprinkled throughout the show go unfulfilled. Though incredibly frustrating this is not an uncommon occurrence in TV, fortunately you can still buy the source material and read how the story ends.

A cartoon like The Maxx is not for everyone (certainly not children). While the writing is excellent the subject matter may rub some people the wrong way. Being based on a comic book others may even find the lack of traditional superhero storytelling disappointing. Personally I felt the story was both original and refreshing, even if it was a little morose. Compared to the other Image comics that made their way into animation (Spawn, Savage Dragon and Wild CATS) it certainly proves to be a far more honest adaptation. Spawn was okay but the HBO cartoon was actually more adult than the comic. Both the Savage Dragon and Wild CATS went in the opposite extreme and tried to be toned down, "kid" friendly versions of themselves. Only The Maxx sought to be exactly what it always was, a psychologically twisted story about very flawed, three dimensional characters with problems.

Visually The Maxx is an amazing mix of various medias. The show uses actual artwork from the comic book, animation, CGI (some of the earliest you'll see on TV) and even live action very effectively. With so many styles at play one would expect a very visually inconsistent series, this is not the case however. Truth be told The Maxx looks very unified and polished despite its limited budget, even by today's standards it still looks good. A lot of the credit has to go to the youthful exuberance found in the shows creators. While many veteran animators scoff at the idea of using someone else's art or layout, The Maxx's creative staff was so young and inexperienced they didn't care about such egotistical nonsense, they just loved the source material and wanted to make a great cartoon. This naive passion made for a very fearless show, one that wasn't afraid to experiment with things like digital coloring and digital ink, it also allowed the series to overcome its budgetary limitations by making the project a labor of love.

In many ways The Maxx reminds me of today's motion comics. A relatively new media, motion comics take the actual artwork from a comic book, cut it up digitally and add music and voice overs. The Maxx does a lot of these things as well, but far better than any motion comic ever has, or ever will. While a motion comic is strongly bound by the layout and artwork found in its source material, The Maxx was not afraid to expand on - or even break outside of - its predecessors original structure. Vice versa, a full fledged animated show won't use any real comic style layouts, instead opting for the more traditional storytelling found in most cartoons. So it's like you're getting the best of both worlds, a faithful comic book adaptation, but with genuine animation.

The show did have visual hiccups however, occasionally the animation didn't quite match up with the original art styles for example, or a comic book image would not animate well. Still The Maxx's look and feel was - by and large - a huge success. The use of minimal animation was masterful, CGI was surprisingly effective and tasteful, original art was integrated flawlessly and the translation of Sam Keith's layout was near perfect. Given Rough Draft Studios appreciation of the source material - as well as Keith's own involvement - this was definitely a project of personal importance to those involved, and it shows.

Normally I don't spend a lot of time talking about a show's voice acting unless the performances are exceptionally good, or exceptionally bad. Fortunately in the case of The Maxx it's the former that holds true. Featuring the voices of Michael Haley, Glynnis Talken, Amy Danles and Barry Stigler, The Maxx is a very well acted show. Michael Haley probably had the most difficult job being that he was the voice of the Maxx. Since the character needed to be both a tough guy and a simpleton Haley had to really work the dialog carefully, luckily he was up to the challenge and pulls off the roll admirably. Glynnis Talken strikes a spot-on balance of determination, world weariness and emotional damage when voicing the social worker Julie Winters. Amy Danles uses a great melancholy sound to bring jaded teenager Sarah to life. Finally Barry Stigler gives a pitch perfect performance as the know-it-all, arrogant and just a little angry Mr. Gone. I am not exaggerating when I say that the core characters from The Maxx could not have been cast any better.

Musically The Maxx hits all the right notes as well (Hah!). From the jazzy, beatnik opening to the aborigine sounding outback music, The Maxx always sets the right tone. Haunting, irreverent, or just plain silly the music from this show has flavor, a distinct taste that is unmistakably "Maxx" (insert smelly homeless joke here).

Obviously I'm recommending this series to anyone who likes "off the wall" storytelling, or is just a fan of the original comic book (keeping in mind this is not a show for children). It's unfortunate that the story was never really completed in animation, had the series been able to finish with the original story arc I think it would have been an instant classic. Regardless, The Maxx is a very worthwhile purchase. Though it's a manufacture on demand DVD the price is very reasonable and the extras include a short interview with the shows creators and commentary on all (count them all) 13 episodes.

Why I hate anime based on shonen jump.

2010-07-03T10:50:00.006-04:00

With a title like that you might think I actually despise the very existence of shonen jump based anime, or fighting anime as it's sometimes called. Far from it, the truth is I'm a big fan of fighting anime, Dragon Ball Z, Yu Yu Hokisho, Bleach and Naruto are all favorites of mine, even if they are a bit of a guilty pleasure. No, I don't hate shonen jump stories - though they are insanely formulaic and derivative - I hate how drawn out serialized anime makes those stories. Now when I say "drawn out" I'm not talking about a show that should have only been 35 episodes but got stretched out to 50, I'm talking about shows that should have been less than 100 episodes getting drug out to 250 or even 300 plus installments. If those numbers seem outrageous, it's because they are. Dragon Ball Z was over 300 episodes in length before it finished and that's not even including the original Dragon Ball show that proceeded it, currently Bleach is still running at 275 episodes and Naruto is up to 385 (this includes the original Naruto and Naruto Shippuden). While DBZ is thankfully finished, both Naruto and Bleach still have no end in sight, if they continue on as they are now we could be looking at 400-500 installments before either series finishes.

While these numbers are in and of themselves staggering, they're still not the real reason I'm pissed. The reason I'm mad is that almost half the episodes from each of these shows is filler. Uninteresting and unnecessary garbage that does nothing to further the core story or any of the character dynamics that make the series worthwhile to begin with. Imagine, if you will, reading a book that is 300 pages long, now add another 300 pages worth of meaningless events and encounters that have no consequence and no relation to the story you're reading. Sounds pretty irritating huh (or perhaps it sounds all too familiar)? That's what I mean by filler, you can literally skip all of these superfluous stories and you won't even know that you missed anything (something I now do for the sake of my own sanity).

That's not the end of my frustration however, far from it. Besides the standalone filler, shonen anime also partakes in another egregious practice, padding. What's the difference between padding and filler you ask? Filler episodes are just throwaway stories that have little to nothing to do with the manga source material that shonen jump anime is based on. Padding, on the other hand, is the act of taking the actual manga events and drrrrrrrrraaaaaaggggggiiiiiiinnnnnnggggg them out (annoying isn't it?). This usually happens during a big showdown between characters and follows a standard formula. Basically the episode starts with more than three minutes of recap from the previous story, it will then enter into a constipated staring contest (you know, the kind of staring where tough guys squint and growl at one another from every angle imaginable but never move), next we get a nice big heaping dose of exposition in which the characters do nothing but repeat the same exact things they've already said, but with different words, throw in some random flashbacks and a couple cutaways to the "B" story and you got about half the episode finished. In the second half of a padding episode you usually get one or two actual events, the outcome of which is more constipated staring, toss in some additional tough guy talk, flashbacks and the occasional sub-story check-in and you can finally wrap things up with a dramatic shot of somebody actually attacking, the end. By my count that's twenty-two minutes of nothing but posturing and unnecessary recap, I've watched action/adventure shows from the 80's with more substance.

I would estimate that padding makes up about twenty-five percent of the episodes from your average shonen jump anime. Combine this with the fifty percent filler and you have a show that spends three quarters of its time with a thumb stuck up its ass. This then begs the question, why do these shows need filler and padding to begin with? The answer is rooted in timing. Shonen Jump magazine is a weekly publication that prints various action/adventure stories in serialized format (kind of like daily comic strips, but weekly). Shonen Jump anime uses earlier installments from these mangas as a basis for its show and follows a similar economic model by broadcasting a new episode almost every week. This seems simple enough except a twenty-two minute cartoon requires a lot more content than the weekly magazine installment can supply, thus the show will actually catch up to the manga given enough time. Instead of doing the logical thing a put the show on hiatus while the manga builds itself out however, the show uses filler and padding to slow the story down and maintain a weekly pace. This is good for the studio since they get more ad revenue from a weekly (or near weekly) show (plus they can sell you more DVDs ... yeah), but it sucks for the fans who have to suffer through schlocky episodes time and time again.

So are there any real alternatives for shonen jump anime? Sure, they're just not very good for business. For one they could wait until a manga finishes before starting the adaptation to animation, but by then the properties popularity would have waned and the returns wouldn't be as good. Alternatively, they could shorten the seasons to something more reasonable - perhaps 26 episodes a year - unfortunately that would mean less ad revenue and dvd sales. As a fan I find either alternative preferable to the current reality. Heck, I would go all Tom Cruise and jump up on a couch - raving like a madman - if one or more of these ideas was put into practice, but that's not going to happen because - at the end of the day - profit is king. To be fair, it's easy for me to vilify and condemn shonen jump anime for exhibiting bad business practice, after all I'm not the one worried about the bottom line, they are. I guess it comes down to what's good for the business versus what's good for the consumer. Some would have you believe these two things go hand in hand, but the cold hard reality is that they often don't. As long as filler and padding get the job done for shonen jump anime the rest of us will have to suffer.

Well that was depressingly unproductive.

Star Wars the Clone Wars - when the prequels go ... right?

2010-06-28T17:48:00.008-04:00

I love Star Wars. Like many people my age I grew up during the franchise's original release, the memories of which I cherish to this very day. Sadly, once the original trilogy concluded there was a 7-8 year period where Star Wars became less relevant, fading like the ghost of Obi-Wan Kenobi into pop-culture history. In the early 1990's things started to turnaround though, with the release of Timothy Zahn's "Heir to the Empire" novel Star Wars found new life in the form of bestselling books. Before long new toys were being produced, comic books published, video games created and eventually "updated" versions of the three beloved films were released in theaters. By the end of the decade Star Wars was - once again - a dominate force in the entertainment industry.

Then came the prequels. Without a doubt the most anticipated films of my life, the Star Wars prequels proved the old adage that you can never go home again. In other words they were horrible. Not Twilight horrible mind you, just very flawed films in need of heavy story edits, better casting and better characters. Since the release of "The Phantom Menace" Star Wars has continued to spiral out of control. The extended novel universe went to hell during its "New Jedi Order" storyline, toys have become too plentiful and too expensive, comic books are a crapshoot and the latest CGI cartoon continues to run a very tired Clone Wars concept into the ground. Why do I mention all this? Because even as the Bantha carcass that was the Star Wars franchise continues to be picked clean, there are still a couple of bright spots left to remind us why we loved Star Wars to begin with. One would be the Knights of the Old Republic video games, an immersive adventure set in the Old Republic era. The other would be Genndy Tartakovsky's fantastically conceived Star Wars the Clone Wars cartoons.

Unlike the current CGI Clone Wars series seen on Cartoon Network, Tartakovsky was given the rare opportunity to create a Star Wars story his own way, as opposed to the Lucasfilm way (and before the Clone Wars became overused). Premiering in 2003 Tartakovsky's Clone Wars was made up of 20 three-minute shorts totaling one hour in length (this would be seasons 1 & 2). The stories were a mixture of standalone and interconnected events taking place during various battles throughout the galaxy. The second hour (season 3) was comprised of 5 twelve-minute episodes and featured a more in-depth story which ends right where the third prequel film (Revenge of the Sith) begins. Though stylistically different from other Star Wars vehicles, Tartakovsky's Clone Wars works surprisingly well, probably because the cartoons creators stuck to what they knew best, action.

For those who don't know, Genndy Tartakovsky was the man behind both Samurai Jack and Dexter's Laboratory, he also played a big part in the success of the Powerpuff Girls. If you've seen any of these cartoons then you should've noticed how stylized the action is, a staple mark of Tartakovsky shows. Being such a strong visual communicator Tartakovsky is also known for keeping dialog sparse, choosing instead to tell his stories through pictures rather than words. With the Clone Wars my fear was that Tartakovsky would try and modify his directing style to better fit the Star Wars universe. Thankfully this was not the case, and all of these elements are used effectively throughout the series.

The writing from Star Wars the Clone Wars is actually pretty minimal. With the initial episodes being only three-minutes each, there just wasn't a lot of room for complicated story. The twelve-minute episodes that followed do have more substance - with the plot playing out more like a short film - but action is clearly the focus of the series. This is an amusing contrast to the actual prequel movies which have been panned for having far too much "political intrigue", and not enough action. Despite the "lack" of deep narrative however, Tartakovsky's Clone Wars never leaves you feeling cheated, quite the opposite actually. The short running times of each chapter forced the show's creators to streamline everything into a micro format, eliminating anything that is unnecessary and emphasizing only what's important. It's the cartoon equivalent of a powernap, all the substance of a 22 minute show but packed into a far shorter time frame. Taken individually - or all at once - each episode of the Clone Wars is a perfect example of how less can be more.

Besides the tight storytelling and great action, Tartakovsky is also a master of making things look - for lack of a better word - cool. Clone trooper infiltration of a city, awesome. General Grievous chasing three jedi all over Coruscant, nice. Mace Windu vs. an entire droid army, fricking mind blowing. Even really silly ideas - like the jousting villain Durge - work surprisingly well. It would be so easy for a lesser director to falter here, to make these concepts look cheesy or formulaic. Not Tartakovsky, just about everything he does is both awe inspiring and innovative.

Visually Star Wars the Clone Wars is very much a Tartakovsky cartoon. Everything from the characters to the vehicles to the environments are highly stylized and use minimal detail. It's this minimalist approach that makes Tartakovsky an unusual fit for the Star Wars universe, in some ways he's not a good fit at all. The cartoony look associated with his work is a stark contrast to the hyper detailed "dirty" space look that Star Wars usually exhibits. This is why I was afraid Tartakovsky might try and change his animation style, thankfully he didn't. As for the quality of the visuals themselves, they are excellent. When moving the animation is very fluid and energetic, colors are crisp and backgrounds fantastically quirky. You wouldn't mistake the show for an animated feature or anything, but it still looks very high end. Like many cartoons these days the Clone Wars does feature some CGI, thankfully the Tartakovsky style of animation is a perfect match for this and everything blends together seamlessly. In short, this is a very polished show.

I mentioned earlier Tartakovsky's penchant for sparse dialog. What I meant by this is that long sequences of events - especially ones related to action - will often take place with no words. This doesn't mean that everything is silent - quite the contrary - in the absence of dialog sound takes on a whole new level of effectiveness. With noises normally overlooked now emphasized, sounds relating to things like frustration, elation, struggle and annoyance become far more effective. You would be hard pressed to find a better use of sound and silence in animation today.

Musically Star Wars the Clone Wars uses the same orchestra style music synonyms with the franchise. This is a good constant since the show is such a visual departure from the movies. Voice acting is good all around with many of the voices used in later incarnations of the Clone Wars stories. At the risk of sounding repetitive, this series is very well put together in all phases of its production including audio.

Looking back over this review I think I spent more time talking about Genndy Tartakovsky than I did the actual show itself. With that in mind I'll finish by saying that Star Wars the Clone Wars (often referred to as the microseries) is an excellent series. With an overall run time of just over two hours the show isn't particularly long, but what it lacks in length it more than makes up for in content. If you're a fan of Star Wars, action/adventure animation or Genndy Tartakovsky then this is a must watch. Unfortunately both DVD volumes of the series are out of print, so tracking down copies can be tricky. The best place is probably Amazon, though new copies are outrageously priced the used copies are still pretty affordable.

Atlantis - The Lost Opportunity

2010-06-14T19:34:00.009-04:00

It was the turn of the century and feature film animation found itself at a crossroads. With the success of CGI film studios like Pixar, Hollywood started to ponder a move away from traditional animation. Seeing its own classically animated films return less and less at the box office, Disney tried to regain its swagger by creating an epic feature that would use both hand drawn and computer generated images. The film was Atlantis, a $120 million dollar extravaganza that spared no expense in both production and promotion. Unfortunately Atlantis was met with mixed reviews and a modest box office return of $85 million dollars domestically (the film did recover its production budget with the world wide box office however). Adding insult to injury Dreamwork's Shrek and Pixar's Monsters Inc. would go on to be huge hits - both critically and financially - that same year. Looking back at it now, this was probably the tipping point where traditional animation lost its credibility as a feature film medium.

With a premise like finding the lost city of Atlantis it should come as no surprise that I was very pumped for this film. I'm a longtime Disney fan and getting an animated feature with roots in science fiction seemed like a dream come true. Unfortunately the movie fell far short of my expectations and I found myself massively frustrated for the second time in just one year (the first frustration being with Fox's Titan AE).

The story of Atlantis centers around Milo Thatch, a linguistics expert working in the boiler room at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington DC. Milo believes the key to finding Atlantis can be found in an ancient book called the Shepherds Journal and needs funding for an expedition to find it. Unfortunately for him the Institution's board believes that both the Journal and Atlantis are nothing more than myths and refuse Milo's proposal. This rejection is doubly painful because Milo's deceased grandfather - who raised him - was ridiculed for his own obsession with the fabled civilization. But Milo's luck takes a turn for the better when eccentric millionaire Preston Whitmore steps into the picture. Turns out Whitmore was a friend of Milo's late grandfather and he's already found the Shepherds Journal. In need of a linguist to decipher the Journal, Whitmore offers Milo a spot aboard his privately funded expedition to find Atlantis. Joining Milo is a band of eclectic experts including Demolition specialist Vinny Santorini, medical officer Dr. Sweet, geology expert "Mole" and tomboy mechanic Audrey Ramirez. Leading the expedition is Commander Rourke and his second-in-command Lt. Helga Sinclair. The last character worth mentioning is Kida, the 8,000 year old Atlantean princess who serves as Milo's love interest later in the story (Personally I would have been a little more apprehensive about hooking up with Kida if I were Milo. That girl has to have been around the block more than once in the last 8,000 years, I'm just saying). Sounds interesting enough right? Unfortunately the final product can't live up to the strength of its own premise and many animation fans left the film feeling unfulfilled.

Before I discuss the writing of Atlantis I want to offer the following warning. The next four paragraphs all contain minor story SPOILERS. Normally I try to avoid this but the movie is almost ten years old and most of the issues I had were very specific. If you don’t want to know any story details then skip the four paragraphs following this one.

If I had to describe the story of Atlantis in one word it would be “underdeveloped”. What I mean by this is the film doesn't provide enough detail or explanation for many of its plot points. Want to know why Atlantis sinks into the ocean? Because the king wanted a super weapon ... that's it, that's all you get. Or how is it the people of Atlantis can learn to speak English so quickly? Sure their language was the basis for many of today’s modern dialects, but that's not really good enough. Knowing some root elements of a language and speaking said language are two completely different things. After all English (or any language for that matter) has evolved and changed over the years; so how could a society isolated from the rest of civilization for over eight millennia learn it in just a few brief seconds? But while these plot points are unabashedly lazy they at least try and provide the viewer with an answer, Atlantean lifespan - on the other hand - doesn't even get that much. While recounting her younger years Kida implies that she witnessed the fall of Atlantis. Milo quickly realizes this would make her over 8,000 years old and subsequently points this out to Kida. Her response … “Yeah, so”. And there you have it, a bombshell revelation suggesting that much of Atlantis’s population is thousands of years old gets a “Yeah, so”. No explanation - not even a lazy one - just “Yeah, so”. To quote Eric Cartman … lame.

The flippant manner in which Atlantean lifespan is addressed isn't the real problem here though, the giant plot holes it creates are. For example, the citizens of Atlantis are no longer able to read their own language. This would make sense if hundreds of generations of Atlanteans had passed and the knowledge was gradually lost. But since Kida - and presumably others - were all around when Atlantis fell, how is it that none of them can read? Did everyone, including the adults forget how? Combine this with the fact that given 8,000 years just about anyone could decipher a language and you've got a nice big plot hole staring you right in the face. This same issue shows up again when Kida takes Milo to see a flying machine she has been unsuccessfully trying to start for ages. Being a linguistic expert (boy that's convenient), Milo quickly reads the vehicles instructions and reveals the simple three step ignition sequence ... put hand here, insert crystal and turn it one way then back the other. Wow Kida, 8,000 years and you weren't able to figure that out on your own using trial and error? Good God, you're supposed to be an advanced race, one that hasn't even seen a single generation pass, yet you can't deduce something that simple? My car is harder to start than that. It would have made much more sense for the Atlanteans to simply be descendants of the cataclysm survivors. Descendants whose culture is being lost and thus they need an outsider to help rediscover it. Personally I wonder if the original script for Atlantis included this long lifespan fiasco. Being that it's common practice for movie scripts to get "retooled", I could easily imagine the story of Atlantis receiving "enhanced" ideas, the kind that create large plot holes like the ones found here.

The characters comprising Atlantis are also frustrating, mostly because I couldn't bring myself to care about any of them. Commander Rourke and Lt. Sinclair are complete cyphers that have no backstory or motivation beyond clichéd greed. Mole is similarly barren and serves only as comedic relief. Even the secondary characters who do get a backstory like Dr. Sweet, Vinny and Audrey can't escape the two-dimensional characterization that plagues this film. Don't get me wrong, the crew is likable enough. Vinny and Dr. Sweet in particular made me laugh on numerous occasions. The problem is that I didn't care about anything the cast did or had done to them, even the expedition's obvious "betrayal" left me feeling underwhelmed. In the end only Milo is given any real depth, but while he has motivation (to prove his grandfathers theories on Atlantis are correct) it fails to deliver any real emotional impact. Compare this to Scar's betrayal in the Lion King, or the robots sacrifice at the end of the Iron Giant. Those scenes sent a chill up your spine, they made you care, not so much with Atlantis.

Even forces outside the movies control conspired to undermine it. Atlantis was released in the summer of 2001, about one year after Fox's animated flop Titan AE. Why does that matter? Well for those of us who watched Titan AE the previous year Atlantis reeked of deja vu. Lets run down the similarities:

Eclectic crew trying to find a lost place(or)thing. Check
Main character possessing unique abilities necessary for finding lost place(or)thing. Check.
Betrayal by eclectic crews greedy leader and second-in-command. Check.
Subsequent life or death battle between said leader and second-in-command. Check.
True power of lost place(or)thing is unleashed causing the revitalization(or)rebirth of something. Check.

Now I'm in no way implying that these films purposefully aped one another, in fact I'm sure they did not. What I am saying is that these unfortunate coincidences detracted from the latter films original viewing, in this case Atlantis. Sitting there in the theater I was stunned by the number of thematic parallels and plot twists, especially the betrayal. Of course this doesn't matter anymore since the films are both a decade old, but for people like me who really wanted both Titan AE and Atlantis to be good, their similarities and shortcomings will forever be linked.

When it's all said and done the story of Atlantis just doesn't work in its final form. It's hard to tell if the movie was under or over developed, but it definitely feels incomplete. Ambitious to a fault, Atlantis suffers from an overly ambiguous mythology, two dimensional characters, horrible plot holes and formulaic storytelling. Though the film is completely watchable don't be surprised if you find yourself sensing something amiss. Kind of like you're waiting for the last couple pieces of a puzzle to fill in, sure you can tell what the picture is, but it still doesn't look finished.

Luckily the visuals from Atlantis do look very complete, not surprising being that it's a Disney animated feature. Animation is always smooth, movements are natural and characters stay on model. Backgrounds are similarly beautiful with great design work and a cool (mostly blue) color pallet. The only complaint I had was that a couple of scenes - specifically those early in the film - looked flat, like they forgot to add shading. Though it doesn't really hurt the film at all I still found these rare occurrences jarring enough to take notice. Fortunately Atlantis manages to effectively do something that other animated features of the time often couldn't, it convincingly blended CGI and cell animation. Unlike Titan AE and Sinbad, Atlantis really does a good job of making computer generated images look like they belong in the traditionally animated environments. Yes you can still tell the CGI from cell pretty easily, but the overall illusion holds together quite nicely and that's what really matters.

Character designs from Atlantis are a little different than your average Disney film, but in a good way. Mike Mignola (artist and creator of Hellboy) was a production artist on the movie and his influence is very noticeable, especially in the angular look of the people (as opposed to the rounded look found in many other Disney movies). Of course there's still a Disneyfied quality found in many of the films characters - Kida and Dr. Sweet for example - but other people like Lt. Sinclair and the faceless gas-mask soldiers have a great edge about them, much like a Mignola comic book. Overall I thought the design and execution of Atlantis's visuals were a win, had the film's story been able to deliver this could have been something special.

The voice acting and music of Atlantis is all very good. My favorite actors were probably Micheal J. Fox (Milo) and James Garner (Commander Rourke), but everyone turned in a solid performance. Being one of Disney's non-musical films Atlantis's music lacks the distinct sound found in many of their other animated movies, still the music does its job well and I had no complaints.

So there you have it, an animated film with superior craftsmanship including: great animation, excellent design, good voice acting and solid music. Too bad it's wasted on an underdeveloped story that - despite its promising origins - fails miserably. To be fair Atlantis never stood much of a chance for success. With the creatively sentimental story of Monsters Inc. and the humorous pop-culture writing of Shrek, audiences just weren't interested in another "safe" Disney film. I doubt that even a perfect take on the story of Atlantis could have succeeded in the face of those odds. Still I think that the opportunity to create something timeless was lost here and that's truly unfortunate. As for recommending the film I'll say that it's worth a watch, if only for the visuals. I wouldn't go out of my way though.

G.I. Joe Resolute - Thats more like it!

2010-06-02T20:03:00.007-04:00

Being a fan of 1980s action/adventure cartoons can be tough, after all they were just glorified toy commercials containing little to no substance. Their fear of watchdog parent groups made them ridiculously tame and silly, something any child over the age of ten came to quickly realize and ridicule. Production value was minimal, music was repetitive, voice acting generic, in short ... they were bad cartoons. Still some part of me loves these cheesy shows and wishes that the magic I felt as a child could somehow be recaptured. Of course my - and many others - hope has not gone unnoticed. Again and again studios have tried to update the cartoons from my youth in an attempt to cash in on both their commercial potential and nostalgia value. Transformers has seen numerous incarnations including a handful of cartoons and two blockbuster (but bad) movies. Similarly GI Joe has several cartoon reboots and a lackluster live action film to its credit. Even He-Man got re-imagined on Cartoon Network back in 2002 and has a feature film script in the works. Financially these projects have seen a varying degree of success, but not even the best among them could meet, let alone exceed my expectations.

Where did they fall short? Well the new He-Man cartoon had the right idea, it featured intense action while staying true to its roots. Unfortunately the show's stories proved to be childish and ultimately frustrating to watch. Transformers Beast Wars was really well written, but the characters just weren't the same as the ones I grew up with. GI Joe Sigma Six was dumb, same goes for Transformers Animated. As for the live action movies ... well don't even get me started on those. So why is it that none of these remakes hit the mark for me? Probably because what I want is so specific. I want an updated version of my favorite childhood cartoons, one that respects the characters I loved while maturing the content to something more appropriate for a person my age. Of course what I want doesn't really make for a fat profit margin so the odds of seeing such a thing are remote at best. Then the impossible happened, GI Joe Resolute was created. Originally shown on Adult Swim as an eleven part series (5 minutes each), GI Joe Resolute was literally everything I ever wanted from a modernized GI Joe cartoon; Intense action, beautiful animation, over the top villains and great characters, all wrapped together in a sixty minute story that managed to be both intelligent and cheesy at the same time.

Written by comic book veteran Warren Ellis, the story for GI Joe Resolute wastes no time setting its tone by showing the crime scene of recently murdered Cobra agent Major Bluud, this is shortly followed by the bombing of GI Joe's aircraft carrier the Flagg. Just five minutes in and you know this isn't going to be some campy 1980s retread of the original cartoon. Though its departure in tone is somewhat severe, Resolute still manages to pay tribute to its predecessor by bringing back a classic plot device, the Cobra doomsday weapon. Like the first couple mini-series before it, Resolute sees Cobra trying to - once again - hold the world for ransom with a super weapon. But this isn't some weather dominator, or a teleportation device, Cobra's new doomsday weapon does just one thing ... destroy. This is proven by Cobra Commander when he does something his 1980's counterpart never could (or would), he blows up Moscow ... all of Moscow. Faced with Cobra domination or absolute destruction the world turns to its only hope, GI Joe. This is a great setup, taking elements from the original series and raising the stakes so that the threat posed by Cobra has actual weight is a fantastic update to the old GI Joe formula.

The use of doomsday weapons isn't the only homage to make its way into Resolute however. Warren Ellis actually takes elements from both the original cartoon and the comic book and fuses them together to create the ultimate piece of fanservice. You want some Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow training with the Master? No problem. You want to see Zartan assassinate said Master? You got it. How about a visit to the town of Springfield? Sure. Don't forget about the showdowns either; Snake Eyes vs. Storm Shadow, Duke and Scarlett vs. Zartan, Destro and Baroness vs. Roadblock and Gung-Ho, it's all here. Ellis even goes as far as to take Scarlett's comic book romance with Snake Eyes and cartoon romance with Duke - combines them - and makes a love triangle out of it. At the same time more ridiculous things that other writers would've been tempted to include - like the battle cry "Yo Joe" - have been mercifully omitted. I have no idea if Ellis is a fan of GI Joe or not, but his knowledge of what's most important in the GI Joe universe really is admirable.

Another excellent - though less surprising - aspect to Ellis's writing is his use of science. By that I mean all the technology used in GI Joe Resolute has really good scientific theory behind it. Instead of just having a giant laser cannon that blows up cities (something your average lazy writer would use), Cobra's ultimate weapon uses a particle cannon to superheat the ionosphere. Energy from the particle reflection is then dispersed across the ionosphere so that Cobra can reassemble it and form a collimated beam above any target of their choosing. Realistic? Probably not, but boy does it make for a good sounding super weapon.

Equally impressive are the visuals of GI Joe Resolute. Though the style would probably be considered "anime" there is nothing generic about the films look. Personally I found the character designs very attractive with just the right amount new and familiar elements. I did have a couple complaints, like "Army" being printed in large letters across Duke's uniform, but overall I think the designers did a superb job. The same goes for the films animators. With the exception of some bad CG on the Flagg, the films animation is extremely fluid. Fight scenes are well staged and highly energetic, backgrounds look beautiful and lighting effects are attractive. Really, the movie just looks fantastic.

Unfortunately Resolute does exhibit one significant weakness, uneven voice acting. This shortcoming is most likely the byproduct of only having about four actors do all the films voices. With each actor being responsible for anywhere between 4-8 characters, you're bound to run a little thin in the variety department. Supporting this theory is the fact that heavily accented villains like Destro, Cobra Commander, Zartan and Baroness all sound pretty good, whereas the more standard sounding heroes like Roadblock Gung-Ho and Duke do not. Duke also suffers from having the over familiar voice of Steven Blum. Though Blum is an excellent actor he has used his "Spike" voice far too many times. This makes it really difficult to get into a character because the voice is so ubiquitous that you continually find yourself thinking "oh, that's the guy who did Spike's voice", a problem that continues to grow in the action/adventure genre (I'm referring to Spike from Cowboy Beebop).

Clearly I'm recommending this film to any fan of the 1980's GI Joe franchise. If you liked either the cartoon, comic books or both, you should check out Resolute. For those action/adventure lovers who aren't GI Joe fans per se, I would at least suggest that you rent or watch the film online (keeping in mind this is TV-14, so it's definitely not intended for younger viewers). The DVD itself is pretty cheap (about $15) but it doesn't come with any real extras. Also the video does occasionally show some signs of over compression in the form of banding, just something to be aware of in case you want to buy.

Flight of Dragons - Science fiction meets (sorta) science fact

2010-05-14T22:39:00.007-04:00

Sometimes it's really fun when you come across something that's both old and new, such is the case with Flight of Dragons. This charming story was produced by Rankin and Bass as a DTV movie in 1982, then later shown as a an animated TV special in 1986. I had never even heard of the film until its recent release by the Warner Bros. Archive Collection, but since I was already re-watching several other Rankin and Bass movies I decided to order a copy and give it a try. What I found was a very well written - if mediocre looking - film chalk full of unique ideas and concepts.

The inspiration for Flight of Dragons comes from the the Peter Dickinson novel of the same name and the Gordon Dickson novel "The Dragon and the George". It features a young man named Peter Dickinson who has given up his life as a scientist in the quest to write a novel about dragons. Short on funds Dickinson creates a board game (like Dungeons and Dragons) in the hopes that it will prove successful enough to finance his stagnate writing career. Unbeknownst to Peter the characters comprising his game actually exist in an age long past, a time period of waning magic. In this bygone era mankind has begun to embrace science over magic and as a result all the worlds magical creatures face extinction. This is not just a problem for beings of magic though, mankind will also suffer because magic is the source of human inspiration and imagination.

The wizard Carolinus is first to recognize how dire a threat this is when he's unable to perform a simple vanishing spell early in the film. Summoning his three brothers for the first time in four centuries, Carolinus proposes that they combine their remaining powers and use it to create the "Last Realm of Magic", a sanctuary where all magical creatures can live on long after mankind has forgotten magic. Two of the brothers agree to this plan but the third - Ommadon - refuses. Being a wizard of darkness Ommadon plans to use humanities greedy and violent nature against them, all the while growing stronger by inspiring evil deeds. Bound by a cosmic law preventing the four brothers from ever fighting, Carolinus must instead seek out a champion to stop Ommadon. Reaching across time Carolinus is guided to Peter who is brought back into the past and given the task of stealing Ommadon's Red Crown. There are a lot of other important story points that I could detail here but the synopsis above should be sufficient for this review.

What I enjoy most about the writing of Flight of Dragons is the use of science in the realm of magic. Over the centuries there have been some pretty silly mythical creatures. Mermaids for example. Why would a mammal living under the ocean's surface have hair on its head, opposable thumbs, or eyebrows? Same goes for Dragons. A giant fire breathing lizard weighing thousands of pounds that's capable of flight, really? Do you have any idea how enormous that wing span would have to be, or the sheer physical exertion necessary to achieve and sustain lift? I'm no biologist - or physicist for that matter - but I'm pretty sure these animals couldn't exist without the all important "magic" loophole. Yet Flight of the Dragons does something truly fantastic, it actually offers up a scientific explanation for dragons. In the film we learn that dragons fly by filling portions of their body with lighter-than-air gas. Once airborne they use their wings and tail to steer. To dive or lower themselves back to the ground the gas is released and simultaneously ignited via the dragons mouth, thus dragons breath fire. Yes the science here is still pretty spotty, but the fact that such a reasonable explanation is even offered made me exceedingly happy.

Additional lessons in science are offered throughout the film, occasionally giving the movie a "Mr. Wizard" vibe. Every now and again I felt like I was watching a deviously disguised after school special, one trying to trick me into thinking science was cool. Fortunately this feeling would soon pass as the movie would slip back into the standard setting of an action/adventure quest. Besides the excellent use of science, Flight of the Dragons really is a good story featuring an eclectic cast of characters and some genuinely somber moments. I'm not going to use words like "brilliant" or "perfect" to describe its writing, but I will say that I found the movie very clever and lots of fun.

Visually the movie is very average. Being a Rankin and Bass film one should not be surprised to find minimal animation and TV quality backgrounds. Though I like the look and feel Rankin and Bass brought to many of their movies, I also hate that they could never muster more respectable budgets for them. On the positive side I didn't see a lot of the squat, hobbit like designs that often plague these films, a merciful omission to be sure. Additionally the dragon designs were both plentiful and varied, definitely the strongest looking part of the movie. Still there just isn't much to get excited about here.

Another pedestrian aspect of the film would be its audio. Outside of the solid James Earl Jones performance for Ommadon, I wasn't impressed with any of the movies voice acting. Harry Morgan was okay as Carolinus and John Ritter didn't offend me as Peter Dickinson, but neither of these performances really added much to the film either. Musically the soundtrack gets the job done, just not in a very memorable fashion. Ultimately I felt that Flight of the Dragons neither suffered, nor succeeded due to its tepid music or run of the mill voice acting.

Despite the movies lackluster production value, Flight of the Dragons proves to be a surprisingly good film. Much like the battle between science and magic, good storytelling and characterization prove too strong for average animation and mediocre sound to overcome. I definitely recommend this film to any fans of Rankin and Bass, or to anybody who loves fantasy animation. You can get the manufactured on demand DVD from the Warner Brothers website or Amazon.

NOTE: Manufactured on demand DVDs are not exactly the same as DVDs you buy from the store. Mass produced DVDs (like the ones at Wal-Mart or Best Buy) are stamped and should play in any DVD enabled device. Manufactured on demand DVDs are burnt (much like you would do yourself with a DVD burner) and will sometimes not work in secondary DVD devices like video game counsels or PC computers. The reason some movies are only available by manufacture on demand is that it helps keep costs down and storage space minimal for the company producing it. For more obscure movies and tv shows this is the only way the studio can turn enough profit to make a DVD release worthwhile. Though the quality of video is no different and the packaging still quite good, I wanted to make sure that I at least called this out.

Men in Black the Series - So forgettable its like being neuralized

2010-04-28T21:39:00.011-04:00

In 1997 a fun little movie called Men in Black was released. It featured Will Smith (before he was a mega-star) and Tommy Lee Jones as secret agent type policemen who keep extraterrestrial life on earth in check. Like many other moviegoers I really enjoyed the film which featured a perfect mix of action and comedy. Not surprisingly the film's success spawned an animated adaption, Men in Black the series. Running four seasons from 1997 until 2001, MIB the series saw a total of 53 episodes produced, a very respectable number for modern day action/adventure cartoons. This would put the show in the same class as Batman Beyond and Superman the Animated series in terms of length, good company for any action/adventure show to keep. But does the show have the same level of quality as Batman and Superman, or does it go the way of so many other movie to TV adaptations and stink up the joint? Ultimately I would say that it falls somewhere in between, definitely not bad, but certainly not good.

I remember occasionally watching MIB the series when it was first on TV. Since it shared the same channel as Batman Beyond I would sometimes watch both, or catch the tail end of MIB before Batman would start. I felt very ambivalent about the show, it didn't offend me at all but I wasn't really drawn in either. For the longest time I forgot it even existed, like the show had been wiped from my mind with the same neuralizer MIB agents use to erase peoples memory. Eventually I stumbled across some episodes online and decided it was time to give the series a full re-watching. What I found was complete justification for my initial feelings of ambivalence.

Seeing as it was a popular movie most people already know what the premise behind Men in Black is. For anyone who doesn't know however, it goes as follows. Men in Black is a top-secret agency (but not a government agency) that polices all alien activity on earth. It is comprised of "agents" who wear black suits and have had all traces of their existence erased from public record. They do not have any distinguishing marks or even fingerprints. Names are never used, opting instead to go by their first initial (so if your name was Bob you would be Agent B). They are no longer a part of the system, they are above the system, they are the Men in Black.

Before I get going with my review here I would like to offer the following disclaimer. I have never read the original Men in the Black comic book by Lowell Cunningham. I mention this because my review is based on the assumption that MIB the series is mostly influenced by MIB the movie, not the comic book. I really don't know how close the actual movie or cartoon is to the source material so if any of the discrepancies or issues I have are a result of said source material I apologize for my ignorance.

To start things off the writing on MIB the series is decidedly uneven. The show's first season is certainly the worst with the first eight or so episodes being - for the most part - awful. Things do get better though, and by the time season one ends the series is clearly starting to find its feet. This isn't too surprising with veteran cartoon writer Greg Weisman contributing regularly in season two. Weisman is by far the show's best writer having created Disney's excellent Gargoyles series, and later the Spectacular Spider-man. Still, when not watching Weisman's stronger episodes the show becomes very hit and miss.

On the positive side I really enjoyed MIB episodes that revolved around Agent K's past. With years of experience it was only natural that K would be carrying lots of baggage, both good and bad. Some of these stories were better in concept than in execution (Agent A for example), but taken as a whole I found them at least interesting.

On the negative side MIB the series recycles heavily from MIB the movie, most notably in terms of humor. Here's a checklist of what to look for in an average episode:
1) Agent J makes an alien faux pas - Check.
2) Alien Worms declare their love/obsession for coffee - Check.
3) Agent J complains about not getting to drive - Check.
4) Frank the stooley reminds someone he's not a real dog - Check.
5) Agent J does some variation of the line "I make this look good" - Check.
6) Someone shoots pawnshop owner Jeebs in the head - Double Check.

Of course I'm exaggerating when I say that you will find all six of these bits in any given episode, it's probably closer to three out of six. My point is that the writers think they're being clever by using jokes we'll recognize from the movie, but in truth they simply appear lazy by continually beating a dead horse.

Speaking of lazy, I have to call out the writing for the series finale of MIB. In the two part story (the only two part story arc in the entire show) Earth is invaded by an alien fleet that wants our oil. This invasion is portrayed as an Independence Day style event complete with the destruction of Washington Monument and the United Nations headquarters. No longer able to hide the existence of extraterrestrial life, MIB goes public so that they can lead Earth's defenses. In the end our home is saved but the proverbial cat has been let out of the bag, after all you can't neuralize an entire planet. Or can you? During a worldwide press conference Agent L realizes that the whole world is watching them on TV, so all they have to do is wipe every ones memories right then and there and everything will go back to normal. Perfect solution, right? Except the whole idea is preposterous and the basic logic behind it is nothing short of insulting (I'm talking Battlefield Earth, jet flying caveman insulting). Besides the fact that not everyone on Earth has a TV, the idea that each and every person is looking directly at said TV during the exact moment the neuralizer goes off is ridiculous. You mean nobody was taking a leak? How about sleeping, after all it would have been the middle of the night in Australia? What if you're blind? Then there would be all the records of the invasion itself; TV footage, newspapers, home videos. My god do you really think that an alien invasion of such massive proportions could be covered up with a single flash from a neuralizer? I know this is just a cartoon, and I can suspend disbelief with the best of them, but you have to show a little more respect for your audience’s intelligence, even if they're kids.

This brings us to the shows characters. Naturally the producers of MIB the series wanted to capitalize on the success and charm that Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones brought to Agents J and K. This led to the decision to "ignore" the movies ending. As you probably know the ending of MIB the movie had Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) retiring from service, complete with a neuralizer memory wipe from protegee Agent J (Will Smith). In MIB the cartoon however, Agent K is still in service, mentoring Agent J. This would not be so bad except that the cartoon references events from the movie (like the death of giant cockroach alien Edgar) multiple times, thus implying that all the events of the movie (minus K's retiring) are a part of the animated universe. Now I know what some of you are saying "But K was de-neuralized in MIB 2, so it makes sense". We'll I'm afraid that MIB the series started and finished before MIB 2 was even released, so that's not the reason. The truth is that movie properties turned cartoons will often take liberties with theatrical events to better fit their own entertainment medium, such is the case with MIB the series. Despite the potential for confusion though (no explanation is ever offered) I don't hold this against the show’s creators. Only a fool would try and do an MIB cartoon without both K and J. Besides the decision to use both was most likely a mandate from the studio.

But I digress, lets talk about the animated adaptations of our two heroes. I said before that Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones brought a lot of charm to Agents K and J. This then begs the question, do the cartoon versions of these characters have that same charm? In a word ... No (or as Will Smith would say, Awwww hell Naw). Sadly, both Agents K and J come off as mere imitators, and poor ones at that. Where Will Smith brought a boastful, cocky yet lovable personality to Agent J, the animated version feels like a clown. A buffoonish blowhard that never seems to learn from any of his incessant mistakes, cartoon J just isn't very likable. His counterpart is similarly frustrating, but in the opposite extreme. While Tommy Lee Jones does a great job of bringing the folksy, know-it-all, seen-it-all Agent K to life, cartoon K just feels ... cold. For whatever reason the produces of MIB the series mistook K's matter of fact nature as being emotionless. This led to a very monotonous version of the character, one I became quickly bored with. This just isn't the same chemistry found in the movie, an obnoxious rookie and a droning veteran, not exactly the dynamic duo. I'll have more to say about this when I get to the shows voice acting.

Writing on MIB the series never does quite click into place. Characters don't really develop, bad science and plot holes abound, jokes become tired and don't even get me started on the overuse of coffee loving alien worms in season three. If that's not enough, checkout the additions of Agent X and Dr. Zeeltor in season four as well. Obviously the show wanted to expand out beyond its somewhat mundane cast, but bringing in these two was not the answer. Not only are neither of these characters any good, but the move just smacks of desperation, like when they brought in cousin Oliver on the Brady Bunch. When it's all said and done what we are left with is a very averagely written show, occasionally spotted with both excellence and stupidity.

The strongest aspect of MIB the series would have to be its visuals. From an animation standpoint the show does not impress during its first season, but the remaining seasons all look very solid. At times the animation even excels with surprisingly good fight choreography and fluid character movement. Backgrounds are a little unusual with a more illustrative, pen and ink, style being employed. Colors tended to be more muted and sometimes even monochromatic in appearance as well. Despite being less painterly than other cartoons however, these aesthetic choices do work well with the shows character designs and ultimately I liked that.

Speaking of character design, I have to say that I found the design work on MIB the series excellent. Though I'm not sure he did the entire show, Miguelznxo Prado is credited as the shows character designer, and I - for one - really enjoyed his work. Especially the original look of J and K found in the show's title sequence. Where most people had been content to simply follow the "Bruce Timm" look for action/adventure cartoons, Prado brought his own unique style to the series. Unfortunately this look must not have been good for mass production because the in show animation of the characters does trend on the simpler side. Still I like that MIB the series didn't just go for a generic look; aliens, space suites, star ships and various other technologies are all very well designed and - for the most part - look unique. Though the shows appearance would fluctuate more often than I would like, I think the series had a lot of visual ambition and was often successful in implementing it.

Like so many other aspects of MIB the series the show's audio has its ups and downs. Secondary characters Elle, Zed, Frank and Jeebs all feature solid voices and I had no issues with any of them. What I did have a problem with were the voices of Agents K and J. I mentioned before that these two main characters had none of the charm found in their feature film counterparts. A big reason for this stems from the very off the mark casting of both K and J. To start with Agent J is supposed to be very self assured person, but the voice of cartoon J lacks any real confidence. Oh the writers try and fill him with all the false bravado they can muster, but none of it comes across in actor Keith Diamond's performance. At best he makes J sound like a self-deluded, happy-go-lucky goofball. Worse is the monotonous voice used for Agent K. Gone is the cadence and inflection that Tommy Lee Jones brought to the role. In its place we get a robotic performance that fails in its ability to deliver even the simplest of punch-lines. Interestingly enough the voice of K was performed by two different actors. Ed O'Ross did the voice in season one while Gregg Berger did so for seasons two through four. Though the change is indeed noticeable both O'Ross and Berger fall into the same traps when handling the character. This actually makes me wonder if the problem is not so much with the actors but with the shows producers. Given the characterization and writing for Agents K and J it is very possible that O'Ross, Berger and Diamond were coaxed into these misguided incarnations of the characters, otherwise it was just bad casting. Just one additional thing I want to mention, Agent L (Elle) also had a voice acting change going into the shows final season. Jennifer Lien was the original actress and Jennifer Martin was her replacement. Both do a good job so the change isn't really that big a deal, but I still would have preferred more consistency from the show.

Musically MIB the series is pretty average. The in show music gets the job done but offers nothing memorable. I did like the title song though, it had a very harmonic "alien" sound that fit the series nicely. In fact I would have to rank MIB's opening as one of the better title sequences made during the 1990s.

Men in Black the series featured a lot of talented creators; Frank Paur, Victor Cook and Greg Weisman to name a few. Unfortunately none of these individuals were showrunners. Though Executive Producer Duane Capizzi's resume is respectable, he just doesn't have that little extra something necessary to be considered good, just like MIB the series. Given a stronger creative talent like Greg Weisman or Boyd Kirkland this show may have stood a chance of escaping its perpetual mediocrity. That said, when you compare MIB with other live action movie to TV cartoon adaptations the show takes on a whole new light. Take, for example, The Mummy, King Kong and Godzilla. All of these shows came about as a result of "blockbuster" movies, yet they all sucked unbelievable ass. It would have been real easy for MIB the series to go down that same cheap and easy road. Thankfully it at least tried to do something more. As for recommending the show I would probably not advise anyone to go out of their way to do so, especially since it's not even available on DVD in the US. The only release I know of was in the UK, and that was just for season one. If you are bound and determined to watch anyway then you'll probably need to do so online.

The Last Unicorn - Classic fantasy done right

2010-04-18T15:49:00.010-04:00

The Last Unicorn is a very respectably made animated film from 1982, it's also the first non-action/adventure cartoon I've reviewed here. The story of the Last Unicorn actually started as a novel of the same name by Peter S. Beagle. Written back in 1968 the book has been translated into multiple languages and sold over 5 million copies world wide. In part the book's growth in popularity stems from this beloved 1982 film which was directed by the famous team of Rankin and Bass. Even if the names Rankin and Bass don't sound familiar it's a fair bet you've seen their work, especially if you enjoy the stop-motion holiday films Rudolf, Frosty the Snowman and Santa Clause is Comin' to Town. Though mostly known for these excellent holiday specials, Rankin/Bass would venture into traditional animation on a regular basis with such works as The Hobbit, Return of the King, The Flight of Dragons and - of course - The Last Unicorn.

I was about six or seven years old when this movie came about and I watched it on a regular basis. Truthfully I remember being a little scared at times due to the more serious nature of the story, and of course the giant flaming Red Bull. As with many things the movie became a distant memory during my teen years and it wasn't until my college days that I rediscovered it. Sadly the only version of the film available at the time was a pan and scan full screen with tons of dust and scratches. Now with the 25th anniversary edition having been released I can finally enjoy a re-mastered version of the film in widescreen format.

To be clear I have never read the novelized version of The Last Unicorn, so this review will not compare and contrast the book and animated film at all. That said the story of The Last Unicorn is about - as you can probably guess - a unicorn discovering she is the last of her kind, as well as her quest to uncover what happened to the others like her. Along the way she befriends a bumbling wizard named Schmendrick and a middle aged woman by the name of Molly Grue. It is soon revealed that all the missing unicorns have been captured by a magical creature called the Red Bull, and to find them our heroes must travel to the castle of King Haggard. As our three companions journey closer to their goal however, the Red Bull appears and begins chasing the last unicorn. With no other options left for stopping the Red Bull Schmendrick casts a spell that turns the unicorn into a creature the bull has no interest in, a human. The remainder of the film deals with the mystery behind all the missing unicorns, as well as the last unicorns struggle with becoming human. Faced with emotions no other unicorn has ever felt, Lady Amalthea (the name given to the last unicorn after her transformation) must ultimately decide if she should stay mortal (as opposed to an ageless unicorn) or return to her original form.

Without a doubt the story of The Last Unicorn is an excellent one. Layered and intelligent, we just don't get enough of this kind of writing in entertainment these days. Since the screenplay was penned by the books author (Peter S. Beagle) it would probably be a fair bet to say the movie holds very true to the source material. Themes such as lonely vs. loneliness and regret make for interesting subject matter and I'm sure they were a part of the original story. At times I must admit that these ideas were a little underdeveloped, but given the films length (90 minutes) I felt they still worked well. If I had to find any fault with the movies plot/pacing it would be during the Captain Cully scene. Basically Schmendrick is captured by a roving band of outlaws and must tell a story involving Robin Hood to humor his captors. In doing this he actually conjures an apparition of Robin Hood and his Merry Men which allows him to escape. This may not sound all that bad but in the movie the whole scene plays out rather oddly. Something about the edits between Schmendrick and the unicorn left me wondering who really performed the magic. Also the decision to start using magic while telling the tale comes about very suddenly and somewhat unnaturally. The end of the film also feels a tad counter intuitive with the Red Bull backing down rather quickly once he is confronted. I do not bring these points up to condemn the movie in any way, they're just unusual hiccups in an otherwise solid narrative.

Unfortunately visuals from The Last Unicorn are a bit on the uneven side. Animation is decidedly minimal with stilted and inexpressive movements taking away from the characters performances. There are several scenes where the voice actors really pour their passion into the well written dialog, only to have the animation fail in conveying the emotion; most notably when Molly Grue first meets the unicorn and when King Haggard confronts Lady Amalthea. I don't blame the animators per se, it's clear the movie had a limited budget and the limited animation is nothing more than a byproduct of this. Given deeper pockets I am sure the Japanese animation studio could have rendered these characters superbly.

While the animation from The Last Unicorn is somewhat lacking, I would consider the films backgrounds a resounding success. Don't get me wrong, this isn't Disney quality stuff, but it's still very well designed and painted. I was especially impressed with the last unicorn’s forest from the beginning of the film. The look of the trees combined with a shifting color pallet ranging from warm to cool colors reminded me of a storybook type design. Later during the journey to King Haggard's castle, we are treated to a more harsh and rocky terrain. Once again the background painters do an exceptional job setting the mood with darker, more muted hues while detailing the stony surface admirably. Besides the story, I would rank the backgrounds as my favorite feature in the film.

Character designs are either really good, or really bad. Much like they did in the Hobbit, Rankin and Bass used a lot of squat, bulbous human design in the film. Captain Cully, witch Momma Fortuna, Rukh and others suffer from this unattractive look. Though Molly Grue does not share this shortcoming she does sport one of the most ridiculous looking hair styles ever, an unkempt rats nest made worse by the movies limited animation. Fortunately the look of Schmendrick, King Haggard and Price Lir fare much better. The best design work, however, would have to be the creature designs for the Unicorn, Red Bull and Harpy Celaeno. The unicorn is especially good because it goes beyond just the standard “horse with a horn” look and instead creates a very stylized, majestic animal, one worthy of the stories focus.

Overall the visuals from The Last Unicorn serve their purpose. Yes some of the design work could have been better, but ultimately it's the limited budget that hurts the film most. If the movies animation studio Topcraft had been given more money to work with they would have - no doubt - knocked our stocks off. After all many of the people comprising Topcraft went on to work for Hayao Miyazaki’s Studio Ghibli, one of the greatest animation outfits in history.

Like the films visuals, the audio from The Last Unicorn has its ups and downs. The movies score works well with a very folksy soundtrack courtesy of America, but towards the end of the film we get two very out of place songs from both Lady Amalthea and Prince Lir. The purpose of these numbers is to illustrate the last unicorn’s struggle to remember what she is while at the same time falling in love with the prince. While this may be commonplace in a Disney film the songs here just don’t work. They are poorly written, performed and are ultimately superfluous. I personally felt that the movie could have conveyed all these emotions through regular dialog and spared us these musical mishaps.

From a voice acting standpoint I thought the movie had a pretty decent cast. Alan Arkin does a good job as do Christopher Lee (King Haggard) and Tammy Grimes (Molly Grue). The only real complaint I had just happens to be with the stories most important character, the last unicorn. Mia Farrow does the voice of both the last unicorn and Lady Amalthea, but while she possesses the ethereal sound necessary for the character her delivery was lacking. By contrast Arkin really did not have the best voice to fit his character Schmendrick, but made up for it by performing his lines well and thus the character worked.

In the end The Last Unicorn is a flawed, but ultimately solid movie. It would be easy for me to dwell on what could have been, but instead I choose to enjoy the film for what it did right. For anyone who wants to pick this up on DVD I would recommend the 25th anniversary edition. It has a short interview with the book’s author, Peter S. Beagle, and features a re-mastered widescreen picture (though there are still a lot of dust and scratches to be found).

Aeon Flux - Deranged, Violent ... Brilliant

2009-12-31T16:46:00.023-05:00

The first time I saw Aeon Flux was the summer of my 16th year. I was up late with a friend watching Liquid Television on MTV. It was a fun, eclectic show and I enjoyed watching the unusual animated shorts. It was the show's last short that took me completely by surprise though. Instead of funny, oddball cartoon characters, a half naked woman wielding a gun came racing across the screen. There was no dialog, and the story was short (about 2 minutes), but I was blown away by the intense action. Instead of the laser guns I was used to seeing in action/adventure cartoons, characters in Aeon Flux were shooting bullets, actual bullets. People were getting shot, bleeding and even dieing. I had never seen anything, ANYTHING, like this before. Keep in mind this is before the influx of Japanese anime to America, and what little had made its way here I had not seen (with the exception of shows like Voltron and RoboTech). The very idea that an action/adventure cartoon could be like this was as mind boggling as the layered story the show revolved around. Re-watching these short stories (as well as the regular series) now, I am once again floored by the absolute brilliance of this show and its creator Peter Chung.

Aeon Flux premiered in 1991 on the avant-garde MTV show Liquid Television. The cartoon's creator was Peter Chung, a young animator working on - or all things - Rugrats. Feeling frustrated with the restrictions of both the character's movements - as well as conventional editing rules - Chung took full advantage of the freedom MTV's late night show offered. With a variety of inspirations Chung created a 12 minute pilot that was broken up into six parts and shown over the course of multiple Liquid Television episodes. In 1992 a second series of Aeon Flux shorts followed. Based on fans overwhelmingly positive response, MTV finally decided to order ten half hour episodes in 1995. For Peter Chung to do a full fledged show however, several changes had to be made. To start with there needed to be actual dialog, something that was all but absent in the Liquid Television vignettes. In terms of story there was no real carry over as well. This is understandable when you consider that Aeon dies at the end of all the shorts (kind of like South Park's Kenny). Another change came in the form of toned down violence, though saying the series is less violent than the short stories is like saying boxing is less violent than ultimate fighting. Still, the regular series - and shorts - each have their own unique qualities, equally impressive and ground breaking. For the sake of sanity however, I will be basing the rest of this review on the full length Aeon Flux episodes done in 1995.

The premise behind Aeon Flux is a little difficult to describe. If I was to try and boil it down to its essence I would have to say the show revolves around the relationship of Aeon Flux and Trevor Goodchild. Aeon is from the nation of Monica, a society that appears to be based around personal freedoms and self expression. Trevor is from the nation of Bregna, where he serves as head of state for the centralized "big brother is watching you" government. This dichotomy is further illustrated in the uniforms that each nation wears. Monican agents are scantly clad in black leather, showing off their unique physical appearance, reveling in their individuality. By contrast, Bregna soldiers are literally covered from head to toe in identical brown and blue uniforms, even their faces are hidden by a nondescript mask. But the show isn't really about warring nations or ideologies, it's mostly about the psychotic, romantic relationship of Aeon and Tevor. Despite constantly finding themselves at odds, Aeon (an anarchist) and Trevor (a controlling, manipulating politician) actually have a mutual infatuation with one another. Further complicating this bizarre love affair is the fact that neither person really desires the other to change, they don't want each other any other way, even if they end up killing one another. This fatal attraction is played out in most of the shows ten episodes, and it's the only real "constant" found amidst the shows episodic format.

As for Aeon Flux's writing, it's layered, psychological, sexual and at times even metaphysical in nature. Ironic Hitchcock like endings are common, as is the use of sexual fetishes and perversions to characterize persons. Obviously this is not your typical action/adventure cartoon. Instead of thinly veiled and formulaic stories, we get a bold, experimental show that goes places few will. Themes such as identity, free will, humanity, reality and the mind are used as a basis for episodes, with the stories being built around them. This can lead to a somewhat inconsistent tone at times, luckily the shows episodic format and self contained feel keep this from ever becoming a problem.

Given the deeper nature of Aeon Flux you will also find that the show stands up well to repeated viewings. You can come away with something different almost every time you watch an episode. This is something that Chung encouraged while doing the show, even now he does not seek to "interpret" story meanings but instead leaves it to the viewer. To say that the show was "edgy" is an understatement. Even if it were to premiere now - some fifteen years later - the series would be considered ahead of its time (though perhaps less visually original since anime has become so prevalent world wide).

It's not all gumdrops and lollipops though, some episodes do suffer from ambiguity, specifically the latter ones. Demiurge is probably the worst offender with an overabundance of symbolism and a story that is far too "loose" for viewers to come away with anything concrete after viewing. This treads dangerously close to the dreaded "p" word (pretentious), and could easily turn off potential viewers should it be their first exposure to the series. Still, given the unconventional nature of the show this is both understandable and forgivable.

At this time I would like to take a brief interlude and talk about MTV during the 1990s. When you think about important or influential animation from the last couple decades certain studios and networks come to mind. Off the top of my head there's (of course) Disney, Pixar, Warner Bros. Animation, Nickelodeon, Fox, Cartoon Network, Adult Swim and Studio Ghibli. All of this is good and well, but I would like to argue that MTV would make a worthy addition to this list. For close to a decade MTV pushed the boundaries and took chances on experimental animation that few (if anybody) would. I've already mentioned Liquid Television, an obvious precursor to Adult Swim. From this show we got both Aeon Flux and Beavis and Butthead. Of course I love Aeon, but I've never been a huge fan of B&B. Still, you cannot deny both their impact and success on animation, and without them we wouldn't have gotten the fabulous spin-off Daria. In the mid 1990s we were treated to MTV's Oddities, a show featuring The Head and The Maxx. As you may be able to tell from the title "Oddities" both of these shows featured surreal characters and concepts. The Maxx was especially good, sporting a mixture of animation techniques flawlessly executed to tell the story of a homeless superhero. Unfortunately, towards the end of the decade MTV began to stray away from groundbreaking cartoons, dazzled by the enormous ratings found in reality programing. At the turn of the century we did get a couple short-lived gems in Clone High and MTV's Downtown, but eventually the network all but abandoned cartoons to up and comers like the aforementioned Adult Swim. Looking back over their body of work however, one has to admire the courage and gumption MTV showed in pursuing such edgy animation. I personally feel lucky to have gone through both my teens and early twenties during this time period.

With that little love letter out of the way, lets talk about animation. I mentioned before that Peter Chung was frustrated with conventional editing techniques in animation. The end result of this frustration was a very visually unique show in Aeon Flux. Camera angles, perspective, character movements and proportions are all intensely staged and extremely exaggerated. In fact, I would have to say that the word "extreme" is very appropriate when describing the show's look. For example, the way that Chung and crew play with space. I love how characters can slide through narrow spaces you would never expect, or open the gateway located in a mans chest then crawl inside. Legs, arms, even spines can twist and bend to impossible degrees. Characters can run, jump and flip in ways acrobats can only dream of. Fun stuff.

As for the quality of animation itself, I have to say it varies. Some episodes simply look better than others. Character models are always consistent though, and very rarely does anything look "bad". Truth be told the animation from the Aeon Flux shorts is superior. This is probably because the run time was so small and they didn't have to stretch the budget as far. Overall this is a very good looking show though, especially for a cartoon from 1995.

Production design from Aeon Flux is another win. According to Wikipedia, besides the obvious influence of anime, Peter Chung drew much of his visual inspiration from Egon Schiele and Jean Giraud. While watching the special features of this DVD set I did not come across anything to confirm this however, so I cannot say for certain that this is the case (though looking at a couple of images by each artist I would have to conclude that the Wiki author is correct). Regardless the show's design is awesome. Peter Chung's character designs are so fantastically different that people always recognize them. Backgrounds are equally unique and give the quasi-futuristic look necessary to the show. Guns, grappling hooks, robotic spider-bombs and all the other cool spy gear put James Bond to shame. Even the show's color palette is unusually superb, sporting a mute, pastel look very uncommon in animation. All across the board Aeon Flux's design impresses.

As for sound, Aeon Flux is once again excellent. Like so many other aspects of the show, the music is very distinct. I'm not really sure how to describe it, you just have to hear it. Voice acting for the regular series is very good as well. There was a little bit of a controversy with some fans not wanting Aeon to be voiced, but I think that the casting of Denise Poirier in role was perfect. Even better was the casting of John Rafter Lee as Trevor. He just has that perfect amount of British arrogance to voice the egomaniacal leader. Early on in the regular series there was a couple moments of stiff delivery, but overall I feel that the voice acting - as well as the music - of Aeon Flux succeeded beautifully.

The first Aeon Flux short premiered almost twenty years ago, and it's as mind blowing now as it was then. Visually stunning with complex sub-text, the show doesn't just stand up to today's standards, but in many ways it surpasses them. Admittedly the show is not for everyone, but I have to give Aeon Flux a full recommendation nonetheless (keeping in mind that the show is for mature audiences only). Your DVD options are limited, but that's ok because the 2005 DVD release gives you everything you need (it's appropriately titled "The Complete Animated Collection"). All the Aeon Flux shorts and regular series episodes are included with this set. You also get select commentaries, a featurette and various other special features. Amazon has a listing for a Blu-ray release of this collection, however no date has been given as of this review. A great show and a great DVD set, what more can you ask for?

Dungeons & Dragons - Short, but oh so sweet

2009-12-12T18:38:00.023-05:00

The latest 1980s action/adventure show to makes its way through my DVD player is the short lived Dungeons and Dragons. Unlike the weekday afternoon shows (such as Transformers and GI Joe), Dungeons and Dragons was a true Saturday morning cartoon. Instead of watching the show every day you got to watch it once a week. This lack of repetition made the series less impressionable for me in my youth, thinking back on it I couldn't remember if I liked the show or not. Combine that with the small number of episodes produced - 27 in total - and I really had no idea what to expect from this cartoon. What I got was a truly amazing series.

To briefly summarize, Dungeons and Dragons is an action/adventure show that premiered in 1983. It was based on - and shared the same name as - the popular roll playing game. This was actually a point of controversy for the show being that overly protective parents had a real hard-on for D&D at this time (kind of like violent video games these days). Despite this similarity in name, Dungeons and Dragons turned out to be a truly harmless and family friendly cartoon. It featured a group of six children who accidentally travel through a portal to another dimension (while on a carnival ride of all things). Once there they are each given a magical object to protect themselves with. These objects correspond with a different D&D character type (Ranger, Acrobat, Thief, Cavalier, Magician and Barbarian), and are provided by their mysterious benefactor Dungeon Master. As for the characters themselves, they consist of Hank the leader (Ranger), Diana (Acrobat), cowardly smart mouth Eric (Cavalier), nerdy Presto (Magician), Sheila (Thief), and young Bobby (Barbarian). Of course being a show of the 1980s the group has an obligatory "cute" sidekick, in this case it's a baby unicorn named "Uni". Trapped in this new realm together, our heroes must learn to work together, brave countless dangers and find a way home.

Normally I start reviews with an assessment of the shows writing. This will not be the case today however. Instead I will be leading off with the shows animation. Overall I would have to say that Dungeons and Dragons looks really good. The animation is pretty fluid for an 80's action/adventure series. Far superior than shows like Defenders of the Earth and at times as good as G.I. Joe. On the bad side there is some shifting of character models and animation style. These shifts are small however and do little to hurt the show (especially when you compare them to the massive changes in style found in Defenders of the Earth). On the positive side Dungeons and Dragons uses scale really well in several places. Things like giant stone guardians and overly large chains feel truly immense compared to the shows characters. This effect is tricky to pull off, and it's something you don't see very often in TV action/adventure animation.

Production design on Dungeons and Dragons is relatively good as well. All the main character designs are solid, however secondary character designs can be hit and miss. Backgrounds look good and have a nice variety, but they are definitely "TV" quality in execution. Like I said, the design work is nice, it's just not the strongest feature of the show and I've seen better from the time period.

In terms of music, I'm afraid that Dungeons and Dragons falls flat. Not only does the show lack an opening theme song (a staple mark of most action/adventure cartoons from the 1980s), it recycles tons of in-show music. I don't mean that they just recycle their own in-show music, they use other shows music. Spider-man and his Amazing Friends, G.I. Joe and the Hulk are all present and accounted for in the Dungeon and Dragons soundtrack. Considering the quality and expense of the series, I would have expected the show to have its own unique sound, sadly this is not the case.

Rounding out the sound department is the show's vocal cast. I really don't have a lot to say here. The actors give solid performances - and the voices are all distinct - but only Sidney Miller (Dungeon Master) stands out as exceptional. Much like the production design, I would grade Dungeons and Dragons voice acting as "above average".

Up to this point I've told you that Dungeons and Dragons has good animation, solid production design, nice voice acting and bad music. So why was I singing the show's praises in my opening statement? Simple, Dungeons and Dragons has the best writing I've ever seen in any 1980's action/adventure cartoon, period. Maybe this is because the show only consists of 27 episodes (as opposed to the 90 or even 100 plus episodes of other shows), or perhaps the writers are just better. Either way the quality of storytelling in Dungeons and Dragons puts most cartoons from this time period to shame. That's not to say that other shows like G.I. Joe don't have well written episodes, far from it. In just the first season of G.I. Joe there was; Traitor, Twenty Questions, The Viper is Coming, Worlds Without End and There No Place Like Springfield. But for every good episode there were also lots of mediocre, and even bad episodes. Episodes like; The Gamemaster, Lasers in the Night, Ea De Cobra, Cold Slither, The Great Alaskan Land Rush and The Wrong Stuff are egregiously bad. By contrast the worst episodes of Dungeons and Dragons would be no worse than mediocre, and those would be in the minority, the bulk of D&D shows are really good.

Still the thing that really sets Dungeons and Dragons writing apart is "Dragon's Graveyard". Considered the quintessential episode of the D&D cannon, "Dragons Graveyard" is the single best action/adventure story done in the 1980s. The emotion, characterization and subject matter are so mature - yet accessible - you almost forget you're watching a glorified toy commercial. Credit has to go to the episodes writer Michael Reaves. I'm sure it wasn't easy to get the network to agree to do such an unconventional story, but it was worth the fight. We wouldn't see these kinds of stories again until Batman the Animated series changed action/adventure cartoons forever in 1992.

Another superior aspect to Dungeons and Dragons is the theme. Basically the show boils down to a couple of kids just trying to find their way home. This is something anybody can relate to. Almost all of us have been lost before, so imagining ourselves in their shoes doesn't take a lot of effort. Especially when consider that other shows were using grandiose ideas like "stopping global terrorist organizations" or "protecting earth from alien dictators". By comparison Dungeons and Dragons just feels more ... personal.

Sadly the series finale never got produced. At the end of the shows third season, NBC commissioned Michael Reaves to write a final episode, one that would have seen our young heroes finally get home. Unfortunately, ratings decline and expense prevented this script from ever being realized. There is some good news though. If you buy the collectors edition of D&D you can actually listen to this story in a radio style format (basically the settings are described and the dialog acted out, just like they used to do on old radio shows). It's not quite the same as seeing the story animated, but being able to actually get closure to such a fantastic series was a real treat.

So where do I rate Dungeons and Dragons amongst the plethora of 1980s action/adventure cartoons? Well at the risk of looking like a cop out, I'm going to put D&D dead even with G.I. Joe. The latter has superior production value and execution, but the former presents a much tighter collection of episodes, including the best single action/adventure story ever. As for the DVD set itself, you have two options. There's the bare bones edition with no extras, and the collectors edition with a ton of extras (including the finale I mentioned earlier). Personally I recommend the collectors edition, but there is a catch. The collectors set is out of print, so you will have to pay a lot more to get your hands on it. If this idea does not appeal to you then I would go with the standard edition, it's still in print and very cheap. Either way I am highly recommending this show to any fan of action/adventure animation.

Hellboy Sword of Storms is Hella Good

2009-11-28T19:31:00.017-05:00

Looking through the list of cartoons reviewed on this blog, one thing should become glaringly obvious, I'm a long time comic book geek. Not an unwashed, basement dwelling geek mind you. Just an average joe with several thousand comics taking up room in his closet. I tell you this because despite my long history collecting comics I'm still a relative new comer to the Hellboy franchise. For whatever reason I was never drawn to the character, or its creator's (Mike Mignola) artwork. My first real exposure to Hellboy was the live action movie from 2005 (directed by the fantastic Guillermo del Toro), and despite my generally positive reaction I still lacked any real desire to check out the source material. All that changed with Hellboy animated. Soon after the live action film del Toro and Mignola set out to turn Hellboy into cartoon with two DTV movies. The first was "Sword of Storms" and the second was "Blood and Iron". Something about the look and tone of these two movies piqued my interest in the character, and it wasn't long before I found myself devouring trade paperbacks of Hellboy's original adventures.

Just in case you don't know who Hellboy is I'll explain. Basically Hellboy is a demon from another dimension who was brought to this world - as an infant - to wage war and destroy mankind. Luckily for us Hellboy was rescued and raised by a group of "good men" that later formed the Bureau of Paranormal Research and Defense (B.P.R.D. for short). So instead of annihilating us Hellboy protects us from the supernatural things that go bump in the night.

It's this use of the supernatural as an action/adventure vehicle that makes Sword of Storms so much fun. The film starts with a Japanese professor who unwittingly becomes possessed by the two storm demon brothers Thunder and Lighting. The goal of these demons is to free their corporeal forms by destroying the Sword of Storms. Of course the B.P.R.D. is called in and before you know it Hellboy stumbles across the aforementioned sword and is spirited away to another dimension full of feudal Japanese monsters. I could go into more detail but honestly that's all you really need to know.

Not only does Sword of Storms have a solid story (co-written by Mike Mignola himself), it also has fantastic writing. By this I mean that the pacing, dialog and character relationships are all spot on. The film moves at a perfect pace, never bogging down but at the same time never feeling rushed. Banter, especially from Hellboy, is genuinely funny as well. Relationships between the three main characters (Hellboy, Abe Sapien and Liz Sherman) are established early on, feel natural and are fun to watch. This is especially important because the dynamics of Hellboy animated are not the same as the live action film. Liz and Hellboy are not romantically linked in the cartoon, and Abe is far less fragile. I would have to say that with the exception of Liz (who feels like a cross between the comic Liz and the movie Liz), the animated version of these characters are closer to their comic book counterparts than the film versions (personally I think this is a good thing). The story from Sword of Storms also harkens back to the Hellboy comics using folklore as an basis to build the story around (much like Mike Mignola's Hellboy one-shots). The overall movie just feels really tight, not too much or too little, but just right.

In terms of visuals, Sword of Storms is a solid DTV. The animation is very smooth and stylish with nice backgrounds and an attractive color pallet. Compared to other DTVs from the last couple years I will admit that there are better looking films (Wonder Woman and Green Lantern First Flight for example). That said, Hellboy is still on the higher end of animation quality. On the critical side I will call out that there are one or two poorly animated CGI scenes in the movie, still by and large the general look of the film is consistent.

With a great story, solid writing and excellent animation it should be no surprise that the character design from Sword of Storms are - once again - good. This is no easy task since the look of Hellboy animated is completely different than Mike Mignola's comic art style. Where Mignola uses heavy contrast and strong graphical shapes the cartoon version of Hellboy is more in tune with streamlined modern animation styles. Thus the translation of Mignola's art had to be more in "spirit" than in appearance. Luckily the character designer pulls this off relatively well by staying true to the essence of Hellboy while stylizing him in a way that is more appropriate to the medium of animation. Liz Sherman and Abe Sapien also have attractive designs. While these main character design are indeed admirable, the secondary character designs in Sword of Storms are unfortunately lacking. It's not that they look bad per say, it's just a little too "Saturday morning" for my taste. Almost like the characters stepped right out of an episode of the Jackie Chan adventures or something. This is the only real complaint I had with the film, and frankly it's pretty much a non-issue.

Rounding out the strong points from Sword of Storms is the voice acting. Benefiting greatly from their experience in the rolls, Ron Pearlman (Hellboy), Selma Blair (Liz Sherman) and Doug Jones(Abe Sapien) all give fantastic performances. If you've ever heard Ron Pearlman speak then you know that his deep, distinct sound is perfect for Hellboy. Selma Blair's somber, melancholy voice fits the animated incarnation of Liz Sherman very well, as does the David Hyde-Pierce sounding voice that Doug Jones brings to Abe Sapien. Secondary voice actors also turn in strong performances rounding out- what I feel - is one of the better sounding casts you'll find in the DTV arena.

In case you haven't figured it out I'm highly recommending this movie with the following caveat. Hellboy Sword of Storms is closer to PG-13 than it is to PG. There is mild cursing and violence so please keep this in mind before letting youngsters view the film. With that out of the way, Sword of Storms (as well as Blood and Iron) is an all around solid action/adventure DTV. Packed with a ton of good extras the DVD delivers on all fronts and makes a great addition to any action/adventure cartoon collection.

Titan A.E. - Squint really hard and you might see a good film

2009-11-15T09:40:00.020-05:00

Having recently re-watched, and reviewed, the animated sci-fi/fantasy film Starchaser: The Legend of Orin, I thought it would be fun to do the same thing for another epic space opera, Titan AE. Titan AE was an animated feature film released in 2000 by Fox Animation Studios. It was helmed by veteran director Don Bluth (along with partner Gary Goldman) and had a lot riding on its success. Unfortunately the movie was a financial failure, and soon after Fox Animation closed its doors for good.

I remember being pretty stoked for this movie back in 2000. A full fledged animated sci-fi/fantasy film was right up my alley, especially since it encompasses my favorite genre and storytelling medium. Combine that with Don Bluth (the man behind The Secret of Nihm) and I could not see how this movie would go wrong. Sadly, when the closing credits began to roll I found myself both frustrated and disappointed. I could tell that a good movie was in there somewhere, but finding it would have required many fundamental changes in the films animation and story structure.

The story of Titan A.E. goes something like this; in the year 3028 A.D. Earth has been destroyed and the human race now has to wander the universe as galactic drifters. The cause of Earths destruction is the Drej, an alien race comprised entirely of energy. For some reason the Drej fear mankind (something about our boundless creativity) and with the completion of our greatest invention, the Titan spaceship, they decide it would be best to end the human threat by blowing up our planet (can't argue with that logic). The Titan escapes destruction though thanks to its inventor Sam Tucker. Sam manages to launch the Titan and jump to light speed before the Drej can get to it, but in the process he uses up all the energy needed to power the ships true purpose. Before this escape Sam is forced to send his four year old son away on a separate evacuation vessel (since the Titan was the Drej's primary target Sam knew it would be safer this way). During the dramatic goodbye Sam gives his young son, Cale, a ring and states that "as long as you wear it, there is hope". Fifteen years later Cale is now nineteen years old and works in a space based salvage yard. Soon after the introduction of teenage Cale (complete with cynical, angry attitude) Captain Korso arrives. Korso shows Cale that the ring he still wears is actually a genetically encoded map leading to the location of the Titan. Turns out the Drej are also looking for Cale and before you know it he and Korso find themselves in the middle of a good old fashioned space station shootout. Eventually they escape aboard Korso's ship, the Valkyrie, and begin their quest to find the Titan, mankind's last hope. Of course no spaceship is complete without an eclectic crew, and the Valkyrie is no different. Joining Cale and Korso is another human Akima, she is co-pilot of the Valkyrie and obligatory love interest for Cale. On the non-human side we have first mate Preed, navigation expert Gune, and a cranky female weapons/combat officer named Stith. Can this rag-tag bunch find the Titan before the Drej and save mankind? Of course they can, but it’s not the destination that counts, it’s the journey to get there.

As you may have been able to tell from my description above the plot of Titan A.E. is not exactly groundbreaking. It does make for a good action/adventure vehicle however. Executed properly this would be an excellent film. Instead the movie fails in its delivery with uneven story structure and cliché characters. Problem number one occurs during the film's first act. Once Cale joins up with the crew of the Valkyrie we are whisked away to the maps first landmark. With no time to acclimate ourselves to Cale's new surroundings, the movie begins to feel unnaturally rushed. Worse is Cale's capture - and eventual escape - from the Drej. The capture itself serves no purpose other than to allow the Drej to copy Cale's map, and the escape is far too easy and under explained (how is it that Cale can manipulate the Drej energy fields, or fly one of their space craft?). These events just don't feel organic, instead they feel like forced plot points necessary to progress the story. At the same time other important plot points - such as Cale's ability to fix just about anything and Akima's piloting skill - are almost completely ignored. This is especially bad since these character traits play an important role in the movies' climax.

Speaking of characters, I found all three of the central human characters in Titan A.E. to be exceedingly predictable and cliché. I mentioned before that Cale is your typical angry, jaded teenager. He's mad at daddy for leaving him and all he cares about is himself. Of course the journey to find Titan changes all that. Failed attempts to interject humor into Cale don't help either. Jokes about frozen burritos and naming new Earth "Bob" fall completely flat. Korso is even worse (warning I'm about to spoil an important plot point). At first Korso offers Cale friendship and purpose, but Cale soon discovers the ugly truth. Korso is using him to find the Titan so that he can turn it over to the Drej (gasp!). Don't worry though, Korso's betrayal is eventually followed by his redemption as he sacrifices his own life to see the Titan's purpose achieved. Though these are not age old character archetypes they definitely fall into the "modern stereotype" department (much like the space smuggler with a heart of gold, and the naive young hero found in the 1980s). Akima is not as bad but mostly because she lacks definition. Outside of her past as a colony drifter there is very little to be said about Akima. This is unfortunate because I think she had the most potential. A flashback or two from her childhood could have really driven home her passionate desire to find the Titan.

Though I found the story and characters of Titan A.E. somewhat lacking, my real beef with the movie comes from the animation. Have you ever met two beautiful people and thought that their children would be gorgeous, only to later find out the kids butt ugly? Such is the case with Titan A.E. The traditional cell animation and painted backgrounds are fantastic, not surprising when you consider Don Bluth's involvement. Character models are consistent, movement is a fluid 24 frames per second and the overall craftsmanship is decidedly feature film worthy. The same can be said in regards to the movies CGI (computer generated images). Though not as good as the traditional animation, Titan A.E.s CG stands on its own very nicely and there is nothing cheap looking about it. So what happens when you combine these two beautiful forms of animation? You get crap. How can something like this happen you ask? It's simple, the traditional animation and CGI animation look drastically different. Separate from each other they work fine, once they occupy the same space however, the whole illusion necessary for animation to work is destroyed. This is a classic mistake made in other animated films such as Sinbad and Anastasia, it's also baffling. The use of CG in traditionally animated movies was not that new in 2000. Other movies like The Iron Giant (if you have not seen The Iron Giant stop reading and do so now!) and Tarzan were made prior to Titan A.E. and they figured out how to do it, so why couldn't Don Bluth and company do the same? Some scenes do work better than others, but on a whole the effect is simply too distracting. The final scene of Cale and Akima standing atop new Earth is exceptionally bad.

Production and character design is mostly good. I loved a lot of the space colony and space station design as well as the various alien designs. Korso, Preed, Stith and Gune all look good, as does the Valkyrie. Sadly Cale and Akima do have issues. Cale's haircut is exceedingly dated (even back in 2000 it was dated) and Akima's look, though nice, comes across as a little "hipster". Still these are small complaints and do little, if anything, to hurt the film.

Unfortunately the voice acting in Titan A.E. does hurt the film. I've always liked the saying "He has a face for radio", but wondered if the reverse could apply. Well thanks to Matt Damon I now know that the answer is a resounding yes. Matt Damon must have a face for live action entertainment because he certainly does NOT have a voice made for animation. Cale's voice (performed by Damon) is so flat and monotonous it actually becomes distracting during the course of the film. I know studios want to cast big name actors in these roles, but they should at least make sure they can pull it off first. Drew Barrymore is better as Akima, but there are so many actresses that could have done a better job it’s just sad. On the plus side Nathan Lane (Preed), Janeane Garofalo (Stith) and John Leguizamo (Gune) all turn in good performances. Surprisingly the big standout of the group is Bill Pullman (Korso). I never would have expected such an unassuming actor to have such a distinct voice. His inflection and cadence gives much needed dimension to an otherwise formulaic character.

I don't have much to say about the music of Titan A.E. The movie uses a lot of "popular" songs from 2000, something that can be dangerous if done incorrectly. Luckily the choices were all good and actually complement the film. Still I worry that in another ten years or so the movies soundtrack will date it the same way that the Transformers movie soundtrack does (animated movie from 1986, not the crappy Michael Bay stuff).

Looking back at Titan A.E. I continue to wonder what could have been. If all the issues I've detailed were fixed would the movie be a classic? Probably not, but I do think the film had a real shot at respectability. As it is the movie still has enough positive qualities to warrant a viewing, if for no other reason then the fact we don't get a lot of epic space opera animation these days.

Starchaser - The Legend of Orin (AKA: Star Wars and the Temple of Doom)

2009-10-31T17:38:00.037-04:00

Starchaser: The Legend of Orin is an action/adventure animated movie released in 1985. Since it was clearly attempting to attract a Star Wars audience you would expect a 9-year old, such as myself, to have been all over it. However this was not the case. The truth is that I wasn't even aware of this films existence until 2005 (20 years after its initial release). The first place I encountered Starchaser was at a business conference. I was in my hotel room between sessions and while flipping through the channels I came across an exciting spaceship battle that I did not recognize. Curious, I left the movie on and quickly realized that what I was watching was an older animated movie that I had (surprisingly) never seen (at the time I thought it was from the late 70's or early 80's). Unfortunately I had to get to my next conference session and left the film before learning its name. With no real information to go on I let the movie bounce around in the back of my mind for about six months. Then one day while browse my local FYE I saw a DVD featuring characters from that same unknown movie, the movie was (of course) Starchaser: The Legend of Orin. The DVD was on sale for under ten dollars so I picked it up and gave it try. What I found was a truly unoriginal yet entertaining film.

Before I summarize the plot of this movie I want to talk about the story in broader terms. Starchaser shamelessly borrows - both in theme and design - from other popular films of the same genre. The parallels to Star Wars, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and even Heavy Metal are glaringly obvious. This led to heavy criticism regarding the films originality (or lack thereof), but while this unfavorable analysis is certainly founded I also believe it to be somewhat ... exaggerated. True, the movie is derivative, but it's not the one to one rip off that some would have you believe (especially when compared to stories like Eragon, which is basically Star Wars with Dragons). What you have are a bunch of popular ideas thrown in a blender, thoroughly mixed and served up in an entertaining way; and make no mistake the movie is entertaining. The story is well paced, with very few "slow" spots. The action is fun and there are even a few humorous moments. Sadly it's not all good news. I must admit that the characters - while enjoyable - are ultimately clichéd. You have the wide-eyed, naive young hero (Orin), the grizzled smuggler who acts tough, but ultimately has a heart of gold (Dagg), and of course there's the pretty young princess who's just along for the ride (Aviana). All of these characters (and others) feel like superficial stereotypes, a feeling that is undeniably present in many aspects of the movie. The villain Zygon is also emulative, both in appearance and motivation. I don't want to give too much away but let’s just say the played out theme of robots destroying mankind is well represented here. Other failings include a very forced and unnatural romance between Orin and Aviana, as well as a confusing, under explained mythology known as the "Kakann" (the mysterious power that resides within Orin).

I don't want to retell the entire movie here so instead I'll move forward with a brief synopsis. Our story begins with the young hero Orin. Orin lives as a slave in the hellish realm of Mine-World where he's forced to mine red crystals day and night (not that he would know the difference since Mine-World is entirely underground). After discovering a mystical sword hilt Orin is given the task of escaping his imprisonment and traveling to the surface world. Once there he must find the hilt's blade and free his people. Orin encounters several colorful characters along the way to help him on his quest. First is the thieving, Han Solo wannabe, Dagg. Initially Dagg wants nothing to do with Orin, but eventually he warms up to the "water moccasin" (that's Dagg's affectionate nickname for Orin) and the two traverse various planets using Dagg's starship (complete with wise cracking computer). Along the way they pick up a sexy robot secretary named Silica and the obligatory princess Aviana. Unfortunately Aviana is nothing more than a one-dimensional love interest for Orin with next to no motivation or characterization. To complete his quest Orin must defeat Zygon. Zygon is your typical cape wearing bad guy bent on universal domination. He's also responsible for the subjugation of Orin's people.

With the basic story now behind us I'll forge ahead with the movies production quality. The overall production value of Starchaser is pretty solid. Though it's not as good as a classic Disney film the movie clearly had a reasonable budget. My only real hang-up in terms of visuals was the use of rotoscoping. For anyone who doesn't know, rotoscoping is an animation technique where the animator traces over recorded live action movement one frame at a time (this can be quite time consuming). Personally I prefer the more expressive look derived from non-rotoscoped animation (same goes for that ugly motion capture technique that Robert Zemeckis is so obsessed with). Fortunately the rotoscoping used in Starchaser is done in a tasteful way (as opposed to movies like Wizards and the LOTR animated films). True some of the interaction between characters is awkward, but generally speaking the movements are fluid and realistic enough for me to be un-offended. But while the character animation is merely decent, the starship animation used throughout the film is excellent. Turns out Starchaser was animated for 3-D. Of course I've never seen the film in 3-D, but it's easy enough to tell that the main use of the format was during the spaceship battles. From what I understand to accomplish this feat the animators used computer generated models that they then rotoscoped. To maximize the effect we are treated to lots of dramatic shots of starships coming directly at the camera, and plenty of mid-air flips. Considering the movies age I was exceedingly impressed by this choreography. In all my years of sci-fi and animation fandom I have never seen anything quite like the ships in Starchaser. I would love to have seen them in the theater in actual 3-D.

The background paintings from Starchaser look very good as well. Once again, they're not as strong as a movie like Lady and the Tramp, but they are more than able to get the job done. With a diverse series of locations you are treated to everything from underground slave mines to swamps to deserts to pristine forests and even a futuristic cityscape. On the negative side some of the design work on characters and starships is lacking, both in originality and aesthetics. The character design is such a mishmash of borrowed looks that it can become frustrating. Whether it’s the robots that look like something out of Heavy Metal, or the superhero cape sported by Zygon, I just felt like there was nothing new being offered from the movies design team. As for the starship design, the best word I can think to describe it is forgettable (but only in design, not in execution). When compared to things like Tie-Fighters, X-Wing fighters and especially the Millenium Falcon, the ships from Starchaser feel tame by comparison.

Like many aspects of Starchaser the audio from the film is noticeably recycled and dated. Things like laser blasts and starship sounds can be traced to various other films of the same genre. Of course I didn't expect the film to reinvent these sounds, but it would have been nice to at least see an attempt at originality. The voicing cast is manageable, but nothing special. Only Dagg's voice (performed by Carmen Argenziano) is remotely memorable. Musically Starchaser is certainly a product of its time. You can just feel the 80's oozing out of it when you listen to the booming orchestra (reminders me a lot of Ice Pirates). Where some would be critical of this I - on the other hand - found the nostalgia utterly charming.

Though I would never accuse Starchaser of being original, I none the less found the movie to be an enjoyable ride. Yes the film unabashedly "borrows" from other movies of the same genre, I just think that it does so in a charming way. Beside the vintage look and feel of 1985, what I really like about Starchaser is that it is a "complete" movie. There's a lot of feature film animation from the late 70's and early 80's that comes across as hodgepodge. For all of its shortcoming Starchaser never falters in its execution. Even the more ambitious elements - such as the rotoscoped/CG starships - look professional and polished. I'm not trying to elevate the film to classic, or even cult status. What I am trying do is tell you this; if you are a fan of 80's sci-fi/fantasy and you haven't seen Starchaser, you should check it out.