Quest for Camelot gets lost along the way

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 films 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 films 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 movies 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 films 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 films 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 films 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

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

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.

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

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 feel 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 films 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.

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

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.