The Movie Thread

[Failinhearts]

While on my stay in Niagara, I had to see SOME sort of new film at a theater I never went to before. So here we are.

Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation.

Now, we all know the deal with Sony Pictures Animation. They don't exactly have the best reputation thanks to their troubling track record. However, one movie that has proven itself to be a pleasant surprise to many animation fans, it's Genndy Tartakovsky's charming and quirky little movie called Hotel Transylvania. While it wasn't a masterpiece, it was refreshing, unique and for once... made Adam Sandler seem credible.

And of course, you bet your ass Sony's gonna milk this undead underdog for all its work. A sequel, a TV show, and now, a third film.

Will this installment capture the charm which zinged a whole audience that isn't called AniMat? Or is it high time this series takes a vacation for a century or two? 

(Note: This review is coming from a person who has seen, and enjoyed the original Hotel Transylvania but has not seen its sequel or the TV show)

Tartakovsky Style Strikes Again

A big draw of the Hotel Transylvania series, and what I personally think is the biggest draw for animation fans (for kids and tweens, it's probably Selena Gomez) is the unique, quirky and hyperactive animation that looks like a 2D cartoon in the 3D world in the best sort of ways. This is Genndy Tartakovsky we're talking about, the creator of Dexter's Lab and Samurai Jack, and he brings his trademark style back to the computer.

The visual gags and quirks take center stage in this movie, and is pretty much the biggest highlight of the film. Everyone moves so fluidly bizarre and is so charmingly expressive that it's a treat for the eyes during this current era of hyper-realistic CGI where everything needs to look as real as possible. Hotel Transylvania 3 fully embraces the wackiness of the scenario of monsters on a cruise ship to animate some wacky sequences that deliver most of the laughs you'll get in the movie.

...For better or for worse, once you put the writing to account and how the animation foreshadows it.

The animation for this movie is just as good as I remember, if not better since the wacky setting allows the animation crew to go all out with their tools and skillset to deliver the most delightfully, and humourously hyperactive animated movie you'll see all year.

Writing Takes A Backseat Cruise

While the animation and overall aesthetics are an improvement from the first movie, the same can't exactly be said for the writing.

The characters are just as you remember them, and I think all you really need to see to understand this movie is the first one. There's really no need to see the second aside from knowing that Mavis and Johnny have a son, and as far as I know, nothing ties into the third movie beyond that.

It's sort of like a typical kids TV show episode, that aside from some major developments, each episode is written so anyone can sort of jump on and understand the gist of things without prior knowledge of what happened directly before.

In fact, that's the best way to describe this movie. It feels like a glorified TV episode in regards to the story. Right down to the pacing.

The movie feels like a cliche vacation episode you'd see in a series, where the cast needs a change of pace from the status quo. What is also coupled with this story in an attempt to deliver a degree of spice is Drac falling in love with the captain who just so happens to be evil. It's another type of trope seen before.

...And nothing else is done beyond that. No twists on the formula, no surprises, it's as predictable as you can possibly get. You can watch the trailer and you'd know exactly how the film folds out.

Hell, the movie tries so hard to stick to this predictable story that it goes out of its way, takes odd, forced leaps of logic and copious amounts of filler to ensure the story's overall progression is as bare-bones as possible.

And yes, I praised the animation and the many side sequences which do provide laughs, or at the very least, chuckles but the truth of the matter is that these jokes and a good chunk of the characters do nothing for the plot itself. You can cut out most of the jokes, and you won't damage the plot at all. The film will only last about 30 minutes though. You know, the average length of a TV episode?

Putting it simply, HT3 is an extended TV episode that if stripped of its admittedly enjoyable filler, you have an incredibly by-the-numbers story that barely tries anything new.

Now, of course the original movie wasn't the most groundbreaking story on the planet but at least that had its own share of twists to spice up the typical father and daughter protectiveness story with the monster edge. You don't see much of that here aside from some throwaway talk about monster prejudice.

Good Characters, Poor Execution

In regards to the characters and how they act in general, they're just as you remember them. Dracula is the same, hard working and overbearing dad as before, but you can see how his character has progressed from the first film. Mavis is hyperactive, optimistic and as caring as ever. Johnny is still the bumbling comic relief. Drac's pals are just as suitable as comic reliefs as they'd always been, they're all here with their relationships and dynamics in tact.

If that's the case, then what's the problem?

The problem goes into more of what the story requires of them. As I said, the movie wants to maintain its story with all its tropes in tact. It's like, well, a cruise ship. It's a ship heading straight to a single location, the resolution. Every character (who is necessary and not just a gag) are the parts of the ship to keep it moving, and they will work tirelessly, no matter what to maintain a straight, safe course to the destination.

And while, yes, that should be ideal for a REAL cruise, but for a story, these parts of the ship should be allowed to be themselves, allow the ship to steer itself into new, exciting and uncharted territory that also still feels natural and won't just tear the boat apart. 

However, since the movie desperately tries to maintain this steady course towards the end credits, these characters have to do whatever it takes to do so. This means, they need to act out of character, do something too soon, forget certain aspects of the story's development only to remember it when it's most convenient or to be forced to do something, say they've always had it on their mind despite barely anything being done to set it up. 

These leaps in logic to reach a very specific goal makes these characters feel less like characters with natural arcs and development and more like tools to drive a plot no matter how implausible it is.

This is the biggest problem in the movie in my opinion. If the characters naturally acted like themselves and things played out realistically, no doubt you would have a more interesting movie.

Final Thoughts

Hotel Transylvania 3 isn't bad, it was still fairly enjoyable, and I got some good laughs. However, it's bogged down by an uninteresting cliched story that had to be held up with likable enough characters and a good set of filler gags. The story forces the characters to bend to its will, leading to an unnatural pace and progression, and it overall feels on par with a TV show episode.

And that's where I feel like the Hotel Transylvania franchise should stay for the time being. On TV. Only make a fourth movie when you feel like you can make a creative character-driven story out of it.

Is it worth a watch? Not exactly, unless you really wanna see Dracula dance to Madeon along with a couple other fun moments sprinkled throughout, but it's definitely not warranting of a second watch.

It's perfectly serviceable. That's all I can say in the end.

[Failinhearts]

In the past two days, I saw two movies!

Time for a review double feature!

Christopher Robin.

Now, it's a cliche nowadays to take a beloved old property and sort of modernize it, or overall make it more real with a serious tone or realistic edge. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But upon hearing that a movie was being made which involved a grown up Christoper Robin, I instantly saw the potential for it. With the whole deal with Winnie the Pooh representing childlike innocence in the hectic life of adulthood, it would make for a nice, introspective journey about life. In other words, of all these movies that try to put a realistic twist to an old cartoon, Winnie the Pooh was one of the best properties to cover.

Was I right?

Visuals As Sweet As Hunny

Off the bat, what I have to praise Christopher Robin for is its cinematography. This is hands down one of the better looking movies I've seen all year, with a great approach to lighting, camerawork and how it slowly changes during Christopher Robin's progression throughout the movie.

Everything felt dark, gloomy with one specific shot in the opening montage perfectly used depth to convey a message about Christopher Robin's neglect of his family so well. Once Pooh shows up, and they bond as Christopher relives his childhood, things become considerably lighter and even the score goes through an evolution. 

Seeing how the aesthetics subtly and slowly change was a nice way to display how the story progresses. It makes you appreciate and realize that it's not just writing that can tell a message.

Story's Just As Sweet Too

Now, story-wise, this is interesting. Now, the overworked parent who needs to learn how to ease up is a storyline seen many times before. There is no denying that this is a cliche. However, using Christopher Robin and Pooh, characters you have (probably) fallen in love with when you were younger immediately establishes a connection and investment that allows you to look past the trope. So yes, a lot of this movie relies on childhood context to really grip you because otherwise, it is fairly run of the mill. The characters is what make the movie enjoyably sweet. Christopher's development is perfectly natural and uses recurring plot devices well to help come across his development to the audience as he slowly picks up quirks from the other characters. When it comes to those, Pooh is as wonderfully wholesome and a perfect foil for Christopher's overcomplicated mindset by countering it with simple minded way of doing things.

Piglet is always so timid, Eeyore is deadpan and negative, and Tigger is incredibly charming and peppy. However, there's not much to them. The movie primarily focuses on the relationship on Christopher Robin and Pooh, but this isn't inherently a bad thing. It's nice to keep things simple, and the other three still do their jobs well as support.

Notice how I said those three, though... Now, when it comes to Owl, Rabbit, Kanga and Roo... they practically do nothing throughout the movie. It's a double edged sword. On one end, it feels like a waste of these other beloved characters to be basically glorified cameos. On the other hand, it would make this simple little story too complicated by cramming in too many characters.

And it's not like we want a Winnie the Pooh movie to be like Spider-Man 3 now, is it?

So I'll let the character underusing slide. 

The interactions between Christopher and Pooh are just as charming as you'd think. For the first and second acts, those two and their journeys, the clashing of personalities and mindsets and how they mend makes for a very touching and emotional story.

Oh, Bother...

When it comes to the final act of the movie, that's where things unfortunately fall apart and become somewhat lackluster. The final act focuses more on Christopher's unmemorable family rather than Chris himself. It ends in chase scenes, plot devices that need to be carried, and a cheesy ending that even for a cliche story such as this ends with too much of a bow on top.

There's even a shoehorned antagonist that needs stopping which is wholly unnecessary. The antagonist should've been Christopher Robin himself and his whole struggle and not just some other person to pin all the blame on.

Some plot devices and recurring characters are left behind, and it feels kinda like a completely different movie with Pooh and the other ones being the characters who remind you you're watching the same movie.

This final act damages the movie the most.

Final Thoughts

Christopher Robin is a charming, emotional movie with very likable, beloved characters, stunning cinematography and a great first two acts that really keep you invested. Unfortunately, a flawed final act coupled up with some forgettable characters do damage the film quite a bit from being great. As it stands, Christopher Robin is worth a watch, just keep these problems in mind.

...As well as don't think too hard about how these stuffed animals are real in-universe and not Christopher's imagination. It's really weird how they leave that little quirk unexplained.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Movie 2!

Teen Titans Go! To The Movies.

Now, we all know the deal behind this show. The juvenile humor, the hatred for not being the original show, the cynical approach towards their haters, the overuse on Cartoon Network's schedule, we could go on and on about Teen Titan Go's infamy and there are points that have warrent. I've only saw a couple episodes and I was frankly not impressed with it from what I saw. I also grew up with the original show, however I don't remember much of it so you can't really consider myself a fan per se. So when a theatrical movie was announced, I admittedly was one of the more skeptical people. I still wanted to see it... or rather needed to, due to my oath to see every 2D animated film in theaters to support this cinematically dying art form, but you couldn't say I was excited.

As more of the movie was shown off, especially the second trailer, I gained slightly more hopeful that this movie could end up decent at the very least. Nothing spectacular, but nothing great.

Then the early reviews came out, and how positive it was. I was flabbergasted, as well as everyone else.

Could this movie truly be that good?

Well, I went and see it...

...They're right. This movie WAS that good. I loved it, and of course, I'm not the only one. So come at me naysayers, I love this movie... and here's why.

When There's Oversaturation, You Know Who To Call...

Now, I'm a big fan of superhero movies, and I personally don't think they're running out of steam anytime soon. But of course, there's no denying the sheer frequency of movies coming out from this genre, and there are a sizable amount of people tired of them. That's perfectly understandable and TTG knows it. They pull no punches when mocking the tropes from these movies, from their development, reception and even just how you see them in general with jabs at even streaming services and how many they are. (Ironic considering DC's doing one of their own, but this movie is all about mocking their own practices anyway)

The timing of all these jokes, meta or otherwise are really well done with brilliant comedic timing, visual assists and art style changes. So many jokes even catch you off-guard, wondering if they're going to ever go to that place, or that angle, or include this or that person. They do, and it's brilliant.

Spoiler

There are TWO Stan Lee cameos. And yes, that is Stan doing the voice. The Man of Marvel IS in the movie.

Sure, there are instances of juvenile humor. Expect a fart joke, a VERY long poop joke, and a jab at their use of waffles... but there are far more jokes made for the comic book or movie fan and that I heard just as many adults laugh than kids. Many of which were DC fans as well, who get some of the more obscure nods that would fly over the kid's heads.

...From The Plot Points, You Could See It All

Now, while the jokes are amazing, the story itself is predictable... but still very entertaining. It covers a cliche story of how far you're willing to go to get what you want, the power of friendship and how they're more important than anything, and whatever twists can easily be predicted from a mile away. The movie even points out how predictable it is. However, it's clear that the plot doesn't matter too much for a movie like this, and they're not trying to deliver a thought provoking adventure. It's supposed to be a family friendly romp meant to have fun with.

Now... this makes you wonder, how come I'm giving this movie slack for it when I gave Hotel Transylvania 3 flak for basically trying to do the same thing? It all comes down to execution. The fact that this movie covers a meta plot, using subject matter not typically covered in movies like this and having a good chunk of the movie take place in what is literally the Warner Bros backlot? These aspects make the movie a lot more fresh and therefore enjoyable where you can look past the cliches. Compared to Hotel Translyvania 3, where the setting is cliche, the progression is cliche and nothing new is done to differentiate it. Yes, you can argue the monster angle does spice things up, but it never spiced the movie up enough aside from the gags... which never contributed to the story's progression.

Teen Titan Go's gags, while also being funny still served a purpose in moving the story along at a better pace, and there are no out of character leaps in logic to reach a specific plot point like how HT3 did.

It's funny how a show so inconsistent can make a rather consistent movie, even if it was predictable. But in the end, the execution and gags redeem it all.

Teen Titans No.

Now, this movie isn't without its flaws. Slade needed more of a presence as a villain rather than vanishing until the plot needs him again.

Spoiler

Yes, he was in disguise for most of the movie as Jade, but if you want to at least give the twist a bit more merit, Slade needs to be more and more prominent to not make this glaring surprise less apparent.

The musical numbers in the film, while charming in their own self-aware, cheesy way does drag on for a little too long, clearly trying to pad time out to reach that feature-length mark. There is this really out of nowhere implications of a romantic connection with Raven and Beast Boy... although considering the movie and how it mocks cliche, this is most likely a means of mocking the cliches between romantic interests in these movies. However, it either needed to be played down to be more subtle, or played up way more and really take advantage of the opportunity to mock these tropes. Rather, they keep it at a bizarre middle.

These are all somewhat minor, however and doesn't truly detract from the fun you'll be having.

Final Thoughts

Teen Titans Go! To The Movies surpassed all my expectations and became the funniest movie of the year for me, tickling my funny bone relentlessly with great comedic timing, well delivered voice performances, fun changes in art style and a predictable, yet fresh story thanks to the overall execution and the new ideas thrown into the mix with the old ones. 

I can't believe I'm saying this, but Teen Titans Go! To The Movies is absolutely worth a watch as it is a wonderfully fun ride. It's great. I swear, it's great.

The crew knew how risky this movie was. It knew DC's rocky track record, Teen Titan Go's overall infamy, the fact that it was 2D animated, a lot of odds were against this movie and they knew if they are to succeed, they need to make a strong concentrated effort to make the movie good for everyone and not just fart jokes for the kids.

As such, I really do commend Teen Titans Go! To The Movies, you wonderfully bizarre anomaly of film-making.

Also, for you classic fans, there are quite a bit of nods littered throughout the movie such as remixes of the PuffyAmiYumi theme and something at the end credits... so you're not left out either.

[Failinhearts]

Probably never heard of this movie, have you? Don't worry, I'll tell ya about it.

Kin.

This is a movie that I had interest in seeing after hearing the premise. A family drama crime thriller, but with a sci-fi twist. It sounds like a neat, fresh idea. So I decided to give this film a shot and... it's interesting.

I honestly feel like this movie would be better without the sci-fi elements. Lemme talk about it.

Family on the run

Now, if anyone tells you about a movie involving a broken family that comes together thanks to something from space, the first thing you'd probably think of is the animated Disney movie, Lilo and Stitch. This movie, while having its differences, I can't help but think of that movie when viewing this one. We have the Lilo, Eli, a kid from a broken home who recently lost his mother and has only his father left, resorting to finding scraps to make a bit of money. We have the Nani, Jimmy, a rebellious thief with attitude and Eli's brother who just wants to be there for his sibling. We have the David of the movie, who is a friend who helps them through their journey... who in this movie's case, a stripper named Milly.

Now, who's our Stitch in this movie? Well, it isn't an endearing alien... but one thing these two intergalactic entities have in common is that they both were made to destroy. In this case, a bulky space ray gun that Eli finds.

After a series of tragic events causes Jimmy to take Eli across the country to escape from a crime lord's crew led by James Franco, with Eli not knowing the tragedies behind the scenes that led to this trip, it's a race to not get caught while the two brothers bond despite their differing morals. Meanwhile, intergalactic hunters are also after the family, searching for the stolen gun... kinda like Jumba and Pleakely trying to find Stitch.

While the movie has a really lame, generic opening, that feels boring and done before, the moment the plot kicks into gear, you're instantly invested in the fate of those two brothers when before, you cared... but not too much since their character types have been seen a thousand times before. It just goes to show the importance of circumstances in a story, and how the directions and tone changed catches you off-guard. Because of the dire scenario these two are in, and the secrets withheld by Jimmy that are central to everything, you are hooked in seeing how they get out of this. If they get out of this.

The movie plays into our emotions, specifically, empathy to make up for the cliche character archetypes. Even if someone isn't a person you particularly like too much, you still feel sad and worried if anything happens to anyone you know, and it's not like nobody in this movie is by any means hatable. Because of this, the movie gets you to care for their well-being and hope their relationship grows and all will be mended. It's clever how the filmmakers were able to step aside the poor establishment yet molds a compelling story regardless.

Now, does this mean I should excuse the archetypes of these characters? No, not really. There could be more meat to some and it would make the story infinitely more engaging, but as it is, it could've been a lot worse.

In regards to character development, though, that's where the archetypes do add to the story, not gonna lie. A big part of the movie involves around emotional impression. How one can be influenced to do bad for an ulterior motive, even if it's good. Just how far should you go before something is too far? What will separate the heroes from the villains, and Eli's impressionability and Jimmy's "do at all costs" attitude aid to that theme very well because they are so blatantly emphasized as a specific personality trait.

James Franco as a villain, while over the top at times, also deserves some praise for still being intimidating and actually having quite a bit more meat than your average cigarete smoking, booze drinking, money obsessed bad guy. If anything, money isn't even much of his motivation but rather his own connection to his family, providing a thematic parallel as to what happens to someone without a family to go to.

Ohana doesn't need a big freakin' gun.

...Now, you noticed how after all this, I never talked about the main gimmick of this film? The space gun? Yeah, that's where we delve into the movie's more negative standpoints... and I can't believe I'm saying that since I love seeing sci-fi elements in everything but the execution of the implementation of the alien sub-plot is poorly done.

Not enough of the movie revolves around the gun. It feels too disconnected and not irrelevant for the most part, and once you get to the halfway point, the gun is finally used to aid to the story's progression but by that point, it's too little too late. Now it feels out of place, and still isn't that important aside from moments where something needs to be blown up to provide an exit or getaway, nothing more and does little to aid in the bonding Eli and Jimmy form because... well, it came into the film too late.

It's not like the sci-fi couldn't be done well. For example, let's bring back Lilo and Stitch for comparison. Lilo and Nani were two people that didn't get along. Lilo couldn't understand Nani well while Nani was trying to do the best she could as a mother figure because Lilo had nothing else. Then, Stitch came into their life, and thanks to his endearingly curious albeit destructive personality, and the circumstances his appearance led to, it only got Lilo and Nani closer in the end. Stitch as a character, as well as the intergalactic aspect as a whole, was written with the goal of aiding to the theme of the story which is getting it back together. 

I mean, look at the title, even the title for Lilo and Stitch was tailor made to convey this theme. It was never just a cheeky and obvious naming convention because yes, the movie's about Lilo and Stitch. If you look deeper, though, it was telling you the story in three letters. Lilo in Hawaiian means "lost", which is the state of Lilo and Nani's relationship and Stitch, as the literal term suggests is a means of putting something back together.

So Lilo and Stitch means "lost and put back together".

The ray gun never embodies that message, nor is a metaphor for one. It was just a gimmick to lure sci-fi lovers into the theater and nothing else, which is a shame. Because it never amounts to much in the main theme, the scenes which focus on the gun grinds the film's pacing to a halt to either see these needless hunters on their search for the gun, to see the gun perform cool noises and actions or to blow something up. Nothing more, nothing less.

Actually, it does less and hurts the movie more than you expect.

A gunned down resolution

With this story of a team comprising of a thief, a stripper and a kid with a gun on the run from the Green Goblin's gang and a couple of Halo knockoffs, you expect quite an epic climax, right? Well, you do get an intense climax, which is pretty much the movie in general where the suspense of impending doom looms over any sort of levity the movie gives, leaving you on the edge of your seat... this doesn't mean the film gave a good resolution.

If anything, more problems arise from it. At least for us.

We learn barely anything about the gun, about these aliens, Eli's connection to the gun, the overall mystery is still a mystery aside from a sequence of what are literally teases. Teases for what? Well, we're in the age of cinematic universes where nothing can be standalone, right? Might as well tease a sequel promising to reveal all the mysteries we really should have from movie 1.

Because I don't think we're getting a sequel.

It goes to show just how meaningless the gun is. Not only does it pause the movie to uphold a mandatory gimmick, not only does it not aid all that much into the theme, but it just leaves you with more questions than answers for the sake of hoping you'd shell out more bucks just for a simple answer. While the family drama aspect is wrapped up, lots of elements are still left out in the open and the movie knows it.

Movie studios shouldn't be this confident in their build-ups. They are totally free to leave it open to continuation, but the movie, particularly the first installment should work standalone. Because now, this movie can't stand on its own. It can't. Now it's just an hour and fifty minute long teaser for a film we might not even get, ruining the impact this movie leaves on you.

This, most of all breaks the movie. We go into it expecting a solid beginning, middle and an end. I argue, we never even got an end, making the story practically incomplete.

Final thoughts

I appreciate Kin for what it tried to do. It tried to be a compelling family drama with a clever twist from an entirely different genre in an attempt to make an new concoction of storytelling. It tries to prove there truly are no limits to the power of imagination and I do agree with that statement. Such a mixture is possible, Disney got that down in 2002. 

But Kin suffers from a slow, uninteresting beginning and a non-existent end where it makes you wonder if the middle is even worth it. Not to mention the stunning cinematography, which uses the shaky, unkempt camera style of a drama with the techno music of sci-fi. Has those negative aspects dragged the great parts down with it? Maybe. You wonder if all of this was even worth it.

If you're looking for a movie to eat up your time and don't mind too many open questions that may never get answered, all for the sake of a good second act? Kin will do just fine for you, then.

Anyone else? You're better off watching Lilo and Stitch.

[Kevin]

Well guys, the Toon Squad is back, because Space Jam 2 is confirmed!
 

 

[SupahBerry]

So two days ago, me and my family went to see Mary Poppins Returns for our big Christmas movie. So it's only fair I deposit my thoughts now so they don't keep swirling in my head...

Spoiler

Let's get this out of the way first and foremost: Yes, this films is, no denying, a "Force Awakens" remake of the original. Every sequence of events that occurred back in '64 are sequenced the same way here. If you ever considered seeing this film, expecting it to be a break from Disney's habit of rehashing properties, you are flat outta luck. This might've been made pretty obvious from the trailers and coverage, but I can't say for sure as I haven't looked at them. 

 

But there's also another, much more recent movie I feel this film is too similar to: Christopher Robin.

Both he and Michel Banks start out going through hard times with their families, the respective old Disney heroes come to help them, despite being told not to, there's an evil businessman when there didn't need to be a villain in both films, the villains get compared to an animal (Woozle/Wolf), the climax involves retrieving important papers to the villain, something goes wrong with the papers, but then everything randomly turns out alright, and the villains' elderly bosses show up to defeat them. Heck, this is a stretch, but even the balloon Mary holds at the end is red, just like Christopher's! 

 

There are other nitpicks I have: The way the plot is resolved was anti-climatic. It was clearly done just to give Dick Van Dyke his grand entrance to save the day, but at the cost of resetting most of the build-up to it. This movie soars with setting-up objects and events as early as the first act that come in handy later in the third act, like the family drawing being the certificate and setting Big Ben back five minutes. And that's all done within the same movie. The resolution on the other hand relies on believing that the audience all have knowledge of the first film to get it's significance, being that the tuppence Michel gave to his father had eventually built up to become enough money to save the house. 

 

Then there's the whole china bowl subplot, which I first thought was set up to become a Mcguffin in the third act. But thanks to being left with Topsy, the resident Big Lipped Alligator Moment, it just disappears from story altogether and is not mentioned again. Lastly, there's the whole pairing with Jack and Jane, which had so little development put into it that frankly, I don't know why it's there at all. The only reason I can think of is that they didn't want to trigger the Mary and Bert shippers by having Jack hit on her, so they made him hit on Jane instead.

 

So with what I just told you, I wouldn't fault you for thinking I didn't like this movie. But I'm also gonna tell you that you're wrong.

Just as I'd felt with Force Awakens, I could care less about this being a rehash of the first movie. Being a pretty easygoing guy, I let myself get swept away by all the wonders this film have offered. The whole time I had a big stupid smile on face as the film went through each of its songs. Even in a time of the Great Depression and Michel losing his wife and almost his old house, the whole story keeps the optimistic atmosphere of the original film completely intact. Emily Blunt's phenomenal, sassy performance as the lead kept me engaged the whole way through, all without the need to try and follow up Julie Andrews. Dick Van Dyke's grand entrance as I stated above was worth the hype, and him bursting to song and dance once more was hysterical. And the last song with the balloons just looked so silly, but I can't help but pretend I was flying with them all because I looked so much fun.

The biggest highlight for me, of course, has got to go to the 2D animated bowl sequence. It might've felt dated if it was a full movie, but I still captures the whimsical nature of the anthropomorphic animals in tuxedos that ruled the theater back in the golden age. A big relief after another long absence of 2D Disney cartoons on the big screen, it reassured me that Disney ain't quite done with treating it as a real art. It's almost frustrating when you think about it. These people are still more than capable of producing great looking animated characters that aren't made with 3D models. And yet their talents is wasted on long line of creatively bankrupt adaptations and sequels to older properties, when they can clearly be doing so much more.

 

Nevertheless, despite what I've felt after the movie was over, I still had a wonderful time during it all. Should you as a fan of the original film and Disney in general see this movie? Of course! Should you see it if you're getting tired of all the rehashes Disney been producing lately? Maybe not. Is this a better Mary Poppins 2 than Bedknobs and Broomsticks? I don't know. I didn't see that yet.

If you like being with family and want to see a holiday film that's good for all of you, then I'd 101% recommend this.

[BuzzyLee]

On 7/27/2018 at 8:16 AM, Failinhearts said:

While on my stay in Niagara, I had to see SOME sort of new film at a theater I never went to before. So here we are.

Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation.

Now, we all know the deal with Sony Pictures Animation. They don't exactly have the best reputation thanks to their troubling track record. However, one movie that has proven itself to be a pleasant surprise to many animation fans, it's Genndy Tartakovsky's charming and quirky little movie called Hotel Transylvania. While it wasn't a masterpiece, it was refreshing, unique and for once... made Adam Sandler seem credible.

And of course, you bet your ass Sony's gonna milk this undead underdog for all its work. A sequel, a TV show, and now, a third film.

Will this installment capture the charm which zinged a whole audience that isn't called AniMat? Or is it high time this series takes a vacation for a century or two? 

(Note: This review is coming from a person who has seen, and enjoyed the original Hotel Transylvania but has not seen its sequel or the TV show)

Tartakovsky Style Strikes Again

A big draw of the Hotel Transylvania series, and what I personally think is the biggest draw for animation fans (for kids and tweens, it's probably Selena Gomez) is the unique, quirky and hyperactive animation that looks like a 2D cartoon in the 3D world in the best sort of ways. This is Genndy Tartakovsky we're talking about, the creator of Dexter's Lab and Samurai Jack, and he brings his trademark style back to the computer.

The visual gags and quirks take center stage in this movie, and is pretty much the biggest highlight of the film. Everyone moves so fluidly bizarre and is so charmingly expressive that it's a treat for the eyes during this current era of hyper-realistic CGI where everything needs to look as real as possible. Hotel Transylvania 3 fully embraces the wackiness of the scenario of monsters on a cruise ship to animate some wacky sequences that deliver most of the laughs you'll get in the movie.

...For better or for worse, once you put the writing to account and how the animation foreshadows it.

The animation for this movie is just as good as I remember, if not better since the wacky setting allows the animation crew to go all out with their tools and skillset to deliver the most delightfully, and humourously hyperactive animated movie you'll see all year.

Writing Takes A Backseat Cruise

While the animation and overall aesthetics are an improvement from the first movie, the same can't exactly be said for the writing.

The characters are just as you remember them, and I think all you really need to see to understand this movie is the first one. There's really no need to see the second aside from knowing that Mavis and Johnny have a son, and as far as I know, nothing ties into the third movie beyond that.

It's sort of like a typical kids TV show episode, that aside from some major developments, each episode is written so anyone can sort of jump on and understand the gist of things without prior knowledge of what happened directly before.

In fact, that's the best way to describe this movie. It feels like a glorified TV episode in regards to the story. Right down to the pacing.

The movie feels like a cliche vacation episode you'd see in a series, where the cast needs a change of pace from the status quo. What is also coupled with this story in an attempt to deliver a degree of spice is Drac falling in love with the captain who just so happens to be evil. It's another type of trope seen before.

...And nothing else is done beyond that. No twists on the formula, no surprises, it's as predictable as you can possibly get. You can watch the trailer and you'd know exactly how the film folds out.

Hell, the movie tries so hard to stick to this predictable story that it goes out of its way, takes odd, forced leaps of logic and copious amounts of filler to ensure the story's overall progression is as bare-bones as possible.

And yes, I praised the animation and the many side sequences which do provide laughs, or at the very least, chuckles but the truth of the matter is that these jokes and a good chunk of the characters do nothing for the plot itself. You can cut out most of the jokes, and you won't damage the plot at all. The film will only last about 30 minutes though. You know, the average length of a TV episode?

Putting it simply, HT3 is an extended TV episode that if stripped of its admittedly enjoyable filler, you have an incredibly by-the-numbers story that barely tries anything new.

Now, of course the original movie wasn't the most groundbreaking story on the planet but at least that had its own share of twists to spice up the typical father and daughter protectiveness story with the monster edge. You don't see much of that here aside from some throwaway talk about monster prejudice.

Good Characters, Poor Execution

In regards to the characters and how they act in general, they're just as you remember them. Dracula is the same, hard working and overbearing dad as before, but you can see how his character has progressed from the first film. Mavis is hyperactive, optimistic and as caring as ever. Johnny is still the bumbling comic relief. Drac's pals are just as suitable as comic reliefs as they'd always been, they're all here with their relationships and dynamics in tact.

If that's the case, then what's the problem?

The problem goes into more of what the story requires of them. As I said, the movie wants to maintain its story with all its tropes in tact. It's like, well, a cruise ship. It's a ship heading straight to a single location, the resolution. Every character (who is necessary and not just a gag) are the parts of the ship to keep it moving, and they will work tirelessly, no matter what to maintain a straight, safe course to the destination.

And while, yes, that should be ideal for a REAL cruise, but for a story, these parts of the ship should be allowed to be themselves, allow the ship to steer itself into new, exciting and uncharted territory that also still feels natural and won't just tear the boat apart. 

However, since the movie desperately tries to maintain this steady course towards the end credits, these characters have to do whatever it takes to do so. This means, they need to act out of character, do something too soon, forget certain aspects of the story's development only to remember it when it's most convenient or to be forced to do something, say they've always had it on their mind despite barely anything being done to set it up. 

These leaps in logic to reach a very specific goal makes these characters feel less like characters with natural arcs and development and more like tools to drive a plot no matter how implausible it is.

This is the biggest problem in the movie in my opinion. If the characters naturally acted like themselves and things played out realistically, no doubt you would have a more interesting movie.

Final Thoughts

Hotel Transylvania 3 isn't bad, it was still fairly enjoyable, and I got some good laughs. However, it's bogged down by an uninteresting cliched story that had to be held up with likable enough characters and a good set of filler gags. The story forces the characters to bend to its will, leading to an unnatural pace and progression, and it overall feels on par with a TV show episode.

And that's where I feel like the Hotel Transylvania franchise should stay for the time being. On TV. Only make a fourth movie when you feel like you can make a creative character-driven story out of it.

Is it worth a watch? Not exactly, unless you really wanna see Dracula dance to Madeon along with a couple other fun moments sprinkled throughout, but it's definitely not warranting of a second watch.

It's perfectly serviceable. That's all I can say in the end.

This is a very cool cartoon! I only watched the first two parts.

[Failinhearts]

1 hour ago, BuzzyLee said:

This is a very cool cartoon! I only watched the first two parts.

I don't have much to say about 2, but yes, at least the first movie was good.

I have nothing to comment on in regards to the TV show, however.