Frozen II sees sisters Anna and Elsa venturing to the Enchanted Forest, upstream from their own kingdom. There, they will discover a land in need of saving and learn some shocking secrets about their own family history.

Astonishingly, the pre-title sequence is really, really rough. Like, first draft rough. (More likely, it’s the result of too many rewrites, but you get the idea.) The film soon picks up, but even at its best, the script needed one more dialogue pass. The writing simply doesn’t pop in the way that Frozen and Moana‘s scripts did.

We get a few new characters, none of which stick in the mind after the credits roll, except one, who exists purely for the purposes of further queerbaiting (seriously, the sooner Disney takes the plunge with regards to Elsa, the better.) There’s subtext to be found – something about the environment, something about addressing our colonial past – but there’s nothing bold or thought-provoking about it.

The animation is 2019-standard, nothing mind-blowing like the water or hair animation in Moana.

Acceptable describes just about everything in Frozen II. It feels like it could have been a Disney+ exclusive, rather than a fully-fledged cinema release. This film had the same $150 million budget that the first did six years ago, which surprised me. Surely the highest-grossing animated film of all time deserved a bigger, bolder sequel?

I’m curious to see what the legions of fans thought of this. A significant proportion of them may have actually ‘grown out’ of the property, which is the risk you run when you take such a long time developing a follow-up.

Whilst I was never blown away by Frozen, I could at least see why it captured the hearts and minds of so many. With Frozen II, there is very little to set it apart from the scores of other 3D animated movies of the past ten years.

The post Frozen II appeared first on hoopla.nu.

The animation here looks stunning. I am completely in love with the visual style. The sharp-edged characters remind me of ‘Batman: the Animated Series’, whilst the backgrounds have a wonderful 60s vibe. The action is perfectly framed, and it’s clear that the animators have a good sense of how to both mimic live action features and take advantage of all that 2D animation has to offer.

The story is a mix of genres, including heist caper, James Bond-type spy movie and even a dash of Indiana Jones. Carmen herself, voiced by Gina Rodriguez, is a great lead, whilst Finn Wolfhard continues his ascent as the biggest star to emerge from ‘Stranger Things’, portraying whiz kid computer hacker, Player. But the MVP is truly Rafael Petardi as the clueless policeman on Carmen’s trail, Chase Devineaux. His delivery constantly gets the biggest laughs, even if the punchlines aren’t that clever.

Carmen has made the switch from baddie to goodie – strange when you consider we spent the original videogames trying to catch her, rather than playing as her – but the really weird part is how similar her origin story is to She-Ra’s.

I love the educational diversions here, precisely because they are so obviously shoehorned in. The basic geography lessons are kind of charming. It is frustrating, however, to watch the episode set in Australia. The accents are woeful, and what’s more they decided to go with a plot concerning a rocket launch near Uluru – a strange choice, considering there haven’t been any rocket launches in Australia since 1970. If I fancy some mental acrobatics, I could try to convince myself that the show is actually set in the 1960s (but a 1960s with internet and smartphones and etc. etc.)

The only other disappointment is that the plot features some ‘surprises’ that we adults can see coming from a long way off. This didn’t annoy me too much, since the narrative construction and characterisation is tight enough that said twists are quite cleverly plotted – everything makes sense, rather than having abrupt 180 twists for the sake of them.

As far as rebooting 80s IPs so that grown-up kids of the era can watch the shows with their kids, this cartoon is surprisingly lacking in cynicism. Where ‘Stranger Things’ annoys me with its habit of reassuring late gen Xers and Millennials that yes, their era was GOAT, Carmen Sandiego is a solid story, well-told. Bring on season 2.

The post Carmen Sandiego appeared first on hoopla.nu.

I’d like to say that such an approach has yielded quality results. And it has…up until now. Alas, The Hidden World is unspectacular. It’s not that there’s a lot wrong with it; more that it feels like an addendum rather than a glorious final chapter.

Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) has taken the village of Berk into a bold new world, but he still doesn’t feel confident in his role as their chieftain. When Berk is threatened by a new villain, Hiccup and his friends must find a new land for his people and their dragons.

The story is so slight that you could spoil the whole thing in a sentence or two. There isn’t much in the way of subplots, and there are no real character arcs. Astrid (America Ferrera) was cool and kick-arse by 2010 standards, but here she’s simply playing second fiddle to Hiccup, apparently existing only to support her man. I have no sense of what her ambitions or dreams are. Hiccup’s mum, Valka (Cate Blanchett), is present also…but has nothing to do. The new villain, Grimmel (F. Murray Abraham), shows promise but is never much of a threat. Continuing the trend of underwhelming the audience, even the titular Hidden World proves to be…just around the corner.

In fact, the writers messed up big time with regards to the geography. Berk always felt like an isolated village, and yet we have a whole new evil army nearby that no one’s mentioned before, and it’s only a few hours’ flight to the nearest island. Everything about this film is small. Inconsequential, even.

The animation is, of course, impressive. And it’s cool to see how much has changed in the industry in the last nine years. But it seems DreamWorks was too distracted by the technology. The dynamic lighting, the various textures and the ability to have hundreds of characters on screen at once is incredible. But it also makes it hard to watch at times. Sometimes, there’s simply too much going on. This is where good animation would utilise various techniques – composition, lighting, focal depth, no matter how unrealistic – to focus the eye on the important bits. At worst, it’s like the Special Edition versions of the Star Wars films, where locations such as Mos Eisley became distractingly busy.

The Hidden World is a disappointing end to a strong franchise. It’s not as epic or action-packed as the second film, nor is it as emotionally effective as the first. They should have gone out with a bang, not with a whimper.

The post How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World appeared first on hoopla.nu.

That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy it – I had a great time at the cinema. But the story is bland, and there are a number of subplots that are hinted at but never come to fruition.

Opening only moments after the first film ended, Incredibles 2 sees the Parrs continuing to deal with the hazards of being a superhero family. They’re still homeless and supers are still illegal. When an opportunity comes their way, Helen/Elastigirl (Holly Hunter) and Bob/Mr Incredible (Craig T. Nelson) will find themselves having to deal with new challenges and responsibilities, not to mention an enemy they can’t see.

As you’d expect, Incredibles 2 looks fantastic. The 60s chic continues – aside from the odd contemporary haircut – and the animation is slick as can be. Once again, Brad Bird knocks the action scenes out of the park. The ease with which he lets the action beats flow, even at incredible speed, is truly inspiring. There are a number of new supers, and their powers are visually stunning. The comedic beats work well, and the film never gets boring.

So it’s sad to see that there’s not much going on beneath the generic superhero movie plot. There are zero surprises, and quite a few twists are signposted. I appreciate that this is a kids’ film, but Pixar have done better. There are no scenes that will become instant classics, and aside from being pure, unadulterated fun, Incredibles 2 doesn’t offer much.

It’s frustrating, considering we had to sit through two Cars sequels (and two Cars spin-offs) before we got a sequel to the film that had the most potential…only to have it disappoint. At the end of the day, the film’s core dynamic is old-fashioned. “Dad is bad at being a stay-at-home parent” isn’t the most original take. Even the mostly brilliant Inside Out had a problem with its dated depiction of the differences between men and women.

Look, if you’re excited for this film, by all means go out and see it. I really enjoyed an extra two hours with this super-powered family. Just don’t expect anything particularly clever or subversive.

The post Incredibles 2 appeared first on hoopla.nu.

Hilariously, 2017’s Beauty and the Beast fixes most of these plot holes in the first five minutes. This is a confident film that bursts out of the gate strong and barely ever falters. Emma Watson makes a great Belle, and by making the townsfolk actually unlikable, she doesn’t seem so much of a brat at the start.  The Beast is wonderfully realised – we’re able to truly see Dan Stevens’ performance through the VFX – but more importantly, I actually understand why they fall in love, what they see in each other.  Luke Evans’ Gaston easily rivals his animated counterpart, whilst Josh Gad makes LeFou a much more interesting character. Also, I’m once again impressed at how smoothly Kevin Kline has slipped into supporting roles over the recent years.

The production design is as lavish as you’d expect, but through the clever use of particular lenses and colour, it never becomes overwhelming. The cinematography is great except for one particular disappointment: “Be Our Guest”. A flurry of quick cuts and a camera that won’t sit still, this scene was simply too much (not to mention the fact I’m less than enamoured with the new Lumiere design). That being said, “Belle”, “Gaston” and “The Mob Song” are easily as good as the original versions, and Menken’s score is deliciously grandiose but never overwhelming.

I love the subtle changes that have been included to fix the more awkward parts of the cartoon, whether it be Belle’s agency or the couple of homophobic punchlines that felt really awkward when I rewatched the film on DVD the other day.

It’s clear that Disney threw a tonne of cash at the film, yet the budget never overwhelms the performances. Bill Condon is a fantastic director (with the right material) and you’d be pleased to know that this is closer to Gods and Monsters-Condon rather than Twilight sequels-Condon.

With every Disney live-action remake that’s announced, we all cringe, yet so far they’ve done a decent job. The Jungle Book, Cinderella and Maleficent all had their moments, even if I’m yet to meet anyone that’s seen Pete’s Dragon. (I have; it’s mostly forgettable.) Of their upcoming slate, I think Mulan is in the perfect position to blow us all away. For me, this Beauty and the Beast is a definite improvement on the 1991 feature, and barely puts a foot wrong.

The post Beauty and the Beast appeared first on hoopla.nu.

But the thing is, Moana’s a really good film. It’s a complex film, full of interesting issues – perhaps too complex for its own good – but it can stand proud amongst Disney’s impressive recent output.

Chief-in-waiting Moana (Auli’i Cravalho) dreams of going out beyond the reef surrounding her island, but her father, the Chief, has expressly forbidden it. One day the Ocean’s calling proves too much for her, and she sets out alongside the Demigod Maui (Dwayne Johnson) on a quest that will change her peoples’ future.

With minority representation at the forefront, not to mention a three-dimensional female lead, Moana continues Disney’s recent efforts to diversify the cinematic landscape. That’s not to say the film lacks problems (as I understand, it skirts close to appropriating Pacific islands culture, and the depiction of Maui came under criticism) and there was certainly a problem with some of the merchandising. But this is a film where more than half the characters are female, and Moana is clearly the star of the show, rather than Johnson.

There’s a subtlety to the issues presented here, and it’s definitely got more going on than Frozen, thematically speaking. But perhaps that takes something away from the film. I did wonder if the script could have done with another pass (keeping in mind that Disney animation doesn’t really “write” scripts in the traditional sense; it’s more of a collaboration.)

The film deals with the theories of Polynesian navigation, and it’s important to note that when Thor Heyerdahl suggested such a thing in the mid-20th Century, it was met with scepticism. (See Kon-Tiki for more about this.) This is coupled with the idea of Moana wanting to become a different kind of leader from her father, whilst Maui’s dealing with his own issues, having lost his magical powers.

It may come as little surprise, but the animation here is jaw-dropping. Brave may have amazed us with Merida’s hair (Moana’s do is also spectacular) but here it’s the lighting that really stood out for me. After seeing bland and over-lit animation like The Secret Life of Pets, this was a godsend. It just goes to show that there’s still new ground to be broken in 3D animation.

Moana won’t be the hit that Frozen was, but it’s a fantastic film. I kept thinking it should have been more focussed, but what’s wrong with an animation that has narrative depth, and perhaps even requires a rewatch to take in all it has to offer?

The post Moana appeared first on hoopla.nu.

The Secret Life of Pets was not on my radar at all, to be honest. The trailer made the film look like the worst that non-Pixar animation had to offer, whilst the plot – an owner’s favourite dog needs to make room for a new, overbearing shaggy hound in their household – had the distinct whiff of Toy Story about it. The presence of Louis C.K., Albert Brooks, Ellie Kemper and Steve Coogan wasn’t enough to get me keen on the idea of sitting through 90 minutes of brightly-coloured animal antics, yet there I was, halfway through my Tuesday, sitting down to watch The Secret Life of Pets.

The opening montage is probably the best this film has to offer. A wonderfully larger-than-life New York is presented to us as we watch a dozen different owners leave their pets to their own devices as they go off to work. Some sit anxiously awaiting their master’s return, others laze on the couch, whilst some turn on their favourite System of a Down song and rock out.

Before you know it, Duke (Eric Stonestreet) has turned up, making Max’s (Louis C.K.) life hell, because now he has to share the attention of his owner, Katie (Ellie Kemper.) Then they’re off on an adventure (after which presumably they will become the best of buddies) traversing the New York streets, the dingy sewers and the Brooklyn Bridge, where they’ll meet all sorts of other pets.

It writes itself, does it not? Actually, you’d be hard-pressed to argue that this film wasn’t written on autopilot. The situations are contrived, characters come and go, and there’s no real narrative propelling the story along. At one stage, Duke starts talking about life before Katie, but that’s quickly forgotten. Another time, the animals inadvertently hop on a ferry going the wrong way across the river. Surely they just need to wait for it to go back the other – no, no, we’ve forgotten about that. There’s a sausage factory and there’s nothing like watching dogs get excited over processed meat.

So, it turns out that this is the highest grossing animated feature to not produced by Disney or Pixar, and I can’t tell if I’m bitter because it’s such an average film, or because it beat the Ghostbusters remake at the box office. At the end of the day, this is the most mediocre of films. It will keep your kids entertained, but adults will be hard-pressed to get anything out of the experience apart from an inadvertent chuckle or two. Rewatch Over the Hedge instead, or even Toy Story. Or Bolt.

The post The Secret Life of Pets appeared first on hoopla.nu.

The series concerns three alien beings from the planet of Galaluna who crash-land on Earth after escaping a military coup on their home world. Our main characters are Ilana, princess of Galaluna, Lance, a soldier assigned to protect her, and their “bio-cybernetic robot”, Octus. The three of them are forced to hide out at Sherman High School, keeping their identities secret. When trouble comes calling in the form of monsters from their home planet, however, the three of them have their own mech suits they can call upon to do battle. And when all seems lost – in true Voltron style – the three of them can form Titan, a giant robot over which they share control.

It doesn’t sound like anything special, sure, but it’s the genius balancing of serialised storytelling that really impresses. Early on, we get monster-of-the-week type episodes. But we also get episodes focussing on the high school teen drama aspect, flashback episodes detailing the main characters’ earlier lives on Galaluna and regular clashes with all three of their antagonists.

When it comes to the bad guys, General Modula has taken over their home planet, and regularly sends his monsters out to search for the princess. But we also have Earth’s General Steel who has it in for Titan, this huge robot that seems to do a heck of a lot of damage to the cities it claims to protect. And finally we have Solomon, the mysterious figure working for the shady Government organisation known as G3. It’s this regular variation in threats that makes the show feel fresh. Throw in a couple of episodes concerning Octus and his quest to understand what it means to be human (very Data-like) and you have a show packed to the brim with great episodes.

The animation is truly wondrous. As far as sequential art goes, this is some of the best work I’ve ever seen in a TV show. Tartakovsky has an incredibly cinematic eye, and my jaw regularly hit the floor when I was presented with yet another stunning sequence.

So where does Sym-Bionic Titan fail? Well, the most glaring aspect would be the character of Ilana. When the show begins and the three Galalunans enter Sherman High School, it feels like the show’s going to be spoofing high school movie genre conventions. But you quickly learn that it’s not spoofing at all, it’s merely replicating them. Thus Ilana quickly acclimatises to school life, and spends several episodes stressing about being a cheerleader, about going to the prom etcetera. Not only that, but she gets stuck with a mech suit that has a love heart on it *gags* and is regularly knocked down in battle, only to be saved by Lance. Couple this with her being told off for spending too much time stressing about “girly” stuff, and you have a show that is shockingly retrograde.

It’s so frustrating too, because towards the end of this collection, the show (a) shifts focus away from Ilana’s obsession with such things, and (b) introduces a love interest for Lance, a girl just as taciturn as he is, who spends her spare time perfecting her karate skills. They mightn’t have been changing Ilana’s character, but at least the show had begun to present a variation in female archetypes.

With inspiration clearly coming from a lot of anime shows of the 80s, Sym-Bionic Titan was a great burst of creativity from Tartakovsky, despite its shortcomings. It ends on a high note, and whilst not a cliff-hanger, there are enough dangling plot threads that I’m frustrated the show wasn’t continued. At least now you can enjoy its brief run – all 20 episodes – on home media. (And as far as I can tell, this version is the only available Sym-Bionic Titan box set in the world!)

The post Sym-Bionic Titan Season 1 appeared first on hoopla.nu.

If that all sounds generic (or more specifically ‘Kung Fu Panda generic’) then fear not; I’ve deliberately kept my description vague so as to avoid spoilers. Because the story of Kubo is actually quite a complex one. This is a film that most definitely does not talk down to its audience, and indeed it might require a second viewing for me to take in all the nuance with regards to the subplots. Above all, this may be classed as a kids’ film, but it’s one that adults will definitely enjoy (and not for the usual reason, i.e. popping in some naughty humour that only grownups will get.) Even the very generic setup leads to some subtle subversions of the usual hero’s journey stuff. Just trust me when I say that this script is very, very solid.

Kubo and the Two Strings looks stunning. I shouldn’t expect anything less from Laika, who wowed me back in 2009 with Coraline, but even so, this really is a wonderful sight to behold. Every single frame is beautiful, every movement of the characters is incredible. I couldn’t tell where the stop motion ended and – what I can only assume is – CGI began. Dario Marianelli’s score is brilliant also, and you even get the bonus of Regina Spektor covering While My Guitar Gently Weeps.

Whilst the main character is a young boy, at least half the cast is populated by female characters, and they get the film’s most impressive moments. The voice cast are all excellent, from Charlize Theron to Matthew McConaughey, Art Parkinson to Brenda Vaccaro.

And herein lies the film’s only flaw. Laika made a film set in Japan, inspired by Japanese fables, populated by Japanese characters…and then cast a bunch of white actors to play them. It beggars belief. And no, casting George Takei and Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa in tiny, inconsequential roles doesn’t make it okay. First off, how many people are actually going to see this film because Theron and McConaughey are in it? I didn’t even realise that was the case until I was halfway through the film. And secondly, there would have been a tonne of ethnically appropriate actors to choose from. This decision means that the gross smell of cultural appropriation hangs over proceedings…

Aside from that glaring flaw, Kubo and the Two Strings is an incredible film. At the end of the day, you come for the beautiful animation, stay for the wonderful story, leave disheartened by the casting.

The post Kubo and the Two Strings appeared first on hoopla.nu.

But lo and behold, Finding Dory is excellent.

Instead of the usual father/son story we’ve seen time and time again, this undersea adventure is all about Ellen DeGeneres’ Dory – a fish with a learning difficulty. In fact, when it comes to characters with disabilities, Dory is up there with Venellope from Wreck-It Ralph. From the opening scenes, where we see Dory’s childhood, this film grabs you right in the feels. I mightn’t be a parent, but I instantly empathise with Dory’s parents’ pain as they watch their child fail to keep up with the world around her.

Pretty soon, we’re off on another journey across the ocean, and whilst this may seem like mere repetition, I can only tell you that this is a much more powerful story. Dory’s quest of personal discovery sees her meeting three other characters (played by Ed O’Neill, Kaitlin Olson and Ty Burrell) who all have their own physical challenges too. DeGeneres is fantastic in the lead role, and one of the terrible things about her talk show success was always the fact that we’ve been robbed of her presence on the big screen.

Pixar have done funnier films, to be sure, but this screenplay is top notch. The setups and callbacks are perfect – you don’t see them coming, but you kick yourself when they’re revealed because they seem so obvious in retrospect.

As with the first film, the animation doesn’t make a big impression. There’s nothing bad about it, but there’s nothing that truly wows you either. The running time is a speedy 97 minutes and as with most of Disney/Pixar’s animated output, there are no lulls.

There have been funnier Pixar films, and there have been more action-packed Pixar films, but Finding Dory really nails the narrative. It’s an emotional journey, and a triumphant and touching story of a character who was simply a comedic sidekick in the first film. Colour me impressed.

The post Finding Dory appeared first on hoopla.nu.