All Things:Fairytale Movies

Review: Lead-footed 'Pan' smothers the whimsy with a wrong-headed script
Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captur...ith-a-wrong-headed-script#TBrsOLDYlS4wviWb.99

But there is no equally interesting or worthwhile question at the heart of "Pan." Instead, the question here appeared to be: what if we came up with a huge labored backstory for Peter Pan so we could make at least three movies out of it? I do not understand the world of this movie, and neither does director Joe Wright. You're dead in the water if your fantasy world doesn't feel real, and when you've got something as well-defined as Neverland, it seems hard to screw up. That makes it even more impressive to see how much they miss the mark here. It starts with the first moment where they arrive in Neverland, when the flying pirate ship that abducted Peter (Levi Miller) flies him and the other boys to the fairy crystal mines where there are hundreds of orphans from around the world, all pressed into service by Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). The scene is done as a musical number, with all the extras singing the song together. Now, keep in mind, the film takes place during WWII. That is carefully established in elaborate scenes at the start of the film. The song that the entire small army of extras sings together is Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit," and the scene builds and builds as Blackbeard is introduced for the first time, and by the time he joins the chant, "Here we are now, entertain us," he does Russian kicks and hypes up the crowd even more. That is a real thing that happens in the film. A few scenes later, there's a few bars of another musical number, this time set to "Blitzkrieg Bop" by the Ramones.

AND THEN NO ONE EVER SINGS AGAIN, AND THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE SINGING, AND THERE IS NO EXPLANATION FOR THE MODERN SONGS IN A WWII FILM THAT ISN'T, BY ANY OTHER STANDARDS, A MUSICAL.

Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captur...ith-a-wrong-headed-script#TBrsOLDYlS4wviWb.99

oh boy...
 
‘The Jungle Book’: 20 Things to Know about Jon Favreau’s New Adaptation
http://collider.com/the-jungle-book-jon-favreau-things-to-know/

Jungle Book, the Disney version is very dear to me, so this is potentially heartbreaking one way or the other for me. I like what I have seen so far, but the reluctance to show the animal REALLY interacting has me concerned. The new teaser has Bill Murray whistling a few bars of The Bare Necessities, without actualy showing it. I want to assume they are just trying to hold the reveal...but until i see how it works, I will remain concerned. I do trust Favreau...because the cgi work on the initial Iron Man was pretty seamless. And this article shows that a LOT of thought and work went into world building on this. I do look forward to it, as well as the still in development Andy Serkis directed, more mature take that is in the pipeline...but it is definitely going to be VERY HARD to compete with Disney's version, which, if you have not seen...get your hands on the Diamond edition. It's spectacular.
 
Review: Jon Favreau's 'The Jungle Book' With Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley, Idris Elba, Lupita Nyong’o, Scarlett Johansson, More

As an event film that thrives on creating a sense of wonder rather than rich story, "The Jungle Book" is more than an incremental step forward in the digital effects arms race, with spectacular end-game images establishing a new high bar for digital reproduction of real-world animals and environments. The strikingly realistic scenery is dappled with color, light and shadow to create dramatic stages for masterful character animations— if only the story played out on this impeccably-realized fantasy had the same persuasive command. [B-]
 
Review: 'The Huntsman: Winter's War' Starring Chris Hemsworth, Jessica Chastain, Emily Blunt & Charlize Theron

There’s very little in “The Huntsman: Winter's War” itself that is actively bad. Compared to some of its blockbuster rivals, it’s reasonably watchable, never offensive, and mostly coherent. It does what it needs to do, namely “be another movie with the word huntsman in the title.” But it also feels like a prime example of so much of what’s so bad about studio movies today: pursuing franchises at the expense of all else (down to a cravenly sequel-chasing last line), wasting good talent on material that’s unworthy of them, falling back on CGI rather than story, filmmaking driven by committee rather than vision. And as such, despite the fitful moments of charm or craft, it’s an impossible movie to root for. [C-]
 
Back
Top