The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Directed by: Peter Jackson
Released: 2013
Staring: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Lee Pace, Benedict Cumberbatch and Luke Evens.
Rated: PG-13

  At this point introducing any film from J.RR Tolkien's Middle Earth brought to you by Peter Jackson is nearly impossible. The films speak for themselves and The Desolation of Smaug is no exception.

  Rewind to 2001, a series almost forgotten by many mainstream book enthusiast regained a new life in the hands of one unknown New Zealand director. The Lord of the Rings series had been adapted from its book format before, but never in such an appropriate, epic style. Seemingly overnight names like Frodo, Gandalf, and Gollum became household names, and 'Hobbit' may be used as an endearing term to describe your hairy footed uncle who can't recall if this is his first or second breakfast. With multiple Oscars under his belt including one for Best Picture in 2003 and more than a fist full of dollars (highest grossing film of 2003), it was only a matter of time before Peter Jackson returned to Tolkien's material.  

  

  We, the anxiously awaiting (fans) public, knew we'd get the The Hobbit sooner or later, what we did not except was 3 Hobbit films, all filmed in sequence at 48 frames per second with extra material, not published in the original book, but Tolkien's none the less. There was much debate over which portions were Tolkien and which were Jackson's; an uproar sounded in the Middle Earth community, whether it was one of joy or outrage was hard to tell but in the end audiences got much more Hobbit than was expected. 

 I've spent many hours reading, watching, and rewatching the original Lord of the Rings series, and as an avid fan it is my humblest opinion that the more the better! Jackson is a director who, when it comes to STORY, does not sacrifice quality for quantity. Was/is there a whole hell of a lot going on in The Hobbit films? Yes. Does any of it take away for the driving plot line? Debatable, but when you get down to it, the answer is no. Is Peter Jackson a greedy little Dragon who is possibly suffering from James Cameron-Ka-Ching-Ka-Ching syndrome? Possibly. As an avid fan, if you present me with a Jackson quality product that remains almost unwaveringly faithful to it's source material while ADDING even more, I'm going to lap it up. The fact that Jackson can do so much while staying true to the book overshadows any doubts I had about the added material. 

  As a reviewer I see faults in The Hobbit series, An Unexpected Journey more than The Desolation of Smaug, yet as a fan I'm completely enraptured by them both. I tell you this, my dear readers, so you will know, there may be nit picking points accompanied by minor annoyances but in the end The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit has been and will remain my favorite series of all time.

  In my end of the year review for 2012 I named The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey my favorite film of the year on the basis that I had been waiting for it for almost ten years...While this is true, the film was not without it's faults; primarily it's silly, prepubescent humor. The burp, butt and snot jokes were not only disgusting but completely misplaced in Jackson's directorial world. The Lord of the Rings films never lacked jokes and wisecracks, but it's humor never dealt on such a low, bodily level. The Desolation of Smaug regains any traction that might have been lost due to the low blows of An Unexpected Journey by keeping it's humor referential rather than immature, gross out stints. Martin Freeman is a funny actor and very funny in the role of Bilbo Baggins. His physicality and facial expressions lend themselves to the character brilliantly. The script is often quite humorous and I think produces may have read many of audiences reactions to the overall tone of An Unexpected Journey and for that reason darkened the mood of it's sequel.

  The Desolation of Smaug is considerably darker than it's predecessor and rightly so. The first act is over, introductions are finished we know our main characters; we've seen them laugh now we want to see them fight! And fight they do. The Desolation is action packed from start to finish. The fast paced action scenes are engaging and exciting, verging on ridiculous but unimaginable fight scenes are a driving force behind the success of these films. I'm not paying to watch Tom Cruise shoot a gun at a criminal mastermind, I picked this film to see 12 Dwarves and a Hobbit race down a river in wine barrels while pursed by Orcs and high-flying Elves. It's fantasy and fantasy will lend itself to fanciful chases! 

Lee Pace, Director Peter Jackson & Evangeline Lilly

  Speaking of Elves, new comer Lee Pace, beloved from Bryan Fuller's short run and under-appreciated TV series Pushing Daisies, melds perfectly into the world of Elven royalty. He's come a long was from loveably awkward pie-maker. Devilishly wicked and totally unexpected, Pace plays the role of King Thrunduil with operatic bearing. Evangeline Lilly, also new to Middle Earth, was a missed opportunity. A fine actress, Lilly's character whom adds would have audiences believe is the strong, feisty, warrior woman of the series is reduced to an object of affection in possibly the oddest love triangle ever put on screen. I supported bringing in the new, original character of Tauriel thinking she'd be portrayed as a warrior like all the rest; instead she succumbs to the emotional advances of two men...brilliant. This from the director who gave us "I am no MAN", witch king-killing Éowyn. I don't get it. 

  Odd Elven relationships aside, the remaining story line in The Desolation of Smaug stays true to the book as well as any side stories begun in An Unexpected Journey. Audiences weren't left with so much a cliff hanging in the first of the series as something to look forward to, as all good films should. We knew we'd be seeing the great dragon in this installment and the tension leading to the final revel makes it all the more scintillating.   

 

No words review can accurately describe the detail and deadly beauty in the animation of Smaug. It's brilliant, flawless, and any other adjective associated with top notch animation. Every scale and claw was considered...the lighting and coloring are pure perfection...the way he moves and please let's talk about the cutting voice behind though razor sharp teeth. Benedict Cumberbatch with the best and only choice. His voice is pure dangerous allure. Cumberbatch, with the help of visual animation studio WETA, truly became this dragon through motion capture technology. That means voice, movement, and facial expression were all generated by Caumberbatch...and quite perfectly, he gives this inhuman  creature a personality and purpose. A huge hand must be given to the animators behind Smaug, he is a sight to behold on the big screen. No images found online can do him justice.

Benedict Cumberbatch gets in touch with his scaly, fire breathing side

  Smaug's animation soars, leaving many of the other animated characters with a rushed, sloppy, even cheap feel to them. One thing The Lord of the Rings series did so well was create real, disturbing characters through the use of great prosthetics. This is a technique not used as appropriately in The Hobbit series, especially where Orcs, Goblins and other nasty folk are concerned...yes animation is cheaper but nothing draws an audience from the moment like recognizing "oh that's definitely CGI" This is a huge attributing fact as to why Smaug's animation is so incredibly impressive. Comparing the detail in his design to that of others is somewhat disappointing.  

  With a darker atmosphere, Jackson really plays up Biblo's developing obsession with his newly acquired ring and creating a strong tie between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. The Desolation of Smaug is great fun with a couple of nice references for die hard fans and spectacular animation (for the most part) Fans will not be disappointed and new comers to the series should find it just as enjoyable. Don't expect Smaug to be popping up in any category except effects, during awards season like The Lord of the Rings films did, but the heart of this film is in the same place; as is its epic scope and action packed adventure. If there was ever a time to jump into one of the most celebrated fantasy series of all time, now would be it! 

Oz: The Great and Powerful

You know James Franco was high on set when he repeatedly called Glinda "Wanda" for a good 30 minutes of the film.

Directed By: Sam Raimi

Released: 2013

Starting: James Franco, Michelle Williams, Rachel Weisz, Mila Kunis, voice talents of Zach Braff & Joey King

Rated: PG

Times viewed: 1

   The fantasy genre has always been a favorite of mine and I'm always open to a new, exciting revisit of the classics; however, the original trailer for Oz: The Great and Powerful left me feeling anxious for several reasons. First, James Franco. I know he is a huge darling of many a young hollywood fan but in all honesty I find him as dry as the blunts he probably smoked during the filming of this movie. Are blunts dry? I don't really know...we'll say yes for simile's sake. Second was the visuals...As I've mentioned in previous post, I am not a huge fan of 3-D dependent films...but I figured since it is a FANTASY film along the lines of Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, it could be forgiven and James Franco ignored.
 Months pass and eventually my excitement to see Oz grew, so last tuesday night (it was a slow week) my friends and I made the journey to our local AMC. We bought our outrageously expensive tickets, popped on our hermetically sealed 3-D Ray Bans, and were prepared to be wowed by the spectacle of the Land of Oz!

     Overall Impression  
Oz: The Great and Powerful, while high on visual splendor proves to be lacking in script and quality acting.

  The biggest disappointment from this film was my expectation for it to be MORE than a children's movie. From the trailer it seems darker, scarier...just what Hollywood has been doing with recent remakes of classic children's stories, fairytales and fables (Red Ridding, Alice in Wonderland, and Hansel and Gretel) While there are definitely some very scary creatures including the Bad Witches flying baboons and the Green Witch herself, Oz is without a doubt a children's movie. I honestly had no clue going in to the film that it was rated PG and after seeing the flying baboons I was almost positive that it was PG-13...but then the last hour commenced and the sap started to flow.  

Would your 10 yr. old child be ok with this crazy creature reaching out of the silver screen? I don't think I could have handled it! 

  Once the audience scrapes past the intricate and impressive land of Oz filled with high chroma characters and iridescent fog and bubbles, they'll find the film itself is another watered down attempted to teach children that GOOD ALWAYS WINS...even if the man who get's you there is a total con artist.  The script is just sooo dumbed down filled with question, answer, question answer conversationa and lot's of "Look out! This way! Oh my goodness! There're behind us!" The whole film (concerning the script) verges on the edge of too literal to enjoy for an older audience. At least in a film like Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland, Burton effectively utilizes some mature jokes and characters to engage his older audience and fan base.  Burton is the master at incorporating the morals of a children's film with the maturity of adult fantasy without catering too heavily to one or the other. Biggest examples Alice in Wonderland (which I'll compare to Oz a bit later in a visual aspect) Frankenweenie, and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. 

  Now WHO was it that directed this film? SAM RAIMI. Sam, father of gore n' horror, RAIMI. How he convinced Disney to let him direct this movie I'll never know, but I feel like there could have been so much more from him. I feel, since he knew he would be dealing with a well known children's story, he had to dumb it down to avoid any type of backlash from the company and  parents alike. I suppose it's a bit unfair to compare Raimi to Burton..I mean let's be honest...Sam Raimi and Tim Burton operate on opposite ends of the horror scale. Tim creates the quirky, creepy characters, but never anything in the gore end of horror (save Sweeney Todd)...that's Sam's territory. The man creates whole movies around the concept of dismemberment and chainsaws. i.e. The Evil Dead. Perhaps they two should have a meeting and exchange notes...I love Tim Burton and after watching The Evil Dead 2 I've decided I kinda, sorta do like Sam Raimi and his cats in a box style of directing and creating. 

James Franco with Director Sam Raimi  on the set of "Oz: The Great and Powerful."
Is that the book of the dead you're reading Sam? 

So now I have you completely confused by my self contradictions "Oh it's too scary for children, but the story line is too dumbed down to be taken seriously by an older audience." I have to apologize, but honestly, I'm not sure WHO to recommend this movie to...The movie was easy to follow, not confusing, definitely fun to look at but THIS SCRIPT IS SO BAD! So I guess I'll start by giving you some of my positive reactions to the film first...

Visuals concepts, 3-D, & the first 45 minutes.

  As I've written before, this movie is gorgeous to look at. The opening credits are fantastic featuring optical illusions and such, all in mind bending black and white.  I really LOVED that when the film started in Kansas they used the same black and white color palette as well as the smaller screen ratio. The film didn't HAVE to be made this way...the creators could have assumed everyone knows the classic Wizard of Oz and will connect the Kansas in that film to the Kansas in this film but they used the same techniques anyway and I really appreciated that. What I also almost passed out over was (*small spoiler*) the girl who Oz was in love with in Kansas (also played by Michelle Williams) said that she was going to marry Frank(?) GALE. AS IN DORTHY GALE'S FATHER! 

And Disney was kind enough to put the beautiful opening credits on youtube! Even more impressive on the big screen in 3-D

A magical score by Danny Elfman makes me think if this really WAS a project intended for Tim Burton...

As stated numerous times, I am not a fan of 3-D being put in to films when it is NOT needed or movies that are primarily visual effects, HOWEVER for Oz it all works because this is set in a fantasy land that couldn't exist without the help of 3-D and CGI. Apart from several locations that look more like Wonderland than Wonderland did in Tim Burton's adaption, the set design behind this world is brilliant. I'll let the pictures speak for themselves.

  The humor in the first 45 minutes or so of this film is actually quite good. Franco (whom I don't care for) is overly theatrical, charming and a total con artist. Exactly who he should be. But then...after the Balloon has landed in Oz and Mila Kunis' character get's involved...it's all (apart from the visuals) down hill from there.

The Bad

The Acting

  Apart from James Franco, I had high hope for the cast of OZ. I mean, Michelle Williams? She's brilliant! And Mila Kunis proved in Black Swan that she is more than just Jackie. And Rachel Weisz is consistently engaging and believable. Sadly ALL fell apart due to a TERRIBLE script. Proof that bad writing and a bad story can lead to an over all bad movie and the impression of bad acting. I must say...Mila Kunis without a doubt is the WORST. I can't even describe how terrible she was...It was rage and pain but rage and pain that a high school student does in their sophomore one act play. It didn't help when she did turn truly evil and transformed into the wicked witch she looked like THIS...

LET'S MAKE HER AS LITERAL AS POSSIBLE!

I mean this LOOKS awesome right? Right...until she appears and opens her mouth.

Costuming

  This is my territory people and let me put on my Tim Gunn face and say this...EDIT PEOPLE EDIT!! There was just so much random crap thrown on EVERYONE, especially Rachel Weisz's character. Gorgeous, green sequin dress? Lets add feathers on your back AND shoulders AND a huge slit so you can wear leather leggings AND knee high boots! Just WHY!?

So the top I love...then as we go down it's a dress with leggings underneath and just WHY!? I can't explain.

  I feel like there was no turn direction or concept behind these costumes. No connecting thread...Glinda is dressed in half 1930s evening gowns and half Galadriel armor...Mila Kunis was an Equestrian Rider(I actually would have loved that in a different movie), then a 1950's debutant, then THEE most literal translation of "WITCH" If I ever saw one. Individually there are parts of each costume that were impressive but when brought together they just confuse the audience and don't give any inspiration to the true feeling of the land of Oz. Costuming is SO important to the overall feeling and continuity of a film...I feel Oz just assembled 3 different costumers, had them all make separate collections, then picked at random interesting pieces from each. If you read my review of Anna Karenina, you'll understand the importance of connection, continuity, and a solid concept in costuming.

I cringe because this ensemble has NO place in the film! It doesn't fit....

PLUS!!! #1 irritation, the people of Oz didn't where a spec of green!? Anger and sadness.

           GARY JONES...I'm coming after you...

Frankenweenie

The story of a boy, his dog, and every classic horror movie reference imaginable. I loved it. 

Directed by: Tim Burton

Released: 2012

Staring: The voice talents of- Charlie Tahan, Catherine O'Hara, Martin Short, Martin Landau, & Winona Ryder.

Rated: PG

Times viewed: 1

The answer is yes. Yes I am one of those crazed, obsessed Tim Burton fans. Yes, I USUALLY love anything that has is name tied to it in any way, shape, or form...except for Dark Shadows, I'm still trying to forget Dark Shadows. That movie brings up an interesting point. Tim Burton used to be one of those Directors that did basically whatever the hell he felt like, not really concerned if it gained him commercial success or not; however, the past couple years have been, in my opinion, on and off for Burton. First of all Dark Shadows. I did, sort of, enjoy the movie (I'm just going to say, there will never be a Tim Burton film I will not enjoy, he's just ingrained too deeply in my cinematic roots), it was what Burton does well, dark macabre romance as well as comedy, then then last 20 or so minutes was complete..ugh..I don't even know...just BAD. Special effects were bad, story was bad, just BAD. Maybe it was just Chloe Moretz character turning into that sad excuse for a werewolf. Not sure, but at some point it went wrong. Then there was Alice in Wonderland. I loved Alice in Wonderland, but it felt more like a Burton imitation, or perhaps one of his produced films...not a project that was SOLEY his. Sometimes I feel like Disney has a yoke on Burton and doesn't let him express his crazy, beautiful, deadly worlds in full force. The movie I'm going to discuss in this post, Frankenweenie is a perfect example of this restrainment.
  The 2012 stop motion horror nostalgia flick, as many now know, is not the only Frankenweenie. In 1984, Tim Burton was working for Disney as an animator and had the chance to make his own short, live action film. The product, Frankenweenie resulted in the firing of Burton from Disney due to his "wasting" of their  resources. The film tested poorly with young children and was not released until after Burtons rise to fame in early/mid 90's. Typical, way to go Disney.
Come 2010/2011 Disney released Burton's hugely successful take on Alice in Wonderland. The film won 2 Ocars: Costuming (Colleen Atwood) and Art Direction (Karen O'Hera & Robert Stromberg) and is currently the 13th highest grossing film of all time. (world wide) With this HUGE commerical success as well as his cult following, I think this is when Disney decided they should stop trying to control Burton because let's face it, whatever he does will make major dollars.
At this point I envision Tim saying, "Hey Disney! Remember that short you fired me for making back in the 80's because it was too scary for kids? ...Before I was a world wide phenomenon? Yey I'm gonna make it AGAIN! And I'm gonna make it MY WAY! (more death, more monsters, more horror references, MORE MONEY!" ...and that's basically what happened...now that he's made them millions and MILLIONS of dollars Disney's removed Burton's collar and pretty much lets him do whatever the hell he wants. Even create a MONSTER!!

Sparky(Frankenweenie) Who could be afraid of that face? He is ADORABLE!

  For those of us who love the Classic Universal horror films of the 30s/40s this film is jam packed with all kinds of references, easter eggs, and the same beautiful high contrast black and white cinematography we loved from movies like Frankenstein/The Bride of Frankenstein, Dracula, The Invisible Man, The Wolfman, The Mummy, and The Creature from the Black Lagood. Having seen all of these films quite a few times, I found myself inwardly screaming "Oh my gosh! It's the same lighting they used on Boris Karloff's face! Vincent Price-like Character! Elsa Van Helsing, as in Van Helsing the vampire hunter!" ect. ect. #FilmGeekProbs There is even a GREMLINS reference in there if you're paying attention. Hint, just add water ;) 

  All the nostalgia references is without a doubt the a sizable reason I had such an exceptionally positive reaction to this film. Burton's original live action short is good, but the time limit didn't allow him to put in all those great, little details and characters that propel Frankenweenie from average animated movie to the ultimate Horror tribute film...Come to think of it, Burton should have made this film for Universal...they would have gotten a lot more out of it...especially with the re-release/restoration of 8 of their greatest Monster classics see HERE! If I had $100+ that set would be MINE...jumping trains and getting back on track now. 

"Frankenstein" is the name of the doctor who creates The Monster...the monster itself is not Frankenstein...it's just The Monster....incase you didn't know. Basic plot, Victor Frankenstein is a shy, quiet boy who lacks many friends, but possesses a fantasmic imagination and a passion for directing monster movies...huh, who does that sound like? His only real friend is his loyal dog Sparky, who is horribly killed after chasing a home run baseball into the street. *Note to all fathers, never force your child into joining a baseball team in return for your signature allowing him to participate in the science fair.* Asshole. Your child is a scientific protégée and you want him swinging at balls (he clearly does not want to) when he could be curing cancer, just to make friends? He has a dog, leave him alone!

Victor Frankenstein voiced by Charlie Tahan

.......Anyway......after the death of his best friend Victor receives a jolt of inspiration via his Vincent Price-like science teacher, and plans to bring Sparky back through means of electricity and SCIENCE!

Victor's "lab" set up is truly wonderful! In order to conduct the massive amounts of lightening generated by New Hollands nearly constant night storms, Victor utilizes his mothers pots and pans, the christmas reindeer, hair driers, bicycles, every appliance in the kitchen (including the toaster and blender)  and a swing set. These tools radiating with electricity and the resounding snaps and zaps illuminate the same Frankenstein we saw in James Whale's 1931 version. This scene is truly fantastic and heartbreaking as much of the film proves to be. Losing any pet is hard, especially when that pet is your best friend; I think so many people now a days forget how strong a bond between a human and a pet can become over the years. Frankenweenie reminds us, weather we want to or not, the pain of loosing that best friend as well as the desperation of wanting, needing them back. Kenneth Branagh portrayed this beautifully in his 1994 adaption of the classic, a plot line emitted from the 1931 production. The Monster in lonely despair, kills Frankenstein's new bride in order for the doctor to bring her back for himself (The Monster). In 2012, ABC's hit fantasy show "Once Upon A Time" also took on the theme of lost love and resurrection with it's own interpretation of Frankenstein. In the episode The Doctor, Frankenstein does not reanimate any old corpse, The Monster turns out to be that of his recently deceased brother. 

Not magic, but science. David Anders portrays Victor Frankenstein on this season's Halloween episode of Once Upon A Time 

Inevitably, Victor's secret is discovered and everyone wants a piece of his project. The things these children are will to do to win a science fair is quite terrifying....or perhaps it's just the children themselves who are (hilariously) terrifying. First to try to steal the secret is Edgar 'E' Gore. A hunchback little creep with an infinity for wringing his disproportioned, skeleton-like hands. You'd think that he (being Egore in a sense) and Victor would be friends right? Not really the case.

Edgar 'E' Gore voiced by Atticus Shepard

  As in any Tim Burton film, there must always be one fat boy in a stripped shirt. In Frankenweenie that boy is Bob, faithful friend but more like experimental subject of Toshiaki. The creepy asian who rivals Victor in scientific study and throws a mean curve ball. Not racist at all...

Bob. Voiced by Robert Capron

Toshiaki. Voiced by James Hiroyuki Liao

Next in the group of Victors..."Friends" is Nassor. Who basically IS Frankenstein's Monster. Quite obviously. I was a bit surprised they used this design for a competing character when it's very clear from the title and story that Victor is ...Victor Frankenstein and Sparky is "The Monster." Having a character inspired by another horror monster, say Dracula, would have added to the diversity of the characters and references. In the end it proved not to be a very big deal and the character was still very Monster-like.

Huge applause to Martin Short for voicing 3 different characters, Nessor included.

The ghostly "Weird Girl" and her cat Mr. Whiskers, to me, are the scariest things in Frankenweenie. Not only scary but quite funny. The girl reading Mr. Whiskers poop is hilarious and her freaked out face is reminiscent of The White Zombie or perhaps The Daughter of Dracula. Another great reference character. 

Again, cheers to Catherine O' Hara for voicing "Weird Girl" as well as 2 other characters. 

 The Final counterpart and possibly Victors only real friend not to mention possible love interest is Elsa Van Helsing. Not only is she VAN HELSING, Elsa is voiced by Winona freakin' Rider who hasn't worked with Burton since Edward Scissorhands. What's up with that!? Get back together! Elsa's poodle is fabulous not only because she, later in the film, sports some hot Bride of Frankenstein hair, but is also named Persephone. Greek demi godess wife of Hades lord of the underworld. Mythology spasm!

Elsa Van Helsing and Sparky's love Persephone.

  After discovering his secret to creating life beyond the grave, Victor's science fair competitors plan to electrify their own deceased pets and take first prize. This is were more classic horror monster madness ensues! All but Elsa resurect the likes of Shelly (a nod to Mary Shelly) the Godzilla like turtle, Nessor's dead hamster turned into the creeping incarnation of The Mummy...poor thing doesn't get far, The furry werewolf from Nightmare Before Christmas makes an appearance as Edgar's Wererat, and Bob creates an uncontrollable army of sea monkeys (Think Creature from the Black Lagoon meets Gremlins) Annnd the weird girl...well Mr. Whiskers is simultaniously incineracted and conjointed with the likes of a vampire bat. Creating......The emaciated version of Richard Roxburgh's Dracula from the 2004 film Van Helsing.

Well that's uncanny!

  Destroying these monsters one at a time leads to the 3rd tear inducing scene where, mirroring the 1931 flim, Victor is almost killed in a fiery windmill death. Sparky rescues him at his own cost. I'm NOT going to tell you weather the folks of New Holland find it in their hearts to save Sparky or if they choose to let him die; teaching Victor a lesson on life, death, loss, and love. Let me just tell you this scene had me BAWLING! Not just tear, tear, I mean rivers of salt water pouring onto my chest.

 I lost my own best friend when I was in 9th grade and let me tell you that was not easy. Indy had been there basically my whole life. We got her when she was a pup and I was two; we grew up together. She was beautiful, a black lab-huskey mix. She loved to be outside, hunting, running around on my neighbors porch when she wasn't suppose to, and being a ham! Just like Victor, I loved playing scenes with my dog. I would dress Indy up in the most ridiculous costumes and that poor dog put up with it! I wish I was at home because I have a whole album of photo shoots I did with her. I thought she would always be there, so when she got sick and had to be put down my freshman year I didn't take it very well. As I've said in previous posts, I didn't have many friends 5th-8th grade so I'd go home and talked to my dog. Sounds dumb but honesty, she was my best friend in my pre-teen years. Here are some pictures of Indy...I think should would have made a good Frankenweenie. She's got the color scheme and a bit of the creepy look.

Queen of the castle! Always watchful

Look at that face! What a beauty! 

Well, maybe not always...but she had personality! 

This was about a month or two before she died :( Even when she got really fat, and turned orange she was my favorite.

  Tim Burton has expressed in interviews that he wrote this story was because he himself lost a dog when he was younger and had problems coping. I believe this to be a big reason why the movie works so well emotionally. I mean let's face it, this basically IS Tim Burton loosing his dog and doing what couldn't be done. Heartbreaking and glorious.

  This movie was FANTASTIC! It was what Tim Burton does best. BEING TIM BURTON. By drawing inspiration from Hollywood's past, he creates a league of lovable misfits and their monsters. As there must be in all Disney movies, there are life lessons about love, loss, parents accepting their children, misunderstanding science and so on, but no to the point where it's overly cheesy and ridiculous. What else can I say? This is a MUST watch for children and adults of all ages. The older generation will love it for is humorous, accurate reference of the classics, and kids will love it because of it's ADORABLE leading dog and goofy characters. I can say some smaller children might be a bit off put by some of the monsters and the kids, but nothing a good rewatch can't solve.
  I truly PRAY this film ignites a whole new generation's interest and passion for those classic movies that have shaped horror movies, monsters, heroes, and villains into what they are today. Men like Burton, who hold true to the classics and attempt to bring them to light in darkly unoriginal days like this, continue to inspire me. And if that can be done through a "children's film, then bravo. Bravo sir. The greatest original creates spawn from somewhere, an ever evolving chain that links our present to our past. Corporations like Disney must be careful about the talents they choose to support or not support. A missed window of opportunity can change not only the future of cinema, but culture as a whole. Don't believe me? Think of Hot Topic, now imagine Hot Topic WITHOUT any Tim Burton merchandise. This is a small trivial example but to think that an entire sub group of pop culture has been created by ONE man's work is extraordinary.

Enjoying some Valentines chocolate with my own Sparky! ...And Johnny Depp? Well this is a Tim Burton post!

Hugo

-"If you've ever wondered where your dreams come from look around."

There is one sentence in the whole spoken word language that I may never understand...

"I don't really like movies."

  Let me tell you a bit about myself, I was a bit odd (at least to some people) when I was younger. 5th -8th grade, I didn't really have any GOOD/BEST friends that I would go out with. I mean I had friends that I hung out with at school, but any Friday or weekend I stayed home. And I was/am perfectly fine with that! It was staying home all those weekends that turned me into the raving movie maniac I am now, I and couldn't be happier. Movies, are without a doubt my favorite past time. Movies are those magical things that can take you away from your hum drum lives for a few hours and transport you wherever you'd like to go. At least that's what they did for me when I was in my ugly middle school days; and still do today. Never fear, I'll have you know that I am now happily blessed with a very large, wondrous, and diverse group of friends...and what do we love to do when we all spend time together? 

WATCH MOVIES!!!

  So for me to be told or to overhear "I don't really like movies" just breaks my heart because if you just sit down and truly let yourself enjoy a film there are endless opportunities for discussion, discover, and dreaming! 

Which brings me to the first official Miss Morgan Review. Tonight I'll be taking you through the magical modern masterpiece of Hugo. 

Directed by: Martin Scorsese

Released: 2011 

Staring: Ben Kingsley, Sarah Baron Cohen, Asa Butterfield, Chloe Grace Moretz, Christopher Lee, and Jude Law.

  When the trailer was first released, I wasn't really sure what I should be expecting from this movie. A "children's" movie directed by one of the foulest mouthed, violent, and most loved director, Martin Scorsese. Ladies and Gents, this is the man who brought us Raging Bull, Gangs of New York, and Taxi Driver. None really appropriate for any viewer under 13; however, he remains one of the greatest directors of our generation. I should have known right away I was in for many pleasant and unexpected historical film treats, touching moments, and great visuals. Not to mention as truly FANTASTIC story line. 

 Hugo Cabret is a young boy, living in a Parisian train station after the untimely death of his father. Hugo scurries around the station, working the clocks and discretely following the on goings of the station and it's patrons; as always making the life of an orphan appear to be the grandest adventure one could have. Way to go Hollywood. When Hugo is not busy winding clocks or being chased by the always comical Sarah Baron Cohen's Station Inspector and his Doberman Maximus, he strives to finish his fathers last project. Yes that creepy, creepy little doll, man, robot...thing. Try as he might, Hugo cannot coax life into the little man of metal.  Through a series of happened meets and circumstances, Hugo discover the origins of the mysterious Automaton as well as resurrects a forgotten legend. This is where I truly fell in love with the film. 

  Hugo develops a strained relationship with the owner of the train station's toy store. A cold unforgiving man who forces Hugo to work for him in order to repay him for the tools and gears Hugo's stolen from him. During this time Hugo also meets and befriends the toy maker's goddaughter and ward Isabelle. Isabelle longs for adventure and is more than thrilled when Hugo sneaks her into a movie theater to see a picture; something Papa George (Her godfather) never allows. Through some good old fashion book reading and investigation, Hugo and Isabelle discover the reason for his resentment. Papa George is the long lost film maker George Méliès. An artist who lost his life's work due to war and the declining interest in the magic of movies.

George Méliès was firstly a magician and one of the most amazing and inventive film makers of all time. The role is play spectacularly by Ben Kingsley. Kingsley manages to capture the bitter, cold regret of an old man who has had everything he loved and worked for taken away; as well as the vibrant and passionate artist and film maker that Méliès was in his youth. Make-up assisted the performance greatly by not being over bearing as almost all Hollywood make-up is. It was subtle and bright, not caked on and heavy. Other films take note. I suppose the story of Méliès rise and fall was thing I enjoyed most about the film because I LOVE the history of film. Film tells us so much about ourselves and serve as a place where your dreams come alive. Exactly what is illustrated in the last hour of Hugo.

 In creating the story of Méliès lost work along with the story of the lost boy, Scorsese brings to light a cause he himself has rigorously campaigned for. Film preservation. 

You may have seen him in AFI commercials on film preservation in several dvd releases. Scorsese is a founding father of The Film Foundation-film makers for film preservation, an organization that will be getting a large donation after I'm dead and gone. http://www.film-foundation.org/common/11004/default.cfm?clientID=11004&thispage=homepage

Why you ask? They're just films...there will always be new ones. The fact is, I personally believe film is one of the most important historical documents as well as artistic pieces we as humans have created in this last century. Film can tell you so much not only about a time and place in history, but HOW that film was created truly shows how we as humans and artist view our past. Films made today will show later generations what kind of society we live in. Values, beliefs, lifestyles, music, politics, religions, relationships, all of these can be told through the story of film which is why it's so important we preserve it now and restore what could potentially be lost. 

http://www.film-foundation.org/common/11004/preservedFilms.cfm?MovieID=968&clientID=11004&sid=2

  Beautiful examples of the preservation work that The Film Foundation has done. Another reason I have such appreciation for this film is because this is the era of film we're currently studying in Film class and here's one thing I've noticed. The Lumière Brothers created the first real moving picture and used their invention to capture everyday life. The Edison Company of the US exploited it (as we Americans do with all beautiful things) and used it as source of revenue (Dancing girls, cockfights, act.) But Méliès was the first to discover the power that film had to tell a story. To connect people, make them laugh and gasp...as a good magician should. 

  Apologies this has become more of a rant on film preservation and history but that really is the underlying story of this film is. But I might say, this film is never dull or slow. It keeps the viewer engaged at all times with a colorful pallet and equally colorful characters. As I said before, Sarah Baron Cohen and Ben Kingsley are the stand out performers in this piece and wonderful to watch. Hugo is a fantastic film for all ages, which shows what a truly versatile director Martin Scorsese is. I highly recommend you to seek out this gem if you haven't already. It will undoubtedly put a smile on your face and an appreciation for films and the magicians that create them.

Sarah Baron Cohen as the Station Inspector and Maximus.
Cohen has one of the more humorous roles physically as well as some of the best lines.

Ben Kingsley portrays a man of forgotten dreams.

Asa Butterfield's Hugo discovers that Chloe Grace Moretz's character Isabelle
may possess the key to his fathers final project.

"This book was intended for my grandson. I believe it is now meant for you Monsieur Cabret."
Christopher Lee as the all knowing train station librarian