Today we’re talking about the 2013 film The Hunters.
Story
This is a mashup of Indiana Jones and Spy Kids, but it works. The story beats are predictable but interesting, and the world building was fun.
Score: 0.5
Characters
There are a few times where I think the writers got confused about which brother was which but besides that, they were passable characters. Thankfully the acting was significantly better than the dialogue.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
There was a lot of useless explaining and some mixed-up lines, along with some strange reasons for doing anything. That being said, at least the writers understood how to write a romance subplot.
Score: 0
Visuals and Music
The special effects were bad but the locations were nice (Yay BC!). The fight choreography was passable.
The music did its job but wasn’t particularly good.
Score: 0.5
Fun
I enjoyed it but it wasn’t great. The kids got bored a few times.
I usually love when this sort of story mixes myths and reality but the entire made up story of Cinderella’s shoe was frustratingly under-researched and under-utilized.
Score: 0.5
Overall
A fun take on the archeology/adventure genre but its special effects, terrible dialogue, and poor research take away from the overall enjoyment.
There were two movies going on, the first half and the second half. The first half is a meandering mess and the second half is halfway between a revolution and some overly saccharine idealized version of Disney.
Score: 0
Characters
While the main character and the king both get some good developement, the rest of the cast don’t, and that’s too bad because they were interesting.
I loved the goat and the star (the nose booping was cute).
Chris Pine ate up this role and was fantastic. I hate that they made a relatable villain who could be redeemed and chose to make it impossible for him because of “magic rules”. It took away his agency. I prefer my villains leaning into evil instead of being trapped in it forever because they read a book. (Good message there, Disney.)
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
There were a lot of great Disney callbacks and inside jokes. Beyond that, most of it was okay but not amazing. The best lines belonged to the villain and the goat.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
Normally I love Disney’s innovation but the characters in this look like a made for TV animation from a decade ago. The backgrounds are spectacular though.
The score is a great homage to older Disney films but the songs are paradoxically catchy and forgettable. Like someone who was trying really hard to write a Disney song instead of a Wish song.
Score: 0.5
Fun
When we watched the movie, it had a weird stuttering in the video when it panned or zoomed. It bothered me enough to play with my settings before I realized it was the movie. It wasn’t fun for me.
The movie itself was fun but not engrossing. I liked the ending enough.
Score: 0.5
Overall
The most forgettable Disney movie since Black Cauldron (although I haven’t seen Home on the Range). It’s not a bad movie but it tries too hard to be a Disney movie and forgets that each has their own special magic.
The tone of this one is much younger then the first. The story is simplistic; the twist is so obvious that I couldn’t believe it was the actual twist.
Score: 0
Characters
The characters were fairly consistent from the first one, but the movie didn’t give their cast much time to develop. The characters were there, but mostly ignored to make more time for forced drama.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
The dialogue is delightfully silly. Filled with puns and fun tidbits of monster lore. I wish there were more deep character moments, but overall the dialogue is okay.
There’s a lot of forced borderline toddler-level talk about friendship that got tedious quick.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
The visuel style is extra poignant with the contrast to the human world. They did a great job building a colourful, dynamic, and interesting world. Unfortunately a good half of the movie is set in our world and is the weaker for it.
The music is catchy but very similar to the first and again feels better than the plot of the movie.
Score: 0.5
Fun
I’ll be honest, I was bored by the halfway mark. It’s colourful with good music, but not particularly fun to watch. The kids loved it and it wasn’t bad, just meh.
Score: 0.5
Overall
A lackluster sequel which forgets what made the first entertaining and spends way too much time in the human world. The characters and music are great, but don’t make up for the pre-school dialogue and storyline.
This tried really hard to be every Christmas movie in one but it sort of missed the point and the heart of the genre.
Score: 0
Characters
The characters were hilarious. They were stereotypes of stereotypes. Unfortunately, that didn’t make them all that interesting beyond a few gags.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
This was stilted even for a satire of a stitled genre. Other than the gags and wordplay, which sometimes came off as a CollegeHumour skit gone too long, the dialogue wasn’t great.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
Over the top visuals with some surprisingly good sets and costume design.
The music was sufficiently cheesy and played well for gags.
Score: 0.5
Fun
When the wordplay or satire hit this was a lot of fun, but it really didn’t make me care about the characters or want to see how it ends.
My mother in-law was not impressed and the three year old was bored.
Score: 0.5
Overall
A valiant attempt at satirizing Christmas movies which doesn’t succeed at doing more then pointing out things about other movies. There were a few really good jokes, but it didn’t have heart or wonder.
This felt a lot more forced than the first one. Instead of well placed foreshadowing, it was extremely trope-ridden. The archeology parts were fun, the love story worse than the first, and the twists were so predictable it hurt.
Score: 0
Characters
Generic Middle Eastern general, silly twist character, dead dad, and almost better than the Librarian archeologist. Again, the only characters I liked were Flynn, Judson, and Charlene. Although Flynn was a little annoying.
Wait, actually, despite the “Noble Savage” trope, I enjoyed Hakeem Kae-Kazim’s Jomo. Especially his wry delivery.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
The fighting banter between the love interests was cute but got old fast. The actual archaeology-babble was fun though. The near Spider-man repetitiveness of the “sometimes you need to give up what you want for the greater good” was overdone.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
The location shoots were absolutely beautiful when in the wild. Those in the cities had that ridiculous colour filter that American movies love for the Middle-East and Africa. It’s not an alien planet… sigh.
The special effects were better, and less used, but still terrible. The camera work wasn’t as good as the first one and tended to be a little indulgent of the landscape.
The music was fun and I enjoyed the magical pan-flute playing the Librarian theme.
Score: 0.5
Fun
The entire love story really sapped some of the fun for me. I did enjoy it mostly and both kids were enthralled again.
Score: 0.5
Overall
A weak sequel that spends too much time trying to make us fall in love with the love story and not enough with the actual characters making us care about them. It’s predictable and awkward, but has some sights of what this franchise could become.
There is a fine line between doing the story justice and changing the tone and feel. The changes they made to the story didn’t help anything but get the movie past the censors. Instead of coming off as an innocent boy who falls in love at the drop of a hat, d’Artagnan comes off as an airhead.
There’s also a reason that most movies only do the first half of the book. The rest of it is a little bit of a drag.
Score: 0
Characters
D’Artagnan was terrible and flaky when dealing with women, but when he was sword fighting, he was awesome. All the other musketeers were great and I wish they’d gotten more screen time.
The treatment of the women was possibly less progressive then the novel and extremely predictable.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
The dialogue is mostly quippy and fun, except when it comes to the romance where it’s stilted, awkward, and cringe-worthy.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
The filming angles, colours, shots, lighting, and framing are absolutely gorgeous. The fight choreography wonderful and the location shoots splendid.
The music is great and epic.
Score: 1
Fun
An amazing cast which all did a great job. The fighting was fun and the little bits of humour were refreshing, but mostly it was dour. Both kids got bored and so did I.
Score: 0
Overall
A semi-faithful adaptation of the book with not enough humour or sword fighting. Although visually stunning, the changes to d’Artagnan made him unlikeable and the movie didn’t age well.
Today we’re talking about the 2020 Film Palm Springs.
Story
I love time loop movies (writing a time loop book is hard though). This is a passable example. A lot of the awkwardness and swearing felt made just to shock and bring up the rating.
There’s some fascinating concepts on time and they started examining what would happen with the limits of human memory, but then backtracked and just made the character a liar.
It’s a mixed bag with all the awkwardness of an adult comedy and a few cool ideas.
Score: 0.5
Characters
Adult comedies and time loop movies have a commonality of character: likeable but selfish protagonists that make very bad decisions. In a good time loop movie, the character learns and grows through the ordeal. These characters learned very little other than to love each other. They end still selfish and making bad decisions. It’s very frustrating.
That being said, the actors managed to make them likeable and even fun to watch.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
So much swearing with none of the finesse or charisma of Deadpool.
Beyond that there are a few really funny lines and some interesting dialogue, but since more than half of what the the main characters say are lies, it makes it hard to care.
Score: 0
Visuals and Music
It’s a very pretty and stylistic movie that definitely has a surreal quality.
The music is acceptable but nothing special.
Score: 0.5
Fun
So glad I didn’t watch this with the kids. It was pretty awkward to watch at times, other than the “gives up and has fun” phase. It had some cool ideas, but was bogged down by its need to be adult.
Score: 0.5
Overall
Fantastic comedy actors in a mediocre time loop story that is more interested in its adult gags and swearing than finishing any of its substance. Anything new they bring into the genre, they undermine with lies and characters making more bad decisions.
It’s very much a DC Comics movie, lots of angst, lots of grim-dark, and very little humour. There are only two characters that show any form of compassion or common sense. Wonder Woman seems to now care about as much about collateral damage as Superman and goes out of her way to confront the villain at the worst possible time only to give us an action sequence.
A lot of movies set in the 1980’s have a nostalgic sheen. There’s no nostalgia here, more of a deep loathing. The movie spends a lot of time setting up how greedy and hateful humanity is and how even those who know they are hurting others don’t care. It makes the ending feel cheap and un-earned.
The movie recycles tropes from other superhero movies from the “evil oil guy” to “nerd with glasses feels entitled and goes evil” and doesn’t add anything new to them.
The ethical issues of her boning some dude who’s possessed by her ex made me uncomfortable the entire movie.
Score: 0
Characters
I have a hard time with Diana’s obsession with Steve. He’s handsome and he was a genuinely awesome guy. But she was pining (pun intended) for 70 years? It feels like a stretch.
I really find the body possession to be one of the worst ethical issues. She played dress-up with a possessed body and did other things. She effectively raped a man. Yuck.
Steve was posted in London during the First World War. He has seen a subway before. He’s seen a garbage can before. Other than to mock modern art, why would he not be able to tell a garbage can from art but somehow be able to fly a fighter jet? When he was alive, they didn’t even have cabin pressure, but now he just feels how to fly?
The villain was a Trump stand-in with a child, so you know he’ll be redeemed in the end by his love for his kid. It’s so cliché as to be insulting. Especially to those of us who grew up in “broken homes”.
Selena, Willow, Harley, uhm… Barbara is the typical super-nerd who people ignore for some reason. She’s a female Daniel Jackson without the allergies or alien theories. I’m not sure if she’s a male wank fantasy or just a power fantasy. It’s an old trope that hasn’t gotten any more interesting or less insulting.
Score: 0
Dialogue
Other than some over explanations and condescensions, the dialogue was okay. Steve was funny and loveable and the rest was meh.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
We had some technical issues with the streaming service so we didn’t get this in full 4K and the music was stuck in stereo instead of full 5.1 surround.
That being said, the beginning on the island was spectacular. I wasn’t a fan of the filter they used for the 80’s faux look but overall it was a beautiful movie. The CGI on Cheetah was pretty bad though.
The music was fantastic. It elevated certain scenes that could not hold up otherwise. I was disappointed we never heard the full Wonder Woman theme.
Score: 1
Fun
The beginning of the movie and the end credit scene were awesome. There were some interesting bits in the middle but overall it was a little boring. Neither of my kids sat still for it.
Score: 0.5
Overall
All the grim-dark expected from a DC movie. The non-redeemable set of villains that are magically redeemed with a pretty speech. The action set pieces seem overly destructive and add nothing to the plot. The glossed over possession and rape is played as cute and romantic instead of horrifying. Overall, this movie gets lost in it’s hate for the 80’s and humanity and forgets to get to a point.
The main plot of the movie is typical undercover reporter fall in love with subject. It makes reporters look bad and honestly the entire things is awkward.
The parts of the story that shine are when the characters are soul searching or making genuine connections. The sister character is fantastic and I could have watched the whole movie about her instead.
Score: 0
The Royal Wedding
The weak mystery is barely explored instead they spend most of it on wedding angst and pushing the main character around.
Again, like the first on the bright spot is the sister. She’s inspiring and adorable.
Score: 0
The Royal Baby
This was a well written closed-circle mystery that kept me guessing until the end. (Although I did have the culprit in my top 3.) The characters were less wet towel and they gelled with each other more. There was some awkward drama and they tried much too hard to pin the blame on Simon, again.
Score: 0.5
Characters
A Christmas Prince
The main character does a great job of being doe-eyed and fell for the prince the same time we all did, when we saw him with his sister. There’s some nice developement for the main three characters but overall it felt lack-luster.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Wedding
The king went from an unsure prince who doesn’t want to commit to being king to now being an unsure king who trusts his advisors way too much. The main character gets pushed around and is only really interesting when she pushes back or is helping the sister. There’s also a storyline that’s lifted directly from Princess Diaries. I’ll give the movie this, they did a great job with the redemption arc.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Baby
Overall this was a cute and joyful set of characters, something that should be standard for a Christmas movie. I liked the new additions.
Score: 1
Dialogue
A Christmas Prince
Mostly acceptable, if a little over the top. There are a few good speeches about identity, but nothing spectacular. The dad and the sister got all the great lines.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Wedding
Completely over the top; comparing the dialogue to a telenovela would be an insult to telenovelas.
However, as a giant nerd, I did appreciate the quotes and nods to other movies.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Baby
The writers built on the geeky quotes from the last one and made sure to include as much dorky future parents stuff as possible. The dialogue for them was believable and cute.
Score: 0.5
Visuals and Music
A Christmas Prince
The cinematography of this movie made me angry and gave me a headache. My family didn’t seem to notice, but the constant slow paning for no reason was extremely frustrating.
The locations were lovely and very thematic.
The music was lack-luster and was only elevated by the christmas music included. (You can’t go wrong with Tchaickovsky.)
Score: 0.5
The Royal Wedding
The cinematographer discovered quick cuts since the last one and they were almost as over used as the pans.
That being said, the scenery and clothing were good and the music classic.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Baby
Finally the useless pans are gone and the director and cinematographer started to frame the shots better. It’s not excellent, but good. The castle and clothing are as beautiful as ever.
The music didn’t stand out much; a few cute scenes but nothing spectacular.
Score: 0.5
Fun
A Christmas Prince
Breaking a ming vase or shooting an arrow through a window is a level of awkward I don’t like. There’s a lot of the movie that just isn’t fun to watch even if you know everything will end up fine.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Wedding
The obvious mystery was dragged out too long, and the angst was also dragged out too long. I spent a lot of the movie rolling my eyes and not yelling.
The sister and eventual warm ending was good though.
Score: 0.5
The Royal Baby
I have a soft spot for good mysteries and this was pretty close. It also isn’t angsty and kept my attention. A lot of fun.
Score: 1
Overall
A Christmas Prince
An excellent cast with a mediocre script and lots of cringe, the only thing that truly saves this is the interactions with the little sister.
Final Score: 2 stars out of 5
The Royal Wedding
An acceptable sequel to a lack-luster movie. Too little plot and too much angst. Again the sister saves the movie but she’s joined by a delightful redemption.
Final Score: 2 stars out of 5
The Royal Baby
Finally a balance between urgency and angst, this movie is the best of the three, with a fun mystery and lots of the best parts of the first two movies. I will probably skip the others in future years and just watch this one.
A remake of My Fair Lady but with a Frankenstein twist. This could have been a wonderful satire of sexism, fat-phobia, classism, and racism, but instead they decided to ignore the messages of both My Fair Lady and Frankenstein to create a poorly executed adventure romance.
Score: 0
Characters
The titular character is the stereotypical nerd with a heart of gold. He triumphs by sheer brain power and luck. He manages to change his world without changing anything.
The monster is the most civilized and definitely the one that makes the difference in the story.
The only characters that weren’t bland and honestly saved the movie from being boring were Scamper, the immortal rabbit, and Brain. The sidekicks made the best jokes and insights.
Score: 0.5
Dialogue
The wry humour of the sidekicks and the referential jokes save this movie. If it wasn’t for those, the movie would get lost in it’s own blandness.
Score: 1
Visuals and Music
The animation is crude by the standards of it’s time and hasn’t aged well. The monochromatic world don’t help make it visually appealing.
The music is boring and the songs feel like they were chosen by someone who got a bad synopsis and didn’t understand the little amount of plot.
Score: 0
Fun
There were some fantastic jokes and some interesting moments and references to classic monster movies. That was fun but the fat-phobic jokes and constant tropes about beauty sapped the joy for me.
Score: 0.5
Overall
The movie could have used more Scamper and Brain, which are the only parts of the movie that are genuinely funny. Beyond that it’s mostly been done before and I wasn’t impressed.