Recensioni di gavin-thelordofthefu-48-460297

Back when I was a little kid, I remember watching a teaser trailer for this movie as one of the previews from Forrest Gump on VHS and got chills before I realized that it was R-Rated. So later on, in my teen years, I rented this movie on video from a local library somewhere in Virginia and watched the entire film with my dad. To my surprise, it was a very good film. Now, I understand that many people criticized this film for it's historical inaccuracies and character portrayals, but this review I'm making is gonna be based on it's own merits as a feature length film.

The story's concept of William Wallace's lifetime as a Scottish warrior trying to bring freedom and independence is thought-provoking because you understand his motivations after what he went through. Not to mention this movie has the right amount of emotion all thanks to James Horner's musical score which fits the Scottish setting of the film along with the battle sequences. The cinematography from John Toll (Legends of the Fall, Iron Man 3, and Cloud Atlas) is gorgeous and the costumes are very authentic.

And last but not least the acting from everyone involved as they did a really good job especially Mel Gibson. I know many people criticized him, but I thought he was brilliant as William Wallace (needless to say that his Scottish accent isn't that bad at all) and the supporting cast also did good jobs including Patrick McGoohan and Angus Macfadyen.

Overall, Braveheart isn't exactly a 10/10 movie because of, again, the historical inaccuracies but it's still a very good flick especially when compared to many modern movies of the late 2010's/early 2020's. After 30 years, this deserves a seal of approval. :)

As the battle between the Galactic Empire and the Rebel Alliance continues, Han, Leia, and the others are chased by Darth Vader. In the meantime, Luke goes to the Dagobah System where he trains to master the Force so he can confront him which would lead to a secret that can change everything.

When I was nine years old at the 2000's, I came across this movie on video when I was visiting my cousins. Upon watching the whole thing, I was shocked when Darth Vader revealed his identity to Luke at the lightsaber duel scene, which made me realize just how much it left an impact in terms of sequels (especially when compared to modern hollywood).

All the more reason why The Empire Strikes Back still remains as the best of the original trilogy. The story is well written as it not only expands on A New Hope, but contains mature themes that makes it stand out more. The cinematography is gorgeous especially the planet of Hoth, the Dagobah System and Cloud City, all done very well by the directing which compliments that dark tone perfectly. The acting from everyone involved is great especially Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, and James Earl Jones. Even John Williams' music in this movie enhances the film flawlessly with the right amount of suspense and action.

Overall, The Empire Strikes Back is still a perfect movie that holds up after 45 years since it's release. Recommended. :)

Upon seeing this in theaters, I thought it was a great conclusion. Revisiting it sometime later, I'll be honest, it wasn't a perfect ending by any means. Not to say that it's a terrible one. In fact, it's a good one. It just kind of lacked the spark of the original Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Alfred is an annoying side character and there were certain scenes that were too truly devoid of logic such as Legolas jumping on crumbling rocks in the third act.

That being said, there were certain stuff I liked. The cinematography is as stunning as it was Andrew Lesnie's last Middle-Earth project before his death in 2015 and the costumes still amaze. The directing from Peter Jackson is still good, the editing is sharp, and the pacing is decent. Howard Shore still gives out beautiful music as ever retaining some of the themes from the last two films and the action remains breathtaking. And of course, the acting from everyone involved is superb with Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Luke Evans, Lee Pace, and Evangeline Lily giving solid performances as their respective characters.

Overall, The Battle of the Five Armies isn't a perfect ending to the trilogy, but it's fitting enough for a farewell after 10 years since it's release. Happy New Year everyone!

I loved the first two Harry Potter movies. Sorcerer's Stone, while not without some problems, was still a pretty good start to the movie franchise while Chamber of Secrets is even better with improved child acting and interesting mystery. Prisoner of Azkaban is another great installment. My only quibbles is that while it does have some humor, it isn't quite as funny when compared to the first two which had some good humor and Michael Gambon isn't quite as strong as Richard Harris in terms of Dumbledore's portrayal although he did a decent job.

Everything else is handled greatly. In terms of being an adaptation (considering the movie franchise got me into reading the books as well as the fantasy genre in general), it does have some changes, but it was a noble effort in capturing some of the complexities. Not only that, it managed to have character development to not only the Trio, but the side characters as well notably Sirius Black and Remus Lupin. Plus, the acting from everyone involved is superb. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson did great in their chemistry as the Trio while the supporting actors did a superb job including Gary Oldman, David Thewlis, Emma Thompson, and Pam Ferris (which is funny consider Pam Ferris played Aunt Trunchbull from Matilda, an adaptation of one of Roald Dahl's books that inspired Harry Potter and Emma Thompson did her portrayal of Aunt Trunchbull in that 2022 Netflix movie adaptation of the musical).

The directing from Alfonso Cuaron (A Little Princess and Gravity) is unique which captures the dark atmosphere while adding a sense of maturity, the cinematography is beautiful, the special effects are nice especially the Dementors in their chilling appearance, the makeup is great especially Wormtail played by Timothy Spall. And last but not least the music score from John Williams. While not in the same league as the music from the previous two, it's still good and a nice sendoff for the composer considering he later went on to compose music for other movies.

Overall, Prisoner of Azkaban is still a great installment of the movie franchise after 20 years. Recommended. :)

Upon learning that this movie became #1 when it premiered on Netflix, I decided to check it out. Not to mention it had a very interesting premise. An apocalyptic thriller about a family renting a beach house only to learn of an upcoming cataclysmic event involving a breakdown in phones, television and other technology, so they do whatever they can do survive. Sadly, it left me cold. That's not to say it's a terrible movie. I just wished that it could've been so much better.

Which is a shame, because there are some things I liked. First off, the cinematography is very beautiful to look at especially in the beginning, which was a strong start and could've made for a strong film. Not to mention the music score was very effective as it did fit the atmosphere the film was going for. The selling point of the movie, though, is the acting from everyone involved. Julia Roberts, Ethan Hawke, Kevin Bacon and Mahershala Ali did great jobs with their own role, providing some good chemistry. Even the kid actors didn't do that bad of a job at all.

That being said, everything else left me underwhelmed. The story's premise was very interesting especially in the beginning, but later on, it gets both confusing and ridiculous which doesn't explain much that's been going on (especially the ending which came across as too silly and abrupt). I'm aware that this was adapted from the book of the same name, which I have yet to read, although I did learn that the movie changed certain stuff, so I guess that's the only reason why the audience were divided on this. Also, the directing/editing comes across as pretty weird especially with certain camera shots. Not to mention it's too slowly paced especially with the later half. As for the characters, sad to say that they left a lot to be desired execution-wise despite the strong efforts from the actors. Not one of them came across as likeable which is the biggest problem that left me cold.

I'm not trying to be too harsh since this movie got generally positive reviews from critics and other positive votes on this website. It's just that I wanted to like this movie so much considering it's premise, but at the end of the day fell short. It's well acted and has good cinematography, but didn't do anything else with it's premise. 5/10.

In order to coincide with the upcoming animated movie War of the Rohirrim, I'm gonna review this on the first month of 2024.

Frodo and Sam along with Gollum continue their journey to Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring of Power created by Sauron. Meanwhile, Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli, having won the battle of Helm's Deep, continue their strategic ways for their final battle against Mordor.

Return of the King is a 3rd installment that is flawless. It does a superb job keeping the spirit of the source material intact while providing strong emotion and pathos. Plus it provided some depth to Gollum (AKA Smeagol, the hobbit who was driven mad by the power of the ring) while continuing the character arcs for the hobbits (Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin) along with Gandalf, Gimli, Legolas, Aragorn, Eowyn, Arwen, and Theoden. Even Denethor was given some much needed depth too especially when you understand his motives.

The cinematography continues to be beautiful as it gives an expansive scope of Mordor and Gondor, the directing/editing is still superb, and the music score from Howard Shore is just as epic as the music from the previous two which retains the themes while the new themes involving this conclusion resonate.

And of course, the acting is still great. Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Andy Serkis, Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellen, Orlando Bloom, John Rhys-Davies, Dominic Monaghan, Billy Boyd, Miranda Otto, Bernard Hill, Liv Tyler, John Noble, Cate Blanchett, Ian Holm, and Hugo Weaving all did superb jobs with their respective roles which made me glad this movie won an Academy Award back in 2003.

Overall, Return of the King is an epic conclusion to the trilogy that still holds up. Thumbs up from me.

When it came to prequels in cinema, The Hobbit trilogy made people skeptic. So was I, at first, considering the Lord of the Rings trilogy is still the most cinematic masterpiece in the history of Hollywood. Upon seeing them, though, I don't think they're bad at all. An Unexpected Journey had some issues, but it was a good start to the prequel trilogy with great acting, stunning visuals, and beautiful music from Howard Shore.

The Desolation of Smaug is another good installment of the trilogy. Is it a masterpiece? Not really, but it's still good in it's own right. The CGI designs on the orcs aren't perfect and could've have been better as practical make-up and it does drag in it's pacing. However, there are plenty of good things.

The story does retain the spirit of the Hobbit book while connecting the tone to the Lord of the Rings (which I still don't mind), the action sequences are fun and the visuals remain stunning especially the look of the inside of the Misty Mountains. Plus, the CGI design of Smaug is well crafted and intimidating at the same time all thanks to Benedict Cumberbatch's superb voice work. The other actors, including Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Hugo Weaving, Orlando Bloom (with his unexpected return as Legolas), Luke Evans, and Christopher Lee did great jobs as ever with their respective roles, and Howard Shore continues to deliver with his score with his new themes regarding Laketown and Smaug himself.

Overall, The Desolation of Smaug isn't a great installment, but much like An Unexpected Journey, it's a good installment of the prequel trilogy after 10 years.

DreamWorks Animation has done mostly better movies. Most of which are either classics (How To Train Your Dragon and Prince of Egypt) or just downright disappointing (Shark Tale and The Boss Baby).

Back at the early 2010's, this movie came out at the time when DreamWorks was struggling at the box office for a while during the 20th Century Fox era and it lost money for the studio although that didn't stop it from getting a Netflix spin off series later on. That being said, I think this is a very fun movie. Is it a classic? Not really. Does it have problems? Yes. The story does have some cliches we've seen before: the underdog story, the social outcast, the overprotective brother, etc., the secondary side characters especially the other snail racers could've been fleshed out more. Not to mention the villain himself is so one-dimensional despite Bill Hader's great voice work. However, it still has some charm of it's own, the voice work is really good especially Ryan Reynolds, Paul Giamatti and Samuel L. Jackson, the racing sequences are great to look at, the music score from Henry Jackman is very heartwarming, and the third act is where the movie does get better.

Overall, Turbo isn't exactly one of DreamWorks Animation's strongest films, but at the very least it tries to do something with it's weird concept about a racing snail and is infinitely better than Shark Tale, Bee Movie, and The Boss Baby. 7.5/10.

As someone who grew up with Disney back at the 90's, I was extremely hyped to see this centennial anniversary film after Once Upon A Studio. Once I saw it though, it came across as disappointing than magical. Not saying it's awful or anything, but considering Disney has been around for a century creating mostly good content, this could've been so much better.

The story had a good concept about wishes becoming reality and could've provided an emotional core, but the majority of the movie relies too much on references from the past Disney films (which I won't go into full detail) instead of having it's own identity. Which is exactly why Puss in Boots: The Last Wish did a way better job with it's own concept of the wishing star because it fleshed out not only Puss's character arc about overcoming his fear of death, but the side characters as well.

The pacing is weirdly inconsistent considering it's 95 minute runtime which results in scenes that haven't been set up properly and the editing is choppy. Then, there's the biggest problem with the movie. The musical numbers and they left a lot to be desired. The instrumental score is OK for the most part and the singing is good from everyone involved, but the lyrics were so hackneyed and don't rhyme at all.

That being said, there are some good things I liked in this movie. The references, while too self-reliant, are cute enough, the voice acting including Ariana DeBose, Alan Tudyk, and Chris Pine brought some charm to their otherwise one-dimensional shallow character roles, there are some dumb moments that did make me laugh and as I said before, the singing in the musical numbers is so good. The best part, however, is the animation and it's so unique as a centennial anniversary movie. It's blend of CGI animation and watercolor animation makes it all look beautiful especially with the character designs and backgrounds.

Overall, Wish could've made for a magical experience and a great anniversary movie, but instead it came across as disappointing and lazy in terms of it's execution. It's only watchable just for the animation, but to those who want a better anniversary, go watch Once Upon A Studio. 5/10.

Considering it's been 5 years since this came out, I'm not even remotely surprised at this point. We live in a world where a big corporation like Disney makes terrible/bland live action remakes, pushing agendas as an excuse to make a quick buck instead of making original content that's heartwarming, and declining in quality ever since the pandemic. You guys are probably asking, "What does that have to do with the movie?". Well, needless to say that Disney has been losing creativity over the years and this is a perfect example of that.

Sorry for being a little negative right now during the month of Thanksgiving. It's just that ever since I've watched this movie on Netflix years ago, I became baffled. This could've had so much potential to be a good adaptation of a really good book that many people grew up with and yet it fails in every aspect. I know many people didn't like the 2003 TV movie adaptation, but at the very least it tried to acknowledge it.

It's like the executives of this movie decided to butcher the book in favor of spectacle (which doesn't look that appealing to be honest). The pacing is dull, the music score from Ramin Djawadi (composer of Game of Thrones) is so generic, the CGI effects are lifeless, and the characters come across as depressing than charming.

Which is a shame because Storm Reid and Chris Pine are the only good things in this movie since they tried to put some effort into their roles, but even those weren't enough to save the movie. So, yeah, those who are seeking for any good Disney movie should avoid this.

Growing up back in the 90's, I've been very fond of Disney especially in terms of animation. Many of their films I consider to be good/great (The Lion King being one of them considering it was during my childhood) even if some aren't quite my favorites. But when I heard that the studio was releasing an 100 anniversary short, I became very happy and watched it on Disney+ today. To my surprise, it filled me with complete nostalgia.

Not only was it hilarious and cute, but it's also a great loving tribute to the studio and Walt Disney himself. The way it blends both 2D hand drawn and 3D CG animation, it's reuse of old archive dialogue while creating new ones, the way it incorporates other characters from other Disney films (including the ones from particular flops like The Black Cauldron), and the new rendition of When You Wish Upon A Star that's sung very well.

Overall, this will go down as one of my favorite shorts in Disney history. If you love Disney animation certainly check this one out and you'll have the same nostalgia as I did.

Alan Grant, Ellie Sattler, and Ian Malcolm, get invited by Dr. John Hammond, a wealthy businessman to Isla Nublar where he and a group of scientists created a wildlife part of de-extinct dinosaurs called Jurassic Park. Later on, when an industrial sabotage causes the power and security facilities to shut down, the visitors, including Hammond's grandchildren, have to struggle and find a way out of the island.

This movie is so great. I remember watching it on video when I was a kid and got terrified by the suspenseful moments involving the dinosaurs. Later on, I saw the movie in it's 3D re-release back in 2013 and was blown away by how good the special effects were and they still hold up after 30 years. Not to mention the plot in this was very good. It gives us time to know the characters while learning the scientific nature of dinosaurs while balancing it with good drama and suspense.

Everything else is still great. The scenery is so gorgeous it blended very well with the effects, which blended both CGI and animatronics very well. The acting from everyone involved is superb with Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, and the late Richard Attenborough giving wonderful performances while supporting actors like Samuel L. Jackson and Wayne Knight were great too. And last but not least the music score from John Williams which is by far one of his best work since Star Wars. The main theme fits the tone of the movie and has a sense of wonder.

Overall, Jurassic Park is not only one of Steven Spielberg's best movies of all time, but it has aged like fine wine after 30 years of it's release. Thumbs up.

I remember seeing this in theaters back in 2003 when I was 9 years old and loved it so much. 20 years later, I still love it I consider it one of the best Pixar films since the Toy Story trilogy.

The animation is beautiful with some of the most breathtaking underwater effects while the character designs of the fish are both cute and expressive. The music score from Thomas Newman is both beautiful and haunting which enhances the dramatic tone of the movie. The story is superbly written as you understand Marlin's motivations in keeping Nemo safe after the death of his wife which makes the overprotective father cliche work. In fact, it even fleshes out the side characters especially Dory, a fish with short term memory loss, who is not only a good comic relief, but shares some good chemistry between Marlin. Even the other side characters like Crush the turtle and Nigel the Pelican are entertaining as they help the main two characters on their journey to find his lost son.

The characters are both likeable and relatable at the same time with some superb voice performances. Albert Brooks, Ellen DeGeneres and Alexander Gould both did great in their respective roles while the supporting actors like Willem Dafoe, Geoffrey Rush, Andrew Stanton Barry Humphries (who passed away last month R. I. P), Eric Bana, Brad Garrett, Allison Janney, etc, all did good jobs as the side characters especially Gill.

Overall, Finding Nemo still holds up after 20 years since it's release. :)

After the events of the Empire Strikes Back, Luke, Leia and the others attempt to free Han Solo from his frozen carbonite state while dealing with Jabba the Hut. Also, they would befriend the Ewok tribe on Endor in their final battle against the Empire. Meanwhile, Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine create the second Death Star in their attempt to triumph over the Rebel Alliance, leaving Luke in a struggle to free his father from the Dark Side.

When I was a kid, I remember watching the movie on a rental video tape a couple of times and it had me engaged. As a young adult, this is still a great movie. Yes, it does lack the spark that made A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back perfect, but it's a great ending to the trilogy.

The story is very good and it wraps up the loose ends that were established in The Empire Strikes Back and provides an emotional resonance and pathos. As for the Ewoks themselves, I've learned that many people didn't like them as much. For me, I didn't actually mind them at all. They were a great addition to the movie as they represent Nature triumphing over Technology (the Empire) which was very interesting. Not to mention it resolves the conflict between Luke and Darth Vader, his father due to a scene before their final lightsaber duel against each other that Luke tries to see the good in him. As the other characters, they're still likeable and also fleshed out. Especially Han Solo, who volunteers in the Rebel Alliance which shows that he has progressed in his character development after what happened in the previous film as did Leia who allies with the others in their final battle against the Empire.

Everything else is great. The cinematography is well crafted, the action sequences are stellar with the Battle of Endor and the final lightsaber duel being the highlights, the acting from everyone involved is great with Mark Hamill and James Earl Jones being the best while Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher still providing some good chemistry. Even John Williams' music still soars as it retains the cues from the previous two while balancing them with the new themes.

Overall, Return of the Jedi may not have the spark that A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back had, but it's a great conclusion to the trilogy after 40 years of it's release. :)

I came across The Last Kingdom on Netflix when I was 25 years old at the time and to my surprise, I actually liked it. The first two seasons had some problems regarding the editing and shaky cameras in certain scenes, but the story was gripping, it had good character buildups while going into detail on the historical fiction on how England was united, the action sequences were engaging, and the music score is atmospheric. Season 3 is where the show got better with emotional gravitas, the character interactions became more compelling as did the story, and the cinematography was just as gorgeous. Season 4 wasn't quite as strong, but was good nonetheless and Season 5, while also not quite as strong, was an improvement and a great ending to the series

When I heard that Netflix was gonna make a movie finale to the series, I became interested and saw it on the same day it came out. Later on, it turned to be very good.

The cinematography is very superb and well shot, the costumes are just as beautiful, the music score, much like the series, is atmospheric, the acting from everyone involved is great especially Alexander Dreymon, and action is very good.

That being said, there are some problems I do have with the movie. The story does wrap up Uhtred's story very nicely, but some parts feel rushed due to the 111 minute length and could've fleshed out the other side characters. Plus there were some stuff in the story that came out of nowhere (which I won't spoil to those who haven't seen this yet).

Overall, The Last Kingdom: Seven Kings Must Die isn't a perfect movie, but as a closure to the series, it's pretty good. Go check out the series first and then watch the movie. And remember....

DESTINY IS ALL.

When I was growing up in the 90's, I remember playing the Super Mario games (notably the Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Party games) and loved them very much. They were imaginative, colorful, characters that have some charm, and some of the catchiest music in history. Later on, as a young adult, when I heard that both Universal and Illumination Entertainment were adapting the IP into an animated feature film after the 1993 cinematic flop, I was interested in how both of the studios were gonna pull it off.

So my brother and I, being the Super Mario Bros. Fans we are, went to see it after it came out only to end up having a very enjoyable time. Now, before I can go into detail on why this movie is so good, I'd like to say that I'm not really an Illumination fan. For starters, I thought the first two Despicable Me movies were good, but the other films they made have been either passable (Minions: The Rise of Gru, the Sing movies), mediocre/forgettable (the Secret Life of Pets movies, The Grinch, Despicable Me 3 and Minions) or just downright terrible (Hop and The Lorax). So I was a little hesitant at first considering the studio's reputation for mostly appealing to the young demographic. Not to mention I was baffled at some of the casting choices for this movie.

That being said, the studio managed to do some homework when making this film. Ok, it does have some problems, but as a 90's person who grew up with the games, this was a love letter done right.

First off, the animation is so breathtakingly gorgeous and some of the best Illumination has done. Not only does it succeed at being faithful to the visual aesthetics from the Mario and Donkey Kong games, but the character animation designs/movements are accurate which made me so happy. Not to mention the world building is great. The action, however, is where the animation excels even more as it does have a sense of intensity and energy. Also, the music score from Brian Tyler is one of the highlights of the film. He did a fantastic job at his own rendition of the themes from the Mario games with the help of Koji Kondo (the guy who created the music for the original Mario games) and mixes them with some new themes, creating an epic magical musical narrative.

The story, while not too deep and does have some cringe worthy moments, is very fast-paced and engaging on it's own right. Also, it's nods to the video games were well deserved which made me very happy. The comedy, while not the best, is at least funny and doesn't feel over exaggerated. The characters are likeable enough (especially Bowser who is the best part of the movie) and the voice cast was surprisingly good. Chris Pratt did grew on me as the voice of Mario, Charlie Day suited Luigi's cowardly personality very well, Anna Taylor-Joy is heartfelt and courageous as Peach, Keegan-Michael Key is both silly and also aspiring as Toad, Seth Rogen and Fred Armisen did fine as both Donkey Kong and King Cranky Kong and Jack Black is both threatening yet also comedic as Bowser which is a good combo for both intimidating and hilarious at the same time. Plus it was nice that Chris Martinet, the original voice of Mario, got to be in the movie while Kevin Michael Richardson, one of the best voice actors in history, did a great job as Kamek, Bowser's advisor.

Overall, The Super Mario Bros. Movie is not only a great love letter to the video games, but it's an enjoyable movie on it's own right. To those who love the Mario games and everything else Nintendo related, check this one out and you'll have a rockin' good time. :)

Back when I was a kid, I remember seeing the promotional ads for this movie after seeing another Disney flick that came out the same year, Lilo and Stitch (another underrated Disney flick). But I didn't have enough time to see it mostly because I saw the 2nd Harry Potter movie twice. As time went by, I finally saw the movie and to my surprise... it's tragically good.

Yes the story has familiar cliches, but it makes up for it by being a very unique take on Treasure Island. Plus the sci fi elements made it work. Plus the chemistry between Jim Hawkins and Long John Silver is very compelling and feel like a father and son to each other. Plus the action sequences are nice to look at in hand drawn animation form that uses CGI effectively. Even the beautiful animation still holds up.

The music score from James Newton Howard is another great element. It suits the piratey theme of the film especially when Jim and Dr Dopper enter the ship while complimenting the action nicely and sharing some touching moments within the music especially when Jim and Long John Silver interact. The voice work from everyone involved is superb with Joseph Gordon Levitt, Brian Murray, Emma Thompson, David Hyde Pierce, and Martin Short doing great jobs as their respective characters.

Overall, Treasure Planet is another one of Disney underrated animated flicks that deserved better at the box office had it not been for the marketing. Plus I'm glad it's already turned 20. Check it out if you still have time.

When I was a kid growing up in the late 90's and early 2000's, I've watched this movie dozens of times on video and loved every moment of it. As time went by, I've seen plenty of other Disney films that are hit and miss (the recent Strange World included) and looking back at this film, it's a little bit underrated than I thought.

Now, this film isn't without it's problems, but when you look up the recent news that Disney's gonna remake this into a Tik Tok version which in turn isn't a good sign for the studio, you can tell that at least there was some effort put into this upon it's release back in 1997.

Like I said, it's not without it's problems. It isn't very accurate to the Greek Mythology and while the main character Hercules isn't awful, he's just a bland carbon copy of Aladdin from that movie.

That being said, everything else is good. The animation style is very unique for a comedic take on the Greek Mythology. Yes it may not be on par with the epic visuals of the other Disney films of the Renaissance, but the designs had some creativity and don't feel like Saturday morning cartoons (looking at you, The Magic Voyage). Even the visuals are stunning to look at.

The pacing is very nice and doesn't have a dull moment, and the music from Alan Menken, while not on par with Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin, is still good in it's own right as are the songs especially Go The Distance. The voice acting from everyone involved is very entertaining especially Susan Egan, Danny Devito, and James Woods who shines as the sly hilarious Hades, Lord of the Underworld. Also, while the story has certain cliches we've seen in other films, it makes up for it with some good comedy especially with Hades who's also terrifying with his temper tantrums.

Overall, Hercules may not be a masterpiece, but it's one of Disney's most underrated animated movies next to Atlantis: The Lost Empire and Treasure Planet. Plus I'm glad it already turned 25 this year.

After getting into the Lord of the Rings trilogy back in the late 2000s, my brother and I became interested in seeing the prequel trilogy in spite of many people being skeptical of the concept. After seeing it back in 2012, I thought it was a very good movie. It's not a perfect one and it lacks the spark of the original trilogy, but at least a lot of effort was put into it and doesn't suffer from terrible writing (*cough Fantastic Beasts sequels cough*)

My only problems is that it does have a little too much padding and some of the CGI could have been more polished.

That being said, everything else is done very well. While the story suffers from too much padding, it does retain the spirit of the Hobbit book while also connecting it to original trilogy's tone (in my opinion at least), the cinematography is just as stunning, Howard Shore's music is beautiful as is the song (Misty Mountain), the costumes are well crafted, and the acting from everyone involved is superb especially Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins and Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. Plus is was nice to see the other actors return especially Ian McKellen, Christopher Lee, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, and Andy Serkis in the same roles.

Overall, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey isn't a perfect film and I understand where people are coming from, but it's a very good start to the prequel after 10 years.

(Merry Christmas, everybody!)

Taking place where The Fellowship of the Ring left off, Frodo and Sam journey to Mordor together to destroy the One Ring before making an alliance with Gollum later on. Meanwhile, Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli follow the orcs who took Merry and Pippin while also making an alliance with the Riders of Rohan. Later on, they would make plans to escort the people to Helm's Deep were they will fight against them.

The story in this movie is not only a very faithful adaptation like the last film, but it's also effective in it's emotional gravitas and world building. That way, it helps you learn the situation the broken Fellowship are into and their plans to fight back against the Orcs. Plus the themes of family and overcoming their prejudices are well executed. Howard Shore continues to make haunting beautiful music that enchanted the action and atmosphere of Middle Earth.

The production design and costumes are as beautiful as ever, the direction and editing are very sharp, and the action choreography is superb especially in Helm's Deep. And then there's the strong acting from everyone involved.

Elijah Wood and Sean Astin go great together as did Andy Serkis as Gollum (in his solid motion capture). Viggo Mortenson, Orlando Bloom, John Rhys Davies, Ian Mckellon, Christopher Lee, Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan also did great. Other actors like Karl Urban, Brad Dourif, Miranda Otto, and Bernard Hill did very superb job.

Overall, The Two Towers is a great continuation of the cinematic trilogy and still holds up after 20 years.

When I was a kid growing up, I haven't seen many movies that were usually based on stories from the bible (save for Veggietales and The Prince of Egypt). Then, a decade ago, I came across this movie directed by John Huston back in the mid late 60's, the same decade where my parents were born.

Upon seeing the movie's subtitle "In the Beginning", I became curious considering I did some research later and found out that this was supposed to start a film series based on the stories from the bible in a similar pattern to the James Bond franchise that started with Dr. No back at 1962, four years before this came out. Unfortunately, the film lost 1.5 million for 20th Century Fox. Which is a bummer, because you can tell a lot of effort was put into this.

That being said, The Bible: In the Beginning is a very interesting biblical epic. Not a perfect one, but still good for what it set out to do. Now, there are some problems I do have with the movie.

First is the pacing which includes the 2 hr 54 minute length. Now people can argue that the 1956 film The Ten Commandments ran for over 220 minutes which some might have a problem with, but the pacing in that movie was good because you get to learn more about not only Moses, but the side characters as well including Ramses and also gave some character development. The pacing in this movie is very problematic considering it drags a little too long which kind of hurts it. Second, there are times where the movie can be very disjointed. And third, the other actors including Michael Parks and Ulla Bergryd as Adam and Eve did OK for the most part, but not quite as strong.

However, there are plenty of things that worked. Like the music score for instance. It's very rare that a US movie can get a japanese music composer (in this case, Toshiro Mayuzumi) to create a musical narrative for a biblical movie. The music in this movie is great. It's eerie, haunting, and suits the tone with a beautiful main theme. Plus, there are great set pieces such as the Creation of Man, Noah's Ark, the Tower of Babel, and the City of Sodom and Gommorah (considering this was a time before CGI special effects were created). Then, there's the cinematography which is by far the best element. It's gorgeously filmed with breathtaking scenery, the costumes are very authentic to the movie's biblical setting, and the direction/photography is stunning. Plus, the story in the movie, while disjointed in places, is a faithful representation of the first 22 chapters of the Book of Genesis from the Creation of Man to the Binding of Isaac which makes this worth seeing to those who are fully religious.

And mostly, the rest of the acting is really good. Richard Harris, Peter O'Toole, Ava Gardner, Stephen Boyd, and George C. Scott did a great job in their respective roles as Cain, Nimrod, the Three Angels, Abraham, and Sarah. And then there's John Huston who also does a great job as both Noah and the voice of God himself.

Overall, The Bible: In the Beginning... is a very good film. It has it's share of problems and it's not exactly one of the best films of that decade, but with great cinematography, mostly good acting, and a beautiful soundtrack that compliments the film very well, this is a very ambitious biblical film that you should check out.

(I would like to dedicate this review to the late actors Robbie Coltrane and Leslie Phillips who played Hagrid and the Sorting Hat. Those gentlemen were very talented by bringing so much timeless magic to their roles and will never be forgotten. After all, there's no Hogwarts without them. R. I. P.)

That being said, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is not only a good adaptation of the second book, but it's a great sequel. The child acting is an improvement, the special effects are even greater, the cinematography is as stunning as ever, the supporting actors are still great with the late Richard Harris still shining as Dumbledore and Jason Isaac as a welcome addition as Lucius Malfoy, Draco's father. The story is well written as it expands more on the Wizarding world while also bring a sense of mystery when it comes to Tom Riddle. Not to mention the darker tone is well handled while still retaining some good comedy.

If there is one quibble I do have with the film is that it did feel somewhat too overlong when compared to the Sorcerer's Stone's minute length, but that doesn't hurt the movie in any way, though.

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets is one of the best entries of the franchise and still holds up after 20 years. Happy Thanksgiving, everyone. :)