AWW, AWE AND UH-OH

MOVIE
The Lion King
Chiwetel Ejiofor, James Earl Jones, Donald Glover
Director Jon Favreau
Review Ray Chan

Oh, if we could turn back time.
    If this photorealistic version of The Lion King had been the original, replete with all its beautiful songs, it would surely have been lauded as one of the most innovative movies ever made, a David Attenborough documentary set to music with a cluster of crooning critters.
    As it is though, it’s essentially an almost direct copy of the animated classic, retelling the film and making it look as lifelike as possible while keeping the story and soundtrack relatively the same.
    It’s director Jon Favreau’s second anthropomorphic attempt, having first supervised 2016’s The Jungle Book, bringing to life the animal antics of Rudyard Kipling’s story.
    But while there were points of difference in that adaptation, with much of the music missing, for the most part The Lion King is a faithful facsimile, with many of the scenes being recreated line for line, albeit with a couple of new melodies.
    In short, it seems as if Disney just wanted to create a visually realistic version … and that in itself isn’t a bad thing.
    The movie starts off magnificently. Little Simba is such an adorable cuddly cub that audiences will surely warm to him, and the visual spectacle of all the jungle inhabitants congregating in tribute is gloriously breathtaking, taking the viewers from “Aww” to awe in a matter of moments.
    From there though, there is a distinct dissonance that makes the film difficult to relate to.
    The problem is that the facial expressions of “real” animals don’t convey emotions as much as cartoons do. Can you really tell the difference between a pair of giraffes? Or wildebeest, elephants and lions?
    Yet you wouldn't want to have the animals smile, cry or yell out in anger, for that would only look creepy. On the other hand, the same stoic features are seen whether it's Mufasa lolling about lovingly with Simba, or the evil Scar plotting vengeance with a pack of hyenas.
    Certainly, the dialogue can easily convey a character’s emotions, but they all basically come out from an expressionless animal’s mouth.
    It’s definitely worth catching the movie to satisfy the curiosity of seeing the various characters like Timon, Pumbaa, Zazu, Rafiki and of course the pride of lions, brought to life, as it were.
    However, maybe some might feel that they’d be better off just watching the original.
    The “live action” Lion King demands that we suspend our disbelief at the same time that it tries to convince us that we don’t have to, with the resulting discord so hard to reconcile that one forgets how special this story once felt.

#lionking  #disney

SHROUDED IN MYSTERIO

MOVIE
Spider-Man: Far From Home
Tom Holland, Jake Gyllenhaal
Director Jon Watts
Review Ray Chan

After the cataclysmic repercussions of Avengers: Endgame, where does the Marvel Universe go to next?
    Fortunately for the studio, with a character such as the immature and somewhat naive teenage Spider-Man, it has the perfect vehicle to create a follow-up that offers much-needed relief, being lighter in tone and much less cosmos-shaking.
    Tom Holland dons his costume for another solo outing, and continues his story from Homecoming, albeit set five years later after the time-altering chaos from Endgame.
    As Peter Parker, he goes on a European class trip with his peers from Midtown High, and it could not have come at a better time for the affable adolescent, as he really needs to take a vacation from the duties of the spider-suit after his Avenging adventures.
    Peter just wants to enjoy being a kid in high school and pursue his crush on MJ (Zendaya) and maybe get to hang out with his best buddy Ned (Jacob Batalon).
    But inevitably, where Peter goes, danger beckons, and inexplicably, colossal elemental monsters (earth, wind, fire, air) begin appearing in Europe just as the kids arrive for their vacation.
    Even more curious is the emergence of a new super hero who claims he's from another world (Jake Gyllenhaal), who along with Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and Maria Hill (Cobie Smulders), plan to attack this planetary threat head on, subsequently enlisting the help of the friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man, who finds that the late Tony Stark has entrusted him with a fancy gizmo that comes with its own sophisticated Suri voice tech.
    The fish-bowl-headed alien, alias Quentin Beck but dubbed Mysterio, is a slightly different take on the classic Spidey character, although there is a link to his modus operandi which comic fans are familiar with.
    Beck and Peter become strong allies and forge an on-screen relationship that is a delight to watch, but, quite literally, nothing is as it seems with the character, whose specialty is the use of illusions.
    Interestingly, there’s no appearance of characters such as the Shocker or the Scorpion, minor adversaries who were shown momentarily in Homecoming in scenes that appeared to foreshadow their imminent appearance in a sequel. But that works in the movie’s favour, as the spotlight focuses on the main antagonist without any unnecessary sidetracks.
    Jon Favreau also turns up and reprises his role as Tony Stark’s right hand man Happy Hogan, who has always had a fun, annoyed avuncular vibe with Peter.
    In a nice twist to the tale, that expands even further in this film towards unexpected yet enjoyable territory.
    MJ’s character, meanwhile, has developed further in this instalment, and Zendaya carries the role well. However, it’s Holland who shines brightest as he threads the needle between heartbreak and hilarity for the entire film.
    All in all, Spider-Man: Far From Home succeeds by avoiding a retread of the original, while also forging ahead with a fresh approach.
    It emulates the style of movies like DC’s Shazam!, packing itself with genuine laughs yet taking it seriously when it needs to, but also remaining faithful to the coming-of-age humour that made its predecessor so enjoyable.
    As the film winds down, audiences will be sitting back in their seats smiling from this less exacting, wonderfully entertaining ride.
    But then, in keeping with the smoke and mirrors theme, the clouds concealing the apparent happy ending dispel. Make sure you stay to the absolute end for two of the best and most exciting post-credit cliffhangers from the Marvel Cinematic Universe in quite some time.
    They provide the perfect cappers to a film that serves as a great bookend to the first era of the MCU, and a superb start of the next chapter.


#sonypicturesaus #spidermanfarfromhome

UNHOLY WAR

MOVIE

Child's Play
Aubrey Plaza, Gabriel Bateman
Director Danny Boyle
Annabelle Comes Home
Mckenna Grace, Madison Iseman
Director Gary Dauberman
Review Ray Chan

The doll wars are on. In one corner, we have the well-intentioned Chucky, who just wants to be loved and protect his keepers, while in the other, we have his female counterpart, Annabelle, incapable of animation but comprised of evil incarnate.
    And it is this referee’s judgment that good has triumphed over bad, even if a lot more blood was certainly shed by the plastic hands of the star of Child’s Play, a movie nicely updated to the present day.
    The 1988 cult classic has been reimagined, rather than remade, with a sharp sense of humour.
    This version uses artificial intelligence and inter-connected devices to create a different kind of horror, because, unlike the original, there's no supernatural zombie stuff going on this time.
    The action is staged with a combination of wit and gore, with the cast members all sharing enough backstories to make their roles interesting.
    Ensconced in a dead-end job at ZedMart, Karen (Plaza) repurposes a returned Buddi doll (voiced by the incomparable Mark Hamill) as a birthday present for her son Andy (Bateman).
    Designed as a digital assistant, this particular doll has a sinister history, built by a disenchanted factory worker who removed the failsafe limits on its behaviour.
    This enables Buddi to think for himself. Illogical as the premise sounds, accept it for what it is, if you want to enjoy the rest of the film.
    The little playmate renames himself Chucky, and quickly learns that Andy is annoyed by both the family cat and Karen's boyfriend Shane. To appease his master, the marauding mite exacts some grisly retribution.
    Along the way, fellow apartment dwellers detective Mike and his mother, along with friends Pugg, Falyn and Omar, get pulled in to the chaos. Woe betide anyone whom Andy has a grudge with, even momentarily, because Chucky doesn't have an off switch.
    The fact that Chucky is only trying to help brings a light-hearted irony to the red herrings and extreme nastiness that ensue, and helps pull the audience into the nightmare, because the characters are so easy to empathise with.
    But what really makes this movie work is the way it pokes fun at its own cliches, merrily turning the tables on characters and audience alike, while never forgetting the value of some proper on-screen gruesomeness.
    Using communicative technology as a gimmick, director Klevberg has plenty of scope to joke about everything from radios to robots, helping turn the film into an enjoyable mix of comedy and consternation.
    But now Annabelle, on the hand … is a different kettle of creepiness entirely.
    Annabelle Comes Home is the third film titled after a spooky-looking antique doll that was based on a possessed Raggedy Ann figure kept by real-life paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren (who passed away mere weeks before this movie’s release).
    Part of the Conjuring franchise, Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson reprise their roles as the Warrens, who “contain the evil” of the doll by locking it in a glass casing within their room of haunted artefacts.
    As an aside, people might question why the doll was never destroyed, instead of being imprisoned in a cabinet with a sign proclaiming in no uncertain terms that the door should never be opened. In The Conjuring, Ed had explained that it was better to keep the “genie in the bottle” rather than obliterating the vessel altogether.
    But back to the movie, and the Warrens go out on a case, leaving their mopey daughter Judy (Grace) under the protection of perky babysitter Mary Ellen (Iseman).
    Mary Ellen’s bosom companion Daniela hears about the Warrens’ psychic exploits, and, keen to find some way of contacting her dead father, sneaks into the forbidden room and, of course, lets Annabelle loose.
    What follows is nothing we haven’t already seen in previous Conjuring, Annabelle or Nun offerings: standard trapped-in-the-house horror fare, filled with jump scares and ominous musical crescendos that make you think a shock is coming even when it isn’t. Gradually, various apparitions from the objects in the room terrorise the girls, with the eventual goal of murder and possession. Yawn.
    Annabelle’s limitation is its (her) static form, unlike Chucky, who menaces with his mobility.
    She can only move by teleportation and only when nobody’s looking. The scariness factor is constrained to her appearance in unexpected places, a contrivance that gets tiresome quickly.
    Ultimately, the movie is just a succession of supposedly frightening stuff happening, haunted-ride-style, and just as harmless, until someone manages to lock Annabelle up again.
    But praise is due for Judy, who carries the story with her bravery, intelligence and awareness of the paranormal, inherited from her mother.
    Indeed, she radiates an aura of resigned gloom that would do Wednesday Addams proud, and it’s not difficult to see her eventually take over the family’s ghostbusting business, a paranormal-military warrior armed with crucifixes and holy water as ammunition.
    Her personality is a direct contrast to the milksop persona of Andy in Child’s Play, as much as the Chucky rejuvenation is so much more satisfying than the Annabelle offering.

#childsplay #annabellecomeshome #buzzmarketing