badscene Reviews

Cube (1997)

The Thinking Film Fan's "Saw"

[10/10 · 2 September 2023]

8 years before the overrated and derivative SAW, there was CUBE.

This 1997 micro-budget, strangers wake up in a room, death-trap-horror masterpiece, was made with 1/4 of Saw's budget ($375,000) and despite that, crafted a tighter, smarter, and infinitely better looking film than Saw or any of its copycat successors would ever come close to.

It's also a clever, thought provoking film, rife with social allegory, with its sci-fi horror elements firmly rooted in physics, logic and critical thinking. Cube never goes for cheap thrills and instead, makes its characters work proactively, challenging their deepest intellect to earn their right to survive; a rare feat that most horror screenwriters would too lazy to bother with. With a tight, tense and brilliant script, this is low budget 90's genre cinema at its absolute peak.

Murder by Decree (1979)

Not My Sherlock!

[5/10 · 23 July 2023]

Meh. Good concept. Atmospheric, with some cool, gothic and bloody alleyway murders stifled by HIDEOUS, muddy cinematography, a bloated runtime, and a geriatric Watson played by Humbert Humbert James Mason who looks ready for the nursing home.

Plummer as Holmes is flaccid, lacking the rapier intellect and superhuman deduction powers that define the character, leaving him as a relatively pedestrian detective in Holmes garbs.

2.5 stars for foul-mouthed Cockney Hookers and Donald Sutherland as a guy-liner adorned psychic having visions of the Ripper Murders; a fun role inverse from his classic art-horror flick, Don't Look Now: a film similarly about alleyway murders in Venice, seen through the eyes of a psychic, that this film, aesthetically, feels quite derivative of. Sorry Bob Clark, but Nicholas Roeg you are not.

Shoutout to Susan Clark as Mary Kelly, a definite scene stealer for what little time she is on screen.

My advice? Unless you're a Holmes completionist, skip this one and watch From Hell or Don't Look Now instead, for a similar but more skillfully executed experience.

The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959)

A Hammer Snoozefest

[4/10 · 23 July 2023]

To each their own, but Hammer Horror "Sherlock Holmes" did not work for me.

It's an ugly, cheap looking film adaptation of the classic Holmes story, with flimsy looking sets rife with faux rocks and plastic trees and a weak script hindered by unnecessary story changes that do nothing to enhance the plot.

Peter Cushing is certainly the most tedious and lifeless Holmes I have seen so far in a film adaptation. Christopher Lee looked especially bored and sedated the entire film, like he was on ludes. Really though, can you blame him?

Hammer films are usually hit or miss for me, and this one was a major miss. Nowhere near the caliber of Curse of Frankenstein or The Horror of Dracula for a Cushing / Lee vehicle. Boo. Hiss.

Explorers (1985)

EXPLORERS!!! Where have you Been All My Life!?

[7/10 · 23 July 2023]

Explorers is a loose end from the sweet spot of 80's kid fantasy-adventure flicks that I somehow managed to evade seeing until my thirties.

This was such a fun ride! Directed by Joe Dante, a year after he made Gremlins, Explorers, really does play like Goonies in space, with an intriguing plot uncannily similar to Carl Sagan's Contact, also published in 1985. Though obviously less realistic with its emphasis less on realistic astrophysics in favor of childlike adventure, magic and wonder. No complaints there!

Watching this, I couldn't help but think how many times I would have watched this on VHS growing up if I had only seen it.

The fact that I saw Troll II fifteen times before I turned six years old and never once came across Explorers... well, it disturbs me greatly.

As for the bizarre third act... it didn't completely derail the experience for me, like so many others, but it is a jarring shift in tone that feels like something leftover from a first draft, that should have been focus grouped out. Still, I didn't mind it, as visually, everything was so beautifully realized, even in all its ridiculousness (IYKYK.)

Admittedly, seeing Explorers for the first time in my thirties circa 2023, all I could think about during the last 20 minutes was the classic South Park episode "Cancelled" -- of which I am about 99.8% sure Trey Parker and Matt Stone used Explorers as the model for. There's just no other explanation for all the similarities. Anyways, that just made me love it more. And at least no jargons were sucked in the making of Explorers.

Saw (2004)

A Poorly Made Amalgamation of Secondhand Style and Story... Yet Irrefutably Influential.

[6/10 · 23 July 2023]

Saw is okay... It just gets far too much credit for what is essentially a poorly directed amalgamation of secondhand ideas ripped off from better films. Hear me out...

PART I: Firstly, Saw is a poor attempt to copy and paste the stylish grit and brutality of elaborate murder ala SE7EN, a film that despite being made a decade earlier, is so goddamn stylish, its virtually ageless, and looks 10x more modern than Saw did and ever will. Seriously, I'm still more impressed with the opening credit sequence to Se7en than I am with the entirety of Saw. Combine that with 1997's low budget death-trap masterpiece CUBE, a film made for 1/4 the budget of Saw's, and what are you left with?

PART II: Saw is an even poorer attempt at re-writing a century old concept, conceived by Agatha Christie with her classic, And Then There Were None. A story about ten strangers invited to a secluded island, where they are each confronted with their "crimes" via a recording (each of them being directly or indirectly responsible for a murder) by an unknown millionaire with a bloodlust, before being killed off one by one in an elaborate game based on a children's rhyme.

Look, Saw's not terrible, but it certainly wasn't good enough to justify spawning as many sequels as it did.

The biggest issues with Saw are how one dimensional the characters are, but more so, how truly horrible the acting is, with incredibly flat and unconvincing performances by Danny Glover and an absolute career worst by Cary Elwes.

Oh Cary Elwes, always charming as the english gent (Princess Bride, Robin Hood MIT) but on the flipside: never anything but god-awful in thrillers, consistently giving one of the worst American accents ever set to screen. I don't know which is worse, Elwes in Saw or the early 90's Alicia Silverstone vehicle The Crush. "Cheyeeenne!"

However, I can recognize Saw's role in ushering in the new wave of more extreme U. S. horror films, although most of it would soon be typified as torture-porn. Still in my opinion, vastly inferior to the artsy French darling, High Tension, from the year before, Saw really did help pave the way for more extreme Hollywood horror films (such as Hostel) to break into the mainstream. And for horror fans like me, who became desensitized at an early age by realistic slashers like Scream, I welcomed that new frontier with open arms.

Thankfully, despite its shortcomings, Saw II improved upon Saw's core concept, with a better script, stronger cast and bigger budget. I may be in the minority, but I'd take any of the sequels over Saw OG, simply for the fact that the budget allows for more fun to be had with the Jigsaw traps. And let's be honest, that's really all these films have going for them.

Young Sherlock Holmes (1985)

YOUNG SHERLOCK... Where have you been all my life!?

[8/10 · 23 July 2023]

Recently I learned that Chris Columbus, director of quintessential 90's kid staples, Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire, wrote Goonies and Gremlins (two films that more than defined my childhood) back to back in WHAM BAM THANK YOU MAN succession. (The man is obviously a screenwriting genius...)

Having just finished the incredible BBC Sherlock, with Cumberbatch as the iconic detective, and learning that Columbus wrote this around the same time as Goonies and Gremlins, I had to check this oddball in his filmography out.

I have to say, I was expecting something along the lines of Young Indiana Jones... Happy to say that I have never been more happy to be proven so very very wrong.

Set in what is essentially a FantasyScape of Victorian London, Young Sherlock feels like the 80's prototype for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone: Uncannily featuring identical looking characters, a grand boarding school setting complete with potions, long candle lit dining halls, flying cars, and ominous professors,

First and foremost, in pure Chris Columbus fashion, (Goonies, Adventures in Babysitting, etc.) this is a Fantasy Film featuring kid protagonists, facing some majorly adult themes.

Though the plot itself is heavily borrowed from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, (my personal favorite Indie) there is more than enough here to make this film a uniquely crafted anomaly of 80's kid fantasy with a majorly original aesthetic.

Seriously, this one has got it all: murder, magic, hallucinogenic drugs, pissed off Egyptians, insane trip sequences with man-eating pheasants, ,and a body count somewhere in the hundreds.

Suffice it to say, this was far from what I expected in all the best ways!

I'm in my thirties, and like Joe Dante's Explorers, a film I just saw for the first time last month, it also feels like a lost childhood classic I should have been watching all my life. One that fits perfectly on a shelf alongside films like Goonies, Gremlins, The Neverending Story and Flight of the Navigator.

80's babies and 90's Kids, add this one to your arsenal ASAP.

Defending Jacob (2020– )

This was like JAWS for the criminal justice system. Stick With it!

[7/10 · 23 July 2023]

After the pilot I admittedly almost checked out because the performances and lack of chemistry between the cast left a lot to be desired. Thankfully, the cast dramatically improves as the tension rises, and once this show has got you in its vise, IT DOES NOT LET GO.

This is one engaging, riveting "Whodunnit?" that shines brightest when it is knee deep in its own existential DREAD, permeating every scene with an utter hopelessness, like a nightmare you can't wake up from. One you have to stew in, treading from one sterile institutional setting to the next, with tile floors and florescent lighting, somehow making this all hit like a Criminal Justice horror film. One where even the tiniest sliver of joy or contentment is shattered within mere moments by the irrepressible, insurmountable dread, looming tangibly beneath the surface.

What Jaws did to make so may fear the water, Defending Jacob does in its own right (at least it did for me,) effectively enough to leave any citizen, innocent or guilty, live in perpetual fear of the terrors of public prosecution in the United States: forced into the trappings of a nightmarish criminal justice system, where DA's with tunnel vision work like sharks to conquer their prey; coupled with the cruelest of judges: the court of public opinion, upending and staining the lives, reputations, and any chance at normalcy for those marked by tragedy, and all those who surround them.

Still, despite it's many strengths, this series is not without its flaws. On several occasions, our three protagonists exhibit such poor judgment that it can be difficult to reconcile. But the biggest flaw here? The ending, one that leaves a lot to be desired in what feels like an attempt to keep a story going that has already reached it's conclusion (episode 7.) An end that leaves you with a haunting ambiguity that would likely leave all viewers thinking back to this show with chills, similar to HBO's masterful Sharp Objects.

However, instead, the show opts for an episode 8, an epilogue of sorts, that devolves into a messy place, one best left to the imagination, with the he show runner failing to understand that oftentimes, less is more.

Undercurrent (1946)

75% padding... 25% Story.

[6/10 · 23 July 2023]

Nice looking and well directed film hindered by a bloated runtime, and a severely underdeveloped, poorly conceived "thriller" plot spread thin across its 2 hour runtime.

Though, as thriller or mystery it's a dud, as a drama with some mild suspense and good atmosphere, it's entertaining enough.

The sets and wardrobe are FIRE though; the budget definitely shines in that department.

However, this is the kind of film that just does not seem to know what kind of film it aspires to be. And by the time the plot meets it's "genre" (and I use that term extremely liberally) it feels so tacked on and undercooked that it doesn't land.

Also featuring one of the most absurd "happy? Endings" I've seen in recent memory. But hey, at least I laughed a lot.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)

Overrated but Visually Stunning

[6/10 · 23 July 2023]

Flawed, overrated, yet visually stunning and occasionally thought-provoking film with an unsympathetic protagonist that any decent, logical person should be actively rooting against.

It does feature some innovative ideas that have since become tropes instrumental to its genre, so it cannot be dismissed outright, but at it's core, it's essentially 2001: A Space Odyssey for dummies.

I've noticed that Spielberg has a bad habit, Jaws included, of introducing dozens of characters and scenarios, that he completely abandons for the 2nd and 3rd acts with zero closure. This and War of the Worlds are his most egregious examples.

Unpopular opinion: but Poltergeist is a far superior film. It features a near identical setup, a seamless execution, and a tightly plotted story with a proper conclusion and none of Spielberg's signature flaws.

Edge of the City (1957)

An Extremely Progressive Film For Its Time...

[6/10 · 23 July 2023]

Axel (John Cassavetes) drifts from city to city running away from a dark secret. He calls home but is unable to speak to his parents. In New York, Tommy Tyler (Sidney Poitier) offers him help getting a dock work job but he uses a different connect, Charlie Malick (Jack Warden). Charlie turns out to be a corrupt racist who has a running feud with Tommy. Tommy keeps trying to befriend Axel and even sets him up with his wife (Ruby Dee)'s white friend Ellen Wilson.

It's nothing for today's audience but back in the day, it's quite progressive to have this black character. He is higher than most of the white characters. His wife has a white friend. The racism is overt only with Charlie and his minions. Even the police treats his murder as another regular murder. In essence, Tommy is a regular good guy. The only problem with Poitier is that his overdramatic acting style has since become dated. His death scene is a perfect example of that and it doesn't help that it's written that way. Despite the progressive writing, there are aspects that feel dated. Still( it's a solid step forward for its day.

Abducted in Plain Sight (2017)

Nope!

[3/10 · 23 July 2023]

Uh, yeah... Ew.

This was dreadful. Sure, it's a competently made documentary, but the story was not compelling, just frustrating and disturbing.

This family is as depraved as this pedophile and thus, I found it impossible to sympathize with anyone in this film, short of the poor daughter, Jan.

What pathetic excuses for parents... sad. They are also villains in this story, villains because of their own gullibility, selfishness and naiveté, somehow blinded them from any and all parental responsibility.

Seriously, If i was related to any of them, I would cut off all communication and have zero contact for the rest of my life.

Malignant (I) (2021)

30 minutes into this movie, you'll be praying for a tumor...

[4/10 · 23 July 2023]

I'll just come out and say it... Malignant sucks.

It could've worked if it had a sense of humor. James Wan can't direct actors and his casting choices are usually poor. These things have never been more evident than in Malignant.

The third act was okay, fun schlock, but all the poorly executed melodrama and bad performances - by that point, i just couldnt muster any enthusiasm for it.

For instance, if Wanda Sykes was cast as the female cop and the film had a sense of humor, it could have been a really fun tongue in cheek, meta homage to 80's trash horror like basketcase. But it was just so bleak and tedious. Also, idk what people are going on about Giallos. This was NOT a giallo.

Don't Bother to Knock (1952)

Awful and Absurd

[2/10 · 23 July 2023]

Awful, tedious experience with another robotic performance from the bug-eyed android known as Marilyn Monroe. Seriously, I have never seen this woman blink. Have you? If one was to make Marilyn blinking the criteria for a drinking game, you would be in for the most sober party of all time.

Absurd, poorly structured, sloppy plot, rife with inconsistencies and absurdities. Truly one of the most unnecessary films I've ever seen.

If the point of focus here is supposed to be mental illness, this film is laughable at best.

Trust me on this, any random episode of Alfred Hitchcock presents would have ten times the suspense and feature vastly superior performances to this mediocre piece of crap.

Aladdin (2019)

Time Will Not Be Kind...

[1/10 · 23 July 2023]

Not to this one.

Aladdin (2019) is a frustratingly lazy film that for me, was embarrassing to watch. Will Smith is just... ridiculous; painfully miscast. I'm generally a fan of his films, but face it, this was just not his role. He can't sing, phones in the songs and is not a natural comedian. For a role this iconic and difficult to pull off, Disney really should have gone with a pro comedian or at the very least a professional singer. And don't get me started on the freaky cgi blue face that will now be haunting my nightmares like an episode of are you afraid of the dark.

I promise you, time will not be kind to this abomination. But, on a more optimistic note, Aladdin was super hot. He also had great teeth, and I can say with little hesitation, I would have probably made it to the hour mark without bailing had Aladdin been shirtless beneath the goddamn vest like he's supposed to. Stupid Disney, can't even get the costumes right!

Oh yeah- also new Jafar has no menace, charisma, or any of the creepy and overly effeminate villain vibes that the OG Jafar exuded. This guy was straight from central casting.

Under the Banner of Heaven (2022)

Gripping, Illuminating and Frustrating

[7/10 · 19 July 2023]

An unnecessarily sluggish, but ultimately rewarding and illuminating piece of true crime fiction that captures the oppressive horrors of the mormon cult, the politics that surround them, and the slippery slope that is religion fanaticism.

Part period piece and history lesson, part gruesome true crime thriller, the performances here are really what drive this story.

At times a little too hollywood-ized in its execution, I think 5 episodes would have made for much tighter and more compelling storytelling.

My only major complaint is in the creator's decision to tell this true crime story through the focal point of a "fictional detective" while the victim of this tragedy, easily the most interesting character, is reduced to background fodder. I think that was a mistake and frankly, a disservice to the victims who lost their lives. Despite that, Andrew Garfield kills it as usual, and proves once again, that he's one of the best actors working today. Flawless accent as usual for an englishman.

Charade (1963)

Overrated and absurd film with a stong first act,

[5/10 · 23 June 2023]

Starts out promising. Despite a strong first act, Charade shortly devolved into a sad, preposterous and anti/feminist caper with a sad, pathetic protagonist who consistently exhibits the worst judgement imaginable only to serve as a pawn for the poor script's many gratuitous twists. Cary Grant looks like Hepburn's grandfather: a man she has known for a few days, who lies to her about his intentions and identity MULTIPLE TIMES, yet each time instead of jumping on a plane back to America, or maybe calling family or a friend for support, she just blindly believes his clunky explanations, like a sad lovesick gerontophiliac puppy, and continues to cling to him like glue.

Also, she just suddenly has a job in act three? What was up with that? It's absurd that she'd be sticking around, staying in a hotel, at the advice of a complete stranger, when her home and all her belongings are gone. At least her job as a (translator or stenographer) could have provided some reason why it would make sense for her to stick around in a foreign country with her life in mortal danger. Ludicrous.

People are too soft on "classics". Scrutiny should always apply. In a good film, the protagonist's actions and decisions should drive the plot. This a film where the plot and supporting players are driving the protagonist, and one who is all too willing to play the ignorant, doe eyed, ditz for the entire ride.

This is the kind of film that could have set women back a decade.

Alice in Wonderland (1999 TV Movie)

Worth Revisiting

[8/10 · 26 March 2023]

This TV adaptation came out when I was in 7th grade. I grew up obsessed with the 1986 Alice mini series, and between Buffy the Vampire Slayer, South Park and the slew of teen movies pouring out, i had zero interest.

I just rewatched via youtube auto playing and I've gotta say, it holds up and is probably, for me at least, the most faithful and aesthetically pleasing adaptation.

First off, I could tell immediately Jim Henson's company was involved, so obviously all of the creature and practical effects are classic and flawless.

I was also surprised by all the A List cameos, especially Gene Wilder as the mock turtle. Hearing him sing for so many minutes reminded me of his scenes in The Little Prince. Ben Kingsley, Martin Short, Whoopi, and realizing tweedle dum and tweedle dee are Norm from Cheers and a pre Harry Potter Hagrid.

Tina Majorino as Alice is a surprisingly good choice. As a kid, I wasn't a fan and found all her movies like Andre and Corrina Corrina, tedious. I do love Napoleon Dynamite though! The role of Alice is a good one for her, she's ponderous, soft spoken, and mild mannered, as Alice should be.

Anyway, if you're a fan of Jim Henson's brand of fantasy, like MirrorMask and Labyrinth, this would be the Alice in Wonderland for you. I wish I had known that 20 years ago, as this one just kind of blended in with all the countless Alice in Wonderland adaptations that came out each decade.

Black Christmas (1974)

The Prototype for Sorority-Sploitation Slasher Flicks

[6/10 · 3 March 2023]

Unfortunately, this is a poorly made film. The directing, dialogue and acting are sub-par, the film moves at a snails pace, and the deaths are not exactly effective.

People like to pretend this is somehow the Grandfather of slasher movies, which is a tad ridiculous considering The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was released the same year.

If you think this film did anything original in cinema, I'd like to recommend you visit the early works of Dario Argento and the films of Mario Bava (98% of Black Christmas's ideas and shots were ripped off from actual Italian horror auteurs)

It's all there: the killer's pov, the perverse phone calls, the scantily clad college age girls...

The difference is in those films, is Bava was not afraid to show blood, gore and actual murder on screen as far back as the 1950's.

Even Argento's first film, The Bird With the Crystal Plumage, did it all better and far more effectively. But I assume his dubbing style can be a turn off for some film fans. And Black Christmas has Lois Lane in it.

If you stripped this film of the few actual name actors who are carrying it, it would be straight up bad.

Pizza My Heart (2005 TV Movie)

Poorly made and a shameless ripoff of a better film

[2/10 · 27 December 2020]

The plot of this film is literally copy and pasted from a better film, 1995's "Love is All There Is" a retelling of Romeo and Juliet about two families that own rivaling Italian restaurants and starring Lanie Kazan and a young Angelina Jolie as the Juliet character.

This was cheesy, poorly written and acted, but entertaining if you're looking for a background watch while you cook dinner or something. Still, I couldn't get past the Conceptual plagiarism. I mean, how hard is it to come up with your own ideas, especially in the framework of a retelling.

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt: Kimmy vs the Reverend (2020 TV Movie)

Love the series, but this movie is STALE...

[4/10 · 20 May 2020]

Like 2 year old cheese.

The plot of this movie is so paper thin, its obvious that little-to-no effort was spent developing it. "What's it about?" you ask?

Kimmy finds a paperback book in her backpack that doesn't belong to her and decides she needs to figure out where it came from so badly, she has to set off on a cross country odyssey before she can marry Daniel Radcliffe, whose character is just kind of inserted here as a love interest despite playing no role in the series.

Firstly, their relationship didn't work for me at all. As a couple their chemistry was lacking, their backstory was weak and all divulged via dialogue, and Ellie Kemper looks more believable as Radcliffe's mother than his fiancee. I'd much rather have seen Kimmy end up with Dong, or one of her series romances.

The choose your own adventure stuff is fine, gimmicky, but entertaining enough. It does tend to shine best when Tidus is involved.

The biggest problem for me here was that this is a series that thrives on its ensemble cast, my favorites being Tidus, Jane Krakowski and Carol Cane as crazy Lillian. Rather than developing a plot that allows this to be a vehicle for the terrific ensemble and reunion that fans want to see, the plot has Kimmy set off with Tidus and everyone else is left alone with their own running gag of a subplot, rehashing old character jokes that already felt stale by the final season. In short, I'd much rather have seen them all together then apart, and I feel this "movie" suffers for it.

I'd say its on par with the Sex and The City movie. It really didn't need to exist, but someone decided it did. This was not a loveletter to a beloved series, so much as a highlight reel for the issues plaguing a series which was running on fumes for its final season. Nor was it used as an opportunity to offer closure to its fans. Mickey is nowhere to be found and its never made clear whether him and Tidus are together. Kimmy is marrying a random new character we as an audience have no reason to care about. We don't know what's going on in anybody's life. It all just seems... well, kinda pointless.

I did laugh a few times, mostly when Tidus hallucinates and starts eating dirt, but Lillian and Jacqueline get nothing good to work with here.

It's a shame...

I just binged the whole series for the third time a month ago before I even knew a movie was coming, so the timing couldn't have been better. I was really pretty psyched for this. Sadly, I can't recommend this as for me, it was nothing more than a wasted opportunity.

The Seven Year Itch (1955)

Trash

[2/10 · 12 April 2020]

Seems most reviewers here are so enamored with Marilyn, they can't see the glaring flaws in this film through their rose tinted glasses.

The movie starts with about 25 white men painted in "red face" as native Americans. That should tell you straight off the bat exactly what kins of movie this is going to be.

This is a misogynistic and horribly written film about an annoying, unattractive and out of shape man, who speaks his entire internal narrative out loud to himself the entire film.

The premise: with his wife and kid away for the summer, our leading man indulges in sexual fantasies where every woman is a mindless love slave for him, all ready to throw themselves in front of a train for his affection. Are they blind? Then enters Marilyn. I'm sure many will disagree, but Marilyn is a terrible actress. She's awkward, stilted in delivery and never blinks. It's creepy. Their relationship is unrealistic, and I wanted him to suffer as much as I did watching this outdated tone deaf relic.

The Lighthouse (I) (2019)

Meh

[6/10 · 13 March 2020]

As a huge fan of The Witch, I was disappointed. Yes, I noticed the parallels to Proteus / Prometheus and Greek mythology. Yes, it was visually stunning and surreal, and had the same type of ominous score that made The Witch's imagery hit so hard. A nd no, I didn't "not get it." To me, "the Light" was heaven and the island, purgatory, where Pattinson was forced to revisit the sins he committed against Dafoe's character, in his life. I'm just, admittedly, not a fan of heavy handed art films that choose the path of expressionism, symblism and / or surrealism, over cohesion of plot. If that's your kind of film, The Lighthouse might very well be a Masterpiece in your eyes. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it, and consider it a very good film. However, The Witch i found far superior if for no other reason that it didn't sacrifice story for showmanship.

As for the positives, The Lighthouse looks and sounds amazing and the performances are outstanding, especially from Dafoe. I just don't understand how this film scores a whole point higher on IMDB than its predecessor. Also, worth noting, I in no way consider The Lighthouse to be a horror film or understand that categorization. That sort of baffles me.

Puss in Boots (1969)

Weak telling that sacrifices story for singing mice and cut and paste action and style of Sleeping Beauty

[3/10 · 21 February 2020]

Watched as a Recent Miyazaki convert and found this to be a Weak telling of the tale that sacrifices story for singing mice and cut and paste action and style, courtesy of Sleeping Beauty

Firstly, this a poor retelling of the classic fairy tale of a con artist cat with dreams of grandeur. The cat's motivations are never made clear. His cunning skills of con artistry are never established, but you do get 25 minutes of scheming cats and friendly mice singing songs about friendship.

The biggest change here, is that most of the plot of this adaptation revolves around the villain, the devil himself. Yeah, satan. It sounds cool but it wasn't.

Everything about the devil plotline (which takes up most of the films runtime) was so blatantly lifted from disney's Sleeping Beauty, it was hard for me to feel like I was watching something other than a third rate knockoff...

The green faced, black cloaked villain crashing the royal event to threaten the princess, the black and green color palettes, the green fire, the castle fortress with other black and green demonic critters running up and down spiral staircases and towers and draw bridges.

All that is fine as an artistic influence, but this adds nothing to the plot and the animation falls so short compared to the innovative gothic art style of sleeping beauty, it's unfathomable this was In fact made, a whole decade later.

I found the art style strange as well, like a mish mash of traditional anime with a Hanna Barbera cartoon. It felt like two different movies trying to co exist a lot of the time.

Horus: Prince of the Sun (1968)

A dark masterpiece for its time

[10/10 · 20 February 2020]

For 1966, this blew my expectations away for such an early feature length anime.

The story is quite twisted, a dark and faustian fantasy-with elements of horror and fairy tales- a welcomed contrast to disney's typically sugared up / watered down narratives.

The story is about a young hero, a chosen one, who is challenged by the devil, while he reeks havoc on mankind, specifically a small fishing village. There are some very thematic scenes, deaths, etc and I would consider this more of an adult cartoon, as the themes here would likely go past most kid's heads, however there are some cute little critter companions and such.

I'm not surprised to see Miyazaki himself worked on this film. It has the spirit of Ghibli films and of the studio had existed in '66, this would be exactly the type of groundbreaking film I would expect from it. Not to mention, it would I imagine be much more popular. I loved it.

Also worth noting: I watched in Japanese with english subtitles and found the voice acting exceptional.

Gulliver's Space Travels: Beyond the Moon (1965)

I really loved it

[8/10 · 19 February 2020]

I'm new to anime, in my 30's, recently watched the studio ghibli films and liked those quite a lot. So i'm currently on a journey through decades of feature length anime films. Of the 60's anime Films i've seen so far, I enjoyed this the most.

Very ahead of its time in terms of style for an animated film. It feels more 80's than 60's and i watched a crude copy. Remastered it would look spectacular. I can't help but wonder how much of an influence this film had on the future of animation. It's early anime, but the style here is a very minimalistic one, slightly abstract, reminded me of Zelda: The Wind Waker.

Pretty random fantasy adventure but also very relaxing and a nice movie to put on at bedtime. The plot is largely sci fi driven as for the most part, this is a space exploration fantasy film. There are some interesting themes on robots gaining intelligence and fighting back against its creators. The gulliver element is the most confusing to me. I've seen a few adaptation of gullivers travels, and this scientist as an old man gulliver as opposed to an original character didn't really seem to have much of a point. But i guess it all adds to the random charm.

The plot does meander a bit, but it's aesthetically pleasing and never boring. Sort of reminds me of The Little Prince.