We live in the age, where there are plethora of animated movies released on almost a monthly basis, and because of giants like Pixar, DreamWorks etc., there is so much content (and usually really great content), that constantly, when there are discussions about the best animated movies, Ice Age gets often forgotten. To a certain extent, I do see why, as every single Ice Age movie after this one is really aimed towards kids, so it’s playing for the laughs. With that, people frequently forget that the very first Ice Age movie was and still is a different film all together.

I’ve recently re-watched it and was pleasantly surprised how well this holds up, story wise. Even the animation isn’t bad, even though at certain scenes you can tell this was done some time ago (which is crazy, as it’s “only” been 18 years, to see how CGI has evolved since then). But the story elements is where the cookie crumbles and that is why, no other movie from this franchise compared to this one, and there have been a lot of those, can hold a candle to the original.

The main reason for its brilliance is quite simple – the movie is not afraid to have quiet moments. Ever since I’ve seen this film for the very first time, when I was much younger, there was something odd about this movie that struck me every single time, but I could never put my finger on what it was, until I’ve re-watched it now. It’s those quiet moments. Nowadays, we are so used to everything (animated movies especially) being quick, fast-paced, witty, snappy, that we often forget to take a moment. This is what Ice Age does really well – it takes a moment here and there for audience to breathe. It does not feel the need to shove “a funny joke” down our throats every 10 seconds, it has a simple, human story in the middle that captures you and you can’t help but root for all of our main characters.

One fact I’ve realised while re-watching Ice Age, it was a very different movie, not just for its time, but overall, at least when comes to animated films. Because it’s not really funny. Don’t get me wrong, there are laughs and especially children will have a great time with this movie, but it’s nowhere near almost every single animated movie ever made, that’s usually filled in with jokes. This film is more focused on the story of pack of animals trying to get a human baby back to “the people” before it’s too late. The jokes are almost extra, a delicious side with your main course.

It’s pretty strange for me to comprehend how all sequels that followed kind of lost touch with what made this film so different. Maybe it was one of those cases, where the filmmakers thought “our movie was successful because of this, this and that, therefore we need to repeat that” and they misinterpreted what made the original movie standout. Because it wasn’t just Scrat the squirrel, chasing the corn, or Sid, the dumb, yet lovable sloth. No, it was all of them together, but most importantly in a story that made sense. The sequels had to raise the stakes, but unfortunately, they (unintentionally) lowered the quality bar, because the main reason the first film works as well, it almost plays as a decent drama. Whereas higher stakes in a kids movie usually equals more comedy, because we can’t have the movie to be dark.

I would highly recommend re-watching Ice Age, especially if it’s been couple of years since you last seen the first one, and all you can remember are the other ones, that are… honestly fine. But they are heavily aimed at children, kind of like the Minions (2015), where the adults won’t get much out of those movies. But I have feeling if you were to re-watch this one, you would get a bit more from it than you think.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

In order for you to understand my review for the new Hellboy, I need to embark on a quick journey through time to acknowledge both Hellboy (2004) and Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008). Both of these I’ve only seen once so far, but I remember liking them very much. But even though I liked them, I never understood the hype (at least around mid 2000’s) around Guillermo del Toro – sure, he is stunning visual director, but surely anyone would be able to do what he did with that kind of property, right? How foolish was I…

The latest (would this be considered a remake?) take on Hellboy was supposed to be darker, yet it was trying to stay funny. Emphasis on trying. And sure enough, the movie isn’t shy from being dark (blood, plenty of gore) and have “dirty” fun (plenty of swearing, which I don’t mind) but it’s somehow not jelling well together and it comes across as boring. I know I should not compare the previous movies to this one, but I make the rules around here on this… really tiny blog, so I say why not compare two directors and how they approached the “same” material.

I think the biggest difference is Guillermo del Toro isn’t normal, in the best possible way. He’s by his own admission, into weird things, you could consider him a geek, an enthusiast into monsters, creepy things and he’s managed to make a carrier out of it, standout from the crowd. And that is why his take on Hellboy works much better – because, on some level, he is Hellboy, he understands him better. He’s the guy who no matter what, will always standout, not because of his psychical appearance, but because of how he thinks about things such as camera work, monster design, trying to make them unique… From what I remember about his two Hellboy movies, they both looked visually great, they had that unique feel that I foolishly believed it was so “simple” to achieve with that kind of material…

Let’s go to this Hellboy, shall we? Nothing here looks unique (except maybe one sequence I will talk about soon) and the story is kind of all over the place. There are couple of twists in the movie, but one is twist for a sake of being a twist and the other, at the very end, is just plain dumb. I did say “seriously?” when the twist happened, but not the excited version, like what you’d say to your significant other when asked “I have more chocolate stashed in a cupboard, do you want more chocolate?” It was more along the lines of your boss asking you to do overtime for no money, that kind of vibe.

The only memorable thing about this movie for me was the Baba Yaga sequence. Not only it felt more “horror-like” (which I wouldn’t mind if most of this movie felt like this) but I actually liked the Baba Yaga’s monster design, as that actually looked unsettling. So, whoever has done that, really great job to you.

The rest of the movie is just a mix of bland CGI with some blood and guts, with David Harbour trying his best, but missing the mark big time. I know this was probably the direction he was given, so I don’t really want to say he did a bad job, but this version of Hellboy didn’t work for me, as there wasn’t much to grasp, the whole “I’m different, and yet I fight for those who hate me for it” didn’t hit me the way it did with the previous movies. The same goes for Milla Jovovich – I really, really admire her and everything she’s done, but she wasn’t really given much to do here and the movie is worse for it. Shame movie, for wasting two great actors like this.

And it’s a movie’s fault really, as I believe the biggest problem was with the tone. Either Neil Marshall or the producers tried to balance comic book movie with horror/action/comedy and the result is something that’s trying to be all of the above, but fails horribly in every genre. For a comedy it’s not funny, for a horror, it’s no scary, for an action movie, there isn’t enough action. I wouldn’t mind having just a darker interpretation of Hellboy, with little to no jokes, more skewed towards horror, like that Baba Yaga sequence. That would at least differentiate itself from its predecessors and gave us, the audience, something truly unique and definitely better than what we’ve gotten now. This mixed bag of nothingness, that somehow managed to take really popular and beloved actor from Stranger Things and make him… really meh. Don’t even get me started on waste of Milla’s character (what was her screen time in total, 10 minutes…?)

Would I recommend watching the new Hellboy movie? Yes, I would, but only if you’ve seen the previous two movies. Not because they are connected (they are not) or because this one is great (it is not) but to make more people see why Guillermo del Toro is considered one of the best directors alive right now and to give him (albeit retrospectively) the credit he deserves. And yeah, also for the Baba Yaga sequence.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Movies from the “good old days” of Hollywood are usually inadvertently funny, not because they were meant to be, but because of what used to be considered inappropriate or indiscreet (roll credits!) back then. Take this movie for example – there is a scene where Ingrid Bergman‘s sister doesn’t want to leave her by herself in the room with Cary Grant, as that wouldn’t be appropriate now, would it? I mean, a woman who’s NOT married?!

If you look past the archaisms of those days, you’ll see Indiscreet is pretty decent film, that once it decides to be full on comedy, is enjoyable. But it takes the movie a long time to get there. I don’t know why, but the first half of the movie felt to me like the director wasn’t really sure whether he should approach this more seriously, or give into the “craziness”. I had a hard time putting my finger on what this movie actually was for its first 40 minutes or so. But then it seemed like in its second half, the movie decides to be a full on silly comedy, and it’s better for it.

I have not watched plenty of movies starring Ingrid Bergman and this is my first movie of hers, where she’s more on the comedic side and I really liked it. Dare I say she was the main star of this film…? Yes, I would say so. Of course, for a movie like this, where the main story is about Cary Grant’s character lying about whether he’s married or not and Ingrid’s character than being mad at him because he is or isn’t married… you do need a good scene partner to make it work and they do work really well together.

What I need to mention is the fact this movie doesn’t merely rely on those two mega stars (and they were, both in their own right) as all the side characters were pretty funny too, mainly Cecil Parker with Phyllis Calvert stood their own alongside both of those “superstars” and had some funny scenes.

There is a certain charm to these old comedies, where even if you don’t laugh out loud all the time, they feel more relaxed, more down to earth, which is a bit strange considering how much has changed since the time they were released. The way how people act, talk, what used to be considered inappropriate is now so normal, nobody bats an eye when we do it… And yet, on some sort of level, these movies feel more grounded than most of Hollywood comedies made in the last 10 years or so. Maybe the movies from the “good old days” are not relying on physical humour as much and they were trying to work on stories and jokes coming from the characters/situations rather than “this person is loud, that person is clumsy, and this one is just an idiot”, and that helps, having actual characters in your comedy.

As I said prior, the only criticism I have is the first half of the movie didn’t sit “properly” with me. If somebody were to tell me that one director shot the first half of the movie and then they swapped him for a different director, I would totally believe that. But the second half is great, so my rating is still fairly high, as Indiscreet is a pleasant movie, that you could watch on a chill Sunday afternoon and have a pretty good time with.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

I need to admit something – unlike plenty of people, I have only seen the original Zombieland (2009) once and that was the year it came out. For me, it was enjoyable movie, which I remember fondly (even though I wonder how it would play for me today) but I wasn’t really craving “seconds”, never thought this film should have had a sequel. But I am not a Hollywood producer, who were trying to make something happen ever since the first one came out, but didn’t have the script ready, or the main actors weren’t available. But finally, it happened and 10 years later, the result is… meh.

Zombieland: Double Tap is one of those sequels that definitely counts on you going in and LOVING the original. And that means you want to see plenty of the original movie to be referenced here, right? No, you don’t want that? Would you rather have meaningful story line that makes sense within that world and characters who have some growth? Well, then look way further than this movie, because this ain’t it, chief. I am not saying Zombieland: Double Tap is a horrible movie, not by any means. It’s just fairly repetitive, all the beats seemed really familiar (and I need to mention this again, I’ve only seen the first movie once, 10 years ago!) and most of the jokes were predictable. That was the case until Madison (character played by Zoey Deutch) showed up.

I don’t know how they’ve managed to do it, or whether there is just something about Zoey, but she was THE standout performance of this movie. Which is strange, as her character of super-dumb, yet friendly (really friendly) blond girl is nothing new and most of the time is actually really annoying character addition. But she reacts to everything with such a sincerity and all her line readings always landed where they had to, it’s almost impossible not to laugh at almost everything she says. I am not even overstating anything when I say I only laughed at her jokes. They also were smart about her character not becoming the annoying one, so they’ve done something, that I appreciated. Since it’s a new a movie, I won’t say anything more, but that definitely was a smart decision and played well.

The other jokes delivered by the main foursome (technically just a threesome as Abigail Breslin is basically here as almost a glorified cameo) were fine, but they all seemed kind of over this movie, mainly Emma Stone. I don’t know whether this was the direction she was given, or they just dumped a truck full of money in her garden to make this movie and she wanted two trucks, but she seemed checked out in most of her scenes. And she’s somebody who usually is the standout in most of her movies. Truly strange.

This movie also wastes perfectly fine Rosario Dawson (because Woody Harrelson definitely needed that love interest) and Thomas Middleditch, so that’s not helped to make this film’s case. What did help was the runtime, as it never feels boring, there is always something happening and as far as the comedy sequels made long after their first films, this one is not that bad. But it doesn’t stand on its own. And the world of zombies should give you plenty of choices on how to spin a sequel into something not as predictable.

If it wasn’t for Zoey Deutch, actress who I am going to follow with more interest from now on, my final score would’ve been a bit lower, and I would be forced to write something along the lines “there is no one scene or character that’s memorable”. Luckily, she’s here, so there is a reason for you to watch this and who knows? Maybe you’ll enjoy it much better than I have. Just get ready for plenty of the same where at the end, not much has changed.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

After writing about my favourite movie of all time (my review for Lost in Translation (2003) can be found here for those who missed it) I thought it’s a perfect time to re-visit my second favourite movie of all time, Airplane!. Unlike Lost in Translation, where I need to be in a certain mood to watch it, I can pop this comedy in any time I want and just relax, forget about the world for about hour and half and simply enjoy the delightful disaster…

To this day, Airplane! is the only movie that made me physically roll on the floor laughing. I am not exaggerating, when I watched this film for the very first time and the “calm down, lady!” scene came up, I just gave up and slid down on the floor, laughing and thinking this might be the funniest comedy I’ve ever seen. I was fairly young (I reckon I couldn’t be older than 15/16) and now, almost 15 years later, that statement is still true. I have seen a lot of comedies, TV shows, improvs, and plenty of them had me laughing hysterically, but nothing prior or since “the” Airplane! has made me laugh so hard I’d end up on the floor.

The biggest thing (and why this movie was a bit of a revolution when it came out) was because of the way they made it – a parody movie with a straight face! Can you imagine? Until then, it was unheard of for a comedy (especially American one!) to have such a silly script, silly scenes and plenty of what we would today call “dad jokes” delivered with almost a poker face (with the occasional wink at the cameras) as if the actors were in a dramatic Oscar movie. It’s by no accident this style quickly became the golden standard on how to deliver lines, do visual gags… well, at least for the ones who pay attention.

Plenty of people watched this movie and thought “Parodies are easy! We just need to take scenes from different movies, put our silly twist(s) on them, and job done!” And that is why in the late 90’s/early 2000’s we’ve gotten so many bad ones. Because that never was THE strength of this movie, even though they have done it here a few times. The biggest strength of this movie is the fact the movie works without you having to know the references. Who actually knows/remembers this movie is one giant parody of Zero Hour (1957)! A movie, I dare to say, most people who watched this movie, never even heard of, but guess what? That’s perfectly fine! Because this movie works without you knowing this material, it works because they throw plenty of jokes your way and most of them stick. Plenty of jokes you will only notice when you watch closely (again, you could argue this movie set a standard on how to do visual gags too) and it works because the movie is actually trying to have a story. Yes, that story is told in a funny/silly way, but it’s a story nonetheless you can still follow and be somehow invested in.

Just to make sure I am clear – I am not claiming this movie started the parody genre, or established visual gags. I know it didn’t. All I am saying is this movie worked so well, it brought back this genre, re-introduced certain techniques (like visual gags, delivering funny lines without characters realising how funny they are, playing it straight) to the masses and made Leslie Nielsen into the comedy legend he was. People often forget he’s had a really decent career prior this movie (he was acting since 1950!) but if it wasn’t for this movie I dare to say the world would have been a bit poorer not knowing his name. We were extremely lucky to have him for as long as we had and he definitely shines in this movie.

Airplane! is one of those films that even those it shows its age, it somehow stays funny and doesn’t feel “that” dated. There is something about these jokes and the way they are delivered, it just makes it for me. I’m always slightly afraid of re-visiting this movie, because what if those jokes aren’t as funny as I remember them being? But every time I re-watch this movie, I laugh and I’m reminded of that one evening, being really young and rolling on the floor. This movie will always have a special place in my heart. And I am serious, so please don’t call me Shirley 😉

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke