Enchanted (2007)

After several years worth of snarky, self-aware fairy tale-skewering Hollywood hits, Disney finally caught on and took aim at its own lengthy portfolio of animated cheese. Enchanted more than hits the mark. It destroys the mark altogether. Where one would expect Disney to hold back in reverence to its most time-honored fairy tale conventions, Enchanted lays it on thick, as if it were one of the cynical hecklers that live to berate schmaltz.

The film opens as if it were an animated film. A beautiful young maiden named Giselle has secretly caught the ire of an evil queen. Giselle wakes in the morning, sings a sweet song and receives help in getting ready for the day with the help of her animal friends. These early scenes had my eyes rolling and my gut busting with laughter. Make no mistake, Disney’s pulling no punches.

The evil queen tries but fails to dispatch of the maiden before her dashing prince of a son discovers and falls madly in love with her. It’s perfectly gag-tastic. As a last ditch effort, the queen throws the girl into an enchanted well and she ends up as a flesh and blood human being in our world. Wanting to break the idealistic Giselle’s outlook, the queen sent her to New York City, where she would be surrounded by cynical, impatient and rude people around every corner.

Dressed in a huge, poofy dress, Giselle walks the streets looking for help. Jaded and bitter New Yorkers just pay her no mind and she is left nearly desperate. She finds help in Robert Phillip (Patrick Dempsey), a divorced father of one. His daughter quickly falls in love with the idea of having a real princess in their apartment but Robert just wants to put her up for a night and get the nut out of his place.

Sure enough, her prince travels to our world in search of his one true love. He is “assisted” by one of his mother’s advisors, who tries to do everything he can to prevent the prince from succeeding. More of the culture clash humor arises from his quest than from Giselle’s predicament. There are plenty of laughs from her end of the story, but there is also the serious side, which dilutes the fun ever so slightly. You know, the moral of the story.

For all the goofy fun that Enchanted brings to the table, Disney couldn’t help but fall victim to some of the same conventions they roast. The ending is fairly predictable, but it is, after all, a fairy tale. What fairy tale isn’t predictable?

Enchanted is one of the rare films that just about everyone can enjoy. The snarky jibes at fairy tale clichés will appeal to the cynics while the idealistic romanticism will appeal to the rest of the crowd. It makes a few things very clear- First, there’s a reason why fairy tales are best left animated. The costumes and songs are all immensely ridiculous when being worn and sung by flesh and blood actors. Second, cynical views of life and happiness are only okay in small doses. Enchanted really manages to kill two birds with one stone and get two messages out there. Good job.

Also, credit has to be given to the actors. Amy Adams and James Marsden really sell their vapid characters. They go all out and appear to be uninhibited by any doubts about looking or sounding as silly as they do. Dempsey gives a committed performance as an all-too-straight talking dad who doesn’t wish to be bothered by any of Giselle’s delusional yammerings.

The writing is dead on, the acting is tight and the music is light and fun. Enchanted shows that Disney has a sense of humor and can pick on themselves like nobody else. It’s a solid film overall, but it’s not worthy of multiple viewings. You’ll either grow too cynical or to idealistic if you watch it too much. Pull this one out from time to time when you need a good laugh.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5

The Notebook (2004)

I’ve never been a big fan of romances because all too often they fall victim to clichés and stereotypes in the worst ways. Whether it’s the all-too-perfect mushy dialogue or the highly unlikely turn of romantic events, romance films rely on women’s lack of caring about these things in order to see a love story play out that they wish were their own. Often times this brings big bucks too. The Notebook was a very popular and very successful romance film a few years ago and I was pleasantly surprised to see how unlike other romances it was.

For starters, this film doesn’t focus explicitly on the couple’s time together. Most of the film covers their time apart and the issues they faced during this time. They coped with the separation and even had come to terms with it when their lives were suddenly and unexpectedly thrown back together. Their reunion is anything but harmonious and that’s what is so remarkable about this film. It is one of the few honest portrayals of love I’ve seen outside of a traditional drama.

The Notebook shows both sides of love. There are the romantic and thoughtful moments we’re accustomed to seeing, but there are also dark places that love can lead us: obsession, denial, despair. Granted, not all of these moments are deftly acted by such the film’s young stars, but they get it right more often than not, so kudos to Rachel McAdams and Ryan Gosling. The passion they display is one of a kind and the freewheeling, playful side of love they show is actually done right for a change.

But the story doesn’t just exist in the defining moments of their youthful love. As with real life, the story goes on. The real story is a mix of joy and sadness and is so different from anything I’ve seen before in the genre. Author Nicholas Sparks understands that happy endings aren’t real endings, which I appreciate.

One thing I definitely enjoyed (especially coming off the previous review) was the fact all the clothing looked like the characters actually wore it. Everything seemed real: the clothes, the sets, everything. I liked the choices for on-location shots and the filmmakers didn’t overdo it on the music either. Nothing too sappy or melodramatic. It was all pretty well in line.

There’s really not a whole lot more I can say or get into without giving away much about the film (which I am not in the business of doing). The only other thing I can say is that the older actors in the film did an impeccable job and were just as good, if not better, of conveying a deep-seated love that solid movies are built around.

The Notebook is a solid film and I definitely recommend it, if you are into the romantic side of the movie spectrum. Good stuff here.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5

Hairspray (2007)

I’ve run into a slight problem while trying to write a review for this film. I still remember it very clearly, so that’s not the problem. I hit a roadblock in trying to compare this movie-musical to its original incarnation, which I have not seen. Hairspray is a movie-musical based off of a Broadway musical which was based off of a non-musical cult film from Director John Waters. Waters is one weird dude and his films typically reflect that. Waters had little to no involvement with this musical version and I think that was a mistake.

Even though I have never seen the original Hairspray and have only seen bits and pieces of Waters’ work, I was expecting more of his signature weirdness to come through. Instead, we’re treated to a glitzy Broadway confection that fancifully portrays a coming-of-age story during the early days of civil rights and integration. It’s bright, it’s loud, and it’s Broadway.

If you're new to my site, allow me to point out to you that I am not a big Broadway fan. At least not neo-Broadway. Movie musicals based on bright fluffy Broadway hits don’t turn my stomach, but they bore me to tears. I’ve never been a big glitz and glam kind of guy and all the Hollywood tricks that serve to cheese up an already cheesetastic production grow on my nerves with amazing quickness. Silly transitions, extra digital grading, overdone lighting- it’s all just too much for me to appreciate.

Combining the excesses of Broadway with the excesses of Hollywood grinds my gears. It’s gross, it’s gaudy, and it’s gratuitous. People complain about the excess of blood, gore and nudity in today’s string of successful torture porn films, like the Saw and Hostel series. Yet, nobody calls films like Hairspray on their needless excesses. In fact, most embrace them. Hypocritical, paradoxical- I don’t quite know what to call it. Basically, the excess of schmaltz and camp pull me out such films.

While I understand that Broadway likes vibrant colors and crisp looking costumes, I found myself unable to get past the fact that virtually all of the clothing in the film looked like it had never been worn before. The colors I can get past, because I don’t know if those styles didn’t exist back in the day, but when only a few characters actually look like they live in those clothes, my suspension of disbelief checks out.

The inclusion of John Travolta as an obese, middle-aged woman also didn’t earn any points with me. I do know that in the original version of Hairspray, a notorious cross-dresser played the part now played by Travolta, but Travolta just seems to be there for the yuck-factor. Of course it’s funny to see a famous actor dress up like a woman, but the joke overstays its welcome rather quickly. After the first few scenes, seeing Travolta in a fat suit had no effect on me.

Overall, it just feels like this film is missing something and I think it’s the edge that John Waters’ films are known to contain. By adding songs and removing Waters from the creative process, it seems like they watered down the tone of an otherwise better film. And we all know that hairspray and water don’t work well together.

To really give an accurate review I’ll need to watch the original Hairspray and then re-watch this version. Until then, my rating is mostly subjective.

RATING: 2.5 out of 5

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

This movie has guts, plain and simple. Ordinarily, I would have been outraged at some of the decisions that were made in this film. To see certain X-Men characters killed was unthinkable when I entered the theater, and had these deaths not occurred in just the way they did, I probably would have hated this movie. But they killed unthinkable characters in simply mind-blowing ways and never looked back. I repeat: this movie has guts.

Unfortunately, Bryan Singer (who directed the previous two installments of the series) chose to walk away from The Last Stand to direct Superman Returns. The joke would be on him, however, as X-Men would out-earn Superman and also got more love from fans. In Singer’s absence, we have Brett Ratner, of Rush Hour fame, who could have ruined this film, but does a surprisingly good job.

The story is a little all over the place, throwing in shout outs to fanboy favorite mutants just for the sake of including fanboy favorite mutants. The inclusion of more mutants comes at the sacrifice of character and story depth, which the first two films were chock full of. While it’s neat to see mutants like Juggernaut, Beast and Angel, it’s a shame that the story was more or less as deep as the Saturday morning cartoon version from the 90s. An alleged cure for the mutant gene is found, causing the humans of the world to demand mutants all “cure” themselves and rejoin “normal society.”

There are some substantially silly-looking special effects and the series wraps itself up almost too neatly in the end. The best part about X-Men stories is that things are always left a little bit open. There are two “shockers” at the end (one before and one after the credits) that keep potential sequels on the board, but some course correction is never a bad thing.

The little things add up to be a minor nuisance, but the boldness of the film helps you forget about it. X-Men: The Last Stand is a good way to end the series without closing the book on the characters.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5