Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones (2002)

After taking the box office by storm but underwhelming anyone over the age of 10 with The Phantom Menace, Star Wars is back in action with the second installment of the prequel trilogy. Despite a darker tone and much less Jar Jar Binks, parts of this film are agony to sit through. By retaining total control over the script and the film’s direction, Lucas creates another dud that I hold to be worse than its predecessor.

Ten years after the invasion of Naboo, times have only grown darker and more frustrating for the Republic. A separatist movement led by Count Dooku (Christopher Lee) threatens the stability of the galactic government and the Jedi are stretched thin in their attempts to maintain order. After two assassination attempts on now-Senator Amidala (Natalie Portman), Jedi-in-training Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) takes her into hiding for protection while Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) heads to the far end of the galaxy on the trail of the bounty hunter responsible for the assassination attempts. While protecting the senator, Anakin must balance his affection for her while discerning the meaning of his nightmares involving the slave mother he left behind on Tatooine.

Once again, the story has some promise but the execution is sorely lacking. The presence of a sedition group is quite interesting but we never delve enough into it to be engrossed by it. Starting the prequel trilogy at this point would have made things better. I also enjoyed Obi-Wan’s uncovering of a secret army, though I despise the retcon that makes Boba Fett a clone. Sedition, secrecy, and assassination plots would make for a pretty awesome film.

The only pre-requisite is the budding romance between Padme and Anakin. George Lucas botches this royally with wooden dialogue that is borderline cringe-inducing. Anakin’s affections are painfully and awkwardly obvious but we never see that same spark rise out of Padme. I believe this is largely due to the fact that there is zero chemistry between Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman. It’s easy to see why some people thought Portman was the problem because her performance drags even with an adult co-star to work with this time around.

The real problem is actually that Lucas has no idea what to do Padme’s character. She helps the plot pivot a little bit but she’s really only around to give birth to Luke and Leia in Episode III. I’m not sure if the character even warrants being a main character but Lucas thrusts her into that position, leaving Portman hanging onto a weak co-star and an even weaker script. She may fill the prequel’s need for a Princess Leia type character but Lucas doesn’t give the character enough meat and it’s clear that Portman struggles with that.

Another major problem is Lucas’s overreliance on special effects. Sure, the original trilogy films were effects heavy for their time but a lot of those effects were made possible through camera trickery and miniatures. Nowadays, CGI allows Lucas to create the worlds and creatures he’s always dreamed of. Some special effects look great initially but fail to impress when flesh-and-blood characters have to share the screen with them. Real actors just don’t seem to occupy the same space as the fake ones and that is a problem.

Overall this film is half-baked and that is almost to be expected. You can’t blame Lucas for presenting these stories as if audiences are not familiar with the original trilogy. Unless you have never seen the first three films, every piece of the plot to cause unrest in the galaxy is obvious and disguising Palpatine’s face feels annoying and unnecessary. You can’t fault Lucas for these details but you can fault him for all the bad ingredients he puts into this unsavory concoction. Well-written scripts matter, as do believable visual effects. Absent these, George Lucas looks like a kid displaying what he thinks is the world’s greatest sandcastle made from plastic molds. He’s working really hard with the technology at his fingertips but he fails to stretch himself and make anything truly creative.

RATING: 1.75 out of 5

SECOND HELPINGS: Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999)

Given the colossal expectations and hype leading up to this film’s release, is it any wonder that it rocked the box office but flopped in the eyes of millions, if not billions, of Star Wars fans? The original Star Wars came at just the right time to achieve such a dominant following. Home video devices were in their infancy, allowing one generation to share the joy of watching (and some could argue over-watching) Star Wars and its two sequels with younger siblings, cousins, children, and now even grandchildren. The magic of the original trilogy is practically ingrained in our cultural psyche, so how could George Lucas possibly make anything capable of satisfying legions of fans expecting greatness?

There are a lot of things that are wrong with The Phantom Menace and I think that the number of problems is why so many people think it is the worst of the prequels. I maintain that Episode II: Attack of the Clones is the worst but please don’t think I am sticking up for this film. It is certainly flawed and deserving of much of the criticism hurled at it.

First we tackle the filmmaking basics- Phantom Menace has poor writing and some terrible acting. While I appreciate George Lucas’s utilization of modern makeup and visual effects to incorporate more non-human species as main and supporting characters, some of these characters come across as half-baked and others just look like they are there to showcase cool effects. It had to be tricky to create characters for this trilogy because we already know who is in the original trilogy. Creating a set of dynamic and engrossing characters would be tough because audiences would have to deal with their deaths during this trilogy or we would feel gypped if they just disappeared after Episode III.

Unfortunately, we got the exact opposite of this problem. Ewan McGregor does fine as young Obi-Wan Kenobi, here finishing up his training to become a Jedi and not yet a master but we’re never concerned about him because he obviously needs to survive the new trilogy to be part of A New Hope. Jar Jar Binks seems positioned to be the prequels’ version of Chewbacca but he was so obnoxious that Lucas largely wrote him out of the next two to appease the fans. Natalie Portman’s Queen Amidala is stiff and keeps mostly to the sidelines. The only new character of any quality here is Darth Maul and he gets chopped in half at the end.

The whole point of the prequel trilogy is to provide the backstory of how Anakin Skywalker transitions from pilot to Jedi to Darth Vader. With the main character being Anakin, audiences were understandably disappointed by Lucas’s decision to have Anakin be a child in the first film. God bless Jake Lloyd but his character comes across as whiny rather than streetwise thanks to a terrible script that holds back every member of the cast.

Then there are the finer details that drive nit-picky people like me crazy. Why is the technology in this film, only some 30 years before A New Hope, so much more advanced than what we saw in the original trilogy? Lucas was obviously held back by the technology of the late 70s and early 80s but there is a huge rift in consistency that breaks the suspension of disbelief. I just cannot believe that in 19 years from the end of Episode III to the start of A New Hope that technology across the galaxy, even that used by the Empire, would regress to the state it is in during the original films.

Some fans got really bent out of shape over Anakin being the builder of C-3PO. It does not make much sense to me either but you had to expect to see the droids in the prequels somehow. This brings to the fore the reality that was probably the hardest to accept with this film. Despite what people came to believe over the years about events in the Star Wars universe both before and after the original trilogy, Star Wars belongs to George Lucas(until Disney’s recent acquisition anyway) and whatever he says goes.

The Phantom Menace’s status as the ‘worst of the prequels’ is largely due to fan reaction to all the ways Lucas mucked up their understanding of the Star Wars universe. Maybe they wanted Anakin to be a Force-sensitive version of Han Solo, or they didn’t need the Force to be explained away by science, or they just really hated Jar Jar Binks. That doesn’t mean the entire film is bad.

I see a lot of potential in The Phantom Menace. Its script is underwritten and the CGI effects are far too numerous. It opens a huge can of worms with all the minor details, plot points, and retcons, all of which are easy to get caught up in complaining about. But there is some good stuff here too. I liked the podrace sequence, even if it was a ploy to sell a videogame, and Darth Maul makes for some intense lightsaber dueling.

Start with Anakin as an adult with a chip on his shoulder, maybe secretly running supplies past the blockade of Naboo, and you’re already halfway to a decent movie. I’ve got plenty of other suggestions but that’s all beside the point. What The Phantom Menace really shows is that, while George Lucas may be a really good idea guy, his early writing and directing success was either a fluke or he lost his touch pretty quickly. He should have listened to some of the criticism and brought in people to help make the next one better. He didn’t though, setting up the prequel trilogy to disappoint fans further.

ORIGINAL RATING: 2.25 out of 5

NEW RATING: 2.25 out of 5

Star Trek (2009)

Hold on to your tribbles, Trekkies! Wunderkind sci-fi/fantasy director JJ Abrams injects new life into what long ago became a tired franchise by staying true to the show’s spirit. Abrams boldly goes where no Star Trek director has gone before, inviting hard-core and casual fans alike to take a leap of faith and buy in to a rebooted Star Trek universe.

In a fit of rage, the revenge-hungry Romulan Captain Nero (Eric Bana) inadvertently follows Spock (Leonard Nimoy) through a rift in space-time and into a parallel universe. One outcome of this journey is the killing of James Tiberius Kirk’s father, creating a timeline unlike the one Nero and Spock originate from. Kirk (Chris Pine) grows up a rebel but enlists in Starfleet Academy, where he meets a younger Spock (Zachary Quinto), Uhura (Zoe Saladana), Sulu (John Cho), and McCoy (Karl Urban). Far from a cohesive team, the young cadets are thrust into action when Nero re-emerges, threatening the existence of the planet Vulcan and, potentially, any Federation planet he chooses.

This film is unlike any other Star Trek film in that it places hefty emphasis on special effects and action sequences, which were either poorly done or in short supply in the 10 predecessors. Some long-time Trek fans may cry foul over pushing the contemplative side of the series to the back burner but even they should recognize just how bold a move Abrams and company make. They should also be glad that this reboot breathes precious life into a series that is approaching its 50th anniversary.

The characters of the Original Series are, naturally, the most beloved (though Next Generation boasts an almost equal amount of loyalty). Recasting the original crew for further exploits between the end of the Original Series and Star Trek: The Motion Picture or between Star Trek 6 and Generations wouldn’t work save for satisfying the curiosities of a minority of Trekkies. There’s nothing new about inserting a story in front of a known outcome. By creating an alternate timeline, old characters can develop in new ways and everyone becomes vulnerable to the dangers taking place around them. Maybe we don’t fear for the safety of Kirk or Spock that much but everyone else is fair game. As an added bonus, this film in no way retcons anything Trek fans hold sacred. The Star Trek they grew up with still exists.

The reboot makes Kirk a more interesting character, now a hot-headed recruit that can grow into Shatner’s more even-keeled captain. The change is fun to watch because it leads to freshness in character interactions. Gone is the camaraderie of our main characters. Instead of mutual respect, some behave adversarially to each other. Thankfully, every member of the cast is up to the task of re-making these iconic characters. The chemistry is phenomenal, though I do think Karl Urban overdoes it as McCoy.

One thing the previous Star Trek films were shaky on was their antagonists. While sci-fi is full of larger-than-life villains, Star Trek films are notoriously lacking in compelling bad guys. In this film, Nero is full of fire and menace but he rarely shows other emotions. He is certainly powerful and formidable but he is narrow-mindedness makes him a fairly flat character. It would have been interesting to see him outside of his quest to destroy things.

The reboot itself may make this film something of a one-trick pony but Star Trek does pretty well as an origin story. For the uninitiated, this film is a tense, action-packed sci-fi flick. For those familiar with the source material, it is a bold move that enables future endeavors as favorite characters discover their galaxy all over again. The filmmakers put plenty of references to Original Series elements in this film for long-time fans to snicker at. This is fine for this first outing but Star Trek is worthy of a sequel, which means future installments will need to tell their own stories rather than piggyback on parallels to what came before. If they can pull that off, the reboot will have been worth it.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5

Treasure Planet (2002)

File this latest Disney misfire under the all-too-familiar category of a well-intentioned and potentially neat idea that just doesn’t execute. In many ways, the end result of this film is something of a companion piece to Atlantis: The Lost Empire. The two exceptions to this comparison are that Treasure Planet adapts its story from a literary classic and it is easier to follow.

This film is a sci-fi version of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island, where the architecture and clothing resembles that of the 18th century and spaceships look like old-time sailing vessels with rockets. It focuses on a teenager named Jim Hawkins (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), who comes into possession of a map to the hidden Treasure Planet. A friend of the family commissions a spaceship to go in search of Treasure Planet and the crew is a hodge-podge to say the least. Along the way the explorers face many dangers, including a mutiny at the hands of their cyborg cook, John Silver, who wants the treasure for himself.

I read Treasure Island when I was a kid and I recall enjoying it very much. I do not know if it was the full version or the children’s edition but it was exciting nonetheless. The heart of Treasure Island is still very much alive in Treasure Planet and the film could have worked if it had not been adapted so literally. In my mind, there is no reason for the spaceships too look like the sailing vessels of yore. At times that gimmick just doesn’t work. Maybe the science nerd in me is being too picky, but I cannot swallow travelling through deep space without an enclosed spaceship. Give it a Star Wars-esque worn-future look and it just might work.

Some of the animation in this film is pretty spectacular, with 2-D characters worked into 3-D environments. Unfortunately, for every scene where things look spectacular there is a scene where the animation is either unremarkable or the blending doesn’t quite work. That falls far short from the lofty standards set by Disney’s finest films. To top it off, only one song is even memorable from the film and it is not sung by any of the characters. It’s a fine tune by the Goo Goo Dolls but its status as the only noteworthy tune is an indictment upon Disney’s music department.

It’s clear that the Disney Renaissance is a thing of the past. I don’t know if they are just running out of ideas or if their ability to express their ideas is stuck in a lower gear. I appreciate that they try to push the envelope but either Disney is trying to push the wrong envelope or they need to push harder. Too many more films like Treasure Planet and Disney will find itself smack in the middle of a new Dark Age. At least their relationship with Pixar helps even things out.

RATING: 3 out of 5

Iron Man 3 (2013)

This was the second part of my first ever drive-in double feature, the first part being Monsters University. I had held out for years until there were two films showing that I thought would make the occasion worthwhile. The first one met that goal but this Marvel Universe sequel did not. I don’t know what happened to Tony Stark in The Avengers (which I have not seen) but the fun of the Iron Man series seems to have disappeared completely.

Months after the events of The Avengers, Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) is haunted by nightmares and panic attacks. To cope, he plunges himself into making dozens of new super-suits, drawing the ire of his girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow). Meanwhile, a once flaky scientist from Tony’s past (Guy Pearce) reemerges with a potentially game-changing new biomedical process. When an international terrorist called The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) destroys Stark’s home, Tony is believed to be dead. This allows him to work in secret to both uncover the secrets of The Mandarin but also to get his super hero groove back.

I’ve always believed that Iron Man was Marvel’s answer for DC Comic’s Batman- an incredibly smart person who makes up for a lack of super powers with brains and gadgets. While Batman often faces a number of flamboyant criminals, the Iron Man film series has featured more practical baddies. After defeating a corrupt businessman in a super-suit and a genius inventor in a super-suit, I was hopeful for more unique villain. The strength and power of the Iron Man suits require a villain of extreme abilities in order to pose much of a threat. In a way, Iron Man 3 splits the difference and creates two villains- one to challenge Tony’s brain and the other to challenge the power of his suits.

Unfortunately, neither villain really satisfies. The Mandarin seemed like a great villain at first and I even think his true identity is quite clever. But when you think about it, he is little more than the fusion of red herring and MacGuffin. The ruse doesn’t even make the second villain seem any smarter because he ends up being little more than your paint-by-numbers, overconfident, super-powered comic book villain.

As a summer blockbuster and a comic book movie, Iron Man 3 does not hold back on effects-heavy action sequences. The Extremis storyline lends itself to a lot of special effects at times, plunging the series deeper into the sci-fi realm. The whole connected Marvel Universe strikes me as deeply rooted in sci-fi but, not having seen The Avengers, Iron Man 3’s level of sci-fi takes something away from the series, which had been fairly realistic up to this point. Just like most summer extravaganzas, some of the special effects are too prominent and don’t pull off their intended illusions.

Superheroes struggling to find the drive to fight crime again is nothing new but it is interesting watching Tony Stark go through the process. His whole wallowing in a funk through most of the film creates an atmosphere that is more brooding mystery than summer action flick. It doesn’t go all Christopher Nolan-Batman on you but it is definitely a departure for the series. Had the villains worked out better, this probably could have been the best in the series instead of experiencing the growing pains that it does. Even its cathartic ending doesn’t satisfy because you know the Marvel machine won’t let one of its most bankable characters walk off into the sunset just yet.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

The Land Before Time (1988)

In 1979, Don Bluth quit his job at Disney and convinced a number of animators to come with him to start their own animated film production company. Their first two films garnered critical acclaim and success at the box office while Disney was seemingly stuck in a rut of films that failed to connect with audiences. Disney had to be sweating bullets when Oliver & Company opened against The Land Before Time and for good reason. Bluth’s liberation allowed him to tap into everything that Disney was lacking in the 80s until The Little Mermaid came along.

As water and food become scarce, a young Apatosaurus named Littlefoot and his family head out in search of the Great Valley- a land rumored to be untouched by the growing drought. Along the way, Littlefoot and his family are separated by a massive earthquake. Though dealing with grief, loneliness, and fear, Littlefoot commits himself to reuniting with his family. He soon picks up a hodge-podge of other young dinosaurs, forming a unique caravan. As the youths wander the wastelands for clues leading to the Great Valley, a dangerous predator is hot on their tails.

This film continues the success of Don Bluth’s animation team. Most of this film is full of crisp animation, rich colors, and a style that bests most of what Disney produced in the 80s. Each of the young dinosaurs is animated with just the right amount of anthropomorphism in that their dinosaur nature is never truly betrayed. The blend of two-legged, four-legged, and a winged dinosaur injects a nice sense of variety. There are a few moments of less sophisticated animation, where dimension lines are drawn over a splotch of one color. This was used during Bluth’s time at Disney in the 70s and, though I cannot blame him for falling back on a familiar technique, it still bugs me a little as it did with those Disney flicks.

The story is sweet and provides a good message to the target audience. The band-of-misfits-accomplishing-something-amazing storyline was used to death in children’s and young adult films in the 80s and is now terribly cliché but The Land Before Time rises above. Perhaps it is because our main characters are not people. Perhaps it is also because the only great thing the young dinosaurs do is fight to survive. Sure, they get creative in scaring off a group of aggressive pachycephalosaurids and come up with a plan to take on a T-Rex, but it’s never anything that seems too over the top.

Back in the day, The Land Before Time was a heartwarming tale of persistence and innocence. Millennials born after 1990 may not see much magic in the story but for those of us 80s babies, this is a joyful romp in childhood nostalgia. It may not be the masterpiece I grew up thinking it was but this film is still a winner and helped show other studios that Disney did not control the market on quality animated films.

RATING: 3.75 out of 5

Lilo & Stitch (2002)

Modern, real world settings seem to work for Pixar but Disney’s track record with them is spotty. Lilo & Stitch does not improve that assessment at all. While it has a fresh setting for a Disney flick and a few decent elements, the film largely misses the mark.

In another part of the galaxy, a dangerous experimental creature escapes custody and hijacks a spaceship. Crash landing on earth, the creature winds up in an animal shelter and is adopted by Lilo (Daveigh Chase) and her older sister Nani (Tia Carrere). Nani tries hard to take care of her sister but struggles to satisfy the disapproving social worker Cobra Bubbles (Ving Rhames). The creature, now named Stitch, doesn’t make life any easier on anyone between his wild antics and a team of aliens trying to hunt him down.

I don’t come from a broken home or one that was monitored by social services, so I cannot relate at all to Nani’s struggles. While I understand that her role as a caretaker eliminates the need for parents in the film, it’s a bit of a drag. In some ways it feels too modern, as if Disney let in a little too much of the ugly side of the real world into their end product. It certainly helps balance out the ADHD, kid-centric zaniness that erupts whenever Stitch gets going.

Stitch himself is a pretty interesting character and very funny but he alone is not enough to carry a film that features some real downer elements. While the animation is adequate and quite colorful at times, it is pretty much on par with Disney’s TV cartoons of the day. There’s not enough dynamism and magic in all the pretty colors. The same goes for the music. The Hawaiian setting isn’t taken advantage of enough (though I did enjoy Lilo’s affection for Elvis). Just with the animation, there are no memorable original songs or music sequences.

I still maintain that Disney movies live and die by the story, the animation, and the music. While Pixar has had luck with bypassing the movie-musical format, Disney seems to falter when they veer away from it. Heck, they even hit a rough patch with the format in the latter half of the Renaissance. Lilo & Stitch has enough wacky action to keep the kids content for an hour and a half but Disney’s secret sauce is missing. Until they get back that right balance for all members of the family, I will continue to shrug my shoulders. This feels more like Disney spinning the tires and trying to use their past products to score some easy money than an attempt to create something lasting and meaningful.

RATING: 3 out of 5

Short Circuit (1986)

This film is a classic. By classic I mean that it was on weekend movie marathons often enough while I was growing up for me to fall in love with it. This was, however, my first time watching the film in its entirety and uncensored. It’s still a loveable little flick and worth popping in for purely nostalgic purposes but even I have to admit that Short Circuit is little more than a fun guilty pleasure.

When a bolt of lightning scrambles the programming of a secret military robot, Number 5 becomes self-aware and escapes his military home base in a quest for knowledge. Upon meeting Number 5, Stephanie Speck (Ally Sheedy) thinks he’s an alien and feeds his request for input by allowing Number 5 to go on an all-night information bender of encyclopedias and late-night TV. When the military comes looking to find and destroy Number 5, Stephanie teams up with two of Number 5’s sympathetic creators (Steve Guttenberg and Fisher Stevens) to save the robot and help him find his place in the world.

This film has 80s guilty pleasure written all over it. Steve Guttenberg? Check. Humorous science-fiction? Check. Subtle anti-Reaganist sentiment? Check. I do have to say though that more than a few elements of Short Circuit just wouldn’t be tolerable anymore. Hollywood probably wouldn’t dare make a comedy about weaponized technology these days. That’s best left to doomsday-cautioning anti-military industrial flicks with bad acting and spooky music. And let’s be honest- it’s a wonder that Fisher Stevens’ (a white Jewish guy) portrayal of an Indian guy (with tan makeup no less) wasn’t decried back in the 80s.

Short Circuit spins a yarn that is cute but not very believable. Who in their right mind would hide and protect a lethal government robot? Why wouldn’t the government have an internal tracking mechanism on the unit rather than one that can be removed? On top of it all are action-comedy clichés like the good guy disappearing at the right moments to sneak up perfectly on the bad guys. If not for the sass and spunk of Number 5, this film would have been dead on arrival.

But Number 5 looks awesome and has the right blend of innocence and sarcasm to his personality to make him endearing. Once his circuits fry, he ceases to seem dangerous or threatening to our protagonists. You never truly believe that he is alive but he certainly puts himself on the line of potential sentience. Number 5’s construction also helps blur the line between human and machine, with features that mimic eyelids and movements oftentimes precise enough to almost be human.

As flawed as this film really is, the character of Number 5 carries the whole thing on his mechanical back effortlessly. Steve Guttenberg’s presence tells you the film will be corny but it also turns out to be a lot of fun. Hitting the right blend of one part drama and two parts comedy makes this film work. Too much drama and it would seem ridiculous and stupid. Too much comedy and it would be too cheesy even for a guilty pleasure. Dated as just about everything is in this film, I will always have a soft spot in my heart for Short Circuit.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

Mission: Impossible- Ghost Protocol (2011)

Just when you thought this film series was dead yet again, Tom Cruise comes storming back with a new team of special ops experts to make saving the world look super cool. While there is no shortage of death-defying antics, Mission: Impossible- Ghost Protocol passes on labyrinthine plots for a straight-forward action-heist flick with a few surprises along the way. In what may be an unprecedented turn of events, this- the fourth M:I film- is the best entry to date.

After a botched attempt to intercept top-secret Russian nuclear weapon launch codes, IMF breaks Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) out of a Russian prison to steal files that identify a dangerous person of interest code-named ‘Cobalt.’ Ethan and his team (Simon Pegg and Paula Patton) are outted during the attempt and the Kremlin is bombed, forcing the US government to initiate Ghost Protocol- disavowing any knowledge of IMF agents or operations. Now hot on the trail of Cobalt, Hunt and his team must clear their names, stop Cobalt from launching nuclear weapons, and diffusing the tension the USA and Russia, who blame the US for the Kremlin attack.

This film hearkens back to the original Mission: Impossible film while simultaneously moving the series forward. Just like in the first film, Ethan Hunt is trying to clear his name while also stopping the bad guy. As an added bonus, he gets to save the world too. While some might complain about Ghost Protocol’s straightforward approach, it actually helps to make the film’s spectacle action sequences a little more believable.

The film as a whole is less intelligent than the first and third films but it is also far less confusing. The filmmakers craft a tale that doesn’t need a final-reel exposition dump to explain key twists. We are treated to a complete story develop before our eyes that makes sense and is easy to digest. Perhaps this is why Ghost Protocol became the most popular installment of the franchise.

One of my peeves with the other three M:I films is that they don’t feature dynamic support teams for Ethan Hunt. Through three films, only Ving Rhames appeared more than once, rendering the rest of Hunt’s crews to be throwaway co-stars. Thankfully, M:I-GP features great chemistry between Ethan’s team members. Simon Pegg returns to add just the right touch of quirky awkwardness, Paula Patton is a great femme fatale, and Jeremy Renner’s caught-up-in-it-all character makes a great sidekick capable of standing toe-to-toe with Hunt. For once, everyone involved seems as lethal, smart, and daring as an M:I team ought to be. It would be a mistake not to bring all of these characters back for M:I 5.

Like any action/spy flick, M:I-GP has its moments of outlandishness and even silliness. The bit near the end where Jeremy Renner’s character wears a magnetic suit to access a server room is pretty absurd, and there are probably a number of action sequences that fly in the face of physics. None of this bothers me too much because this film is end-to-end fun. A few minor quibbles aside, M:I-GP has the right balance of danger, excitement, and spectacle to make it an undisputed winner. To watch an action film that doesn’t insult your intelligence and is fun to watch? We’ve been longing for summer flicks like this for quite some time.

RATING: 3.75 out of 5

Monsters University (2013)

Every successful movie leads to a film studio at least entertaining the notion of a sequel, but what do you do when the first film wrapped things up so well that a new adventure just doesn’t seem possible? Why, you make a prequel of course! As fun and enjoyable as it is to revisit the colorful and unique monster world, Monster’s University falls victim to a number of issues that should have been apparent from the get-go.

Ever since he was a little boy, Mike Wazowski (Billy Crystal) has dreamed of being a scarer for Monsters, Inc. Entering his freshman year at Monsters University, however, places several obstacles in his path. Few, if any, of his scare major peers think Mike is even scary and, while Mike studies his heart out, a cocky slacker named James P. “Sulley” Sullivan (John Goodman) coasts his way through classes on his family name and natural but raw talent. When an argument between Mike and Sulley breaks a professor’s prized Scream Container, they are initially kicked out of the Scare program. Then, a chance at redemption- if Mike and Sulley can help the team from the über-nerd fraternity Oozma Kappa win the annual Scare Games, they will be readmitted to the program.

There are three key roadblocks to this film matching the success of Monsters, Inc. First, its nature as a prequel automatically eliminates any lasting concern for Mike and Sulley, because we already know that they turn out to be a successful Scare Team later on in life. An event late in the film took me by surprise because it smashes the assumed cookie cutter ending to pieces. A pre-credits montage clues audiences in to Mike and Sulley’s rise to prominence within Monsters, Inc., showing that their hard work did not end with the Scare Games.

As with most films that are the second in a series, audience familiarity with returning characters presents a major problem. How do you make the same characters feel fresh all over again? Half the fun of watching a movie is getting to know the characters. If you don’t try new things, you’re just rehashing the same characters. If you try too many new things, you risk audiences not going along with your new direction for a character.

In Monsters University, Mike is still Mike but we are treated to a different Sulley. It takes a while to get used to rude, slacker Sulley but you see him start to grow into the character we met in the original film. Most of the supporting characters are throwaways that are funny while you’re watching but fail to stick in your memory later on. Our characters never branch out beyond what we saw from them in Monsters, Inc. because they have to grow into those characters. Because of this, character development is stifled. Starting in a new place and ending in a familiar one rather than the other way around leaves the film feeling inessential in the grand scheme of things.

The third and final aspect of Monsters University lacking freshness is the college setting. While college movies seem to have been around forever, I had the misfortune of growing up in the 90s and early 2000s, when most college movies were pretty lame. MU offers a few cute moments of spoofing college stereotypes in the monster world but the film feels confined by its attempt to pump as many references and spoofs as possible. Besides, a fair number of the scenes, gags, and lines alluded to are from films that little kids should never be allowed to see until they’ve outgrown Disney flicks.

Despite being held back conceptually, Monsters University is still a pretty fun movie to watch. Kids will love the crazy character antics while adults will snicker at the college movie references. Pixar’s animators continue to wow me in how much more detail they can put into their work. The group setting treats us to even more unique monsters of all shapes and sizes. The problem lies in the fact that this film tries to answer a question that nobody asked very seriously. Perhaps seeing how Mike and Sulley met as the first film in this series would make this film feel more essential. It’s certainly better than a number of other Disney films but if given a choice between the two, I would watch the first one again in a heartbeat.

RATING: 3.5 out of 5