Change Your Image
Mathewdixon42
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Shark Tale (2004)
PIxar's idea, with Dreamworks Humor!
Shark Tale was released in 2004, to mixed reviews and financial success. Now while many have brought up the fact that Dreamworks released this only a year after Finding Nemo came out. Does that mean it's a shameless ripoff? Eh, not really. Does that mean it's good? Eh, it's alright.
The animation is good, but not as good as it could have been for the time it was made. Dreamworks released Shrek 2 that same year with far better animation to showcase. So it's not like they we're limited by the technology they had available. The character designs are a little off-putting at times. The concept to anthropomorphize the fish characters was an odd one, especially since they didn't do it to all of them. Some of them look just like the real fish counterparts, while others are designed to look like the actors portraying them. This is inconsistent and for the most part kinda creepy looking. At least the shark didn't look like Jack Black, shark were scary enough beforehand.
The story line is very standard for a buddy comedy film, not much else to say about it. It's not unique, it's not that bad. As with every comedy film, it should be judged on the quality of it's humor. This film is actually pretty funny. Although it is filled with references that kids won't understand for the most part. Have your kids seen the Godfather or Titanic? No? Okay well they probably won't understand this movie's humor very well. Are you an adult watching this with your kid? Or alone? In which case you'll probably laugh. Crazy Joe was funny! Watch it and find out.
"You're blowin' it man!" -Crazy Joe.
The acting is actually not that bad. Martin Scorsese and Robert De Niro are particularly good in their roles. Will Smith is not suited for animated roles, most of his cool charisma comes from being on screen. Anjelina Jolie and Jack Black are alright, but both would eventually do better work for Dreamworks in the Kung-Fu Panda films.
Overall this film is too adult oriented for children. Although it has enough clever humor to be appealing to those of us who saw it as kids and revisit it now. Although there is a great deal of humor involving knowledge of gangster films such as the Godfather, those unfamiliar with these film may not find this intriguing at all. De Niro and Scorsese are fantastic in their roles, both being walking talking references to their own classic gangster films.
Shark Tale is not on the same level as Finding Nemo by a long shot, but it makes for enjoyable viewing for the kids at heart.
The Pagemaster (1994)
Does anyone care about the low scores?
The Pagemaster was released after 3 and a half years of work in 1994 to critical and financial failure. However I ask, does anyone care?
I saw this film a very long time ago, as a kid. I loved it back then! And I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'm sure I was not the only one to grow up and be surprised by this films rampant bad reviews. Does it deserve them?
The film opens with a live action segment showing Macaulay Culkin's character and his family. Thankfully this is a short part of the film as it is relatively boring, until it reaches the Library. Here we are introduced to one of many seasoned actors in this film. We start with Christopher Lloyd, as the creepy librarian. Lloyd's performance in this minor scene is really what kick starts the better part of the film. It turns animated in less then 5 minutes from this point.
Now let's talk about the animation first, standard for the time. But very well done. It is gorgeous to look at, although somewhat bland in certain moments. The horror scenes in particular are not very interesting. It's not given enough time for real atmosphere and does not come off at all scary. The adventure section is faster paced, and even a bit longer. We get more time to appreciate the animation here. The animated sequences reach their peak during the fantasy section.
This brings me to the story line. There is one very obvious and unfortunate flaw wit this film. It is only 75 minutes long, which for an animated film may not be a problem. But for this film, they tried to cram way to much in it for a run-time this short. For starters they have classic story-lines from some of the most incredible novels of all time to work with, and very few of them are given any more than 2 to 5 minutes each. This is insulting. To hire someone as perfect as Leonard Nemoy to play Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde for only 5 minutes at most is a waste, pure and simple. To include Captain Ahab for less then 2 minutes is confusing to those who do not know the true mania of his character. The only one to get any semblance of screen time is Long John Silver. If they were planning to show three plots, one from each section, they failed. Too many are included here and all are unfocused. It may have worked if they chose one story for each section and stuck to it for 20 minutes each, finding better ways to include the characters. Not only do I believe that would have worked, but it would have been very unique.
So what about the humor? Meh, hit and miss. Mostly miss. Almost all miss. In fact the script mostly consists of references and repeated lines. The only truly funny one here is Patrick Stewart's character. I admit to still giggling despite my self at his "curl up with a good book" quip.
So far this movie doesn't sound all that great, so what does work in it? The actors, that's what. Christopher Lloyd, Leonard Nemoy, Frank Welker, Whoopie Goldburg, and Patrick Stewart all play their parts very well. In particular Stewart, he played the character so well that I didn't even recognize his legendary voice in the role. Now that is performing. Frank Welker is always fantastic, whether you know you are hearing him or not. Nemoy's voice is wonderful, it's just a shame we didn't hear more of it. I never really liked Macaulay Culkin. I know he was a huge deal in the early nineties, when all said and done though, I've seen far better child actors in better films over the years. Okay he's scared, what else has he to offer? Not much, he spends most of all his performances talking to himself. I've found him to be far more creepy than cute.
Alright, so far not a great review. The story is too fast and unfocused. The novel references are insulting to anyone who knows the stories well, and too vague for anyone who has not read them. I mean really, how many kids in the 90's has read Moby-Dick or The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? I did later on, but sure didn't when I was 6 years old. The acting is enjoyable, although brief. Too many big names are wasted here. The movie moves along far to quickly and spends no time finding itself or figuring out what it wants to be. It could have had a decent message behind it, but it gets lost in a sea of lazy writing and lighting speed pacing issues.
Now, before giving my final word here. I have a love for this movie, because I grew up with it.
This is the curse this movie will always have, it is only appealing to the very young. Unless they were very young the first time they saw it. To anyone else it would come across as bad for all of the reasons I've listed above.
Overall, it's too quick, actors are wasted, the lead is not appealing and it's only appealing to the very young. And worst of all, insulting to those who are familiar with the classic stories it travels through.
I still enjoy it though. 4/10.
Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011)
Dark. Deep... and better than the first?
SPOILERS INVOLVED HERE:
Kung Fu Panda 2 exists as not only a wonderful film, but a benchmark for sequels in general. The animation is fantastic, the story is deep and dark, the characters evolve, and the acting is tremendous!
Starting with the animation. This is a very energetic and fast moving film for the most part, and the animation follows suit. It's bright and colorful. It is a feast for the eyes, and it doesn't insult the audience by skipping through the animation too quickly.
I don't know if it directly came from Guillermo Del Toro's involvement or not, but the story here took a very dark turn from the original. Po's past comes into play leading to some very real tear-jerking moments. Particularly his flashback to his last memories of his parents. This is handled with very little dialogue in two different animation styles. Po's budding friendship with Tigress is explored in this film. There are some very adorable and intense scenes between these two. It could almost be construed as a possible future romance, but this is just an interpretation. Po and Tigress have both taken steps forward as characters in this story. Tigress grows to accept and even like Po. This is a relief after her hard nosed disrespect for him in the first. Po is still a large clumsy Panda for the most part. He has learned Kung Fu and realized his dream, and has even shown to grow up a bit. He has some very serious moments this time.
Jack Black is, as usual, very funny and breezy in this one. It's simply Jack Black being Jack Black, nothing special. Overall good.
The real scene thief in this film is Gary Oldman. His slow, creepy voice is perfect for the calculating Lord Shen. His character and design is the opposite to Tai-Lung from the first. Lord Shen is the most interesting character is this film by far. Gary Oldman is always fantastic in his villain roles, and this is one of his best. His masterful voice work dwarfs just about any other animated villain of the modern age.
Overall this is a wonderful sequel that builds upon everything established in the original in the best way possible.
10/10. It is mind-blowing just how great this turned out to be, considering it is a sequel. The world general agrees that follow-ups rarely match the original in quality, let alone to succeed it. Kung Fu Panda 2 is a better film than the original. Due mostly to the dark and engaging story-line, the growth of some characters, the fast paced animation, and in particular Gary Oldman's incredible performance.
Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker (2000)
This time the Joker is Wild!!!
Nicholson was great. Ledger was legendary! What about the other one? The better one.
Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker was the straight-to-DVD continuation of the Batman Beyond TV series. Bottom line, this should have been in theatres, it outshines most of the live action Batman films by a long shot.
Let's jump right in! You DO NOT have to be familiar with the series to enjoy this film, that works so well in its favor.
To the voice actors I will be talking about a few at first like usual, but Mark Hamill will be mentioned at the end.
Kevin Conroy as Bruce Wayne. This man has the most intimidating Batman voice of them all. I believe he is the only one who could truly disarm an opponent simply by talking. He is calm, stoic and terrifying. Will Friedle as Batman/Terry McGuinnis is passable. He is your average smart as teen character. He is voiced with honest effort and care.
The animation is very good for a DVD film. In some cases better than a lot of traditional animated features of the day. Now this comes at a time when CGI films were all the rage and these kind of films were overlooked. This films could beat out most of them with its dark futuristic style. It fits perfectly with the original Batman Animated Series as you would believe this really is the future of that city.
The story line is unique and unpredictable at every turn. There is not only some great action scenes, but some chance for the World's Greatest Detective to actually do some Detecting rather than beating criminals to a pulp with his bare hands.
Okay now to the main two selling points for why this movie stands with even the greatest Batman films.
First: Arleen Sorkin's portrayal of Harley Quinn. This is a character that was created especially for the Animated Series and eventually was accepted into the comic world as she was so popular. And Sorkin's performance is a big part of why. She plays Harley with a genuine sense of fun, with a perfect mix of crazy. Although not in the film for very long, she leaves a lasting impact.
Second and most important: MARK HAMILL!!! This man is the greatest Joker of all time. Sorry Ledger fans. His voice is crazy, funny, over the top, whimsical and just plain awesome! He stands for everything the Joker ever was and everything he has become since. Hamill presents the perfect blend between Funny Clown and Disturbing Psychopath. The Jokers laugh, none of the others have come close. Hamill has said that he practiced this laugh in his car on the way to record. Anyone who saw him must have been terrified beyond reason. He has a laugh for every moment, and no two are the same. It is the consummate Joker laugh that all of those to come should look up to.
10/10. This films is excellent. Well animated. Characters are well written. The story is thrilling and unpredictable. The voice acting is perfectly enjoyable. Mark Hamill is legendary as the Joker as he has been in all of his appearances!
No one else can do The Killing Joke justice.
Hook (1991)
Wonderful re-imagining of a wonderful story
Hook would not appear to be a perfect film to everyone. Obviously. But to those who do love this movie, we are more than happy to tell you why. This film is wonderful. From its stars, to its take on the story, to its sets, to its sense of wonder and childlike amazement. No, this is not the greatest movie of all time, but there are a lot of people out there who will tell you it is one of their favourites. It is the consummate crowd pleaser.
First of all, the actors. There are many great performers filling the cast here.
Robin Williams is unusual in this film, in that he's not trying to be funny. In the first half or so, his character is very unlikable. This was a somewhat new choice for him at the time. He had always come across very lovable until then, before his foray into playing serial killers later on. Williams is impressive in how he handles his characters movements from uptight lawyer and bad father, to 10 year old kid, to legendary warrior and back to lawyer again sans the uptight/bad fathering.
Dustin Hoffman. This man is simply here to have fun. His performance is neither definitive or great. Its not even award worthy, its just plain fun. Dustin Hoffman is more known, even today, for his dramatic roles. He threw caution to the wind with this one to give us a Captain Hook who was both sophisticated, and psychopathic. If anything, he captured hook perfectly.
Julia Roberts is difficult to critique here. She can neither be labeled as good or bad, because I don't think she fits the role of Tinker Bell. She is one of my few issues with this film.
The child actors are all very passable. Their performances did not feel as awkward as some child actors can. But the standout for me Raushan Hammond as Thudd. This kid just tugs at my cold black heartstrings. This kids is wise beyond his years and not even for a second does he seem fake. It is a real shame he never broke into major acting later on. He made me remember him for life, Him and his Mother. (Tear in my eye)
I have read that viewers say the sets in this film look more like a theme park ride than actual sets. They are right, but that is what is so fun about them. They reminded me of Williams earlier film, Popeye. They felt like something out of a dream and I maintain that they fit the tone of the film.
This film can veer from serious to silly too quick in its treatment of the Pan story for sure. Taken separately however, the first half is very well done. It had a mysterious, almost horror like tone to it. The second half is very fantasy/cartoon like, which appeals more to its demographic I suppose. This shift in tone can be jarring for some. I believe the transition is handled smoothly and works positively for the film. Mostly because it is a fantasy, and reality is supposed to change when you go to Neverland.
Some would say this is a failure for a master like Steven Spielberg. I don't believe so, I see what I believe he was trying to do with it, and I believe he succeeded with flying (no pun intended) colors!
10/10. I may be biased as a grew up with this film, but looking at it even as an adult it still makes me feel the same way. I feel like a kid again. The only downside in the film is Tinker Bell, I don't know where they were trying to take her character and I believe she was miscast. Minor flaw in an otherwise very enjoyable film for families.
DragonHeart (1996)
A very passable fantasy adventure!
Coming to a final decision took a few viewings with this one, years of them.
While this film is far from perfect, there is a lot to enjoy about it.
For starters: Dennis Quaid. His performance is generic, but enjoyable. There seems to be something about his voice and demeanour that I found very compelling. Though he may not make the perfect leading man for this film, he is perfectly passable in the role. David Thewlis is a fantastic actor! He gives us a very uncomfortable, arrogant and miserable character to follow here, and steals every scene he is in. His slender stature and calm voice hide the monster underneath for most of the film. While it is not hugely subtle, it works for the evil King Einon. The stand out in this film, without a doubt, is the voice performance of Sean Connery. This man has a memorizing voice, although it may not suit the voice of a large powerful beast in some minds. Draco can be a hard character to take seriously. Sometimes you might have to push Sean Connery's name out of your mind, and just listen to the words he's speaking.
The special effects for Draco were ground breaker then, and they've held up very well. The modern film-goer would most likely think it looks cheesy and fake, but to this day I believe it to be the perfect successor to the Ray Harryhausen creatures from the time before CGI. Draco integrates very well with the actors and the gorgeous environments.
The story may leave a little to be desired. Although the central premise and lore surrounding the dragons is very unique and interesting. The story-line that follows in its human characters is for the most part, by-the-numbers. Aside from King Einon, the film is missing characters worth investing in. The best moments come from Einon and Draco. Although the tale end of the film can be very tear jerking, even though it is very rushed.
There is a wonderful nostalgic 90s quality to this film and it is certainly recommended. Take a chance on a younger audience, hopefully we'll get more like this one to come.
8/10 - The special effects are fantastic. Connery and Thewlis' performances as Draco and Einon are very compelling. Aspects of the story-line and lore are very unique.
Although most of the story points are nothing you haven't seen before. The effects may feel dated to those used to modern film CGI. Quaid is somewhat average.
The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008)
It stands on its own pretty well
This film stands apart from other Sci-fi remakes of the day, as it did not take the effect heavy action/blockbuster route. While thrilling, this movie focuses more on the moral implications of it's subject matter, rather than just blowing stuff up for an hour and a half.
I should say right off the bat, I only saw the original 1951 film once. So I won't be making too many comparisons in this review. I'll be looking at this film on it's own merits.
I have always loved Jennifer Connelly. I have always thought she should do more big budget films, as she is a wonderful leading lady. Having said that, her character Helen is not as interesting. For the most part she is a cardboard scientist. The scenes involving her and Jaden Smith are very poignant and emotional however.
Jaden Smith was pretty convincing as a bratty kid in this film. He just lost his father and is living with his stepmother. Smith seems to be the most down to earth character in the film. During all of the world-ending danger going on throughout, his simply wants his father back. This is exactly what a real kid would do, think about their own world. Smith handles this well and is very believable in his sincerity.
Keanu Reeves. He is a talented man, he has shown in the past that he has a decent amount of range. Since then he seems to have settled on stoicism. He is good at it, it may not work in all of his films, but it works very well here. His monotone performance is very compelling and alien in nature.
The supporting roles are filled by several very talented actors. While I don't have the space to go into detail for each of them, I wanted to name them out of respect for their performances. Jon Cleese, James Hong and Kathy Bates all perform their respective roles very well.
As for the story, I acknowledge that the "Humans are destroying the earth and ourselves" plot has been done so many times now it borders on cliché. I believe it works here for one simple reason, the 1951 film was one of the first to do it. This film is unique in using the Step-Mother/Step-Son relationship to show humanities capability to grow. It it well done and is not something you'd normally see in wide release film-making.
The visuals and special effects are well done. Most of all they do not distract from the acting or the story driving quieter moments that I believe make the film.
7/10. This film gains points for mostly the performances of Jaden Smith and Keanu Reeves. The inclusion of the Step-Mother/Step-Son plot was very emotional and unique. It only loses points for its sometimes clichéd nature. It also has several uninteresting performances and characters. The heavy CGI moments do not add much to the film and are for the most part unnecessary.
After Earth (2013)
Kinda... Sorta... Not so bad...ish
Despite all the bad press and poor reviews, this movie is relatively entertaining. It exits in that realm of: It could have been a lot worse.
Now at this point in time, I am not a fan of M. Night Shyamalan's body of work. Not to say he is not talented, I believe he is. His newest film: The Visit, is a prime example of that. Now as I understand it, Shyamalan was mostly responsible for the visual aspects of this film, while Will Smith did most of the Story and Performance direction.
I'll start with the look of the film. It truly is a beautiful looking film. The effects are convincing, the scenery is gorgeous, and the cinematography is flowing and effective for the tone of the film. Shyamalan is clearly a very visual director, some say this is his primary talent, as his screen writing has been criticized in the past. So the visuals are the real shining aspect of this film. However, the set pieces during the scenes on the ship and Nova Prime are rather drab looking. Boilerplate Sci-Fi sets, they would have done fine in a 1950's Sci-Fi film. Perhaps that was the point...
Jaden Smith is pretty awkward in this film. I'm not sure what he was trying to do with this performance. I understand that Will Smith personally coached him during the shoot, which is unfortunate. There has been evidence that Jaden Smith can act, he was charming and funny in The Karate Kid. He was emotional and bratty in The Day the Earth Stood Still. So maybe the problem wasn't the younger Smith, but the older one.
Will Smith's performance is just plain boring. This is a man with unlimited charisma. He used to carry the best of blockbusters, shame it has come to this. I truly hope there are better things on the horizon for him, because if he was hoping this would be his entry back into blockbuster films. Well... he was very wrong.
The survival base story-line of the film has it's thrilling moments. Although it can seem slow and episodic at times. There is good to be found in several of the scenes in the film.
When all is said and done, this film is carried by it's visuals and some of the more thrilling scenes. The actors have both shown they are more than capable, so it is a shame to watch them struggle in this one.
Now having said all that, I personally enjoyed watching the film. I found it's ideas fascinating and the visuals are very striking. While it's far from the greatest Sci-Fi adventure ever filmed, I had an enjoyable time watching it.
5/10, it mostly gains it's points on it's visuals. Points are lost from the performances of the father/son duo and the sometimes meandering story.
Godzilla (1998)
You had to grow up with it
Is this movie bad? I suppose so...
I still love it! And nothing will ever change that.
Godzilla was created by Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich, the same team behind Independence Day. There is no better way to describe what this film turned out to be. It's Independence Day with a giant Iguana, instead of aliens.
As a lifelong Godzilla fan, I do have to agree that this is Godzilla in name only. But how does it stand on it's own merits.
The tone and direction is exactly the same as Emmerich's other films. Fun action, amazing special effects, cardboard characters, wooden performances, and cliché filled scripts. Matthew Broderick is amusing to watch in the film, he seems to be trying to do the "awkward nerd" routine, but it just comes off as rather awkward in general.
Jean Reno is fantastic. I maintain that there is no movie this man could not save. He does all he can with this performance, giving us mystery, a commanding presence, and some of the films genuinely funny moments.
The design of Godzilla (or Zilla as he is now known) is very strange. At the time this was somewhat of a disappointment after all of the marketing. We we're expecting Godilla, and we got a ugly looking Iguana. They really, truly did take the "God" out of Godzilla here. The effects are cool though, even for a nineties movie.
So why do I love this movie? It's a fun movie, and it doesn't need to be anything more then that. The 2014 Godzilla and Pacific Rim became the new standard for American monster films, but this one came long before, it failed. But it's still fun...
Granted I was 7 years old, that could be a factor I suppose. Is the movie good? Nope, not really. Would it work for a modern audience? I doubt it. Did 7 year old's in the late nineties like it? Good god I hope so!
If you found this review rather boring, you most likely would not like the film.
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)
Avengers... Step aside!
This film is just plain... FUN!!!
Guardians of the Galaxy is part of Marvel's unmatched MCU franchise, thankfully this particular entry could barley be described as a superhero film. Myself and a friend of mine agreed that the film deserves the much coveted title of: "The next Star Wars"!
Okay now that I've spent a whole paragraph over-praising this film, let's get to the technical stuff.
The film begins with a young Peter Quill running from a hospital room after witnessing his mother passing away from cancer. He is then kidnapped by freaking aliens! Flash ahead to 30 or so years later to find Mr. Quill working as a scavenger. This leads to one of the most well put together opening credit sequences I've even seen. Peter Quill begins dancing across an alien planet to "Come and get your love" by Redbone. Even going so far as to use an alien looking rodent as a fake microphone. This scene is hilarious and sets the entire tone for the film in a big way. The number one quality Guardians has going for it is the highly clever and fast paced humour. Not to say that the more dramatic moments are not well done, because the absolutely are. The comedic timing and writing however, makes even Joss Whedon's amazing humour in the Avenger's seem tame. Guardian's never takes itself to seriously and live completely in what it is, a fun, hilarious action movie!
As per the usual in the Marvel cannon, there are some impressive casting choices here. For starters, where did this Chris Pratt guy come from all of the sudden? Oh yeah... Parks and Recreation. Who would have guessed this man could carry a full fledged blockbuster in one of the highest grossing film franchises of all time? He rises to the occasion in a big way. His perfect comedic timing and clumsy demeanour is unusual for a film like this, but it fits with the tone of the film perfectly. Pratt's performance hearkens back to a cocky Han Solo type and give hope for comedy actors making there way into large scale studio film. Another surprisingly perfect cast member comes in the form of a former wrestler. Dave Bautista portrays Drax the Destroyer, he works as somewhat of a C3P0 type in this film, not quite understanding the complexities of his companions odd, quirky behaviour. Bautista's delivery is the perfect match up for Pratt, in that everything Drax hears is taken literally. This leads to many humorous moments with Drax, along with the best straight man routine since Leslie Nielsen in Airplane! The special effects are predictably astounding, but are taken to a whole new level with the inclusion of two fully CGI animated characters. Rocket Raccoon and Groot, played by Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel respectively. These two character exist as some of the most perfectly integrated and lovable CGI effects in history. They exist in the pantheon with Gollum, Caesar, the Hulk, and Draco as landmarks in visual effects and motion capture. Guardians is not without its issues however, most notably Ronan the accuser. Not to say the Lee Pace didn't do an admirable job in the role. The character is just not that interesting. The genre blending could be a bit jarring to some, the film jumps between fast paced comedy and high stakes drama very suddenly.
Overall this is a highly enjoyable film, as well as one of the best in the Marvel Cinematic Universe so far.
Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977)
Another nostalgic adventure from Ray Harryhausen!
I recently review The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, now having grown up with both films I wanted to review this one as well. I mostly wanted to discuss this one, because honestly, I like it a bit better. At the time, it was the same summer that Star Wars was released. Although this film does not stand on the same level as A New Hope, it is an enjoyable film in its own right.
This time around Sinbad has journey to the kingdom of Charak to ask his good friend Kassim for his sister Farah's hand in marriage. The captain, however, finds that Kassim has been placed under a terrible curse. Now Sinbad must journey to find an ancient Alchemist and an ancient land to find a cure.
Three performances stand out in this film. The first is Taryn Power as Dione. Her deep voice and demeanor brings an air of tomboyish toughness to the role, while also giving the impression of a very sensitive and intelligent person. She offsets the overwhelming stereotypical "damsel- in-distress" Jane Seymour as Farah perfectly. The second is (similar to The Golden Voyage of Sinbad), another Doctor Who alum, Patrick Troughton. He plays the Alchemist Melanthius. In similar style to Tom Baker's performance in Golden Voyage, Troughton brings an over-the-top style to Melanthius, which makes him undeniably fun to watch. His commanding voice and presence make for the perfect scene stealing character. However, he must complete for the scene occasionally with the villain of the piece. Margaret Whiting portrays the films antagonist Zenobia. Who in all honestly gives a performance as enjoyably over-the-top as her characters name. Her accent is deliciously villainous. Her costumes put give her an air of class, although Whiting always has a way of showing you the monster underneath. Her performance is shockingly emotional for a film like this. Her character seems to genuinely care for her son, and her raw emotion towards him at the end of the film is very convincing.
The production and set design for this film is very pleasing to the eye, even more so than the previous film. Much more of this film takes place outdoors, rather than in caves and on the ship. This gives the film a much more adventurous feel.
The dialogue in the film doesn't feel as tacked on this time around, although there are still quite a few cheesy moments to be found. Although some might say this makes it more enjoyable. The romantic subplot between Sinbad and Farah is forgotten about as quick as it is introduced. Only to be reintroduced at the tail end, not to complain too much about that. However it seems like it was unnecessary aside from getting Sinbad involved in the adventure.
As with the other films in the series, the highlight of the experience is the animation and creature designs from Ray Harrhausen. These animations make for several enjoyable action sequences. Harryhausen was also able to animate a constant companion for Zenobia, the golden hulk, Minaton. Minaton is almost perfectly integrated with Zenobia and her son Raffi on their ship. Unless you knew beforehand, one would not be able to see that Minaton was most likely only the size of an average action figure. The baboon was so perfectly animated with the cast that one would almost believe it was real. Overall the special effects in this film we're amazing for the time and still hold up even today.
Overall this film is a highly enjoyable classic from Ray Harryhausen. There are several fun performances to be seen. The production value is gorgeous to look at. The special effects are incredible even today.
I give this film eight out of ten for the following reasons. First, Several of the performances are fun enough to carry the film alone. Second, The production design and sets are even larger than the last film. Third, The special effects from Ray Harryhausen are as fun as ever and even more creative with each film.
The film loses points only for the same kind of episodic writing as the last film. As well as the occasional silly dialogue.
The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973)
A fun Harryhausen adventure!
The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the legendary sailor as he races against a dark sorcerer to an ancient land. Sinbad and his crew are aided by two golden tablets which contain clues to finding a treasure beyond any of their imaginations.
Some may consider this film a cheesy, old, over-the-top, episodic waste of time. Well that is all correct, aside from the waste of time. This is a fun and nostalgic film, and contains some terrific stop motion animation from Ray Harryhausen.
John Phillip Law plays Sinbad in this version of the story. He adopts a somewhat convincing accent. This makes him a little more believable than his eventual successor Patrick Wayne. Although not as energetic or enjoyable. He gives a passable performance, but he is overshadowed very easily by his more interesting supporting cast. Caroline Monroe and Douglas Wilmer are worthwhile in this film. Their performances show commitment to the subject matter, which could be very difficult to take seriously. Although it can be frustrating that their characters Margiana and the Vizier are not developed in any way past their uses to advance the plot. Kurt Christian does his job as comic relief, although his character Haroun's dialogue is where most of the cheesiness comes from.
Tom Baker, who would later gain worldwide popularity as the Fourth Doctor on the iconic British science fiction series Doctor Who, portrays the main antagonist of the film, Prince Koura. Tom Baker gives a joyfully over-the-top performance in this film. His memorizing voice will distract you enough from the fact that a lot of what he is saying is pure gibberish. There is a particular scene where Koura is controlling a creature aboard Sinbad's ship from a distance, and he does not move from his chair the whole time, but his pure commitment to the intensity and pain of the scene would make anyone think he was really there, experiencing every moment. Baker seems to be both charming and slimy in this film and it makes for a very intriguing performance.
There is not much to say for the story of this film. However, the story has a nostalgic feeling to it. It is almost better than most modern fantasy films because of the simplicity of the script. The beautiful production design and clever animation make up well for the lack of compelling writing.
The final set piece of the fountain is particularity well done. It is gorgeous to look at and very well built. Although some of the scene is obvious green screen, it integrates well with the action and the set remains pretty enough to look at.
Almost all of the worthwhile material in this film comes from Tom Baker's performance and the animation from industry pro Ray Harryhausen. Harryhausen, of course, was the most well known animator of the time. He was known for his imaginative creatures and almost flawless stop motion techniques that melded with the films so well. I was first introduced to this film as a child in the 90s, and the effects seemed more interesting to me than dated. Which in later years got me thinking that stop motion may be the only timeless for of special effect, because of the sheer amount of effort it takes.
Sidenote: I would like to mention Koura's theme music composed by Miklos Rozsa, every time I see this film, this particular piece of the score gets completely stuck in my head. It is energetic and perfectly befitting an over-the-top villain such as Prince Koura.
Overall this is a fun adventure film, probably more for the film buffs among us than the general crowd. The effects are brilliant, as Mr. Harryhausen's always we're. The story has a nostalgic feel. Tom Baker gives a very fun performance to watch, and an intriguing villain at that. I give the film 7 out of ten for a couple of reasons: 1: The classic feel of the film. 2: Tom Baker's terrific performance as the evil Prince Koura. 3: The production design and sets are fantastic. 4:MOST IMPORTANTLY! Ray Harryhausen's unique special effects and creature designs.
The film loses points due to the following: 1: The script is cheesy and for the most part uninteresting. 2: The story is very episodic. 3: John Phillip Law seems for the most part disinterested when playing Sinbad, aside from his accent. 4:The comedy in the film feels tacked on.