The Critical Frog: Equestria Girls 4: The Revengening (Legend of Everfree)

Well, here we are again. Back on the blog, now that I have the time to spare. College can get pretty stressful. And what better way to blow off stress than returning to one of the common fixtures on this site- the Equestria Girls series?

It might be the bias that I have as a fan of the series that the universe of Equestria Girls is based out of, but I always enjoy reviewing these films. There’s a lot wrong with them, sure, but there’s always something that keeps me coming back. The characters are fun, the 2d animation has it’s moments and the songs can be downright incredible. I’ve had mixed opinions on these films, and each has it’s advantages over the others and their moments. 

The first film in the series followed My Little Pony character Twilight Sparkle and her dragon assistant Spike as they enters the human world in an attempt to recover a mystical crown from the villainous Sunset Shimmer before she uses it’s power. In addition to dealing with hunting down a dangerous foe, Twilight must come to grips with a new world and body as well as encountering human versions of her friends back in Equestria (as well as reuniting the six main characters after an apparent feud). While it was by no means a masterpiece, it was enjoyable enough. The characters’ personalities stayed true, the physical comedy was humorous, and the story held itself together most of the time.

The second had Twilight venture into the human world once again to aid her new friends (including Sunset Shimmer, who has discovered the magic of friends and is now trying to change her villainous image) against the threat of three malicious Sirens who seek to use the school’s musical showcase to take control of the student’s minds. The main characters must work together to evade the Sirens’ spell and the sabotage attempts of the contest-crazed opposition to defeat the three musical menaces and discover why the magic from Twilight’s world seems to be bleeding into the human world. While the story was at times fast-paced or had unanswered questions (wouldn’t Spike be affected by the sirens too?), it did boast a wonderful soundtrack and a delightful trio of villains that easily propelled the film to become my favorite of the series. 

The third film offers us the whereabouts of the human world’s version of Twilight Sparkle, a student at the prestigious Crystal Prep who seeks to uncover the strange energies pouring out from Canterlot High and is forced to compete in the dueling schools’ Friendship Games at the demands of the headmistress. As her new invention unintentionally begins to sap the magic from villain-turned-protagonist and hero Sunset Shimmer and her friends (our Twilight is currently unavailable due to reasons), our heroes must not only participate in the games (which quickly turn dangerous- is motocross technically a school-appropriate sport?), but track down whoever is causing the strange magical events around the school. While this film has neither the humor of the first or the musical prowess of the second, I do give it credit for striking a nice balance between the two, and having arguably one of the most intense climaxes of both the film series and the show. But how does number four stack up?

After a school year of crazy events, human Twilight (who has been transferred to Canterlot High), Sunset Shimmer (who’s human counterpart we have not encountered yet) and their group of friends are going on a field trip to Camp Everfree. This camp has everything the campers want: archery, nature hikes, arts and crafts (the muscular Bulk Biceps’ mama needs new pot holders), but offers only one strict rule: do not go hiking by the rock quarry. Even Twilight finds herself smitten with the counselor’s brother Timber.

The most intriguing thing about the camp to the characters is the tale of Gaia Everfree, a mysterious forest spirit leaving a trail of gem dust in her wake who is said to hold domain over the forest. It was said that she struck a deal with the first settlers that they could have the land for a time- but swore to one day return and take back the forest for herself. Suspecting a renegade magical being from Equestria much as the Sirens were, the heroes must keep an eye out not only for Gaia, but on Twilight- who fears that the camp and her magic  are awakening something dark inside of her. Something she- and the rest of Canterlot High- would probably like to forget.

Tensions rise when Sunset suspects the counselors of hiding something, and Twilight deals with the fallout of her actions in the friendship games in the form of nightmares about her darker side (Twilight Midnight). To top off what should be a relaxing week, wild and dangerous magical occurrences have begun to spring up around the camp, with the mane six at the at the center of the action. Could it be that being at the camp is awakening some hidden powers for our characters? The race is on to discover the truth before Gaia returns to claim the land as her own- or before the millionaire Filthy Rich buys out the land and replaces it with a spa. 

But most intriguing to the characters is the tale of Gaia Everfree, a mysterious forest spirit leaving a trail of gem dust in her wake who is said to hold domain over the forest. It was said that she struck a deal with the first settlers that they could have the land for a time- but swore to one day return and take back the forest for herself. Suspecting a renegade magical being from Equestria much as the Sirens were, the heroes must keep an eye out not only for Gaia, but on Twilight- who fears that the camp and her magic  are awakening something dark inside of her. Something she- and the rest of Canterlot High- would probably like to forget.

On the surface, there’s a lot of interesting things going on in the fourth Equestria Girls: the background characters develop themselves a little more (many of the well-loved background characters have fun moments or speaking roles, and even former worthless love interest Flash Sentry finds himself with a little development), the characters retain their personalities and enjoyable demeanors, as each character has their quirks and running jokes (much like the other two sequels, the characters can’t stop accidentally reminding the two former foes of how awful they were at the Fall Formal and the Friendship Games), and there’s a legitimately interesting story about human Twilight  and her friendship with the other characters, particularly Sunset Shimmer, who proves that the two are similar in more ways than being cabin mates. There’s also some great chemistry between the other characters and their developing powers (there’s a fun scene where the girly girl pushes the tomboy into a lake). The songs are nice too (human Twilight has a short but sweet soliloquy, and Sunset Shimmer continues her run as one of the best solo singers of the bunch)- while they certainly as bombastic or synchronized (or often)  as the second film’s, Daniel Ingram supplies a much more laid-back and relaxing soundtrack this time around. I suppose it fits the rustic atmosphere of the fourth film.  There’s a neat villain who displays some impressive powers and a catchy song along with some reason behind their madness. And while the climax is a bit rushed, that’s run-of-the-mill in Equestria Girls films. There’s an interesting setup for a sequel as well- one i’m sure will come.

But, of course, we have to have to discuss the flaws. The conclusion is, of course, somewhat forced and sappy and designed to sell toys- as one would expect from a kid’s film. There’s a nice array of characters and stories, but most of them are shoved aside in favor of the development of Twilight, Sunset or Timber. Some characters have one line and are pushed out the door (Trixie, who was a minor antagonist in the second film (although you could argue that she was brainwashed) has one line and only shows up as a background character). And, of course, there’s a love story that slogs the interesting parts down. It’s not too badly done, but it certainly holds the film back. I would have also liked to see more of the powers in action, but maybe that’s just me. Regardless, Equestria Girls 4 is a welcome addition to the series- while not quite attaining the status as the second, it certainly comes close. Story and character-wise, it surpasses them all- but it’s lack of the musical prowess of the second holds it back from being the best yet.

6.5/10

Further Thoughts: 

-It’s the background jokes that really make the film. There’s a lot of in-jokes to the series that are fun, and we even get little shots at the characters from the 100th episode (I still think lyra and Bon Bon are into each other). I would love to see little slices of life at Camp Everfree from these character’s perspectives. That would be a fun mini-series to do. Someone get on that.

-Call me crazy, but I ever actually thought Filthy Rich was as bad in the show as he is in this film. I always thought of him as a respectable, wealthy, but still kind businessman. He supports the local farmers (he buys the first 100 or so jars of their apple jam every season), donates to the school and even takes time out of his work schedule to visit the hospital and see if the old matron of the Apple family’s farm is recovering from a supposed illness. If he’s this bad in the human world, I’d hate to see his wife. She was bad enough as a pony.

-I was hoping to see some more of the characters who had been introduced in the last seasons of the show, if i’m being honest. Now that Starlight Glimmer is a member of the cast, I wonder if we’ll see her in an EG film anytime soon. Preferably not leading a cult. As silly is it is, i also want to see Pinkie’s and Rarity’s families sometime. Their stark contrasts are simply hilarious.

-What happened to the other Crystal Prep people? i couldn’t care less about that witch of a headmistress, but the other characters would be interesting to follow. Do you think Cadence and Shining Armor are together yet? Will we be getting a humanized Flurry Heart?

-WHERE’S MY HUMAN DISCORD?

The Critical Frog: Ms. Peregrine's Home For Peculiar Children

In the world of today’s film, monstrous beings known as Hollows walk among us, invisible to the ungifted eye and more than willing to kill. As if that’s not bad enough, some can even take on human form through gruesome rituals. Very few humans are able to see Hollows, but the ones who do have made it their goal in life to hunt them down while protecting the innocent. Each character has a story all their own, but our tale focuses on one main character and his quest to discover his place in a world he finds himself thrust into. Endowed with a unique power, he bands together with other empowered children and they work to protect their world from certain destruction. 

Let me be the first to say that I’m delighted that a live-action version of this story has been made. I’ve always been a fan of Tite Kubo’s hit manga/anime Bleach ……

Hold on. I think I got the wrong movie. That one isn’t coming out for a while. But then what is this?

Ms. Pergerine’s Home for Peculiar Children is ons of those films that bears such a striking resemblance to something else that it simply has to be pointed out. It may just be the nerd of the past that's inspiring me to make the far-fetched claims that the film adaptation of this book and a Japanese Manga are strikingly similar. But there are so many similar aspects in both Tim Burton's vision and the book to Bleach that it's almost impossible for me to bring up one without comparing it to the other. From the Hollows to the showdowns to the bizarre similarities during a fight, this film hits a bit close to what the live-action Bleach adaptation that's been rumored to happen would be- in both good ways and bad. 

Our star of this film is Jake, a young boy who leads a typical life until he is thrust into an encounter with the monstrous beings known as Hollows. Here he is tapped to join an alternate world full of super-powered teens or adults known as Peculiars who are kept hidden from the modern world due to their powers. He is guided by the mysterious Ms. Peregrine on his journey to find a place in this new world- but when a powerful Peculiar turncoat named Barron kidnaps the mysterious woman and sets his sight on innocents for his own needs, Jake must rally a ragtag band of Peculiars to rescue Ms. Peregrine and defeat Barron once and for all- IF they can put up with each other.

(Skip the next part if you don't want Frog's Boring Villain Comparison)

Before we continue, I'd really like to point out some similarities between the antagonists of this film and the antagonists of Bleach. Specifically, their powers. You see, in both worlds, Hollows have the ability to take on human form by one way or another. In Bleach, the strongest of these Hollows are called the Espada, and they are noted for three things: the weaker humanized Hollows they travel with (the Fracciones), the numbers on their body detailing their order of strength (lower is better), and their ability to transform into a more powerful form (Resurrecion) that represents an aspect of death- one of the ten paths of darkness that can be the death of a man. The villain I want to talk about here is properly introduced as His Majesty, the God-King of Hollows, and Espada Number 2- Barragan Louisenbairn. His aspect of death is represented by his Resurrecion form's skeletal appearance - Aging, that which overcomes all in the end- and he shares more than a bit in common with Barron.

It looks like after all his years of ruling over Hollows, Barragan has finally met his soul brother. These two should get together and talk politics sometime (or would that be Hollow-tics?). Where to start? Not only are they both Hollows who take human form and have the ability to change shape, but their personalities are similar: both maintain a cool and collected persona on the surface, but have tendencies to maintain a holier-than-thou image of themselves (Barragan constantly refers to himself as the strongest aspect of death although technically Espada 1 (Isolation) is stronger) and to fly off the handle when lightly enraged to the point of cursing or yelling at their foes. They're more than happy to throw their power around and impose their authority, even to those who may yet be stronger than them, and can become a major threat when irritated. In addition to this, each deploys a pack of six followers- Barron's four Hollows and two Peculiar/Hollow henchmen he sends out to intercept the heroes as opposed to Barragan's six Fracciones- and have two other humanoid allies who they give orders to (two more Peculiar/Hollows or Espadas 3 and 1), one of which has beast-related powers and the other has powers related to the elements (one of the Peculiars transforms her body parts into those of a wolf/cat thing and the other can freeze people Vs. Espada 3's control over water and Espada 1's Resurrecion Los Lobos), one of which is killed by a character who's powers are rarely seen and only revealed during this series of events-oh, you've got to be kidding me. We're gonna move on before I find more to say about this one.

Did the book copy Bleach? It's possible that the similarities aren't a coincidence (Bleach came out nearly 10 years before the novel of Ms. Peregrine), but if it really didn't build off the Manga, this one is a pretty  nasty coincidence. Until then, let's just look at it as a happy accident and hope that nobody calls me bad words for assuming such a thing.

(OK, you can stop skipping.)

Putting aside the similarities to a well-loved Japanese series, does the movie stand on it's own? Yes, certainly- the characters are charming, the peculiarities are unique (one Peculiar can animate things by putting grotesque makeshift hearts in them), and Tim Burton's directoral input grants some frightening imagery for the Hollows and wonderful scenery, as well as some amusing comedy (Barron gets a few funny lines) like many films. It's Burton live action, which is always a good thing. The scenes are wonderful, the fighting is creative, but a bit of it suffers from the slog of everyday life for the characters and the obligatory love scenes (there's no need to develop Jake any more than you need to; we want to see his shenanigans with the Peculiars, not the random island people). Jake himself is a bit bland, and quite a bit is left to the imagination- but overall it's a fun, dark little flick. I'd say it's worth a look for the Hollows at least- I always wanted to know what happened if The Slender Man had a child with Mortal Kombat's Barakka.

OVERALL RATING: 7/10

The Critical Frog: Wiener Dog

There are times for every critic when a film hits a little too close to home. Whether it's a film with abusive parents being shown to a victim, or a drug problem in a movie seen by a former addict, sometimes a film's content becomes too much to bear for an unprepared audience. And while this can be expected most commonly in horror films where shock is needed, there's a proper time and place to be sad or out there. For me, the line is drawn when pets become involved.

At this point in my career, I'm practically desensitized to most acts of violence: there's always something that can surprise me, sure (such as The Joker's shocking 'Pencil Trick' in The Dark Knight), but not much in the ways of damage to a human body can shock me anymore in the cinema. But animals hit a soft spot for me: as a dog lover myself, particularly dachshunds, the idea of pain or illness affecting man's best friend can leave me with a gaping mouth. Perhaps the fact that the essential plot device of Wiener Dog bears a striking resemblance to a female version of my beloved Ace is what drives me to my conclusions about this film.

Before we start, I'd like to say one thing: If you're looking for a lighthearted comedy about the exploits of a cuddly animal friend or a pet's quest to reunite with it's owners, then please look elsewhere. You're not going to find anything of the sort in today's film.  There are many fun animal films out there, like Homeward Bound, The Secret Life of Pets or even the recent Keanu (although that is admittedly a stretch) that one can watch to get the feelings that the innocent poster and name of Wiener Dog would lead one to expect. This film is not an adorable animal film, where one can watch pets and owners engage in wacky hijinks or tearful reunions. This film is DARK.

Allow me to put things in perspective. There weren't many people in the theater where I went to see Wiener Dog, none of which were behind me, so I had the opportunity to take out my laptop and take a few notes. The second note on my list is, and I quote, "Man, this film is depressing." The last five of these notes are in all caps and each include a unique expletive. Yep, it's one of those films.

Wiener Dog tells the story of a female dachshund as she is passed from owner to owner. Adopted first by a working father as a present for his son (who is recovering from chemotherapy), who christens her "Wiener Dog". After an incident where the child foolishly feeds Wiener Dog a granola bar (as a former vet-in-training, I can say that granola is not harmful to dogs in the dose shown in the film), she is taken to the vet to be put to sleep- only to be rescued by a vet tech who continues the story. The dog is renamed Doody and continues her travels being passed from owner to owner.

Despite what the title of the film would lead one to believe, similar to Keanu,  the focus rests not on the previously mentioned Wiener Dog but on her different owners and their stories. As the years pass, she settles down with not only a family and a vet, but a grouchy old woman, a mentally challenged couple, and a struggling film teacher (played by Danny Devito, he of the magnum dong), and watches as they face life-changing experiences.

Oh, and there's an 'intermission' halfway through the film that has the wiener dog green-screened over famous locations. This lasted long enough for me to run out to the concession stand, refill my cup of water, and return to the theater. The remnants of the water were promptly expelled all over my table when I saw the climax of the film.

Because my job refuses to allow me to give everything away, I will regale you with a story relating to the climax of Wiener Dog: when the film premiered at this year's Sundance, reviewers were so outraged that they resorted to spoiling the movie's ending in their writings so as to prevent others from seeing the film. Draw the conclusions you will from that one.

OVERALL RATING: 5/10
---------------------------------
Wiener Dog is one of those works that people are incredibly split on. They either love the dark humor and silent moments or they don't. And while I'm a fan of black comedy and dark humor myself (I grew up on a cartoon revolving around the grim reaper's wacky adventures), the darkness and sad lives on display in Wiener Dog can be too much. This movie is an exploration more than a film, and the dog is more of a plot device in the end. A few parts of this film work well (Danny Devito's story had a likable lead and some funny jabs at the screenwriting process), and the wiener dog is cute, but aside from that it's something too depressing for most audiences and sometimes too boring for the other end. If you want a dark, funny pet film, go for Keanu- the focus is still on the humans, but the dark stories are overwritten by the comedy duo in the lead.

The Critical Frog: Sausage Party

The poet Shel Silverstein once wrote in his short piece "Point of View" about a young man who realized the thankless aspects of food once he began to look at it from his meal's perspective. This can make one wonder what exactly it is your food sees before it enters the cavernous regions of your mouth. Sausage Party, the first R-Rated animated feature in over a decade, takes the time to show us, and the results are ABSOLUTELY HORRIFYING.

Sausage Party is so over-the-top in its sexualization, language and brutality to food that it's no wonder some critics have hailed it a hallmark of adult animation. But does it really pull it's weight, or is it the shock and reintroduction of R-rated animation that sparks such glowing reviews? It's a bit of both, actually.

Our star character is a sausage named Frank, who lives in a supermarket with his pack of hot dogs and has a mutual affection for Brenda the hot dog bun. They dream of being chosen together by the gods who prowl the supermarket aisles and whisked away to the Great Beyond, where supposedly nothing bad will ever happen to the food products at all. After a traumatic event wherein a pot of honey mustard commits suicide to avoid being sent back to the Great Beyond, Frank and Brenda are separated from their packages and shopping cart and must hurry to find their way back to packaging before the day the hot dogs and buns are chosen together for the Fourth of July. But Frank is tormented by the dead condiment's last words, and so goes on his own mission to discover the truth of the great beyond, while Brenda races back to her aisle while evading the nefarious feminine hygiene product that pursues her and Frank on a quest for vengeance. She's joined by a kosher bagel and a piece of Lavash bread that can't get along as well on a journey to return to their feuding aisles (guess what this is a metaphor for?). Meanwhile Frank's pack discovers the horror of what happens once they leave the store, and one little hot dog attempts to escape.

The film can be funny at times, but other scenes take the profanity and sexualized content too far. There's an admittedly thin line between too much and just enough, that very few shows can walk effectively (South Park, Bojack Horseman) that separates the good and the bad of adult animation. If South Park is a ten on the understanding scale and Family Guy is a negative twenty seven, than Sausage Party  would be roughly a six. There are quite a few moments where the profanity fits (such as when a sentient potato is peeled alive, or when a character has an epiphany), and the sexuality works to the film's advantage, but most times it ends up looking too overdone.

OVERALL RATING: 6/10

The Critical Frog: Suicide Squad

While the focus on every superhero film is intended to be the superhero, with a little time and effort put into the character, the focus can just as easily be shifted to a well-developed villain. Remember Christian Bale's Batman from The Dark Knight? Of course you don't, because you were too busy thinking about how good Heath Ledger was as The Joker. How about Thor? Nope, we wanted more of Tom Hiddleston's surprisingly attractive Loki. And with such a massive roster of villains in both the Marvel and DC universes, there was bound to be a villainous team-up eventually. And while the Legion of Doom may not be around anymore, we do have a group that challenges the Guardians of the Galaxy in terms of misfit antiheroes. Enter: the Suicide Squad.

The Suicide Squad originates from DC comics, and works in a way similar to the Avengers: Following the 'death' of Superman in the trainwreck that was Batman Vs. Superman, agent of the US Government Amanda Waller recruits several of the most dangerous villains in captivity into a makeshift task force to save the planet when planet-smashing heroes aren't nearby. With a combination of ace shots, nutjobs, and superhumans, can she pull the group together in time to stop any major threat? Or will the villains be too busy fighting with each other?

Suicide Squad provides us with a strong roster of villains to grow attached to: in addition to the acrobatic and ditzy Harley Quinn (who Frog may or may not have a serious crush on), we have the seasoned marksman Deadshot (Will Smith), fire-shooting Diablo, amphibious Killer Croc, and Captain Boomerang (for some reason). The squad is advised and ordered around by Waller thanks to explosive chips implanted in their necks, which will blow their heads off should they disobey her orders. But when one of the previously drafted villains goes rouge with a plot to destroy the modern world (Enchantress, who has the powers of whatever the writers need her to have at the moment), it's up to the rest of the Suicide Squad to put a stop to the evil Mary Sue. And what will happen once Harley's boyfriend gets involved?

Well, here we go. The big thing that needs to be talked about in this film: the new Joker, played by actor Jared Leto. It's been talked about and debated for a long time before the release of the film, and with his unveiling, people have compared it with the Jokers of the past. But my thoughts? Well, it's...alright. Not the best, but bearable.

He has some good bits. He has some good lines. But following the brilliant portrayal from Heath Ledger (may he clown in peace), Jared Leto certainly has big shoes to fill. But while Ledger's character was more calm and unpredictable, Leto's performance is far more manic and wild. It's not just a differing opinion: this is specifically designed to be more true to the comic than The Dark Knight. And, as the owner of several Harley Quinn comics (I am not ashamed), I can say that it is more true to the comics. Although, to be fair, once you've seen Heath Ledger in the makeup, it's tough to picture anyone else in it. Leto isn't bad, but he's no Dark Knight. But with a decent cast and a fun setup, how can this go wrong? Two Words: Zack Snyder.

I'm just going to flat-out say it. Zack Snyder is not allowed to be in the same room as a superhero film script anymore, alright? We saw how that went with his last few experiences. They've all had the same issues, particularly his lack of pacing. Much like in Batman V. Superman, scenes either rush or draw out with little flow between one scene and the next, and characters that bear no real reason for appearing in the story (The Flash is here again, for about two seconds again), typical tropes for Snyder, have returned from Batman V. Superman much to our chagrin. My personal favorite tropes come from the trailers, where lines appear that are not actually said in the film and scenes that have entirely different dialogue (Jared Leto has said that some of the film was never used).

DC has not had as much luck with the film industry as Marvel has, and for one simple reason: Marvel understands the roots of it's characters, DC isn't quite sure where to put them. Marvel understands that we don't want to watch the Hulk have an emotional breakdown. We want to watch him smash things, and so Marvel only uses him in situations where things needed to be smashed. We want to see Captain America in more serious situations, and so they only use him when serious topics arise. DC, on the other hand, DC feels the need to insert every character into every situation, and nowhere is this more sure than at the end of the film (which is a bit of a cop-out).

OVERALL RATING: 5/10
----------------------------------
I want to love Suicide Squad. I do. The idea of villains banding together to do justice with their own goals is a fun one, and with a little practice, could become something like Guardians of the Galaxy. But, with Zack Snyder's "magic" touch, it falls flat in the water again, despite all the good aspects. The characters are interesting and diverse (Deadshot works to protect his daughter, Diablo has sworn to never light up again, and Harley is driven by a quest to reunite with her Puddin'), Harley in particular is very well-written (I don't care if she has a thing for crazy clowns, she WILL BE MINE), but the good just gets buried under all the mediocre. It's worth a look to see the new versions of some old characters, but aside from that, there's not much special here.

The Critical Frog: Don't Hug Me I'm Scared

I know it's not in my nature to discuss things other than film, but I wanted to take some time and take a break following last week's unfortunate news and talk about something that doesn't normally get brought up in the world of criticism: the independent online series.

It's hard to believe independently-funded film can overpower big budget blockbusters, but with a little creativity and a sense of understanding when it comes to the material, something made cheaply or by a small group can easily run circles around the creations of Hollywood. And while quite a few independently begun projects have admittedly flopped on their faces, the ones that do succeed become legends in their own right by defying the circumstances or otherwise turning into something special. Whether it's an indie video game that gets by on simplistic graphics to tell a meaningful story (Undertale) or a film that manages to pull it's weight despite a pathetic budget, the world of kickstarted or independently funded projects is something amazing. And today's discussion topic is a great example of this: the intelligent and horrific world that is Don't Hug Me I'm Scared.

Where does one begin with a series that has sparked so many theories and fan interpretations? I imagine we begin with the main premise of the series. Hold on to your sanity and lunch as we delve into my favorite online series of all time.

The original video of Don't Hug Me I'm Scared was released 4 years ago as a short independent film project, and quickly sparked an internet phenomenon with it's bizarre and sometimes nightmarish ideas and melodies. A Kickstarter campaign to revive the series for five more episodes quickly captivated the internet, and surely enough, episode 2 of the series, Time, came out three months later as promised. Since episode 2's release, new episodes were released at the rate of one every three months until the final episode aired last month on this very day. And what better way to commemorate the end of the series than by giving my thoughts on it?

Let me start by saying that despite the looks, this is  DEFINITELY not a kid-appropriate series. It starts off harmless, sure, but oh boy, does it get dark quick. If you've got a weak stomach or are freaked out easily, let me say that this is most certainly not the series for you.  But if you've got the stomach, I urge you to give it a shot. If you can stand the imagery, it's quite the find.

Anyways, to begin the story, it centers around these three:
\

I call them (left to right) Red Guy, Yellow Guy and Duck, because I'm pretty sure those are their names. They live day-to-day lives while learning about different aspects of life, such as creativity, time or love, all of which seem normal until things slowly become more horrifying (it's all fun and games until someone makes a cake out of organs). Things go from bad to worse when the puppets disappear one by one and the lessons become more and more demented. But what seems to be an ordinary horror show takes a strange turn as we start to notice some errors in the logic of the characters and begin to wonder what exactly it is that goes on in this bizarre world.

I first want to start with the characters. What ages are they? One can tell by looking at not only them, but the common date in every episode of the series: the 19th of June, and as we later learn, the year 1955. Red Guy is sarcastic, refuses to participate in the lessons, and outright talks back to the teachers (flat-out telling the teacher of lesson four to shut up)- very similar to that of a typical teenager, close to adulthood. If we consider the dates an aspect hinting to the ages of the characters, we could say he was about 19- close to moving out and not willing to listen. Yellow Guy wears childish clothing, misspeaks his words, and cries easily- like a 6-year old. And due to the slight clues in episode 2 (carrying a pocket watch, a picture of him in military dress) and the process of deduction, we can deduce the Duck is approximately 55 years old. A teen, an old man, and a young boy. These are the main characters of our story, and who are the targets of the never-ending horror ride that is Don't Hug Me I'm Scared.

The lesson of the first episode is creativity, and how being creative is a good thing. The teacher, a notepad, teaches our three puppet friends about some ideas to help them get creative. This is offset by the fact that she seems to have a problem with the puppets whenever they decide to do something they want to that they see as creative. When Yellow Guy decides he wants to paint a picture of a clown, the notepad gleefully destroys it by covering it in a black goo. And when she asks them to arrange sticks and leaves in the shape of their favorite colors, she objects to the fact that Yellow Guy loves the color green, stating that it's not a 'creative' color.

This pattern continues for the next episodes- the teachers suggest some topic or another to the puppets, who usually draw their own conclusions from the lessons. But when they do interpret the lesson their own way or try to think about it differently, the teachers get mad and decide to distract the characters with something else (when the puppets have some questions about time in episode two, the clock who teaches them about it never actually answers the characters and instead lets out an ear-piercing shriek).

If you've got a taste for the macabre like I do, or just want to see a good example of dark messages done right. then I highly recommend Don't Hug Me I'm Scared. It's not too long (the entire series put together is about thirty-two minutes), and if you can stomach some of the grisly scenes, it's definitely worth a look if you're in the mood for something twisted and intelligent. Check it out- it's sure to leave an impression. Or at least, make you want to get creative.

OVERALL RATING: 9/10
----------------------------------
I've watched these videos over and over, and every time, I find something new. The amount of Easter eggs and little details that bring so much to the show is astounding, especially in the later episodes.

What's your favorite idea? Grab your computer, some 'healthy' snacks, and maybe your special one- and make some time to find out.

What I Learned From Buddy

Death is a curious thing. There are those who embrace it and those who fear it, but none understand exactly what it is or why it instills the feelings it does. All we understand is that it takes things we love away from us. For most, the fear of death comes not from death itself, but from what it entails. And for me, the fear comes not from death, but from the feeling of hopelessness it brings. There is no stopping it. Once death begins it's descent, nothing can hold it back. And it took me a great loss to not only understand the inevitability of death, but the concepts of unconditional love and inner calm. The loss of my beloved corgi Buddy has moved me to emotional levels I did not think were possible.

Buddy was a Pembroke Welsh Corgi, adopted from a cattle farm in Florida before I moved to my current residence. While a tad aggressive at times, he was kind and protective, loving and sweet. No matter how bad my day was, Buddy was always there with the same smile on his face. He took care of my mother while I was away for months at a time. He was her protector, and the family's guardian. Everyone loved Buddy, and Buddy loved everyone- but especially my mother. He would never leave her side.

A few months ago, I began to notice some strange differences in Buddy's behavior. He began angrily snapping and barking at nothing in particular. His demeanor changed from happy and loving to cautious and afraid. 

It was two weeks later when his right hind leg stopped moving. A month passed and it became both hind legs. I had looked at the reports, studied the corgi biology, and had Buddy seen by a vet. He was diagnosed with a paralysis disorder unique to Pembroke corgis. His front legs would be the next to go, and eventually his entire body would be paralyzed. 

We could keep him alive. Some drugs. an IV....it would be fine. But it wasn't Buddy. His eyes said more than words ever could. He was in pain. And he was ready to go. We scheduled an appointment for him to be put to sleep that week.

A few nights ago, my mom called me into her room. She informed me that his heart rate was quickening. I rushed into the room to see a slumped over Buddy with my mom crying over him. Buddy was alive, but still in pain. He was dragging his limp hind legs along the carpet. He walked over to me, and did something I will never forget: he placed his head in my arms and began to lick.

I'll always remember what happened with Buddy when I was younger. I made mistakes. I was cruel to the dog, if unintentionally so. What reason did he have to love me?

But there he was, licking my arms and face for what seemed like ages. I wondered what I had done to deserve this treatment from the dog, but realized something: Buddy didn't care. He loved me unconditionally. And for that, I will always be grateful. 

Buddy is gone now. He passed away peacefully. But I'll never forget him. He taught me about love, friendship, and unrequited compassion. In a way, I learned more from him than any amount of writing could put into words. And so I offer my simple thanks.

My uncle believes that dead animals go to a special place, known as Rainbow Way. His cat is there. So is my dad's dog. And now my own beloved pet joins them in what is hopefully a happier place. And so I say goodbye to my long time friend, the one who was always there for me and loved me no matter what atrocities I committed. 

Bye, old pal. You'll always be my best Buddy.

TCF: Announcement

I'm really sorry for the delays, everybody, but a lot has happened lately. My computer broke down, for one, I was away at a camp and will be for a few more weeks, and to top it all off, I'm going to college in the fall. I may have to put the Blog on hiatus, sad to say, but I've got quite a bit in the works- including some personal stories and another SCP or two along with my usual reviews. I guess this is goodbye for now- at least for a few weeks until I can get this all straightened out. Thanks for always following me!

The Critical Frog: PopStar

It's time for everyone's favorite show-PMZ! The show that somehow has thousands of followers despite providing no insightful thought or entertainment! Today we've got six people who clearly should question their life choices talking to a smarmy guy looking over a cubicle about pop star Connor 4 Real! Given, they're running a marathon of the 100 greatest films of all time over on the TCM channel- but why think when you can be immersed in celebrity culture?

(PMZ will return after these sarcastic comments.)

I dislike modern celebrity culture. Really, I do. I don't feel the same way other people do when it comes to fawning over popular figures. It's nothing personal- I don't particularly hate any celebrities or have strong feeling towards most mainstream figures- I just don't share the common attraction. But because I have access to the internet, I find myself battered by the unwanted celebrity gossip everywhere I turn. This has given me insight into the smart humor of PopStar, and why it works the way it does.

This film is a look into the private life of the entourage and work of pop star Connor For Real, a former member of the Style Boys (a popular trio) who has made a huge name for himself due to his undying charisma and voice. This is offset by the fact that he is entirely detatched from reality as opposed to other characters. His posse includes his best friend and DJ Owen (a former member of the Style Boys who makes admittedly good music), manager, and interchangable army of tag-alongs. The film is shot in a way that is reminiscent of a pop documentary charting the life and events during a particular time in Connor's life- a time that tests him when his fame takes a dive and his second album turns out to be a complete flop. In desperation, he hires an opening act- but when this opener seems to leapfrog Connor's popularity and his struggles isolate him from his friends, can this pop sensation bounce back from a crippling series of humiliations and reclaim the trust of his team and his friends? And what about the third Style Boy, the one who has faded out of the public eye? Maybe it takes more than two to make a perfect team.

The characters of the story, in the guises of pop sensations, play well on the typical tropes of celebrity ignorance and entitlement: when Connor says something stupid, people will agree because he's Connor. If Connor turns his back to the basketball hoop, the people around him will tell him it went in despite it completely missing it's target because he's Connor. And, when a terrible wardrobe malfunction makes him the target of media hordes, people watch- because he's Connor. It deals with the positives and negatives of stardom, and in a way that plays with both the context and work of the star himself, as well as his relationships and publicity missteps (my personal favorite comes from his song about equal rights for gay marriage, in which he constantly has to bring up that he is not, in fact, gay) . It's a fun picture that messes around with every trope to the last (there's even a TMZ cameo), and while it may not be relevant in the future, it certainly will still be funny.

OVERALL RATING: 8/10
--------------------------
Do you think people at TMZ ever think about what they're doing with their lives? Are they able to work somewhere else, or is it some sort of prison? Is TMZ Hotel California, a prison we are unable to escape that may or may not be hell? Food for thought.....

The Critical Frog: The Lobster

The strange thing about dystopian futures is that when you take a hard look at some of them, it feels as if they aren't too far away. When looking at cinematic universes such as The Purge or today's film, you can see the reasoning behind the dystopia as it pertains to today's logic. The logic behind The Purge, which creates a perfect state 364 days of the year at the cost of one night of insanity, can widely play on the tropes dividing anarchy and perfection, and shows the horrors people are capable of when they have the night to do anything they please. Today's film plays on our society's ideals of romance and couples being a massive aspect of today's media making people feel they are an outcast if they aren't directly involved in romantics with a partner. But coming from a single man, it's difficult to describe this need.

I've never been one for romance or companionship (this has nothing to do with the fact that I'm socially awkward and couldn't have a girlfriend if I tried), but for some reason people see that as a fault on the person's part. The Lobster takes this to the extreme, taking place in a world where coupling up is mandatory. Each person must have a partner at all times in the world of The Lobster- male or female, it doesn't matter- and people who have divorced or are not in a relationship are sent to a special hotel/institute for the sole purpose of finding one. Our main character is David, a recently divorced glasses-sporting everyman, who checks in to the hotel with hopes of finding a new partner. This place has conditions, though: After forty-five days, if he has not found his true love (shown by sharing something simple in common, such as being shortsighted), he is to be turned into an animal and set loose into the woods nearby. David chooses a lobster should he fail, hence the film's title. The head of the hotel also explains cleverly that most people end up picking a dog, hence why there are so many dogs in the world and so few of endangered species. This is what became of David's brother, a dog who accompanies him to the hotel.

Eventually, David meets some friends, but running his time short, decides to fake being a heartless jerk in order to escape transformations. After an unspeakable incident with the heartless woman, he flees into the wilderness to escape the punishment and coupling society. There he meets the Loners, a vigilante group living off the wilderness while constantly evading the nightly hunts of the people of the hotel. But in one world where he will be killed and another where he will be punished for being a couple (in the Loner camp, they slit lips with razor blades for kissing), is there still a perfect girl for Davd out there? And in which world will he meet her?

For the simple plot of a romantic film-date or be an animal- this film is seriously dark. No kidding. There are some pretty brutal scenes of violence and graphic talk (the process of animal transformation is partly explained in a grisly talk, a man gets his hand in a toaster for doing something I' not permitted to discuss here, etc.). But, aside from that, it's pretty interesting and entertaining to watch and think about. It's one of the few romantic films that leaves it's audience filing out with a thoughtful face instead of a smiling one. Throw in a cliffhanger ending and you have a unique idea with a tense story and dystopian future, creating a stand-out, morbid, entertaining spectacle.

OVERALL RATING: 8/10
-------------------------------------
Personally, I liked to think more about which animal I'd like to be. Can you guess? ...That's right. Hippopotamus.

The Critical Frog: The Jungle Book

Reboots are a curious thing. They can make a good series bad or a bad series good depending on the way the filmmaking dice roll,or can sometimes draw an entire generation of hate for ruining the old-school charm of a classic. And with the recent outbursts over the new Ghostbusters film, with feminists declaring war on people who have decided against seeing the film (I'm staying out of this one), I figured the only way to counter one reboot is with another. This is what led me into the theater to see the new remake of The Jungle Book- and I have to admit, I was surprised. Not only was it a newer, darker version of the classic story, but it was a well-made one.

I know I'm going to get hate for this,but it needs to be said: I wasn't a huge fan of The Jungle Book growing up (I was more into cartoons like Teen Titans), and
 looking back on it now, it just doesn't seem to hold up. The characters are fun,sure, the Bear Necessities is catchy, but the plot can get dull and shaky at times and the villain is nothing but a cocky brat. I realize it was made in a different time- but keep in mind Fantasia was made even earlier. Regardless,it's a fun and harmless filmto keep your little one occupied. The reboot is nothing like it.

Watching this in a theater with small children, I was admittedly humored by the reactions of the angry parents who expected it to be a simple live-action remake of the happy-go-lucky story. But, times have changed. We live in a time where people are more interested in conflict and fright. And so, as pop culture adapted, the classic story had to as well- and the best way to do that was to reinvent the jungle using the wonders of CGI.

I absolutely love the computer-generated animations in this film: every little thing is alive and humming. You can see the foliage rustling and the breath of every animal in the scene. Every character has been wonderfully redesigned to fit the modern ideals of them: Bageera the black panther takes on a more mysterious presence, Baloo the Bear now looks like a real bear, and even former whiny tiger Shere Khan has developed an intimidating presence and voice. My personal favorite change is that of the snake, Kaa (please dont look him up on Google Images), who has not only grown several feet in size, but has received gender reassignment surgery and is now voiced by the strikingly attractive Scarlet Johannson. King Louie, too, is affected by this change, and has grown from being a mere orangutan to a massive Gigantopithecus, now so large that smaller monkeys can use his shoulders as landings. Even Shere Khan, admittedly a bad villain in the original, takes on a more cunning and ruthless nature when given a touch of CGI and the incredible voice of Idris Elba.

There's a lot to enjoy in the film- from the darker new characters to the fast-paced and tense action scenes (when King Louie does get off his throne, he's a massive and imposing figure, capable of causing rockfalls with his massive size). Young mancub Mowgli (who's child actor isn't bad, honestly) uses his human instinct and trickery to emerge victorious from troublesome situations (he creates an admittedly impressive pulley system to gather honey from a cliffside beehive) on his way to follow Bageera's orders and reach the man villiage. But now that the tiger is a genuine threat, can he make it in time? And does he even want to go back? See foryourself in this dark reboot of a classic story, that captures the jungle of the original with it's own unique twists.

OVERALL RATING: 7/10

The Critical Frog: SOAC Act 4: Looking Up

After a long delay, here's part four of the giant Smile of a Child network review! This is definitely because people enjoyed the first three, and not at all because I haven't had the chance to see any films lately and have network access for a bit.

Mickey's Farm

-------------------------

Have you ever thought that your children shouldn't be exposed to action or conflict? Is the idea of big problems too much for you to grasp? Well, for those who can't possibly stand conflict being a part of children's entertainment, look no further than Mickey's Farm, where nothing particularly troublesome ever actually happens.

The best way one can describe the first entry on our list is uninspired, at best. No animals have moving lips and are instead provided voice-overs that in no way match the facial expressions of the animals. Animation is choppy and constantly re-used. The musical numbers are boring and re-used. Everything about the show is re-used. Mickey the dog, his animal friends and his girl Megan do not face problems that cannot be solved with a simple song or basic apologetic statement. It's the very definition of an attention holder, and that isn't good. The goat has a nice voice, though. Pity I can barely hear it over the shrill squeaks of the blasted ferret.

1/5

------------------------------

Nest Family Animated Bible Stories

------------------------------\

Hey, it's another animated Bible show! While I do have a relatively 'meh' opinion on this network in general, I do applaud the animated shows such as Little Women and Swiss Family Robinson (which, I learned, were early works of Miyazaki), and The Story Keepers blows most on the network out of the water by actually being entertaining to watch and providing a unique story. Nest Family Animated Bible Stories is sort of between Little Women and The Story Keepers, in that it tells sometimes interesting stories with admittedly decent animation. These episodes are animated retellings of stories from the Bible, and as such can have good meanings and values it intends to teach (the one on forgiveness is actually quite nice). The voice acting is well-done, and overall it seems like something from a Saturday morning block on an old cartoon channel. Question is, what are this and The Story Keepers doing next to things like Little Buds or Mickey's Farm?

4/5

--------------------------------------

Veggietales

---------------------------------------

Aww, yeah, now we're talking! 

It's going to sound ridiculous to some people, but back when I was a tadpole, we had a group of singing, talking, Christian vegetables to teach us about God. They were the stars of Veggietales, and they had something that most Bible kid's shows don't have nowadays: an actual sense of understanding when it comes to humor and parody (I was gonna say talking vegetables, but Aardvark to Zucchini has one too). It was a show that taught us lessons while being actually entertaining to watch, that sticks in your head even when you grow out of it (I can STILL remember the lyrics to 'The Pirates who Don't Do Anything'). But what was it that made Veggietales so good?

A lot of it comes from the characters, and how they retain their personalities even during their retellings of Bible stories. Larry the Cucumber may play a legitimately serious character (such as one of the ship workers in Jonah and the Whale), but still retains his silliness and unexpected reactions to the events. Bob the Tomato is always the straight man. Archibald the Asparagus is snooty and uptight. The list goes on and on. Just the fact that I can still remember these characters to this day does say a lot about the impact the show can have on a kid. 

But of course, the big aspect of a Bible show is the lessons from the Bible, and....you know what? I'm cool with them. They bring up faith and believing in god, sure, but do it in a way that doesn't exclude faiths or belief systems (my dad was Jewish and was fine with Veggietales, and I'm agnostic but still like it), and focus more on standard behavioral and social lessons such as not stealing and perseverance, through original and old stories (Sumo of the Opera was always my favorite), with the sole purpose of teaching kids not to be jerks. Not bad for the contents of your produce bin.

5/5

-------------------------------------------

Pahappahooey Island
---------------------------------------------

Hey, this one's actually a lot of fun! I didn't expect to see a decently-made puppet show on the network when I first came across it. But, after several days of watching it (it was either that or the Home Shopping Network) , I found out that not everything on the channel is awful. Some of it is only slightly awful.

I kid, I kid. As I've mentioned, there are a few bright spots on the network, much as any other channel has. And while Smile of a Child doesn't have shows that rival things like Adventure Time (which has quickly become one of my favorite cartoons), it does have shows like Dr. Wonder's Workshop or Pahappahooey Island that are interesting concepts or otherwise enjoyable. This one's a puppet show that reminds me of a Christian Muppet adventure, with an ongoing story, reocurring characters and some surprisingly decent humor.

The story centers around Allie (there's no proper spelling I could find, so I'm going by pronounciation here), a young girl who quickly becomes the subject of a grand adventure thanks to her discovery of a mysterious tablet. This tablet holds a key to the Lost City, which is said to contain a mystic book that can prevent Pahapahooey Island from destruction. She assembles a team of heroes to find the city and save their home. Our characters are the determined frog Captain Hobbs, greedy but good-hearted navigator Milard the penguin,  short-sighted woodchuck mechanic Hacksaw, and on-board entertainer Fernando the firefly, all joining Allie for their own reasons (Fernando wants excitement and a new venue, Millard wants treasure, etc.). After discovering the lessons of the book (the Bible, of course), the group shacks up with crocodile chefs Guiseppe and his mama (Mama Mia) and their aid Wee Tyke, working hard and spreading the messages of the book whenever they can, to the delight of the island's elders.

This is actually quite a fun series; the jokes are on par (Allie, approaching the bar Hobbs hangs out at, remarks that sailors seem more dangerous when they're having fun), the lips on the puppets match up to the line reads, the songs are catchy and amusing, and even the lessons aren't too hard. The few things I do have issues with are nitpicks at best: there's a lot of buildup to the Lost City that goes nowhere (the 'traps set are literally grabby toys sticking out of the walls) , a lot of the legends leave open how they spread or were lost (Hobbs knows what the Lost City is, and is surprised that they left a marker), and the Council of Elders fades from relevance shortly after the heroes return. But those really are nitpicks for a show like this. For Bile shows, this one isn't bad at all. Its funny, entertaining, and well-made. No doubt, Pahappahooey Island is for you, and me, and he, and she, and them, and us, and...aww, forget it. (Line from the theme song)

5/5

The Critical Frog: The Darkness

"Chief Silly Bull, is it true that we Native Americans name our children after the first thing we see when they are born?"
" We're not going to make that joke. Everyone's heard it before.Your name isn't even Two Dogs Mating. You're not funny, Little Beaver."

Every Horror film nowadays needs something unique to put it above the clouded mass of typical films, and all of the most iconic in the genre are perfect examples of this. The original Psycho had one of the first horror twists and a talented actor as Norman Bates. The Saw franchise (although you could technically call it a slasher, I prefer it as horror) used low budgets, a deranged mastermind and creative death traps. The Darkness provides us with an intriguing couple of ideas, but fails to deliver in more ways than one.

The film centers on Mikey, an autistic youth- which could have some potential as a module for horror. With a character who has a mental condition, a lot of things can be done that not only play on the character's existing condition, but the reactions of those around him as they debate whether Mikey's explanations of the situation are real or just products of his imagination and issues, as well as if he unknowingly caused the events himself.  A much better horror film, Occulus, did this well, having characters with mental issues making you question if the horror was real or just in the lead's twisted imagination. In this case, however, Mikey definitely caused the events, and they're definitely real.

Mikey brings home some rocks from the Grand Canyon, which causes him to act strangely- counting to 5 at seemingly random intervals, an increase in violent behavior (he attempts to kill the family cat), and the appearance of what seems to be an imaginary friend known as 'Jenny'. His behavior is followed by strange occurrences around the family- animals appear from nowhere (a snake finds its way to Grandma's house) and strange, black handprints spontaneously materialize on the walls and ceiling. Eventually, the family learns that this may be the work of five Native American spirits (Crow, Wolf, Coyote, Snake and Buffalo)   that Mikey unknowingly awakened by removing the stones from their burial grounds. These spirits aren't exactly happy with the family, and it's up to them to find a way to put the spirits back to rest without losing their lives in the process.

The film finds interesting possibilities with Native American lore and an Autistic child as the main character, but is crippled by it's tendency to fall into the stereotypical aspect category of horror films. Whenever something interesting happens, it's quickly shut out by so many cliche'd moments that you don't have time to enjoy it (when the animal spirits finally do show up in beast form, they're never mentioned again, and Buffalo is nowhere to be found). What ends up happening is that the good ideas all get buried under a slog of the typical. If the film didn't rely on bad scares and strange icons to frighten, it would be something different. Sadly, The Darkness gets beaten down by the typical stereotypes and becomes just another horror come-and-go. Dirty hand prints are not scary. Random black liquid is not scary. Chanting is not scary. The Darkness is a combination of all three for the scares, and thus is a combination of...you guessed it.... not scary. Maybe the Native Americans didn't use every part of the buffalo. Maybe they left the scary parts at home.

OVERALL RATING: 3/10
--------------------------------

Here's something to think about: why did the spirits decide on the name "Jenny"? You'd think Native American ghosts with animal personas would think of something more intimidating. Mikey sounds like the kid's just got an imaginary girlfriend.

The Critical Frog: Purple Rain

With the recent passing of the musician Prince (or The Artist Formerly Known as Prince, if you're one of those people), it comes time again to break the code of reviewing recent films and discuss something that is truly a product of it's time. And, naturally, it is a film starring the late musician that we talk about today. 

If I may discuss my musical taste for a second, I have to admit that I dislike pop in most cases- but wathing Prince in action really made me want to. The man's stage presence was incredible, with the only other musician similar being the late Michael Jackson, This was definitely his strong point- but today's film discusses the music of the artist. 

Purple Rain is a fictional story about the early years of Prince's fame, as a young boy with issues at home and a rivalry with a fellow club singer. He deals with problems involving the harsh nature of nightclub business, the abusive relationship between his parents (in an early scene, he rushes to stop his dad from hitting his mother, still in full show attire), and the romance and turmoil that led to the creation of 'Purple Rain', arguably one of his best songs. Starring in the film is Prince ( as 'The Kid') and his band themselves, admittedly talented actors in good roles. But here's the issue with every musician like this, and I'll do it by comparing two completely different films. Here's a synopsis for Equestria Girls 2:

We see the main character (Sunset) and the band perform. Then we see the trouble going on behind the scenes with the band, then meet the antagonists (The Sirens) who perform, and then there's a contest to prove which band is better. A huge twist in the story (band being locked under the stage) causes the band to lose faith, but have it restored by their inspiration and friends. Both sides are awesome in the competition, but the ones we like bring out a new song that levels their opponent and cements our heroes as the victors. Audience of primarily males rejoice at cameos (Lyra, Bon Bon).

And here's a synopsis for Purple Rain:

We see Prince and his band perform. Then we see the trouble going on behind the scenes with Prince, them meet the antagonist (another club singer), who performs, and there's a contest to prove which band is better. A huge twist (the suicide of Prince's father) makes the artist lose faith, but has it restored by inspiration and his friends. Both sides are awesome in the competition, but Prince brings out 'Purple Rain' which levels the competition and cements him as the victor. Audience of primarily males rejoice at cameos (Ziggy Stardust, possibly Bruce Springsteen).

Do you see what I'm getting at? It's hard to tell one musical film from another in terms of basic plot and character. Not that one can compare Purple Rain to a kid's film, but every one seems to have the same general plot. I've scoured countless films trying to find a good exception, and no luck. At the moment, Purple Rain plays like an R-rated Disney Channel special: good music, but an unoriginal plot and overall boredom-inducing film while you wait for the real entertainment (the musical performances).

OVERALL RATING: 7/10

-----------------------------------

Nope, not gonna do it. I'm not gonna bring up Feathery Wings in a comparison again. Moving on.

The Critical Frog: Captain America 3- Civil War

Superhero films run a balance of story and action, and when done well, can open a doorway in the film to messages about the promise of power and the consequences of their actions, leading to not only better films, but better characters and plot lines to make better films. And if the film is a Marvel production, you bet that it will try to balance these.And with a series like Captain America, this can lead to some pretty awesome films.

The current reboot of Captain America has a lot going for it: not only does it play a key part in the much-loved Avengers lore, the three films in the new Cap trilogy work as great and intense standalone films. Most Marvel films are like this. But it's Captain America that really drives home the point of what exactly it is Marvel is capable of in the movie industry.

The iconic Captain America got his start after a young Steve Rogers was chosen as a canidate for a secret project to create the ultimate soldier.The serum given to him drastically raises his physical strength and speedlc A custom-made shield of the unbreakable Vibranium rounds out his ensemble, and his sidekick Bucky joins the fight. For many years, Cap was the proud defender of American rights until the untimely death of Bucky, as well as a plane crash put him in stasis until the present day. Thawed out with everyone he knew aged or gone (his former love is now old and withered), the brave captain fights the enemies of justice while struggling with being torn from history (to put it in perspective, he was frozen in WWII). It's an inspiring story of a character whose sense of right allows him to keep on despite the impossible. The second film took on this and improved it, featuring not only Cap in a struggle to defeat terrorist organizations, but a powerful enemy known as the Winter Soldier. This time, the focus is more on his adopted family (the Avengers)- but Cap still gets his fair share of the action.

After a long chain of destructive events, the United Nations decides to put a strict limit on the power of the Avengers. Called the Spokovia Accords, these papers allow the government complete control of the superhero team (except Thor and Hulk, who apparently had better things to do). But they have bigger problems than who's going to sign it and who's not. Zemo, a maniacal assassin with nothing to lose, wants revenge against the Avengers for taking everything from him. The Winter Soldier is back, and beginning a chain of terror that spreads even to the most enigmatic nations. But when the mysterious enemy has a clandestine meeting with Cap professing innocence, who's going to take what side? And will the relationship between Cap and his good friend Iron Man be severed by a simple signing of paper?

This film is a tour de force of superhero tropes: The big fights, the meaningful words, the genuine friendships formed between characters, and the masterful plots by the baddie of the week. Zemo himself is a cunning and resourceful villain with a devious plan, and the heroes who do sign the Accords are as delightful as always (Robert Downey Jr. Is the best Iron Man ever). But we all want to know: who are the contenders in the film's climactic showdown?

On one side, we've got Cappy, his winged friend Falcon, the miniscule Ant-Man, Scarlet Witch, the retired Hawkeye and the Winter Soldier himself. Iron Man's team consists of him and War Machine (his armored buddy), the android Vision, the very attractive Black Widow, the masked Black Panther making his film debut and a certain red-suited web slinger. So pick your side, see the film and let the battle begin.

OVERALL RATING: 8/10
---------------------------------------
Civil War takes a hard look at the consequences of collateral damage that the heroes always do to save the world, and what a man can become if he allows himself to be consumed by them. It's got a much darker tone than the rest of the Captain America films, but it really works. The only thing is...it's not a Captain America film. True, most attention is on him, but it's more of an Avengers thing with the giant hero fights and arguments. Regardless, it's a suspenseful and powerful superhero film with a balance of action and inaction.

The Critical Frog: Keanu

It is said that there are few bonds stronger than that of a man and his pet, that they build a foundation of friendship and love so strong one can move mountains to get to the other. And as a pet owner myself, I feel it's true: my dog Ace can say more to me by cuddling up by the fire than most people can when talking. Keanu is a film about the bond between a man and a stray kitten he finds, his cousin, and dangerous gangland drug dealing (one of these things is not like the others....).

It's needless to say that this is a comedy, pouring both intense violence and adorable kittens into the same scenes, and naturally this film is the product of a comedy group: Key and Peele, who have had much success with their comedic stylings on Comedy Central. And, upon watching this, one can see why: while the humor is crass and sometimes overdoes itself, the two have wonderful chemistry and build off of each other in a manner similar to that of Abbott and Costello (though not as effective). There's a distinctive sense of mutual respect and enjoyment from working with each other you get from seeing them, and when they do get to have fun with the roles, the results are delightful. But throw them in a serious situation and they lose quite a bit of their luster.

The plot involves two cousins- Clarence, who lives a stable if quite dull life, and Rell, a bong-hitting bachelor. Clarence goes to visit Rell, who is torn apart by his breakup with his girlfriend. Rell, however, finds a kitten at his door and proceeds to take it in, naming him Keanu. Keanu quickly becomes Rell's everything, complete with a large cat nook in the house and a picture of Rell's girlfriend affixed to the scratching post, and as such he is devastated when, returning home from a late night film, finds his home broken into... with Keanu nowhere in sight. A local tip leads them to a gang known as the Blips (members were kicked out of the Bloods and Crips), and Rell drags his unwilling cousin on an adventure to discover what happened to his beloved kitty. The two end up masquerading as two notorious criminals known as the Allentown Brothers (under the names 'Tec-Tonic' and 'Shark Tank'), and get tangled up in a web of lies, gunfights and drug lords in their attempts to bring the cat home.

The interesting thing about the film isn't entirely the relation between Rell and the cat; it's the relation between the cat and everything else. In the start of the film, Keanu's first owner (a Mexican drug king) is gunned down by the real Allentown Brothers, who take a liking to the kitten as well. Keanu somehow runs from them and ends up in Rell's neighborhood, then is taken by gangsters, and yet still somehow finds his way constantly back into Rell's arms, which of course ties him into the stories of so many other characters who want the cat as their own pet. It's a wild ride for not only Rell, but for Clarence, who must not only come to terms with violence beyond his comfort zone, but to learn how gangsters talk. Gratuitous use of a word I'm not going to say follows.

Of course, where Keanu falls short is the side plots and characters. There's a short scene about how Clarence and some of the gangsters bond and communicate over George Michael, and I would have enjoyed more scenes like that. I liked the gangsters, and wanted more of them. My personal favorite characters, the actual Allentown Brothers, have lots of bizarre aspects that I'd love to see the film expand on: they hold up in an abandoned Showbiz Pizza, never speak, are seemingly unstoppable in gunfights, and play rock-paper-scissors to determine which one gets to do the dirty deed of finishing off the last one alive. One of them even has a necklace fitted with the unmentionables of his previous victims (as one of the boys says, "Please tell me those are fingers."). I would have loved a film about these guys, or at least to know them a little better. Alas, not every aspect of the film can be good. Regardless, Keanu comes off as a gangland comedy that shows the lengths a man is willing to go for his beloved pet. Maybe it' the pet lover in me, but I had a lot of fun at the film. And, at the end, isn't that what a comedy is supposed to do?

OVERALL RATING: 7/10
---------------------------------
To be clear, yes, there is a scene where the cat talks. And yes, it IS voiced by Keanu Reeves (it did take place during a high, so luckily the kitten didn't talk all the way through).  Couldn't let that joke slide, huh? Kitten's cute, though.

The Critical Frog: Jem and the Holograms

Being home without access to a vehicle means a few bizarre things to a critic: for one, no trips to the theater to check out the latest films means you're stuck with whatever you can find for free on demand, and for another, the films you haven't seen are always located directly next to films you have seen and enjoy. When I was browsing the free film listings, Jem and the Holograms was right next to the Equestria Girls trilogy, and I was so close to just watching those and enjoying myself. Then I remembered that nobody likes it when I talk about things I enjoy, so proceeded to select Jem and the Holograms from the list. Then I realized that I probably should have gone with my gut feeling.

For those unfamiliar with 80s' television (why do I know about cartoons that came out before I was born?), Jem and the Holograms was a show by the toy company Hasbro as a way to draw attention to their respective toy and music line. It was, as expected, a massive product of it's time: the glitzy pop music of the decade and multicolored spectacles in the show must have been amusing for it's time- amusing enough to warrant an unneeded reboot so many years later, when Hasbro began to rise back into the spotlight thanks to the ever-popular Transformers and the surprise hit of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. So, why not try to bring another old show back from the grave, this time with a live-action film? After all, Hasbro does have contacts in both the live-action and music industries- Michael Bay had a hand in 'helping' make Transformers a big-budget spectacle, and they could probably talk Daniel Ingram (the head composer for My Little Pony) into bringing  his talent for catchy and fun songs into the mix. But apparently the knowledge of the success of the past did not influence the future. Instead of a more intriguing choice, the production group went with John M. Chu (no relation to Pika), who's previous accomplishments include two Justin Bieber biographies (and G.I Joe: Retaliation for some reason), in the director's chair, and Nathan Lanier for musical direction (who's previous credits include a Bieber film and something called 'How My Dad Killed Dracula'). And now we begin to pick apart what makes something from the past flop in the future.

Before we start, let me begin by saying that I'm definitely not a product of the 80's, when glitz and pop had major impacts on both the fields of film and television. So, in a way, is it unfair to judge a musical film based on a musical genre you technically weren't around for? Well, I couldn't tell you. I can't even tell which decade this film wants to be from.

Let's see, we've got the glitzy pop stylings of the 80's, the dreamlike quality of the 60's, the flashy light shows of the 70's, the internet music boom of the early 2000's and the overall mediocrity of modern pop here in one giant potpourri- which, in a way, could be a cool idea, but the film's one crippling flaw is that it forgets what made each of those original decades special. It was unique because not only did the music reflect the differing tastes of generations, but the issues facing each generation- The Village People were so popular because they reflected and spoke out against discrimination based on sexuality (if you put them in nowadays, they'd seem dated as there are now plenty of differing sexualities represented in media), for example. And while it's fair to say that some musicians are reflective of everlasting themes (did the songs about first-world problems create the emos, or did the emos create the songs about first-world problems?), you can't just throw anything into a vat nowadays. With programs like Spotify and Youtube available for small, up and coming artists, the industry has opened up to so many different kinds of unique musicians and styles on the small screen before moving to the big one. But what these groups must remember is to have a sense of pacing, which this film lacks. Characters fly from one scene to another, one musical show to another without any sense of time or importance. I'm fairly certain if you took out the random Youtube clippings and pointless scenes, this film would be shorter than an episode of the old show.

The film is said to tell the origin story for the band's rise to stardom and fame, but I couldn't tell the difference between that and anything else here. It's a typical rise to power story that needs no explanation,except for the after-credits scene that is so hilariously sure of a sequel that I honestly couldn't tell if it was joking or not. There isn't much to say about this one- it's just a teenage band story that sometimes dissolves into the equivalent of, "Look at this thing I found on Youtube!". Boring,messy and unpleasant.

2/10
------------------------------
"Hey, didn't you forget something? A joke you usually pull?"
Nope. Not making that reference this time. Don't care if it's my favorite song.
"So you don't want to bring up Feathery Wings in any way, shape, or form?"
No, the review's done.
"What if this quotation box was to say that someone could make your same argument about why that song sucks?
Then I'd like to know if that quote would like to step outside for a moment.....

The Critical Frog: What Makes Pokemon Such a Success?

Every series that gives birth to a fan community has something special that makes it leave a lasting impact on their viewers or players. This is common in not only video gaming, but TV and film as well. And most of the time, this aspect it what makes the subject work with both audiences and critics, as well as starting a trend that can influence future creators. And most of the time, these aspects can have a good impact on the makers of the generation: the multi-film crossovers of Marvel films allowed for more interaction between characters and interesting situations (DC would later attempt this with Batman V. Superman). Last year's breakout indie game hit Undertale offered a unique aspect on the typical RPG setup with lovable characters and the ability to kill or be kind to your foes, with consequences for your actions, and this touched and intrigued enough people to allow it to be labeled one of the greatest video games of all time. Even cartoons such as Adventure Time or My Little Pony can make critics and fans swoon with deep stories (in the former's case) or their direct interaction and understanding of their fanbase (I have a long-held belief that the second season and beyond of My Little Pony would be completely different if there was no Brony phenomenon). But of all the fan-attracting magnets in the history of media, one reigns supreme: the decade-spanning legacy of the Pokemon franchise. 

I'd explain what Pokemon is, but it's kind of pointless nowadays: much like the Mario brothers or Dragon Ball Z, a show with such a massive impact on the media as a whole eventually seeps into the knowledge database of people with no desire to have it there. Most people nowadays can name at least 10 of the things off the top of their heads. The classic game franchise taking place in a world of magical creatures (which you immediately proceed to make fight each other) has spanned over twenty years and over 700 lovable Pokemon, and with another sequence of games (Sun and Moon) on the way, shows absolutely no signs of slowing down. And with a well-tried formula, basic game play and creative Pokemon, the games appeal to all ages. Adults who grew up with the original Red, Blue and Green (because someone is going to bring it up anyways) can share their experiences with their children with the newest games  It's a franchise that spans generations, older than quite a few of it's fans (technically, you could make the argument that My Little Pony does that too, but we Bronies don't like to talk about that). But what is it that makes it such a strong force in the market? 

We're all aware of the media enterprise that Pokemon has created. In addition to the wildly popular video games, it's spawned multiple TV shows, trading cards, toys, and a heap of films among other things (maybe I'll do a Pokemon summer someday), with fans always expanding on it. The games have even risen to insane levels of competitive play, giving birth to more strategic combinations and play styles than you can imagine. Everyone has their favorite type, and no matter what, everyone has a favorite Pokemon that they have an attachment to. It's similar to the gaming style in that no matter what the situation, there's always a favorite card, piece or character you find yourself drawn to, that eventually you form a bond with (I still remember my first Pokemon- this post's for you, Twinky the Charizard)

Maybe that's the big key to Pokemon- that there's something that keeps us coming back. The knowledge that we always have something waiting for us around the corner. The fact that these digital creatures have their own personalities, natures and responses makes them so much more than groups of pixels. It's nice to have a world whereyou're the champion. Maybe, just maybe, what makes the series such a success lies in it's ability to make us feel like one.

The Critical Frog: Batman Vs. Superman- Dawn of Justice

In the history of the world, theorists always wonder what would happen if one prominent figure from times past or present had the opportunity to battle another. Be it real or fictional warriors up to the plate, these clashes are the 'what-if' stories we all want to know the outcomes of. And as long as two characters have been around, one what-if battle has always remained in the minds of media lovers. Two beloved heroes clashing to settle who's better. I am, of course, referring to Superman Vs. Son Goku- but Batman fighting Superman is up there too.

Coming down from my Cool-Cat induced April Fools joke, we finally get the opportunity to discuss one of the most hyped films of the year, and indeed of many a superhero fan: the epic clash between the Man of Steel and the Dark Knight. A battle between the invincible alien and the man who trained his way to the top? Well, who wouldn't be excited? Er.......me.

See, here's the problem I have with this famous 'who-would-win' battle. True, you have two legendary superheroes on the field of battle. Batman and Superman themselves are pretty cool, and putting them into a fight seems like a perfect idea. But the problem comes from the fact that one of the contenders is ridiculously more powerful than the other. True, Batman does have the intelligence and secret weapons to wipe out nearly any threat, but on the other, this is Superman we're talking about. The guy is nearly invincible, and boasts a ridiculous array of powers that can make quick work of any of his enemies. Even if we're talking about Batman's tricky nature and massive arsenal, it's hard to say that the Bat would have a fair shot against a man who can bench-press the Moon. Supes could crush Batman in  few seconds by just looking his way (especially with heat vision and frost breath). So how do you expand that short fight into a full-length feature? Apparently, by hiring Zack Snyder and taking every chance to make the scene 'edgy'.

Where to start with the issues in the film? It gets so dark it's hard to see, the scenes can drag on for insanely long periods of time without anything happening, and some of the characters can become quite annoying at some points. But how are the dynamics of our heroes?

As you probably guessed, Batman would have to discover some powerful trump card to overwhelm the Man of Steel. In this case it's a bit of the powerful rock Kryptonite from the late Zod's spaceship, capable of neutralizing and defeating Superman. This massive ship had approximately enough Kryptonite to create three bullets and the point of a spear. Coupled with Batman's new power armor, the Man of Steel must not only deal with the consequences of his massively destructive tendencies, but more threats: the psychotic tycoon Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg, hair included) and his ultimate weapon, Doomsday, a primal force of destruction born from the remains of Zod and his ship. Meanwhile, Batman struggles with a conspiracy regarding Luthor's company and a mysterious woman who seems to be interested in Lex's research. How will the two heroes solve their issues in time to avoid a deadly confrontation? Maybe it'll take a third hero.....

The thing about superhero films is that there are different kinds of them for different fans. If you want something funny, you put on Deadpool. If you want to think during your superhero movie, then you put on Captain America 2 or maybe The Dark Knight. Want to just relax and watch some heroes smack things around? Look no further than The Avengers. Superman and Batman fit two different niches of the genre, however: while Superman works well in straightforward action stories where he can do what he does best (fly in and punch things), filmmakers seem to love putting him in more psychological stories where his use is debated. Instead of the world's strongest man punching and lasering his way through the enemies, we focus on questions such as "Does the planet truly NEED a Superman?" (Apparently, yes) and "Where is Superman's true place?" (Punching bad guys in the face). The dark and psychological stories are more Batman's game- but here, he's the subject of more physical combat and vigilante justice scenes. It's like a case of role reversal, but not a good one.

Another problem with the film comes from the overabundance of side characters and plots. Lois Lane is back, tackling a plot about terrorists being supplied with weapons, the identity of the mysterious woman, the fruits of Lex Luthor's research, Batman and Superman's nightmares, etc. And by the time the film ends, we have no answers- just more questions.

And, of course, the most important thing to discuss is the battles. Superman and Batman get to fight for about five minutes, Batman kicks around thugs, and the heroes band together to fight the newly-created Doomsday (who, for some reason, is stark naked- geez, the chrysalis couldn't have made him some pants?). All in all, it's about thirty-five minutes of battle in a 2.5 hour film. The rest is mainly padding and forced drama. Characters with no use appear and disappear (the Flash, I think, is in here for two seconds), the ones who stay do nothing (Lois's greatest accomplishments are dragging Superman out of the final battle to save her and throwing Batman's spear about five feet), and the film has nothing to keep us interested until the fighting commences. I went to Batman V. Superman expecting another Avengers film, and wound up with a Star Wars prequel.

OVERALL: 5/10
--------------------------------------------
The strange thing about me is that I draw ideas of what I want to see the instant I view a trailer. I didn't envision seeing this film to listen to debates and court discussions. I came here to see Batman and Superman slug it out- and with so much in front of it, it was hard to see. Fusing two genres can be beneficial, but here, it sticks both superheroes face-first in a slog of unwanted stories.

(Also, I can't discuss enough the fact that Doomsday is nude. It's pretty hard taking him seriously when his rear end is clearly visible. Towards the end of the fight, he does gain his trademark spikes and massive power, but it becomes more and more difficult to watch when you imagine that he kept the privates of the two subjects used for his creation. The image of the assumed Doomsdong swinging wildly during the fight probably explains why everyone there looked so distracted and horrified.)

The Critical Frog: The Perfect Film

From time to time, a critic like myself must pause and think about his own ideals of film- what exactly separates standard movies from true film classics. What it is that makes something worthy of the term "Art"? I thought about this for quite a while, spending many sleepless nights thinking of the answer. But while browsing the films in my collection, I discovered one that allowed me to finally draw my conclusion. Was it 'Blade Runner'? 'The Shawshank Redemption'? My treasured copy of 'V for Vendetta'? Perhaps the universally loved 'Citizen Kane'? Close, my friends, but no cigar. The film that finally enlightened me is none other than the glorious feature film 'Cool Cat Saves The Kids'.

What exactly makes a film like this work? A better question would be what doesn't work in this glorious display. Who could possibly compete with the acting talents of Derek Savage, Cool Cat and a definitely not drunk Erik Estrada? Is there any plot arc as powerful as Cool Cat's struggle with cyberbullies in his dreams and reality? And is there any other song as emotionally and musically powerful as "The Cool Cat Boogie"? Certainly not "Feathery Wings", that's for sure. My readers, there is no need to say anything more. With this film, we move forward into a new era of film. An era where there is no need for critics. As we ascend into the future, I vanish with the true belief of enlightenment in my grasp. Thank you, Cool Cat. You have started the wave of change. The wave of rebellion. The dawn has come, and it's name is Cool Cat.

The Critical Frog: Zoolander 2

There's always a strange feeling of duality that comes from watching a sequel to a film you love. On one hand, it's always nice to see characters you know and care about continue their stories. But on the other, you risk having not only your opinion of the first film, but of the series changed in the case of a particularly bad sequel. While sequels can spread the influence of a universe to different generations, there's always the risk of a bust. For every Shrek 2 there is a Secret of Nimh 2- it's a vicious cycle filmmakers are hard-pressed to break. But what happens when you take a film that comes off exclusively as a product of the fads of it's time, and make a sequel more than ten years later? You wind up with the dated fusing with the new in a bizarre amalgamation called Zoolander 2.

As we all know, the original Zoolander was a product of it's time more than anything else. A satirical look at the men's fashion industry, it told the tale of Derek Zoolander and his fall from grace in the men's fashion industry. Having lost much of his former glory, Derek was signed on to an ordinary fashion show that doubled as a plot to assassinate the Prime Minister of Malaysia- and in the process of preventing his death, Derek gained friends, a lover, and a son. He's even gotten into a new business with the Derek Zoolander Center for Kids Who Can't Read Good (And Wanna Learn to do Other Stuff Good Too). With an ending like that, how exactly do you continue the story? Unfortunately, by ripping everything from the poor man's hands in one catastrophic series of events.

These events take place directly after the ending of Zoolander 1, and quickly work to tear down the progress of the first film: Derek's institute has crumbled into the sea, and his wife was a casualty of the incident. His best friend Hansel has been severely burned and now must wear a mask to hide his grotesque mark. Derek's son has been taken away by Child Services, and with nothing left, Derek himself has retired into the mountains and away from modeling forever. But when an unusual invitation brings Derek and Hansel to Rome for a fashion show, which happens to be the same city Derek's son is being raised in, the two male models must come to terms with their relationship issues and their pasts if they want to make their big comeback. But a new relationship for Derek, the worry of fatherhood for Hansel (from all 12 members of his orgy- including a sumo wrestler and Keifer Sutherland) and many other issues, it's going to be harder than it looks.

The original Zoolander wasn't exactly an all-time classic- as I mentioned, many of the references and jokes are products of the male fashion boom at the time and wouldn't make as much sense in later eras- and Zoolander 2 follows suit, with references to popular musicians and services. Justin Bieber gets axed off in the first few minutes. The crew is advised on their journey by Sting. MC Hammer has been jailed for his taste in pants. The list goes on and on. For all it's references it still has the spirit of the original, which is nice, but the modern atmoshpere just isn't the best place for poor Derek.

6/10
-----------------
All is done!

The Critical Frog: 10 Cloverfield Lane

Urgh....it's been a while since I've done this. What happened? Didn't Deadpool kill me in my last review?

Nah, I didnt even touch you. You tried to charge me and tripped over yourself. Been passed out for weeks now. I've just been in here eating your food.

That's....sad. Anyways, can you get out? I got some films to review and some shame to work out.


-------------

Putting aside my typical sarcastic revue, I'm really sorry I haven't been able to write lately. Got some things going on- but thankfully I've got more time on my hands now and more chances to blog. So let's start again with a new film with rave reviews- the tale of a woman, a man and a crazy elder. This film is 10 Cloverfield Lane.

It's a little tough to explain what 10 Cloverfield Lane is about without explaining first the categories of both suspense and found-footage in film. By now we're all familiar with the concept of suspenseful horror- horror films that rely not on easy jumpscares and disturbing imagery but building tension and short, massive bursts of emotion and action (The Shining)- but found footage is much less prevalent. Whether you like them or not, i's difficult to deny that films such as the Blair Witch project and Paranormal Activity have brought much attention to unknown threat and found footage genres of film. Most of this comes from the inner fear of the unknown portrayed in the films in the fact that you never actually see the threat. This leaves it open to the imagination, and as such, the threat is only as dangerous as you imagine it.

10 Cloverfield Lane begins with a strong story and looming threat- our hero, a woman named Michelle is involved in a car crash on her way to Chicago and awakens in the bunker of Howard, an old man who informs her of the situation at hand. Apparently, there's been some sort of attack- Howard is unsure if it was terrorists or something worse- that has left the world in turmoil and the air apparently toxic. With nowhere else to go, Howard has taken Michelle into his bunker for her safety. Rounding out the group is Emmett, a handyman who rushed into the bunker at the cost of a broken arm. The three must survive in their small living space (which has a kitchen, living room, and bathroom among other things, including tons of stored food) while waiting for the air to clear. But trouble brews within the bunker as Howard's manipulative and demanding behaviors start to take shape. Is it really the things above ground that Michelle has to fear?

While the urgency comes across as an unknown threat our protagonists that makes returning to the surface impossible, Howard doesn't help matters. A former Navy soldier, Howard has spent his life preparing for the inevitable disaster he believed would once shake the world. And with the unknown disaster, he was right. Now holed up underground, Howard is struggling to keep sane as the strangers hold out with him. And he's willing to keep Michelle alive- no matter what the cost. John Goodman plays the part well, demanding with a tinge of regret and determination, and it's hard not to feel bad for him.

Everything is smooth and great about this film- until the ending. While I'm not going to give any spoilers....well, sometimes it's better to not know what happened. But putting that aside, 10 Cloverfield Lane boasts powerful shots, lots of looming tension and great acting, and an all-too-believable cast. It's slow, subtle and at times horrifying- exactly how a suspenseful film should be made.

9/10

This is a really good film. The quiet and looming tension coupled with a lighthearted soundtrack and design of the bunker really work to offset the outbursts of the characters and the bleak outlook of the situation. I may go into the ending in a later review, but for now just take it with a grain of salt and enjoy a truly suspenseful movie that understands how to be truly terrifying. Watch it for barrels of tension and a story that bubbles up in the most unpleasantly good way possible (see what I did there, people who have seen it? Heh, heh, heh.....)