Reviews

Captain Jack Sparrow sets sail again, this time with the notorious Davey Jones looming over his head, leaving the usually imperturbable Captain Jack fleeing for his soul.

The Curse of the Black Pearl was an anomaly that set the bar to a height that may well be unattainable. How often does one find a movie that has so much going against it, and it still remains a success. Originally, when executives discussed the plan of making a movie based on the beloved theme-park attraction, they conceived a made-for-video movie that would attempt to make a low-budget story out of a ride without a clear story.

The first film worked because they didn't try to make sense of the ride (which as much as I love it, the story of the ride would make a very dull pirate movie) Rather they tried to create a swashbuckling pirate movie that would rejuvenate the franchise for generations to come, and with the amazing talent of Johnny Depp in their corner, create one of the most memorable characters to ever hit the silver screen.

The first movie could stand alone as a complete story, without need for further delving into the legends of Captain Jack, but where would be the fun (and profit) of that? Dead Man's Chest suffers from the trilogy syndrome, much in the same way that Back to the Future and Lord of the Rings suffered: The second movie will inevitably remain the weakest of the three, and during it's initial release, will become the whipping-boy for the franchise. Because the public is mostly aware that the third movie is in the works, the story is created as a bridge between the first and second movie, and will always result in a cliff-hanger of sorts. Those who are unaware of the impending third movie will scorn the directors for leaving it so open at the end, and the more informed viewers will overlook the film to keep their eye focused on the conclusion of the story.

Sadly, the studio themselves seemingly do the same thing. Production values on Dead Man's Chest were not as high as they were for the Curse of the Black Pearl, and it's likely that the studio is more focused on part 3, making part 2 more of a necessary evil rather than an important piece of the puzzle.

That notwithstanding, the movie itself is fun. The action sequences are exciting, the jokes (although not as witty and original as they were in the first) are great, and Captain Jack is just as lovable a rogue as ever. The blending of CGI in this film compared to the first is not as smooth, and there are some design issues for several of the creatures that ILM created this time around.

Walt Disney hated sequels, and when asked why he wouldn't do a sequel to the Three Little Pigs, he simply stated that "you can't top pigs with pigs." In this case, you can't do it with Pirates either.

Overall, it's still a fun and exciting movie, and it leads into what promises to be an equally fun and exciting third installment. As long as you don't expect it to surpass the first film, you should enjoy this adventure with Captain Jack

After a long wait, Chicken Little will finally be released to the public this week, and after a preview screening, I think they should have delayed the release a little longer.

I love Disney, it's something that has its roots in my childhood. I hold ambitions to work in the animation industry, and would love to work for the company that has provided me with so many wonderful memories over the years. With that said, nothing makes me more sad than to see Disney continuously putting out films like Chicken Little.

The concept was interesting, the animation phenomenal, but the story was atrocious (not as bad as the Blue Sky offering "Robots," but still not worthy of the Disney name.) Disney used to be the pioneers of the industry, always pushing the competition to do better, as well as pushing themselves. Now the real talent from Disney has apparently moved to Pixar, while corporate monkeys who have no place in a creative environment are writing the films. Chicken Little feels like a rip off of movies like Shrek, Madagascar, and the like. Rather than committing to something magical, they cram the film with gags that have run their course, and crummy remakes of pop songs that didn't really do that well to begin with.

The real shame is that there are still some creative people working for the mouse who'd talents are being choked off by the suits who think they know better. I still am optimistic for the future, and I think that the films currently in production have a lot of potential, but they will have to raise the bar quite a bit to move beyond Chicken Little.

For a more enlightening animation experience, I say that you should save your money and go see the Wallace and Grommit movie instead.

There seems to be a rapid decline in the quality of cartoons today. Watching Cartoon Network and Toon Disney proves that kids today are being subject to shows that can be labeled as mediocre at best. Despite their current popularity, Spongebob and the Powerpuff Girls lack the charm and longevity of the great cartoons of a few years ago. Warner Brother's newest Batman offering pales in comparison to "Batman the Animated Series," and Animaniacs and Tiny Toons seem to have vanished forever.

Just a few years back cartoons were well developed and exciting. They sparked kids imagination, and parents could sit down and watch these films with their kids and not worry about the content. The crown of all of these great cartoons was Ducktales.

Ducktales told the adventures (or misadventures if you will) of Scrooge McDuck and his nephews Huey, Dewey, and Louie. The quadrillionaire would go to great lengths to find rare treasures, much to the delight of school kids around the world. Ducktales took cues from the Carl Barks comics that Disney produced, and kept the spirit alive with newer characters to play off of the original team. Launchpad McQuack could take Scrooge anywhere for a cheap price, landing safely was another story. Webby provided a girls point of view to the many situations, much to the chagrin of Scrooge's nephews.

Even in later years Bubba Duck and Fenton Crackshell/Gizmoduck provided stories that could encourage kids to shoot for the stars. I remember running home from school so that I wouldn't miss Ducktales.

Now that I'm older, I spot the sloppy animation and Lip Synch. I notice the continuity errors and painting mistakes; however, it doesn't matter. I still enjoy Ducktales for what it is, and I want to be able to pass along this great series to the children in my family. Even with the errors, Ducktales still stands as the ruler for which I measure all other animated series.

It seem that movie sequels being awful became such a joke that Hollywood is starting to fight back. In that respect, the Bourne Supremacy is a worthy follow-up to it's Predecessor.

The story takes place 2 years after the conclusion of the Bourne Identity, and life for Jason has started to quiet down. But a botched operation in the CIA brings up his name, and Jason finds himself once again hunting to keep his peace.

Matt Damon once again gives an excellent performance as Jason Bourne. The story feels more like a continuation of the previous story, rather than a "let's throw more into it and blow the audience away" sequel that we've become accustomed to expect (Batman Forever/and Robin, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle, Star Wars Episode II, etc.)

The only major difference in continuity is that Brian Liman isn't directing this one, and it shows. The camera work is very shaky, which tends to be more of a distraction during the fight sequences and car chases. Often times it was unclear what was going on during these scenes, which made them far less entertaining to watch.

Jason comes off being more human and less superman in this film, which was a major plus. This is easily one of the few spy/espionage thrillers that you see that doesn't insult your intelligence.

The whole revenge plot is somewhat old hat, but it adds to the intricate plot of this film. On the whole, Supremacy is a well done film, but it isn't as grand as Identity.

7 out of 10

I admit that I generally watch this show when it's on cable (which is about every other day,) but it's not a film that you can expect much out of. Most of the time, you watch the movie thinking up comments for an episode of Mystery Science Theatre. The acting is a baby step away from pathetic and the dialogue is awful. About the only decent part of the show would be the mildly original story.

It's entertaining, but only if you don't think much about it!

This was a very well done movie, though I disagree that it was the "scariest movie ever made." in fact, I would say that it really wasn't scary, rather it was tense and disturbing; while there are horror genre movies out there that are extremely morbid, and huge fans of those movies would probably finds this film rather pale in comparison.

This movie is much closer to being a dramatic thriller rather than being a horror flick. For what it is, it's very well composed; though you'll find a more frightening movie in classics like "Silence of the Lambs," or "Jaws."

For being the scariest movie ever made, I think that's a tough title to earn. This certainly didn't out do "The Exorcist" or the original "Haunting."

All in all, it was definately worth seeing, but don't expect to be scared out of your wits.

Well done animation will not make up for a lack of a good story. Professionals in the animation industry will tell you that, and Final Fantasy is living proof of that.

There are plenty of animae films that are the poorest quiality of animation available, but the stories are so well written that it makes up the difference! Then Disney Feature Animation, which is always very high quality, pulls an Atlantis, which has huge problems with the story.

Final Fantasy falls in the same category, which is why it was a horrible show, and why it is quickly forgotten... just like Titan AE, Heavy Metal, and a slew of others!

After hearing my co-worker go on and on about how this was "the creepiest, coolest thriller ever made," I finally decided to check it out. It was definately interesting... After I started I wasn't about to turn it off until I had finished it; however, I wouldn't put it on too high a pedestal. A movie is really scary when it messes with your mind while you watch it. This is why the 1963 "The Haunting" was so successful. This is also why the Blair Witch Project was initially successful... until they finally admitted it was fake (which after the incredible amount of hype they put into making it seem real, you would think that they would have waited at least a year before coming out with the truth.)

Joy Ride is not an intelligent thriller. It's highly cliched, and relies more on cheap thrills and loud music in time with quick action rather than good writing and effective mind-manipulation. It's entertaining, but highly unbelievable. I know that there are some sick SOB's out there, but this truck driver is way out in the left field. A successful scary movie freaks you out because it's realistic enough that it really seems like it could actually happen to you. Ol' "Rusty Nail" is about as likely to chase you in real life as Freddy Kruger or Jason Vorhees.

By all means, watch this movie, but of you're looking for an entertaining evening with cheap thrills and an interesting plot. Just don't expect it to be the scariest movie that you will ever see.

I Rate **1/2 out of *****

I love film, and the magic of being transferred into another place and/or another time. I like being able to see life through the eyes of someone else. Everyone has their own interpretation, and this film is Quentin Tarintino's view on life. There are a large group of people out there who follow Tarintino's career and praise his genious and mastery at story-telling. I am not one of them!

To me, Pulp Fiction was a horrible film! I thought the plots were boring, I thought that the movie was a waste of time, and I feel that way about everything that Tarintino has put out! All he does is recycle the same garbage over and over, and the public praises him for it. From my perspective, the only thing that I see in the film that I would consider an original idea about this film is the manner in which the story was presented (ie the sequence of events being presented as they were.) However, if you really want to see a great and unique approach at story-telling, watch Memento!

What it all boils down to is that I don't believe that Quentin Tarintino is any better a director than Britney Spears is an actress; but that's just my opinion!

I Rate - * 1/2

I searched for this film at every rental store I could find so that I could watch it. I am a fan of Westerns, and of Rachael Leigh Cook. I almost bought the DVD, until I finally found it at Blockbuster. I was so glad that I didn't buy it!

This movie was extremely poor. With the actors that they cast, I was really expecting a great movie, but instead it was an over-the-top, just plain awful film.

I rate-*1/2

When I first heard that Disney was doing a futuristic version of Treasure Island, I was really upset. Even though I am a huge Disney-phile, I thought that the idea of taking my favorite story and setting it in the space age was a really bad idea. When I heard that Glen Keane, who is the most amazing 2D animator in the world, was animating Long John Silver, I knew I would have to see the movie; however, I was still doubtful about how good it would be.

Man, was I ever wrong!

Treasure Planet is the most amazing animated film since Tarzan! The merging of 2D and 3D animation is flawless, and the way the story is presented is incredible. YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS MOVIE!

my rate-*****

I'm not going to spend a long time pouring over details of this movie. I just have to say that this is easily one of the 3 best movies that has ever been made! The film is a visual and acting masterpiece. I was encouraged to watch this film in my multi-media art history class, and I've been a fan ever since.

I must add that this movie has inspired more movies, television shows, and animated films than you can imagine.

I rate-*****