Theo Cinema: ATLANTIS - THE LOST EMPIRE (WOEFULLY Bad)

[AndyDursin]

Ed -- that's a very fair point, it's just someone like Natalie Portman could still deliver those lines with some dignity left, but Christensen couldn't. He's really bad in the second movie and makes it all worse IMO, but sure, someone else should've been brought in to handle "the love story." Too bad Leigh Bracket wasn't still alive or he didn't use another writer (who was the guy he worked with? Jonathan Hales? Obviously that didn't help).

At least with ROTS, there seemed to be more visual reactions from the actors that worked better, emotionally, than any of the clunky dialogue.

That's very true, I like SITH a lot -- and a lot more than any of the Disney movies -- and I recall Christensen being much better in the film. It's one I'm revisiting next weekend most likely!

[AndyDursin]

Considering Christensen is coming back to the franchise for that upcoming Ahsoka Tano D+ series, it's going to be really interesting to see how he fares when not saddled with Lucas' leaden, vaguely autistic dialogue.

Uggh, can't wait for that. This BOBA FETT show is a complete disaster at this point. I'd rather sit through the HOLIDAY SPECIAL for unintentional comedy, at least it's more entertaining.

The Prequels, compared to the OT, showcased how important it was to have Lucas' vision funnelled through the viewpoint of other people, who could polish and refine his vivid imagination by giving the characters witty and lively dialogue. Lawrence Kasdan was a big part of the success of Empire and Return Of The Jedi, and even the original film had significant, uncredited dialogue polishes by the Temple Of Doom / Howard The Duck team of Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz. Lucas' dialogue in the Prequels always sounded like "placeholder" dialogue, something a screenwriter puts in just to have something there until they could come up with something better. At best, it was dull and ponderous. At worst, it was laugh-out-loud awkward (all of the Anakin/Padme "romantic" blather in Attack Of The Clones is amongst the worst of all SW dialogue exchanges ). Say what you will about the Disney sequel trilogy, at least those films were populated by charismatic actors who were given enjoyable, witty things to say to each other (at least, up until "They fly now?!" ).

Is the writing witty? I guess compared to George it is, but it's kind of an empty "improvement," because all that happened was JJ Abrams went back to EPISODE IV and watched how characters interacted with each other, then recycled that banter and "energy". At the time, plenty of fans including me were like "this is great, we got our STAR WARS back," only to realize Abrams, Disney and Kennedy had no clue whatsoever where to go with it.

Still, the prequel issues aside, I still find them far more engaging than the Disney films. At least they are the actual work of a single filmmaker and not a board of Disney executives. Lucas' shortcomings are what they are, but the characters aren't "supposed to be having a good time" like Han Solo -- he made a trilogy that's starkly different in tone and tenor. The characters are more "serious," the mood is more "mythic" -- and he didn't want to repeat himself. Good or bad, he took a chance. It's a lot more ambitious than JJ Abrams "cut and paste" recycling of the original STAR WARS in THE FORCE AWAKENS.

Plus SITH is a really solid piece of entertainment, the acting and dialogue are less important there than the visual element as Ed said, so it plays to Lucas' strengths. The movie is good, and it works, even if it's the only one of the three that really, fully clicks.

What surprised me on this viewing was that CLONES could've worked well if the dialogue functioned and the performances, Christensen especially, was better. From a structural viewpoint, I felt it was better paced and edited than PHANTOM MENACE and might've worked had those elements and a couple of scenes been better executed (Anakin's rescue of his mother for one). But it didn't, and the love story died a slow death. Actually it was never alive to begin with!

[Paul MacLean]

Is the writing witty? I guess compared to George it is, but it's kind of an empty "improvement," because all that happened was JJ Abrams went back to EPISODE IV and watched how characters interacted with each other, then recycled that banter and "energy". At the time, plenty of fans including me were like "this is great, we got our STAR WARS back," only to realize Abrams, Disney and Kennedy had no clue whatsoever where to go with it.

Apart from George Lucas' talent and imagination (and that of Marcia Lucas, Paul Hirsch, John Williams, etc.) the original 1977 film was a movie that just "worked" from top to bottom. It just had that "extra something". Plus it came along at the right time, and gave us heroes people could believe in, when America was jaded in the aftermath of Vietnam and Watergate (and simultaneously enduring the blundering Carter administration).

But Star Wars was originally never thought of as anything more than a one-off, nor predicted to be anything more than a modest success. John Williams regarded it as "a children's film" which "we thought was going to be a great Saturday morning show. None of us had any idea it would become a great world success".

In contrast to a literary series like "Harry Potter" (whose entire seven-book trajectory was outlined by JK Rowling when she began the first story) Star Wars had the problem of "Well, what do we do next"? And while TESB was terrific, it did lack most of the fun and swashbuckling type of adventure of the original film.

I remember seeing Return of the Jedi opening night -- and actually hearing people groan upon reading "...the Empire has begun construction of a New Death Star...". Personally I though it would have made more sense to have a big battle between the rebels and the empire above Coriscant -- but Lucas wanted to make his "Vietnam metaphor".

I like the first and third prequels but they are clunky, and marred by awkward plotting, stilted moments, silly (and unfunny) humor and sometimes bad acting (or more accurately bad directing of potentially good actors). The spirit -- and finesse -- of the original film has never been recaptured as far as I'm concerned, and the quality of the successive films has just mostly dropped lower and lower.

[AndyDursin]

That's such a good point Paul. STAR WARS, the 1977 movie, can still be taken as an independent film experience in my mind -- before there was a franchise, it was just that: a movie that people genuinely loved and accepted as the Saturday Matinee that it was. It didn't have some intricate mythology, the bad guy got away at the end, but it wasn't a plant for a dozen movies and decades of sequels. To me, the movie can still be viewed as it is -- not as EPISODE IV or A NEW HOPE, but STAR WARS. And IMO it remains the pinnacle of all the movies in that series in terms of its freshness and vitality, Williams' scoring, and editing that was positively unique for its era.

I do fault Lucas for one particular element with the prequels: the steadfast attention to the Skywalkers colored not only those films but also Disney's obsession with them in the sequel trilogy. It's a HUGE galaxy with an endless amount of characters -- but we never get a diversity of stories or characters. Neither they nor the prequels gave us compelling new characters or supporting heroes. It's all Anakin and Jedi, even in the Disney movies the focus is the Jedi, Leia, etc. There was no Han Solo in the prequels, so the movies really missed a "human" audience surrogate swept up in the midst of what's a heavy going, mythology-building story.

That's where I think Lucas got tripped up -- that, and building this Joseph Campbell-like mythology for Luke and everyone that kind of overran the "fun factor" of EMPIRE and JEDI. In the original STAR WARS, Luke isn't even "the chosen one" per se -- he's just a hard-working underdog from a worthless planet who gets involved in the greatest adventure of all. That "common man" theme went away as we got into the Skywalker back story, at least until Disney clumsily attempted to instill this "we're all Skywalkers" message in their series of films.

[Paul MacLean]

I do fault Lucas for one particular element with the prequels: the steadfast attention to the Skywalkers colored not only those films but also Disney's obsession with them in the sequel trilogy. It's a HUGE galaxy with an endless amount of characters -- but we never get a diversity of stories or characters. Neither they nor the prequels gave us compelling new characters or supporting heroes. It's all Anakin and Jedi, even in the Disney movies the focus is the Jedi, Leia, etc. There was no Han Solo in the prequels, so the movies really missed a "human" audience surrogate swept up in the midst of what's a heavy going, mythology-building story.

One thing I do appreciate about the prequels is that, for me, they give Return of the Jedi more resonance. I find the confrontation between Luke and Vader (and the Emperor) more powerful because he finds himself in the same position of temptation as Vader years earlier. Vader's decision to do what is right at the end is also way-more impactful, as the character has more of a background (and as a once-good guy). That said, I did not care for the way Hayden Christensen was digitally inserted into the final scene!

I can't relate to any of these spinoffs though. Rogue One was a morose downer, whose morally ambiguous characters are the antithesis of the "good guys" you wanted to cheer-on in the original films. The Mandalorian features the cosmetic style of Star Wars, but if you take away the art direction and make Baby Yoda a different type of creature it could take place in any setting.

[AndyDursin]

I can't relate to any of these spinoffs though. Rogue One was a morose downer, whose morally ambiguous characters are the antithesis of the "good guys" you wanted to cheer-on in the original films. The Mandalorian features the cosmetic style of Star Wars, but if you take away the art direction and make Baby Yoda a different type of creature it could take place in any setting.

We've been watching MANDALORIAN as a family recently. Theo enjoys it. I don't hate it, but the episodes are very basic in terms of their writing and structure. There's nothing witty, fresh or all that exciting happening -- and nearly episode feels like its length is double its actual narrative value (I've fallen asleep on it three or four times). Jon Favreau has a decent sense of packaging a product and his direction is competent -- and the series looks good -- but he's a much less talented writer by comparison.

But I recognize at least it's a STAR WARS story that's kind of satisfyingly wedged between the movies in a different corner of the universe, which is what the films should've been instead of a direct-line sequel story fans became irritated by.

The main reason for its popularity is -- let's face it -- Baby Yoda. This series doesn't have "The Child" and it's going nowhere.

[BobaMike]

Book of Boba Fett got better once Boba wasn't in it. I can't believe I would ever write that!

[AndyDursin]

We're up to the beginning of Season 2 of THE MANDALORIAN -- I admit it, it's good stuff. Especially the Season 2 opener. Even the music has grown on me, but the bits when Ludwig quotes Bill Conti like he's scoring ROCKY XX are kind of outrageous in their "shared DNA".

Anyway a couple of recent views:

THE MUMMY (1999)
Stephen Sommers' big hit remains a thoroughly enjoyable mix of Universal Monster mania and RAIDERS styled Saturday matinee fun. The fast pacing and on-target comedic performances go a long way, at least for kids, to off-setting the more horrific elements of this -- but frankly we probably could've waited a couple of years to show Theo this one, because he was scared in a couple of places by the guy who loses his eyes and the Scarab beetles chewing on a victim. Goldsmith's score is mostly good outside some repetitious action music and a couple of clumsy cues -- the romantic thematic element is sweeping and effective, and the movie holds up well (plus looks great in 4K!)

FAIRYTALE: A TRUE STORY (1997)
What a strange movie that doesn't really work, but still contains a subdued, laid-back, elegiac tone that proves infectious. That said, I didn't really know how to feel about it until its satisfying ending put it over the top.

The big problem is a screenplay that really tries to work in too many narrative elements for its slender 90 minute run time: the true story of two British girls who claimed to photograph fairies outside their country home during WWI would, you would think, be enough to fuel the entire narrative, but writer Ernie Contreras also packs in the dead young brother of one girl, the missing father of the other, grieving parents, a meddlesome reporter, not to mention Harry Houdini (Harvey Keitel) and Arthur Conan Doyle (Peter O'Toole) for good measure! Veteran British director Charles Sturridge is unable to corral all of these elements -- in fact, dramatic crescendos seem to happen at all the wrong moments -- but I can't say the movie didn't have a curious pull to it despite its missteps.

Really though it's a mixed bag until the picture's ending -- which has the definite feel of A LITTLE PRINCESS' conclusion -- emotionally connects its disparate strands and offers a welcome, unbilled cameo from the superstar whose production company produced the film.

[AndyDursin]

Couple more to add to the list:

REVENGE OF THE SITH
He's full on into Star Wars at this point, even if he's trying to get all the timelines in order (can't blame him; we're going to segue into a viewing of the original trilogy again next). As I wrote in the other thread, I like this film quite a lot and it's held up, easily, the best amongst the prequels -- the fast pace and really strong final act trump the clunky dialogue and still-born romance. Christensen is still barely serviceable, but the movie does work -- I also had forgotten how dark it does get, even briefly (was the scene where he goes into the room with the kids REALLY needed?). Lucas did a good job otherwise not dwelling on that at least and making the Emperor cartoony, almost on a Snow White-type of level, which while I know some complained dulled "the dark edge," it also makes it much more viewable for kids. No matter what, the last 30 minutes render a payload of exciting action scenes and a clear dramatic focus, punctuated by Williams' superb scoring. No moment in anything Disney has made post-Lucas comes close.

HOOSIERS
Annual viewing event for us, and Theo's first view -- he managed to understand pretty much all of it ("the coach was angry he didn't pass the ball enough") though he wanted to know what was wrong with Dennis Hopper so we kind of explained it as "mental health sickness" which it basically is anyway. Spontaneous applause when they won the game as well! This movie is SO good and well-edited, and Goldsmith's music -- especially when the "town theme" comes back at the end -- carries it all effortlessly. No dialogue is needed, the images and the music say it all -- beautifully.

[mkaroly]

Good thoughts on SITH - easily for me it was and continues to be the best of the prequels. Amadala's character arc, however, always bothered me. She goes from being the leader of a planet who can engage in combat to an emotional, crying pregnant woman, stripped of all her authority and intelligence (IMO). I know that is harsh, but I never liked how her character was treated by Lucas in SITH. Her character devolves into a caricature. Otherwise, it has Hayden's best performance and I liked that Lucas did not shy away from the darker tone...I feel like it kind of had to be. The ending Darth Vader "NOOOOOOOO!" was really, really goofy IMO. I laughed in the theater when that scene came up.

HOOSIERS is the best sports movie ever made IMO.

[AndyDursin]

I'm with you Michael on HOOSIERS. Can't wear that one out!

On SITH, I also noticed how thankless that role was for Natalie Portman on this viewing. I don't know if I'd say it's a character arc issue, or else he really didn't know what else to do with her. SITH is really about the action and momentum of story elements that don't have to do with Padme so she ends up stuck in a secondary role of little concern to what's going on in this movie. But it's a story about Anakin so...I don't know how they could've integrated her beyond making her some kind of "kick ass" modern heroine that wouldn't have worked. I don't think she's stripped of her "authority." She still has her "senatorial role" but it's all off-screen stuff -- and frankly we didn't need scenes of her, say, lobbying other planets to combat the rising dictatorial power of Palpatine. We had enough of that in the first couple of movies. I don't know, there's actually a lot happening in this film, I'm not sure how they could've integrated her better, but I agree, it's unfortunate for Portman that Padme is basically sitting in the apartment for most of the movie.

I love the last scene with Obi-Wan dropping off Luke. Williams' use of the STAR WARS theme itself is just eye-wetting and so effective in that last scene -- unlike the Disney movies, he was sparing in his use of the old STAR WARS motifs in the prequels so when he made a direct quote like that, in that moment, it really has an emotional pay off.

There are still some goofy moments but it's a (very) good film and highly entertaining.

[mkaroly]

Good points Andy!

[AndyDursin]

We're finally done with Pokemon! Hurray! (I think...for the moment anyway lol)

STAR WARS
EMPIRE STRIKES BACK
RETURN OF THE JEDI
Since Theo has watched the prequels and turned 8 there's a lot more he understands and asks about these films. I have the "4K" uploads people have produced for the original cuts of these (you need to have them on a hard drive for their size) and they are vastly more satisfying, still, than the Special Editions. Not much new to add -- he enjoyed these a lot even if his favorite part was "Boba Fett" because...

THE MANDALORIAN - Season 2
BOOK OF BOBA FETT
I fully concede at this stage that the best Disney revival of STAR WARS aren't the movies but rather these two series, which tell a peripheral story at the edge of the Lucas galaxy but with its own unique character set -- something that should've occurred with the Kylo Ren/Rey movies. In fact, the weaker part comes when elements from the original trilogy are introduced, like Boba Fett himself and a CGI'd, RETURN OF THE JEDI era Luke.

But that said, there's an enormous amount of entertainment in THE MANDALORIAN and Dave Filoni and Jon Favreau got the mix right. It starts off slow in Season 1 but improves as it moves along and becomes pretty irresistible and consistently solid entertainment. I didn't even mind Ludwig Goransson's music which channels Bill Conti and ROCKY (no surprise since he scored CREED) meshed with more familiar Star Wars musical flourishes.

THE BOOK OF BOBA FETT is not nearly as cohesive and goes along the Marvel formula of continuing a wider story arc in the guise of a separate series (which it really isn't) -- thus, in the last couple of episodes, the show literally turns into THE MANDALORIAN "Season 2.5" as Fett is nowhere to be found. Not that it's a bad thing, since the series perks up when Mando and "The Child" take over. Yet even some of the early Fett episodes are fun, including an expanded role for the Tusken Raiders of Tatooine, and a dusty Tatooine sheriff played by Timothy "Justified" Olyphant.

The show looks good, is paced pretty well (again, better once you get past the early episodes), and offers a host of characters from the Lucas ANIMATED franchises like "The Clone Wars" as well -- savvy, smart, fan-friendly moves that also work well in the context of the show. This is the direction Disney should've taken with the movies, no question.

GREMLINS
We were on the fence on this one for a long time because I knew he'd love it -- but I also figured he'd be frightened by portions. Turns out the Gremlin in the Blender didn't bother him -- but the "melting Stripe" at the end of the movie did, so he was a little shaken. I still think Phoebe Cates' monologue about her father breaking his neck in the chimney on Christmas Eve was over the top and unnecessary -- I also forgot the line it's how she learned there wasn't any Santa Claus, since Theo isn't entirely convinced Santa's not real. But then again I'm not sure he knew what she meant either, so we'll see if it sunk in.

Anyway, I know the 2nd film is fine for him (and I recall the hilarious moment when they parody Cates' monologue), so we'll see what he thinks of that when we get to it. The even broader, cartoony tone makes it more suitable for kids.

For me I love GREMLINS, and always have since I first saw it right after school on the last day of 3rd grade in June of '84. Goldsmith's score absolutely nailed the wild tone of that movie -- the Gremlins Rag is classic. The Gizmo theme is a heart-tugger, and I well up at the end every single time when he says "Bye Billy" and heads off into the night. Talk about an ending they "nailed"

[AndyDursin]

ATLANTIS: THE LOST EMPIRE (2001)

Is this the singular most charmless Disney animated film of all-time? Wow, I scarcely recall watching this before -- and I know I did 20 years ago when it came out -- but sitting down this time around with Theo, all I could think of was what an awful, misconceived waste of a film ATLANTIS is. Drably drawn, the movie is so dark, and piled on top of it are cliched stereotypes -- and a TON of characters -- none of whom are remotely appealing or likeable. Coming around the same time as THE EMPEROR'S NEW GROOVE (a movie that was far afield from its original intended concept) and TREASURE PLANET (another misfire), all I could think of was how Disney was forever meddling back then -- writing, rewriting, then rewriting so many animated films that the finished products were the result of a dozen cooks in the kitchen (or more), resulting in head scratchers that ended up dooming hand-drawn animation when they underperformed.

ATLANTIS comes off that way -- and the final result is befuddling. There's no magic in this film, no joy -- it's absolutely dreadful.

Theo did sit through it, but I could tell he was never really into it, and certainly didn't talk about it again after it was over!

[Monterey Jack]

That run of early-mid '00s Disney films is pretty woeful all around (Lilo & Stitch being a notable exception). You could tell they were trying to stretch beyond Disney Princess movies and cater to the "teen boy" market by concentrating on action and adventure as opposed to wacky sidekicks and musical numbers, but these films are every bit as scattershot, reworked and unsatisfying as the "Dark Disney" films of the late 70s and early 80s (The Black Hole, Watcher In The Woods, Something Wicked This Way Comes). Those DD films at least were far more interesting than Disney's early 00s animated output. An underrated animated movie from the same period as Atlantis and Treasure Planet that was far more lively and entertaining was Don Bluth's Titan A.E., which is sadly probably never going to receive a Blu-Ray release due to Disney buying up Fox.



I don't think Disney really got their animated mojo back until Bolt in 2008. That mid-00s period was awash in rightfully-forgotten junk like Home On The Range and Meet The Robinsons.