Retro Review: Jim Henson's The Dark Crystal (1982)

In preparation for the newly released "The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance" series on Netflix (may review that as well), I decided to watch the original film "Jim Henson's The Dark Crystal" for the first time.

Plot synopsis: In the fantasy world of Thra, the source of all life is The Crystal of Truth, but one day, it is suddenly cracked, losing one of its shards, and turns into the titular Dark Crystal. At the same time, two races appear: the monstrous Skeksis and the wise Mystics, with the Skeksis taking control of the Crystal and using it to drain the life force from Thra's other creatures to maintain their youth.

A thousand years later, a young Gelfling named Jen, supposedly the last of his kind, must find and return the shard before Thra's three suns align, or else the Skeksis will gain immortality and rule forever.

As someone who mainly grew up on Sesame Street and The Muppets, seeing a lesser known entry in Jim Henson's filmography was going to be both an intriguing experience and a confusing one: Henson is an undeniable staple in many people's childhoods, and he always seemed to have a lot to offer in terms of creativity and imagination. How could he go wrong?

Indeed, when I started watching the film, his magical touch was prominantly on display: Absolutely gorgeous visuals with a wide array of unique looking creatures ranging from enchanting and alien-like to appropriately ugly and vile. There is a great sense of atmosphere and mythology here; a lived in world that you want to explore more of.

Where it shines in visuals though, it unfortunately lacks in story and character. Story-wise, much of it is told in narration or exposition by the characters, sometimes with the same piece of information over and over again. Character-wise, while the main ones have a trait or unique ability that makes them stand out, there isn't really much to them in terms of personality. The saving grace there, however, is in Henson and his team's expert puppetry work, bringing some genuine emotion and character reactions that I did find moving at times. While doing some research on the film, I discovered one of the inspirations was Grimm's Fairy Tales, which can definitely felt in Jen's journey. The caveat there though is that while fairy tales, myths, and legends can work well with simplistic characters on the page, they need more complexity on the screen.

Another smaller issue I had with the film, was with some of its pacing. In a number of scenes meant to be suspsenseful and action-packed, the pacing drags as the characters seem to be waiting for the bad guys to come attack, even though its a race against time. The pacing also drags a bit in quieter scenes as well, such as when it shows the Skeksis disguistingly and selfishly eating a big feast for several minutes, hammering in how unlikable the Skeksis are meant to be.

All that being said, however, I can see where both sides are coming from. I can see why a number of adults who grew up in the 80s love and cherish it (and were terrified by its darker material), but I can also see why it is more of a cult classic and not as well remembered. Ultimately I'm glad I saw it and I envy those who got to experience it as kids. Its also a good film for fantasy enthusiasts and artists to watch to get inspired for their own work. Overall, The Dark Crystal is a fun film for older kids and adults, but if you're one that prefers some deeper material, then the Muppet movies, Fraggle Rock, or The Storyteller might be more your bag.

Final Rating: 3 stars out of 5.

Onto The Age of Resistance!

Comment your thoughts on the film below.

Treintañera (Short Film)

As young adults trying to make our way through the world, two major factors gain focus in our lives: our careers and our romantic relationships. Some become really lucky and are able to fulfill one or both right away, but many have to wait.

As we grow older, however, we may start to question these factors: Am I truly happy where I am? Did I make the right decision? Which one is more important right now?

This last question is one that the protagonist of the comedic character based short Treintañera, struggles with as we follow her through one awkward situation after another.

Valentina, a Latina photographer, laments her unsuccessful love life. Fearing that her granddaughter is cursed for not having a Quinceañera party on her 15th birthday, Valentina's abuela decides to surprise her with one for her 30th, so she can find a man. On the same day, however, Valentina receives her dream job offer of working for National Geographic. Afraid to let her abuela down, she decides to keep quiet, only for things to quickly get messy.

Written, co-produced and starring Tamara Bunker, Treintañera is a very upbeat and charming film, having the unique combination of feeling like a romantic comedy, but also a little like a slice-of-life story as well. Valentina does get into some quirky silly over the top situations like in a romantic comedy, but at the same time, her personal struggles are real and relatable, with some insight about her Latin American culture and heritage, which is really refreshing.

The cast is easily the best part of the film with Bunker leading the way as Valentina, having great comedic energy and wonderful chemistry with Tina D'Marco, who plays Valentina's abuela, producing some hilarious one-liners, as well as having a cute relationship with Nick Cimiluca as Valentina's prospective love interest, Tom.

Like the film's tone, Bunker's performance naturally swings between the over the top exasperation at the embarrassing situations she's pulled into and the worn down but warm and slightly sarcastic demeanor in the more serious moments, resulting in a character very much of the real world pulled into unusual but not unrealistic circumstances. This balance is heightened into her chemistry with  Tina D'Marco's Abuela character, feeling like an old comedy duo in the more humorous situations but also having a very real and warm familial support in the more serious scenes, showing the kind of relationship they've had over many years. Her chemistry is also heightened with Nick Cimiluca's Tom as his character also has the same sort of everyday likability, taking Valentina's warmth and dry sarcastic wit and returning it to her for some nice banter.

Miss Bunker recently expressed her desire to turn Treintañera into a feature, a decision I am wholly looking forward to. I am curious to see how she will explore this material and these characters further, and how things will play out.

As a character driven short, Treintañera really really works with strong characters and acting work, great chemistry a warm heart, and hilarious comedy. Bunker and the rest of the cast and crew's talent and skill definitely shines through and shows them as filmmakers to keep an eye out for. I definitely will and look forward to their future work.

Definitely see it if you can!

Hidden Figures

The Biopic genre is a fun and interesting one to watch because I'm getting to learn about a person, group, or piece of history that I didn't know about before. So many different stories, voices and viewpoints to hear from. Even better, it encourages me to find out more about them.

Despite certain changes for dramatic purposes, when done well, the strong stories and the amazing real life characters are still there to experience. As a result, there are so many great biopics to choose from: Apollo 13, Remember the Titans, Lawrence of Arabia, Rush, The King's Speech, etc.

Its safe to say that Hidden Figures, about several African American NASA employees and their crucial efforts that helped get John Glenn into orbit and eventually men on the moon, is a worthy addition to this list.

Starring Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Spencer, and Janelle Monae as mathematicians Katherine Johnson,  Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson, the film covers their rise from members of the "West Area Computers" group at Langley Research Center to their respective roles that made history: Jackson joining the all white, male Flight Research Division, Vaughan becoming the supervisor of the group in charge of working with the new IBM supercomputers, and Jackson becoming a flight engineer, and all the obstacles that they had to overcome. and how they used scientific knowledge and education to do so, an aspect that I really loved.

There's an old fashioned feel to the film, both in visual style and theme. Its the kind of film that one might be shown in class during school: a film that views history through more innocent eyes. Something like To Kill A Mockingbird or Remember the Titans. While the film does not have the bite of those films or show the more brutal elements of that era like Selma or the non-fiction The Help, it still holds the same kind of emotional impact as those films because it fully fleshes out those women as characters, both in personality and intelligence and shows the difficulties and tense atmosphere both in work and out of work that they had to deal with,

One such aspect, Johnson having to cross campus every day just to use the colored bathrooms is played for laughs, but at the same time, is built up for a very satisfying and emotionally cringe worthy payoff, when she emotionally explodes when criticized for always being away from her desk.

It shies away from the violence, but comes in full force with the emotion.

The film is also well cast, each actor giving good energy and finesse, but also warmth and humor to their characters, especially Glen Powell as a confident, friendly John Glenn. It was also great to see actors that I haven't seen in a while like Kevin Costner and Kirsten Dunst again and they do a great job as always.

Fault wise, the issues I had with Hidden Figures are rather moderate but still strong enough that the film would be even stronger if they were fixed. The first fault being that while we do spend a lot of time getting to know these characters very well, both at work and at home, it felt like there was too much of them at home at times and not quite enough times at work, but the times at work were strong and satisfying enough, that I'm glad to overlook it. The second fault is with the character of Paul Stafford, the Flight Research Division's second in command, as played by The Big Bang Theory's Jim Parsons, it doesn't feel like there's enough personality or purpose to the character other than to be given orders and to be an obstacle for Johnson, which is disappointing because since he's a co-worker  of the Johnson character, his dynamic with her could be a lot more antagonistic, or dynamic, or funny in a really engaging, memorable way and it would add more to his emotional arc as well.

The third fault I had was that while Johnson, Vaughan, and Jackson have a good balance to each of their arcs, it feels like Jackson's arc ends a little bit early and as a result, she does not get a visual satisfying payoff of herself working as an engineer at the end, like it shows Johnson in the Flight Research Division and Vaughan working with the supercomputers, and I found that a bit distracting and a little emotionally unsatisfying.

The fourth and final fault is rather minor and more of a nitpick, but some of the editing in the opening shots felt a bit wonky or weirdly paced as well, which threw me off for a second, but lI was able to quickly overlook it.

Overall, despite these faults, Hidden Figures is still a great historical biopic, upbeat and well made. I hope it is eventually shown in schools and many families see it with their kids because I bet it will definitely inspire kids to become interested in science and education as well as following their dreams/reaching a goal that seems out of reach.

I definitely say see it!

4.5 Stars out of 5.

22 Years (Short Film)

Its no surprise the amount of emotional baggage divorce can bring a child: strained relationships, changed lifestyles, moments of self doubt and wondering who was to blame. In time, most are able to overcome these problems and go on to live full enriching lives as adults. But sometimes, these feelings are brought back to the surface.

This is the focus of 22 Years, a wonderful character based short film, directed by Fred Thomas Jr. and produced, conceived, and starring Dawn Noel as Avi Moreno, a young, independent woman on the rise, who is thrown for a loop when her estranged father, who she has not seen since her parents' divorce decades earlier, wants to meet.

Noel commands the screen, subtle and nuanced in her performance. Through simple facial expression and strong naturalistic dialogue, we are slowly drawn in and learn so much about her as we follow her along her journey of deciding whether or not she wants to have this meeting. In exploring Avi's life, we also see her relationships with friends, family, and co-workers, played by a rich supporting cast of actors like Kearran Giovanni, Luis Jose Lopez, and Roberto Sanchez.

The film is enriched even further by its technical side as director Thomas Jr. works with cinematographer Sean McDaniel and composer Mike McKnight to create bright colorful visuals and soft atmospheric music, that, when mixed together, become almost characters of their own.

Everything and everyone work together in such an organic and natural way to tell this slice of life story that if feels like could almost be a documentary as well. Nothing feels forced, false or needless added. Its simple, old fashioned filmmaking with new themes and new voices, something I haven't seen in a long time and was very happy to see again.

To see such skill and professionalism done on such a small budget, $5000, is inspiring and a sure sign that Dawn Noel, Fred Thomas Jr., and the rest of the team are filmmakers to keep an eye out for. I definitely will and look forward to their future work.

Definitely see it if you can!

4.8 stars out of 5.

My thoughts on the new Dunkirk Trailer

(For my actual thoughts on the trailer itself, skip to the fourth paragraph):

Growing up, Christopher Nolan has, as a filmmaker, been a large presence in my life with films like Inception, The Dark Knight Trilogy, and the Prestige. So much style, atmosphere, and cerebral elements that stuck in my mind after leaving the theater that its always fun to talk about them. I've always looked forward to a new film of his being released but the last two releases, The Dark Knight Rises (has a number of problems but has a lot of good stuff too) and especially Interstellar (was quite ambitious in scope but rather predictable, emotionally unsatisfying, and a bit depressing in storyline) left me a bit underwhelmed.

With the upcoming Dunkirk in 2017, however, its still a bit too early to tell, but judging by the new trailer, it feels like Nolan is going to be back in full force with this one. When the project was first announced, I was so used to Nolan's films being in the crime, science-fiction, fantasy, and surrealistic genres with non-linear storytelling that I was a bit narrow minded and confused as to how he was going to approach the project. Was this going to be like a surrealistic war movie? A sci-fi time travel sort of thing? How is this going to work? He's never done a film of this genre before.

But in actuality, his previous films prove that Nolan is perfect for doing a film like Dunkirk all along because despite the surrealism, non-linearism, and off the wall action and spectacles, all of his films have had a gritty realism to them that helped ground the more fantastic elements so that they're believable. Following, Memento, and Insomnia are pure crime stories with the most fantastic elements being the background and situations of the characters,, high detail is given to the period that The Prestige takes place in with all the magical elements being explained, and the more outlandish parts left mysterious and vague but in tune with the tone and is not altogether too outlandish, Inception balances realism with fantasy into two worlds but sets things up in a way that the two can be confused, and The Dark Knight movies are gritty crime stories with Batman having the use of realistic military equipment in his work (and the easy means of obtaining them because he's a billionaire) and the villains being the most outlandish elements either because of how they're dressed or their background but their intentions and beliefs are realistic and gritty in an insane way.

Getting to the actual trailer itself (sorry about that), I'm immediately excited because as a history enthusiast, I love learning about anything from the past that I had never knew before (especially the 19th and 20th centuries and World War 2) and as a period piece, Dunkirk looks great: old, gritty, darker colors or lack there of. It looks and feels like an old fashioned war film akin to something like Saving Private Ryan or Paths of Glory. What adds to that feeling even more and makes me very excited are all the great members of the cast Nolan has collected: Tom Hardy, Kenneth Branagh, James D'Arcy, Cillian Murphy, and Mark Rylance. I know i'm going to have a fun time just based off that. The story itself sounds great too about hundreds of thousands of soldiers being trapped under constant enemy fire and the efforts to get them out (I haven't seen that many war films before but this kind of story mixed with the tone and actors involved always makes me want to see more of them) and I'm excited to see what Nolan does with it.

I really have no problems at all with this trailer. Really I have more of a problem with some of the reactions to the trailer on Youtube (a stupid thing to complain about because its the Internet, I know, but I just have to bring these up).

Some people have said that the trailer looks boring or it does nothing for them. The latter I can get because war films, like any genre, are not for everyone (I myself have only watched certain war films because of who was involved in production rather than the actual film itself, which I need to change) but for the people bored by the trailer: Um, watch more movies and or study history. Its a true story, it takes place during one of the greatest conflicts in all of human history, and just because it might be slower, doesn't mean it will be boring. Watch the movie and let it happen to you before you complain. Not everything has to be fast and quick cut.

The other complaint I noticed was about the casting of Harry Styles from the band One Direction in the film. While I have heard a lot of negative thoughts about the band and while I'm not really a fan of the post 2000s teen pop kind of bands/musicians that have appeared, I don't know that much about the band anyway and no one has seen this guy act so I think its a little early to complain about him. For the most part, Nolan really seems to know what he is doing and I trust his judgement. He's made controversial casting choices in the past (Heath Ledger as The Joker, anyone?) and look how those have turned out. (Really, the only time/s its felt like Nolan has miscast someone has been Marion Cotillard in The Dark Knight Rises and David Oyelowo in Interstellar (but those were badly written roles to begin with anyway, so its not really their or Nolan's (from a directing standpoint) fault.

Long story short (too late), I'm loving what I'm seeing from Dunkirk so far, I'm excited to see what the future trailers show and I'll definitely be at the theaters when the film opens next year. Let me know what you thought in the comments below:

Moana

Moana is a wonderful film: Beautifully and richly animated with strong, heartfelt characters, an engaging story, toe-tapping songs and great humor.

Directed by legendary Disney artists John Musker and Ron Clements ( of The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, The Princess and the Frog, and Treasure Planet fame), the film is about a Polynesian girl named Moana who has loved the ocean all her life and wants to go beyond her island home to explore it, but cannot due to her father's insistence that they have everything they need on the island and her time is better suited to leading their tribe. When their source of food starts to die off however, Moana must venture out and find the demigod Maui and return a magical stone he has stolen, to make things right again.

The film has a very strong cast led by newcomer Auli'i Cravalho, a wonderful actress and beautiful singer, as Moana and Dwayne Johnson as Maui, who has a lot of funny quips and one-liners, as well as a magical tattoo (that kept reminding me of the Genie from Aladdin for some reason).

The story and animation blend together wonderfully, exploring the theme of finding one's identity and true calling in life and really opening up the scope and majesty of the epic world it inhabits, which is the culture and mythology of Polynesia (bringing back happy memories of my visits to the Polynesian Cultural Center in Oahu. If you haven't gone, I highly recommend it!). The film somehow even manages to subvert the cliches of Disney formula like joking that Moana isn't technically a princess since she's the daughter of a chief or glossing over the fact that "she is the chosen one", which is actually really refreshing. It also takes its time at telling the story, dedicating at least half an hour or so to setting everything up, but it really pays off, leaving me very satisfied emotionally.

While not as catchy as "Try Everything" from Zootopia or ear worm, can't get it out of your head inducing as "Let it Go" from Frozen, all the songs in Moana are still very strong, heartfelt and memorable, especially "How Far I'll Go" and "We Know The Way", which I've found myself listening to several times after having seen the movie (and plan to listen to listen to several more times in the following weeks).

I really have nothing negative to say about the film other than extreme nitpicks that I could easily overlook with a second viewing, although I could see these being problems for other people, like why, except for comedy relief and one brief moment during the climax, was Moana's animal sidekick a really dumb chicken? It had no significance to the plot. Other nitpicks include some of the jokes involving Maui being a little too meta, like an eye roll inducing in-joke to Twitter, a cliche that took away from Maui's arc a little bit, and least of all, some of the transitions into songs were a bit sudden.

But like I mentioned above, those negatives are extreme nitpicks that do very little if anything at all to deter the so many great positive elements of the film overall.

I definitely say see it! Disney has done it again!

4.5 Stars out of 5

Doctor Strange

Dr. Strange is the latest entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the latest to introduce a new character and new environment/world to explore during their origin story. 

Benedict Cumberbatch does a great job as the titular Doctor Steven Strange, a cocky and selfish but brilliant surgeon who eventually turns sorcerer after a car accident permanently damages his hands, as do the rest of the cast, especially Rachel McAdams as Christine Palmer, a nurse and Strange's ex, Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mordo, a fellow sorcerer, Tilda Swinton as Strange's teacher The Ancient One, and Mads Mikkelsen as the villain Kaecilius. All the main characters in the cast are wonderful acted and their relationships are really strong and heartfelt (there are some moments that are really sad and heart tugging) , especially the chemistry between Cumberbatch and McAdams. The majority of the character arcs are strong and effective as well.

The visuals and special effects are extremely well done and imaginative, as are the fight scenes. Unfortunately, two major elements of this movie hinder all the positive elements of the movie, preventing me from giving a higher rating: Strange's character arc and the world of the movie that the story takes place in.

With Strange's character arc, it just feels rather muddled. I was never really sure whether his arc was going from a selfish jerk to a more selfless person, finding a way to move on and find a new purpose in life after his accident, to forget everything he knew and see things in a new life, embrace death, or all of the above, because they felt all over the place, so I was never quite clear about what it wanted to say.. Not only that but, while it did show some progression of an arc (like Stephen practicing and learning these new skills, a lot of times, they felt really rushed, like I didn't know that Strange has been training for several months until a character says it, but it only feels like a few days. Then suddenly, he is thrown into a new location where he'll be ending up at the end of the film. The arc was in so many pieces that only the relationships he had with Palmer and Mordo felt emotionally earned (even the crossover during the credits felt rushed as well).

With the world that the story takes place in, I love the idea of someone exploring eastern methods of healing and spirituality (indeed Buddhism and Hinduism sound like very intriguing topics), but the film is so vague and confusing with the "other worlds, dimensions and planes of existence) element, that, when mixed with Strange's muddled character arc, I didn't find myself caring as much about the overall story as I should have, and I don't have much of a desire to see the film again. 

Maybe I will catch more details on a second viewing and if they fix these two problems while keeping the other elements strong in a sequel, then I will totally be on board. Until then though, I find this only an okay addition to the MCU and a meh addition to the origins section of the MCU library (Go to the first Iron Man and Captain America: The First Avenger for the absolute best of that section).

3 stars out of 5