Foodfight! (2012)

Directed by: Lawrence Kasanoff

Story by: Lawrence Kasanoff & Joshua Wexler

Screenplay by: Brent V. Friedman, Rebecca Swanson and Sean Catherine Derek & Lawrence Kasanoff

When the supermarket closes at night, the contents inside come to life! The shop becomes a living world for Dex Dogtective and all other creatures inside it at night time. However, with the new Brand X coming into the store, things take a turn for the worst.

---

I've wished I had an extremely terrible movie to review for once, even though it's painful for me and now I had the chance to see one of the worst movies out there. It's so bad I feel like I can't even say anything about it.

The story sucks. There's no focus, even though there is a main storyline, but there are so many useless scenes and it's hard to follow. Not that it'd be cleverly complicated or anything like that, it's just so messy, confusing, loud and obnoxious I'd rather not follow it. The pacing is so bad it seems like not one scene matters. And the final "food fight" takes way too long. They should edit like 20 minutes out of this movie. Scratch that, edit 80 minutes out of the movie.

The animation is awful, the worst I've ever seen. Everything's ugly, twitchy and disgusting. It's like you don't want to see the movie but even less you want to see the characters. The camera movement is giving me motion sickness and it's moving so much and the editing is crappy. Oh, and speaking of movement, nothing moves naturally in this movie. It's awful. Also everyone looks dead, no one has life in their eyes and it's creepy.

And worst part about this movie, it's so incredibly dirty. Like there's no way this was ever meant for kids. Language is coarse, it's mostly bathroom jokes, and there's so many sexual innuendos. and the outfits on the lady character... This is a... fetish movie...

Also this is a weird detail but why does that one character sound like a drunken Tim Curry? I was super scared Curry was in this movie for a second, but I'm so happy it's just someone copying him.

I decided to do a count for actually funny jokes and I got one. That's on funny joke in an ~80 minute movie, and I didn't really laugh out loud at it, just like oh, one funny joke, great.

No one needs me to tell them not to watch this movie. You see the poster and you know it's going to suck. Even worse, it has an 1,8 on IMDb. So yeah, keep avoiding this movie. You'd think it'd be fun to watch with friends to laugh at it and I can tell you no, it's still just sad.

☆

1 / 10 

Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010)

Directed by: Brandon Vietti 

Written by: Judd Winick

There's a mystery afoot in Gotham City, and Batman must go toe-to-toe with a mysterious vigilante, who goes by the name of Red Hood. Subsequently, old wounds reopen and old, once buried memories come into the light.

---

Batman: Under the Red Hood differs a lot from the previous animated Batman movies I've reviewed. It has a different look, tone and sound. Unlike Mask of the Phantasm or Mystery of the Batwoman, it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the animated series. The tone is much darker, and the cast is completely different.

The animation in this movie is beautiful, flows really well and it's even really impressive at times. I like the simple look of the series, but for a movie this style really works well.

Actually finding out about the cast was the point where I almost lost my interest. The cast is still talented, but I just adore Kevin Conroy and especially Mark Hamill. I like John DiMaggio in his other roles, but him as Joker? He did a good job, and so did pretty much everyone, but it just doesn't feel right.

The story of the movie is great, but the structure feels clumsy. The beginning just isn't that capturing, and the fact that it starts with a brutal torturing and death and then skips to five years later, it's just annoying. As the story went on, I managed to really get into it, and eventually I really, really like it. It's just a shame that a movie only lasts 75 minutes, and it just doesn't manage to capture the audience immediately. Also I'm glad the twist comes early because it's just too obvious, so no one has to pretend they don't get what's going on.

I also like about how this movie deals with philosophy and morals behind Batman. There are two views to how he operates, and neither one is wrong. We get why Batman doesn't really kill anyone, but I think everyone has at one point wondered, why the hell doesn't he just kill some of the most dangerous villains, who will just keep breaking out of Arkham Asylum and killing people. These are some aspects of Batman's character I'm never tired of exploring.

This movie is great when it gets great, and has interesting and cool things in it. With some fixing it could be even more amazing, but I'm kind of alright with what we got.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

7 / 10

Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman

Directed by: Curt Geda

Sequence  directors: Jennifer Graves & Tim Maltby

The Dark Knight must contend with a mysterious female vigilante who emulates him, but to a more ruthless degree.

---

The DVD box that contains Batman: Mask of the Phantasm also has four other movie, including straight-to-video movie Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman. While Mask of the Phantasm was close to perfect and phenomenal, this one is just... ehh.

Don't get me wrong, the mystery part of this movie is amazing. It kept hinting that I was right, yet proving me wrong a lot, and I enjoyed every minute of it. But the thing is, that is the best part of the movie, everything else is just alright, mostly because there isn't much interesting in it, except the mystery of the Batwoman.

The main villain of the movie is Penguin, who's just super boring. I guess who we should be afraid of is who he hires, and in this movie he hires Bane. Freaking Bane! He's supposed to be interesting but I just found him odd. I mean definitely better than Bane in Batman and Robin, but different from the Banes I like: the one from The Dark Knight Rises and the one from the video game Arkham Asylum.

And nothing the villains are planning is interesting. Like sure, in Mask of the Phantasm didn't have a villain with a great plan. The movie had god damn Joker in it and he wasn't even the main villain, but it still was interesting because of other things. Here after the mystery of the Batwoman is solved, everything is just boring. I'm not really sure what Penguin did, probably sold guns or something... It just didn't really seem to matter.

If something saves this movie, it's the nice animation and the fight sequences, which are something really cool, other times... just weird.

Of course you can't expect a direct to video movie to be as great as something that was released in the theaters and which was clearly paid more attention to. Still I would've liked this to be at least a little bit more interesting.

☆☆☆☆

4 / 10

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993)

Directed by: Eric Radomski & Bruce Timm

Written by: Alan Burnett, Paul Dini, Martin Pasko & Michael Reaves

Batman is wrongly implicated in a series of murders of mob bosses actually done by a new vigilante assassin.

---

I tumbled onto a video of this movie by Nostalgia Critic, and he did a damn good  job talking about the movie, because I immediately wanted to watch it. What really won me over was how the movie has interesting character study without being too analyzing like some other movies filled with 'very important dialogue', and the fact that this story is actually a mystery. While Batman is a detective, the live action films don't really have any mysteries for him to solve. 

The runtime for this movie is only 76 minutes, so there is no time to waste. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm starts immediately, and there are no scenes or moments unnecessary during the story. And the movie actually manages to be thrilling right when it starts. 

The story is interesting. Of course the mystery is intriguing, and very well written. It keeps you invested and guessing. One negative thing I might point out is that it doesn't feel like there's anything to lose. Sure, people thing Batman is killing the mob bosses, but we know he isn't, and honestly, what could the police do about it? Clearly in the world of this story Batman sticks to the shadows and is rarely seen, so it doesn't seem like he could be caught, or that anything could happen to him. Also even if the killer of the mob bosses wasn't caught? It's not like the audience is interested in their lives.

Another great thing about the story is how we see a different version of Bruce Wayne in the flashbacks. He isn't exactly Batman yet, and he considers not even being Batman, since he's in love and actually happy. It's a new side to him, and it asks and answers the question, what if Bruce Wayne was happy? Could he still be Batman?

While watching the movie I was briefly annoyed by the amount of flashbacks, feeling that they might slow down the story, but they actually provided us with some time to breathe. And I won't lie, all those flashbacks were necessary in one way or another. 

And I have to say it: one of the biggest reasons I wanted to see this movie was Mark Hamill, and I love how they tied Joker into the plot. He could've just been thrown in the mix since he's the Joker and people love to hate him, but instead he actually had an interesting role. And honestly, Mark Hamill is the only actor who has made me sort of afraid of the Joker.

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm is an excellent Batman movie, and if I had to rank all the Batman movies I've seen  - mostly live action - this one would probably be number one on that list. It's well-written, mysterious and while it's a family picture, it's thrilling to both kids and adults.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

9 / 10

Frozen (2013)

Directed by: Chris Buck & Jennifer Lee

Written by: Chris Buck, Jennifer Lee & Shane Morris

When the newly-crowned Queen Elsa accidentally uses her power to turn things into ice to curse her home in infinite winter, her sister Anna teams up with a mountain man, his playful reindeer, and a snowman to change the weather condition.

---

This review contains spoilers.

Do you have a movie you swore you'd never watch? Especially a movie that was so annoyingly popular you kind of hated by default? If you answered, did you ever end up watching that movie? And did the movie prove you wrong?

Well, Frozen certainly did not prove me wrong. I admit I have my assumptions of the movie, but mostly I was hoping I'd see Frozen and think oh, well it wasn't that bad. Sure, it wasn't bad but it's not really good either. It's so aggressively mediocre I just feel annoyed after seeing it.

The story is inspired by The Snow Queen by Hans Christian Andersen, but The Snow Queen is a very interesting story. I actually have never finished the story, it was read to us in elementary school, but even just the beginning of the story was magical and interesting, and definitely not the bland Disney version. The early concepts of the movie were closer to the story. If you haven't seen any, google them. They are really amazing, interesting and stand out from the typical shit Disney throws into the movie theaters nowadays.

Here's the problem: if Disney wanted to make The Snow Queen, why didn't it make the Snow Queen? Why alter the story so much it's barely a shadow of itself? If they wanted to make an original story, they could've. Disney has made some movies that have an original story, and they are magnificent, but the stories that have a source material which they do not really follow are usually very boring. My sister pointed out this with Oliver and the Company: the characters and songs are really good, but because the movie tries so hard to be Oliver Twist, the story is quite bad.

Of course the story here is alright, but that's it, it's just alright. There's nothing absolutely interesting about it, apart from the sibling relationship. I mean most Disney characters seem to be the only child or an orphan so that's kind of new. And since the sisters were isolated from each other while growing up their relationship has a weird feel to it. It's understandable though, but it's not like, say, Lilo and Nani in Lilo & Stitch.

And there's one thing especially I'm really angry about the plot. The parents are so adamant about Elsa having to learn to control her powers, but how is it done? "Never use your powers again, suppress everything." There has to be someone in the kingdom they could've hired to teach Elsa, right? I mean that can't be the only magical thing in the kingdom. Hell, why didn't they ask the trolls?

Now I'm getting to the spoiler-y part, so if you're reading this and don't want to be spoiled (if you haven't been already it's a fucking miracle) skip to the next paragraph. Anyway, I want to talk about Hans. He's the villain, though you wouldn't know it, because he pretends to be something completely different throughout the movie until he reveals his true side to Anna rather spectacularly. Seriously, the "If only there was someone out there who loved you" -line, the whole scene was the best part of the movie, because it's so very intense. But what I love about Hans is they really kept his dark side hidden. I mean he didn't look evil, his design was actually quite nice, and he was helpful when Arendelle was frozen and people needed help... He didn't even get a typical villain song (though I would love to think it's this one). I mean I knew he was the bad guy, because spoilers were thrown in my face, but still it was made so well. You really couldn't tell.

Another big problem with Frozen is it should be edited more. The begining? Way too slow and has a completely useless scene and a useless song. Just start the story where it begins. There are several songs that add absolutely nothing to the story. Actually there are only 3+1 songs that are interesting and are useful: For The First Time In Forever (+ reprise), Love Is An Open Door and Let It Go. Honestly, there just were so many songs that made me want to scream edit, edit, EDIT!

You know who else adds nothing to the story? Olaf. He's a really annoying character that seems to be there only to be cute and sell merchandise. And guess what, Olaf isn't cute. With a better design and another voice actor he could be cute. Josh Gad's voice just doesn't make sense to me, and Olaf sounds like he should be voiced by Jack McBrayer. Honestly listen to this song from Wander Over Yonder and tell me he wouldn't be perfect for Olaf.

You'd think one thing I could say for certain about Frozen is that it'd be visually pleasing. Sure, it is. The snow and ice looks great, but you know who doesn't look great? Elsa and Anna. Many people have said this before me, but it's still true: they look bland, way too similar and to be honest, not very expressive. Also they stand out - or don't stand out - from the crowd. Side characters have their own special look while Else and Anna look exactly like each other and just don't sit well with the more interesting looking characters.

I'm old-school. I'm not a big fan of this kind of animation, give me 2D animation, maybe hand-drawn, and make the background or few special effects 3D. That's the dream. And computer generated animation always has those mistakes you can't make in 2D animation. In 3D there's mistakes like body parts clipping through each other. In 2D the most common mistakes are like colouring mistakes, stuff like that.

The story of Frozen is alright, very typical and very Disney, but I don't really see if there's a reason for the hype. Was it just advertised so much that everyone went to see it? Like was this genuinely because of the audience or was it just because it was that Disney movie?

☆☆☆☆☆

5 / 10

A Goofy Movie (1995)

Directed by: Kevin Lima

Written by: Jymn Magon, Chris Matheson & Brian Pimental

When Max makes a preposterous promise to a girl he has a crush on, his chances to fulfilling it seem hopeless when he is dragged onto a cross-country trip with his embarrassing father, Goofy.

---

After the rough week our family has had, it was fun to relax with my sister and my dad to watch A Goofy Movie. ... What's up with that title though? Shouldn't it be The Goofy Movie? A Goofy Movie makes it sound like it's just a Goofy Movie, as if there are several, and I'm just talking about some of them, I don't know or care which one.

A Goofy Movie (I still really want to say 'The') is really funny. It has that slapstick from the typical Goofy shorts, but also the fun is brought on to a new level with the new character Max, Goofy's son. He's a teenager embarrassed by his dad, especially since he can't go to a party with his crush when his dad surprises him with the fishing trip. He lies to the girl about knowing a popular musician, and eventually deceives his dad by altering the map, making their destination L.A.

The father-son relationship of the movie is actually good and well thought out. Goofy seems like a weird choice for a father, but when you think about it, he's the perfect choice from the pre-existing Disney characters. He's... Well, he is Goofy and he's goofy. He is a loving father but also really gives a teenager a reason to be embarrassed. A teenager has no real reason to actually hate his father, so here it's just embarrassment and annoyance from Max.

I think most of the viewers who have been teenagers can see themselves in Max. We've all been like that once. He's kind of annoying and whiny but you understand his reasons. Teenagers just are like that, and as we get older we can laugh at what we were like, but also we understand better what we were going through. Or if you don't see yourself in Max, because you just weren't like that, you can at least see your friends or siblings in Max. (Discussed this with my sister. She never was quite like Max, but she remembers the times I was an annoying teen going through puberty)

So while of course these movies cater to kids, but there are two kind of adults (at least) to whom the movie has something to offer. There are the young adults who have been that teen, and there are parents.

Because of our childhood, we decided to watch the movie with the Finnish dub. Mostly it's really good, my only complain is that Antti Pääkkönen voices way too many characters, especially P.J. Max in Finnish sounds like an actual teenager, even when singing. That is the main reason we prefer the Finnish dub. Especially when you listen to the song After Today. In English, Max sounds like an adult, in Finnish he sounds like a teenager. But when Pääkkönen voices P.J., he sounds like an adult, even if it is an adult with a really high voice. Pääkkönen is talented, one of the most beloved voice actors here because he's in everything, but here it's a wrong choice.

Another weird choice in Finnish dub only lasts for a few seconds, but it's Jukka-Pekka Palo as Mickey Mouse during the song at the beginning of the road trip. Huh? What? I've always assumed Pääkkönen voiced Mickey during this time, and a movie filled with characters voiced with Pääkkönen went with Jukka-Pekka Palo? He's best known for playing the villains, like Scar in The Lion King and Tzekel-Kan in The Road to El Dorado. Sure, he does other stuff, but we remember him as the villains, and knowing he voices Mickey Mouse is just weird.

And now that I've already mentioned the songs, let's talk about the songs. Most of them leave no impression. They just kind of are there, and there's no real reason for them. The only ones I kind of like are the ones by Powerline, because that makes sense, and the one sung at the start of the road trip. Even that is only funny because of a) Goofy and b) all the freaky stuff happening around them like that corpse or kidnap victim starting to sing.

Also there are two confusing things I want to point out.

First one is kind of minor, but it's Mickey Mouse. No, I'm not going to talk about Jukka-Pekka Palo again. No, it's that in the beginning Max has a Mickey Mouse phone. I mean that has to mean Mickey Mouse is famous, right? But when they go on the road trip they see Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck hitchhiking. If they are famous, why... why are they hitchhiking. And also if Goofy knows them, and they are famous, considering everything Goofy should be famous too. Why does it seem like no one knows who he is apart from the town?

Another thing is that my dad was angry at this one transition where first the characters are like we're going to go to that place. Then next scene they are in the place. There's no planning, they just get there. My dad feels like they missed a scene, but I kind of disagree. Isn't it funnier to not know? I don't know, people might see this differently depending on what they like and what they know about screenwriting.

Goofy Movie is funny, surprisingly deep and apart from the few confusing points we really enjoyed seeing it again. I haven't seen it in ages. My only problem was that the dub wasn't always so great, but it's something I can forgive rather easily.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

7 / 10

Looney Tunes: Back in Action (2003)

Directed by: Joe Dante

Written by: Larry Doyle

The Looney Tunes search for a man's missing father and the mythical Blue Monkey diamond.

---

I really liked this movie when I was a kid and because I'm hungover I wanted to watch something comfortable and I though hey, I haven't seen Looney Tunes: Back in Action in ages. Yeah, of course it's a children's movie and it's very silly, but for me this is kind of that adventure comedy I compare all others to, at least subconsciously, since it's about the first one I saw.

Even as a grown-up I still find this movie funny. Yeah of course there are some corny childish jokes in there, but most of the comedy is still funny. The Looney Tunes character bring most into this movie. Sure, Brendan Fraser's character is alright and Timothy Dalton is good and all that, but still none of those characters beat Daffy Duck or Bugs Bunny and all those other characters we've learnt to love watching the Looney Tunes shorts.

The story itself is pretty simple but it has so many hilarious details and the characters and the fun mix between live action and animation are the things that make this movie fun. It's not the best adventure movie out there, but it's hilarious, and what kid wouldn't love it?

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

The LEGO Batman Move (2017)

Directed by: Chris McKay

Screenplay by: Seth Grahame-Smith, Chris McKenna, Erik Sommers, Jared Stern & John Whittington

Story by: Seth Grahame-Smith

Batman created by: Bob Kane & Bill Finger

Superman created by: Jerry Siegel & Joe Shuster

(wow that's the most credits I've ever had to type)

Joker plans his revenge trying to get him to admit his Batman's number one enemy, while Batman struggles with his greatest fear: clown snakes being part of a family again.

---

Guess what movie I've been super excited about for a few months? That's right, The LEGO Batman Movie! And I liked this movie so much I didn't even feel ridiculous when I met another film fanatic who was going to see La La Land. Also I met few friends who were going to see Fifty Shades Darker, then I was truly happy with my life choices.

I hate Batman. There, I said it. I hate the movies because they are either completely ridiculous (when Joel Schumacher was directing) or annoyingly dark and brooding (Nolan's trilogy and also the Batman V Superman blah blah). The only live action movie I kind of like is Tim Burton's Batman movies. Burton's movies were dark but not like brooding dark, more like, well, Burton dark.  

The first time I ever liked Batman was in The LEGO Movie. He was clearly Batman, but he was also so much fun. Also the first time I saw The LEGO Movie I was like "holy shit that's GOB!!" because I didn't learn Will Arnett's name until the end credits.

Michael Keaton is the perfect live action Batman - and Bruce Wayne. To me he has always looked like the right Bruce Wayne. And Will Arnett will always be my favourite Batman. He has the perfect voice for it, and while he nails the voice he can also be silly with it. Like I can't imagine Christian Bale doing that. Yikes!

Anyway that's how I feel about Batman in general. You know, to give you a little context about how much I don't like Batman movies.

But I loved this one! It is so good! The LEGO Movie is one of my favourite films, and The LEGO Batman Movie is just as good! Of course the universes are a bit different. The LEGO Movie is a mix of, well, every possible universe, while The LEGO Batman movie is mostly DC universe - with a mixture of different villains released by Joker. Also that certain meta feeling is not there, that was in The LEGO Movie, but that might've been good. The difference between the two is that The LEGO Movie was, in a way, about Legos. Now the characters in The LEGO Batman Movie are made of legos, sure, so are buildings and all that, but it's not addressed so much. We don't have to think about it. It could be just another superhero movie, apart from few jokes that require Legos. 

This was so much fun! Since I obviously went to see this in English (and since the subtitles didn't work), the audience was mostly grown ups, and every one of us was laughing. And there were so many kind of jokes. One of my favourites is Batman saying it would be stupid to have villains fight villains.

And of course The LEGO Batman Movie isn't just action and fun, even though that would've worked too. There's some pretty deep and important stuff about Bruce getting over his fear of intimacy and all that. Of course all that is kind of sappy, but hey, when isn't stuff like that sappy? It's still really nice to see Bruce Wayne / Batman actually have more character development in The LEGO Batman Movie than in the whole Nolan trilogy. Also there are probably a lot of adults out there who might actually see their own issues in Bruce Wayne, who is not going to just be dark brooding Batman and never let anyone close. And also I mean it gives children a nice lesson about family as well. Altogether all the life lessons in The LEGO Batman Movie were so nice, and even if they were sappy, even someone with cynic's traits might melt a bit. I know I did.

Right now I can't think of anything wrong with this movie. It was a great experience! It has the best parts of a children's movie and a superhero movie. It's an excellent movie, better than any other Batman movie, and the only Batman movie I've given a full 10/10.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

10 / 10

Zootropolis (2016)

Directed by: Byron Howard, Rich Moore & Jared Bush (co-director)

Story by: Byron Howard, Rich Moore, Jared Bush, Jim Reardon, Josie Trinidad, Phil Johnston & Jennifer Lee

Screenplay by: Jared Bush & Phil Johnston

In a city of anthropomorphic animals a rookie bunny cop Judy Hopps teams up with a swindler fox Nick Wilde to discover why so many predators are reported missing.

---

Yay, another reason for my sister to think I'm a furry, smh.

I'm not usually into Disney. Everything is too soft for me. I like a few, mostly because I saw them when I was a kid and they make me nostalgic. I rented this mostly because there was a sale and if you rented five movies you could have them for a week for seven euros, and it was a bargain, and I remembered my sister wanted to see this at least at one point. I did want to see this for a few reasons. One of them was that people mostly said it was great. Another was that Jason Bateman was in this movie. Now I'm not his biggest fan or anything, but I've watched enough Arrested Development to like him. So, what the hell, I watched it.

I was so pleasantly surprised. What's the highest rating I've given a children's animated movie? The Lego Movie, which was awesome, and I gave it 9 / 10. Zootropolis doesn't come close to The Lego Movie, but Zootropolis is great. It is funny, and it is actually super thrilling. I was on the edge of my seat wanting to know what was going to happen, and what had happened, and all that. It also has just the perfect amount of scary. I'm glad I watched this.

Of course there are few things that bother me like why isn't Disney using voice actors instead of some random Hollywood live action actors and actresses. Like sure, they get more viewers, but there are amazing voice actors and actresses out there, who could be magical in a movie like this. Now it's mostly like "hey, that dude sounds familiar" and maybe recognising one actor (Tommy Chong). It's not like the cast is bad but... why can't you use people who will definitely, absolutely do a great job?

Also this movie could be a great metaphor for racism and all kind of prejudice, but it's a bit... weird. It's mixed. First it seems that everyone is pushing the prey down, but in the end everyone is awful towards PREDATORS, like hey, maybe don't be prejudice against that huge ass beast who could murder you and eat you. If you are a tiny bunny, you kind of have the right to be scared of a jaguar or whatever. Maybe you're not supposed to think about these animals as humans, but still you are kind of telling kids hey, that person who bullies you and hurts you? They have their own issues going on. Sure, they might have some issues of their own, but that doesn't make it okay... I don't know where I'm going with this, but this situation kind of bothers me.

But other than those things, this movie is surprisingly good. Like I said, super thrilling yet fun. I really like this movie.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"...the Internet and dreams are similar. They're areas where the repressed conscious mind escapes."

Year: 2006

Directed by: Satoshi Kon

Written by: Yasutaka Tsutsui (novel), Seishi Minakami & Satoshi Kon (screenplay)

All hell breaks lose when a machine used by therapists to record and watch their patients' dreams is stolen. Three scientists, a police inspector and a sprite named Paprika must try to find the thief and not submit to the mind tricks created by the machine and dreams.

---

What did I learn while watching this film? From now on I will always, always read some kind of summary of a film. For like most part of this movie I had no clue what was going on. And I still have no idea what Paprika really was. And I watched this film with my sister, and she too was super confused during this film. Usually not reading the summary doesn't affect me one way or the other, but this time I realised that there still are very confusing and complex movies that require some form of research before actually watching it.

There's one thing I'm certain of Paprika: it's a very creepy movie. It's creepy in a weird way, and I can tell you that music playing when the weird dream parade marches on the streets will probably haunt me forever. And because the biggest theme of the film are dreams, many of those creepy, terrifying moments make absolutely no sense, like dreams usually don't. That what makes it resemble a nightmare and why you feel like you're going to have nightmares, even if you're not actually scared during the film. I mean nightmares are terrifying when you're sleeping, but once you are awake, they seem ridiculous. So that goes with Paprika. Naturally you are awake while watching the film, and it makes no sense like nightmares don't once you are awake, but it still creates that weird nightmare like feel to it.

Even though this movie is mostly about dreams, I love how they were able to bring movies into it.

But yeah, let's be honest, this movie is visually so beautiful! The characters are drawn very well, so are the backgrounds and all the weird dream things. Even when this movie gets so very freaky, it still looks amazing.

Paprika is an interesting film and I wish I could write more about it, but unfortunately I think it would need a second watch - at least. Because during the first time I just felt like I was trying to get what was going on. But it's visually beautiful, the music is amazing and the plot and the dream theme are very complex and astonishing. Still, Paprika is definitely the weirdest film I've seen so far.

☆☆☆☆☆☆

6 / 10

"With this hand I will lift your sorrows. Your cup will never be empty, for I will be your wine. With this candle, I will light your way into darkness. With this ring, I ask you to be mine."

Year: 2005

Directed by: Tim Burton & Mike Johnson

Written by: John August, Caroline Thompson & Pamela Pettler (screenplay) and Tim Burton & Carlos Grangel (characters)

A nervous groom keeps screwing up the wedding rehearsal, so he goes to the woods to practice his vows. Unfortunately he puts the ring on a corpse's finger, and he realises he's now married to a dead woman.

---

Corpse Bride is one of those almost classic movies you should watch on Halloween if you're not too into horror movies. That's kind of the speciality of Tim Burton: he makes dark movies emo or goth teens are way too invested in. I don't know if it has to do with the plots or the aesthetic.

But the aesthetic of Corpse Bride is amazing: almost colourless land of the living, the colourful and fun land of the dead. The characters look amazing, everyone looks different and has different shapes of their faces and body. It's a nice change from typical animations, but of course the main characters are tall and skinny with the typical Burton styled faces: pale skin, huge eyes with dark circles around them. Still, every little detail in the animation is amazing. I could talk about stop-motion animation all day long, but perhaps not.

Danny Elfman's music is pretty but generic. It's been heard over and over again. Sure, Victor's Piano Solo may give the viewer goose bumps, but other than that, every song feels like it's been done so many times before. The soundtrack is alright, but could be way better.

The story is interesting and well-written. It's short, and many things are left unexplained, but it's better that way. It's good that it ends quite suddenly without anything like "FEW WEEKS LATER" because that would kind of ruin the moment. The movie is about what it is about, it doesn't need anything else. The structure of the story is very similar to The Nightmare Before Christmas. No, it's not entirely the same, it's not "copied", but it has some sort of parallels and symmetry.

Corpse Bride is a good movie to watch around Halloween, but that's about it. I can't imagine watching it during the summer or anything. Corpse Bride has charisma, unique aesthetic and astonishing setting.

☆☆☆☆

4 / 10

"It's my responsibility to bring the Book of Peace safely to Syracuse." "See, now I just feel bad, 'cause you're gonna get fired."

Year: 2003

Directed by: Patrick Gilmore & Tim Johnson

Writers: John Logan

"A Persian sailor named Sinbad is on a quest to find the magical legendary Book of Peace, a mysterious artifact that Eris, the Greek wicked goddess of chaos, has ultimately framed him for stealing! If he fails on this quest, his childhood friend Prince Proteus of Syracuse will take Sindbad's death penalty, while Eris gains a desired foothold of power in the world of mortals."

- Summary written by Anthony Pereyra

Mostly I watched Sinbad - Legend of the Seven Seas tonight because I watched the Road to El Dorado yesterday. These two very much go to the same category, even if the latter was my favourite and the former... not so much.

This film looks as good as The Road to El Dorado. Especially the mix of traditional animation and the kind of 3D computer animation is very interesting. Most of the creatures look three dimensional and it makes the threat they pose seem way more threatening when you compare the realistic looking creatures with the human characters, who look much simpler and just less real. Especially the 3D animation works well in the realm of Eris, the goddess of chaos, because with that technique it looks way more chaotic. 

The music in this movie is not as good as in the Road to El Dorado. Don't get me wrong, the music is alright, but that's it. It's just decent. The only track that's really amazing is Let The Games Begin which very much plays whenever Eris is around. That track is mysterious and playful, and it gives the original sound to those few scene that same melody is playing, even if the song itself would be different. Harry Gregson-Williams is of course a good composer, but let's be honest, his music doesn't really stand out in films. 

What is really missing from Sinbad is the chemistry. There isn't that kind of chemistry between any characters than is between Miguel and Tulio from the Road to El Dorado. I'd hate to compare these two movies too much, but the Road to El Dorado just sets the demand for animated adventures very high - especially when we are talking about characters. However, there's something similar between Sinbad and Miguel and Tulio. They all were swindlers, dishonest people, and very unlikely heroes. The difference, however, is that Sinbad actually was a hero. 

Can you guess what I loved most about this movie when I was a kid - and what I still love the most? Eris. The character looks amazing. She looks beautiful yet chaotic and evil, and her hair, my god, her hair. Even if the animation is so beautiful in this movie, Eris' hair is the best part.

The story of Sinbad is interesting, except partially it doesn't make sense. Why do they need a book to keep peace? Why is Eris in this, because this movie doesn't take place in Greece, does it? Those are the two most important questions I learnt to ask now, even if I didn't wonder that as a kid. 

Sinbad is breath-takingly beautiful movie, but the story doesn't live up to the visual side of the movie. Something is lacking, but it sure is nice to look at.

☆☆☆☆

4 / 10

"If I believed in fate, I wouldn't be playing with loaded dice."

Year: 2000

Directed by: Eric 'Bibo' Bergeron & Don Paul

Written by: Terry Rossio & Ted Elliott

Two Swindlers, Miguel and Tulio, end up on an unknown coast after several misadventures with only a horse and a map to El Dorado. They decide to find the city of gold and steal the gold, but neither of them could've expected that the natives mistake them for their gods. 

When I was a kid, The Road to El Dorado was one of my favourite movies. Sure, that can be said of many movies, but the point is, I wasn't the only one. Especially now I often find out how so many people loved it as well. I think I've heard almost anyone saying at least once that they loved it, and most say it was their favourite film growing up.

It's not surprising. The Road to El Dorado charms you right in the beginning. Even if you usually hate songs in animated films, the music of this one is amazing. Every song is beautiful and amazing, and makes me feel nostalgic these days. And they don't ruin the dialogue by turning a conversation to a song (Apart from It's Tough to be a god, but that song was so good it didn't even matter). Instead they are planted in scenes where no words are spoken. It works very well, and is a lot better than characters of the movie singing. Even if the music in the Lion King is phenomenal, Can You Feel The Love Tonight is kind of ruined by making the stanza Simba and Nala's thoughts, it kind of ruins the moment. In this film, it works way better. Both soundtracks are by Elton John, but The Road to El Dorado works better.

And the animation is so beautiful. It's really captivating. The human characters look so much better than what Disney's usually do, especially because they are way more diverse instead of just putting the same face on every Disney prince. And the world around the character is the most beautiful I've seen in an animated movie. It's very colourful, it's lovely.

But what really keeps the movie going and makes the story really stand out, is the main duo. Miguel and Tulio are great characters. They are different from each other, but they want the same things - which is why I wouldn't want to see a sequel for this movie. I'd rather see a prequel. How did they meet? How did they end up doing what they were doing in the beginning of the movie? It's interesting. And thankfully Miguel and Tulio aren't exactly the kind of heroes you'd except. In fact they aren't really heroic, apart from one or two deeds. Above all, they start as criminals. And their chemistry is so good. And these days there are a lot of rumours going around that they were meant to be homosexuals, but I don't really know if that is true. I haven't seen any reliable information, only speculation and claims that had no proper sources. If anyone has a proper source, please, let me know, because I think it would be interesting to read.

The Road to El Dorado has always been amazing movie, and that hasn't changed in all these years. If you haven't seen it, do yourself a favour and watch it. It's great, and it's hilarious. I could go on an mention every good thing about this movie, but I think that would be pointless. This movie is one of the best animated films that has been ever made.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

10 / 10

"I only work in black and sometimes very, very dark grey."

Year: 2014

Directors: Phil Lord & Christopher Miller

Writers: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, Dan Hageman & Kevhin Hageman.

"The evil plans of Lord Business to ensure order in his world with a powerful weapon is in jeopardy as a prophecy about 'Special' comes true with the discovery of 'Piece of Resistance'. With odds like Bad Cop, Micro managers and 'Man from upstairs' stacked against him during his journey to save the world; Emmett, a construction worker, has a long way to go before he succeeds."

- Summary written by PipingHotViews

My sister and I were about to watch the Big Hero 6, only to find out it wasn't on Netflix. Anyway, we decided to watch the Lego Movie, and if I'm completely honest, I probably will prefer Lego Movie over Big Hero 6 any day.

The world in this movie is amazing. It feels limitless and imaginative - which exactly has always been the strength of the toys too. You can build anything and your imagination is the only limit (apart from you know, not having enough pieces.) I love how they didn't just make a dumb funny movie, but actually captivated the power Legos have always had. I mean, they are without the doubt the best toy there is. Okay, enough about how great Legos were. But yeah, the best part about the movie is how amazing the world is. Yeah, there are many pop culture characters there, like Batman, but it isn't just a crossover of many things, the pop culture characters just are like a nice spice there. Sure, they aren't completely loyal to the originals, but who cares, they were fun.

Another amazing thing about the world is how it plays with many levels of reality. Of course there are the many different worlds in the Lego worlds, but that isn't all, as you can guess by the 'Man from upstairs'. 

The plot is good. It is of course simple, but what do you expect from a movie that suits for the whole family. Simple story doesn't mean the story wouldn't have many meaningful lessons. Not that I'm going to list them all. There are probably better lists out there that also explain things and introduce different views. Anyway, the plot was intriguing. One of the elements are the different levels of reality. That brings so much depth to the story. And it is also very exciting. I was eager to see the end, because like many great movies, it actually made you think "how are they going to survive this".

But the Lego Movie is hilarious. The humour is so absurd at times, but it isn't just absurd humour. There are many different kind of humour. Sometimes putting many kind of jokes together doesn't work and it's just kind of "Decide already!" but it works in Lego Movie, since it's intended to be funny to people of all ages. I cracked up many times, the first one was at "Lord Business". 

And the animation! Oh, it looks so smooth and nice, but also it is hilarious when needed to be. Even if it wasn't stop-motion, it has the same strengths with that technique, since it's made to look the same way. 

The voice acting in this movie is great, though it would be nicer if they used actual voice actors instead of typical Hollywood actors. Sure, Chris Pratt is great, but what about... Billy West? That would've been great. Of course my favourite was Will Arnett as Batman. It might have something to do with me watching both seasons of BoJack Horseman in four days. 

Summa summarum, the Lego Movie was hilarious and original, even if the story was pretty much used. I do not regret for one bit that I saw this movie, even if I was suspicious at first.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"How can you walk away from something and then come towards it?" "Walk around the world."

Year: 2009

Director: Henry Selick

Writers: Henry Selick, Neil Gaiman (book)

Coraline and her parents have moved to a new house. She feels bored, until she finds a small secret door which leads to Other World, where Other Mother is welcoming her with open arms. But soon something starts to feel off...

I've heard so much about Coraline. Most of what I've heard was how scary Coraline was considering it's "for children", an animation. So I finally decided to watch it. I had some expectations, and I'm pretty sure this movie met most of those expectations. 

The animation was so marvellous. This kind of animation is cute, but it also has the possibility to become very, very creepy, which is good if it's a movie like this one. All the movement is so smooth and the characters don't look too much alike (which is something Disney could learn from). The music was also both beautiful and creepy, depending when and what kind of music. 

The story is kind of typical, it was kind of like some distorted Alice in Wonderland. The idea of someone going into another world has been used a lot, but most of the time it's always left kind of vague - was it true or was it just a dream? Well, in Coraline it was pretty clear that everything was true and actually happening, not just a little girl's imagination. Even though the basic idea isn't too original, Neil Gaiman has added some details that made the story completely new, original and exciting.

The only one of my expectations that this movie didn't meet was how scary this would be. I wasn't expecting anything like horror movies for adults, but I was still waiting for something more. But no, this movie wasn't scary as much as it was... creepy and disturbing. You don't get scared so suddenly you scream a little, no, you just feel so disturbed and crept out by whatever is going on. And Other Mother? Totally creepy. 

But I haven't read the book. I have a feeling that everything wasn't told in the movie. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere how much scarier Other Mother was in the book. I definitely need to see that.

Coraline is wonderfully made, visually pleasing yet creepy movie. I recommend it to everyone, even those who don't like horror movies. Maybe this can be your way to start going towards horror movies.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

8 / 10

"Bite my shiny metal hat!"

Year: 2009

Director: Peter Avanzino

Writers: Matt Groening and David X. Cohen (Created by), Ken Keeler, David X. Cohen, 

While Leo Wong is planning to destroy a purple dwarf star for miniature golf course, Leela joins the eco-feminists and Bender falls in love with the wife of the Donbot of the Robot Mafia. Meanwhile Fry notices he can read others thoughts. After he loses at poker, he finds out it's (again) he's destiny to save endangered animals from powerful telepathic beings, the dark ones.

I've been watching Futurama with my sis for the past six months and I can't get enough of it. Soon we'll run out of episodes, but luckily we have these feature-length Futurama movies.

First I was kind of nervous that the movie would be ruined by the length. I mean usually when a TV show is developed into a movie, it seems like the makers had hard time coming up with a plot that's long enough. I was afraid that Into The Wild Green Yonder would be unnecessarily lengthened, but it wasn't. Actually it felt weirdly short, even though it was long compared to the 20 minute episodes, but still, it went pretty fast. 

What's most importantly, the movie was just as funny as the TV show. And Futurama offers all kinds of humour, I mean there's parodic and saritic humour, really absurd humour, stupid sex jokes, and just really weird humour, situation comedy and all kinds of humour, really. Actually that seems to be true on everything Groening has created and developed and written himself. At least Futurama proves that. I haven't watched Simpsons that much, but Groening's comics are also hilarious in many different ways, it's amazing. I really like and admire Matt Groening, I've  read Life In Hell since I was little. Maybe not the best comic for a 12-year-old, but I loved it. It's always a pleasure to see his head in a jar in episodes of Futurama.

The plot of this movie was interesting. It developed the same way episodes developed in the earlier seasons - it started with something not so important and just went on before you realise what the point was. And well the plot of Into The Wild Green Yonder was sort of complex, with so many  different side plots.

There's actually one thing this movie did that no episode did. I actually felt excited and thrilled during the end. I mean of course you know how these things usually end, but still it was thrilling, the whole situation seemed almost hopeless. I'm actually really amazed now.

And like any Futurama episode, 33 % of all the characters were voiced by Billy West. Okay, maybe not that much, but when you open the iMDB page, Billie West's roles just go on and on. Oh my god.

So yeah, this movie was good. I can't say if it was better or worse than the TV show, and why should I say either. I mean, they are part of the same story-arc, more or less. Would I recommend this movie to anyone? Well, yeah, but first you need to see first four seasons, and preferably the fifth season after this movie. But do as you please, I mean there's really not some kind of big plot that would join the plots of all movies and episodes. And of course this movie may not be cinematic masterpiece, but I don't think it's supposed to be. It's supposed to be fun, and it totally is.

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

7 / 10

"I just want to see... a little sunshine." "But you're nocturnal, Phil. Your eyes barely open on a good day."

Year: 2009

Director: Wes Anderson

Writers: Roald Dahl, Wes Anderson, Noah Baumbach

Mr. Fox returns to his old habits by stealing food from three farmers. After the farmers retaliate, he needs to help his community with his plan.

I've meant to see this movie for a while, but only now really made it. I had two reasons to watch this movie. First, I love Wes Anderson, and his movies always cheer me up. Like even if the movies would be kind of tragic (The Grand Budapest Hotel is partly very very sad), they are still always so... happy and aesthetically pleasing. Second reason is that I used to read this book a lot when I was little. Though it's been a very, very long time since I read that book, so I don't remember very well what in this movie was made up by Anderson and Baumbach, and what really was in the book.

First of all, the casting was interesting. Anderson's movies are always filled with really amazing actors and actresses, even in surprisingly small roles. That's what got me interested in The Grand Budapest Hotel in the first place, that and the cinematography. Anyway, I watched this movie for like five or ten minutes before I gave up and went to see who was playing who, and I was surprised to see that George Clooney was Mr. Fox, and Meryl Streep Mrs. Fox. Jason Schwartzman's voice I recognised immediately. Some of the actors weren't even that surprising, like Bill Murray, Owen Wilson, Adrien Brody and Schwartzman. Most of these have been in every Wes Anderson movie I've seen. 

Of course at this point I could say that I'm kind of annoyed how often Hollywood actors doing voices get paid more than actual voice actors. And they don't usually even have the talent voice actors do. I think Billy West talked about this once. And I totally support this, because Billy West is one of the most amazing voice actors there is. I mean come on, he voiced so many characters on Futurama alone, and I didn't even realise it, because he can truly change his voice. These regular actors don't do that. But then again, I don't know, Wes Anderson is probably the kind of director who wants to use "real" actors, even if he's doing animation. And I don't know, it suits him, but it still bothers me.

I said before that Wes Anderson movies always cheer me up. Well this is true with Fantastic Mr. Fox also. It was a really cheerful movie, even though it had its really hopeless moments where it felt like the animals couldn't survive the events, but still, one of the happiest movies I've seen in a while, and it was fun in an animation kind of way. 

And the animation, oh, it was so amazing. Beautiful, and so detailed. I haven't read about it properly anywhere, but I'm certain the animation was made with stop motion technique, same used in The Nightmare Before Christmas, Corpse Bride, etcetera. That technique takes a lot of effort and time, but the result is always worth it, because it is very pleasing to the eye, because it's so detailed. And stop motion technique really suits with Wes Anderson symmetric style.

I warmly recommend this movie to anyone who likes cheerful movies and isn't afraid of watching animations. And of course to everyone who loves Wes Anderson and hasn't yet seen Fantastic Mr. Fox. It might not be his best work, I mean compared to The Grand Budapest Hotel or Moonrise Kingdom, but it's worth watching. 

☆☆☆☆☆☆

6 / 10

"Haven't you heard of peace on earth and goodwill toward men?" "NO!"

Jack the Pumpkin is feeling depressed after Halloween, which seems easier and easier year after year. He wanders around and finds himself in Christmastown! He suddenly feels inspired again - and he decides to plan Christmas.

There's that eternal problem with this movie - do you watch it during Halloween or Christmas? Well, we watched it in September.. Which is close enough to Halloween.

I've always liked this movie. Even though I have seen it many times it hasn't lost its magic. It's partly because of the wonderful soundtrack. All the songs are fun, and I know almost every one of them by heart. To be honest, I probably annoyed my sister by singing all the songs. The lyrics are just simply amazing and melodies are simple and catching - and that's all you need in a good musical: lyrics that carry out the story and melody that gets into the audience's head. My favourite songs are probably "This is Halloween", "Jack's lament", "Kidnap The Sandy Claws", "Sally's song" and "Poor Jack". Even though there's this really cool album with all the songs sang again (meaning This is Halloween performed by Marilyn Manson and Sally's Song performed by Amy Lee and what else), the original soundtrack is much better.

But what's more amazing is the animation. Stop motion animation will always be hundred times more impressive than CGI animations. Stop motion looks amazing, it has a lot more 3D feeling than 3D CGI has, which of course only makes sense since the characters and things actually exist, they are actual things rather than inside some computer program. And also... the patience the animators must have. But the animation is one of the reasons for the magic of this movie. I don't think it would have the same eerie feeling in Halloween town if it was simply CGI or the traditional animation. 

All the actors are also well chosen. What I most love is Danny Elfman singing Jack's songs. He has magnificent voice. Though I keep wondering why didn't he do the whole thing - is it because he isn't an actor? I mean voice acting is challenging, so if Elfman hasn't done any acting then I kind of understand. But Chris Sarandon has such a similar voice, which is why it took me a while to even realise there was something different with Jack's singing and speaking. I think accent or something gave it away. Also Catherine O'Hara is marvellous as Sally. I especially love her voice when she sings Sally's song. There's something unique in her singing voice. 

☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆

9/10

"And Sniff was the first small animal to see the comet through telescope."

I'm so glad there was an option to watch this in English! I've watched moomins all my life, like every Finnish kid, so I'm really picky about the voices. But I was happy with most of them - especially Sniff, who was voiced by Mads Mikkelsen. This also was the reason I watched this movie.

Björk's song at the beginning was awesome. Maybe not so... Maybe it didn't go along with moomins and all this, but it was really cool. 

But, I have to compare this to the book and to the previous film, the Japanese one. This was very much like the book, which is good, since the book is the second best Moomin book ever written. It had all the nice parts the Japanese movie didn't have - like that shop - but still nice parts that weren't in the book but were in the movie - like the cake, Mr Muskrat sitting on the cake, and Sniffs little cat friend. But that one party scene was missing - and I really wanted to see that one. 

But it bothered me that all the characters knew each other already - in the book Moomin and Sniff meet Snufkin and later on Snork and Snorkmaiden, since it's the second book. Sniff joined Moomin family in the first book already. But here they all knew each other already! But yeah, at least they hadn't mixed Little My in it, like they did in the Japanese movie.

I don't know if it is his accent or if he has a lisp, but Mads Mikkelsen's voice made Sniff sound really, really small, as in young.

"Why are you reading that book? Nobody reads books anymore! Movies are always better, especially sequels."

Hoodwinked! was probably one of the most legendary movies I saw as a kid. I mean they were hilarious. I watched the first one again last night, and now I watched the sequel. And yeah, it is a sequel, it doesn't beat the original one. But it still was pretty amazing. And I'm glad they kept few characters, like that Goat who was cursed, so he had to keep singing. One of my favourite characters. And by favourite character I mean I laughed my fucking ass off while watching the first movie. This time? Not so much. But the movie was pretty okay. I think I will stuck with the first one, though.

But yeah, the actors in these movies were amazing. And I don't even mind that Anne Hathaway wasn't Red in this one, Hayden Panettiere was pretty good. And you know, voice actors just are so bleeding good. I mean you can almost see a character (as a human, if it's not, like the wolf, or that bear who is police and so on). Also that little rabbit is still freaking me out so much, I mean come on.