Toy Story 3 has had a lot of hype since being announced. Not because Pixar has been showing off or bragging in any sort of way but mainly because we had not seen a Toy Story movie in 11 years. That’s right eleven. Toy Story came out in 1994, Toy Story 2 came out in 1999 and then out of the blue Pixar told us we had a third installment headed our way. So we have all been curious as to why we were getting a new Toy Story. Some people have been counting down the days to see the third and others have been dreading the day, afraid their beloved Woody and Buzz would be tainted by a horrible sequel. Could it be that Pixar–the amazing movie making machine–could finally be out of ideas and found the need to drag out a franchise that is their calling card?

The answer is a resounding no. I have already seen the movie twice. Because the first time I saw the movie I thought I was just blinded by bias. But after seeing it again I realized that it is that amazing. It started with a bang with Pixar’s new amazing short “Day & Night”, which is an inventive combination of 2D animation, 3D animation and sound effects. The short was brilliant and perhaps my favorite short they have ever produced. Toy Story 3 itself was superb. The movie picks up as a 17 year old Andy is off to college and has to decide what he should do with his old toys that he has kept in his toy box mainly because they were tough to part with not because he uses them.

The movies theme is incredibly simple: moving on. The theme works for Andy as well as his toys. Yet while the the movie is an incredible joy for children it seems as if the movie is speaking to the now young people that have cherished Woody and Buzz for the last 16 years. However, everyone that is going through a “getting older” stage in their life can relate. Usually when we are getting older we have to do new and scary things and we have to move on and lose parts of our younger selves that we do not want to part with. This theme resounds through our lovable cowboy protagonist, Woody. And because it’s through Woody we can all relate. It’s genius. It’s a little emotional at times. Once again Pixar is a movie plot genius because the have a plethora of characters from the last two movies and they even add about twenty or so new characters this time around but Woody is still the focal point of the plot. It keeps things simple and allows for the other characters to be great comic relief. (Don’t worry Buzz fans he gets a great sub-plot and is still an amazing part of the story.)

And as cerebral as it seems like I’m trying to make this movie sound it is still gut bustingly hilarious.There is one moment of the movie that Mr. Potato Head (Don Rickles) makes the whole theatre laugh and keep laughing everytime he shows make up. Micheal Keaton is amazing as Ken, that’s right Barbie’s Ken. Ned Beatty, Timothy Dalton, Jeff Garlin, Bonnie Hunt, Whoppi Goldberg, Richard Kind, Kristen Shaal (of “Flight of the Conchords) and Javier Fernandez Pena (you’ll see) are the new comers in the already star studded cast.

Pixar’s done it again and while the movie has it’s small flaws, they are completely forgivable for everything that it does right. The story is amazing here and is an instant classic. Both kids and adults will relate to growing up and the pains it sometimes holds. Moving on is a part of life and it is often difficult but maybe not so much with a comfort movie like this. Let’s hope Pixar never grows up and continues to give us films that make us laugh, help us stay young and touch our hearts.

Directors Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois are the mad geniuses behind the 2002 anti-disney film Lilo & Stitch, which I consider a wonderful gem in the very forgettable Disney era of the late nineties and early aughts. (I’m talking about hand-drawn not Pixar , calm down.) Stitch was a great movie because of it’s very different perspective and endearing characters.

How to Train Your Dragon uses the same formula. The protagonist, Hiccup,  is misunderstood, missing a parent and desperately wants to be loved. While his family and social life is lacking his imagination and heart is not. He might be a complete screw-up but he is endearing a lovable.  The same goes for his newfound friend Toothless the dragon. (The Stitch character of this film). Toothless is wild, reckless and violent but deep down just needs someone to understand him.

This is a very good movie and has plenty of heart and a great creative story, based on the book by Cressida Cowell, it soars under the supervision of Sanders and DeBlois. It has it’s flaws but they’re easy to overlook when there is so many good things in the film. It’s a great kids movie and very enjoyable for adults. With this past year of so many great animated/children’s movies (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Up, Where the Wild Things Are, Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs) it’s a great time for the kids to go to the movies. Dragon I think is automatically nominated for an Oscar–congrats Dreamworks you perennial loser you. Dragon is a wonderful movie that’s very enjoyable. Take the kids and enjoy.

Watching The Princess Frog was refreshing. It was almost like going into a time capsule and going to the movie theatre as a kid. Almost. This movie is criticized mainly for being just a shadow of what 2D greatness Disney used to offer. Of course this movie is going to fall short of Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King. It’s almost not fair to try an compare Disney’s first 2D, musical outing in years to those amazing films.

Princess Frog offers lovable supporting characters, lavish musical numbers, the idea of true love and the beauty of New Orleans. I think the main critique I have for this film is that it seems like they sacrificed character development for getting the movie under a certain time. I felt like the main character Titana and the villain, the Shadow Man, were under developed. Especially the Shadowman, I felt like there was so much promise for this villain but nothings ever really explained about him. He has a evil shadow that has a mind of it’s own that’s really never addressed. I think Disney might have thought an audience wouldn’t pay much attention to a 2D film and opted to move the story as quick as possible.

There also has been talks of it being too scary or even possibly evil because of the use of voodoo. This, in my opinion, is over sensitivity. In every Disney movie there are villains that use magic, which I believe when evil is referred to as witchcraft. From Snow White’s evil witch with her poison apple all the way to Hercules’ Hades…who is the mythology form of the devil. I thought this movie was not too scary for most children, but then again the last children’s movie I watched was the horribly frightening Christmas Carol.

At the end of the day this movie is not going to be remembered as one of the greatest Disney movies of all time, but it could be the beginning of a revival in good, quality Disney cartoons. All you have to do is support it.

I think the majority of us will admit that it’s strange to watch a movie in ‘Zemeckiscope’, a term that I give Timmy Wood credit for. One of my friends claimed that watching a Zemeckis cartoon is like watching corpse puppets. They look like humans but there’s something eerily non-living about them. Sometimes I feel like I’m watching cloned actors. Every now and then there is something really strange about the eyes of the cartoons, I honestly believe that I can peer into the character and see that it has no soul. I think that it’s off putting for the majority of viewers because the animation is so good and at times you feel as if you’re watching a real movie not a cartoon. In other words, these meat puppets be scary at times.

As a quick disclaimer, I think that Zemeckis is a forerunner and if he’s lucky he’ll master this niche of film making. Or unfortunately, he’ll be the other type of forerunner. The one that is misunderstood and thought of as a fool. The guy that takes a beating for introducing something too early for popular consumption. He’ll either be a mad-genuis or a martyr, only time will tell.

Now on top of all of this, I was with a group of children. You know, what the group of people we would assume would be the target audience for Disney’s A Christmas Carol. I don’t know when Disney started making movies for adults because this movie is NOT for children. I repeat do not take children to this movie. They will cry.

I thought the movie was decent. Jim Carrey was pretty good and deserves some credit for his work in this animated film. Gary Oldman found another way to make himself unrecognizable. Oldman might actually deserve an award for acting in a cartoon. The performances were pretty good but in the end my main problem with the movie was the same I had with the animated characters: they both lacked soul. It was hard to really get emotionally involved in this movie and in the end you should feel the change of Scrooge not just see it. I thought it was a solid attempt and decent but not memorable unless you want to see obese animated Carey Elwes…

We got there early. With snacks tucked away in her purse and we were surprised to see fifty people already in line waiting to sit in the theatre. Is this movie really that big of a deal? John Cusack fans maybe? Why do so many people want to see this movie?

This movie was beautiful, the special effects were ridiculous. So much earthquakes and crap falling apart/blowing up/falling into the earth. But there are so many problems with this movie it’s not very fair to try and judge it. So spoiler alert! Here’s somethings I found amusing or liked.

1. Danny Glover as the President. Man I love me some Danny Glover and his gruff whisper acting. How close do they have to get the mic to that guy? I seriously love him and my favorite part of the movie is when he asks for the translators of the world leaders to give him a minute to talk them in private. He says, “Your English is sufficient.” Then he goes into a speech with numerous multi-syllabic words. It was like a SAT vocabulary test. But what can you expect from this kind of a script?

2. This movie has so many moments where trouble is right on the heels of John Cusack. He’s in so much constant peril it’s ridiculous. Plus there are too many scenes where a plane is taking off from a runway that’s too short. That scene was copied and pasted into the script a couple of times.

3. This movie is so cheese-ball. I loved the stereotypical Russians.

4. Woody Harrelson. What a champ. The man decided to do whatever crazy thing he wanted. That pickle thing was the best part of the movie. The movie goes downhill after he dies.

5. The dog survives! That dog made it onto the ark, what a champ! How ridiculous…who would win in a fight that dog or Woody Harrelson? Debate!

6. Oliver Platt and Chiwetel Ejiofor make the movie watchable. These guys are good actors and make things enjoyable…sort of. Mr. Ejiofor joins Ioan Gruffudd and Djimon Hounsou in the Actors-I-Like-But-Don’t-Know-How-To-Say-Your-Name list.

7. The Boss from Just Shoot Me is in this movie, there should have been more of him.

8. Why was this movie so long!? I spilled a bit of the soda I sneaked into the theatre on my pants and was worried that I would walk out looking like I peed myself. But the movie was so long it dried by the time it was over. I would have rather been embarrassed than sit through a movie longer than 90 minutes.

9. I thought Danny Glover was going to have a Bill Pullman president speech like in ID4 during that presidential address. But it was not nearly as awesome and it was cut short. Bill Pullman’s speech goes down in history as best movie president speech ever.

10. Speaking of Independence Day. Roland Emmerich will never make a movie better than Independence Day. Ever. That movie is classic. I want to see that movie now. This might be the closest Emmerich gets to making a good movie again. Retire my friend or make a video game. If this movie was a video game I’d want to play it.

Many people have felt the same way I have the past couple of years: Hollywood is ruining my childhood. Case in point GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra. The special effects were more believable than Channing Tatum in that waste of film. Sometimes it seems like every fond memory I have of watching TV as a child is being turned into a bad movie.

So I was horrified when it was announced that ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ was being adapted into a movie. Then I was glad to hear Spike Jonze was involved. Then when the movie’s release date was pushed back I was skeptical. This movie has been pushed back for a long time, it was filmed in 2006. That’s no typo, 3 years ago. However, when I saw the trailer I got excited again.

To be fair to Spike Jonze the studio was scared to release the movie. Spike Jonze is risky (Adaptation, Being John Malkovich) and studios want to make money not take risks.  Now adapting a children’s book, essentially a couple of sentences,  into a full length major motion picture is crazy. Then put Spike into that formula and the studio is asking for something that will be bizarre and different. So even though it took three years and countless arguments Where the Wild Things Are is finally released. And I loved it.

Where the Wild Things is a beautiful piece of work that will not be appreciated by the masses. This movie is destined to be a cult classic, a rare treat for the adult looking back on their childhood. I connected with this film from the beginning. Max (Max Records) is just a little boy causing terror and making a trail of mess wherever he goes. He’s basically a boy.

The movie takes off and goes to strange and unusual places, figuratively and literally. But what I most appreciate is that it is told with the imaginative innocence of a young child. Max has his feelings hurt and doesn’t know how to deal with it, he acts out and misbehaves, he runs away from home. Recklessly acting out of emotion like a child who hasn’t yet been trained how to properly deal with stress. The movie moves with Max caring not for justification, moving out of quick and carnal decisions not worrying about consequences. I thought it to be an accurate portrayal of how children can act out. Then I realized I was in a theatre filled with children and parents who were maybe not appreciating this on the same level I was.

The bad thing about Spike Jonze making an adaptation of Where the Wild Things Are is that Spike Jonze is very cerebral. Artsy and smart is not usually what parents and children look for in movies. While I did hear children giggle and gasp I felt like me and my girlfriend were the only ones laughing and having a blast. Children’s movies are not usually like this and are more marketable. Even Wall-E and Up, which had their moments of film snobbery, made sure to make a likable movie for kids. This movie is about kids, not necessarily for them. Yet at the same time there’s huge puppets from Jim Henson’s Creature Shop and not many themes that will appeal to adults. I’m not all too sure if this movie will find a wide audience. It will be too slow and strange for most people and possibly even a disappointment for families.

While this review could end there I would like to mention what I’m sure some people are concerned about, the actual ‘Wild Things’ or monsters. These creatures have so much life in them and mirror the concerns and attitudes of children it is amazing. As someone who works with kids I can see the similarities loud and clear. You hardly ever notice that these things are puppets, you completely buy into their world. It’s the world of children each wild thing is trying to vie for attention and be liked. The innocence and insecurities of children are showcased in each monster. Reminding us that every now and then we can all be a little monster having problems that faced us in childhood. Like how to appropriately show anger, trying to make friends, not wanting to play with others and feeling like no one ever listens to you. The cast of creatures all do an amazing job. James Gandolfini is incredible as Carol, the main creature, who is meant to be a mirror to Max’s own beastly behavior. Chris Cooper, Catherine O’Hara, Forrest Whitiker, and Paul Dano all give brilliant vocal performances with words that broke my heart and made me laugh in memory of my own childhood.

For people like me, who have fond memories of this book as a child and enjoy indie films and Spike Jonze body of work this is a must see. However, I think most parents of young children might want to look elsewhere for their theatre experience.