Star Wars: The Clone Wars

Yeah, no. Not reviewing this garbage.

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith

Let me just say writing this is a relief, because I'm able to get Attack Of The Clones out of my head. Is this one any better? Well, there was nowhere to go but up. 

This movie's boring. I have very little to say about it. It's probably the best of the prequels, but I'd still rather not watch it again. The acting is still atrocious, although Ewan MacGregor somehow manages to squeeze in a respectable performance despite the dialogue, and Ian McDiarmid is fun, if a bit silly. They hyped the hell out of Darth Vader, but we only got thirty seconds of him. And of those thirty seconds, were they supposed to be funny? Because if not, George Lucas shows even more how incompetent of a director he is, to make such a hilariously bad scene without realizing it. The fight between Anakin and Obi-Wan is okay, but waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long, to the point where you stop caring and forget about why they're even fighting. 

The digital photography and CGI still bother me, although it's a bit better now. They at least develop it into a unique visual style, and give the movie its own look with a cool colour palette. It still looks absolutely nothing like what I would expect a Star Wars movie to look like, but looks okay on its own. 

That's all I got. I know this review is all over the place, but this movie is super forgetful and dull. It really doesn't need anymore to be said. I think I'll do a Star Wars retrospective later on where I'll talk more about the prequels, because I'm done talking about them. This trilogy sucks, and I don't recommend any of them. Now, let's get to the better movies!

Star Wars Episode II: Attack Of The Clones

I'm seriously starting to regret reviewing all of these movies. This movie is a total disaster. Attack Of The Clones is much worse that Phantom Menace for a great number of reasons. In fact, I consider it to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

I actually have been putting off this review off because I have no idea where to begin. I guess I'll talk about what gets me the most, although again, a lot of it has been talked about. Look at the poster: who's front and centre? Anakin and Padme. This was really set up to be a love story between the two, and make us care. After all, if we don't care about them, why would we care when Anakin turns evil? We know what's coming, we know Anakin is going to become Darth Vader, so George Lucas had a unique chance to do something interesting. It doesn't happen, the love story between the two is shockingly awful. I don't buy for a second that these two would love each other. I guess I kind of buy that they're attracted to each other, but attracted is not even close to being the same as full blown love. I don't buy that Padme would fall in love with Anakin, not with his constant whining about Obi-Wan and his life, his obsession with death and self centred attitude. I guess Lucas is trying to set up that Anakin always had darkness in his soul. That's fine, but that's a very fine line to walk. If you add too much darkness, then the audience will just say "Yeah, he was always evil" when he puts on the costume, and not care that a "hero" has fallen. That's exactly what happens: Anakin is a horrible, vile, arrogant, irritating, forced, unlikable, uncharismatic, uninteresting and downright disgusting excuse for a main character. The whole point of the prequel trilogy is to show how Anakin Skywalker, the great and noble Jedi Knight met his downfall and became the ultimate villain. Well I found myself hating Anakin in this movie more than I ever did when he put on the Darth Vader suit. It starts off bad where we see him become an agonizingly arrogant character. He does nothing but brag about himself and try to show off for Padme. He blatantly ignores Obi-Wan (The only likable character, more on him later) early on, and comes off as overall unlikable. The writing is so bad that the character is beyond saving, but a good actor may lessen the pain. Yeah, you knew I was getting to this... Hayden Christensen. He's not good in these movies. At all. We're talking not good enough for an Uwe Boll directed soap opera levels of not good. I'll admit I haven't seen any of Christensen's non Star Wars work, but I've actually heard really good things. I know he got a Golden Globe nomination fore Life as a House, so that's certainly something. It seems Christensen is a decent enough actor, but he was in a bad situation here. First of all, he just isn't right for the role. His voice is the main problem: it sounds whiny way too often, to the point where I just can't buy him as this great, promising young Jedi that they keep saying he is. Show don't tell: that's one of the great rules of storytelling, and these movies violate that.

 Christensen may be weak, but the script does nothing for him. These lines are beyond saving. Couple that with some weak direction, and I don't blame Christensen's performance on him. Beyond that, I just can't accept Anakin as a hero. Again, these movies are supposed to chart the fall of a great hero. Remember in the original Star Wars movie, where Obi-Wan remembers Anakin. "And he was a good friend," he says, more to himself than to Luke. We don't get that. Instead we see the two of them bicker constantly to the point where I feel they have some genuine animosity towards each other. On top of that, Anakin is a monster. The sand where he kills the Tuskan Raiders in inexcusable. He openly says to Padme that he killed the woman and children like it was nothing. I'm sorry, but no. This is not a hero! This is a monster! I don't feel sad to see him go the Dark Side, he was already there! Not only that, but he than proceeds to blab on about death, and how he will commit himself to seeking power. Forget that this not contradicting the whole point of the trilogy, let's remember this happens maybe halfway through the movie. How can we cheer for him after he does this? Why should we care when he's in danger throughout the movie when he's the biggest monster in the whole thing? Even Tony Montana wouldn't kill woman and children. This extends into the next movie. Why should we care about him? Why should we root for him? We don't watch in horror when he "falls from grace," because he did that a long time ago. Anakin alone is enough the destroy this movie, but I'm not done. Not even close. This is no longer a review, this is a rant. Did I mention that I despise this movie? 

The other characters all suck. Ewan McGregor I guess is the best of the worst, although he's pretty dull. He is clearly giving an effort though, and he would recover in the next movie. He is a great actor, and the fact he turns in a weak performance is more a commentary on the dialogue than anything. Every line of dialogue sounds stilted and unnatural, and the same is true of every actor (Except for Christopher Lee, but that's because he can make even the dumbest of lines sound brilliant and epic) The lack of good direction clearly doesn't help. Every time an actor opens their mouth, the scene automatically falls flat, and it's impossible to get engaged in the movie when this is happening. They try to cram in classic Star Wars imagery like Boba... errr... Jango Fett. I actually quite like the Jango Fett armour, so there's that. But did we really need him here? It was just classic Star Wars imagery that really added little to this movie. Speaking of that, there really was an abundance of Star Wars imagery in this movie. There was a Death Star cameo, and the Storm Troopers... ahem.... CLONE Troopers were introduced. Decent touch I guess, and I admit I didn't see the Troopers working with the Jedi coming. We also saw force lightning introduced. It would seem Lucas tried to cram classic Star Wars imagery in here just for the sake of it. And that brings us to another point.

Remember when I said I liked the 35mm photography in the Phantom Menace? Well that changed here. Lucas decided to get rid of film and make Episode II with digital cameras, a trend that would carry into Episode III. It looks awful. The Star Wars movies had a certain visual style that was completely discontinued here. The original movies were done in the 70's and 80's, and took full use of the camera technology available then. The film grain was incredibly important in the look of those movies. The Phantom Menace at least looked like a Star Wars movie with that film grain. A Star Wars movie overloaded with CGI, but still a Star Wars movie. Besides, the Special Editions had gotten us used to this. The digital photography here flat out sucks. First off, it looks nothing like Star Wars. It doesn't look like a big epic space opera, it looks like something out of a web series. Digital photography has made great strides in the last few years, but this was 2002. Things weren't ready yet. To see classic Star Wars imagery in a movie that looked nothing like Star Wars was really jarring. It made it look like the movie had no clue what it wanted to do: embrace the classic Star Wars look or create something new. It just doesn't fit. Furthermore, the visual style looks bad on its own. There's no life to it, no charm. It looks bland and flat, and the overabundance of CGI makes it look even more lifeless. The CGI is too clean looking, and never looks realistic. Does the CGI Yoda look anywhere near as good as the Yoda from Empire Strikes Back? Yoda's voice also seemed to change here, even though Frank Oz reprised his role as Yoda. Maybe he could only make the character sound right when he was actually on the set operating the Yoda puppet, rather than just standing in front of a microphone. The argument of practical effects being better than CGI is old as the hills, but it's fitting here, in a franchise that once revolutionized practical effects. The practical creatures had life. They were dirty, they were rugged, they were actually THERE. They were there in front of the camera, as real as the actors. They could be lit and filmed at the same time as the performers as set. Now, they were just added in later on a computer. The CGI was bad. I guess it was okay for 2002, but it doesn't hold up. It looks like a made for TV movie. I guess you could say that I shouldn't expect fourteen year old CGI to hold up but hey, the practical effects in the original trilogy hold up. Or besides that, the CGI in Jurassic Park and Terminator 2 hold up decently, better than this movie, and they both came out years before.

Finally, there's the stupid scenes in this movie that drive me crazy. Yes Lucas, we know you made American Graffiti, but did you really need to reference that in a Star Wars movie? I find it funny that the gritty young filmmakers would made that movie would one day pay homage to that movie with a CGI heavy scene with a robotic waitress and a computer generated monstrosity named Dexter Jettster. Seriously, why would a 50's style diner exist in the Star Wars universe? Would a droid waitress clearly reference Earthly dialogue? And then there's Dexter who's just... oh man. Next. There's the scene where C-3PO gets his head stuck on a battle droid in a scene so bad even Anthony Daniels spoke bad about it, calling the computer generated C-3PO from the scene "awful." There's the idea that a bounty hunter like Jango Fett would hire an assassin to kill someone when he could the job himself. The fact that Obi-Wan talks about Anakin in Episode IV with great reverence, and yet this movie seems to say the two hated each other. There are some throw away lines that try to tell us about their past adventures, but they don't really make much of an impact. Show, don't tell. 

I'm out of stuff to talk about. This movie is an absolute catastrophe on every level. This is one of my most hated movies of all time, and I actually kind of hate writing about it. Avoid it all costs.

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

Yep, I'm taking the plunge. I'm going to do the thing that every movie fan has to do: review all of the Star Wars movies. A lot of my opinions are pretty much the standard opinions on these movies, but I do have some interesting views on some of them. 

What can you say about Star Wars? It's a part of all of our lives, and we've known it such childhood. It informs our creative minds so much, and interested us to no end. We all have our feelings on these movies, and I think that's a sign of people's passion for this franchise. How can people complain about the prequels without deeply loving the originals? With that out of the way, let's get on to the Phantom Menace.

Oh boy.

Ohhhh boy. 

What do I say about the Phantom Menace that hasn't been said? What else can I add to it? This is one of the most maligned movie of the past twenty years, and for good reason; it sucks! Everything about this movie fails. The story is weak, the plot has little consequences, to call the characters cardboard cutouts would be an insult to cardboard cutouts, the CGI was offensively annoying, Jar Jar was just plain offensive, the acting shockingly awful, this movie is just bad. A total letdown, considering the hype for it. This movie was a marketing machine, which I'm sure anyone alive at this time will tell you. I plan on doing a Star Wars retrospective later on where I'll get more into the marketing of Episode I, but the constant ads were self sabotaging, building up the hype to levels no movie could attain, let alone a movie as terrible as this. Does it deserve the hate? Yes. This movie was just meant to make some money, not to tell the "early story of Star Wars" like George Lucas loves to insist. I know he's claimed that Star Wars is really just one long movie with six acts. Sure. 

Is there anything I do like about the Phantom Menace? Well... this is a weird thing to say, but I like that it was shot on film, not digitally. Yeah, I know how much I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel here, but it's something. I think it's because Episodes II and III was shot digitally that I even notice this, but I like the way Episode I looks, minus all the weak CGI. It had a warmth to it that the awful looking digital photography lacked later on. I'll get more to the digital photography later, but that is one thing Episode I has that I like. I also kinda like the podrace, I guess. It was kinda fun. I do have a nostalgia for it that does at times cut it a bit of slack. I was growing up when the hype train was coming, and I was really into it. But I'm still able to look at it objectively as the disaster it is. 

Not the most detailed review I've ever written, but I'm just retreading old material. Watch the Red Letter Media review for more stuff, or just Google the title. It's one of the most discussed movies ever, for all of the wrong reasons. So go ahead, look into it for yourself. Phantom Menace sucks. Next. 

The Summer In Review (2014)

Here is my long awaited review of this summer's movies, or at least the ones I saw. I didn't get to all of them, but I'm happy with what I did see.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Total waste. I already talked about this movie so I won't go too much into detail, but I'll just say again that this is one of the worst examples of corporate filmmaking in years. It does have some good aspects, but the negatives kept me from even remotely enjoying this movie. 1 Star

Godzilla

I'm writing this on the same day I wrote my initial Godzilla review, so go read that. Not perfect, but still an enjoyable night at the movies. 3.5 Stars

The Purge: Anarchy

I don't know what to say about this one. One hand it's terrible. The acting is weak (except Frank Grillo), it's not even remotely scary... and yet it was tons of fun. The concept of the Purge is dumb, but it works as a social satire. It was an improvement over the first Purge movie, which took this great concept and turned it into a weak remake of The Strangers. This one was showing us city streets during the Purge and all the insanity going on. It's my guilty pleasure of the summer. 3 Stars

X-Men: Days Of Future Past

I didn't think it was as great as some other people did, but it was still a great franchise fixer. It's rare to see a broken down franchise like this one return to glory, so it was cool to see. The cast was great, the action great, and the story very ambitious. I do wish they answered some questions (How is Xavier alive?), and it was bit less populated with plot holes, but it was still great. I hope they keep the old X-Men cast, although the new one is pretty great. 4 Stars

Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes 

This was an outstanding movie, one of the best big budget summer blockbusters in years. I loved it, I loved every bit of it. Well, maybe Jason Clarke and Keri Russell could have been a bit less bland, but that's the only issue. It was an epic story, with one of the best post apocalyptic worlds I've ever seen in a movie. It did a great job selling the tragedy of what's happened, especially with Gary Oldman's character. I love how you can understand every character, even the villains. No matter how evil Koba is, or how some of the human blatantly and cartoonishly hate the apes, you still understand where they're coming from. Andy Serkis needs an Oscar. Badly. That man is a genius. Well done. 5 Stars

Wait, what do you mean there's no Pixar movie this year?

Guardians of The Galaxy 

What can I say about this that hasn't already been said? This movie is a total blast. It was funny, action packed, exciting, suspenseful and incredibly entertaining. The visuals are incredible, but its heart still manages to be bigger than its effects budget. It shows what happens when the filmmakers care about making a good product, despite it being a big budget summer movie. 4 Stars

Boyhood

I don't really equate this with summer since I saw it in October, but it did technically come out in the summer. I'm not writing a third review of it, so I'll again say this is an outstanding movie, easily the best of the year. 5 Stars

Godzilla (2014)

 

As promised, here is my review of this year's Godzilla movie. I was really looking forward to this movie, it was easily my most hyped movie of the year. The marketing was great, really selling that this was finally the perfect American Godzilla movie, the one that the 1998 movie wasn't. That movie is kind of a guilty pleasure for me. I know it's terrible, I know that as a Godzilla fan I should hate it, but the movie is fun in a stupid way, even though the movie did virtually nothing right. Luckily, this movie was a big improvement.

Let me say that Godzilla is easily the best part of this movie, which is more than I can say for the 1998 movie. Everytime he showed up in that movie, a part of you cringes, simply because it's such a poor representation of the character. Here, it's different. This IS Godzilla, executed perfectly. He steals the show everytime he's onscreen, and it was so great to see the radioactive breath. When his back fins start to glow blue, it's a great moment, you know what's coming. I loved this Godzilla, full credit to director Gareth Edwards for getting him right. I disagree with the people who say Godzilla didn't get enough screen time. Sure he doesn't show up until later in the movie, but that's the way it should be. I'm glad they went for a slow build, just like the old Japanese Godzilla movies did. The best Godzilla movies were the ones that focused on the human characters, while the weaker ones focus on Godzilla as the protagonist. It's better to wait to see him. Besides, the wait to see him isn't astronomically long like in Peter Jackson's King Kong (Which I liked, for the record), he does show up in due time. And man, was his first appearance great. The buildup is fantastic, starting from the long shot of the beach. You know what's coming. Then they keep building up until the soldiers fire those rockets, revealing his neck. Then he turns and roars, the classic Godzilla roar. It was such a thrill to see. I guess it's true that the MUTOs were more of the centre of the movie than Godzilla was, and that's a problem. Even so, I thought Godzilla got a nice amount of time in the movie.

I also loved Bryan Cranston, though that's a given. He's probably the best actor alive, and he didn't disappoint. It would have been easy to imagine him phoning this in, being a Godzilla movie and all. But that misses the point: Cranston isn't capable of phoning in a performance, he's simply too incredible an actor. I loved his character arc, I loved his quest. That whole opening was actually pretty great and emotional. Much of that comes from Cranston (And the fact I was so hyped to be watching a new Godzilla movie didn't hurt), but also the writing. It's all very emotional, more than you would expect from a monster movie. 

Now for the problems. Yes, there is way too much of the MUTOs. I didn't mind them as monsters, but we say way too much of them. The whole point of the movie is to destroy them, and Godzilla just kind of acts as a wild card in his own movie. Also, the image of the MUTOs eating nuclear missiles was.... odd. Really, that's what they want? To eat missiles? Cranston was easily the best character. He was the only one with a real character arc, the only one who actually has a goal he's building towards. I also hated how soon he leaves the movie. Part of that is the advertising's fault. It basically promised Cranston vs Godzilla, and that couldn't be farther from the true. The fights with Godzilla and MUTOs were fun, but hard to see. Why must all American giant monster movies be shot at night and/or in the rain? I want to see Godzilla fight a monster on a bright and sunny day, not when the fights are hard to see. Godzilla 1998, Pacific Rim and this movie are all guilty of this. Also, the fights are too brief. Here's an example. We see Godzilla show up to fight the MUTO, and he charges at the other monster. We then cut to people watching a TV showing the fight for maybe two seconds before going back to our main human characters. Seriously! I don't want to see Aaron Taylor-Johnson and friends, I want to see the fight! I know I just said it's better to focus on the human characters, but not in a situation like that. I expect Edwards to know what the audience would want to see in that situation. That's another problem, Aaron Taylor-Johnson. He's not a bad actor, but he sucked in this movie. He was about as emotive as a block of wood, and he spent what little effort he gave unsuccessfully trying to hide his British accent. He absolutely sucked, which is a shame. Elizabeth Olsen was.... wait, Elizabeth Olsen was in this movie? Huh. I had no issues with Ken Watanabe, he was fine as the exposition guy. I always liked him and it was great to see him here.

I know it sounds like I'm trashing this movie and yeah, it has plenty of problems. But I had a good feeling leaving the theatre, I did enjoy it. There was plenty of good here. It wasn't perfect by any stretch, but at least it was a Godzilla movie. If nothing else, I'm glad they finally got him right. I'm glad they're making a sequel. I can't wait to see this version of Godzilla again, and hopefully they'll iron out all of the bugs in the next one. 

Why Do We Love Frozen So Much?

As I'm writing this, Frozen has been in release for close to a year. It currently sits as the fifth highest grossing movie of all time, and sits as the highest grossing animated movie of all time. The costumes and merchandise are everywhere; you just know you're going to see lots of Elsa's, Anna's and Olaf's this Halloween. Type in the letter "L" on Youtube, and "Let It Go Frozen" is the second result. It seems every singer, pianist or any other musician has performed a cover of this song. Again, this is nearly a year after it came out. The movie took home the Oscar for Best Animated Feature, making it Disney's first ever win in this category, not counting movies made by Pixar. As of October 17th, 2014, the soundtrack for Frozen sits at number 18 on the Billboard 200, meaning it is still one of the best selling albums a year after release. I've seen more than one store bearing signs on the door saying "Frozen products sold here." In short, Frozen has become a full blown pop culture phenomenon, in an era where these phenomenons are few and far between. Sure, we have billion dollar movies all the time. But in this information age, stories come and quickly, and we barely remember them. Remember Transformers: Age of Extinction? Well it currently sits as the eleventh highest grossing movie of all time, but I don't hear people talk about it, and this is only a few months after it came out. A movie comes to theatres, people talk about it, tweet about it, and then move on to something else. That's the way the world is now, fast to the point you barely notice anything. So why is Frozen different? How did this movie break the rules, how did it become a phenomenon?

Let me start off by giving my thoughts on the movie. I love Frozen. I love it to death, I think it's a masterpiece of an animated film. The story is incredibly clever, especially in the way it allows Disney to parody itself. The characters are wonderfully loveable, and the character depth is stunning. The songs are perfect, possibly the best soundtrack Disney has ever done. I think it's a misnomer to call this a kid's movie. Kid's movies suck, I strongly believe not a single good kid's movie has ever been made. No, it's family movies that are good. Movies like Frozen, Toy Story, The Lion King and Shrek. Movies that adults can enjoy just as much as their child. A kid's movie is a cheap piece of entertainment that only young kids will enjoy, and no adults will find enjoyable. These are movies with no plot, no character, and just piles on the stupid jokes to mindlessly entertain children. (I'm looking at you Shark Tale) Just because something is for kids doesn't mean the filmmakers don't have to think. Kids like good plots, they like good stories. I know I always preferred watching Beauty And The Beast over Mac And Me as a kid. Frozen gets this, and doesn't talk down to its audience. It treats them as intelligent people and expects them to think. I had a huge smile on my face all throughout the movie, and I'm thrilled that this movie got the attention it deserves.

Now, why has Frozen stuck around? How did it become so popular, and how did it keep that popularity up? I think it's simple. It stuck around because it's really good, and people loved that. We live in a cynical world, where movies are ruled by dark gritty realism. I love Christopher Nolan, but his effect has damaged Hollywood. Not everyone is as talented as he is, and it would appear that Hollywood's attempts to capitalize on his success is to make everything dark and depressing. The examples are everywhere: Man Of Steel, The Lone Ranger being some of the most noteworthy ones. But here is an example of something that is bright and uplifting, something that puts a smile on your face. That doesn't mean Frozen just plays a lot of bright colours and cute songs in an attempt to make the audience smile. It does it through the characters, the songs, and the message. At the end, everyone feels like  they have been through a great journey with the characters. At the end, it feels like you're with friends. I can see why children identified with Anna and Elsa, especially why they wanted to see the movie over and over again. The identified with wanting to be noticed by those you look up to, they wanted to see the sisters to come together. The idea to not have Elsa be a true villain was a genius move, and I don't think the movie would have any lasting power if they did make her a villain. Kids loved Olaf, who was not just there for jokes. He had a big heart, he was loveable and kind. The love story was great, and Kristoff provided a good male protagonist to attract boys to the movie. Throw a thrilling quest, outstanding songs and some of the best CGI animation ever done, and you have a recipe for a movie  kids would want to see again and again. But kids can't drive themselves to the movies, and that's where Frozen also finds success.  This movie is so relevant to older audiences. At its core, Frozen is a coming of age story, and story of self acceptance, two things that every adult has had to deal with. Elsa struggles with her powers, which I view as a metaphor  for self doubt, something that everyone experiences as they grow older. Finally, she learns to accept herself and take her place in the adult word. Anna has to grow up, and stop being such a jokester and start to see herself as an adult. Every adult can look at that and smile. And again, the idea of wanting to be noticed by someone you look up to is something everyone can remember doing as a child. That's why "Do You Want To Build  a Snowman?" is a perfect song for the movie. There is something beautiful about those piano chords, something powerful and nostalgic, something that reminds you of your own childhood in a way you can't explain. Pair that with lyrics that could melt the heart of  even the harshest cynic, and you have something that hooks you at the beginning of the movie. The way the song goes from hopeful to tearful is extraordinary, and full marks to Kristen Bell for her incredible vocal performance. And the movie doesn't let up from there. Adults can get dragged into the tragedy of the story: how Elsa leaves Anna alone because of her great love for her, something Anna doesn't know. That makes their resolution all the sweeter. I would expect adults to love this movie as much as children, and that goes a long way in explaining its popularity. Once the adults fall in love with a kids movie, that's how word of mouth really spreads. Parents talk about it on Facebook, Twitter, and tell their friends to take their kids to see it. They see it, and then they fall in love. And what happens next? The kids want to see it again, and the adults are only too happy to go back: but maybe they'll bring a friend this time, or invite another family. Then in comes the merchandise. Every kid is going to want the toys, and that is really how the popularity spreads. Once demand for the movie spreads outside the theatre, you know you have something special. Then there's the soundtrack. Let It Go got tons of attention, and for good reason. It's outstanding, a tour de force vocal performance from Idina Menzel. It wasn't long before other musicians tried to cover it, which they done: in droves. Covers of the song are all over Internet. Once this movie hit the Internet, there was no stopping it. The memes popped up, the song covers, the scene recreations. The Cold Never Bothered Me Anyway trended on Twitter.  The world quickly fell in love, and it should come as no surprise. The movie deserved it, and people couldn't get enough.

What I just described is what made the movie a hit. But there are tons of hit movies. Snow White And The Hunstman was a hit, but people didn't talk about it years later. How did Frozen go from hit to phenomenon? Well to really understand that, you have to go back to the movie season of 2013. Man Of Steel, The Lone Ranger, World War Z, The Wolverine and Star Trek Into Darkness ruled the box office. I'm not saying they're all bad, but they were all dark and gritty. There was little joy, especially in Man Of Steel. Not to say they didn't have their moments (Again, except for Man Of Steel), but for the most part these movies embraced darkness: dark movies for a dark and cynical world. Then Frozen comes along. It was bright, colourful and funny, while still being powerful and emotionally resonant. People just wanted to smile in November 2013, and Frozen realized it better than anyone. People laughed, cried, smiled, sang and smiled again. The power of this movie carried it acclaim and love. Dark movies can be good: The Dark Knight is one of my all time favourite movies. But often times, the movies that are remembered are the ones that bring people joy, the ones that give them more than entertainment, the ones that leave an impression. Movies that bring magic to people's lives. Frozen was able to do that, and that's what movies are all about.

The success of Frozen should serve as a lesson. Darkness and grittiness are fine, but we need balance. We need movies like this, movies that add something to your life. I'm glad this movie got its success, and I can only hope it will bring joy to people for decades to come. Somehow, I think it will. This generation of children will pass this movie down to their children, I have no doubt. This will stand the test of time, and that is the best compliment you can give anything.