In 2018, Sony took us Into the Spider-Verse, with a film Animated Views called a “game-changer”*. It won the Best Animated Feature Oscar, was the first non-Disney movie selected by our readers as the best of the year, and made a ton of money. So a sequel was a no brainer. But Sony has never been one to shy away from exploiting their Spidey film rights as far as possible, so it wasn’t too much of a surprise when they announced two sequels.

The first, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, picks up about a year and a half after the first film. Miles has grown into the suit, both physically and talent-wise. But being Spider-man takes a toll and he misses the friends he made who went back to their own universes. On her version of Earth, Gwen is struggling alone with her responsibilities and has issues with her father. When they discover a secret society that moves across dimensions to keep things in balance, they both want to join for their own reasons. What happens next? Ummmmm…**

Let’s discuss the first of two elephants in this multiverse. When the film title was originally announced, it was called Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, Part One. A few months later, the “Part One” was removed and “Part Two” was officially retitled Beyond the Spider-Verse, with both halves being made simultaneously. So going in, savvy viewers knew we weren’t going to get the complete story this year.

Other made-as-two-part films have threaded this needle in different ways. Back to the Future II and III took two mostly separate stories and weaved them together with a cliffhanger ending sandwiched between. Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame (originally titled Infinity War Parts One and Two) took one epic story, and strategically divided its story elements over two films. These two series of movies worked well because the first part did the job of being both a satisfying and freestanding film that was also able to setup a followup.

Across the Spider-Verse chose a different path. The filmmakers took one long story and just arbitrarily cut it down the middle. Despite its massive runtime, the entire movie is just a big setup for part two. There is almost no plot point resolved in this first half.

That’s not to say the setup isn’t interesting or entertaining. The half of the plot we do get is leading to something good. I was definitely left wanting to know what happens next. But I also felt somewhat cheated due to getting only half of a film. If the credits started rolling on The Little Mermaid right after Ariel makes her deal with Ursula and you were told to come back next year for the rest, you’d wonder why you even bothered to watch this half now rather than wait for the whole thing.

The second issue that can’t be ignored is the length of the film. At two hours and twenty minutes, Across the Spider-Verse is the longest animated film in Hollywood history. Arguably, only two other major studio animated films have ever crossed the two hour threshold***, so not a common event. Even with the amount of animation released seemingly increasing exponentially over the past 30 years, runtime is not something studios have been willing to experiment with. The fact that Sony allowed its filmmakers to not only split this movie into two pieces but also make the first half so long, would hopefully imply they had confidence that the most would be made of all the extra time.

Unfortunately, that faith may have been misplaced. As I’ve already stated, the plot is not uninteresting or unentertaining. Not by a long shot. There is, however, too much filler. It’s like once the animators got the permission to not worry about runtime, they used that leeway to stop editing the story they had, rather than to fill the extended time with more story. Over and over, scenes drag on well past what is needed. The opening scene runs so long that when the title card finally shows up it’s almost a surprise that we’re still so early in. A later scene features a needlessly slow moving device that we watch way too long before a character notes the ridiculous speed in a throwaway joke. An excessively long chase scene seems to be the main plot of a third of the film. There was so much room to tighten up this story, that the runtime feels more like an ostentatious luxury than a necessary requirement.

Looking past all that, most of the other aspects of the film are pretty great.

The brilliant and unique animation style of the first movie is continued here, with mostly similar results. With each different dimension of the Spider-verse getting its own distinctive look, there are plenty of beautiful visuals. But occasionally the effect felt forced or not up to par with the original. The music of the Spider-Verse is fresh and fun. But the audio mix of some of the dialogue really could have been a lot better.

The voice actors were the best parts of the film. The returners (Shameik Moore as Miles Morales, Hailee Steinfeld as Gwen Stacy, Brian Tyree Henry as Jefferson Morales, Luna Lauren Vélez as Rio Morales, and Jake Johnson as Peter B. Parker) step back into their roles without missing a beat from their great performances in the original. And the newcomers (Oscar Isaac as Miguel O’Hara, Jason Schwartzman as The Spot, Issa Rae as Jessica Drew, Karan Soni as Pavitr Prabhakar, and Daniel Kaluuya as Hobie) easily rise to meet their level.

I need to reiterate that the half of this movie we do get is not bad! My complaints are more with the length and pacing, and the choice to not give the audience more of a standalone film. I’m sure when these two parts are watched back to back, the experience will be amazing… and I’ll be the first in line for tickets! But I’m only able to review the half that we were given and not what might be Beyond.

After being betrayed by rogue con artist Forge Fitzwilliam, widowed bard Edgin Darvis and his barbarian companion Holga Kilgore plan to get back at their former associate and reclaim Darvis’ daughter Kira. Fitzwilliam has become Lord of Neverwinter and he’s bringing back a popular, yet controversial event with high-stakes betting that will fill his vaults with riches beyond imagination. The ideal target for a heist. Darvis and Kilgore enlist the aid of half-elven sorcerer Simon Aumar and tiefling druid Doric. But in the background is Sofina, a red wizard setting a nefarious plot into motion that leaves the group having to deal with more than just breaking into a heavily guarded vault.

One of the biggest hurdles in adapting Dungeons & Dragons into a film is that there is no one plot to be based off of. It’s generally up to the players to create their stories and how they would play out. Supplemental material have been released over the years offering pre-made content, from world settings to adventure ideas, for players to use. As such, there’s numerous options to choose in developing a film. For Honor Among Thieves, Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley went with telling an original story and based it within a popular setting called The Forgotten Realms. This has helped settle on a nice mixture of options for the presentation.

Most stories within the fantasy genre tend toward an eventual “saving the world” plot. To have Honor Among Thieves be more unique, the filmmakers instead are telling a heist that happens to be set within a fantasy world. This allows for emphasis to be on developing the characters and less on spending time having to flesh out the world when it is unnecessary to do so. If there’s any lore to be told, it’s because it’s something that will benefit the characters. Thus there is a purpose to the group spending time learning about and trying to locate a magical item called the Helmet of Disjunction as it will help Aumar break the powerful enchantments placed upon the vaults.

Another big hurdle has been how to portray the game’s mechanics and spirit. The mechanics is perhaps the hardest at bringing to life as much of how things work are not visual. This led the previous feature film to make spell casting inaccurate to how they’re done in the game so that it could be apparent on screen that such is happening. Honor Among Thieves is interested in the mechanics and figures ways to showcase them with delightful results. Aumar possess a token that brings a dead creature back to life. It is alive only long enough to answer five questions, then it is dead for good. What can be a conundrum is that it answers any five questions spoken aloud.

Honor Among Thieves captures the spirit of the game in realizing its key component: fun. More often than not, films in the fantasy genre tend to play with such seriousness that they run the risk of being droll and stiff. The other direction is to spoof the genre, lampooning the troupes to a corny degree. Goldstein and Daley instead looked to find a middle ground in which things are not taken with great seriousness, but it’s not a mockery. This is exemplified with Xenk Yendar, a human paladin the group seek the aid of to find the Helmet of Disjunction. But though they are in awe of his stoic prowess as a true heroic figure, his mannerisms get on their nerves very quickly.

Adding to the fun factor is the wonderful performances by the ensemble cast. Chris Pine captures the charm and occasional vulnerability of Darvis. Michelle Rodriguez hits the right beats playing the tough and warm Kilgore. Hugh Grant perfectly personifies the deliciously despicable Fitzwilliam. Justice Smith works quite well as the neurotic Aumar. Sophia Lillis is lovely as the unpredictably endearing Doric. Regé-Jean Page seems to be made to portray the righteous Yendar. And Daisy Head stands out superbly as the devious Sofina. Often in these films an actor’s presence can overtake the character. Here the whole cast embody their characters very nicely.

What’s also fun are the Easter Eggs fans of the game can discover. They’re utilized in such a way that audiences unfamiliar with Dungeons & Dragons don’t need to feel like it’s something very important, which happens to hilariously be spoofed in the film when Sofina explains in few words how it is the vaults are enchanted to a pair of delegates who just take her for her word. There’s quite an Easter Egg late in the film that’s sure to bring a smile to fans, which I won’t reveal even though clips of it have been shown already. And I was howling over a credited cameo appearance and how it’s done both visually and its part in fleshing out the backstory of one of the characters.

It’s almost a given that Honor Among Thieves would be special effects heavy like the first Dungeons & Dragons film. Whereas the previous film relied on the effects to carry the film, this film uses just enough that they do not hinder the storytelling. A lot of the visual effects animation is done for Doric whenever she uses her wild shape ability to transform into a creature. There’s a fantastic escape sequence that evokes being a single take shot in which she’s changing between herself and into various animals while trying to avoid getting captured. It’s impressive by itself, but made more so because it serves the plot in showing how dangerous the heist is going to be.

The visual effects are used quite well in bringing to life the many races and creatures that previous adaptations hardly touched upon. While they don’t play major roles, their presence lends itself to showing that there’s more than just humans, elves, and dwarves. There’s the eagle-like aarakocra and the aptly named dragonborn conversing with the characters. One of the most recognizable creatures within Dungeons & Dragons is the owlbear, brought to life is Doric’s preferred wild shape transformation whenever in combat. There’s even a unique use of a red dragon that’s wonderfully done with great animation making it all the more fresh and fun.

Honor Among Thieves is so much fun that it’s few flaws can be overlooked very easily. It tries not to be a spectacular epic like The Lord of the Rings trilogy. It flirts with going for the scope one would expected from the fantasy genre, but doesn’t quite go all the way. This can be either a good thing or bad depending on one’s interests. Same can be said with keeping the world-building at a minimum. While it would detract the story, digging deep into the history and lore of The Forgotten Realms would be enchanting to those interested. I may have to listen to it a few more times, but I found the score by Lorne Balfe to be merely pleasant and I’m not entirely sure how memorable they are. Again, these are minor criticisms that are forgivable for a film that’s difficult to dislike.

I’m hopeful that Goldstein and Daley have developed a blueprint on how to adapt Dungeons & Dragons into a feature film and make it work. Honor Among Thieves doesn’t take itself too seriously, yet it also avoids being a parody of the genre. The narrative benefits character development over unnecessary world-building, allowing for audiences to enjoy things happening and their servicing the storytelling. The animation is very nice and the overall visual effects do a wonderful job of bringing to life creatures and races from the game that had yet to be showcased on screen before. It is just a fun movie to watch from start to finish, having managed to roll a critical success.

I usually synopsize a movie in the second paragraph of my reviews. But for this movie there has been a question lingering that probably should be answered up front: how does this film connect to the Toy Story canon? That’s answered right at the beginning with text explaining that in 1995, Andy saw a movie featuring the fictional character Buzz Lightyear. He loved it so much he got the action figure for his birthday that year. We’re then told, “This is that movie”.

The story follows Buzz Lightyear and his fellow space rangers as they divert from a mission to explore an uncharted planet. They end up stranded after an attack from the local flora and fauna destroys their hyperdrive. Buzz makes it his single-minded mission to fix what he sees as his mistake. The rest of the crew decides on a different course. So Buzz is forced to rely on a small group of ragtag rookies to try to get everyone home.

The plot is a fairly by-the-numbers and straightforward story. There are no big surprises and the tension is never dialed up very high. Unlike many other Pixar features, there is really no strong emotional through-line driving viewers to feel the highs and lows along with the characters. That means no tears this time out! But it also means we don’t care as much about what our protagonist is going through. On top of all that, it’s also not an extremely funny film. Sure, there are laughs throughout. But it’s more action-adventure oriented than comedy-based, which might be surprising to some fans.

Now you’re probably reading that and thinking, “Predictable, lacks heart, and not funny? So it’s pretty bad, huh?” Well, not really! It’s actually a solid little film. Plotwise, the writers have given the characters realistic motivations and interesting conflicts. So rest assured that this is not a boring story. Emotionally, the characters are moved to make the choices they make for personally important reasons. And those are explored. And we can understand their differing points of view. True, it never rises to the point of making you feel personally invested, but that doesn’t mean the characters themselves aren’t. And a lack of non-stop laugh-out-loud humor doesn’t mean something isn’t fun. The filmmakers have crafted a film that is very different than what you might expect from Pixar. That alone doesn’t make it bad, but adjusting expectations might be a good idea.

Another story-point I want to mention are the references to Buzz Lightyear from the previous films. The writers have done their homework! Catching all the little things that explain or at least call-back to what toy Buzz did or said was a lot of fun. As a bonus, (and without giving much away) after the film be sure to consider the journey Buzz went through in this film; recap it in your mind… (I’ll expand on that in the comments if anyone would like me too!)

I am not saying the animation in Lightyear was bad, because it absolutely was not! But looking back I can’t really recall anything blowing me away or even standing out much. We may just be at a point where their quality is so good so often that we’re used to it, maybe even spoiled.

Michael Giacchino, who is no stranger to animation, sci-fi, or action adventure films, gets to put his considerable talents on display here, and it works well. Themes stand out, but occasionally things do get lost in the background.

One of the biggest fan reactions at the announcement of this film was the replacement of Tim Allen with Chris Evans as the voice of Buzz Lightyear. I thought this was an understandable decision since technically these are two different characters, and was willing to give Pixar the benefit of the doubt. That was the right call. Chris Evans wonderfully channels some of Allen’s vocal mannerisms and inflections while lending the character a lot more gravitas. James Brolin is a nice choice for Zurg. Keke Palmer and Dale Soules are solid sidekicks. Pixar director Peter Sohn is a lot of fun as a robotic cat named Sox. I’m a big fan of Taika Waititi. In movies like Jojo Rabbit, Thor, and Free Guy his eccentricities melded into his character. Here, though, I felt like Buzz Lightyear just had Taika Waititi hanging around with him. Fun maybe, but a bit distracting.

Overall, this was an enjoyable movie. Did it really need to be made? Perhaps not, but it’s here and it’s easily better than some of the other things we’ve had to sit through in recent years. Does it measure up to the rest of the Toy Story legacy films? No, but to be fair, that’s a high bar that hardly any follow-up from any studio for any franchise has ever been able to do. Should you see it? Yes, it’s definitely worth the time. Sure, it’s not the most buzz-worthy film in the Pixar vault. So maybe go in with your expectations lowered to just infinity.

The Bad Guys are one of the most feared and successful criminal enterprises in town. But when a moment of doubt by their leader gets them nabbed, the quick-thinking Mr. Wolf gets them a chance at redemption — if they can pretend to be good while supposedly being reformed.

The story centers around a heist, and the filmmakers have gone out of their way to get the various tropes of the genre right. Adult fans of films like The Usual Suspects or Reservoir Dogs will be smiling at all the nods while they watch with their children. And while the tone is definitely kid-friendly, the plot itself has not been dumbed down for their sakes. Not being able to see where things are going too easily is vital for a film with so many twists and turns, allowing both grown-ups and kids alike to get caught up trying to figure it out before the end.

For an animated film about bad guys becoming good guys, it would’ve been easy to lay on the moral message too thick. Thankfully, the writers don’t fall into the trap. The Bad Guys aren’t that bad when they’re being bad, but they’re also not that good when they’re being good. Their personalities aren’t defined solely by which side they’re on — they’re the same people they always were, just with some different motivations at different times. In other words, (mild spoilers ahead:) they’re still fun and interesting characters by the time we get to the inevitable happy ending.

While a compelling story and interesting characters are vital to good movies, it’s the addition of humor that helps really set apart the most enjoyable animated films. Here, The Bad Guys delivers the goods. A lot of the heavy lifting comes from the way they play with the conventions of the genre. For example, the cliched “hacker” character who is always seen typing away furiously is a tarantula — so when typing away furiously isn’t cutting it, her laptop ridiculously sprouts more keyboards allowing her to use more hands. The stereotypical “master of disguise” character is a giant shark — who no matter the disguise always looks like a giant shark… but still always fools everyone.

The animation is a departure from the DreamWorks norm. Rather than perfect CG models and effects, the film has a more hand drawn feel, like a mix of their usual style with Into the Spider-Verse and Looney Tunes added in. The overall effect is charmingly beautiful, but also gives the entire production a lot of energy and fun it wouldn’t have had with just out-of-the-box, plodding CG. Character animation is stellar across the line-up, with each extremely varied role (wolf, shark, tarantula, shark, piranha, fox, guinea pig and more) all getting distinctive touches that make their persona feel unique and fresh compared to all the others.

The voice crew assembled for this team is what really elevates things past “just a kids movie” into a really good heist film. Sam Rockwell as Mr. Wolf, Marc Maron as Mr. Snake, Anthony Ramos as Mr. Piranha, Craig Robinson as Mr. Shark, Awkwafina as Ms. Tarantula, and Zazie Beetz as Diane Foxington voiced characters that could have fit in with the cast of Ocean’s Eleven without missing a step. As good as all the other components of the movie were, like a good heist, I’m not sure the filmmakers could have pulled it off without this crew.

It’s been a long time since I’ve enjoyed an animated film this much in theaters… and much, much longer still since that film was from DreamWorks! Like their title characters, it’s great to see them leaving their bad days behind and moving on to do good.

Unfortunately for me that meant taking a bit of a break from reviewing movies here at AV. I still watched them though. So instead of leaving 2021 as a big black hole in our review coverage, we thought why not just end the year off right with a quick review recap of some of the big studio releases!

Since it’s been a while (and for any newcomers) here’s how I rate movies. I give films two scores: an Overall score based on artistic merit like you’d see at any other review site. And a Fun Factor score, rating the movie purely on how entertaining it was. The scores are on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being the worst of the worst, and 10 the best of the best. Those scores are saved for the very rare movie that really deserves them. I think I’ve only awarded those scores twice in 15 years. From there I determine if the movie was poor (1 to 3), average (4 to 6), or good (7 to 9).

The first two films listed I did a full review of earlier this year. The next seven are new reviews.

I know your scores will probably be different than mine. So feel free to tell us what you thought of the films of 2021 in the Animated Views Forum!

March 4th / FORUM DISCUSSION

I reviewed this movie back in March. Read the full review here.

BOTTOM LINE: With a mess of a story, a spinoff angle that felt forced in, and an over-the-top and embarrassing attempt to canonize the main character, there’s no denying fans of the show deserved better. Feel free to run from this sponge.

March 5th / FORUM DISCUSSION

I reviewed this movie back in March. Read the full review here.

BOTTOM LINE: So much potential. An unplumbed setting for an animated film, a deep and interesting foundational legend to build off of, a good message, amazing animation, a great cast of actors, and all the resources Disney can provide. All of it squandered because somewhere along the way, someone suggested they give audiences a pop princess rather than a hero on the regular.

April 23rd / FORUM DISCUSSION

HEADLINE: A surprisingly touching film about the straining bonds between a father and daughter… set during a techno-pocolypse!

STORY: The Mitchells vs. the Machines is a very funny movie, but right from the start shows its heart. The story centers around a father and daughter who just can’t understand why the other doesn’t understand them — even though they are both more alike than they seem to think. The tension between them is exacerbated as the daughter is about to leave home for college, and both want to leave on good terms. When that doesn’t seem likely, dad suggests a cross country family road trip to her school. While that alone is an idea ripe for drama and comedy, the end of the world gets thrown in as well. And it mostly works! The ending gets rushed and a bit too “deus ex machina-y” for my taste, but fits well enough with the manic energy of the rest of the film. What really gives the movie it’s emotional heft is something that a lot of animated stories (which are usually aimed at kids) ignore: parents. Parents get short shrift in a lot of animated films. But here, not only does the father learn to see and appreciate things from his daughter’s point of view, she is encouraged to take a step back from the hustle and bustle and other distractions of a teenagers life to really see and comprehend what he has sacrificed for her.

ANIMATION: The visual style was interesting. While obviously computer generated, the animation for humans and backgrounds incorporated hand-drawn elements that gave them an even softer look when compared to the sleek robots. Think Into the Spider-Verse (also from Sony) but instead of a comic book overlay, more of a pencil sketched look. Additionally, the entire film is punctuated with animated extras throughout, as if the main character, an amateur filmmaker, was putting in special effects for a YouTube video. For small example, when characters hug, a hand-drawn heart might appear between them. Or for a bigger scene, the film may go into a freeze frame while the entire screen is covered with meme-ish GIFs and captions. These were sometimes cute, occasionally cringy, but mostly ignorable.

MUSIC: The movie was so fast paced and frenetic that I didn’t really notice the score. Obligatory pop songs are scattered throughout, usually as stingers to a joke or big moment.

ACTING: The casting for the film is solid across the board. The father/daughter dynamic is captured perfectly by Danny McBride and Abbi Jacobson, with Maya Rudolph and Mike Rianda bringing in support as the rest of the family. Olivia Colman, Fred Armisen, and Beck Bennett are great as several of the title Machines.

BOTTOM LINE: A lot of fun, but with some real emotional depth.

June 18th / FORUM DISCUSSION

HEADLINE: The Little Mermaid meets Cars meets Ratatouille? OK, not exactly, but weirdly close!

STORY: The plot is fairly simple, but crafted extremely well. Luca is a sea creature who wants to explore that shore up above but who’s parents forbid it. Alberto is a sea creature who lives on land with a collection of human gadgets and gizmos aplenty. (When out of the water they appear human.) Luca runs away, befriends Alberto, meets a human girl named Giulia, and the three team up to enter a local race that will allow the two secret merman to buy a Vespa and explore the rest of the above-water world. The story is sweet and fun, and the conflicts are not too heavy or emotional. One of my favorite sources of friction in the film is the triangle between the three young leads. The story takes place in that innocent time of childhood before kids are aware of romantic entanglements. So having a girl come between the two boys, but in a strictly platonic sense, made for a unique plot line. The climax of the story came a little too fast and the resolution didn’t feel completely earned. I really think extending the fairly short 95 minute running time was needed to give the audience a proper ending.

ANIMATION: The animation in Luca is very different from the Pixar norm: almost cartoony, with wide open mouths that move to the sides when characters are in profile, and arms and legs that sometimes look like they’re being controlled by puppeteers. That’s not a knock. It works well with the film, given it’s lighter tone… and the fact that their mouths kind of look like fish!

MUSIC: The score helps underscore the setting, which is important when the setting is so important to the story. But it doesn’t do much more than that.

ACTING: I enjoyed the main characters’ performances all around. Jacob Tremblay nails Luca’s naiveté and curiosity, Jack Dylan Grazer gets Alberto’s misplaced confidence and secret loneliness, and Emma Berman portrays Giulia’s excitement and indignation just right.

BOTTOM LINE: A lovingly well made piece of light entertainment.

August 6th

HEADLINE: Musical monkey on a mission with Lin-Manuel Miranda.

STORY: Vivo is one of those types of films from studios not named Disney, Pixar, or DreamWorks that always worry me, especially when they feature singing/rapping animals! But, like a lot of recent Sony animated films, this one was a pleasant surprise. The plot has the too often used cartoon road trip as its foundation, but doesn’t fall into the episodic trap. The journey is interesting enough, has some fun characters along the way, and isn’t too predictable. The film has a fairly solid emotional core that by the end will have you actually caring about what happens to the characters.

ANIMATION: Sony Animation is not slacking in the animation department vs their competition. The overall art style here is fun and colorful and character designs are varied and interesting. We even get some wonderful hand-drawn styled animation throughout where the original CG-renderings get a 2D-makeover that doesn’t feel like it was done in a slapdash manner, but with care for the format.

MUSIC: Lin-Manuel Miranda writes some great music, but he is a very infuriating lyricist! Whenever I listen to one of his song scores, they always feel… unpolished. There’s always a song or two that are good to great, then too many that seem like he didn’t finish them in time so rushed out the last few verses. Also he has a few stylistic choices that grate, like just narrating action rather than being lyrical, repeating words and phrases too much, structuring the song with too many different sections, using filler words to get the lyrics match the melody, and thinking that having an up-tempo song that is so dense with words that it’s incomprehensible is clever. All that is true here. But thankfully the ratio of “works” to “doesn’t work” is more on the plus side than usual.

ACTING: While I originally didn’t think Miranda’s voicing of the title kinkajou was a good fit with the character, it did grow on me as the film went on and by the end I enjoyed his performance. Ynairaly Simo was sweetly annoying as the hyper Gabi, which is not a dig but a complement! And Juan de Marcos González and Gloria Estefan bring some gravitas to the roles of old musical partners who try to reconnect after years of denying their feelings for each other.

BOTTOM LINE: Vivo may not be an Oscar contender, but it is entertaining and made with care — far beyond the assembly line animated fare studios sometimes churn out without regards to quality knowing they’ll still make money.

October 22nd

HEADLINE: Another surprisingly touching dystoian-esque take on the role social media play in our lives.

STORY: Barney and his friends have grown apart over the years since elementary school, with their online lives seemingly subsuming their real lives in a race to create content and generate clicks to show how popular they are. Without a device of his own, Barney is a digital and IRL outcast. When personal social media robots become the next craze, his family finally gets him one, whom he names Ron. But it’s defective and doesn’t have the proper algorithm for friendship. So Barney has to teach him how to be his friend. The writers do such a wonderful job of almost surreptitiously demonstrating to Barney and the audience that friendship is not a one way street. Social media, which only shows part of our lives and doesn’t involve any real interactions with those commenting and liking, is literally that one-way street — which makes building a true friendship difficult. Kids experiencing relationships through their phones isn’t necessarily a bad thing. During the pandemic and lockdowns it was a life line. But Ron’s Gone Wrong reminds us that may have forgotten (or maybe teaches those too young to have realized) that it’s the people on the other ends of these devices that we should be forming bonds with, not the devices themselves. Even better, it does it without getting preachy. And to top it all off, it’s a very funny movie!

ANIMATION: While the animation in Ron’s Gone Wrong is great, it’s not distinctive or different than what any other good studio is putting out. However, Ron’s animation is noteworthy. The animators and writers did a wonderful job with the somewhat limited ways in which the he can show emotion and interact with others. This, along with the vocal performance, are the reasons why Ron is such an endearing character.

MUSIC: Another film where the music was perfectly serviceable but not particularly memorable or even important to the plot.

ACTING: I’m always surprised when I enjoy a Zach Galifianakis movie performance so much because I usually just think of him as a big goofball. But he is a very good actor in just about everything, and his role here as Ron is no exception. And Jack Dylan Grazer plays well against him as Ron’s owner Barney. These two center the action and heart of the film and are an important part of why the story works so well.

BOTTOM LINE: A movie with a message that doesn’t make the message the movie. All while being a lot of fun.

November 24th / FORUM DISCUSSION

HEADLINE: A magical mess of a movie.

STORY: The Madrigal family lives in a magical house, and each one of the family members is gifted a magical power when they reach a certain age. Everyone but Mirabel. She does however start to notice that the magic seems to be fading in the house and among her family — a fact everyone else want to ignore. And that’s basically the plot. There is no antagonist. Why the house is magic is never explained. Why Mirabel has no power is never explained. Why the magic is disappearing is poorly explained. One major plot point that is finally revealed is later ignored. In the end everything that went wrong is magically fixed with no explanation as to how or why. This is such a mess of a movie that I’m having trouble trying to even explain what’s wrong with it since there is not much plot to talk about.

ANIMATION: Despite the story issues, Disney can almost do no wrong when it comes to animation these days. Stunning scenery, amazing effects, compelling character designs. They got it all right. Especially praiseworthy was the Casita. A house that was both magically alive and rooted in realism as a building (for example, not just going all out by adding hands, feet, and eyes) was a fine line that they tight-walked beautifully.

MUSIC: Lin-Manuel Miranda writes some great music, but he is a very infuriating lyricist… Everything I said above for Vivo applies to Encanto’s songs as well. But the ratio of “works” to “doesn’t work” isn’t as high. Germaine Franco’s score, however, is nice: fitting to the setting, functional to the story, and just fun.

ACTING: One big problem in Encanto is a glut of characters, so many that they all get very little meaningful screen time. All were fine in their roles, but again, due to sheer numbers and the running time, they don’t get a lot to do. The one character who gets the most time, Stephanie Beatriz as Mirabel held the movie together almost single-handedly with an enthusiastic performance.

BOTTOM LINE: What in the world was that? “Let’s make a movie about family love. That’s a plot, right?”

December 15th

HEADLINE: Monsters fighting monsters. What else do you want?

STORY: Monsters fighting monsters. What else do you want? Seriously, this is a basic, by-the-numbers story about a sports league where monsters representing different cities fight other monsters representing other cities. The townsfolk get behind their monsters and root for them fanatically. The monsters have a coach who works to train them. That’s basically the story… and it’s not that bad! The plot is your cookie cutter sports cliche movie: a washed up player tries to live up to the legacy of dad with a unexperienced trainer on a team far removed from its glory years to attempt to win a championship from an unbeatable opponent who has disrespected them all. It’s every sports movie you’ve ever seen with absolutely no surprises. But again, if you accept that, it’s not that bad. Not great, but entertaining enough for something most of us weren’t expecting much from.

ANIMATION: Like the story the animation is not bad, but nothing will wow you. While the monster designs are fun, the human characters look too stiff.

MUSIC: Some stock pop songs (including the obligatory Eye of the Tiger and Tubthumping) and not much else.

ACTING: I love Will Arnett. He’s one of the funniest guys in show business. But his voice is so distinctive that it sometimes takes me out of the film for a moment. Changing it up just a little bit like his roles in Horton Hears a Who and The Lego Batman Movie would go a long way. Geraldine Viswanathan brought some much needed emotionality to the film without going too far with it or losing the character’s gruffness. And Terry Crews was a lot of fun and the egotistical champion Tentacular.

BOTTOM LINE: Monsters fighting monsters. What else do you want? A good choice for a rainy day when you want to relax and enjoy a movie but not think too hard or feel too much!

December 22nd / FORUM DISCUSSION

HEADLINE: Another one!?

STORY: You know how almost every animated movie ends with the characters all singing a pop song and dancing as the film goes to the end credits? What if the entire movie was the characters all singing a pop song and dancing as the film goes to the end credits? And then what if they made a sequel to that film? Sing 2!

ANIMATION: Illumination does have some great artists. Colors pop, movement is fluid and natural, sets are fantastical, and the art is top notch. Please give these wonderful artists something better to do with their talent.

MUSIC: Pop song after pop song after pop song.

ACTING: Matthew McConaughey is a good actor. I have no idea why he agreed to be part of this! But I will admit his performance is better than this film deserves. Like Will Arnett, he has a distinctive voice, but does an incredible job of hiding it with a voice that doesn’t feel fake at all, but is almost unrecognizable.

BOTTOM LINE: Ugh.

In 2017, Zack Snyder abruptly left the director’s chair on Justice League following the unspeakable tragedy of his daughter’s suicide. Too heartbroken to find the fight in him to deal with studio executives who were increasingly putting pressure on him to change his intentions for the project, the reins were handed over to Joss Whedon. The result was Whedon more or less taking over the film, doing a number of reshoots to add more humor (some might say “to make it more like Marvel”), but with Snyder still receiving top billing (Whedon would be given a screenwriting credit).

Which is to say that the theatrical version was a different beast entirely from what Snyder was aiming for, with Whedon’s edition serving as a breezy, fun extravaganza which intentionally or not played like a nostalgia-fueled tribute to superhero movies of the 90s. “One misses the days of wind-up exploding penguins,” Alfred lamented in a moment exclusive to Whedon’s film, as though longing for the more simplistic days of Batman Returns and Superman: The Movie where good and evil were clearly defined and moral grayness was almost nonexistent (this was further exemplified by Danny Elfman’s score). And, in many ways, that’s what it gave us–rather successfully, I would argue.

Yet even as someone who has been quite vocal in defending–and even loving–what we got (I’ve also been a champion for Solo: A Star Wars Story, so maybe I have a soft spot for patchwork productions), I’d still say there was something missing from it, something hard to define. For one thing, as much as I enjoyed it, the tonal shift between it and the much-darker Batman v Superman was more than a bit jarring, as it functioned less like a continuation of what Snyder was doing and more like the Diet Coke equivalent of Whedon’s own Avengers–which, in fairness to him, was probably exactly what he was brought aboard to do. While I think it’s hogwash to claim the now-popular narrative that Justice League was “universally hated” upon its release is an accurate one (I watched it in theaters twice with audiences who laughed and cheered at the right places), it didn’t feel quite epic enough, and didn’t land as the “big event” that it ultimately should have.

A couple of years and several fan petitions and hashtags later, and we finally have Zack Snyder’s Justice League–or The Snyder Cut as fans will almost certainly refer to it as–a bigger, badder, better vision of what came before. Amazingly, in spite or perhaps because it has pretty much the same plot (and most of the footage) of what we got in theaters, it’s like experiencing a film you haven’t watched. It’s longer than The Irishman,  but it feels at least an hour shorter, and many might be surprised by what an easy sit it actually is (for those with sore bottoms, there are convenient Quentin Tarantino-style “chapters” for easy breaks). It never allows for things to go too long without an action scene of some sort, but gives its characters some breathing room between each titanic battle, making the excitement even more effective than it was in the so-called “Whedon Cut.”

So if you liked the original film, you’re probably going to like this even more. If you didn’t like it, you still might enjoy this cut, which provides more of, well, everything. The drama has more weight, the punches have more impact, and perhaps most importanly, the stakes are much higher. There’s simply more “gravity” to the storytelling here, whether it’s Wonder Woman taking down British terrorists with more intensity and force, or Batman choosing to have Superman brought back from the dead, which here is highlighted as a risky and even borderline terrifying action which could have grave consequences for everyone in the future (something which no doubt would’ve been elaborated on if the intended sequels had been made).

What you’re essentially getting is Justice League, but with far more explanation points(!!!), yet at the same time Snyder’s film has plenty of quieter moments which almost resemble the delicate intimacy of arthouse cinema. It’s like Avengers: Endgame if it hadn’t waited two hours to get to the fireworks.

And while many of the goofier jokes Whedon added are not to be found here (and aren’t terribly missed, even if some of them were pretty funny), this is at the end of the day a more lighthearted outing than Batman v Superman (not to mention more accessible), feeling appropriately comfortable with itself while not abandoning entirely what that movie had already established. As a director, Snyder displays full confidence, delivering interpretations of these classic characters that feel more traditional than what he’s done before, while managing to maintain what made his takes on them feel unique to his universe.

In other words, Snyder gets to have his cake and eat it too, with the extended running time allowing him to balance the childlike enthusiasm he brings to his fisticuffs (of which there are plenty) with the more mature filmmaking he demonstrated in Watchmen. For instance, Lois Lane’s grief over Clark’s passing gets to be explored much further here, as she takes the same walk to Superman’s memorial repeatedly, unable to motivate herself to go back to work, but giving her life some level of a foundation by buying a police officer a cup of coffee every day. It’s discreetly poignant, a deceivingly simple gesture of kindness on her part which she’s most likely not giving herself enough credit for. It’s little touches like this that make this Justice League feel fully fleshed out, and all the more emotionally rewarding for it.

Speaking of fleshing things out, Steppenwolf gets a full special effects makeover, and a lot more to do. Emphasized as a servant to Darkseid with slavish devolution to him, Steppenwolf becomes a character plagued by pain, his eyes constantly haunted even as he’s carrying out his overlord’s attacks. He’s also a lot more violent this time, with the R rating providing permission for him to kill a lot more people than he could with a PG-13 in theaters (although even with a fair amount of blood splattering, this is a pretty tame R). Darkseid, of course, was only name-dropped in the theatrical version, but does get to make a few notable appearances here, looking towering, menacing, and cool.

Much of the new content focuses on The Flash and especially Cyborg, whose backstory–similar in execution to Dr. Manhattan’s in Watchmen–takes up a good amount of the film’s focus. A welcome addition in an extended edition, it’s easy to justify why this was removed from the theatrical version simply for the sake of time and pacing (of course, that’s not taking into account the much publicized alleged feud that took place between Whedon and Fisher during production). Other removals are more confusing, such as a cameo by Willem Dafoe which serves as a teaser to 2018’s Aquaman and would’ve worked as a nice set up to that in the original cut.

If there’s anything about Zack Snyder’s Justice League that might disappoint some fans, it’s that most of the film’s action beats were already in Whedon’s version, with a breathtaking sequence involving Flash rescuing a young girl from being run over by a truck being the only one that’s completely new. That being said, all of the fights have been amplified and expanded upon, with horses being thrown further, bodies falling down harder, and every kick and gunshot feeling fiercer. This is all greatly enhanced by a brand new musical score from Tom Holkenborg, which increases the adrenaline factor where it really counts.

It’s also a wonder how much the muted color palate helps this feel different from the original movie, with Snyder thankfully removing the bizarre glaring red sky that Whedon added to the climatic conflict. It also works remarkably well in 4:3 framing, giving everything a subtly retro feel which–intentionally or not–makes it resemble a film viewed on VHS presented in the pan and scan format.

It’s fitting, in a way, that Snyder chooses to end his opus on a cliffhanger, teasing the creation of what might’ve been while still managing to find contentment in doing so. Zack Snyder’s Justice League has the shadow what came before looming over it, the existence of Whedon’s meddling with it both inviting comparison  to it and almost taunting it like a cartoon shoulder devil.

But it overcomes all of this and triumphs as an individual creative vindication, albeit on a bittersweet level, with the spirit of Snyder’s daughter floating over it like a halo, her presence being felt frequently throughout the film as it’s probably no coincidence that grief, fatherly love and affection are among its most consistent themes. Given its rousing nature, I was initially wanting to clap once the movie’s end titles started rolling (to clarify, I was alone and in front of my laptop and it was past 3:00 AM), but instead my silence was demanded as Snyder dedicates them to his loss, with Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah being played quietly on a piano as it was his daughter’s favorite song.

Whether you love Zack Snyder’s Justice League or hate it, you have to respect its existence.

But I may have just discovered a major downside.

Based only on the original teaser, I went into Disney’s latest animated feature, Raya and the Last Dragon, expecting a Mulan-style fun-but-serious action adventure film set in a foreign land with a diverse cast. Those of you who watched the rest of the trailers were much better prepared for the actuality of what we got. I, however, was stunned. Imagine going into a theatre to watch what you assume with be the next The Lord of the Rings, but getting the next A Troll in Central Park instead.

I really don’t know if I can articulate just how bad this film was measured against my expectations. I usually don’t like to spoil much about a movie, but to make my point, let me just share some of the actual dialogue in this film — remembering that I assumed we were getting something a lot more dramatic and profound than this.

— “That was awesome! Gimme some shell!”
— Two characters talking about how much they like dragons:
      “I’m a bit of a dragon nerd.”
      “Well I’m the one wearing the fan necklace!”
— “Here’s the sitch…”
— Describing how good a swimmer the character is:
      “Imma wicked when I hit that liquid!”
— “Bling is my thing.”
— “This beetle has a booty!”
— “Super flow plan, amirite?

Before you think, “well those were probably all from side characters”, let me disabuse you of that notion. Four of those lines were spoken by Raya herself.

While watching the film and taking notes, I came up with two perfect encapsulations of what I was seeing and how I might be able to describe it later. The first is simply, “Raya and the Last Dragon is Mulan — if every character were Mushu.” The recent live-action Mulan ruined what made a lot of the original so good by losing the fun. But that classic film would have been just as marred by replacing all the gravitas in the story with quipping.

The second comes from the eighth season of The Simpsons. There is an animated show within the show that the Simpson children watch called The Itchy & Scratchy Show. Think Tom and Jerry with the violence ratcheted up 500%. When the producers of the show want to make the cartoon appeal to what they believe modern audiences want, they add a new hip dog character named Poochie to the cat and mouse team. Here’s the conversation the executives have:

“We at the network want a dog with attitude. He’s edgy, he’s ‘in your face’. You’ve heard the expression, ‘let’s get busy’? Well, this is a dog who gets ‘biz-zay’! Consistently and thoroughly.”

“So he’s proactive, huh?”

“Oh, God, yes. We’re talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.”

The wise-cracking supposedly trendy dog does not fit at all into what the audience of the show has come to know, love, and expect and Poochie is hated by all.

I can completely imagine higher-ups at Disney having a similar conversation as The Itchy & Scratchy producers! “Today’s girls want a princess with attitude. She’s hip, she’s in your face. We’re talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.” Perhaps some evidence of this idea can be seen after the film, where a possibly unprecedented four directors are credited, as well as eight writers! That’s literally the definition of film by committee.

Another issue I had with the story was with the setting. As an Air Force brat back in the day, I made a lot of school friends from Southeast Asia at one of my father’s postings. I was looking forward to seeing the cultural influences I remembered from growing up with them in the first Disney animated film set in that region. But unlike Mulan which really felt like it took place in China or Coco which had a definite Mexican influence, Raya and the Last Dragon felt much more generic in its environs and inspirations. To be fair, I suspect the dialogue issues I had may have taken me out of movie too much to appreciate the impact of the setting they were going for.

Compared to the above, a relatively minor nitpick I noticed with the plot was the characters had a little too easy of a time getting through it. I’ve spoiled enough already, but when watching the film note the stops the hero makes on her way to the end and consider what she had to do at each to accomplish her goal. If you boil them down to their essence, she really didn’t do much at all at each step, making the journey feel a bit anticlimactic.

Despite all those issues, this though was probably the worst. There was actually a really good story hidden underneath all this. The underlying mythology created for the film about dragons and the evil spirits and the magic orb and the five tribes could have been epic. Should have been epic! This was a story that could have supported being one Disney’s best animated films ever. But they took this phenomenal idea and put the worst characters and dialogue on top of it. Which is almost unforgivable based on what could have been. As if that weren’t bad enough, even the movie’s over-aching message was admirable, but was all but lost amongst the wisecracking until near the end.

Let’s turn to something done extremely well in this film: the animation. Disney went all out in this respect and it shows up on the screen. The character designs are so well done. The first time we meet Raya’s father I had to pause the film to ensure the animators weren’t cheating with some kind of live-action hybrid! And the locales and backgrounds were beautiful, even if I wish they had gone a little further with the Southeast Asian designs. I wasn’t enamored by the look of the dragons. But the design of the Druun spirits were very well done and so unique and appropriately eerie.

The voice acting in the film was… okay. Don’t get me wrong. All the actors did perfectly fine jobs — with what they were given. And I’m actually a fan of most of these actors outside this film. But that dialogue! I don’t feel like it’s fair to blame the actors for their performances when it’s the words they were saying I take issue with.

Raya and the Last Dragon had so much potential. An unplumbed setting for an animated film, a deep and interesting foundational legend to build off of, a good message, amazing animation, a great cast of actors, and all the resources Disney can provide. All of it squandered because somewhere along the way, someone suggested they give audiences a princess who gets “biz-zay” rather than a hero on the regular. (Yes those last three words are another quote from Raya herself.)

The idea of SpongeBob’s pet snail Gary disappearing and SpongeBob and his friend Patrick having to leave their home in Bikini Bottom to search for him was done previously in a popular episode of the series in 2005 titled Have You Seen This Snail? This was no ordinary episode either. Nickelodeon gave it a huge promotional push with it’s own special, a month-long commercial campaign, and a contest. A Tony Award winner wrote and performed a song just for the episode. It ended up as one of the most watched shows on TV for the entire year among kids, only behind the Super Bowl. Sure in the TV episode Gary runs away and here Gary is snail-napped. But it still feels a little too similar an idea for a big budget feature film to rehash one of the most well known episodes from its small screen counterpart.

Putting that aside, the story itself is sloppily put together. Instead of one coherent through line, the plot consists of several mini-stories that aren’t well connected. Spoilers ahead! We get stories about: Plankton trying to steal the Krabby Patty formula; the king needing a snail; SpongeBob and Patrick going to look for Gary after he’s taken; a strange and completely unnecessary trip to an old west town with zombies; Mr. Krabs, Squidward, Sandy, and Plankton going to look for Spongebob after realizing how much they miss him; a night in Atlantic City; a trial; a cloying musical number about how everyone loves SpongeBob; and flashbacks to when all the main characters were much younger and at a summer camp. While there is plenty of humor in some of these storylines, they don’t feel like they’re from a single movie, but are instead just a bunch of leftover TV show storyboards slapped together.

Perhaps the worst part of the film is the fact that it seems like it was created by some corporate entity looking to launch a spin-off series to keep that SpongeBob money rolling in, rather than to be actually entertaining as a standalone movie for the long time fans of the franchise. The previously mentioned summer camp storyline sets up the Paramount+ series Kamp Koral. Every flashback in the film itself was clumsily set up, and none of them was remotely funny. They all featured the same conceit, showing SpongeBob being kind to someone he just met and therefore becoming lifelong friends. Between all the sickly-sweetness of the SpongeBob love-fest by the other characters in the movie proper and the preschool-like gentleness of the flashback scenes, too much of Sponge on the Run felt more like a Blue’s Clues movie than what fans have come to expect and love about the show.

The animation in this film has switched from the old-school-looking 2D style used on the series to 3D-CG-style used by almost all major animation studios today. While it is beautiful and extremely well done, the change is not an improvement at all when it comes to the characters themselves. With the CG animation, they gain a little too much gravity, making their movement slightly more lumbering and heavy than the freer, lighter way they moved on TV. And facial expressions lose a lot of the frenetic and fun energy they used to have, and instead feel more rigid and rubbery.

As I’ve mentioned previously on this site, I’m a huge fan of SpongeBob. So maybe I’m being a bit harder than others might be on this film. But with a mess of a story, a spinoff angle that felt forced in, and an over-the-top and embarrassing attempt to almost canonize the main character, there’s no denying fans of the show deserved better. Feel free to run from this sponge.

(Speaking of rehashing, apparently I could have just taken the review I wrote for the last movie and changed a few of the plot points to fit this film!)

Joe Gardner is an aspiring jazz pianist, who has had to settle as a part-time middle school band teacher. His obsession with the music he loves ends up causing an accident that sends him on a path to The Great Beyond. Looking for a way back to Earth, he meets a soul waiting to be born who doesn’t want to go. They devise a plan to get what they each want… that, of course, goes completely off track.

I think it’s important to say right up front that Soul is not your typical American animated film. Even for Pixar, this one is much more on the heavy side. It’s definitely got humor and fun. But a lot of the enjoyment to be had comes from watching the development of the characters and pondering the deep questions being considered. That is not a put-down! Go in ready to be stimulated and you’re going to enjoy the movie. Go in expecting a laugh-fest, you’re going to be disappointed.

With that out of the way, the story is almost pitch-perfect. Unfortunately for me, it’s hard to convey what exactly I thought worked so well without spoiling things. But, as usual, I will try my best!

In a somewhat surprising move, Joe is sent on his way to The Great Beyond before the opening credits. We as an audience have barely gotten a chance to get to know him. However, that choice works well as a storytelling device since it allows us to see his life from the point of view of others, not from his own biased perspective. We hear from him how his life was, then watch as he sees it from a different vantage point. We realize at the same time as he does that he wasn’t always seeing things as they truly were. And that connects us with what he is going through. The yet-to-be-born soul, named 22, may be on the opposite side of the divide, but she’s playing the same song as Joe. She’s never experienced life, but considers herself an expert on how terrible it is. She too is forced to see things with fresh eyes. Having two seemingly discordant characters each taking an opposite side of a position, but in reality going through the exact same experience makes the story-telling all the more engaging.

As I wrote earlier this year in my review of Onward, one of my favorite things about certain Pixar movies is what I call their “subversive wisdom”, for lack of a better phrase. Hollywood has simplistic morals that usually get repeated over and over again in media for kids. Pixar sometimes gives kids a little more nuanced message. In Soul, the lesson repeated for most of the film sounds exactly like what you would expect in a cartoon: “find your spark, your purpose in life”. But by the end of the story, the writers have turned that messaging into something much more interesting, meaningful, and complex for those paying attention.

A major issue one might have with the plot revolves around an unavoidable problem when doing a story with characters moving between life and after-life: how do you get them back and forth? Pixar has come up with their own way, and, like anything they might have come up with, if you think about it too long you can come up with several large plot holes. As much as I hate to say it, in a story like this you have to kind of ignore some of that. As long as the writers make rules about how their version of this world works and they stick to it, I think you have to give them some leeway to riff.

Another thing viewers might debate is that ending. There were so many different directions they could have went in, all of which were potentially set up. I obviously can’t say more, but after reflection I did agree with the ending they composed though I did find it surprising at first. If you aren’t happy with it, it might help to think back on that subversive wisdom.

Big picture, I love the ambition Pixar showed in green-lighting a story like this. This is a film that could have went wrong in so many ways. This is the Pixar we all remember! The studio that made a movie with no talking for the first thirty minutes! The studio that made a movie with rats in a kitchen cooking and made it beautiful! The studio that made a movie with a geriatric lead character! The studio that put their most popular characters into an incinerator holding hands as they faced certain death — and we all knew if any studio had the guts to actually kill some of their characters off it would be Pixar! So I applaud them for even taking the risk on Soul. They took a crazy concept and an idea with a huge scope and made it relatable the same way they always do — by focusing it all down onto a small number of characters we come to care about.

The animation in Soul is some of the most beautiful and interesting in the Pixar canon — and some of the most diverse as well. As in Ratatouille, where the city of Paris was almost a character in and of itself, here the spirit of New York City is palpable in every scene it is featured in. Like the actual city itself, these scenes are filled with life and have a wonderful lived in quality that sometimes is hard to capture in computer animation. The land of the souls-in-waiting is plush and has a beautifully hopeful feel to it. The path to The Great Beyond is stark and eerily stunning. Like the locales, the character designs are equally appealing and varied. Joe and his fellow humans are some of the most detailed Pixar has ever given life to. The souls are at the same time playful and ethereal without seeming like ghosts. The soul counselors deserve special praise. Their Picasso-esque designs were extremely compelling and their animation and movement were a lot of fun.

Like the animation, the music of Soul features a mix of styles. Unlike Coco, another Pixar film with a focus on music, here everything blended well without feeling forced. Jon Batiste handled the jazz sections of the film while Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross focused on the score, specifically those parts in the metaphysical realm. While maybe not always as immediately hummable as a Newman or Giacchino score, in the film both styles worked just as effectively and really helped sell the authenticity of each world.

I believe a voice cast works best when you never even think about the actors themselves. While I of course knew Jamie Foxx was playing Joe, after a few minutes that fact never crossed my mind again. And I had completely forgot about Tina Fey’s involvement so wasn’t even aware of her until the end credits. Both roles were very well voiced. And while the duo may not be as iconic as other Pixar buddies, that is more down to the film itself rather than the performances.

Soul is a film with lofty aspirations, and it hits the high notes almost every time — with incredible animation, captivating music, and an engrossing plot. While it’ll make you think a lot more than it will make you laugh, the end result is a virtuoso performance. And at the very end of a year like this one, we can all use a reminder about how precious life is and that we should make the most of the time we’re given.

ZooPhobia primarily followed a neurotic young woman named Cameron. Out of desperation for a job, she unwittingly became a permanent resident in a magical world filled with talking animals and mythical creatures. The trouble was that Cameron suffered from a terrible case of zoophobia and was now serving as a guidance counselor at Zoo Phoenix Academy, where the very presence of its students and staff scare her. Medrano began publishing ZooPhobia in 2012, but put the comic on pause by 2016 to focus on her Patreon page and developing Hazbin Hotel. Now able to continue the series some more, she has developed an animated short film in Bad Luck Jack.

Bad Luck Jack is a 12-minute short that seemingly looks that the day in the life of Jackson Wells. Jack seems like any other shy and gentle canine student at Zoo Phoenix Academy. Unfortunately, he is cursed with eternal bad luck. At any moment, a terrible accident will befall him. What’s depressing is that he is essentially immortal. So while he can instantly heal from every wound including dismemberment, he will forever feel pain and be regularly hurt by everything that happens to him. When the curse badly depresses him one day, his best friend Zill takes it upon himself to do what he can to cheer him up and tries to protect Jack from the incoming accidents.

Whereas Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss were adult shows that were not family-friendly in the slightest, certainly not when both are set in Hell, Bad Luck Jack is essentially the equivalent to a Disney Channel program like High School Musical. Even with instances of bones sticking out for a few seconds or dismemberment after Jack suffers a terrible accident, it is super tame and actually rather wholesome. There’s virtually no blood as the would-be violent effects are very cartoony in nature, like classic Disney and Loony Tunes. The short also happens to contain hardly any sexual references and lacks profanity, making it far more accessible for families to watch.

It is becoming a signature of Medrano’s to be able to independently develop a production with high quality animation and Bad Luck Jack is no different. The crew she has been able to assemble continue to astonish with such beautiful visual designs. Perhaps because the short is more wholesome than Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss that everything on screen is incredibly colorful and vibrant in comparison. And yet Medrano and her dedicated crew take great care to ensure each scene is not an assault on the eyes. All the while maintaining an appealing look that is wonderfully defined and detailed. It’s very easy to pause often just to examine and appreciate.

One does not really need to know much about ZooPhobia to get into and easy follow Bad Luck Jack. Medrano and co-writer Amanda Heard crafted the story to focus pretty much squarely on Jack and keep things simple so that it serves more of an introduction to viewers new to the series. There are sure to be some questions asked that the short doesn’t quite answer, such as why Jack wears a cast if he has instant regeneration, or what exactly kind of creature Zill is supposed to be. Fortunately, they’re not really a distraction to the overall storytelling. I imagine other questions, like why Jack is cursed, would be enough to interest folks into checking out the comic.

The characters do come off as rather stereotypical of Disney Channel troupes, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re any less fun. Jack may seem like any other shy, kind-hearted teen, but the fact that he will forever painfully suffer makes him very sympathetic. Zill is the good-at-everything best friend with genuine sincerity and humbleness that makes him pleasant. A stand-out is Zill’s girlfriend Kayla, a kangaroo whose Australian accent and vocabulary makes her unique to hear as much as watching her caring nature. There are other characters with defined personalities, but little time is spent on them due to the nature of the story’s focus on Jack and the short runtime.

Speaking of the voices, the cast do a pretty good bringing the characters to life. Bryson Baugus hits the right tones to further add sympathy to Jack, though it’s not hard to imagine he might be channeling his best Tom Holland. Joe Zieja works perfectly fine as Zill. I wouldn’t call it generic as it sounded like he was putting a little spin to the voice so that it would not seem as stereotypical as the personality would be. And it’s quite fun to hear Reba Buhr as Kayla because it’s a voice not normally heard from a love interest of a main character. Certainly unexpected after hearing her singing voice, which is provided by Miraculous star Cristina Vee.

Saying that Bad Luck Jack is like High School Musical is more than just an analogy. Medrano has become publicly known for her love of musicals, so it should be no surprise that there are three catchy songs that are fun to hear. The pop romance duet “Make a Start” that opens the short would very much fit like a glove in High School Musical. “The Curse” makes for a nice teen angst ballad that defines Jack’s character quite well. Those two songs, written by Sam Haft, would be perfect molds for Disney Channel programs, while Parry Gripp’s “Monster Fighting Time” is as delightfully goofy as would be expected, and that’s before the sudden lyrical shift.

Following up on the success of the adult Hazbin Hotel, as well as the equally adult Helluva Boss, it’s nice to see Medrano develop something more wholesome with a return to her web comic, ZooPhobia. Bad Luck Jack is a nice little short and is very easy to follow without needing previous knowledge of ZooPhobia. The characters and story may seem typical of Disney Channel programs, so those not fond of such may not enjoy this. Yet there’s no denying the beautiful high quality animation Medrano and her crew continue to produce. Alongside three catchy songs, Bad Luck Jack is a perfectly enjoyable creature that is fun to watch and not fear.