Beauty and the Beast (2017)

Year: 2017

Director: Bill Condon

Starring: Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Josh Gad, Kevin Kline, Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, and Emma Thompson
Tagline: Experience the tale as old as time
Synopsis: Disney's animated classic gets a live action update.

Review

Disclaimers:

1. If you want to go see this live action version of Beauty and the Beast and haven't already, go see it.  Read this review after.  It will all be spoilers.
2. The 1991 animated Beauty and the Beast ranks in my top five favorite movies.  Ever.
3. I had a lot going on emotionally when I saw this live action film.  Some of that might have affected my enjoyment thereof.
4. This is not a short review.

Still here?  Okay then.

You may have sensed this coming from the disclaimers: I was disappointed.  I didn't really like this live action version of Beauty and the Beast.  I don't hate it.  I think it is a decent movie and the visuals are pretty amazing.  But it cannot hold a candelabra to the original.  So even though I went in with mid-level expectations, I left feeling thoroughly disappointed.

I'll limit my critique to three areas: music, story, and characters.

Music
I'll give Emma Watson, Josh Gad, Luke Evans, and even Ewan McGregor credit.  They all do an admirable job of singing their iconic songs.  But as much as I love Emma Thompson as an actress, as a singer she is no Angela Lansbury.  And that was all I could think about during "Beauty and the Beast."  It's the titular song, an Academy Award winning song.  And the warmth and hope that Angela Lansbury imbued into it are lacking.

Of the four new songs, three feel like mere filler.  I would much rather have heard the songs from the Broadway version.  The film teases with an instrumental version of "Home," but no more.  That said, the Beast's solo "Evermore" is terrific and a suitable addition to the film.  It is what's needed in that moment and Dan Stevens' voice manages to be both rich and growling as needed.  "Evermore" was one of the few highlights of the film for me.

Story
This version follows the animated version in many respects.  But as a live action film, it tries to expand the world.  Some attempts work better than others.

For starters, the nature of the curse changes.  Beast's household are slowly turning into objects, becoming less and less human as each rose petal falls.  Rather than living indefinitely as objects, their ultimate fate will be turning forever into lifeless objects.  That does up the ante for them, but it also adds a darker tone and makes the situation and the curse seem more hopeless and cruel.

The film also addresses how the entire village could be oblivious to an enchanted castle not far from them in the woods.  They've all lost their memory of the place and its inhabitants.  Both of those elements work.  But just how much does the curse affect them?  The townspeople still become a mob and set out to kill the Beast for no reason other than Gaston's fear-mongering demagoguery.  At the film's end, I found it difficult to simply dismiss their behavior toward the Beast, Maurice, and Belle.  Throwing in a Mr. Potts and an overbearing wife for Cogsworth added nothing.

One thing the live action Cinderella did well was give more backstories to the characters.  This Beauty and the Beast tried to do that ... but only half-heartedly.  It's a given that Belle's mother is deceased.  Trying to make that more dramatic by having her mother die of the plague in an old Parisian windmill doesn't add anything to the story or to our understanding of Belle.  All it explains is why Maurice wants to live in the clean air of the countryside.  [Side note: Having the enchantress give the Beast a magical book makes no sense, does seem cruel, and feels like a haphazard plot device to facilitate this moment of backstory.]

As for the Prince/Beast, his backstory simply feels lazy and cheap.  His mother dies and his father raises him to be spoiled and selfish.  That's it.  And it bothered me because it seems to take away much of his personal responsibility or accountability.  It's his father's fault.  That cheapens his growth and change in the story.  I'm not saying parents can't emotionally stunt and scar their children.  But the film throws it out there as a shortcut, rather than exploring any depth to the Beast's story.

Characters
The characterizations were what I had the hardest part with.  Nearly every character feels like a watered-down imitation of the lovable and lively version in the animated film.

We'll start with LeFou.  Is he gay?  Yeah.  Is a big deal made of it?  No.  Will your kids ask about it?  I don't know.  Should you talk to them about the movie anyway?  Always.  [That's a soapbox that I may someday get on ...]  It's probably good to explain to kids that LeFou and Gaston have a toxic relationship, platonic or otherwise.  Honestly, the few hints thrown in didn't really faze me.  They don't add anything at all to the film.  But they don't detract either.  And of all the characters in the film, LeFou is actually most like his animated counterpart.

With the animated Gaston, you know from his first moment on screen that he really is arrogant and boorish and not at all suitable for Belle.  He insults her book then gets it muddy!  It's instant dislike.  This Gaston wasn't like that.  Yes, he seems full of himself and far too self-assured.  But you don't feel any immediate distaste for him.  Belle's first interaction with him in the film actually felt rude on her part.  It takes a while for his downward turn and it comes about in a way that makes him feel more bi-polar than villainous.  I'm not sure if the film-makers did that on purpose, or if they simply took for granted that people would dislike him immediately.

Gone is the eccentric inventor who builds overly complicated and dangerous machines.  In this telling, Maurice is an artist and tinker.  He seems to specialize in music boxes.  (I didn't know you could make much of a living at that in a little town.)  Rather than being odd, he's perfectly sane, though bearing some sort of emotional scarring from his wife's passing.  While I missed his lighthearted goofiness, Maurice is more of an active participant in the plot this way.  He openly defies Gaston on more than one occasion.  And that works in this retelling.

The animated bookseller has been replaced in this version by a chaplain who keeps a meager collection of books in the church.  He and Belle appear to be friends.  At the climax, it's clear during Gaston's "kill the Beast!" rant that the chaplain is having none of it.  Good for him.  But I then expected him to come to the aid of Belle and Maurice in some way.  Nope.  He simply vanishes.  He isn't seen attacking the castle.  But he does nothing and says nothing to stop them.  It felt like the filmmaker's simply had no idea what to do with his character, so he simply disappears.

I had a hard time with the household objects.  They feel too much like objects and not enough like people.  They all feel like pale imitations of their animated counterparts.  If they are going to look less human or humanized, then the voice acting needs to compensate by adding more life and humanity.  I didn't feel like any of the actors brought that.  None of them feel endearing.  Moreover, some of the story changes led to characterization changes.  They feel selfish or at least self-centered.  Everything Lumiere or Mrs. Potts do for Belle feels like it is part of a scheme to bring Belle and the Beast together to break the curse, rather than out of genuine concern for Belle's comfort and well-being or for their master's happiness or personal growth.

I'm sorry, but in many ways, the filmmakers killed the Beast.  I have nothing against Dan Steven's portrayal.  I think his voice is great.  And as previously noted, his song "Evermore" is the best part of the film.  But that is not the Beast from the animated version.  They gave him father issues instead of personal issues.  They made him more jaded and cynical and robbed him of the lovable innocence and innate goodness he has in the animated version.  And the CGI of him feels so dark and soulless.  What happened to the intensely blue human eyes that showed the man within the monster?  The film also changes two of my favorite Beast moments.  In the animated version, after the Beast scares Belle from the West Wing with a fit of anger, he then realizes his mistake, immediately regrets it, and does a face palm.  It says so much about who he really is.  The other moment is when the Beast gives Belle the library.  In the animated version it is a big moment.  He is so excited he can hardly contain his giddiness and he wants the moment to be absolutely perfect.  In this version, the Beast shows her the library and then gives it to her almost as an afterthought.

I love Emma Watson.  She's a talented actress.  She simply is Hermione Granger.  But she isn't Belle.  How much of that was her and how much of that was the script she was given I don't know.  But she was not the character I know and love, the character I've sympathized with for 25 years.  She feels less charming and a bit more ... jaded and as though she has a chip (a small chip) on her shoulder.  Her rejection of Gaston's proposal feels more harsh.  Her sacrifice for her father is only to give her time until she can escape.  She seems to approach the West Wing and the rose more out of rebelliousness than out of innocent curiosity.  And when she expresses her love for the dying Beast, I found I didn't really believe it.

One change I do like in this version is integrating the enchantress character (Agathe) into the story.  I like that she remains watchful over the villagers.  The impression I got was that she even leads Maurice (somehow) to the castle.  How else to explain a path that appears one night and disappears the next.  So I guess she knew that Belle would rescue her father and ... somehow things would come together?  It's an odd bit of matchmaking, that's for sure.  Mostly I like that she is there during the climax, not participating at first, just observing.  The visual of her breaking the glass dome around the now petal-less stem is striking.

Conclusion
Like I said, I didn't hate the movie.  And maybe at some point I'll give it a second chance when I'm in a better mood.  But for a movie about seeing beyond superficial appearances, for me there isn't much beyond the flamboyant/Gothic facade.  The magic, the warmth, the charm, and the joyfulness are all missing.  Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go watch the animated classic again.

Quotable Quotes

• "Have you really read all of these books?"  "Hmph.  Some of them are in Greek."  "Is that a joke?  Are you joking now?" -- Belle and the Beast
• "Nobody deserves you!" -- Gaston to his reflection in a mirror
• "I am not a beast!" -- the Beast to Gaston

The LEGO Batman Movie

Year: 2017

Director: Chris McKay

Starring: Will Arnett, Michael Cera, Ralph Fiennes, Rosario Dawson, and Zach Galifianakis
Tagline: Always be yourself.  Unless you can be Batman.
Synopsis: When the Joker unleashes havok on Gotham City, Batman must move past his lone vigilante ways and team up with others to save the day.

Review

Most films don't start until after all the opening logos have finished.  Not LEGO Batman.  Nope, in this zany Batman mythos tour de force we hear Will Arnett's gruff Batman voice narrating from the very first production logo.  From the onset, you know this movie isn't trying to be serious.  Yet for all its joke/gag-a-minute antics, its endless parody, and its winks and nods to every previous incarnation of the Dark Knight, underneath that is a story with heart and a solid message.

LEGO Batman is a zany good time.  The more you know about Batman and his previous on screen iterations, the more fun you'll have.  But even if this is your first Batman flick, it is still fun.  The same goofy humor that was in The LEGO Movie can be found here, though perhaps not to quite the same extent.

For a movie about computer-generated plastic mini-figures, there's a lot of humanity in LEGO Batman.  Batman is a fairly dark hero, with a tragic past and lots of personal demons.  Somehow this film manages to deal with those elements in a way that is kid-friendly and hopeful.  Batman finds healing and meaning in his relationships with Dick Grayson, Alfred, and Barbara Gordon.

I don't really know what else to say.  The LEGO Batman Movie is fun, zany, heartfelt, and well-made.  If you haven't already, go see it.

*** Spoiler Section ***

As a full-fledged nerd, seeing Voldemort, the Eye of Sauron, and Daleks ("British robots ... ask your nerd friends") made me quite happy inside.

Quotable Quotes

• "Riddle me this: what ... just happened?" -- The Riddler
• "Wait, does Batman live in Bruce Wayne's basement?"  "No.  Bruce Wayne lives in Batman's attic." -- Dick Grayson and Batman
• "Pew! Pew, pew!" -- Anyone shooting a gun

ISFS

Lion

Year: 2016

Director: Garth Davis

Starring: Sunny Pawar, Dev Patel, Rooney Mara, Nicole Kidman, and David Wenham
Tagline: The search begins.
Synopsis: A young Indian boy accidentally ends up nearly a thousand miles from home and lost.  He is eventually adopted by an Australian couple.  As an adult, he uses Google Earth to search for the family he lost.

Review

If I had to sum up Lion in two words, it would be "beautiful" and "heart-wrenching."  This is one of the films nominated for Best Picture.  It's also nominated for five other Academy Awards and it deserves each nomination.  Even if it doesn't win any of the awards, it deserves to be seen.  Why?  Because it is an amazing story that is beautifully told.  And what makes it all the more special is that it is based on a true story that unfolded this decade.

With the story being based on a true story, there is a certain amount of inevitability to it.  There aren't any surprise twists.  We know five-year-old Saroo is going to get lost and that some 25 years later he will again find his birth family.  This isn't a story about surprises, it's a story about the journey, physically and emotionally.  And it is a beautiful journey, beautiful in its story and in its cinematography.

The acting in the film is outstanding.  Dev Patel (older Saroo) and Nicole Kidman (his adopted mother, Sue) carry the film emotionally.  But newcomer Sunny Pawar as young Saroo is the true gem.   To get such honest emotion from someone so young is impressive.  I forgot I was watching an actor.

One thing the film does well is how immersive the first half is.  It is filmed in India and all the dialogue is in Hindi with subtitles.  Those are real streets and real slums and real dark alleys.  Yes, this is a movie, but it reminds you that far from the comforts of our middle-class American homes is a very different world.  And yet it is not so different.  Kamla loves her children and is doing her best to provide for them.  Guddu is a loving and protective older brother.  Saroo is happy in his life, not knowing anything different.  They may not have much, but they have each other ... until they don't.

After Saroo is safely adopted by John and Sue Brierley, we skip ahead to adult Saroo, now thoroughly acclimated to his life in Tasmania.  He's going to business school and has a girlfriend (portrayed by Rooney Mara).  But he starts feeling a hole in his life.  And memories of his former life and his lost family begin to haunt him.  Cue Google Earth and an amazing (though undoubtedly tedious) search for something that looks familiar.  Saroo's search is much more compelling than watching someone scroll through train lines on a computer.  It affects his relationships, with his girlfriend, with his adopted brother (also from India), and with his adopted parents (who he hides his search from).  Through it all, the emotions are real and relatable.

Lion is rated PG-13 for some mild sensuality and thematic material.  Probably you wouldn't want any kids in the audience because they might be traumatized at the prospect of getting lost.  But there are also a couple of scenes where young Saroo narrowly avoids being taken by men whose motivations are anything but good.  Nothing is clearly stated.  But it doesn't take much imagination to figure out how they would exploit children.  I don't recall any swearing.  There might have been a word or two.

Unfortunately, Lion didn't get a very wide release or much publicity.  I hope the Oscar nominations change that.  It is a quiet film, in the sense that there are no explosions or car chases or gunfights.  And again, the first half of the film is entirely in Hindi with subtitles.  If you love a good story, I think you'll love Lion.  And if you are a mother or a father, maybe bring extra tissues.

*** Spoiler Section ***

As heart-wrenching as the first half of the movie is, the hardest part for me was learning that Guddu had died the very same night that Saroo vanished.  I can't even fathom what their poor mother went through.

The other thing that got me was the actual footage shown before the credits.  It is of Saroo's second trip to India, where he brings his mother Sue to meet his mother Kamla.  Yep, there were some tears on my part as his two mothers embraced.  That's when it really hits home that this was a true story about real people.

It was after that when we finally learn why the film was entitled "Lion" rather than "A Long Way Home" like the memoir.  All those years Saroo had been mispronouncing his own name.  His birth name was "Sheru" which is Hindi for -- you guessed it -- "lion."

Although it is not in the film, and I have no idea if it is credited in Saroo's memoir, I could not watch the film without seeing a Divine hand watching over Saroo as a child and guiding him again as an adult.  That Saroo was able to survive on his own in Kolkata at age 5 and never get taken by child traffickers is miraculous.  And I do not believe Saroo simply got lucky while scrolling -- after years of scrolling -- and thus found something familiar.  For me, this story is a reminder that God is mindful of all His children and watches over them in numerous ways.

Quotable Quotes

• "I'm sorry you couldn't have blank slates.  You didn't just adopt us, you adopted our histories as well." -- Saroo to Sue
• "So this is where you've been." -- Sue to Saroo, after seeing his maps

ISFS

Hidden Figures

Year: 2017

Director: Theodore Melfi

Starring: Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Spencer, Janelle Monae, Kevin Costner, Kirsten Dunst, and Jim Parsons
Tagline: Meet the women you don't know behind the mission you do.
Synopsis: During the dawn of the space race, three black women helped NASA put America into orbit.

Review

It takes quite a movie to unseat Rogue One from the top of the box office.  Hidden Figures is quite a movie and deserving of that honor.  It's inspiring, fun, engrossing, and all around well made.

Films like this are really interesting in that they take what to me is history and make it come alive.  For me, Sputnik as the first satellite and Yuri Gagarin as the first man in space are facts recorded in history books.  I also know about Neil Armstrong setting foot on the moon, thus "winning" the space race with Russia.  To me there's nothing dramatic about those things.  They're a historical given.  Not so in the world of the film, where there is very much a "How could we let this happen?!" mentality as the Russians send first Sputnik then Gagarin into space while NASA sputters.  Adding to my mentality shift, I saw the movie with mom who was in college during the time portrayed in the film.  She remembers listening to the radio and watching the television as these events unfolded.

Any film that can make history come to life in an exciting and fresh way gets points from me.

Of course Hidden Figures is about more than the space race.  The film strikes a good balance in terms of its portrayal of the segregated realities of l960s Virginia.  It never feels heavy handed.  But it also doesn't feel like it pulls any punches.  While there were plenty of times when I could only shake my head in frustration at some of the idiotic actions and words of some people, overall the film has a sense of hope and of moving forward with unified purpose.

The growing movement led by Martin Luther King is mentioned a few times during the film.  But the underlying message of the story is that the world isn't changed just by men like Doctor King.  It's changed by the "hidden figures" who live their lives and do their jobs with not only character and decency, but with purpose, gumption, and brilliance.  The more Katherine shines, the more other characters are forced to recognize her efforts and contributions.  The same is true of Dorothy and Mary.

It is the characters that make Hidden Figures shine.  Katherine, Dorothy, and Mary are all inspiring women.  They are intelligent, hardworking, tell-it-like-it-is women who also each have a good sense of humor.  I suppose you'd have to have a good sense of humor to put up with some of the nonsense they deal with.  The supporting characters also do a good job, especially the oft-exasperated Al Harrison (Kevin Costner) whose head is in space and can't always fathom the division going on here on earth.

My only critique of the film is that it felt a bit slow during the scenes with Colonel Jim Johnson and Katherine's courtship.  As part of Katherine's story, it makes sense to include it.  But it sometimes felt as though the film-makers weren't entirely sure what to do with those scenes other than fit them in.

Hidden Figures is rated PG and has some mild swearing.  There were moments of injustice where I wanted to shout "C'mon!" at the screen.  But there were more moments where I wanted to cheer at the triumphs.  Do yourself a favor and go see this excellent film.

*** Spoiler Section ***

As I said above, Hidden Figures never feels heavy handed, including in its resolutions.  For example, for most of the film Paul Stafford (Jim Parsons) has been standoffish (at best) toward Katherine.  Rather than end their arc with some forced apology, we see two small yet meaningful actions.  First he lets her add her name next to his on a report (something he adamantly refuses during previous attempts).  Second, he brings her a cup of coffee.  We see that his views have changed.  That is more powerful than a trite speech.

I have two favorite scenes in the movie.  The first is when Dorothy triumphantly marches all her "West Area" ladies from their segregated building to across the campus and into the shiny new IBM computer room.  The other is when Al Harrison throws open a door, shouts Katherine's name as she dejectedly heads down a hall, and holds up a security badge to her.  Those moments deserve far more cheers than any superhero saving a city.  Those moments -- or at least similar moments -- actually happened.  Those moments change lives.  And slowly but surely, they change the world.

Okay, my third favorite scene is the IBM people having to explain that the brand new computers they are delivering don't fit through the doors to the room.  All Al Harrison can come up with is "use the big hammer" to tear down the doorframe. #ProblemsofProgress

Quotable Quotes

• "We can't justify a space program that doesn't put anything in space." -- NASA big wig
• "Use whatever bathroom you want, preferably one close to your desk" -- Al Harrison to Katherine after he has torn down the "colored" ladies room sign
• "Yes, they let women do some things at NASA, Mr. Johnson.  And it's not because we wear skirts.  It's because we wear glasses." -- Katherine to Jim
• "There is no protocol for women attending."  "There's no protocol for a man circling the Earth either, sir." -- Paul and Katherine

ISFS

A Monster Calls

Year: 2016

Director: J.A. Bayona

Starring: Lewis MacDougall, Felicity Jones, Sigourney Weaver, Toby Kebbell, and Liam Neeson
Tagline: Stories are wild creatures.
Synopsis: A tree monster visits young Connor to help him cope with his mother's terminal illness. 

Review

A Monster Calls is an interesting film in that it deals with very real, very human problems, but it does so with an element of the fantastical.  The titular monster comes to Connor one night and explains that he's going to tell him three stories on different days.  After he has told the third story, it will then be Connor's turn.  He must tell the monster a story, the story of his recurring nightmare.  As the monster terms it, Connor must tell the monster his "truth."

When not being told stories by a tree monster, Connor must continue going about his normal life.  This includes distracting himself with drawing late into the night, being bullied at school, arguing with his strict grandmother, seeing his partly estranged father, and watching as treatment after treatment fails to heal his mum.  Over and over he tries to tell others he's "fine" only to have things unravel more and more.  Connor is scared, angry, and in pain.  And odd as it may seem, he needs a monster to help him through it.

The visuals in A Monster Calls are stunning.  It was amazing to watch the monster first come to life.  Even more beautiful are the first two stories the monster tells.  As he narrates, the stories are brought to life through animation that is stylized to look like watercolor paintings.  They are mesmerizing to watch.  [The closest comparison I can come up with is "The Tale of the Three Brothers" from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.]  The tales themselves are also interesting.  They play out not as one would expect.  "Humans are messy creatures," the monster observes as he tries to teach Connor a few lessons.

As much as I enjoyed the film, it did have a few flaws.  The scenes with the bullies felt a bit overemphasized.  Nor did they quite convey what I believe they were supposed to: that Connor is almost seeking out their abuse as a way for him to deal with his own anger and pain.

Another weak spot was Sigourney Weaver.  For most of the film she seemed not quite the right fit for her role.  That said, she did an excellent job during the scenes where her own grief surfaces.

For their parts, Felicity Jones was perfect as the ailing young mum and Lewis MacDougall was completely believable in the wide range of emotions he was called to convey.  The two of them really grounded the film.  Liam Neeson was also perfect as the voice of the monster.  [I'm reminded of his work as Aslan in the Chronicles of Narnia films.]

A Monster Calls is rated PG-13 for some scary images and mature themes.  While it has fantastical elements, it's not a fantasy for kiddos.  What it is is a beautiful, honest look at the messiness and healing that can be found through the grieving process.  It's a film that reminds there is power in stories and there is power in the honest truth, no matter how painful.

*** Spoiler Section ***

As Connor is looking through old pictures of his mum, there is one of her as a girl with her father (who apparently passed away at some point before Connor's birth).  The father is portrayed by Liam Neeson.  Is the monster her father, come to help his grandson heal?  Later, as Connor looks through his mum's book of watercolors, he finds pictures from the monster's stories and a final picture of the monster himself.  Perhaps the stories were ones her father told her before his death.  Or perhaps the monster came to help her through her own grief at her father's death.  I love that it is left unexplained.

The last third (or so) of the movie is the most powerful and poignant.  Though he would almost rather die than tell his secret -- his truth -- Connor does finally tell the monster of his nightmare.  In doing so, he admits the truth he is ashamed of: that he wants it to be over.  He is ashamed of that truth.  He hates himself for that truth.  Because he knows the only "over" is his mum's death.

The monster wisely points out that what Connor wants -- what he really wants -- is for his pain to be over.  He points out the dichotomy of pain and grief: we want it to end while not wanting it to end because of what it means.  It's a powerful and difficult truth, and one that applies to more than the death of a loved one.  But it is only in finally facing that truth -- those fears, that pain -- that Connor can begin to heal.  Thus he is ready (as ready as a breaking heart can ever be) to tell his dying mother "I don't want you to go" while also being able to let her go.

Grief is hard.  It is messy.  A Monster Calls does an excellent job portraying that.

[As a side note, earlier in the week I saw Rogue One again.  That's two films in one week where Felicity Jones' character dies.]

Quotable Quotes

• "Sometimes there's just messily ever after." -- Dad
• "What should I destroy next?  It is most satisfying." -- The Monster
• "It will be hard, very hard.  But you will get through it." -- The Monster
• "I want it to be over!" -- Connor
• "It starts with a boy: too old to be a kid, not old enough to be a man." -- The Monster

ISFS

La La Land

Year: 2016

Director: Damien Chazelle

Starring: Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, and John Legend
Tagline: Here's to the fools who dream.
Synopsis: Aspiring actress Mia and jazz pianist Sebastian pursue their dreams.

Review

My previous review was of a "let's put on a show!" musical.  La La Land on the other hand is the kind of musical where there's a definite story to tell and the characters burst into song and dance because that's where their emotions lead them.  The former will entertain the kiddos, the latter is a fantastic movie.

With the exception of a couple of 80s songs during an embarrassing gig (even serious musicians have to pay the rent), the music of La La Land is original.  And I thoroughly enjoyed it.  Since seeing it, the various songs have been stuck in my head and I don't even mind.  "City of Stars" and "Audition" are both haunting melodies that stick with you.  And the "A Lovely Night" song and dance number will put a grin on your face.  Oh, and the film starts with a musical number set during a traffic jam.  Because Los Angeles.

But La La Land is more than a string of song and dance numbers.  There's a story to tell.  Part of it is a love story between Mia and Sebastian.  The other part is a love story between them and their individual dreams.  And the bittersweet thing is, those dreams aren't always compatible.  Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling both give it their all to create believable, passionate, and vulnerable characters.  They carry the film with grace and toe-tapping glee.

The film is rated PG-13 for some language.  The language isn't excessive, but there is one F-bomb.  There is nothing else.

La La Land is a terrific film.  It's upbeat and bittersweet, original and breathtaking.  I'm not sure it entirely lives up to the hype surrounding it, but it is still a beautiful film worth seeing, especially if you love musicals, and even if you don't.

*** Spoiler Section ***

The epilogue, that's what got to me.  Seeing what might have been through Sebastian's eyes and music as he seemingly asks himself, "Could I have had it all?"  I don't know if that sequence is what would have been or is simply what he wishes could have been.  Near as I can tell, the dream sequence differed from how things actually played out based on choices Sebastian made (it is his fantasy after all).  Instead of following success, he follows his heart and Mia.

Even before the sequence, I was wondering why on earth Sebastian didn't go with Mia to France.  Dude, they have jazz in France!

As I've thought about La La Land, I think it was trying to pay homage to Casablanca.  In one scene, Mia notes a studio lot window that was used in the classic film.  That theory certainly fits with the final sequence where two former lovers meet by chance in a club and the piano player (in this instance Sebastian) plays "their" song.  The irony is that one of the famous lines from Casablanca is "We'll always have Paris" when in this instance, they could have had Paris.

Also, while it seemed like Mia got all she wanted, it was hard to be happy for her when we know nothing of this "David" fellow she's suddenly married to.  Hopefully he is more interesting than Greg (the guy she was dating before Sebastian).

*** Other Spoiler Section ***

Initially, I didn't enjoy La La Land as much as I had hoped to.  Part of that is the bittersweet ending.  The hopeless romantic in me wanted the fantasy finale to be the real ending.  But really, the bittersweet of the film stems from the fact that I am a fool who dreams.  I've had many dreams throughout my years, and yes, many of them were Hollywood dreams.  At some point, however, every dreamer has to count the costs and make a decision.  Some dreams pan out.  Some dreams get placed gently, reluctantly, on a shelf.  C'est la vie.

Quotable Quotes

• "Will you grab my keys?"  "What kind?"  "It's a Prius."  [There are a dozen such keys.]  "That doesn't help me." -- Mia and Sebastian
• "City of stars, are you shining just for me?  City of stars, there's so much that I can't see." -- Sebastian
• "Here's to the ones who dream, foolish as they may seem.  Here's to the hearts that ache.  Here's to the mess we make." -- Mia 

ISFS

Sing

Year: 2016

Director: Christophe Lourdelet and Garth Jennings

Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson, Seth MacFarlane, Taron Egerton, and Tori Kelly
Tagline: Auditions begin 2016
Synopsis: To save his theater, Buster Moon (a koala) puts on a singing competition.  Singing and hijinks ensue.

Review

Sing was simply a movie to see with my mom during Christmas break.  Was it a terrible film?  No.  Did it have moments that entertained me?  Yes.  Did it have cringe-worthy moments that made me roll my eyes and groan?  Yes.  Was it the worst movie I've seen this year?  No.

It's probably wise this film was slated about as far from Zootopia as possible.  As anthropomorphic animal movies go, there is no comparison.  Not in story.  Not in characters.  And not even remotely in animation.  I suppose in Sing's defense, it was never trying to compete and thus it is unfair to compare.  Moving on.

As a film student, I learned there are two types of musicals.  There's the kind that has a definite plot with a story to tell and the characters simply break into song from time to time in order to express their emotions.  And then there's the "Hey, guys, let's put on a show!" variety which inexorably leads to a "The show must go on!" finale.  As the latter, Sing is a paint by musical numbers film.  There's some plot and a few character arcs.  But the outcome is as inevitable as it is predictable.

Then again, the reason that second kind of musical exists is to showcase talented singers and dancers.  In Sing's case, the singers and dancers happen to be animals.  So, we get an array of animals performing 2016's "Now That's What I Call a Soundtrack!"  There is a good deal of variety to the film's music, I'll give it that.  There's a mouse who sings Frank Sinatra (of the Rat Pack, get it?), pigs doing Taylor Swift, a gorilla performing John Legend, and the list goes on.  There's also "Hallelujah," "Venus," "Gimme Some Lovin'," and "Lollipop," to name a few more songs.  Most of the songs are catchy and the animals are amusing.

On the low end, the film had a flatulence gag.  I don't recall anything else questionable.  But I had a hard time liking Buster Moon (the main character).  Hard-working, do-anything-to-succeed is one thing.  Not paying employees, dodging creditors, and stealing electricity and water is another.  [Somebody report this koala to Officer Judy Hopps ...]

There were a few highlights though.  Rosita's housework machine is ingenious and fun.  And her "Bamboleo" routine in the supermarket is entertaining.  I was also amused by the car wash.  The colorful squid are also neat and I'd have liked to have seen more of them.

Overall, Sing brings nothing original to the table.  But if you've got kids dying to see animals singing pop tunes, it's not a horrible way to spend 108 minutes.

*** Spoiler Section ***

There's seriously nothing to spoil.  Sing is like one of those road trip tourist stops.  "30 miles to Buster's Burger Bonanza!"  "20 miles to Buster's Burger Bonanza!"  "10 miles to Buster's Burger Bonanza!"  "Two plot points to Sing's inevitable wrap up!"  "You have reached the happy ending."

Quotable Quotes

• "When you've reached rock bottom, there's only one way to go, and that's up!" -- Buster Moon
• "Has anyone seen my glass eye?" -- Miss Crawly

ISFS