Reviews

This documentary comes across as unintentionally fascinating for a few different reasons. I assume the filmmaker is striving to present Celine in a positive light; specifically portraying her as a dedicated artist who is struggling to overcome a debilitating medical condition while her passion for her music remains a steady beacon of hope for herself as well as her fans. The film gives us an intimate glimpse into her current family life while also drawing from her early years as the youngest child in a family of 16. But despite all the makings of a traditional 'hero's journey' set-up, this film seems to accidentally portray a subtler, more sobering story. At 56 years of age, with a wealth of life experience behind her, Celine herself is rarely observed bequeathing any real sense of wisdom or personal grasp of life's meaning. She spends the majority of the film bemoaning her circumstances while openly longing for the days when she was an actively-working celebrity. It is interesting to see flashbacks of her making honest claims about her addiction to being on stage, at one even making a comment to the effect of "it's not about the song; it's about the performance." While we truly do empathize with Celine's medical condition, it is nevertheless difficult to watch two hours of a highly-talented performer caught in a psychologically frozen state when, arguably, we would love to see this accomplished woman demonstrate more maturity and spiritual resilience in the face of her life-altering trial. And while her music is truly an inspiration for many people across the globe, it nevertheless becomes a sad realization that her profound work ethic may have actually contributed to the demise of her health. One can't help but feel sorry for her (not to mention for her children who, ironically, seem quite distanced from her in the film) as she speaks endlessly of her intention to fight through her illness in order to "crawl" if needs be, back to the very stage.

Under Paris is trying visibly hard to be a smart, eco-savvy variation on the classical shark horror genre. While quite clumsy and cringingly forced in its narrative, the film does manage to deliver a sobering warning on the potential harms of pollution and human carelessness, although the depth of the message suffers due to its campy portrayal of a highly unlikely threat (aka. a rapidly-adapting, self-reproducing ocean carnivore that produces scores of offspring while thriving in freshwater). The characters and the writing are quite dry overall, and it seems quite difficult to feel any attachment for the people or the situations portrayed. As such, character development remains in 'shallow waters' while the actual horror scenes are ridiculous and over-the-top while relying heavily on CGI delivery for their impact. The human stereotypes in the film are probably the most stunning jump-scares in the whole story, shamefully stolen from Spielberg's original masterpiece yet without any of the original believability or depth. The conclusion of the film is flat and disappointing, leaving one to wonder how else they could have benefitted from an hour and forty-two minutes of their life. Violence is moderately graphic (there is an abundance of blood and post-bitten body parts), and foul language is quite steady throughout the film. Sexuality is confined to a passionate kiss between a lesbian couple in their twenties who ultimately meet a watery fate (neither of whom are very likeable by the way, leaving one to secretly root for the fish itself). Overall, while taking itself very seriously, this Millennial-soaked bloodbath gets a single star for its impressive cinematography and notable views of Paris itself. As a piece of narrative, it is decidedly embarrassing as a rip-off of previous shark outings while pretending to be an intelligent thesis on the dangers of environmental degradation.

On many levels, this is a finely-crafted example of television narrative. The storytelling is richly-layered, and the characters are handsomely complex and watchable, despite how difficult it may be to witness some of the graphic content, not to mention the self-destructive elements of Cumberbatch's character Vincent. To be clear, this series is definitely not for children, and I would suggest that many older adolescents likely wouldn't appreciate or comprehend some of the textured aspects of this story either. Over the course of six highly-absorbing episodes, Eric is a simple story that slowly unfolds itself into an unpredictable, complex web of criminal intrigue. It is also a very touching and poignant odyssey of a broken man's struggle to navigate the labyrinth of unrealized fatherhood. The concept of stifled childhood itself becomes a central core to the story, not the least because of Vincent's brilliant but misaligned efforts to manifest the spirit of children through his puppeteering. The story ultimately weaves itself back to a satisfying and genuinely unpredictable conclusion, and the viewer is left to ponder what it means to break old legacies in order to prevent future injuries. One of Eric's notable strengths is the way that it takes each major character through a near-complete journey of self-reckoning, and how it effectively closes the gap on virtually every theme discussed. Eris is also a captivating commentary on mental health itself, as demonstrated by Vincent's angst-ridden struggle with avoidance, self-absorptive neurosis and addiction. As far as sexuality is concerned, there are strong homoerotic references and highly suggestive images that involve pedophilia and child trafficking. There is near-constant foul language, excessive drinking, and periodic drug use. While the series itself is an unlikely tale of redemption, there is no shortage of troubled and disturbed lifestyles portrayed. A sober tale for sober-minded parents.

The overarching message of IF can be interpreted a couple of different ways. The film reaches a higher level of quality when seen as a portrayal of self-generated resilience (ie. the fabrication of an 'Imaginary Friend' as the manifestation of a child's inner strength). Alternatively, it falls somewhat short when viewed simply as a story about conjured beings who somehow take on a life of their own outside the imagination of a child, ultimately becoming a source of external empowerment that the child may not have achieved otherwise. For now, however, I'm happy to assume the former interpretation. It does seem to fit, given the way in which this film bravely tackles subjects of grief and loss - as well as the question of what happens when a child grows up and has to face complex, adult-level challenges. Does resilience itself mature? Does it disintegrate as cynicism and fear start gaining more real estate in the child's psyche? If so, does resilience and self-empowerment remain things that children are more likely to possess due to their innocence? Either way, IF is a film that gently speaks to these questions while giving us a colorful mix of warm, likeable characters that are easy to watch and easy to root for. Ryan Reynolds' character 'Calvin' is an intriguing element, while also serving as a fun source of speculation about his actual purpose in the narrative arc. Some of IF's weaker aspects would be its loose way of stringing important scenes together, in addition to some visually-striking but rather inexplicable sequences. The story is not advanced in some of these parts, though the scenes themselves are very fun to watch all the same. To be sure, the subject matter is deeper than your average kids' movie, but is more likely to go over a younger child's head than upset them. My concerns would be the use of OMG multiple times, and the deliberate focus on a banana character who is asked to cover up his genitals. On the whole, a lovely and sweet film.

A gentler and more sentimental take on author Jim Davis' edgy but classic feline, with a positive message about forgiveness, second chances, and repairing old family schisms. The humor is generally geared towards early teens and younger - with some scattered jokes that will be appreciated by the older generation as well. Sexual content amounts to a quick reference to Tinder near the start of the film, as well as a suggestive embrace between a bull and a cow near the film's conclusion. Digital media is very present in the film, primarily represented by scores of online apps, references to social media, and delivery drones (the latter of which play a significant role in the movie's final act). Violence is more implied than actually portrayed, with some suspenseful adventure scenes that might prove a little intense for kids younger than five. Overall, The Garfield Movie is a fun little romp with some lovable - if not forgettable - characters, although fans of the timeless comic strip might be disappointed with the abrupt departure from some of Davis' classic themes and storylines.

Migration is a fine family film which, on the surface at least, promotes themes of family loyalty and working together. There is a running theme of fatherly incompetence and misguided tradition-keeping which inevitably dovetailed (or duck-tailed, rather) into an obvious promotion of women having to do the lion's share of rescuing and problem-solving as a result. In any case, the storyline is far from original, but the scenes of peril are sufficiently crafted to entertain and even produce some genuine moments of suspense. Humor is tame, although rather dry in concept and delivery. Sexuality is confined to one brief comment from one of the characters who sarcastically sympathizes over her brother's failed opportunity to eventually mate with a local female duck. Characters are generally forgettable in this film, including the villain himself and all of the cameo characters who's main purpose is to infuse more laughs in an otherwise uninspired film. Overall, the movie's strengths are in its visual effects, use of gorgeous autumn colors, and pacing of the story.