Encanto - Movie Review - Disney Animation delivers more of the same

Walt Disney Animation Studios are obviously one of the most significant animation studios of all time. They practically invented the game with feature length animation way back in the day and have managed to persevere and maintain their relevance and skill at their craft with time, despite some dark spots here and there. However, in recent years, I can't help but feel like they've just been making the same sorts of films over and over, and while most of them still end up being good, their general commitment to a formula does make a lot of their output feel repetitive and predictable. The trailers for Encanto did not give any hope that they would stray from the age-old Disney formula and give us something surprising, but they did at least show a film that looked good in and of itself, so I went in expecting a jolly good time at the very least while also hoping that maybe it would have something unexpected up its sleeve.

The story centres on a magical family called the Madrigals where each member possesses a special and unique ability. However, this isn't the case for one member named Mirabel, who is not respected by those around her and is seen as a disappointment because of this, not least by her Grandmother, who obtained the source of the magic many years ago and seeks to preserve it at all costs. But, when it seems as if this magic at the centre of the family is in danger, Mirabel might just be the key to saving it. 

Well, first of all, I have to say that, much like how nice it was to see a new MCU movie in the cinema after a long time earlier this year with Black Widow, it was rather lovely so be sat in a cinema watching a new animated film released by Disney. The last one I saw was Onward just before COVID kicked off, and every subsequent one has been a Disney+ watch for me. So, there was a rather pleasant feeling in seeing that logo in front of an animated film in a cinema for the first time in... what feels like forever!

As I suspected, Encanto is very formulaic; it hits all the beats of a standard Disney Animation film and doesn't really have any surprises in that regard. But, on top of that, as you may have guessed from that summary, it also has a very familiar story. We've all seen a story about an outcast within a group who constantly fumbles and is disrespected only to eventually prove everyone wrong and be accepted. You know where it's going to go right from the start and every turn the film takes is highly predictable. While this isn't inherently a bad thing, it did make the film thematically and narratively uninteresting for me as it offered very little nuance. However, I've always believed that a film can get away with being unoriginal as long as it's well executed, and that's definitely the case with Encanto. It thrives off of how well a lot of its elements are executed.

As with any Disney production it has wonderful visuals. The film completely uses the animation to its advantage and manages to find many unique ways to be creative. The best example of this is with the house that the Madrigals live in  - it's personified and brought to life in a way similar to the ocean from Moana, which led to some really inventive moments in terms of how each bit of the architecture conveyed a different feeling or emotion. There's also a really creative choice involving each member of the family living in a space that revolves around their ability, and this gave way for a variety of beautiful and distinct environments encountered throughout the film, such as a vast jungle filled with animals, or a haven covered in flowers. 

I also love how the characters were animated; not only are the designs top-notch, but they all felt so human. When the film isn't being frantic and cartoony, the movement and behaviours of the characters all felt so realistic, making it so easy to emphathise with them. There's one moment where Mirabel picks up a fallen roof tile and cuts her hand in doing so, and each and every aspect of it felt so real. I'm also always amazed at just how much emotion can be expressed on an animated character, a single frame of one of their faces truly speaks volumes. These are very little things for sure, but I find that the little things tend to be the most admirable in an animated feature, as you know careful attention to detail is applied to each and every aspect.

The film is also a musical, and the songs are all really terrific. They weren't the most instantly memorable bunch and they certainly felt very familiar to songs from other Disney films, with the establishing opening number, the protagonist's 'I want' ballad, the goofy side character song, and so on, but they all managed to work really well. I mean, when I got home from the cinema I listened to and downloaded most of the soundtrack while eating my dinner, which is usually an indicator of some pretty damn good stuff. I don't know if I could single out a favourite as I think each of them had something great to offer. 

Additionally, as conventional as it may be, it's hard to get to frustrated by the story in the film as it definitely means well. It's a film all about family and not losing sight of your love for others, as well as understanding how everyone has their own place in the world, which are of course very amiable ideas. They didn't really reach me emotionally, but I can see how they might do for others. 

The only issue I had aside from the predictable nature of the film was the humour. Again, in sticking to the classic Disney formula, the film of course has to throw in some comedy. Unlike some of their other films, it isn't ill-fitting here as the film is deliberately wacky a lot of time, but lots of it was still very toe-curling for me. I've had this issue with many recent Disney and Pixar films, and it may well be because I'm getting older, but a part of me does think that the comedy itself isn't all that good. 

You might be wondering what it is that I want to see from Disney Animation going forward. Well, it's quite simple, I just want to see more unconventional things from them. They've proven time and time again that they can make a solid family film with a sweet message, and while they don't make bad films of that nature, they are very unsurprising, which is making me slowly lose interest in seeing what comes next. Films like The Lion King, Zootropolis, and Fantasia all prove that they can stray from their formula with films that dare to be audacious, rich, and mature, so I know they're capable of doing so, and I'd just like to see more. This is their 60th animated feature, which they proudly show at the start of the film, and I think it's about time they change things up. 

Overall, Encanto doesn't bring anything new to the table and offers very few surprises, but in and of itself, it's a perfectly satisfactory film with some splendid animation, solid musical numbers, and a story that definitely has its heart in the right place. It's about on the same level of quality as Luca, the Pixar film from earlier this year, another predictable yet sweet and charming film. I'd obviously like to see Disney venture into new territory with their animated features after over eighty years of them mostly doing the same thing, but if they can still manage to deliver perfectly good movies, I can't complain too much. 

I'm going to give Encanto a 7.5/10

Ghostbusters: Afterlife - Movie Review - Yet another nostalgia-fuelled sequel to an 80s movie

I like Ghostbusters. It's a movie I've seen a couple of times and really enjoy. It's not an all time favourite, but I do tend to revere it in the same regard as other 1980s franchises that I have a bigger soft spot for like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Back to the Future, because, like those movies, not only is it really iconic, but it's an easy watch and something you just can't seem to go wrong with. But, the fact remains, I'm not an enormous fan. I haven't seen Ghostbusters II nor the 2016 remake that angered many people, and so I never initially planned to catch the upcoming new installment, Ghostbusters: Afterlife. But, because it's a new movie and could be a decent way to spend two hours, I went to see it anyway, not really expecting much. 

In the film, a single mother along her two children move to a small town where her recently deceased father left a house behind. Shortly after arriving, the two children realise that they are descendants of a Ghostbuster, and with ghosts starting to show up again, they need to keep the legacy afloat and save the world. 

Ghostbusters: Afterlife was actually really good fun. It offers many set pieces that are thoroughly exciting, enjoyable, and funny. There's a chase scene around the middle that serves as the first proper action scene and it's very well executed, offering some neat variations on the Ghostbuster gadgets we all know. There's also a really funny scene in a supermarket with Paul Rudd's character encountering little Stay Puft marshmallow men as they cause chaos, and also getting chased by one of those demonic dogs from the first movie. The climax is a little uninteresting by comparison but has its own charm, which I won't get into as it involves spoilers. The visuals were also very memorable throughout most of these scenes too.

I liked a lot of the characters as well. As mentioned, Paul Rudd is in the film and he's as good as ever; such an effortlessly charming and likeable presence and he fit in perfectly here. I wish he had a little more to do overall as he does get sidelined from the end of the second act onwards, but he still makes the most of what he's given and I enjoyed him very much. The two children are also really good, as are some of the others they meet throughout the film. There are also appearances from some more familiar faces, which you can probably guess, and they were all very welcome and put a smile on my face. 

I suppose my main issue with Ghostbusters: Afterlife is that it just felt repetitive. It doesn't have the same plot but with a new coat of paint like other movies of this calibre such as Star Wars: The Force Awakens or Jurassic World, but it does overall feel very familiar. It ultimately just feels like more Ghostbusters, and while that isn't inherently a bad thing, it does mean that the film comes off as kind of superfluous. It is fairly different from a narrative perspective, but many of the plot beats are predictable and have been done countless times elsewhere, so it doesn't really offer anything special or unique outside of, well, giving these elements a Ghostbusters twist. I suppose this is probably an issue for me because I'm not head over heels for this franchise, so if you are a massive Ghostbusters fan, you may well enjoy seeing this kind of story as well as more of the same. But, as for me, it didn't do an awful lot besides servicing some decently entertaining stuff.

One thing that did tick me off a fair bit was the fan service in the movie. This is nothing novel for sequels to a culturally popular film made over a decade or two after the last installment, but Ghostbusters: Afterlife uses it in some of the most contrived ways I've seen. The iconic "Who you gonna call?" line is shoehorned in very unnaturally, and various recognisable props (which I only recognised having rewatched the original the day before seeing this) also pop up in ways that don't feel particularly organic, but rather just because there was probably a checklist of recognisable props from Ghostbusters that the filmmakers were running through while writing the script, and needed to find ways to incorporate no matter what. I won't say this really irritated me, because it didn't, but it did stick out as instances of really lazy writing to capitalise on nostalgia. Fan service isn't something I'm against as I know how nice it is to see a little (or big) nod to something you know and love, but integrating it with such forced means takes away a lot of the charm.

All in all, Ghostbusters: Afterlife was jolly good. While it relies too much on nostalgic novelties and overall feels superfluous, it has enough going for it with some charming performances and well crafted set pieces. Will I ever see it again? Probably not, as most of what it offers can be found in the original, a highly superior film that I do anticipate continuing to revisit from time to time. But, should I ever come across it again, I know I'll be in for a bit of fun. 

I'm going to give Ghostbusters: Afterlife a 7.0/10

Eternals + Spencer - Movie Reviews - A disappointment and a surprise

Once again, I am having to jam my thoughts on two seperate films together just to make life a little easier for myself with the relative lack of time I have to write reviews here.

On this first week of November, two notable films came out here in the UK. One being Eternals, the new entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and the other being Spencer, a drama about Princess Diana. I was infinitely more excited for the former but was also interested in checking out the latter as well, so I was able to see them both and came out of each with reactions I hadn't quite anticipated.

First off, Eternals. This new MCU film comes from Chloe Zhao, who only just found great success with her film Nomadland. I wasn't crazy about that film, but it did leave me thoroughly keen to see where Zhao would go next, and the fact that an MCU film from her was on the near horizon was really exciting. Eternals looked great from the trailers and posters; I loved epic nature it presented with characters that seemed straight out of ancient mythology, it looked truly awesome. But, a sea of mixed reactions flooded in, including the MCU's first rotten score on Rotten Tomatoes, currently sitting at less than 50%. I don't really take RT scores as an accurate indication of a film's quality, but the fact that this was the first film in this franchise with over twenty films to get a score this low was interesting. So, suddenly I was a little cautious, but still mostly certain that I'd enjoy the film. It involves a team of ancient warriors known as the 'Eternals' who have lived on Earth for thousands of years, protecting the people from a group of nasties known as the 'Deviants'. After a long period of dormancy, the Deviants seem to be re-emerging as cataclysmic events begin to unfold, prompting the gang to get back together again. 

Okay, so is the film as bad as you might have feared? In my opinion, definitely not. But, is it much good? Well, it's interesting. Eternals is successful in lots of places but falters quite significantly in others. What I liked about it most was the scale, it does feel truly epic and as if great things are at stake, which makes the film thoroughly exciting and visually spectacular. Also, while a lot of the characters were fairly underdeveloped, I still really enjoyed them and their interactions for the most part. Gemma Chan was really good in the lead, Richard Madden gives another solid performance, Kumail Nanjiani is as funny as ever, Brian Tyree Henry is really likeable, Barry Keoghan continues to prove he's a very versatile performer, and everyone else for the most part wasn't bad. It's also great to see such a wonderfully diverse cast of characters, reaching out to demographics that haven't really been represented at all in the MCU prior to this. The main problem is that the film was ultimately kind off a mess. It's structure relies a lot on flashbacks that go on and on and distract from where the plot currently is, there's an awful lot of exposition that is delivered in contrived ways, and these result in the film being badly paced and feeling really long, boosting the runtime to unjustifiable lengths. The humour was also very hit or miss, but mostly miss to be honest, and unfortunately, the action was slightly underwhelming, with some interesting visuals but ultimately boring stuff being depicted. I also feel like the narrative itself was a bit incomplete - I'm sure a future installment will tie some of these loose ends, but that meant this film didn't feel particularly cohesive on its own. 

All things considered, Eternals wasn't as bad as I feared it might be, but it also wasn't as good as I hoped it'd be. I enjoyed it just fine and had fun, but that didn't stop me from recognising how it is a bit all over the place and definitely needs some work. 

I'm going to give Eternals a 7.0/10

A few days later, I saw Spencer. I was intrigued to see this film as the trailers made it look fascinating, but I had an underlying sense that I probably wouldn't enjoy it. I'm not usually a fan of dramas or slow-movers, or even period pieces to be honest, so I suspected I'd just end up recognising things that are good but also feeling quite unengaged overall. The film covers a troubling three days for Princess Diana spending Christmas at Sandringham estate and struggling to adapt to the royal way of living and fearing what sort of future lies ahead. 

I thought Spencer was a very impressive piece of work, and a lot of it comes down to how it depicts the events on screen. After watching this film, the royal life feels anything but enviable. Many scenes are so hard to watch because you're so caught up in how anxiety-inducing certain events are, even if they don't immediately seem that way. Eating a meal seems so uncomfortable and even horrific, having a wardrobe full of clothes to chosen for you to be worn at specific times and being forced to close your curtains is all so restraining, contributing to this extremely pessimistic atmosphere around a way of living that many wouldn't inherently connect. A lot of praise has been directed towards Kristen Stewart and her portrayal of Diana, and for good reason. I'm very unfamiliar with a lot of her other work, but she's really compelling in the film; you easily pick up all the awkwardness and uneasiness that she feels in this environment, to the point where I didn't even feel like I was watching a performance, I just thought I was watching the real Diana, having to remind myself that it was in fact an actor. Amazing stuff from her. The way the film is shot stood out to me as very effective. The choice to shoot on film is gorgeous, and it captures the nature of the setting so perfectly; it seems so bleak and so cold. It makes it all feel so old-fashioned as well, so much so that I almost forgot this takes place in 1991! I also liked how, for most shots inside the estate, Diana is framed to look really small, adding to the idea that she's out of her depth. It also goes without saying that the costumes and set design were all top notch as well, solidifying this film as a visual feast. I also think it's amazing that the film manages to convey this atmosphere (of anxiety, loneliness, bleakness, etc.) while also being set at Christmas. I mean, Christmas is literally the most joyful time of the year, and it's almost impossible for me to watch something related to it and not feel jolly in the slightest. But, somehow, it didn't prevent this film from doing what it did, not even serving as a form of relief for the main character in any way, just going to show how unattractive this way of living is. If there are any issues with the film, my main one would probably be that the overall tone of the film isn't something I'd instantly want to revisit, as successful as it may have been. Also, I'm not at all familiar with the way this story panned out in reality, but there were parts that did certainly feel quite on the nose and as if they were embellished.

Overall, I was very surprised by how much I got out of Spencer. I thought it was a really well made film anchored by a strong central performance and with an atmosphere that was executed masterfully. Is it something I'd love to see again? Probably not, but on this occasion, I thought it was remarkable and certainly worth my time.

I'm going to give Spencer an 8.5/10 

So, let this week of new releases go to show that, sometimes, all is not what it seems. Something you assume you'd really like may not do so, and vice versa.