Unicorn City Review

Independent films are generally hit or miss; they are often made and written by amateur film makers who haven't quite mastered the art just yet. As such, a lot of independent films are overlooked or never seen. Unicorn City (2012) is an obscure little title that ended up having a lot of heart and a remarkably low budget.

Voss (David McGinn) is a gamer who is unemployed and looking for work. After much searching, game developer company Warlocks of the Beach interviews Voss for a management position. He seems a good candidate but lacks evidence of the leadership skills necessary to land the job. Given one week to prove himself, Voss does the only thing a rational adult would do; create a Utopian society for gamers called Unicorn City, where everyone plays their characters in a Live Action Role Playing (LARP) Game. Voss convinces his gaming guild to follow him into the mountains and has Marsha (Jaclyn Hales) a long-time gamer and best friend to document his abilities. However, Shadow Hawk (Jon Gries), Voss's gaming nemesis likes having control over the game and, as much as possible, over the lives of those who play it. It's not long before Shadow Hawk shows up to overthrow Voss' Kingdom and claim it for himself. Things get progressively worse and Voss's geek utopia begins to fall apart along with his hopes at getting his dream job.

While there are a lot of fantasy elements in this movie, it's not actually a fantasy. It's literally a bunch of reality-deprived geeks, most of whom probably live in their mother's basement, pretending to be princesses, knights, elves, and even centaurs. They have obviously homemade costumes to help them enact their fantasies. This is primarily a comedy of errors with some romantic overtones, though it blurs the lines between real life and fantasy. At one point Voss has to save Marsha. While the danger is very much real, they both stay in their LARP characters during the conflict. It's surreal, ironic, and kind of funny.

There are only about three characters in Unicorn City who aren't super geeks. I enjoy my geeky pastimes, but I've got nothing on these ubergeeks. My knowledge of a few Klingon insults pales in comparison to these guys. The movie really captivates geek culture in all of its socially awkward glory without bashing it in any way. The dialogue is brilliant. There are lots of very clever nods to geek culture that will probably go over most non-gamers' heads. The game company Voss is interviewing at is called "Warlocks of the Beach", which is a play on the actual gaming company "Wizards of the Coast", who is responsible for the famous Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons games. This isn't to say that only gamers will get these references. Similar to how Galaxy Quest was probably much funnier to Star Trek fans due to all the in-jokes and references, audiences who have played D&D are more likely to get a bigger kick out of Unicorn City.

There's a catchphrase that goes, "Fake it 'til you make it." meaning to imitate confidence so that as the confidence produces success, it will generate real confidence. The purpose is to create a positive feedback loop so as to avoid getting stuck in a self-fulfilling prophecy related to one's fears of not being confident. That is essentially the theme here in Unicorn City. All the main characters have real-life issues they are facing, and they lack the confidence or skills to overcome them. They draw upon the strength they have given their in-game alter ego characters and learn to overcome their real world problems. "You are what you pretend to be," they are frequently reminded. I really like this theme of drawing strength from the fantasies these movie characters have created for themselves.

This is a hilariously low-budget film and it wouldn't surprise me of most of the wardrobe came from clothes lying on the floors of the cast members' bedroom closets. It looks pretty cheap, but since these characters are usually unemployed 20-somethings, it fits really well. There's a common folly in independent films where some shots are held just a little too long and ends up making the shot feel a bit awkward. This happens several times in Unicorn City, but that may have been intentional to accentuate the awkwardness of the bumbling geeky characters who seem to lack much self-pride in the first place. 

Unicorn City is a decent film. It's a fun idea, has funny relatable characters, a good theme, great dialogue, and manages to tell a decent story on a very low budget. It's not without its flaws, though. It features a couple of amateur actors, it slows down a lot in the second act, and features some bland camera work. These are hardly deal breakers, though. Unicorn City's weak points pale in comparison to what it manages to do well. The movie is rated PG, but probably won't appeal much to younger audiences. There's a lot of geek culture involved in this movie, so the geekier you are, the more you'll get a kick out of it. It's on Netflix Instant Play as of this writing, but you can also watch it for free (with commercials) on Hulu.com. I thought it was a fun movie, but not quite worth owning a copy of. It is good enough to seek out for a viewing sometime.

Here's the trailer for Unicorn City. Check it out:

Are you a gamer? Are there any table-top RPGs you'd like to see made into a movie? I wouldn't mind seeing a good Dungeons & Dragons movie made. I'd also love to see a Werewolf: The Apocalypse movie. Comment below and tell me about a game you'd like to see made into a movie and why!

The Lego Movie Review

I was so excited for The Lego Movie (2014) when I saw the trailer for it. It looked hilarious. I could see it either being an incredible, fun animated movie or a hundred-minute long commercial for toy products. This movie not only met my highest hopes, but it exceeded my expectations by a lot!

Emmet (Chris Pratt) is an unremarkable construction worker who is perfectly happy with his settled existence as an ordinary citizen of the metropolis of Bricksburg. The plastic world is run by the evil Lord Business (Will Ferrell). Everything is monotonous and routine, but no one complains because no one knows any different. Things change when Emmet follows a mysterious figure named Wyldstyle (Elizabeth Banks) and discovers an ancient artifact known as the Piece of Resistance. According to the prophecy, this makes Emmet "The Special." After escaping Lord Business's henchman, Bad Cop (Liam Neeson), the two meet up with Vitruvius (Morgan Freeman) an old wizard to determine Emmet's role in stopping Lord Business's evil plans. They meet up with other Master Builders including Batman (Will Arnett), Uni-Kitty (Alison Brie), Metal Beard the Pirate (Nick Offerman), and Benny the 1980-something space guy (Charlie Day) to construct a plan to save the entire Lego world from Lord Business's secret weapon, The Kragle.

The Lego Movie was written and directed by Phil Lord and Chris Miller. These are the geniuses who wrote and directed the first Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, which I absolutely loved. Lord and Miller have excellent talent for writing an interesting and fun story, capturing high energy in their camera work, a great sense of comedic timing, and animating some very expressive characters. All of that is present in this movie, too.

The animation for The Lego Movie is absolutely phenomenal. Literally everything is made out of Lego pieces; people, buildings, cars, props, fire, explosions, water, fog, etc. What's amazing is, I don't think there were many Lego pieces used in the movie that don't actually exist in real life. The animation is CGI, but the movement is made to resemble stop motion animation. The characters moved like Lego figures; their arms could only move on one axis, they don't have knees, and they don't have articulate hands. All that made the movie feel much more tactile and realistic. They even got the texture of the Lego pieces spot on. Some are shiny and smooth, others are more rough and don't reflect the light as well, you can see the plastic seam leftover from plastic mold, you can even see slight tooth marks on some old pieces. You know you tried to unstick two stubborn Lego blocks by prying them apart with your teeth as a kid. Don't deny it. It looks for all the world like a camera zoomed in on an elaborately build Lego set. Here's a clip to help illustrate:

One of the neat things about The Lego Movie is that it captures feel of the Lego toys. There is a remarkably fun feeling of creating, inventing, and self-expression that is laced throughout the movie. It even encapsulates the manic feeling of trying to build something out of Lego blocks. In one scene, the newly assembled team is trying to make an escape vehicle as fast as possible. They are constantly shouting things like, "If anybody has black parts, I need them, okay?" "Use the yellow bricks." "No, it has to look this way!" "Does anyone know what this is and do you need it?" "We should use wings and rocket boosters." It sounds exactly like my friends and I did when we were playing with Lego. There are lots of mismatched characters and sets, just like you would have with a collection of different Lego sets. Dumbledore and Gandalf get annoyed when they are mistaken for each other, Michelangelo, the artist, is juxtaposed with Michelangelo the Ninja Turtle, and there are several cameos by actors portraying either themselves or characters they have played, not the least of which includes Shaquille O'Neal. It's simply amazing how the feeling of playing with Lego was incorporated into the movie! 

Part of what makes The Lego Movie so interesting is the layers of theme. On the surface it looks like a brightly colored fun light-hearted kids movie. Lord and Miller skillfully balance an impressive array of narrative and thematic spinning plates; the tension between following instructions and going your own way is at the heart of this movie. It also tackles ideas like order and chaos, adults and children, practicality and magic, the real and the imaginary. Yet it presents it in a laugh-a-minute, kid-friendly way that will entertain kid viewers and intrigue adult viewers. It's almost like Toy Story had it been written by Mel Brooks after reading George Orwell's 1984. 

The Lego Movie completely blew me away. I was hoping for something good, but hadn't dared to expect something this well made. Just as it's recurring musical number suggest, "Everything is Awesome" and there really isn't a better word for it. The characters are fun, the animation is exceptional, the setting was highly creative, the themes were multi-layered and interesting, and the humor was right up my alley.  I honestly can't say anything bad about this movie. It's got a 96% on Rotten Tomatoes, for goodness sake! Go watch this in theaters; it's well worth ticket price. It's the kind of film we want to encourage Hollywood to keep making. I wasn't even halfway done with the movie before I decided I had to get a copy on blu-ray when it becomes available.

This was easily the best movie based on a toy product that I can think of. Can you think of another one that was good? Which toy based movie was the worst? Comment below and tell me all about it!

Despicable Me 2 Review

Despicable Me was one of Universal Studio's best selling animated features. In fact, it was the highest-grossing non-DreamWorks/non-Disney-Pixar animated film in North America. This lofty title was overthrown by its sequel, Despicable Me 2 (2013). That's worth talking about.

While Gru (Steve Carell) the ex-super villain is adjusting to family life and attempting an honest living in the jam business, a secret arctic laboratory is stolen. The Anti-Villain League decides it needs an insider's help and recruits Gru to the investigation. Together with the eccentric AVL agent, Lucy Wilde (Kristen Wiig), Gru concludes that his prime suspect is the presumed dead super villain, "El Macho" (Benjamin Bratt), whose teenage son Antonio (Moises Arias) is also making the moves on Gru's eldest daughter, Margo (Miranda Cosgrove). Seemingly blinded by his over protectiveness of his children and his growing mutual attraction to Lucy, Gru seems on the wrong track even as his hordes of Minions are being quietly kidnapped en masse for a malevolent purpose.

Despicable Me had lots of heart and some great characters. Most of that movie's energy revolved around an evil super villain having to get along with three young girls who like fluffy pink unicorns. The characters bounced off one another very well and it made for a lot of situational comedy. In Despicable Me 2, the lovable characters return, but they are all getting along perfectly well and their situations aren't nearly as creative and funny. Now Gru is set on being a good father and taking care of his new daughters. That's all fine and dandy, but the characters' story arches seem to be watered down to a standardized prepackaged family drama that's been overdone many times before. Furthermore, Gru has turned from being a great bad guy to a boring good guy. That's a critical thing the first movie had. His previous nastiness undercut the prevailing sweetness perfectly well. This makes the movie hopelessly nice and insufficiently naughty. The characters in Despicable Me 2 manage to be fun, but they lack some of the depth of the first movie.

Despicable Me 2 could easily have been called "The Minions Movie." Don't get me wrong, the Minions are hysterical. They steal every scene they show up in. They are cute, they are funny, they sound silly. The way the movie was advertised, you'd have thought it was all about little yellow guys who were incapable of speech doing nothing but a bunch  of silly physical gags. There are a lot more Minion shenanigans in this movie, and it's a stitch! They don't technically say anything, but the way they are animated and the sounds they make you can usually tell what it is they are saying or in some cases singing. It's an indication of good animation when we can tell what a non-verbal character is saying or thinking. By the end of the movie every child is going to want their own Minion toy. Heck, I want one!

Despicable Me 2 is a cute movie. It doesn't quite exceed the quality of its predecessor, but it has enough charm, humor, and warmth to make it a solid family film. It's a credit that the writing can be so funny in the moment that you don't have time to stop and realize it lacks cohesion, dramatic tension, or a life lesson for the characters or audience to learn. The movie is a lot more like getting together with old friends for a few laughs and seeing what they've been up to. And that's just fine! Kids will get a huge kick out of revisiting the same sort of jokes while adults will be entertained enough to enjoy it with their kids. Despicable Me 2 is worth owning on Blu-Ray if you've got kids who will want to watch it repeatedly. I enjoyed it, but not enough to get my own copy to watch again and again.

There are tons of Minion antics between the two movies. Which one is your favorite? Comment below and tell me why!

The Lone Ranger Review

I'm still convinced that Disney is searching for another cash cow like Pirates of the Caribbean was. Prince of Persia didn't quite cut it and John Carter was a flop. The Lone Ranger (2013) is their latest attempt. The movie was dragged through the mud by other critics, but I ended up seeing it anyway. Frankly, I think it's a whole lot better than the media made it out to be.

In the 1930's, an elderly Tonto (Johnny Depp) tells a young boy the tale of John Reid, The Lone Ranger (Armie Hammer). An idealistic lawyer, he rides with his brother and fellow Texas Ranger in pursuit of the notorious Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner). Ambushed by the outlaw and left for dead, John Reid is rescued by the renegade Comanche, Tonto, at the insistence of a mysterious white horse and offers to help him bring Cavendish to justice. Becoming a reluctant masked rider with a seemingly incomprehensible partner, Reid pursues the criminal against all obstacles. However, John and Tonto learn that Cavendish is only part of a far greater injustice, and the pair must fight it in an adventure that would make them legend.

The Lone Ranger has a few things going for it that other Pirates of the Caribbean-success attempts didn't have. First, it has Johnny Depp. Depp is type cast a lot of the time, but still excels in comical roles like he did in Pirates of the Caribbean. Second, The Lone Ranger has the same director as Pirates did; Gore Verbinski. He did the first three Pirates movies, Rango, and Mousehunt. He's a very visual director that has made some outstanding family films. It's the fact that both of these Hollywood personalities are present in The Lone Ranger. I'm certain it was the decision of studio executives and film producers to have them involved in The Lone Ranger in hopes that it would be as successful as Pirates was.

The Lone Ranger started out as a radio show way back in the 1930's. There have been a number of television shows and movies based off of it. I've never seen or heard any of these, but I am familiar with the cultural icons. All are present in this movie and they are well incorporated. The catchphrases, well known characters, Even the music from the William Tell Overture, which was used as a theme song in the old radio show, is present.

A lot of the exterior shots were filmed on desert locations in Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona. Gore has captivated an excellent Old West feel with gorgeous widescreen spectacles that owe a lot to classic “spaghetti westerns” of the 1960's. Even the action heralds back to Buster Keaton-style stunts. As far as visuals and action goes, this really is great movie to watch since it draws inspiration from a lot of old successful western movies. There had to be at least as many stunt men as there were digital effects artists working on this movie.

Depp and Hammer were great together. Hammer is a ridged, comically straight laced, sheltered, naïve city boy who is completely out of his element. It's kind of fun to watch him learn how the world really is and how he decides to take a stand and make things as good as he believes they should be. Depp is basically the same wacky character he often plays. This rendition of Tonto is similar to Captain Jack Sparrow but with a Native American motif. He's funny, weird, and serves up wacky humor.

The Lone Ranger is certainly not without it's faults. The most blaring of which is having a very white guy portraying a Native American. I love Johnny Depp, but it's so awkward when actors who are obviously of European decent, are playing characters of other ethnicities. Why not just give an actor of the character's ethnicity an opportunity to shine? I think that Tonto's character acts so comically weird that he becomes a politically incorrect depiction of Native Americans, and might offend some viewers. On the other hand, the Native Americans in the movie (actually played by Native Americans) all agree that Tonto is crazy and doesn't represent them. Still, the character makes me cringe a little.

Another problem is the spiritualism theme. It's repeatedly established that “nature is out of balance” and is causing animals to behave strangely. This is occasionally funny such as the scene when John's horse is found in a tree, and sometimes creepy. What causes this is not really established. Is it all the corruption from the outlaws? The western civilization taking over the American wilds? I have no idea. While the idea is repeated several times, it's neither resolved nor explained. It seems that it was haphazardly stuck into the movie here and there in an attempt to create a sense of larger stakes than what was originally thought, or to establish a sense of urgency. The story would have made more sense without it.

Finally, I thought the length of the movie was too long. It's fun, but long. The first forty-five minutes of the movie are excellent. It's easy to get lost in the second forty-five minutes. There ends up being multiple groups of villains that take too much time to explain. By the time it's all sorted out we've stopped caring and we're ready to see our heroes duke it out with the baddies. I think the movie would have been stronger with just one central villain.

The Lone Ranger is fun. Everyone told me it was crap, but I genuinely enjoyed it. There's tons of deadpan comedy and witty humor, lots of exciting action, some impressive visuals, and fun characters. It runs a bit long and might lose its audience from time to time, but that train scene at the end makes any confusion well worth enduring. I don't think it's quite as good as the first Pirates of the Caribbean was, but it is by far much better than critics were saying it is. I highly recommend renting The Lone Ranger, you may even consider purchasing a copy if you enjoyed other Gore Verbinski films.

Did you see The Lone Ranger? What did you think? Would you be up for watching a second installment? Comment below and tell me why or why not!

Her Movie Review

March is quickly approaching, which means that Academy Awards season is here. This means that there's a lot of Oscar Bait in theaters between December and March. Her (2013) seems like Oscar Bait material; biographies, period dramas, weepy inspirational stories, big name actors, etc. Her wasn't half bad, but I'm not sure it's going to win Best Picture.

Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) is a lonely man in the final stages of his divorce with his childhood sweetheart Catherine (Rooney Mara). When he's not working as a letter writer, his down time is spent playing video games and occasionally hanging out with his married friends Amy (Amy Adams) and Charles (Matt Letscher). Theodore decides to purchase the new OS1, which is advertised as the world's first artificially intelligent operating system, "It's not just an operating system, it's a consciousness," the ad states. Theodore quickly finds himself drawn in with Samantha (Scarlett Johansson), the voice behind his OS1. As they start spending time together they grow closer and closer and eventually find themselves in love. Having fallen in love with his OS, Theodore finds himself dealing with feeling of both great joy and doubt. As an OS, Samantha has powerful intelligence that she uses to help Theodore in ways others hadn't, but how does she help him deal with his inner conflict of being in love with an operating system?

The thing that makes this such Oscar Bait material is that there is a lot of dialogue about life, love, and what it all means; that's a telltale sign. That's not necessarily bad; in fact Her does this quite well. It's an impressive piece of writing. In fact, one of the Academy Awards that Her is up for is Best Writing and I think it's got a very good shot at it. The frequent exposition on love and relationships is thought provoking, poignant, and flows naturally with events in the story. It didn't exactly make me want to run out and fall rapturously in love with someone and appreciate the tender moments in life as other movies have, but it's still a solid piece of writing.

What makes this movie so interesting is the fact that Theodore is falling in love with an incorporeal personality; specifically artificial intelligent software on his computer. This adds a surreal quality to this love story. You don't doubt that Theodore and Samantha are in love, but how can that possibly work out under the best of circumstances? Her does address this and explores the surreal nature of the relationship. There is a "sex" scene which really is just Theodor laying in bed by himself while he and Samantha are describing what each would be doing if they could actually touch one another. It really is a strange and surreal scene. It manages to express what a normal sex scene usually does, that is depict the unity of the two characters, while also drawing lots of attention to how bizarre that unity is.

Her also comments on our "relationship" with our technology today. We are so plugged into our computers, smart phones, and iPads that we are gravitating away from human interaction and connectedness with real people. This is particularly well illustrated as Theodore's job is acting as a ghostwriter for clients. He makes handwritten letters to a recipient, which is printed out, put in an envelope, and mailed off. The idea of literally falling in love with technology is not too much of a stretch of the imagination. Frankly, if Theodore and Samantha were both human doing the same things ,the movie wouldn't be nearly as interesting. But seeing this guy on a date with a disembodied voice who sees through the lens of his cell phone is attention-grabbing. It's one thing to see someone guide a date by the hand to a surprise; it's another thing entirely to see a guy wandering around with his eyes shut and his cell phone out in front of him as a disembodied voice directs him to a surprise.

Her isn't a bad movie. It's got interesting characters, an original concept, some excellent writing, great camera work and direction by Spike Jonze, and a great performances from the cast. Since this is a movie about adults and relationships, there are several adult scenes and adult dialogue. It's all meaningfully implemented, but put me off only as a matter of personal preference. It's still a good solid movie even with the Oscar Bait material. I recommend seeing this if you're not too put off by the adult situations.

Would you date an operating system? What kind of perks might that have? Comment below and tell me why!

Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters Movie Review

I suppose that Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters came about in wake of other dark fairy tale revisions such as Red Riding Hood, Snow White and the Huntsman, and Jack the Giant Slayer. Unlike the others Hansel & Gretel was not meant to be taken very seriously, and indeed it is hard to do so. But even for a fantasy/action/comedy/horror movie that aims for campy fun, it's still not very impressive.

The siblings Hansel and Gretel are left alone in the woods by their father and captured by a dark witch in a candy house. However, they kill the witch and escape. Years later the orphans Hansel (Jeremy Renner) and Gretel (Gemma Arterton) have become famous witch hunters. When eleven children go missing in a small village, the Mayor summons Hansel and Gretel to rescue them. Upon arrival, the siblings save the red haired Mina (Pihla Viitala) from the local sheriff (Peter Stormare) who is accusing Mina of Witchcraft. Soon they discover that the Blood Moon will approach in three days and the powerful dark witch Muriel (Famke Janssen) is responsible for the abduction of the children. She intends to use the children together with a secret ingredient in a Sabbath to make the coven of witches protected against fire. As Hansel and Gretel race against time and fight off powerful witches, they begin to learn some mysterious secrets about their parents.

I have to give this movie a little bit of credit. They took what is ordinarily a short and simple fairy tale and did practically nothing to change it. The whole classic fairy tale is done during the prologue of the movie before the opening credits start rolling. This movie is about what happened afterwards and hints at creative underlying motives of the characters. The fairy tale is not corrupted or reinterpreted; just expanded. I liked that, and it gave Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters some potential to be an interesting and fun movie.

Of course, they didn't actually make it interesting or very fun. The movie starts out with some exciting action scenes chasing and killing witches with ridiculous weapons that would seem at home in a Final Fantasy video game, but then it slows down a whole lot. Hansel develops a romantic interest with Mina and Gretel meets up with a troll. Most of these scenes don't seem to do much for the story overall. I realize a movie like this isn't going to be profound by any means, but during these scenes it's almost like it's flailing around to achieve some deep character development. That's respectable, but seems so perfunctory and not well thought out.

The movie is very predictable. With each character that is introduced, you can pretty accurately predict how each one was going to play out. I was never wrong. I did, however, appreciate that there wasn't an insipid teenage love triangle forced into the story. We have too much of that rubbish already. One inconsequential detail about Hansel's character that I liked a whole lot was the fact that because he was force fed candy as a kid in the candy cottage, he now has diabetes and has to take regular insulin shots. That makes sense, and is not something I had ever considered. It really has no meaningful role in the movie, but it was kind of a neat detail.

The special effects were kind of hit or miss. The CGI lacked refinement and looked very much like it was computer-generated imagery; the blood and gore looked almost silly, but was better than that of Sharknado. The practical effects were decent, though. The aforementioned troll was all animatronics and looked pretty good. Exploding heads and other such nastiness looked good for what it was. It's not exactly my cup of tea, but that's appealing to some viewers.

Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is an interesting genre mash up. The fantasy isn't half bad, the action is ridiculous and hard to take seriously, the comedy usually falls flat, and the horror is more like "somewhat gross" than it is actually scary. There's several F-bombs and other profanity which I didn't really feel was necessary; the profanity and gore gives it an R rating. The story slows in the middle, but the beginning and end is pretty exciting. In the end it's not a very good movie and isn't as much fun as it tries to be. It's little bit better than Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter; it doesn't quite achieve what it's trying to be. It's okay if you just want to watch some senseless violence that doesn't require much thought, and even then it's barely worth the price to rent. Otherwise, don't bother.

I know I've asked before, but what other dark fairy tale revisions would you like to see?

The Croods Movie Review

Now that Dreamworks is essentially doing its own thing down instead of trying to emulate Pixar (see my Kung Fu Panda review for further ranting), Dreamworks has created a number of exceptional animated movies. The Croods (2012) was fun and showcased some stellar animation, but floundered a bit in terms of story.

The Croods, a family of prehistoric cavemen, has managed to survive harsh environmental hazards and predators for years in the safety of their cave. It is the job of the patriarch, Grug (Nicolas Cage), to keep his family safe and has repeatedly taught them the rules that have kept them safe for so  long; "new things" pose a threat to survival, and to never not be afraid. Grug's wife Ugga (Catherine Keener) and their three kids, Eep (Emma Stone), Thunk (Clark Duke), the ferocious baby Sandy, and Ugga's mother Gran (Cloris Leachman) spend their days cowering in their cave and scavenging for food. The Croods are forced outside the safety of their cave when it is destroyed as the tectonic plates begin to shift. Terrified of the alien world outside, they seek out a new shelter with the help of a nomadic caveboy named Guy (Ryan Reynolds) who, unlike the Croods, uses his brain to come up with ideas and inventions to overcome obstacles.

Concept Art for The Croods
Similar to Lilo & Stitch art

Chris Sanders is the guy responsible for The Croods. He directed it, wrote the screenplay, came up with the story concept, and heavily influenced the character designs. Chris Sanders also did all of this for Lilo & Stitch as well as provide the voice for Stitch. He's got a passion for animation and it does show in The Croods. You can see some similarities to the art style from Lilo & Stitch manifesting itself in The Croods.

The animation in The Croods is really fantastic. Everything is highly texturized. You can see very believable cracks and crags in rock formation, see clumps of fur and individual hairs on the characters and their fur skin clothing, small blemishes and imperfections in the skin, you can even see the veins bulge in Grug's neck when he yells. Among the most impressive bits of animation is the dust clouds. They look remarkably realistic!

Most of the characters are actually not that interesting. Grug and Eep are easily the most interesting since they each grow and develop the most. The other characters pretty much have one shtick that defines them and it is continuously reiterated in each scene. For example, Gran seems to be there for the sole purpose of mother-in-law jokes. On the other hand, Grug is having to accept change, accept that he can't control everything, and that rules naturally need to change as the world changes. It seems that rebellious teenagers go back as far as protective fathers do. Eep wants to explore and see the world, which goes completely against Grug's "new things are dangerous" and "never not be afraid" rules. Eep learns that the rules that have been around for generations have lasted for a reason; they work, and they keep us safe.

One of the things I particularly appreciated about The Croods is the family doesn't fight with one another. They certainly have very different views and don't always agree with one another. Sometimes they become angry at each other, but they don't fight amongst themselves. Family movies often have a kids vs. parents sort of theme, but that is not present here at all. The entire Crood family loves and respects each other despite their differences. This is established early on when The Croods scavenge for food; the whole family is in on it and they work together as an efficient team. Everyone works seamlessly together in a hilarious scene that is a cross between dodge ball, an obstacle course and a rugby game. I thought that was refreshing and I would love to see more movies do that.

There is a joyful, exciting, and tense theme of exploration and discovery. None of the prehistoric creatures the Croods encounter are actual prehistoric animals; they're all unique, comical, and bizarre. Even the landscapes they traverse seem highly strange and otherworldly. This gives us a sense of unfamiliarity along with the characters. While this was well implemented, they didn't do much else. The Croods encounter a new thing, they panic, and either accidentally find a way around it, or Guy provides a way around it. Nearly every scene follows that pattern, and it quickly becomes predictable.

The Croods is a good clean movie that the whole family could enjoy. It wasn't the best movie, but it had some very good qualities. It features some remarkable animation, some simple characters and some good characters, a fun theme, and good family values. The slapstick and cartoon physics are funny, but not very diverse. That coupled with a predictable story pattern weakens the movie overall. In the end, I think it's an okay movie. Kids will love it, older audiences will be amused. It's worth seeing once, but probably not worth owning unless you've got kids. You shouldn't lose any sleep over missing this, should that be the case.

I really liked the fact that the family in The Croods was actually functional; they disagreed and became angry with each other at times, but were always loving and respectful of one another. It was realistic, yet optimistic. I want to see that in more movies. Can you think of any other movies that have a family like that in it? Comment below and make some recommendations!