Animation

Transformers One (2024): One of the Most Human Transformers Stories Yet, Despite There Being No Humans in the Movie

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Transformers One” is directed by Josh Cooley (Toy Story 4, Inside Out) and stars Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Rush), Brian Tyree Henry (Eternals, Godzilla vs. Kong), Scarlett Johansson (Iron Man 2, Don Jon) Keegan-Michael Key (Toy Story 4, Keanu), Steve Buscemi (Reservoir Dogs, Miracle Workers), Laurence Fishburne (The Matrix, Man of Steel), and Jon Hamm (Mad Men, Baby Driver). This film is about the origins of robots Orion Pax and D-16, who eventually become Optimus Prime and Megatron. As a team, these two and several others are given the powers and capabilities to change their planet, Cybertron, forever.

I was born at the tail end of the 1990s, so I was alive at a time when Transformers was continuously shrinking in relevancy. Then a big bang happened in 2007 when the franchise’s first Michael Bay-directed film came out. That is when I first heard about the property, that is when I also started watching it. I had little to no experience with any of the toys beforehand. And no, I have not gone back to watch any of the “Transformers” material from the 20th century. I am somewhat familiar with it. I am aware of “Transformers: The Movie” killing off all the Autobots and that scarring several viewers. But I have not seen the movie myself. But even with my lack of experience of older “Transformers” material, I can confirm that my biggest problem with a number of the live-action “Transformers” films of this era is that they do not feel as character-based as they could be. Not to mention, despite having “Transformers” in the name, the movies are more about the humans than anyone else. Admittedly, I like the first Michael Bay “Transformers” film. I had some fun with “Dark of the Moon.” “Bumblebee” was fantastic. And while it is not the most memorable of the bunch, “Rise of the Beasts” definitely has its moments.

That said, “Transformers One” removes the humans and makes the movie about its titular robots, which is refreshing. The movie is entirely set on Cybertron and features zero scenes on earth. Despite these differences, this movie arguably has the most human story I have witnessed from the “Transformers” franchise yet. It is very much an underdog story about rising up, questioning authority, and embracing the power of friendship.

The main friendship we see is that of Orion Pax (lower right) and D-16 (upper right), played by Chris Hemsworth and Brian Tyree Henry. I bought every moment of their connection. The two come off as genuine friends. They have some admirable moments where they bond, they stand up for each other, exchange items. The two are best buds. Both of their respective actors do a great job in this film, which relieves me. After all, this is yet another animated project featuring a cast of mostly celebrity voice actors whose names and faces are known in popular live-action projects. These people may as well have been used as a selling point to adults who would be weary about taking their kids to a film like this. Granted, some of these actors have voiceover experience. Scarlett Johansson was in “The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie” as well as “Sing 2.” Keegan-Michael Key has several voiceover credits including “Toy Story 4,” the 2019 “Lion King,” “Migration,” and “IF.” He’s doing well for himself in the voiceover department. Everyone does a good job here and the story serves them well.

This movie is perfectly paced. Every action scene had my attention. The character moments are admirable. The humor stuck the landing. It is not the funniest movie I have seen in years, but it had quite a few laughs. The best part about the movie, it follows a paramount rule of show business, which is to leave the audience wanting more. By the end of this film, I was happy with what I got, but there was a point where I wanted to see where these characters would take their adventures next. I remember when I saw “Transformers: Age of Extinction,” which finished on a note where certain ends were not tied together, and I did not really care as much as I could have. This film has a balance in its journey and conclusion where I was satisfied by what was in front of me, but it also left me eagerly hoping to find out what is next.

The film also has a nice polish to its animation. In this age, having bad animation in a major motion picture is kind of a surprise nowadays. But this film, like some others I have been seeing recently, has an individualistic look to it. I cannot say its style offers the diversity of the “Spider-Verse” franchise. But “Transformers One” is stylized just enough to have an identity of its own. The way the movie plays around with some of its shots are fast-paced and immersive. Cybertron itself is sometimes a sight to to behold. This movie is based on toys, so of course the color palette is eye-popping.

Despite my recent positives, I have problems with the movie. For one thing, the storyline is a bit predictable. Sure, as someone who knows about “Transformers,” and the way certain characters are, I know how some characters will wind up by the end of the film. That is not my biggest problem. But there is one other character in the film who as soon as I saw him in the beginning and the way he was written, it was not that hard for me to speculate where exactly this character would be taken. Again, this is a character who has been used in the franchise previously, including one of the Michael Bay movies, all of which I have seen. But I am willing to bet if this was my first “Transformers” anything, I would have nevertheless found this character’s path to be utterly predictable. Maybe unless I was a young child because I have not seen enough movies.

Speaking of young children, I do think that “Transformers One” is a fine family film. Although I would not necessarily say this movie is entirely kid-friendly. At least for all ages that is. There are a couple instances of violence, granted, it is cartoon violence, that kind of push the line as for what you can see in a modern PG movie. Heck, even some of the language pushes the line. There are no f-bombs or s-words here, but Bumblebee repeatedly refers to himself as “Badassatron.” If I had kids I would not prevent them from watching this movie. Heck, part of me would want to put this on for them before “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom,” which is rated PG and came out just before PG-13 was ever slapped onto a film. If my future children watch “Transformers One” say when they are 7 or 8, I have no problem with it. Ask me again if I become a father, but still… “Transformers One” is a good movie with solid action, a good story, and despite some moments that go a bit far, the movie manages to have positive lessons for its viewers to take with them. I would question taking a certain type of four year old for example to see “Transformers One” in the theater, but if they are a little older, things should be fine. Parents, if you are reading this, I say this as someone who is not a parent, so maybe I am just a moron, but use your own judgment. Despite being one of this year’s most attractive and colorful films, “Transformers One” might not be as well-rounded for all ages as say “Inside Out 2.”

In the end, “Transformers One” is an incredible time. Some people might be rejoicing right now and saying that this may be the first great “Transformers” movie in ages, or maybe even ever. For the record, I disagree. I think Michael Bay’s first “Transformers” is good. His third movie is good. Travis Knight’s “Bumblebee” might be my favorite of the live-action ones they have done. “Transformers One” is honestly up there with “Bumblebee” for me. If it were not for being one of this year’s more predictable narratives at times, that would probably be the one significant thing that could make a movie like this better. But “Transformers One” handles its material with excellence. It is great for both adults and kids. It might not be suitable for all kids, but I am sure many kids will enjoy this just fine. I am going to give “Transformers One” an 8/10.

“Transformers One” is now playing in theatres everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have another animated movie to talk about soon, and that is “The Wild Robot!” That review will be available soon. Also coming up, stay tuned for my thoughts on “Joker: Folie a Deux…” The most divisive movie in ages. My goodness… That review is going to be fun. …Probably. If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Transformers One?” What did you think about it? Or, what is a movie about friendship that you enjoyed? Let me know down below! Scene before is your click to the flicks!

Inside Out 2 (2024): A Bigger, Not Better, Yet Still Really Solid, Look Inside Riley’s Head

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Inside Out 2” is directed by Kelsey Mann (Party Central, Megas XLR) and stars Amy Poehler (Parks and Recreation, The House), Maya Hawke (Asteroid City, Do Revenge), Kensington Tallman (Drama Club, Home Sweet Rome!), Liza Lapira (NCIS, The Equalizer), Tony Hale (Veep, Arrested Development), Lewis Black (The Daily Show, Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law), Phyllis Smith (The OA, The Office), Ayo Edebiri (The Bear, Bottoms), Lilimar (Batwheels, Cleopatra in Space), Grace Lu (Fright Krewe, Super Wings), Sumayyah Nuriddin-Green, Adèle Exarchopoulos (Blue is the Warmest Color, Passages), Diane Lane (Let Him Go, Extrapolations), Kyle MacLachlan (Dune, Twin Peaks), and Paul Walter Hauser (Richard Jewell, Cruella). This film once again follows the emotions inside Riley’s head. As Riley enters puberty, the five core emotions of the previous movie face the reality that they could potentially be replaced with newer, more complex emotions. Meanwhile, Riley tries to properly navigate herself and fit in while attending hockey camp.

Pixar is one of those studios that I automatically associate with greatness. What Studio Ghibli likely is to Japan, Pixar is to the United States. A group of talented individuals making some of the most mature, watchable animation out there. When it comes to the Disney library, I tend to prefer Pixar’s work over their own in-house studio. That said, I still think “Raya and the Last Dragon” is one of the best animated films of the decade. While studios like DreamWorks and Illumination tend to have their place in moviegoing, when I watch an animated movie, chances are I am going to prefer it to be under the Pixar banner. Their track record over the past few decades has been astounding. With the exception of “Elemental,” I like every film they have put out so far. That said, when they greenlight a sequel, a part of me asks why. Granted, part of the answer is likely money. But even with that in mind, I question the creativity factor that would go into such movies like “Toy Story 4.” I felt the same way about “Inside Out 2,” which I was kind of intrigued by, but I was worried that it would not have the same impact as the first one. I thought the original installment was one of the best films of the 2010s. Then again, even though I thought “Toy Story 4” is the worst of the franchise, it is still an incredibly watchable, admirable flick. Maybe “Inside Out 2” would meet a similar fate.

To my lack of surprise, “Inside Out 2” is in fact a step down from the original. In fact, when it comes to the Pixar lineup, I would put “Inside Out 2” in the lower or middle tier. But as I have said before, Pixar movies that do not meet the higher tier are still, most of the time, solid enough to possess a level of quality that plenty of movies would kill to meet.

The good news is with “Inside Out 2” is that it does a nice job at evolving its characters. In this film we see Riley become a teenager, she is going through puberty, and we get a decent look into how that all plays out. Inside her mind, we see all the complexities of her emotions begin to rise as we meet new characters like Anxiety, Envy, Ennui, and Embarrassment, all of whom seem to serve their purpose. And these characters, on the surface, tend to accurately represent what a lot of teens probably go through at that time of their lives. Between their identity, seeing other people have things they do not, aging out of things that they may or may not actually want to age out of. If it did not properly represent me at that age, I am sure it will do so for somebody else.

On that note, Pixar usually does a good job with casting. Of course, Amy Poehler is back, and she brings a powerhouse performance as Joy. Phyllis Smith also does a great job as Sadness. Both characters continue to be the heart and soul of the franchise to some degree. Lewis Black also shines as Anger. But Maya Hawke as Anxiety is a serious contender to go down as the year’s most memorable voice performance. Not only is this character fantastically written and conceived, but she is performed at such a pace that I would automatically think of when it comes to Anxiety. Even if she is talking normally, her voice sounds like she is moving a million miles a minute. She is hyperactive, a little zany, but not too much. And there is one scene we witness towards the film’s climax where she is stunningly animated. Her movement in said scene very much fits her name. Her general design fits the role too. Anxiety is one of those characters that looks appealing, but kind of gets on your nerves once you get to know her. I say that in a good way of course, her purpose in the film is brilliantly realized. She is the closest character this film has to an antagonist, but I would not necessarily call her a villain. But much like some of the best villains or antagonists, Anxiety is someone whose perspective you can easily understand, possibly even appreciate. That said, I was still able to root for the core emotions throughout the movie. For Riley’s sake, I wanted them to get their way as the film went on.

The best thing about these two “Inside Out” movies, in addition to many other entries to Pixar’s library, is that there is a lot for grown-ups to appreciate to a greater degree than children. There is a segment where we get deeper into Riley’s mind and visit some of her more archived possessions. Two of which include characters named Bloofy (Ron Funches) and Pouchy (James Austin Johnson). First off, from an animation perspective, I love how this movie seamlessly blends these 2D characters into its 3D environment. Second, if you ever seen an episode of say “Dora the Explorer,” either as a child growing up or as a guardian watching over somebody else, I guarantee the moments that these two are on screen are going to get a laugh out of you. I knew seconds after they came on screen exactly what they were going for. These characters even did the cliche where they’re breaking the fourth wall, asking the viewer what they think should be done. Points all around. This movie amazingly described a lot of people’s childhoods while they were sitting in front of the television. And going back to the animation style, these are not even the only two styles we see, because the film also introduces a character named Yong Yea, who very much has a design similar to the artstyle of characters from the “Final Fantasy” games. These styles complement each other beautifully and never come off as distracting.

If you must know, “Inside Out” has arguably my favorite ending in an animated movie. It is to some degree, one of the simplest climaxes in a major motion picture. But what goes down in said climax is nothing short of emotional. It hits me every time I watch it because it shows that sometimes in life, happiness and sadness can work together to make you feel whole. In this film, the stakes feel a little bit bigger. Not just inside Riley’s head, but also outside. That said, one thing that felt a little smaller in this film’s ending compared to the last one is the emotional impact. The ending is really good and makes complete sense. But it seemed to be missing a moment that I took with me as the movie ended. There is one moment, or more accurately, a repeated line, that I continue to think about. Each time it was said, it truly showed what Riley was going through, and how she was perhaps letting her emotions and desires get the best of her. But with the last movie, you have multiple moments that I will list among some of the greatest in cinematic history between “Take her to the moon for me,” and Joy and Sadness allowing Riley to have a second to shed a tear when she needed it most. There are no moments in “Inside Out 2” that quite reach that level.

The structure of this movie is one to admire. Because the film is partially about Riley trying to get on a hockey team. In reality though, as much screentime as we get out of it, you could argue it is a borderline B-plot. The A-plot is inside Riley’s head as the B-plot is happening. That plot being the fight to make sure Riley is mentally stable. Because the reality is if Riley does not make the team, deep down, she still, depending on the state of her emotions inside her, has her mental health. The emotions’ jobs are to make sure Riley is herself and in control. And if she ends up making the hockey team, that is just bonus points. But if Riley reaches an extreme that could alter the course of her life for the worse, then chances are they are failing at doing their jobs.

If you think “Inside Out 2” is better than the original, I could totally understand why. But I feel like the first does a slightly better job at addressing the problems Riley and her emotions go through. It also possibly benefits from its originality. At the time, I do not think I have seen any concept like it. The first film exemplifies what Pixar does best. Taking inanimate concepts and heightening them to the point where they can make you laugh, cheer, and cry. “Inside Out 2” takes a lot of what is great about the first movie and builds on it, but it is not quite as memorable or as impactful as the material we got back in 2015. That said, there is a reason why the film has made more than a billion dollars at the box office. Because it is quite watchable. Good for kids, good for adults, good for everybody. Much like “Wall-E” did for me when I was younger, I am sure young children will probably watch this in their childhood and see it one way, and maybe come back to it as an adult and watch it with a new, matured set of eyes. And it is possible they might enjoy it more at such an age.

In the end, “Inside Out 2” is, again, not the best Pixar movie. But it is still a really good watch. I definitely found more enjoyment out of it than their previous feature, “Elemental,” so that is quite a positive thought if you ask me. The emotions are all well written and performed. I even liked Liza Lapira filling in for Mindy Kaling as Disgust. I thought she did a great job. Tony Hale as Fear was also quite good. He was very expressive throughout the picture. Although I could tell there was a difference in his voice compared to Bill Hader’s. That said, it is a good thing he is putting his best spin on the performance as opposed to doing a crappy impression of the previous one. The score of these past two films tend to serve as a character of its own sometimes. It was touching in the first one, and the same can be said here. As soon as the music played in this start of the film, I felt like I was instantly transported back to this universe. But as usual for Pixar movies, this film is beautifully animated. And kind of like the first film does in its abstract thought scene, “Inside Out 2” manages to seamlessly diversify its animation style. It looks great and never feels out of left field. I am going to give “Inside Out 2” a 7/10.

One last thing… I was a bit on the fence when they announced an “Inside Out 2,” partially because of how good the first one was. Having seen this second film, I can confirm the first one is far superior. But also having seen the second film, it honestly got me thinking… As much as I enjoy franchises like “The Incredibles” or “Finding Nemo,” they feel finite compared to “Inside Out” when you consider they’re about a certain group of characters. Even though the franchise revolves around the mind of Riley, I would not mind seeing inside the mind of a young boy or the mind of someone entering their 50s, or someone working the graveyard shift. There are tons of possibilities for the “Inside Out” franchise. If they greenlight an “Inside Out 3” with the Riley as the center, I am there. If they greenlight an “Inside Out” spinoff with somebody else as the center, count me in. I am game no matter what.

“Inside Out 2” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga!” Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Thelma,” “Daddio,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Maxxxine.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Inside Out 2?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your personal favorite of the “Inside Out” movies? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Garfield Movie (2024): A Case of the Mondays

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Garfield Movie” is directed by Mark Dindal (Chicken Little, The Emperor’s New Groove) and stars Chris Pratt (The Super Mario Bros. Movie, The LEGO Movie), Samuel L. Jackson (The Avengers, Pulp Fiction), Hannah Waddingham (The Fall Guy, Ted Lasso), Ving Rhames (Mission: Impossible, Pulp Fiction), Nicholas Hoult (The Menu, Jack the Giant Slayer), Cecily Strong (Schmigadoon!, Saturday Night Live), Harvey Guillén (What We Do in the Shadows, Eye Candy), Brett Goldstein (Ted Lasso, SuperBob), Bowen Yang (Saturday Night Live, Awkwafina is Nora from Queens), and Snoop Dogg (The Joker’s Wild, Training Day). This film is inspired by the “Garfield” comic strip and centers around the iconic orange feline who reunites with his father all the while needing to complete a high-stakes heist.

The “Garfield” property is one that I never found myself overly attached to. As a child who grew up in the 2000s, I have come across the Bill Murray-led “Garfield: The Movie” and watched it a couple times. I did not have a passion for the material, personally. In my early double digit ages, I have also watched a couple episodes of Cartoon Network’s “The Garfield Show” when we had company at my house and I was not the one controlling the TV. Safe to say, with my limited exposure and lack of memory or experience with the comics, “Garfield” was not something I cared about a lot as a kid.

Speaking of not caring, I felt rather indifferent about “The Garfield Movie.” The only catalysts that could have gotten me invested in “The Garfield Movie” are the trailers looking uniquely bad, and the powers that be deciding some time ago that Chris Pratt is the only person who can lead big animated movies now for some reason. As soon I heard Chris Pratt was voicing Garfield, my first thought was the same when I heard he was voicing Super Mario. And that thought was, “Why?”

Now that I have seen “The Garfield Movie” and have now witnessed Chris Pratt’s performance as the title character, my thought was the same when I finally saw “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” and heard Pratt voice the title character in that. And that thought was, “Why?” Genuinely, I do not know how Chris Pratt could have worked in this role. The only defense I could possibly come up with is that Garfield, by nature, is a pretty lazy individual. And when I am hearing Chris Pratt talk, he kind of sounds rather mellow and unenthusiastic. That maybe could be what the movie’s going for, but it doesn’t work for me. And maybe this shows Pratt’s range because he also voiced Emmet in “The LEGO Movie,” which, sure, is pretty much the definition of an everyday, ordinary guy. But Pratt sounds enthusiastic enough in his performance there to put a spin on the everyday nature of the character. If anything, Chris Pratt in “The Garfield Movie” is about as interesting as a trip to DMV. He is lifeless, lacking in flair, and sounds as if he is just getting ready for the fat cat of a paycheck. The best way I can sum up Chris Pratt’s performance in “The Garfield Movie” is to say that I do not see a cat. I just see Chris Pratt in a soundbooth. It is the same problem I had with Dwayne Johnson voicing Krypto in “DC League of Super-Pets.” When you get a big name celebrity like that to be the lead voice of your film, sure, maybe it will boost credibility for select audience members. But to me it almost fails to come off as “acting.” I love “The LEGO Movie,” and Chris Pratt is a standout as the voice of Emmet. But “The Garfield Movie” is not a good fit for him. I did not think Chris Pratt could give a less interesting voiceover than “Onward.” Then “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” happened, and so did “The Garfield Movie.” What a world we live in.

That said, the movie’s supporting cast is a bit better. Samuel L. Jackson does an okay job as Vic (center). Hannah Waddingham, even though she could have been written better, does the best she can with Jinx. I thought Nicholas Hoult gave a much better performance as Jon than I anticipated. I like Hoult, but I was rather surprised he put as much passion as he did into the role. But by far the best performance in the movie is Ving Rhames as Otto, a bull who served as a mascot for a farm. Rhames currently has a consistent career in the voiceover game doing Arby’s commercials. But his performance as Otto proves that he not only has the meats, he has the goods. Also to his advantage, he has the best lines in the movie. There is one line, I cannot remember it verbatim, that he uses to mathematically determine how long it would take for Garfield and Vic to cooperate and work as a team. But for what I remember, based on the way it was executed, it delivered one of the bigger laughs I had during the film. And that transitions into another disappointment. I wish this film were funnier. After all, “Garfield” is an iconic comic strip. You’d expect humor out of something like “Garfield.” And sure, there are glimmers of “The Garfield Movie” that deliver a few laughs, but not a ton.

Animation-wise, the movie delivers a fairly wide color spectrum in certain scenes. There are moments, color-wise, that feel surprisingly bland. But I was impressed with the animation of the Italian restaurant we see at the beginning of the movie. Additionally, there are a few shots that tend to stand out and match the film’s mile a minute pacing. But I cannot say anything regarding the animation is revolutionary or changes the game. Although one compliment I would add is that Garfield himself is well designed. For the most part, he looks like he is straight out of the comic strip. They did a good job at bringing him to life. I just wish he were voiced more effectively.

One thing I took from “The Garfield Movie” is the notion that if this is how the title character is in his other material, then I probably do not have a passion for said character. On paper, Garfield may sound relatable, but his relatability is hard to balance for story like the one this movie is delivering. Garfield’s relatability comes from laziness, unwillingness to get outside, flawed dieting choices, things that make us human. Deep down, some of us can put ourselves in Garfield’s shoes, but throughout this film, no matter how much the plot chooses to progress, Garfield himself appears to lack dimension. In fact, going back to Ving Rhames as Otto, I think he had by far a much better journey in this movie than Garfield did. By the time we got to the end of his portion of the story, it delivered a greater sense of satisfaction to yours truly to what I felt as soon as we got the end of Garfield’s time in the film.

On another note, I was surprised to know how much product placement is in this film. Who directed this? Michael Bay?! Where are the explosions?! Where’s the corny, outdated dialogue? Come on, guys! What are you doing?! I’m guessing this what one of the “Transformers” movies changes into when it needs to shake things up. When it comes to animated movies, “The Garfield Movie” is not quite as bad as “The Emoji Movie” in terms of product placement, but there are obvious winks to FedEx, Popchips, and multiple instances of Olive Garden to the point where I thought I was watching a “Sonic the Hedgehog” movie instead of “The Garfield Movie.”

In the end, “The Garfield Movie” is predictable, disposable, and unmemorable. I would almost argue the movie is too chaotic. Everything gets into gear really quickly to the point where I never found myself fully invested with what was happening. The best phrase I can use to describe this movie is “run of the mill.” I have most definitely seen better, but it is not horrible. It is not the worst thing I ever seen. In fact, with “Madame Web” having released earlier this year, “The Garfield Movie” is not even the worst Columbia Pictures movie we got this year. But the first act at times is a chore to get through. Garfield is rather unadmirable as a character. The story, even with its more complex elements, is somewhat predictable. The ending almost overstays its welcome. And Chris Pratt is incredibly miscast as the titular role. I am going to give “The Garfield Movie” a 4/10.

“The Garfield Movie” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “I Saw the TV Glow.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” “Young Woman and the Sea,” and “Inside Out 2.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Garfield Movie?” What did you think about it? Also, Garfield clearly loves lasagna to such an insatiable degree. On that note, I must ask, what food would you say is your weakness? I have a number that come to mind, but pizza’s gotta be up there. I literally took a two hour drive from my house a month ago and stayed overnight in a hotel just to try a pizza place I have been eyeing for some time. With that said, let me know down your hunger-inducing weaknesses down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

IF (2024): John Krasinski Brings the Power of Imagination to One of the Best Family Films of the Past Few Years

Posted on by Jack Drees

“IF” is directed by John Krasinski (A Quiet Place, The Office) who also stars in the film as Bea’s Dad in addition to also voicing a Marshmallow. Joining him in this film is a cast including Cailey Fleming (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, The Walking Dead), Ryan Reynolds (Deadpool, Free Guy), Fiona Shaw (True Blood, Killing Eve), Phoebe Waller-Bridge (Fleabag, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny), Louis Gossett Jr. (An Officer and a Gentleman, Roots), and Steve Carell (Despicable Me, Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy). This film is about a young girl dealing with drastic changes in her life who is suddenly able to see imaginary friends of real people who have grown up and separated from them.

“IF” had me partially interested but at the same time, skeptical. When I watched the marketing for this film, I noticed that it was trying its best to show off its humor, but very few, if any of the jokes, made me laugh. That said, I thought “IF” had potential. The overall design looked nice. The cast was stacked. And it was being directed by John Krasinski, whose directing resume is limited, but nevertheless impressive. I admire his work on the “Quiet Place” movies, especially the first one. That first film had 25 lines of voiced dialogue. That is pretty impressive in this day and age for something that has become rather mainstream. While it is not my favorite horror movie of the 2010s, it is arguably the most beautifully made. Krasinski has shown what he can do behind the camera so quickly and so effectively to the point where I was looking forward to just about anything he could be directing next. I did not think it would be something like “IF.” But I had an open mind.

The best thing I can say about “IF,” particularly when it comes to John Krasinski, is that this movie is probably his best showcase of his abilities as a writer. Unlike the first “A Quiet Place,” where he had help from Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, Krasinski wrote “IF” by himself. For the record, Krasinski also wrote “A Quiet Place Part II” solo, but looking back at the film, I did not attach myself to all the characters. There was a certain magic from the first installment that seemed to be missing, even though I did ultimately lean positive in my verdict. “IF” on the other hand is not only magical, it is likely going to end up being one of the best family movies of the year. Not only that, I was pretty surprised by how good this movie ended up being. Again, I was a bit skeptical. But I was nevertheless pleased by how this movie turned out.

I have talked about my love for Pixar on this blog before. To this day, their batting average is incredible. No pun intended. Thus far, the only film from the studio I would give a thumbs down to is “Elemental.” I know it is probably a hot take, but I stand by it. “IF” is not a Pixar movie. It is not even an animated movie. But there are a lot of elements to this project that remind me a lot of what Pixar does best. Taking unlikely beings and flawlessly humanizing them. Going for deep, emotional layers. Using one’s experience from the real world and letting them craft the best story possible out of it. This movie was inspired by John Krasinski’s time as a father and it clearly shows. It reveals what it is like to see your kids grow up. Yes, they’re maturing. Yes, they’re becoming one of a kind human beings, but there is also a loss of childlike innocence. Growing up, to some degree, is where plenty of people look at their dreams and put them aside for whatever reality lies in front of them. In fact, “IF” sort of reminds me of one of my favorite Pixar movies. Particularly, “Inside Out,” which had an imaginary friend character named Bing Bong. Much like “Inside Out,” “IF” does a really good job at highlighting the role that having an imaginary friend can play in a child’s life. But this film also makes an argument as to why we would also need them as adults. When we grow up, we might actually need them more than we ever did before. It would make us feel young. It would make us feel free. It would make us feel happy.

One of my favorite arcs in “IF” has to do with the Grandmother (left), played by Fiona Shaw. We learn a bit about her backstory and interests throughout the picture, including her love for dancing. The way this story plays out breaches into fantasy to some degree, but for this movie’s universe and rules, it absolutely works. This movie is very much about maintaining every bit of that youthful spark you’ve had since you were born and this particular arc is perhaps the movie’s most graceful and dazzling example of that. I loved this character, and Shaw owns the role. Great casting.

Speaking of great casting. This movie does a pretty good job on the IFs, or imaginary friends. These characters are primarily voice roles so we do not see any actors themselves. But I thought Phoebe Waller-Bridge was a particular standout as Blossom, a humanoid butterfly. Emily Blunt does a good job as the Unicorn. Christopher Meloni unleashes some of the film’s more comedic moments as Cosmo, a detective. And Steve Carell gives it his all as Blue, a furry purple monster.

If I had to pick one person I thought would be miscast, it would probably be Awkwafina as Bubble. I like of the concept of her character, which is just a bunch of bubbles that can reconstruct once popped. It’s pretty clever. But I think Awkwafina, despite her clearly not sleepwalking here, continues to show that she somewhat lacks a chameleon nature about her. From my experience, I feel even if Awkwafina is not playing the same character in one movie to the next, she’s riding that line, and she continues to ride that here. I like Awkwafina, I think she is charming in films like “The Farewell” and “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings.” But is she the most disguisable, range-filled actor of her generation? If you are asking me, I would not think so. While we are on the negatives, I mentioned earlier that the movie had me turned off by the comedy shown in the marketing. There is one joke from the trailer revolving around Steve Carell’s Blue that honestly did not work for me. Specifically, the one where Bea is keeping Blue from saying “IFs.” It is about as awkward and as cringeworthy as I expected. But hey, at least this movie did not pull a “Madame Web” and straight up lie to me in the marketing. I thought the joke was odd in the trailer, and also odd in the movie. It feels great not being ripped off!

On that note, when it comes to the live action roles, everyone plays their part well. Cailey Fleming is well cast as the lead. John Krasinski is also doing his best in front of the camera as the Dad. And Ryan Reynolds holds his own as Cal. While this film is not likely going to warrant any high caliber acting awards from these people, Reynolds in particular gives a standout performance because it is a lot different than what I am used to seeing from him. Usually I am used to Reynolds giving portrayals of his characters that lean more on the hyperactive end of the spectrum. This is evident through his efforts in projects like “Deadpool,” “Free Guy,” and “Spirited” for example. If anything, Reynolds’ performance in “IF” reminds a bit of his time in “The Adam Project,” partially because both characters serve as mentor figures to the film’s protagonists. That said, Reynolds seems to bring a much calmer, down to earth presence in this movie. As someone who has seen some of Reynolds’ previous work, I am not used to him toning things down a bit here, but it gives me more respect for him as an actor. Not that I did not have respect for him already, but this project shows a bit of his range.

“IF” also stands out to me from a musical perspective. This film’s score is composed by Michael Giacchino, a composer whose work I admire from films like “The Incredibles,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” and “The Batman.” “IF” is one of his best scores yet. Because in every moment, it fits the vibe of the picture. It ranges in its nature from being innocent at one point, to straight up bombastic in another. It is kind of like if the theme for “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” had a baby with the score for something much more epic, like “How to Train Your Dragon.” While “Wall-E” might currently be my favorite score from Giacchino, “IF” could honestly compete with that film to the point where it becomes my new top dog from the maestro. I know this is a Paramount movie, so I sort of apologize for the lack of brand synergy, but this is the kind of score that I would dare to blast from my phone if I ever go to Disneyland and make a run for the castle. That is, if it were not crowded there… Nevertheless, there is something about this score that makes me want to reclaim my youth and go back to a simpler time. Giacchino outdid himself here and I will definitely be playing the music in my spare time, perhaps as I write my future reviews.

As mentioned, “IF” is likely going to be one of the year’s best family movies. It is that good. If you have not seen “IF,” make an effort to do so. It is a movie that I would recommend to absolutely anyone. Kids. Teens. Adults. Seniors. Anyone. If you have ever had a human experience, this movie is for you. That said, going to back to my love for “Inside Out,” this movie reminded me of another thought that seems to stick in my mind regarding that film. While kids can definitely watch “Inside Out,” it is hard to know how much kids are going to appreciate it when they are young. I think kids will like the film. It is vibrant, colorful, packed with surprisingly decent humor, and it is a fun adventure. But I think this is a film that will resonate more with adults. I saw this film in a packed theater a week before it officially came out. There were lots of kids, but also plenty of adults. There were instances of the movie where a good amount of people took tissues out. I could hear crying in the audience. And those tears were clearly from adults. This movie seems to have hit these people where they live. I have no idea what the ratio would be when it comes to comparing children who at one point had an imaginary friend as opposed to those who did not. But even if you can go on the record and say you never had an imaginary friend, there is probably something in this movie for you. I did not know what to expect from “IF.” That said, John Krasinski is a mighty fine storyteller. With his range, I cannot wait to see what he does next.

In the end, “IF” is an easy recommendation. Go see this now. Take your family. Take your friends. Take your lover. Go by yourself even! I did! Solo movie outings rule! “IF” is filled to the brim with stunning visuals, clever concepts, and a story that anyone can attach themselves to. There are certain movies that I look back on like “Kung Fu Panda” that I liked as a kid, but have grown to appreciate more as an adult using the experience I have taken with me as I grew up. I am going to be curious to know how today’s kids are going to look back on this movie in a decade or two from now. When you have phenomenal casting, a script that is better than it has any right being, and an overall look to the film that is stupendously easy on the eyes, there is not much else to ask for when it comes to my experience with “IF.” I am going to give “IF” an 8/10.

“IF” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for another family film. “The Garfield Movie!” Look forward to my thoughts on that coming soon! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Back to Black,” “Summer Camp,” and “Young Woman and the Sea.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “IF?” What did you think about it? Or, did you have an imaginary friend? I cannot say I ever imagined a friend from scratch if I recall correctly, but I can confirm throughout my life, I have imagined myself being friends with pre-established fictional characters or celebrities. Maybe it kind of shows a weakness in my imagination if you will. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Kung Fu Panda 4 (2024): Jack Black Does His Best in a Bland Fourth Installment to One of DreamWorks Animation’s Finest Franchises

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Kung Fu Panda 4” is directed by Mike Mitchell (Trolls, The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part) and Stephanie Stine (Raya and the Last Dragon, How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World) and stars Jack Black (The Super Mario Bros. Movie, School of Rock), Awkwafina (Renfield, Migration), Bryan Cranston (Godzilla, Malcom in the Middle), James Hong (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Mulan), Ian McShane (John Wick, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides), Ke Huy Quan (Everything Everywhere All at Once, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom), Dustin Hoffman (Kramer vs. Kramer, Rain Man), and Viola Davis (Suicide Squad, Fences). This fourth installment to the “Kung Fu Panda” franchise centers around Po, who must become the Spiritual Leader and seek the next Dragon Warrior. As he deals with this new curveball in his life and finds himself in kahoots with a grey fox, Po must also keep the evil Chameleon from bringing back his past foes from the spirit realm.

One of the reasons why I am such a movie nut is because ever since kindergarten, I had a television in my bedroom. Therefore, almost every night, I would put a movie on the television. Around third and fourth grade, one of the movies I would loop on my DVD player is “Kung Fu Panda.” And I mean it when I say loop. One of the things I noticed early on about that DVD is that unlike many others I owned, it automatically starts the movie after a short period of inactivity. So when I would fall asleep to it, I would eventually wake up and find myself watching another scene from the film. It was like playing movie roulette. Safe to say, I watched “Kung Fu Panda” a buttload of times as a kid. And I must also note that the second film, which I watched a few years later, is on the same level as the original for me. To be frank, based on a recent rewatch of all three films, I think the second one might be my favorite. The third one’s not bad, but it has its fair share of weaknesses. It leans more heavily towards a comedic route whereas the other two tend to keep comedy and drama slightly more balanced. Although that is kind of funny to say because if I had to choose a movie I think is the funniest of the three, my mind directs itself to “Kung Fu Panda 2.” Guess it goes to show how much I liked it.

When they announced a “Kung Fu Panda 4,” I did not think it was as odd of an idea as say, a “Toy Story 4” when they announced that. That said, when they announced a “Toy Story 4,” I was not prepared for how much I would end up enjoying it. Even though “Kung Fu Panda 3” is the weakest of the previous installments, I thought it did an okay job tying things up in a bow and sending off our characters with grace. But now, apparently, there is more material to unravel. If “Toy Story 4” could work, there is always a chance that “Kung Fu Panda 4” could work as well.

What did I think of this new “Kung Fu Panda” installment? Much like the “Toy Story” movies, I can claim “Kung Fu Panda” is 4 for 4. All the movies released in this franchise are good. Unfortunately, also like “Toy Story,” this fourth installment is the worst of the quadrilogy.

That said, there is one noticeable positive consistency between this film and its predecessors, and that is Jack Black as Po. Obviously, having done the amount of material he’s done in the past, Black has the Po character down to a bit of a science. When it comes to “celebrity” voice actors, I think Black is one of the most talented working today. He is dynamic, upbeat, and always in the moment. He spews every line like he knows there is no tomorrow. There is always a sense of passion with his delivery. As I will highlight in this review, this movie does not have the best storytelling or writing. But Black makes the most of what’s in front of him.

While the main storyline with Po definitely has its moments, one of the most noticeable problems of “Kung Fu Panda 4” is a subplot between the two dads. You have Po’s biological father, Li (Cranston) and his adoptive father, Mr. Ping (Hong) getting into an adventure of their own. Something I have come across a lot through this movie and my recent rewatch of the other three is that these films tend to highlight lessons and experience that can tie to parenting. This one is no exception. An enormous heartbeat that drives the subplot involving these two fathers are their worries for their son. While something like this may come off as relatable to an older audience, perhaps a select few adults who saw these movies as kids and passing the torch to the next generation, it is the weakest part of the film.

In fact, the balance of comedy and drama is not the only thing that seems to be missing in this film. You know who is also missing? The Furious Five. Now, the film does establish they are missing for a reason. They are off on other missions. But a huge part of the “Kung Fu Panda” franchise is seeing Po interact with these five warriors. Unfortunately, co-director Stephanie Stine said on a Discord Q&A they were not in the movie due to the costs of the original actors. I missed them throughout this film, they have great chemistry together.

Instead, the closest thing we get to a side warrior in this film is Awkwafina as Zhen. I will give this character one thing over the Furious Five. Unlike the Furious Five, this new character is not just named after its respective animal. Imagine if I had a kid one day and I named it “Human.” That’s a choice if there ever was one. Moving onto more important characteristics, I will also note that this character very much represents someone who has seen a lot through urban life. Yes, we have seen Gongmen City in “Kung Fu Panda 2,” but “Kung Fu Panda 4” introduces a different kind of city in Juniper City. The first connection I can immediately make with this city with something in our lives is New York, particularly Manhattan. Everyone’s on the move, it’s crowded, and the film goes on with the fitting notion that you cannot trust everyone.

As for Awkwafina’s performance in the film, I had similar feelings regarding it to how I felt watching her performance in “Migration.” I was pleasantly surprised with it. Unlike “Migration,” Awkwafina plays a much more central character this time around so we see much more of her, but I was delighted to have my expectations exceeded. Her performance is definitely enhanced by some okay writing and layered storytelling. Again, compared to the other installments, the story and writing is not as good. But Zhen’s character is one of the script’s highlights. I was kind of worried that she was going to be an annoying sidekick who would get my nerves real fast. And while she is far from the franchise’s best character, the way she is handled in this movie gets my approval.

As of now, “Kung Fu Panda” is a multigenerational franchise. There are a fair share of gen y and z individuals who likely found themselves invested in some crevice of the property at least once when they were kids. Some of those people probably know or have children of their own now that they can share this movie with. Additionally, they made a television series on Netflix called “The Dragon Knight” that some younger viewers likely watched, so the age range this movie is targeting is slightly diverse. As someone who was introduced to the first movie by watching it at the IMAX at eight years old, I have a bit of a nostalgic connection to this property. And a big selling point of this movie is the nostalgia factor. Not just having heroic faces like Po and Shifu back, but also having the franchise’s villains return as well.

…Kind of.

As mentioned earlier, this movie features the Chameleon (Davis), who can turn into other beings, including Po’s old enemies. This means we see the return of Tai Lung (McShane), even if it is some grade B variant of the character because this Tai Lung does not necessarily come with the same depth as the one we saw in the original film. Not that I’m saying this character’s depth is supposed to be exactly the same. The chameleon is the main antagonist this time around. This story is more about her. That said, I liked her motivation to copy as many kung fu masters’ abilities as she can. On paper, it sounds enticing. Voice-wise, Viola Davis was a decent pick to voice the character. She does a good job with the role.

That said, it is nice to see McShane come back to voice Tai Lung, especially when this movie features other characters from the franchise’s past, both heroic and villainous, and we don’t even get a line out of them. We also see Lord Shen and Kai, the villains of “2” and “3” respectively. But they don’t make much of a contribution to the final product. They’re just there. This movie runs at a tight 94 minutes, which is consistent with the previous installments, and the runtime of DreamWorks Animations in general. I know there appears to be a formula to making these movies, but I would not mind them expanding the runtime just a tad to get a little more out of the other movies’ villains, especially when we see as much of Tai Lung as we do. For all I know, their respective actors said “no,” were busy, or they were never in the plan to begin with. But this could have been the “Spider-Man: No Way Home” of the “Kung Fu Panda” franchise where we get an epic return of the franchise’s villains. Maybe that was the plan all along, it did not fall into place, and the crew had to work with what they had. They had to work with no Furious Five, and a couple of wasted villain cameos. At a certain point it could have been too little too late. Is the movie still watchable with the material we have? Sure. But it could be better.

Much like “Kung Fu Panda 3,” the humor seems to be mile a minute. Unfortunately, the jokes are not enough to save the movie. The problem with having quite a bit of jokes is that not all of them are going to hit. They are quite off and on. There are a fair few that land, but there are also many that don’t. The jokes that miss in this film are by no means the worst I have ever heard. I was never offended. They just didn’t work for me. Despite the movie’s flaws, tonal differences from its predecessors, and lack of Furious Five, I am still glad I saw it. I had a good time with what was given to me. But I will not deny that unlike the franchise’s previous weakest link, “Kung Fu Panda 3,” which I had an urge to watch a second time as soon as I left, I do not think “Kung Fu Panda 4” sits in the same camp. That said, give it a shot and see what you think. For all I know, it may be a better experience for you.

In the end, “Kung Fu Panda 4” is a fun movie, albeit a slightly forgettable one. This movie comes with the pros of its predecessors from a polished animation style, flashy action sequences, a great score composed Hans Zimmer and for the first time in this franchise, Steve Mazzaro. To top it off, the movie delivers a spectacular voice performance Jack Black. Having seen this movie though, I do not know if I want to see a fifth installment. That said, if another “Kung Fu Panda” gets made, I hope that they can bring back some of the dramatic flair of the original two movies. I do not mind humor. I am not saying “Kung Fu Panda” should not be funny. If anything, it is a franchise that lends itself to comedy. I just wish the jokes we got were better. Also, between a continuously likable protagonist with Po, an okay supporting character with Awkwafina’s Zhen, and a somewhat well realized, but noticeably gimmicky antagonist with the Chameleon, the characters serve the story sufficiently enough for it to be halfway decent. “Kung Fu Panda 4” is a chance to introduce the franchise to a new generation. But I think a better way would be to put on one of the first two movies. But that’s just me. I am going to give “Kung Fu Panda 4” a 6/10.

“Kung Fu Panda 4” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more reviews, you’re in luck! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” “Snack Shack,” “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire,” and “Monkey Man.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Kung Fu Panda 4?” What did you think about it? Or, did you see the other “Kung Fu Panda” movies? Tell me your thoughts on them! Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Migration (2023): Illumination’s Second Barely Passable Animated Flick of 2023

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Migration” is directed by Benjamin Renner (Ernest & Clementine, The Big Bad Fox and Other Tales) and co-directed Guylo Homsy (Despicable Me, The Lorax). This movie stars Kumail Nanjiani (Silicon Valley, Eternals), Elizabeth Banks (Press Your Luck, The LEGO Movie), Keegan-Michael Key (Toy Story 4, Keanu), Awkwafina (Renfield, Raya and the Last Dragon), and Danny DeVito (My Cousin Vinny, Jumanji: The Next Level). The film is about a family of ducks who leave their habitat with the intention of migrating south, much to the resistance of their overprotective, closed-minded father.

Of the major animation studios out there today, the one that interests me the least is Illumination. “Despicable Me” never struck me as a franchise I tended to enjoy. “The Secret Life of Pets” has one average movie followed by a painfully awful sequel. “Sing” is the one notable saving grace the studio has delivered over the years. “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” is about as barely passable as movies can get. Granted, it is major step up from the 1993 live action adaptation of the iconic video game franchise, but when it comes to Illumination’s legacy, I have never found myself attached to it. Illumination is no Pixar, which has banger after banger after banger. Well, until they released “Elemental” this year which was one of the most disappointing animated features I have seen in my entire life. That said, this has been a great year for animation. For those who do not know, little preview behind the scenes at Scene Before, I am currently working on my top 10 best movies of the year, and I have not reviewed or seen everything I wanted to see yet, but a good portion of the titles contending for that list are animated.

I have good news and bad news. Let’s start with the bad news first, “Migration” is not going to join the top 10 best movies of the year for me. The good news is, “Migration” is nevertheless a decent movie. I was quite surprised with this film. I honestly thought the movie would not only be bad, but it would completely suck on every level. The marketing has been underwhelming, and ever since it started, I have not had the best impression of it. I remember when they dropped the first teaser back in the spring and half the trailer was just Illumination patting themselves on the back for all the movies they created so far. Now, I am a bit of a hypocrite because “The Boy and the Heron” just came out, which had a trailer close to the film’s release looking back at many of Hayao Miyazaki’s films. But one, I like most of those movies. And two, given the long time it took to make Miyazaki’s latest film a reality, the trailer in that campaign felt somewhat earned.

But you know what? I was pleasantly surprised. I did not pay to see this film, I ended up attending an early screening less than a week before the film came out and I had some laughs and smiles. The film does not reinvent the wheel and is far from the best animated film released this year. If anything, it is somewhat predictable and cliché, but as I said before on this blog, a movie can be predictable and done well. “Godzilla Minus One” has some predictable moments, but as long as they make sense or feel earned, I can forgive them for being there.

All around, the voice acting is decent. Not the best of the year, but when it comes to Illumination, it is collectively better than what we got in “The Super Mario Bros. Movie.” Jack Black as Bowser is the glaring exception. Kumail Nanjiani does a good job as Mack (right center), the lead duck who happens to be stuck in his ways. Elizabeth Banks as Pam (right) is a standout amongst the cast. Banks traditionally has a lively, often upbeat voice that lends itself to roles like this one. As husband and wife, I bought into the duo immediately. Their respective voice actors were well paired.

One voice actor I was shockingly entranced by was Awkwafina. I have not seen everything Awkwafina was in throughout the past few years, but she has built a reputation of being particularly unlikable amongst some people. I never found her that way, but in the past few roles, she seems to be typecast and relying on previous schtick that is not quite old yet, but is getting there. That is why I am pleased to say that Awkwafina, despite my reservations from the trailer, is a fun standout in this film as Chump the pigeon. Her lines landed perfectly within the context of the film. She voiced the character well. And I felt that almost every scene she was in enhanced the picture in the long run. When it comes to Awkwafina, this is obviously nowhere near as memorable of a portrayal as the one she gave to Billi Wang in “The Farewell.” I will also say she is better in films like “Shang Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings,” but I always like a good surprise.

And that is kind of what this movie is. I watched the trailer months back and absolutely hated it. Then I watched the movie a couple weeks ago and ended up liking it. I am not going to pretend this is Illumination’s best work. “Sing” is a step up from this, though this might be a tad better than “Sing 2.” But like those movies, “Migration” has its flaws.

The most prominent flaw for me, and this may strictly be based on personal preferences, I did not like how the movie portrayed its antagonist. The antagonist in this case is a restaurant chef. It kind of reminded me of another Illumination title, “The Secret Life of Pets 2,” where the villain basically overembellishes everything. I understand this is an animation, but there is a certain threshold that this movie crosses with the antagonist at certain points that I was not able to buy. I do not want to dive too deep into spoilers, but there are select moments where I saw the antagonist do certain things or act in certain ways that did not feel authentic.

However, like other Illumination titles, “Migration” has a nice polish in its animation. The color palette is pleasing to the eye. The film looks good. Much like the studio’s previous effort, “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” the animation is one of the top tier qualities of the entire film. But also like “The Super Mario Bros. Movie,” “Migration” tends to suffer sometimes from its screenplay. In fairness, the screenplay makes sense and everything lines up. But it is full of cliches. Sometimes it feels safe and familiar. There are some creative decisions here and there, and there is one scene involving herons in the first act that was quite good. It was tense and had some laughs. But I am not going to remember this movie as one of the best of the year because it does very little to lean away from predictability. I think “Migration” is a good family movie. And if you are looking for something to do with the kiddos for the rest of their winter break, this makes for a fine time at the cinema.

In the end, “Migration” is one of the biggest surprises of the year for me. I think it is probably my second favorite title from Illumination. But then again, that is not saying much, because I have not seen every single film from them (I do not give a crap about “Despicable Me”) and when it comes to the films I have seen, their collective average when combining my final scores is not that great. In fact, the film is quite flawed at times. It is utterly nonsensical in terms of its overall story and how some scenes play out. Again, I know this is animated, sometimes there is a ceiling the film needs to avoid cracking. But the film has a couple of chuckle-worthy moments, likable characters, and it is nice to look at. There is not much more to write home about, and there are significantly better animated movies I have seen this year. I could name a bunch of them. but this film was a pleasant surprise. I am going to give “Migration” a 6/10.

“Migration” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, good news! I have more coming! Stay tuned for my thoughts on “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” and “Poor Things!” Also coming in January, it is that time yet again! I will be revealing my best and worst movies of 2023! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Migration?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite animated movie of 2023? Right now it is kind of a tossup for me between “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” and “The First Slam Dunk.” Let me know your picks down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Boy and the Heron (2023): Hayao Miyazaki’s Imagination Runs Wild in His First Feature in a Decade

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Boy and the Heron” is directed by Hayao Miyazaki (Spirited Away, Howl’s Moving Castle) and stars Soma Santoki (Koko wa Ima kara Rinri Desu, Idatan: Tokyo Olympics Story) Masaki Suda (The Great War of Archimedes, Death Note: Light Up the New World) Aimyon, Yoshino Kimura (Boku no yabai tsuma, Confessions) Shōhei Hino (My Happy Marriage, Emperor) Ko Shibasaki (47 Ronin, Dororo), and Takuya Kimura (Space Battleship Yamato, Howl’s Moving Castle). This semi-autobiographical fantasy film is about a young boy who longs to see his mother one more time. After discovering an abandoned tower, the young boy ventures into a world shared by the living and dead.

My earliest memory of watching a full piece of anime from start to finish goes back as early as 2011. I was attending summer school and we ended up watching a movie that I would long forget the name of, only to realize years later that movie would end up being “Howl’s Moving Castle.” I have since rewatched the film and continue to think it is really good, but it goes to show how much of an impact Miyazaki has had on the craft. He is a well known individual in this industry, even across the world. And yes, I heard of “DragonBall” like a lot of other kids growing up probably did. But even today I never got around to it. That said, when it comes to my limited knowledge of anime, Hayao Miyazaki and Studio Ghibli have a notable presence in my mind. I have seen most of the Studio Ghibli features, many of which include Miyazaki’s work. The recently mentioned “Howl’s Moving Castle” is an imaginative adventure. “Spirited Away” is an otherworldly ride. “My Neighbor Totoro” is a cute little tale. “Ponyo” is a simple, but incredibly well done story. “The Wind Rises” is an emotionally charged piece of animation. Miyazaki is not my favorite filmmaker, but having seen most of his work, he has a remarkable batting average that puts him up there with the greats.

When it comes to the 2023 roster of films, I would often get excited for “Oppenheimer” and sometimes refer to it as “the next Christopher Nolan movie” to show my fanaticism for the director. I acted similarly when it came to “The Boy and the Heron.” Despite knowing the title of the movie, I would often talk about my anticipation for the film and not even use the title, I would just call it “the new Hayao Miyazaki movie.” That is how excited I was to see one of his films come to life. There is also a novelty that comes with a film like this because it is the director’s first in a decade. But with an extended break, has Miyazaki lost his touch? Absolutely not. If anything, this movie goes to show how good of a filmmaker he is. Watching this film made me realize Miyazaki may be one of the most imaginative minds alive right now.

“The Boy and the Heron” is a layered, beautifully animated, and charming time. All the characters are likable, the journey itself is quite fun, and it successfully does what I ask many movies to do. Have me escape from my own reality. The movie also has its fair share of funny moments, which I was delighted to see.

When it comes to the main character of Mahito, I could not help but root for him once we are first introduced to him. Now I cannot say I followed a similar path to him as his primary motivation is to see his late mother one more time. But I very much liked the character conceptually. I think his primary motivation that we see throughout the film made for quite his journey all the more compelling.

Sadly though, I think the big problem with this film is that there happens to be little impact from most of these characters once I left the auditorium. On the surface, I liked everyone, but some characters either felt surface level, or their substance or backstory could not match their stunning design. Yes, I enjoyed Miyazaki’s other films because of how spellbound I became upon seeing the animation. But I also enjoyed “Kiki’s Delivery Service” because the titular character had my attention the entire time. While not my favorite of his movies, part of why I liked “My Neighbor Totoro” is because of the chemistry between Satsuki and Mei, the two young sisters. I cannot really name too many character relationships in “The Boy and the Heron” that had me in as much of a trance as those. But even with these thoughts in mind, “The Boy and the Heron” is one of 2023’s best film experiences. Everytime I watch a Hayao Miyazaki movie, it is like going on vacation to somewhere fantastical. Everything feels nice and serene, even if there are adventures along the way. This film is no exception. The locations are beautiful, the effects are eye-popping, the story has quite a solid progression to keep me hooked, and of course like many other stories from Miyazaki, it is wildly imaginative.

I say Miyazaki’s imagination is as vivid as the sun. One small part of that has to do with how he handles a particular set of characters in the movie. Specifically the parakeets. First off, these parakeets, while mostly interchangeable to a degree, are fantastically drawn. They’re all colorful and match the palette of the film at hand. Not to mention, these parakeets are the definition of cute but not cuddly. These creatures are kind of like the Ewoks from “Return of the Jedi,” who may look innocent, but if you ran into a couple, chances are they will proudly murder you. I am not going to pretend I own any Studio Ghibli merchandise, but if I saw one of these parakeets in my travels, maybe I’ll pick one up. I don’t know. In terms of world-building and establishing the environment, the film does a great job with that. In fact, one of the minor flaws with this movie is that it does such a good job at building its world to the point where I am more focused on the background as opposed to the characters. And maybe that is part of why I have my previously mentioned character complaints. This is probably where a second viewing would come in handy. But of course, one would be warranted if I like the film enough the first time around. Thankfully, my initial watch of this film provided for a glorious experience.

If I have any real flaws with the movie, portions of the story were inferior to others. I think the film takes a bit to get going. There are a fair share of decent moments when the movie begins, but I think everything from the second to third act had more of my attention compared to select moments in the first act. This is not me ragging on the movie, this is just me stating my personal preferences. I like everything in it. But certain things appealed to me just a bit more.

My other big highlight of the movie is that it has one of the better musical scores I have heard this year. And I should not be surprised because not only does Miyazaki make a comeback here, but his longtime composer, Joe Hisaishi also returns here and he fires on all cylinders. Maybe it is recency bias talking, this is one of the better scores I have heard from him. I think when it comes to my favorite work of his, I think “Kiki’s Delivery Service,” “Howl’s Moving Castle,” and now I am probably going to put this up there. There is one particular theme from the film that is still stuck in my head, and it very much matches the sense of adventure this film provides.

In the end, “The Boy and the Heron” comes with minor flaws, but even with them in mind, there are a gargantuan number of positives that make me reflect on this movie being one of my favorites of the year. 2023 has been an excellent year for cinema. Animation especially. From Japan alone we had “Suzume,” which was marvelous. And we had “The First Slam Dunk,” which turned out to be one of this year’s most overwhelming and delightful surprises. Now we have yet another winner from that market and it comes from the man whose mark on this industry is almost unmatched. I like a fair number of his movies, and Studio Ghibli is a remarkable company. Is this Miyazaki’s best movie? No. But it is far from my least favorite. And even when I say that, I do so knowing that I have not seen a bad film from him yet. If anything, the film is worth seeing. I already saw it in Japanese, and you bet I have plans to one day check out the English dub. I am going to give “The Boy and the Heron” an 8/10.

“The Boy and the Heron” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review and want to see more, good news, there are more coming! My next review is going to be for “Dream Scenario,” starring Nicolas Cage. I just had the chance to see this movie a couple weeks back and I cannot wait to share my thoughts. Also coming soon, I will have reviews for “Maestro,” “Wonka,” “Migration,” and “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Boy and the Heron?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Hayao Miyazaki movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Wish (2023): The Stars Align in Disney’s Latest Animation

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Wish” is directed by Chris Buck (Frozen, Frozen II) and Fawn Veerasunthorn and stars Ariana DeBose (West Side Story, The Prom), Chris Pine (Star Trek, Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves), Alan Tudyk (Wreck-It Ralph, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story), Angelique Cabral (Life in Pieces, Enlisted), Victor Garber (The Orville, Alias), Natasha Rothwell (Sonic the Hedgehog, The White Lotus), Jennifer Kumiyaya (The Sessions, Awkward), Harvey Guillén (Blue Beetle, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish), Evan Peters (X-Men: Days of Future Past, Kick-Ass), Ramy Youssef (Mr. Robot, Ramy), and Jon Rudnitsky (Catch-22, Saturday Night Live). This film is about a young girl named Asha who wishes upon a star only to have said wish unleash complete and utter chaos on her homeland.

My history with Disney is not as prolific as some others. Of course, as they have bought various properties over the years like “Star Wars” and Marvel, I became more inclined with the company as they produced more things I’d be predisposed to enjoying. But I was born in 1999, and as a kid, I was not as into Disney’s projects as some other people. I am male, and therefore was not inclined to embracing princess leads or royal stories. Television-wise, I was more of a Nickelodeon kid than a Disney kid if you had to ask which of the cable channels I’d be more likely to torture my parents with. And even as I aged, most of the movies in my growing collection would come from other studios for certain periods of time. I did watch “Power Rangers,” which for a time aired on Disney-owned channels and was owned by them. But when it comes to the more historic Disney properties, I never bothered with them as a kid. I still haven’t bothered with a lot of them now. I still have not watched “Aladdin,” as much as I try to. I still have not seen “The Little Mermaid.” I have not watched “Dumbo.” Despite Studio Chizu’s “Belle” being my favorite film of the decade so far, I still have not gone back to watch Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast.” Maybe I had these titles on in the background somewhere as a kid and just don’t remember it, but I can never say I watched any of these films and had the urgency to call it a core memory. They were just never my thing. I watched game shows as a kid. When I was young, I did not want to fly like “Peter Pan,” I wanted to buy vowels on “Wheel of Fortune.”

But Disney is now a hundred years old, and their newest animated title, “Wish,” comes with an ooze of specialty attached. It is practically a celebration of a century of Disney as a brand. Now, this is its own story that introduces new characters, new places, new ideas, even if it does take inspiration from other stories. Though as I watched this movie, one thing I will say, as someone who knew the significance of sorts regarding it, is that the movie is an appropriate title to release to commemorate such an occasion. The movie is about wishes and sort of represents an idea that Disney has represented for decades. Taking wishes and dreams and making them come to life. If I were in a pitch meeting for a movie celebrating such an occasion, this would be a foundation I would emphasize. But the movie has to be as good as its backbone, and thankfully, I had a good time with it.

“Wish” is not the best not best Disney movie of all time, but if you ask me, I like it better than their previous couple of animated outings. As much as “Encanto” dominated a certain sphere of pop culture in recent years, I have had no urges to go back to it after one viewing. As for “Strange World,” I would say that film did not even deserve one viewing. It was easily one of the biggest bores and wastes of time I had in that year of moviegoing. “Wish” is a film that works because of its characters, specifically its relationship between the protagonist and antagonist.

Asha wants to be the apprentice for King Magnifico, the most revered of her land’s people as he is able to grant wishes. I thought the way this movie starts off the relationship between these two, as they conduct an interview, unleashes some phenomenal chemistry between them. Ariana DeBose and Chris Pine work well together. But when their relationship goes awry, we continue to see a divide in their personalities and thoughts, which in the case of Chris Pine’s character, Magnifico, brings forth one of my favorite antagonists of the year. The reason why I love Magnifico as an antagonist is the same reason why as much as I rooted for the Avengers in “Infinity War” and “Endgame,” I understood, and sometimes agreed, with where Thanos was coming from in those movies. Magnifico, as mentioned, grants wishes. It’s his thing. But Magnifico refuses to grant every single wish that is given to him, including one given by Asha’s grandfather that I probably would have granted if I were in that kind of position. The reason he gives for not granting it, specifically its elusiveness, is not one I necessarily would side with, but that’s his choice. But the reality is, even though this, in addition to a sudden revelation, understandably enrages Asha, I am on Magnifico’s side when it comes to wish granting. What if someone wished for world domination? What if someone wished for the extinction of bees? What if someone wished for the resurrection of Adolf Hitler? These are outright dangerous or terrible things that most sane people who have a knowledge of how things are supposed to work would tend to avoid desiring. But at the same time, from Asha’s point of view, her grandfather’s wish, while Magnifico may see it one way, she sees it another way that can only be described as positive. I understand where she is coming from. But this also results in a mixed message of the film. Sure, you should be able to follow your dreams, but you better make sure that dream is a good one. It is a bit of a coin toss of a message when broken down.

“Wish,” like many Disney titles over the years, is a musical, and I have to say some of the songs in this film are quite good. Not all of them stand out, but I cannot name one that I outright thought couldn’t even achieve mediocrity. Whether it was the song itself or the visuals that accompanied it, everything had a place in the film. My favorite of the film is the one that was often used in the advertising, specifically “This Wish.” And I should not be surprised that I am giving this much praise to the song, because it is sung by Ariana DeBose, who has a musical background, including an Oscar-winning (and Jack Award-winning) role in Steven Spielberg’s “West Side Story.” Her singing power is marvelous and instantly emits classic Disney vibes. It is perfect. Speaking of incredible songs, my runner-up for this category would have to be the villain song, “This Is the Thanks I Get?!.” Not only does it encapsulate a particular spiral into madness Magnifico experiences, but Pine’s range in his voice throughout the song is a standout. This is not Pine’s first time singing in a Disney movie, as he previously did so in 2014’s “Into the Woods.” I have not seen “Into the Woods,” but I was delightfully surprised here at Pine’s singing abilities. He’s not the best I’ve heard, but he is much better than I could have imagined him being. But then again, having seen him in other roles, I often get the sense that Pine easily oozes charisma. So maybe I shouldn’t be surprised.

If I have to note one thing in the movie that is kind of hit or miss, it is the humor. Now, maybe if I were a kid it would land with me better, but there are jokes in this film that are probably going to hit more with younger viewers. That said, it is less insulting than some other jokes I have seen in some animated movies in recent years so it gets points there. There’s not much, if anything, that made me roll my eyes. Some jokes just stuck the landing better than others. Although my favorite exchange in the movie comes about thirty, forty minutes in where Asha explains the cause behind everything that is going on. She says “I wished upon a star.” In response, her friend, Gabo, asks, “What are you five?” Between the brief pause, the context of the scene, and the line delivery, this could not have been more perfect. I loved this moment. Speaking of voices, most of the cast of this film does a good job, but Alan Tudyk is a standout as Valentino the goat. I think his voice, no matter the role, is a thing of beauty. Here, he tends to use the same voice he uses as Clayface in Max’s “Harley Quinn” series, which if you have not watched, you absolutely should. Despite the similarity, the voice is appropriate for the character and adds a comedic edge for his lines. His lines are not laugh out loud funny, but they do deliver a chuckle here and there. I am not going to go into detail, but I have seen better, more satisfying climaxes out of Disney movies. Though if you recall certain details about this movie’s lesson I mentioned earlier, that is a partial reason why I find this climax to be inferior.

Sticking with the idea of Disney 100, this film’s animation style very much reflects the company’s history. It is a bit of a mish mash of what they have done over the years. The character designs reflect various eras of the company, and so do the minute little details surrounding the image. I do think there is an unfortunate shortage of 2D animated movies. If I had my way, we would more 2D animated movies, and fewer Disney live-action remakes. When it comes to this hybrid style, there are glimmers of beauty, but there is an obvious gimmicky feel to it. DreamWorks’s “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” which is much more 3D-esque than this movie on the surface, manages to pack a more palatable outlook when it tries to implement 2D tricks. It feels much more seamless. While there are a lot of good-looking shots in “Wish,” in fact there is one about 20 to 30 minutes in that is one of my favorite shots I have witnessed in any movie this year, the movie makes me think that the animation style should not be given any more attempts in the near future. But if I have to say one thing, between this, “The Mitchells vs. the Machines,” “Puss in Boots 2,” and the recent “Spider-Verse” movies, I am noticing more studios taking cracks at unique animation styles in recent years. I will give credit where it is due. I often say that having good animation is a requirement nowadays considering how much we have evolved over the years, but I am glad that when it comes to style, even if it emits inferior results, that we are seeing more unique projects being made.

In the end, “Wish” is not the brightest star of this year’s animated slate. But it comes packed with plenty of glowing qualities. “Wish” has the significance of doubling as a 100 year celebration of Disney, and I think it is a lovely tribute to the company, but it pales compared to a ton of their newer animated fare like “Wreck-it Ralph” and “Zootopia.” I am admittedly probably on an island of a lonely opinions because when I look back at Pixar’s release this year, “Elemental,” I think Disney proper’s “Wish” is the better of the two films. But if you look at Rotten Tomatoes, the scores for both critics and audiences are higher for “Elemental.” It goes to show the subjectivity of art. I think visually, the film works. Sound-wise, it packs a punch. The music puts its best foot forward. But what makes me want to go back to this movie despite its technical beauty is its two leads, because both of them are compelling. Earlier in this review, I said I never once had any urges to go back and watch “Encanto” a second time. I cannot say the same about “Wish.” I might even buy it on 4K Blu-ray if I had the chance. I am going to give “Wish” a 7/10.

“Wish” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for Taika Waititi’s latest directorial effort, “Next Goal Wins.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will have my thoughts on “The Holdovers,” “Napoleon,” “Godzilla Minus One,” and “Ferrari!” If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Wish?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Disney animation? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes (2022): A Fantastic, Time-Spanning Concept Wound Together Beautifully by an Excellent Leading Duo

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” is written and directed by Tomohisa Taguchi (Bleach: Thousand-Year Blood War, Akudama Drive) and stars Oji Suzuka and Marie Iitoyo as Kaoru Tono and Anzu Hanoshiro. The film centers around these two teens who develop a companionship all the while discovering the ins and outs of the mysterious Urashima Tunnel, where the laws of time and space are completely different from reality.

When the first hour or so of the past few years started, I would often scour Internet sources like Wikipedia, IMDb, YouTube, to get a sense of the films that are coming out later on in the year. Often times, most of the confirmed content would come from recognizable names or franchises, therefore a film like “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” was never on my radar. I never knew of the original source material, but I saw that the film had a few shows near me at select theaters, so I thought, “New anime… Never heard of it, what’s it about?” As soon as I saw the premise, I was sold. It sounded borderline existential from the description I read. Having seen the movie, I can tell you upfront that this is easily one of the best times I had at a cinema this year. The film is based on a light novel, which has since sparked a manga series. I am not sure how faithful this material is to its source, therefore I have nothing to compare it to. I am just a third party observer who just wanted to see a good movie. I got a great movie.

My favorite thing about “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” is everything involving the introduction and buildup of the tunnel itself. Some of my favorite films of the past decade like “Arrival” works really well because of how perfectly it sets up its out of the ordinary environment. “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” works to a similar capacity. When it comes to some of the more visual aspects of the story, it allowed for some immersive scenes. When we see the two leads come together, it allows for one of the most inviting and intriguing moments of exploration I can remember seeing in a film. It also helps that the tunnel itself is a cool concept on its own. The fact that staying in there for long periods of time can quickly take you through many years of your own life? That is a killer idea.

But of course, it also helps that the events of the real world are just as exciting and riveting. When we get a sense of Kaoru’s background, there is some family drama we get to explore that helps not only establish the character, but get me to root for him. I also love the background we learn about Anzu, specifically how it ties back to her grandfather. It sort of reminded me of a relationship we saw in one of my favorite films from the past year, “The Fabelmans,” specifically between the titular family and Uncle Boris. While not exactly the same in principle, both relationships tend to stem off the backbone that a character became committed to the arts and their family eventually ended up casting them out to a degree. In this film, it is revealed that Anzu’s grandfather is a rather unsuccessful, but apparently passionate, manga artist. Anzu wants to follow in his footsteps, much to the backlash to her parents. This becomes a bit of a driving force for the character and it is one that I appreciate as someone who is a bit of an artist himself. Ever since I was young I always wanted to work in media or film. Right now I call myself incredibly lucky to be able to do that, and continue to talk about my passion for the industry on this blog. This film makes me appreciate the support I have from my parents for allowing me to set myself into an industry that I admire. I am, and always have been, an artist, and I think if you are either an aspiring, somewhat accomplished, or heavily experienced artist, you will relate to the character of Anzu. She manages to both love what she does but also pack in some hints of imposter syndrome. I share my written work here on a regular basis, but I will not deny that there are times where I have done reviews or other forms of art where I feel like I could have done better or maybe I am not confident in the material or my ability to complete it. I nevertheless push through because I want to see the journey of my progress reach the end, but it goes to show how relatable the character is.

If I have any real gripes with the film, there would be very few. If I had to be real, I would say that the film does feel tonally inconsistent at times. At one moment it is kind of cutesy, at another it is somewhat adventurous, and at another it is a serious drama. Sure, these kind of make for a neat package once the bow is tied, but I will not deny that the movie almost, and I put emphasis on the word almost, misses an identity because of it. Other than that, some of the supporting characters are a tad over the top, which does not really help considering how comparably down to earth much of the movie plays out in its execution, especially with its two leads. And yes, that is a weird thing to say when much of the plot revolves around a mysterious tunnel, but the way that pans out, given the circumstances, feels somewhat grounded when everything unfolds. If anything, this film creates a successful fine line between adventure and gloom, but it does not change how there are moments of the narrative that feel less in line with others.

Sticking with the idea of adventure and gloom, the film perfectly represents that in its visual style. I was not expecting it from the poster I saw prior to entering the cinema, but it nevertheless struck me with a sense of awe I am not accustomed to experiencing. At times the film is fun, at others I am riveted with the drama on screen. The color palette often times looks bleak and depressing, but it does not mean the movie fails to occasionally spark joy. But everything inside the tunnel not only looks otherworldly, but much more wonderous than everything in the real world. The movie does a good job at differentiating the vibes between the characters’ reality and the magic of the tunnel. There are plenty of bright and vivid moments, but the ones that give a greater soap opera feel in the film tend to stand out.

As for other positives, the music in the film is quite good. Everything from start to finish in the narrative had my attention. The movie for the most part is well-paced. The animation is sparkly and pristine. The voice acting is great. And if you must know I did watch the Japanese edition. This film reminded me a lot of flicks like “Arrival” or “Inception” where we have this unique concept to explore and the process of doing so is ever so exciting. I went into this movie curious, and I left the movie hooked by everything in it. I do not regret seeing this film during its short run.

In the end, “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” is the third anime film I have seen in 2023, and of the three, it is the weakest. That said, it is also one of the better films of the year. When I first put the film amongst my rankings so far this year, this actually ended up in my top 10, at least for now. But I put it there for a reason, because it engaged me the entire time. Not once was I tired, uninterested, bored, or agonized by any of it. Sure, it has its flaws, but even when I think about them, they feel totally minor. They almost don’t even exist to a degree. The positives in this film not only stand out, they sparkle like gold. The main characters are both compelling and have phenomenal chemistry. Said chemistry is highlighted by their two talented voice actors. The concept of the film is fantastic. Both on paper and in execution. The tunnel itself is brilliantly designed, nicely colored, and easy on the eyes. Despite some minor tonal inconsistency, this film blends drama and adventure beautifully. I highly recommend you check this out at some point. I am not sure how long this rating is going to stick as I do want to watch it again in the near future and am very curious as to how a second viewing would go, but as for my first viewing, I am going to give “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes,” an 8/10.

“The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes” is currently playing in select theaters. The film is also available to buy on VOD.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, why not check out my other ones? I mentioned this is the third anime title I reviewed in 2023. If you want to know the other two, check out my reviews for “Suzume” and “The First Slam Dunk.” My next review is going to be for the brand new MCU installment, “The Marvels!” Also coming soon, I will have my thoughts on “Wish” and “Next Goal Wins.” Speaking of anime, this review is a ways out, but I just got my ticket for Hayao Miyazaki’s latest film, “The Boy and the Heron.” If I play my cards right, that review should be up sometime next month. If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “The Tunnel to Summer, the Exit of Goodbyes?” What did you think about it? Or, do you have a favorite anime you have seen this year? I’ll also accept television. Tell me about it! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Strays (2023): 2023’s Sausage Party, with Dogs

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Strays” is directed by Josh Greenbaum (Single Parents, Fresh Off the Boat) and stars Will Ferrell (Step Brothers, Barbie), Jamie Foxx (The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Ray), Isla Fisher (Keeping Up with the Joneses, Tag), Randall Park (Fresh Off the Boat, WandaVision), Brett Gelman (Fleabag, Stranger Things), and Will Forte (Scoob!, Saturday Night Live). This film is about a dog who is abandoned by his owner. After realizing what has happened to him, he aspires to get revenge.

I am the furthest thing from a dog person. Now, having just pissed off half of humanity and perhaps destroyed any chance of being in a committed relationship, I should have you know that I was looking forward to “Strays” ever since seeing the first trailer. This film looked hilarious, over the top, and filthy. I can go for all three of those things every once in awhile. In fact, this summer, we are starting to see a comeback of these three things, specifically when it comes to putting them all together in the same movie. “No Hard Feelings” delivered plenty of laughs and despite its taboo premise, ended up feeling as cute as it was naughty. “Joy Ride” is one of the funniest, most well-written comedies I have seen in a long time, and it is all the better given how far it takes itself in terms its dirty content, not to mention depth when it comes to story.

Next up on deck when it comes to this style of comedy, is “Strays.” The big difference here is that the film does not revolve around humans, and instead, personified dogs. So, is it delightfully naughty or insanely revolting?

The answer, somewhere in between.

Now, before we go any further, sometimes watching a movie with somebody else can define the experience. I am the kind of person that would be more than okay sitting next to my mom and watching “The Wolf of Wall Street.” That said, I went to “Strays” not only with my mom, but also my grandma. Needless to say, both individuals were okay with it. To my delightful surprise, both happened to enjoy the movie, but they appeared to be a bit surprised by how far it took certain things. As someone who appreciates dark humor, I was trying to my hold laughter back in certain scenes, especially with these two nearby.

My mom reads this blog, by the way. Hello!

That said, even in the darker, filthier moments, I came to the conclusion that this movie ultimately comes off as one big gimmick. Heck, there are tons of talking dogs on screen. It’s a gimmick of a gimmick! It’s gimmickception! With that being said, seeing a dog say “f*ck” one or two times can be funny. Heck, even a family-aimed movie like “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” contained some pretty foul language from a canine. That moment in particular was one of the better parts of the movie. But a movie like “Strays” can reveal why more does not always equal better. I admire when a movie is willing to push the boundaries with its comedy, especially when it may look innocent on the surface. But the funniest moments in “Strays” are not even the naughtiest ones. A lot of the funnier moments in the film range from random witty remarks to physical gags that would even fly in a tamer environment. There are also plenty of jokes that are specifically dog-related or are likely to be appreciated by dog lovers or owners. Those tended to work as well.

Although speaking of inside baseball when it comes to dogs, I am well aware that dogs tend to get scared during loud sounds such as fireworks. There is a scene in the film I thought was particularly well done involving fireworks. The reason why I found this scene compelling was because of how it was spliced together in the edit, and the way it uses sound. Because I have heard fireworks in person. I do not know why people even like them. I mean, sure, they are a spectacle, but they sound as if someone is constantly battering a drum right into your ear. I have always had sensitive ears, and I do not know how other people felt watching this movie, if they had the same experience I did. But this movie tends to use fireworks in a way to simulate a dog’s perspective of hearing them. I may not have a dog’s sense of hearing, but the fireworks scene in this film honestly took me back to when I was dragged by others to a fireworks show. Safe to say, I may have been more well behaved during certain dental procedures throughout my life.

Another highlight of the movie is the casting. Will Ferrell is incredibly good as Reggie. Picking Ferrell to play the lead role was a smart choice because not only has he proven to be good with voiceover through his roles in “The LEGO Movie” and “Megamind,” but he continues to have a knack for comedy. Sure, I thought he may have been the weakest part of “Barbie,” but if you watch last year’s holiday movie “Spirited,” now streaming on Apple TV+, he still has charm and wit like he has shown in various projects many years ago.

Also joining Ferrell is Jamie Foxx as Bug. I love these two dogs together. They are quite the odd duo. These two could not be further apart personality-wise, but their separation works for the story and execution brought to the table. If anything, their connection gave me a similar vibe to, speaking of Will Ferrell, his character’s connection to that of Mark Wahlberg’s in “Daddy’s Home.” As much as I did not enjoy that movie, the two had halfway decent chemistry at times.

“Strays” is a blend between “The Secret Life of Pets” and “Sausage Party.” It is a film featuring talking animals, in this case dogs, where they all blend together, act as one big ensemble, and do anything to stand by each other. But much like “Sausage Party,” the film takes a concept that has primarily been aimed at families over the years, specifically stories revolving around dogs, and flips it on its head with a perverted twist. The idea of a dog wanting to bite its owner’s junk may work in a family movie as a blink you’ll miss it moment, but not as an extended motivation for the protagonist. The way Reggie’s motivation is built up works perfectly and it makes sense once it is first exposed. As a start to finish narrative, “Strays” is finely tuned.

Although when it comes to being a comedy, “Strays” is a complicated balancing act. There are a lot of moments in the movie that had me dying of laughter, but then there are plenty of moments that had me silent. While I have respect for how far the movie goes with its content, its extremes on both ends make me hesitate to give this movie my recommendation. This is far from the funniest comedy of the year. In fact, as much as I love dark humor, there might have been one or two moments that I honestly wish I had not seen. Maybe the movie was trying to be gross to come off as funny, but it solely came off as gross as far as I am concerned. When it comes to gross humor this year, “Joy Ride” may be the clear winner right now. But that’s just me.

In the end, “Strays” is… fine. I admit, when the first teaser came out, I did have high expectations. But I was kind of disappointed with this movie. It was not as funny as I wanted it to be. The filthier moments were honestly not as appealing as I would have expected them to be. And as the movie went on, this felt like one giant gimmick that played out for an hour and a half. I compared this movie to “Sausage Party,” which some people may understandably call a gimmick as well. But I think that movie was a lot funnier, had a more satisfyingly twisted concept, and had an incredible narrative that came off as layered. But I should also note, I was 16 when I watched “Sausage Party.” I was less mature and did not know as much about movies at the time. As I watched movies and comedies over the years, I continue to feel like I have nearly seen it all. I have not witnessed many examples of perverted dog movies, but I just wish I could have seen one that made me leave feeling I witnessed something better. That said, the movie is still on the positive end of the spectrum, so I am going to give “Strays” a 6/10.

“Strays” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! My next reviews are going to be for “Gran Turismo,” “Meg 2: The Trench,” and “Bottoms.” Stay tuned! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Strays?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite R-rated comedy? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!