My Neighbors the Yamadas A.K.A. Hōhokekyo Tonari no Yamada-kun (1999)

A Japanese animated comedy directed by Isao Takahata.
A Japanese family consists of the mother, father, grandmother, son and daughter. They live in an ordinary city and have sitcom style problems.
If Crayon Shin Chan did not have crude humor, this is what it would be. That being said, I liked this film. The animation style was extremely simplified to mimic a child's drawing. According to Wikipedia, the entire film was painted entirely in computers. There were many small plots which had little to do with one another, but what this did was develop the characters excellently. The vignette plots all focused on universal subjects in family life like neighborhood noise, a lost child, a lost ball, food decisions and forgetting items. The only negative remarks that I can make are that the daughter was under-featured and the all-important question: whose neighbors are they? I did not see any vignettes which included neighbors. I rate this awesome because of animation style and humor. Watch it!

The Tale of the Princess Kaguya A.K.A. Kaguya-hime no Monogatari (2013)

A Japanese animated drama directed by Isao Takahata, starring Chloe Grace Mortez, James Caan, Mary Steenburgen, Lucy Liu, George Segal, James Marsden, Oliver Platt, Dean Cain, Beau Bridges and John Cho.
A woodcutter finds a miniature princess in the forest and brings her home to his wife. The princess turns into a baby and begins growing at a rapid pace. The woodcutter then finds gold and silks in the same forest and decides to make the girl a princess. After building a mansion for her in the capitol, a tutor is hired and suitors come and ask to marry the princess.
I'm writing about this movie because the animation was so good. As with most Miyazaki, Takahata and Ghibli films, the plot and characters were developed very well. There are background details and some serious "re-watch quality". There is also the common theme in these films of simple things being better and a return to nature. As you can see by the image above, the whole film was animated in a style similar to traditional Asian paintings. The fact that this is how the whole film was done explains the 49.3 million dollar budget. What I don't get is it only grossing 24.2 million dollars in the box office. It seems like something this good would have made more money than was spent on it. This is top shelf animation and I rate it awesome. Watch it!

Pm Poko A.K.A. Heisei Tanuki Gassen Ponpoko (1994)

A Japanese animated fantasy directed by Isao Takahata, starring Jonathan Taylor Thomas.
The forest home of raccoons is being destroyed by humans building homes. The raccoons try to use their shapeshifting abilities to make the humans leave.
I'm writing about this film for a variety of reasons. I found the plot to be engaging and interesting, but tragic. Although the plot was so good, the characters were relatively shallow and a "narrator voice" filled in the story. Testicles of the tanuki (Japanese raccoon dogs) play a major role in folklore and were included in the film. All of the male raccoons had them and some transformed their ballsacks for other uses. Balls were mentioned in the dialogue and songs of the original Japanese version and the English subtitles, but not the English audio. There were also breasts on the female raccoons and even a topless scene. I liked the environmental theme or moral of the film because it is so true. Human city development really is destroying the homes of animals. Finally, I just plain like the film. Being Studio Ghibli and having a good plot guarantees that. I rate this best. Watch it!

Lion (2016)

An Australian British American drama biography directed by Garth Davis, starring David Wenham, Nicole Kidman, Deepti Naval and Nawazuddin Siddiqui.
A boy from a rural village in India follows his older brother, who is looking for work. The older brother walks off and the younger wanders onto a train, which departs from the station. After a few days, the boy is deposited in Calcutta. From there, he is picked up by an orphanage and adopted by an Australian family, who also adopt a mentally ill boy from Calcutta. 20 years later, the main character is attending college and decides to find the small village which he came from.
I think this may be the best "based on a true story" film I've seen. I enjoyed the adventure element most, as this little boy travels such a long distance. There were some plot gaps, but not necessarily holes. Text like "20 years later" appearing on the screen did not leave loose ends or contradictions. The audio begins in a language from India and moves into English when the boy enters Australia. I could hear all of the dialogue and the subtitles that I found matched the video file. The camerawork was generally good, showing clearly what was happening. It often did this in creative ways, with pull-outs, tracking shots and deep focal lengths. There was a little bit too much hand held camera for my taste, but it did not detract from the film. My main point in writing this is to mark a good film. The viewer will see how lost the little boy is, how he grows up to be a good person and the ending which I won't spoil. I rate this good and would recommend it for fans of the adventure, drama and biography genres.

Limbo (1999)

An American drama directed by John Sayles, starring David Strathairn.
A woman works at a bar as a singer and her daughter is working on being a writer. They both fall in love with a manual laborer in the small town where they live. The man's brother is a drug dealer and when all 4 of them go out on a boat, the brother is killed and the other 3 are stranded on an island.
Crappy. I should have turned it off. Let's start with audio because that was the worst. This woman's voice was horrible and the songs she was singing were stereotypical, mediocre crap. The scene in the pickup truck included the loud roaring of the engine, which did not add to the film in any way. It was just annoying. The plot took so long to get moving that I was bored within the first few minutes and stayed so until an hour and 12 minutes of the 2 hour duration. Considering that this film is a pile of crap and nobody should watch it, I feel no remorse about spoiling the plot. When the main characters are shipwrecked, the daughter is "reading" from a blank diary. This was revealed too late to make her stop, but too early for it to be correctly dramatic. The adults just sit there and continue listening as she makes up more stories for 1 scene. Why? The inconclusive plot is another point that I would like to point out. An airplane is coming toward the island. It could be the brother's drug dealer friends coming to exterminate witnesses or it could be someone to rescue these people. I would like to think that it was the former. I rate this shit because I should have turned it off instead of watching the whole, stupid thing. I would recommend this for those who like Ben Hur (1959), Some Kind of Monster (2004) and The Garbage Pail Kids Movie (1987).

John Wick 1 & 2 (2014 & 2017)

American action films directed by Chad Stahelski, starring Keanu Reeves.
A former assassin's wife has died and left him a dog. Attracted by his reputation and wealth, a Russian mobster's son kills the dog and steals the car. The assassin comes out of retirement for revenge. Once he regains his automobile and adopts a new canine companion, an old business partner calls upon him for work in his old trade. The assassin says no and the co-worker burns down his house. Desiring retirement, the assassin agrees to the job and accomplishes it, but people were lying and not everyone knows the whole story, so with a $7 million bounty on him, the assassin is pitted against the entire workforce of his old job.
I know that the plot sounds interesting. It's not a bad movie, but I'm writing about it because of how mediocre and predictable it was. Has modern American action cinema become the decadent and trite type of crap that China produced in the 1980s? It's getting pretty close. 1980s Chinese films had a rich history of martial arts, kung fu and far eastern culture to draw upon. Modern American films have recording and editing technology to draw upon. We've got the same type of revenge plots going on, films are dominated by action sequences and all of them seem to share sets and costumes. Where 1980s China had the ancient sets and costumes, 2010s America has modern and futuristic items. It seems that American heroes now wear black and fight in cities. There is always a car chase and guns are the weapon of choice. Another similarity is audio production. 1980s Chinese films hardly passed a second without "whoosh" or "whack" being heard with clipping audio levels. America has done the same thing with guns. If a character even thinks about a gun, it sounds like there is a busy factory cutting and pressing steel machine parts. I would conclude that 2010s American action films are too similar to 1980s Chinese action films. Go ahead and watch them if you want, but don't expect anything different or interesting. I rate this o.k. and would recommend it to fans of Drunken Shaolin Monk 4, Flying Tiger Fist of Death 6 and Revenge of the Kung Fu Dragon.

House series (1986 - 1992)

An American horror produced by Sean S. Cunningham, starring William Katt.
1: A writer moves into his aunt's house where his son disappeared. 2: A man and his wife move into a house which is missing a crystal skull and dig up the man's great grandfather. 3: A killer haunts the house of a police detective. 4: A house that was built over a healing spring is inherited by a man's wife when her husband is killed by his brother, who wants to demolish the house.
The only common themes which tied these films together were title and being produced by Sean S. Cunningham. I really liked the first 2 because the first film was a more serious horror and a horror classic. The second film was a horror comedy, which is one of my favorite genres, but only from the 1980s, which this was. It was even made in the magic year of 1987 (golden age of modern cinema, see other posts). Number 3 had nothing to do with any of the others, mostly because nobody moved into the haunted house to get the film started. However, it did have Lance Henriksen who played Bishop in Aliens and Alien 3. Number 4 brought back William Katt as Roger Cobb, but his character died at the beginning. I rate them like so: 1 awesome, 2 good, 3 bad, 4 bad. I would recommend the first 2, but not the others.

Leave No Trace (2018)

An American drama directed by Debra Granik, starring Ben Foster and Dale Dickey.
An Iraq war veteran is living in a forest with his daughter. The cops raid their camp and abduct them, forcing them into social services. They leave the christmas tree farm where they are loaned a small house and eventually find a mobile home community.
I really liked this because it was not an average, mainstream Hollywood film. The slow pace and sparse dialogue went well with the main characters and their "off the grid" lifestyle.All of the video looked good. I didn't even notice the editing or cinematography because it was all so seamless and done so well. The audio was going great until the ending credits and whatever inappropriately produced song was playing there. Those who have seen Winter's Bone (2010) will recognize Dale Dickey. The only complaint that I have is that the plot is not explained sufficiently to figure out why these people are living in the woods until the very end. I was watching along, expecting it to be some type of dark vision of the future. I thought that the main characters needed to live outside of society in order to retain some basic freedom, but no. I rate this awesome because of its uniqueness and for having "off the grid" living in the plot. I basically recommend it for anyone who liked Winter's Bone.

Imagine That (2009)

An American comedy directed by Karey Kirkpatrick, starring Eddie Murphy, Thomas Haden Church, Ronny Cox and Martin Sheen.
A stockbroker is too busy at work to spend time with his daughter and a co-worker is luring away his clients. When the daughter draws on her father's paperwork and the co-worker steals another group of clients, the stockbroker has a breakdown. He shows the child's drawings to the clients and interprets them into stock advice. It turns out that the advice was correct.
This was a mediocre, mainstream film that was not even that great. Not only that, but the video quality of the copy I watched was terrible. It looked like it had been made by pointing a camera at a television. Why I'm writing about it is because I had just finished reading David Icke's first book, Truth Vibrations (1991) in which he wrote about conversations with mediums and spirit channeling. The daughter in this film uses her "goo-gaa" or security blanket to contact imaginary friends who always provide correct stock tips. At one point, a female co-worker articulates it so accurately as a "securities blanket". The client-stealing co-worker even goes as far as to purchase an expensive and mystical blanket for his son, feed him energy drinks and use him for divination. What I would have really liked was a scene in which Eddie Murphy is depicted in his daughter's fantasy world. I rate this film adequate because some parts were funny and it matched what I was reading, but was otherwise mediocre and the video quality was bad.

Fahrenheit 451 (1966 & 2018)

A fireman meets a woman and they become friends. The fireman is in the business of finding and burning books and the woman is in league with book hoarders. Eventually, the fireman starts questioning why things are the way they are and begins to read the forbidden books.

1966 A British science fiction directed by Francois Truffaut, starring Julie Christie and Cyril Cusack.
The 1966 British film was great. I liked it because the plot fit in with Brave New World, 1984 and THX 1138. It also seemed to accurately reflect what Wikipedia says about the book synopsis. The characters seemed to act like they were on a 1960s British sitcom, but they did fit their roles. Although the special effects looked fake, but were convincing as far as plot was concerned, everything else looked and sounded plausibly realistic. I thought it was a really cool movie and rate it awesome. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the books/movies mentioned above.

2018 An American science fiction directed by Ramin Bahrani, starring Michael Shannon and Martin Donovan.
The 2018 American version was bad. I almost immediately wanted to turn it off for many reasons. The top of these reasons was the plot not accurately reflecting Ray Bradbury's novel. Even the characters and their relationships were rewritten. Montag doesn't even have a wife in 2018! As I said with The Hobbit (2012 - 2014), apparently Ray Bradbury's writing was not good enough for Ramin Bahrani. Who cares if it's classic literature which has stood the test of time? The acting was way over the top: overacting. Compared with the 1966 version, these people should be committed to a mental hospital for the way they played their roles. The special effects looked realistic, but were not convincing in the least bit, except the library fire. Obviously, modern technology allows a reasonably realistic representation of a person being burned. The only thing that I really liked was the "+100" bit. Anything above and beyond expectations was +100, implying that the population had lost conception of numbers and degrees of magnitude. I rate this shit because I ended up turning it off at around the hour and ten minutes mark.

Edges of the Lord (2001)

A Polish American war drama directed by Yurek Bogayevicz, starring Willem Dafoe and Haley Joel Osment.
A jewish boy hides in a catholic family during World War II. He has various adventures with the other children of the village.
Normally, anything that includes "During World War II" is a terrible waste. It has all been done to death like jews in a gas chamber. This was not typical of the genre. What I found to be so different about this was first, the leisurely pace gives the viewer time to process what is going on. Having the plot revolve around a group of children during that most military of times reminded me slightly of Stand By Me (1986) and It (1990). Obviously, it lacked the carefree childhood innocence of Pippi Longstocking (1969 - 1973) and Tom Sawyer (1973). The only thing that really put me off was the amount of handheld camera shots. I prefer the stability of tripods, dollies and other supports for filming. I'm rating this awesome because it made me want to watch it again.

Dog Eat Dog (2016)

An American crime film directed by Paul Schrader, starring Nicolas Cage and Willem Dafoe.
A trio of criminals are out of jail and try to work together on 2 jobs. The first job involves robbing a drug dealer and the second is kidnapping a baby for ransom.
I thought this was a well put together crime flick. The characters were memorable and played by good actors. The plot was not quite as great, but did the job. There were some interesting video effects with colors, lights and lack of color, but not really "special effects". The beginning is a good example of this. One of the 3 main characters is in a pink room, but there is also a blue room next to it. The plot soon reveals the reason for the pink room and it makes sense. I'm rating this good and think it's a keeper.

Ashby (2015)

An American drama directed by Tony McNamara, starring Mickey Rourke, Kevin Dunn and Michael Lerner.
A high school boy joins the football team, finds a girlfriend and befriends an aging neighbor. Turns out, the neighbor is a C.I.A. hit man.
I really had mixed feelings about this. Some parts were so thoughtful, had meaningful plot and made me like the characters. Other parts made me want to turn it off because they were vapid, had bad acting and dealt with the same bland subject material which so many other films have overdone. Mickey Rourke is a good actor and I liked his role in this film. However, I did want him to call Ed "bubble boy" and ask for a ride to the truck stop. The relationship between the two main characters was so interesting that it seemed like everything else was taking up time that could have been better spent. Overall, I have to give this one of those weird, pink ratings because of the contrast between good and bad.

Smokey and the Bandit (1977 - 1983)

An American action adventure series directed by Hal Needham and Dick Lowry, starring Burt Reynolds, Sally Field, Jackie Gleason, Jerry Reed, Mike Henry, Paul Williams and Pat McCormick.
A father and son team set a challenge for a truck and racecar driver team to travel a certain distance within a time limit. A Texas sheriff and his son chase them.
I know I already reviewed this long ago, but I watched the whole series and it seems right that it should have a new review. The first film was great. It had a very clear plot and developed characters that the viewer would care about. The shot compositions were also great. It was followed by 2 lackluster sequels which did not live up to the first film's standards. There were a few repeated scenes, scenarios and jokes that I feel should be mentioned when discussing this as a series. The idea of escaping from lawmen obviously appeals to me. If you refer to my review of Gone in 60 Seconds (1974), you will see how much I enjoy the destruction of automobiles. The soundtrack style developed in the first film continues through the series, but on a downhill trend toward the last film. Another point to note is HAM radio communications with entertaining handles for each radio operator. The last point is the family name of the men who arrange the race. Although the subtitles refer to them as "Enos" through the whole series, the 3rd film has a logo with their name on it spelled "Enis". Having characters named Big Enis and Little Enis amused me quite a bit. I would still rate the first film good and recommend it for any audience. However, the sequels would only be rated adequate.

Josh Kirby... Time Warrior! (1995 - 1996)

A Romanian American science fiction series directed by Ernest Farino, Frank Arnold and Mark Manos.
A boy gets into the middle of an argument between 2 scientists from the future over a world-changing device. He then visits various times and places as the scientists continue their duel.
So cheesy. At least it was cohesively so, unlike Trancers. The plots and characters were a joke and the pacing left much to be desired. What should have been quick was slow and what should have been slow was quick. There were clear fabrications of action scenes, as evidenced by the fact that no human is stupid enough to make the mistakes which caused them. The props and sets were pitiful. It all looked vacant, like there was not enough money to furnish anything appropriately. The boy goes crazy over finding a girls' bike in the second film. Did I mention that the writing, dialogue and acting were terrible? If there were any reason to watch this, it was to see how far special effects have come since 1996. To really get down to the root of the problem, I think this was grossly under-funded. I rate it poor because I watched it all and have seen much worse.

Trancers series (1984 - 2002)

An American science fiction series directed by Charles Band, C Courtney Joyner, David Nutter and Jay Woelfel, starring Tim Thomerson and Helen Hunt.
A cop from the future uses technology to transport to different times and places as he hunts violent zombies known as trancers.
I would categorize this series as a steep downhill slide. The first 3 films were alright and cohesive. There were consistent characters and the plot continued reasonably well. Then came the medieval ones (4&5). I was reminded of the later Scorpion King films by bad acting and lack of sets. #6 took such a dive that I even found it funny. Thomerson is only seen laying on a table as he enters the body of his daughter/grandmother. Watching the young woman act like Jack Deth was comical, but the lack of sets and costumes really made it funny. This is more of an update to my post long ago concerning the first film in the series. I rate this set o.k. because it was way better than The Mummy/Scorpion King set, but not anything that I would recommend.