Weird Wednesday: Congo

Welcome to the Soothsayer’s Weird Wednesday. I’m not the Soothsayer. For the month of November, I will be filling in on Wednesdays to allow our host to get that sleep he never gets and to bring you a different flavor of review. I’ll be taking a look into my own crystal ball to bring you my version of the truth, tying it into either a special say that arrives that week or a movie release on the Friday. Thanks for reading and enjoy.

——–

In 1993, Steven Spielberg took Michael Crichton’s novel, JURASSIC PARK, and brought it to the big screen. The movie thrilled audiences and sparked a wave of films based off of the author’s work. RISING SUN and DISCLOSURE took to the concrete jungle of business but in 1995 Frank Marshall returned to the wilderness with CONGO.

Crichton wrote the novel as a modern variation of the classic adventure story. Like Heart of Darkness or, more aptly, King Solomon’s Mines. Like its genre counterparts Crichton’s CONGO follows a group of explorers deep into the jungle where they face off against the natives, the animals and the environment itself but the most obvious villain is a group of grey gorillas that guard the mountain. The novel is a fast paced yarn with plenty of Crichton’s trademark science.

The film version follows the same basic plot and includes the same characters. These include Dr. Karen Ross (Laura Linney), who is searching for a missing friend, Dr. Peter Elliot (Dylan Walsh), who is searching for a home for a gorilla that he has taught to speak in sign language, Captain Munro Kelly (Ernie Hudson), a gun-runner and guide searching for a payday and Herkermer Homolka (Tim Curry), a Romanian expatriot searching for the lost city of Zinj also known as King Solomon’s Mine. Despite some strong, if zany, performances by the entire cast and even a Stan Winston created gorilla the movie fails to live up to both the novel and the adventure genre.

The first act drags on way too long and sets up the characters one after the other as characters but not as people. We know what they do but not who they are and so it is almost impossible to care about them or their exploits. It doesn’t help that once the exploits start it is one problem after another without much connection in between. Frank Marshall cut his teeth working under Steven Spielberg on some of the greatest adventure films of all time, the INDIANA JONES trilogy, but all he seems to have picked up is that you need to keep moving.

Quickly upon arrival in Africa, Captain Munro takes over as guide and the characters that we had any sort of compassion for are sidelined so that Munro could get them into and then out of one scrape after another. Nothing happens of any importance for at least the first half of the movie. It’s a nightmare of plotting. In the novel we know what the goal is and why they need to get there and there’s even a timeline issue involved. In the movie they seem to be able to take all the time in the world and even schmooze, read bribe, an African warlord and we never find out why their destination is so important.

The climax of the film involves a tribe of violent gorilla’s guarding a diamond mine on an exploding volcano. This exemplifies the entire movie. One problem leads into the next without any explanation. Why does anything in this movie need to happen? The plot circles back to the main characters at this point but it is too little, too late. The movie is over and Marshall never made us care.

Michael Crichton passed away in 2008 and is remembered as the father of the techno-thriller genre of novel. He branched into movies with Westworld and then became the first writer to have the number one novel (Disclosure), the number one film (JURASSIC PARK) and the number one television show (E.R.) in the same year. Congo the novel is a thriller worthy of his resume; the movie isn’t.

2 out of 5

Movie Review: Conquest of the Planet of the Apes

After the tragic events of Escape from the Planet of the Apes, the producers needed to find a way to keep the series going. That all came down to the mind of Apes screenwriter Paul Dehn who had been steering the series since the first sequel. Paul was the one who wanted to bring the series back to its origins with Escape and tell the story of how the Ape World came to exist. His dark vision for the series began in Escape and escalated into the next two films.

The movie takes place twenty years after Escape, in the year 1991. Cornelius and Zira’s son, Caesar, is now grown and is still under the care of circus master Armando (Ricardo Montalban). As the film opens, Armando introduces Caesar to how the world has changed. It turns out that a plague in 1983 wiped out every dog and cat in the world so many humans adopted apes as their new choice of pet. These new pets transgressed into slaves when humans learned apes could do simple tasks which lead to enslavement. This turned man lazy and a Fascist regime rose in the ranks.

The regime created an Ape Control Centre where wild apes would be flown in from all over the globe and conditioned to do medial tasks. Through torture and strict discipline the apes were domesticated.

After Caesar speaks out against some police punishing an ape. Armando is forced to get himself arrested so Caesar can escape. Caesar infiltrates the Ape Control Centre and learns all about his race’s plight. So he hatches a plan for freedom for all.

“Conquest of the Planet of the Apes” is a strong sequel and finally reveals the overall vision of Paul Dehn. The uprise of racial tension and equality in the late 1960s and early 1970s really is shown in this film. The film does feel very dated with the tone and stylization but if you can get past the fact that the year is supposed to be 1991 and that this is an alternate timeline then you can probably enjoy the film.

One of my biggest hurdles with the structure of the film was that Armando calls Caesar by that name from the opening scene. Cornelius and Zira named their son Milo after their fallen comrade. Where did the name Caesar come from? Wouldn’t have been better to call him Milo at the beginning of the film then Caesar when Breck (Don Murray) asks him to choose his name? Just a thought.

Roddy McDowell once more acts his heart out as we watch Caesar grow from pet to slave to leader and eventually dictator. There are some really great key scenes in his evolution that make this film really touching.
I also thought the performances from Ricardo Montalban and Don Murray were quite exhilarating. Montalban’s fatherly affection for Caesar was so touching. His character grew as much as Caesar. Don Murray’s Breck, the Fascist leader, was also powerful. His “planet of the apes” speech, his desperation and that end scene were all dynamite.

“Conquest” is a surprise and now after the release of “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” you can see that this film was probably the biggest inspiration for that Summer 2011 blockbuster. But we will touch more of that when we get to that review.

3.5 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer

Side Note: The movie comes in two versions on the Blu-Ray of the film. Unrated version and theatrical version. The difference is the unrated version, which was shown during a test screening and scared parents, is bloodier and Caesar’s final speech is more dramatic. The Unrated is far superior because you really don’t see Caesar’s full evolution until that speech and the theatrical version cheapens it.

Movie Review: Escape from the Planet of the Apes

“Escape from the Planet of the Apes” is the best sequel of the original five Planet of the Apes films.

In the film, Cornelius (Roddy McDowell) and Zira (Kim Hunter) are thrown back in time to the 1970s when one of their fellow apes Dr Milo repurposes Taylor’s spacecraft before the destruction of Earth.

They land in the 1970s and this time they are the minority and it is the human beings who are shocked at their arrival. When Zira leaks information about the destruction of Earth and how the Apes rose up, the US Government freaks out. Cornelius and Zira, who is also pregnant, are on the run.

The movie was a clever way to undo the maniacal ending of the original film. It also saved the two best characters from the franchise and embraced just how great they are. The moving scenes between Cornelius and Zira is more like a love story in a world gone inside. Or as Chuck Heston put it in the first one, “It’s a madhouse! A madhouse!”

Roddy McDowell and Kim Hunter give very touching performances as they reprise their roles. Thank goodness Roddy came back to the series. Eric Braeden is a good calculating villain very similar to the suave villain he would play in 1977′s “Herbie Goes to Monte Carlo”. Ricardo Montalban’s circus ringmaster Armando is also a great character but really he is just Mr Rourke from Fantasy Island surrounded by animals.

I loved how light and touching the film was. It brought drama, magic and integrity back to the series and did a perfect job of setting up future sequels. I have to say without a doubt that this film saved the series and if it wasn’t for this film I don’t think there would have been Ape-Mania and the television series in 1974.

What is great about the film is not only do we get to revisit Cornelius and Zira but that the film builds on the fascination with the series. It tells us for the first time what happens to the human race, how apes were brought into society and eventually how they took over. These elements are at the core of the Apes mythos and were what the 2011 reboot “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” focused on when revisiting the series. Building this kind of bible and expanding on the mythos of a film is what sequels are for and that is exactly what Escape is all about.

This is a really solid sequel and it is no wonder Ape Mania kicked into high gear after it.

4 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer

Movie Review: Beneath the Planet of the Apes

Where do you go after one of the greatest endings of all time?

“They blew up! Damn them all to hell!”

Well according to this first Apes sequel, you bury your head in the sand like an ostrich and give up.

“Beneath the Planet of the Apes” begins where the previous film left off. Taylor (Charlton Heston) riding off into the sunset with his mute beauty Nova (Linda Harrison). The sequel skips the Statue of Liberty scene and has Taylor riding into the desert. In the Forbidden Zone, he encounters a wall of fire and disappears into it when he tries to breach it. Nova is left shocked, alone and wandering the desert.

Meanwhile, another spaceship crashes and a new lone survivor emerges Brent (James Franciscus) and he encounters Nova. Together they get captured by apes, meet Zira (Kim Hunter) and Cornelius (not played by Roddy MacDowell) and search for Taylor.

When the sequel was conceived, it was supposed to have Taylor, Nova and Brent create a colony and rebel against the apes. Instead they ended up with a script so horrendous that the movie almost never got made. James Franciscus was brought on board because he resembled Heston and he was cheap. The movie’s budget was slashed from $5 million to $2.5 million and if you look really close 90% of the extras don’t even have proper ape makeup but instead just ape rubber masks.

Franciscus was appalled at how bad the script was so he worked day and night with director Ted Post to try and bring more of a character to Brent. In some ways, Brent is even a more tragic character than Taylor. He’s on a rescue mission that can never turn out good. He meets this hot native girl but she only wants another guy. And well he’s also being hunted by apes.

During the time it was being conceived, Fox was going down the tubes. Heir apparent Richard Zanuck was waiting to take the reigns of Fox Studios from his aging father Darryl Zanuck. But after a string of flops including Star! and Hello Dolly and the studio $77 million in the red, Darryl fired his son. Dick Zanuck went nuts when he left saying to Apes producer  Arthur P. Jacobs, “Blow the whole planet up!” Charlton Heston also agreed with Zanuck and only agreed to come aboard so his character could be killed off.

So the ending can be seen in many different lights, 1) Zanuck telling his father to go fuck himself by destroying the only thing that was making Fox money thus destroying the studio, 2) granting Heston’s wish, 3) warning man about the effects of nuclear war.

The whole film is a mean-spirited, suicide mission. It takes away from the intrigue and fascination of the original film and slaps us in the face.

Yes, we explore the ape world a little more but really did the ape sauna scene really bring anything to our fascination with this world?

Not to mention what a waste of character General Ursus is. No wonder Orson Welles didn’t want to play this makeshift pawn for plot.

The human’s bowing down to a nuclear weapon and turning out to be mutants made me groan, the first time and every time after that I have seen this movie. I just felt with that whole society the writer and filmmakers were trying way too hard. Serling’s original Ape ending was great because it was simple. I compare the unmasking in this movie to the brain scene in “Hannibal”. Both scenes are there just to try and shock us more than the previous film did. It’s only there for shock value and nothing more.

Franciscus acts his heart out in this film and he is really the only reason to see the film. Linda Harrison’s Nova is always a delight and her prison scene is worth noting but would have loved to experience that kind of moment in a worthier sequel. It is a shame that this is the only direct sequel to the original film and that we ended up with this movie that feels more like a footnote than something worth remembering.

2 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer

Movie Review: Planet of the Apes (1968)

I have seen the classic Planet of the Apes probably twelve times at least. Each time like any great film I find something new. This week I have dedicated this blog to the first science fiction movie phenomenon.

So be here! GO APE!

The original novel was written in 1963 by French novelist Pierre Boulle, who also wrote the classic Bridge on the River Kwai. In the book, two scientists in the year 2500 fly off to discover outer space. They discover an Earth-like planet so they land and discover what they think is a new paradise. When they meet the inhabitants of the planet they are primitive humans and that Apes rule the world. The novel’s twist ending is very much like Tim Burton’s 2001 remake. The lone survivor escapes the planet and returns to Earth 700 years after he left to discover that his Earth is now run by Apes as well.

In the film, Charlton Heston leads a group of shipwrecked astronauts on an expedition to find civilization. Slowly they start to find signs of life and after swimming at a waterfall their clothes are stolen by the locals. Buck naked they try to find their clothes and follow the natives into a clearing. The scene shifts when the natives take off running. Before they know it they are being hunted for sport by not humans but horseback riding gorillas.

Heston and his group are caught and sold as slaves into the Ape society. It is here where Heston meets Cornelius (Roddy MacDowell) and Zira (Kim Hunter), human rights sympathizers.

The film written by Rod Serling and Michael Wilson is a more condensed version of the book. It was Serling who said, what if it was Earth all along and it was Wilson who injected racial tension into the flipped-upside-down world of the Apes.

“Planet of the Apes” is one of the greatest science fiction films of all time. But the reason for its genius probably can be attributed to Rod Serling. Rod built on Pierre Boulle’s novel and gave us one of the greatest endings in cinematic history.

The movie’s amazing photography, haunting score and tour-deforce performance from Heston makes this film a must see for anyone. It’s commentary on the human condition is astounding and how in a blink of an eye our world could change.

The makeup is legendary and won an honorary Oscar for the film. There is no way the makeup would pass today but it just brings so much character to each character. Roddy MacDowell talked about how he wore his mouth out overacting every line in the films to compensate for the makeup so it would look like he was talking.

The acting in the film is also quite brilliant. Heston’s hero broke the mold. He was more of an anti-hero, cynical and abrasive much like the 1960s themselves. Roddy’s Cornelius is skeptical but fair. Kim Hunter’s Zira is compassionate and curious. Roddy and Kim’s contributions to the series and how we reacted to their characters is exactly why later films in the series work so well.

This 12th time watching the movie I did notice two things I hadn’t notice before. During Taylor’s trial when Zira is offering Heston’s defense the judges are in the infamous “see no evil, hear no evil and say no evil” stances. The other thing I noticed that the apes actually have outlines of toes on their boots. Sticking out is the standard ape thumb.

If you haven’t seen this film I strongly urge you do. It is a cinematic landmark.

5 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer

Foreign Friday: Girl Who Played with Fire

We are taken back into the dark world of Stockholm’s underworld again through the lens of author Stieg Larsson.

This time our heroine Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace) is up to her neck in trouble when she is framed for three murders including two of Mikael Blomkvist’s (Michael Nyquvist) friends. Lisbeth’s framing could be linked to Blomkvist’s latest expose on a sex trafficking ring  involving some of Stockholm’s richest clients.

The twists and turns of Dragon Tattoo are directly related to uncovering who is the murderer and the characters themselves are just along for the ride like the audience.

The sequel does a good job of keeping the twists and turns coming but this time it is playing closer to the vest. The movie relishes in pealing back the layers of one, Lisbeth Salander. In the first film, we catch a glimpse of Lisbeth’s past. We are told about a grisly fire that Lisbeth set when she was younger. Now, we learn who the victim was.

So who is this twisted, mixed-up and highly guarded woman? Why does Blomkvist care so much for her?

All will be revealed and this story is almost more shocking that the previous film’s complete plot.

Like the previous entry and seems to be a commonality in the series, the prologue to the movie’s actual plot is long and drawn out. If you can survive the first 35 minutes or so the pacing picks up and we are thrown head long into the film’s plot.

I liked how the author brought these two people back together as the mystery crisscrosses their lives. I found this more interesting then how they originally were pulled together.

Rapace is wonderful again as Lisbeth. She is the action hero in these stories while Blomkvist is the thinker. Nyquvist seems to be more comfortable in his role in this film than in the previous entry.

If you love these characters then you are going to love the sequel. I have to say that the sequel outweighs the original in some ways but falls back in others. But overall I would say it is equal to the first film.

3.5 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer

Retro Review: Below

After the Tiger Shark submarine, U.S.S. Manta mysteriously lost her captain, Lt. Richard Brice must pull his crew together and unravel an eerie mystery to get his crew home alive.

“Below” is one of those films that got lost in the shuffle of theatrical release.

Headlined by sci-fi director David Twohy (Pitch Black), “Below” is one of those films that plays with your mind until the final frame.

It is utterly amazing how involved you can get with this film. Twohy also uses a lot of interesting camera angles to accent the confinement of being in a sub.

Twohy also has a lot of support from character actors Bruce Greenwood and Olivia Williams. “Below” is definitely a gem lost in the sea of video.

(4 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer.

Weird Wednesday: Labyrinth

Welcome to the Soothsayer’s Weird Wednesday. I’m not the Soothsayer. For the month of November, I will be filling in on Wednesdays to allow our host to get that sleep he never gets and to bring you a different flavor of review. I’ll be taking a look into my own crystal ball to bring you my version of the truth, tying it into either a special say that arrives that week or a movie release on the Friday. Thanks for reading and enjoy.

There’s something to be said for the passion and heart that Jim Henson brought to all of his creative endeavors. There’s a kooky fun involved with THE MUPPET SHOW and sentimental about SESAME STREET. No matter what he focused on you could feel how much he cared about telling a great story, and about the characters and world he was creating.

In 1986 Jim Henson directed LABYRINTH, a darker fantasy tale than he had previously attempted, only to be met with commercial failure. It was a low point in his life since he had put just as much of his time, energy and heart into his vision as he had for any other muppet movie.

LABYRINTH tells the story of a young woman named Sarah, played by Jennifer Connelly before she grew up into an Oscar winning actress, who wishes her baby brother away only to have her wish granted by Jareth the Goblin King, a fun performance by David Bowie. She immediately regrets her wish and begs Jareth to return her brother. Now what kind of villain would give back a perfectly good baby? Instead Jareth challenges Sarah to reach his castle by traversing the titular labyrinth.

The quest is an archetypal story for fantasy films and LABYRINTH wastes no time getting into it. Sarah meets many odd and interesting creatures, most notably Hoggle a small craggy faced creature, Ludo a lumbering behemoth and Didymus a fox-like swordsman.

The adventurer meeting three allies is similar to classic films like WIZARD OF OZ or THE PRINCESS BRIDE except in this case everyone Sarah meets is a Jim Henson creation. The movie doesn’t lose any of the fun by replacing her fellow adventurers with muppets but instead gains a surrealistic bent, as if the film were a nightmare. In fact Henson plays up that feeling by having weird asides of dream spells and hallucinations.

With interludes for songs written and performed by Bowie the movie can be extremely fun but it loses steam. Rather than building towards the end LABYRINTH devolves into a string of incidents. One bizarre creature encounter after another and one dangerous locale leads into the next. Everything is lovely to behold but the story lags. Henson tries to add a little more depth to Hoggle’s character but fails to add any to Ludo or Didymus. Vast portions of the second act feel flat as a result.

There is a return to form once they reach the castle and Sarah has to confront Jareth in a staircase filled room straight out of an M.C. Escher drawing but it comes a little too late. The ending comes suddenly and without any warning and you wonder why any of this had to happen in the first place. Was it really all a dream?

LABYRINTH is a labour of love and can be fun but it is too long without more plotting to keep it fresh. David Bowie revels in his performance and Jennifer Connelly shows flashes of the talent she will grow into but the movie still fails to reach it’s potential.

2.5 out of 5

Retro Review: Lucky Number Slevin

Are you one of those movie-goers who is annoyed when a film is too cheeky? You know those kinds of films where you never get caught up with the characters because they all think they are so smart. Well I had that problem with “Lucky Number Slevin” and not to mention I guessed the film’s final twist about five minutes in.

The film is basically a case of mistaken identity as Slevin (Josh Hartnett) is mistaken for his friend Nick who seems to be caught up with two rival crimelords (Morgan Freeman and Ben Kingsley). It turns out that these two mobsters have been at war for decades and that one of them wants Slevin’s friend Nick to kill the other’s son. Is Slevin a patsy in a much larger plot? Can Slevin get away from these mobsters before he gets killed? Furthermore, what is it with this other assassin (Bruce Willis) shadowing Slevin’s every move?

As I watched “Lucky Number Slevin” I felt that it was like someone amateur was trying to be a Quentin Tarrantino or Elmore Leonard but never really grasped the full concept of that kind of character development. Sure the film has a lot of really good dialogue, Hartnett is adequate as the film’s hero and the almost robot quality of Bruce Willis is fun to watch but where is the magic and depth you get from watching this kind of film.

When watching this kind of film you need characters to do just more than spit clever dialogue and go through the motions. You need to understand what makes each of them tick and the dialogue should reflect that. Just because it’s clever doesn’t mean it does the character justice. I guess the only character in the film this probably doesn’t apply to is Slevin because he is a smart ass and his dialogue is perfect for that persona. As for anyone else, it kind of left me scratching my head.

Like M. Night Shyamalan’s 2004 disaster “The Village”, I guessed every twist and turn and where the film was going from almost the beginning. I wanted the film to surprise me and show me a twist that was going to surprise me but it never did.

If you can get swept up in the film and ignore the fact that it is trying to be something that it just isn’t then I can say you will like this film. But if you’re a movie junkie like me watch “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” instead.

(2.5 out of 5)

So Says the Soothsayer

Are Disney sequels worth it?

I have begun a new quest on this blog. I have decided to take an in-depth look at all the animated Disney sequels.

I began to this quest because one of my favorite Disney animated films of the past twenty or so years is the very underrated “The Rescuers Down Under” and well it was a sequel and was done amazingly well. Not to mention it was the second film of the 90′s Disney Animation Renaissance.

In some ways this sequel is as good as the original, if not better. It truly is a rarity in the Disney vault. So I wondered are there other great sequels out there?

There have been other theatrically released sequels such as 2003′s “Return to Neverland” and 2 Winnie the Pooh movies. Not to mention the Winnie the Pooh theatrical remake from just this year.

But the majority of them have been released straight-to-DVD to cash in on the popularity of Disney characters. But what we seem to forget is that some team of animators and storytellers had to actually sit down and conceive these unneeded sequels. Case in point: “Bambi 2″ or “Fox & the Hound 2″.

Other questions I had when I began this quest is which are the best of these brand of sequels. Could any of them actually achieve classic status? And could there be a writer out there that could deliver a spin on these stories that could surprise us?

Here are capsule reviews of each of the Disney sequels. Each mini-review should give you and your children an idea if these 25 sequels are worth checking out:

ALADDIN 2: THE RETURN OF JAFAR (1994)
When Return of Jafar was released on home video, Disney was in the middle of legal battles with star Robin Williams over how Disney handled Robin’s involvement in the original film. Dan Castellaneta (aka Homer Simpson) was cast as the genie in the sequel. Dan had voiced the character in the popular Aladdin TV series. In the sequel, Jafar is found within the lamp and released and with his genie powers reigns terror once again upon Aladdin with the help of Abis Mal (voiced by Jason Alexander). The movie a pale comparison to the original. It is darker, less humorous and also very predictable. It is a very weak sequel. (2.5 out of 5)

ALADDIN 3: KING OF THIEVES (1995)
This third entry returns Robin Williams to the voice to the genie and from the opening scene this feels like an Aladdin film. The story tells of Aladdin and Jasmine’s upcoming nuptials and during the wedding they are robbed by the infamous 40 Thieves. It turns out that Aladdin’s long lost father Cassim (Jerry Orbach) is the their leader. Before Aladdin can marry he must seek out his father. This is very much in the tone and humor of the first film. It does have a rather long middle but the beginning and finale are some amazing Aladdin fun. (3.5 out of 5)

ATLANTIS 2: MILO’S RETURN (2003) 
Click HERE for my review of Atlantis: The Lost Empire
Click HERE for my review of Atlantis 2

BAMBI 2 (2006)
Believe it or not, this isn’t the first sequel to 1942 animated classic Bambi. The original story written in 1923 had a sequel that actually debuted in 1940 called Bambi’s Children. It followed the adventures to Bambi’s off-spring, two twin fawns Geno and Gurri. In the 1942 film, there is a gap in the story between Bambi losing his mother in the winter and the time where he learns what it is to be ‘twitterpated’ in the spring. The 2006 sequel expands that gap in time and answers the question, what happened to Bambi after his mother died? Surprisingly this sequel, taking place within the constructs of the original film works. Why does it work? Well first of all the character development is astounding. The expansion of the Great Prince (now voiced by Patrick Stewart) and his contrast with a hyper young Bambi is such a revelation. What a pleasant surprise. It couldn’t have lived up to the original in any way. But this is probably one of the best Disney sequels out there. What a shock and delight it is! (4 out of 5)

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST 2:
ENCHANTED CHRISTMAS (1997)
Picking up just months after the original film, this sequel finds all the original voice cast returning as they tell the story of Belle’s first Christmas in the enchanted castle. The presentation reminds me much of Cinderella 2. But it is still great to have the whole cast returning. The new characters voiced by Tim Curry and Paul Reubens seem like a waste when there is such great characters already there. I did however really enjoy the enchanted Christmas decorations headed by Bernadette Peters. The animation pallet is very dull and reminiscent of a Disney TV Christmas special. But this is a good film to let the kids watch on Christmas day. (2.5 out of 5)

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST 3:
BELLE’S MAGICAL WORLD (1998)
I have to admit every time I remember the magic that was Beauty and the Beast I want to forget this sequel ever exists. It is ranks right up there with the horrid Lion King 3 and Pocahontas 2. Like Lion King 3 and Little Mermaid 2, it is a storybook styled film entry. Three stories, a lack of character development and cheaply degrading. It is a surprise the original voice talents returned. The movie is for very young children only as it tries to teach the lessons of forgiveness, love, and be kind to one another. Gag! (0.5 out of 5)

BROTHER BEAR 2 (2006)
“Brother Bear” is one of my all-time favorite recent Disney films. Why I liked it so much was it surprised me and caught me off guard unlike any Disney animated film in recent memory. It is nice to see that the sequel was taken with as much care. The movie’s animation, plot and feel is very much like the beloved original. This time Kenai (now voiced by Patrick Dempsey) must help his childhood sweetheart (Mandy Moore) move on with her life. So they go on a pilgrimage to burn a trinket that means a lot to the both of them. The music this time has been arranged by Melissa Etheridge and like the Phil Collins tracks of the previous film compliment the movie in so many ways. Etheridge’s “It Will Be Me” will tug on your heart strings like never before. Dave Thomas and Rick Moranis return as the comedic moose who bring us even more laughs. This is truly a beautiful sequel and the way sequels should be done. (4 out of 5)

CINDERELLA 2: DREAMS COME TRUE (2003)
Cinderella’s loyal mice create a storybook chronicling what happened to Cinderella and the mice after their happily ever after. Three stories make up this follow-up including wishes being granted to the mouse Jack, who wants to be human so he can impress Cinderella and the evil stepsister Anastasia, who just wants to fall in love with a normal baker much to her mother’s digust. The animation and quality of this film is quite good and as anthologies go this one really fits Cinderella very well. The only problem with it is that it feels like three episodes of a TV show strung together rather than a movie sequel. It shocking how dull this movie is compared to the third entry in the series. (2.5 out of 5)

CINDERELLA 3: A TWIST IN TIME (2007)
In this movie, Cinderella’s evil stepmother returns and steals a magic wand. She casts a spell turning back time to before Cinderella was fitted for the glass slipper. This third Cinderella film has become infamous in many circles in Hollywood and for good reason. Unlike other Disney films or even sequels, it challenges the foundations of the fairy tale with the question ‘what if?’ The story is delightful, the songs fit the characters and well there is lots of fun to behold. I just would have liked a little more mischief and little less slapstick. (4 out of 5)

THE FOX & THE HOUND 2 (2006)
In the 80′s, Disney Animation began to fade as 1981′s “Fox & the Hound” marked the end of an era for Disney. The more adult tones of F&H and the three animated stinkers (Oliver & Company, Black Cauldron, Great Mouse Detective) to follow it was the end of classical animation for Disney. It would take almost a decade for animation to return to greatness at Disney with 1989′s The Little Mermaid. F&H is one of Disney’s most misrepresented classics mainly because of the film’s ending. The sequel takes place in the middle of the film before the Fox and the Hound grow up and realize they are destined to be enemies. The Fox and Hound attend the county fair and meet a country singing dog act (voiced by Patrick Swayze and Reba McEntire). The film’s main plot is the Hound joining the group. Once again here is a sequel that basically ignores and morally betrays anything the original put forth. I like the idea of returning to the childhood of F&H but this plot is just ludicrous. The best part of this film is the country music all-star soundtrack. But the rest of the film just made me ache to see the original again. (1.5 out of 5)

HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME 2 (2002)
It is Quasimodo’s turn this time. Hunchback was probably the darkest of Disney’s 1990′s classics. The fluffier sequel takes place five or six years after the original as Quasi still tends to Notre Dame, Esmeralda is now married to Phoebus and has a son and the gargoyles still keep Quasi company. A master illusionist (Michael McKean) comes to town in hopes of stealing Notre Dame’s prized bell. The illusionist sends a young girl named Madeleine (Jennifer Love Hewitt) to seduce Quasi and find out the location of the jeweled bell. The movie reunites the entire voice cast of the original film including Demi Moore and Kevin Kline. But the horrid animation, missed opportunities and departure of character make this sequel hard to stomach. Yes it is great to see Quasi fall in love, finally. But why couldn’t it have been done in a way to honor the original film instead of slapping it in the face? (1.5 out of 5)

THE JUNGLE BOOK 2 (2003)
What happened after Mowgli went back to the man village? This sequel picks up just weeks after the classic ended. The sequel stars the voices of Haley Joel Osment (Mowgli), John Goodman (Baloo), John Rhys-Davies, Mae Whitman and Phil Collins. Mowgli misses the freedom of the jungle and returns to visit his friends. Upon his return, Shere Khan once again is on his trail. The movie just doesn’t have the innocence, spark or tenderness the original had. When these stars sing the songs that were in the original it just seems like blasphemy. That film also had an iconic soundtrack and a beginning, middle and a beautiful ending. The animation even feels stiff which is kind of ironic given the movie is supposed to be all about ‘jungle rhythm’. (1.5 out of 5)

KRONK’S NEW GROOVE (2005)
I was never a fan of the first film and felt that it just lacked the magic of previous Disney efforts. You know how ‘Road to El Dorado’ felt like a Disney film and Groove felt like Dreamworks. Maybe that was just me. In this sequel, Patrick Warburton’s Kronk has to setup his life perfectly before his domineering father (John Mahoney) arrives. Warburton is the perfect animated voice for anything he does which is the reason I was looking forward to liking this sequel. Sadly its just unwatchable and if you had a hard time with the first one at all this will be a chore in a half. (1 out of 5)

LADY AND THE TRAMP 2: SCAMP’S ADVENTURE (2001)
Lady and the Tramp was probably one of Disney’s tenderest love stories. Beautiful pampered dog meets a street dog and they fall in love. Well in the sequel, Lady and Tramp’s offspring Scamp (Scott Wolf) is the pampered dog and he meets a street-wise female dog named Angel (Alyssa Milano). The songs are average at best but there is something to say for the animation and getting involved in the story. This is miles better than 101 Dalmations 2 but still has that DTV feel. (3 out of 5)

LILO & STITCH 2: STITCH HAS A GLITCH (2005)
I have to admit I liked the first Lilo & Stitch even though it felt more Dreamworks than Disney. Really what is not to like about Stitch. He is the ultimate wild card. This film was the first film sequel to the series. The animated series began with a pilot called ‘Stitch: The Movie.’ The title says it all as Stitch’s genetic programming has a glitch and he reverts back to his more primal nature. Can their friendship get through this tough time? This sequel felt like an afterthought way after the TV series finished and they wanted to bridge the two. If you love Stitch then this is a must see but it just isn’t as cute as the original film. (2.5 out of 5)

LION KING 2: SIMBA’S PRIDE (1998)
This surprisingly strong sequel follows the exploits of Simba’s daughter Kiara as she comes into her own and falls in love with Scar’s son, Kovu. Their love could unite the pride or send it into full scale war. The movie features strong voice performances from Matthew Broderick (returning as Simba) and Susanna Pleshette as the villainess Zira. It also features three delightful songs with “He Lives in You”, “We Are One” and “Upendi”. Joss Whedon even provided music for the film. Lion King 2 is worth a look. (3.5 out of 5)

LION KING 3: HAKUNA MATATA (2004)
(also known as Lion King 1 1/2) Lion King’s relentless comedic duo of Pumbaa and Timon return in Mystery Science Fiction Theatre 3000 style as they take you on a prequel/parallel look to the original Lion King film. It is a really awful attempt to cash in. Watching reruns of Timon/Pumbaa animated series was less painful than this. If you discount this cowardly attempt at a sequel, The Lion King really isn’t a trilogy of films at all. Can you even call this a film? (0.5 out of 5)

LITTLE MERMAID 2: RETURN TO THE SEA (2000)
Ariel’s daughter Melody is never told her mother was a mermaid in hopes that the daughter would never be found by a new sea witch, Morgana. But on her 12th birthday she returns to the sea. The animation is pretty sloppy and looks like a long lost Saturday morning cartoon. Original Ariel, Jodi Benson tries to bring back the delight she once brought to an inquisitive Ariel but to no avail. The songs are beyond flat. I expected better. (2.5 out of 5)

LITTLE MERMAID 3: ARIEL’S BEGINNING (2008)
Like the Lion King sequels, these Mermaid sequels feature an adventure with the offspring of the main characters and a prequel. In this prequel, Ariel tells the story of what happened to her mother, Athena and how the kingdom banned music after her death. I was hoping this movie would be fun since it is set before the first film and Ariel still has her curiosity. The animation is far superior to the first sequel but this one’s story is sort of a tone deaf version of Footloose. If this movie is about celebrating music why are there no good songs in either film? Benson belts out the tunes but it is missing the magic. It just feels routine. (2 out of 5)

MULAN 2 (2004)
Mulan 2 is a surprisingly strong sequel to the Disney hit. Before Mulan and Shang can marry, they must escort these three princesses to a neighboring country for an arranged marriage. What is great about this sequel is that 95% of the original voice cast returns, basically everyone but Eddie Murphy. The story is strong and there is no betrayal of the characters except for maybe Mushu. Mushu, the dragon, through the whole movie tries to break up Mulan and Shang so he doesn’t lose his title as guardian. This isn’t the Mushu of old because he was so supportive in the previous film. For me what made the movie strong was the three princesses. They are really fun and voiced by Lucy Liu, Sandra Oh and Lauren Tom. I liked this new adventure. (3.5 out of 5)

101 DALMATIONS 2: PATCH’S LONDON ADVENTURE (2003)
After two live-action adaptations of 101 Dalmations starring Glenn Close, this animated sequel is purely a cash grab. The animated style does try to bring the audience back to the original but the plot to me feels like a rejected script from Muppet Babies. In the film, rebellious dalmation Patch is left behind on moving day and then takes off into the streets of London to meet his TV hero Thunderbolt. The best part of the sequel is Cruella de Vil and her new boyfriend Lars (Martin Short) who every time are on screen are a pure delight opposed to the dog’s very simple adventure. (2 out of 5)

PIGLET’S BIG MOVIE (2003)
Piglet feels left out so when he goes missing the gang go searching for him. And the gang begins to learn just how important Piglet is in their lives. Disney has milked AA Milne’s character to death and since Pooh and his friends are one of the top selling Disney merchandise, we keep getting movies on video and in theatres. The lessons of friendship and be kind to us all are all over the stories and even more so in Piglet’s film. This movie is basically three classic Pooh stories told from Piglet’s perspective and how Piglet becomes the hero of each story. Like the other Pooh movies if you love these stories and these characters then this movie is for you especially if you happen to be age six or younger. I would rank it higher than say 2000′s Tigger movie but really each of these sequels just reminds us how great the original Winnie the Pooh movie from 1954 was. (2.5 out of 5)

POCAHONTAS 2: JOURNEY TO A NEW WORLD (1998)
Made four years after the original 1995 film, Pocahontas 2 finds the title character journeying to England to make peace with the King of England. Pocahontas was the weakest of Disney’s hit animated films from the 1990s and it is even more obvious with this sequel. Spoiler: John Smith is killed off in the first 7 minutes and then the movie meanders into finding a new lover for Pocahontas. What? Why? Have they lost their mind? Gag! The movie has many an identity crisis as it tries to bring the innocence of Pocahontas to England but it just doesn’t translate. What made the original film what it was, was the clashing of two worlds and the romance side of the film. Other than the cartoon antics of the Pocahontas’s companions this movie is utter waste of time. (1 out of 5)

POOH’S HEFFALUMP MOVIE (2005)
Although the elephant like character “the heffalump” is only referenced in one of Pooh’s nightmares in a previous film, this film expands what would happen if an elephant came to the 100 Acre Wood. The residents become squeamish as they have never heard an elephant’s cry before. Even though this is the least successful of any Pooh film it is one of the best. Finally we have a movie that isn’t a retelling of the classics in a different form or another. This is quite an adorable expansion and introduces the new character of Lumpy. I loved how the movie in its own way teaches kids, through Roo’s eyes, to not be scared of the dark and the unknown and most important friendship. The songs for this film are also quite delightful. The Pooh universe needed a breath of fresh air and this was the first sign of it. I have to say it is welcomed. Besides the classic original, I would say this is the best sequel hands down! Lumpy is a great character and I hope Disney doesn’t forget about him after the new 2011 Pooh movie. This truly is a beautiful movie. (4.5 out of 5)

RESCUERS DOWN UNDER
The Rescuers is an agency of mice stationed around the world who save kidnapped children. In the first movie, Bernard and Bianca (Bob Newhart & Eva Gabor) rescued a young girl deep in the bayou. In the sequel B&B are sent to Australia to save a young boy who has been kidnaped by a vicious poacher (George C Scott). Flying them to Australia is an albatross named Wilbur (John Candy). The beautiful landscapes and epic adventure of both films make me yearn to see these on Blu-Ray. The adventure here is really fun. Like a pint-sized version of an Indiana Jones film. I love the reluctant hero that is Bernard. My only problem with the film is how come all the animals in the film can talk except for Joanna and the eagle? Why is that? The movie is a beautiful tribute to the original film and shows the potential of an untapped Disney franchise. I would love them to make a third Rescuers film. Please Disney! (4 out of 5)

RETURN TO NEVERLAND (2003)
This sequel follows Wendy’s daughter Jane and her adventure in Neverland after she is kidnapped by Captain Hook. The movie’s bookends are simply amazing as Wendy’s family is caught up during the bombings of World War 2. Once we are in Neverland the movie becomes very much like a Saturday morning cartoon except maybe for Tink’s dilemma. I would have liked to have seen Peter Pan as a tool to hide the children and Wendy from World War 2 instead of just a minor distraction. It could have been so much more. (3.5 out of 5)

TARZAN 2 (2005)
Not to be confused with the other direct-to-DVD release “Tarzan & Jane”, which is the first 4 episodes of the Disney TV series. This sequel is in some ways a prequel, the movie takes place within Disney’s Tarzan. It expands Tarzan’s childhood where he is struggling with if he fits in with his ape family. The jungle is being terrorized by a beast known as a Zoogor so when Tarzan is seperated from his family he must discover the Zoogor’s secret, out smart a trio of selfish apes and find his way home. Phil Collins adds two new songs for this sequel as well as a new rendition of his classic, “Son of Man”. But really the film is a letdown and feels more like a really sad Jungle Book sequel. The TV series was a lot more fun than this sequel. (2 out of 5)

THE TIGGER MOVIE (2000)
Winnie the Pooh’s friend Tigger gets his own movie. In the classic Tigger song, he claims he is the only Tigger. But when he begins to wonder what happened to his family, Tigger searches the 100 Acre Woods for his family roots. And the gang helps him especially Roo. At the heart, Tigger Movie is really about family and how you don’t have to be blood to be family. It is also about friendships and how they can enchant our lives. There are some good lessons here for the younger ones but for me Tigger was always better in small doses and basing a whole movie around him for me just didn’t really work. (2 out of 5)

WINNIE THE POOH (2011)
The new Winnie the Pooh has a lot in common with the original 1977 film, The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. This new entry in the series is once more a collection of short stories threaded together by Pooh searching for a honey pot for supper. The first story is “A Tail for Eeyore” and the second is “The Backson”. These three stories once again introduce us to the animals of the 100 Acre Woods. The music for the film was conceived by Disney veteran Jim Cummings and the two of the main track were sung by Zooey Deschanel. The movie just doesn’t feel as classic as the original even though it has gone above and beyond to do so. But really how can you top Winnie the Pooh in 1968′s A Blustery Day. This movie is good for younger audiences but really doesn’t emerge past that. Oh, and stay during and after the credits for some cute little scenes and one revelation at the end. (3 out of 5)

DISNEY’S SEQUELS RANKED

4.5 OUT OF 5
Bambi 2
Pooh’s Heffalump Movie

4 OUT OF 5
Brother Bear 2
Cinderella 3: A Twist in Time
Rescuers Down Under

3.5 OUT OF 5
Lion King 2: Simba’s Pride
Mulan 2
Return to Neverland
Aladdin 3: King of Thieves

3 OUT OF 5
Winnie the Pooh (2011)
Lady & the Tramp 2: Scamp’s Adventure

2.5 OUT OF 5
Cinderella 2: Dreams Come True
Little Mermaid 2: Return to the Sea
Aladdin 2: Return of Jafar
Piglet’s Big Movie

2 OUT OF 5
Tigger Movie
Little Mermaid 3: Ariel’s Beginning
Tarzan 2
101 Dalmations 2: Patch’s London Adventure

1.5 OUT OF 5
Jungle Book 2
Hunchback of Notre Dame 2
Fox & the Hound 2

1 OUT OF 5
Atlantis: Milo’s Return
Pocahontas 2: Journey to a New World
Kronk’s New Groove

0.5 OUT OF 5
Lion King 3: Hakuna Matata
Beauty & the Beast 3: Belle’s Magical World

In conclusion, there were many surprises on my journey through Disney Animation. I think because Disney has been around for so long people take their content and quality for granted. Yes there are a many cash grabs when it comes to Disney films. (ie: ‘available for a limited time’  or ‘it’s going back in the vault’) But what is important is that imagination and creativity is still inside the “Mouse House”. Watch “Bambi 2″ or “Pooh’s Heffalump Movie” with your kids and you will see Disney is still the place to be.