beccad90

Before I begin, let me say this: I like Jim Carrey. I really do. In fact, I watched Ace Ventura: Pet Detective back when I was a kid, and I still find it funny today. But, as with most actors and comedians, there is that little thing called shtick. Don't we all see a pattern when we see those familiar faces on the screen? In fact, it seems to generate the same kind of reaction: We become endeared to it at first, but then it gets real by the time the fourth or fifth movie rolls around. Will Ferrel, Adam Sandler and even Carey himself, are all the biggest 'offenders,' so to speak, in this day and age. But, for the sake of this interview, let's focus on the latter, and how this movie relates to his 'shtick.' The movie in question, if it wasn't obvious already, is Carey's latest venture, Mr. Popper's Penguins. Based loosely—the key word being 'loosely'—on the 1938 novel by Richard and Florence Atwater, "Penguins" tells the story of a work-obsessed businessman named Tom Popper, whose life is turned upside down when he inherits six penguins from his late explorer father. As is wont, his cold heart begins to melt by means of the flightless, cold-loving birds. In the meanwhile, he tries to evade suspicions of his bosses, a respected entrepreneur, and a brown-nosing zoo keeper while also rekindling his relationship with his estranged ex-wife and kids. And, yes, that's the plot in a nutshell. But, does that mean it's as mind-numbing as it sounds? No, my friends. It's not as bad as it seems.

First off, let's get the downside out of the way. The plot is thoroughly and shamelessly predictable. It is riddled with so many clichés, that I could sit there, predict every turn the movie was going to take and be right. Also, I sat there and counted six—yes, six—poop or fart jokes. There may have been a couple that I missed during a bathroom break, but I'm sure there were a couple more that I could have counted. I blush to admit it, but I do laugh at potty humor, but only when I don't expect it or it makes the movie actually funny. Again, predictability killed the mood for me.

However, for all its faults, it's more charming than repulsive. Carrey, though he is relying on his standard, over the top shtick, is not overshadowing those adorable penguins. But, aside from Carrey, his six co-stars, and his estranged family, there are two saving graces for this movie. Mr. Popper's secretary, Pippi (played by British actress Ophelia Lovibond) is a prim little poppet with a penchant for alliterating all her sentences with any and every word beginning with the letter P. She does grate a little bit, but she is still quite adorable. The other actress to show her face here is the great Angela Lansbury, who plays the owner of a restaurant that Popper used to eat at with his late father. It is so refreshing to see this woman on the silver screen again, especially for a girl who grew up with the likes of Beauty and the Beast and Bedknobs and Broomsticks (There's alliteration there, too, eh? Oh, darn this movie!). She still retains that grace and charm through all the forced dialogue and situations, and I applaud her for that.

Overall, my feelings for this movie can best be summed up by its summary on RottenTomatoes.com: "Bland, inoffensive, and thoroughly predictable, Mr. Popper's Penguins could have been worse…but it should have been better." But for all its faults, its charming, fun and completely harmless. It's probably best for kids, but animal lovers will love the cuddly penguins, and Carrey fans will like seeing their idol on screen. Give it a shot and decide for yourselves.

If you took Sam Peckinpah, Terry Gilliam, and Disney and put them all on Hunter S. Thompson's brainwaves, you would get Rango. Yes, this movie is as outrageous as it sounds. It's surreal, it's gritty, it's undoubtedly sneaky with its wit and humor, and its all the more fun because of it.

The film stars a chameleon (Johnny Depp), going through an existential crisis, as he has lived his whole life in a terrarium. When that life is quickly—and literally—shattered, he finds himself walking in search of water. Instead, he finds a town called Dirt, where all the residents are plagued by outlaws and a severe lack of water, which is used as currency, it's so rare. Rango, seeking acceptance, assumes the role of sheriff, a role that has been played before, but with more unfortunate results. To make matters worse, someone is dumping water in the desert and draining all of dirt's resources. Who could it be, what is their diabolical plan, and is Rango really the unlikely hero of his own story?

In case it wasn't obvious enough from this summary, the film's tone is surreal, complex and almost shockingly mature for an animated picture. It blends in so very many movie references, blending the gritty, revisionist western with the surrealism of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, a too-obvious comparison on the latter's part. Director Gore Verbinski had a unique way of producing and directing this picture: he gathered Depp and all the other actors on a sound stage, in various costumes, acting out their scenes, as a sort of visual reference. Depp affectionately—and appropriately—called this 'Emotion capture,' as it gives the movie a more natural, organic feel, as if the reactions were believable. When it's put on screen, it's full realized in both interaction and appearance.

What most people have touched on when talking about the pros of this movie is, indeed, the stellar animation…and, boy, is it stellar. Granted, some of the human cameos are kind of on the flat side, but our animal heroes are textured and expressive, which is important in this kind of movie. We can reach out and touch these sets if we were able; the roughness of the scales, the harsh desert heat and the sponge and spikes of cacti that crop up throughout are just a few of the details in this grand visual experience. The characters that make up this floundering town are actually interesting to look at and listen to, as the animation and awesome voice work give them all distinct and likable personalities.

Resident include old prospector mouse Spoons, large, but quiet tomcat Elgin, morose, trigger happy little aye-aye Priscilla (Breslin), and, my favorite, the kind, but no-nonsense Beans (Fischer), a rancher lizard who finds herself falling for the goofy, but sincere hero. But, by far, the biggest fan favorite has to be Bill Nighy's rogue, Rattlesnake Jake, who is hands-down, flat-out scary in any scene he is in! How any kid will survive his scenes is beyond me! However, that made him more of a threat that Rango needs to overcome, which is more satisfying in the long run.

Overall, while Rango has a few glaring problems (like seeing the Spirit of the West, who had been built up too much to show his face and be effective), Rango is easily one of the best movies of the year, if not one of the best-animated movies. It's surreal, but rewarding; strange but still gets the message across in a reasonable way that all can understand. Just don't bring the under 7 crowd, as it may be too odd and definitely too scary (*coughRATTLESNAKEJAKEcough*), but for those who can tolerate it, Rango is a trip that you soon won't be forgetting, no matter how many times you watch "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas."

(I mean, you're already in a reptile house if you think about…Oh, never mind…)

When I heard that Disney was finally going to adapt the classic Grimm's fairy tale, Rapunzel, I was ecstatic. For as long as I can remember, I have been waiting for them to pick it up and put their own spin on it. The final product is the musical comedy Tangled, which, while not as edgy as I would have liked it to be, was still very enjoyable. The tale is kooky, funny, moving, uplifting, and—what else—Disney.

Directed by the co-directors of 2008's Bolt, Tangled is a twist on the traditional tale of Rapunzel, wherein the damsel (played by a sweet-n-spicy Mandy Moore) possesses magical hair, which is kept by the villainous Mother Gothel (played with malice by Donna Murphy) to maintain the latter's physical beauty. When a charming but irresponsible rogue thief named Flynn Ryder (Zachary Levi) seeks refuge in her tower, she sees this as her ticket out of there, and off to see the floating lanterns released every year on her birthday. These lanterns are released as a memorandum to a kidnapped princess that was stolen on that very same day. Coincidence? I think not.

What makes this movie work is the timing. The trailers tried to appeal way to much to the hip crowd, making it out to look like another floppy animated comedy. But, when I checked out the story, the characters and, finally, saw the movie itself, I realized it kept tighter to the traditional Disney formula of once upon a time and far away, but it was also giving off its own vibe, without trying to be something its not. The jokes all worked, for the most part, and helped tell the story instead of clogging it up with throwaway jokes, which I do appreciate.

The story also shows one of personal growth, especially that of Flynn Rider, whose story this really should have been. He starts off as an irresponsible thief, trying to find a shortcut out of sticky situations with his charm. On his journey with Rapunzel, he falls in love with her spirited nature and even gives his life to save her…but I won't give too much of that away. Donna Murphy's villainous Mother Gothel was also pleasantly over-the-top, but gradually became more threatening as the tale went on. Even though she is not Disney's strongest villainess, she still is a pretty fun one.

The art in this movie also helps tell the story, as well as makes everything look lush and colorful. Rapunzel's hair is one of the most awesome props in the movie, and makes it out to be something more than just looking pretty. It's used as a swing, a rope, a makeshift weapon —besides that darn frying pan—as well as a light and a healing device, which is activated by a special song. Everything else, the flowers, the foliage, water, characters, all look amazing, even if it is in computer animation. The most beautiful scene though, is when Rapunzel and Flynn watch the floating lanterns from the lagoon surrounding the palace. It was here that I started to get a little teary eyed…until the ending.

The only real problems with it were A) I would have liked to see it in traditional 2D animation and B) I would have liked Rapunzel to be a bit edgier (and a tad skeptical, but how WOULD you feel if you spend your whole life in a tower). However, as is, I think it's one of the best Disney films out there so far.

All in all, Tangled is a fantastic watch, with beautiful animation, a solid—as well as funny— storyline, and fantastic songs and voicework. While not as good as Dreamworks' earlier 2010 release, How to Train your Dragon, OR even 2009's The Princess and the Frog, it still holds up.