San Andreas (2015) analysis/essay

Welcome to the last of my disaster movie analyses! We're wrapping up this 'mini-series' of sorts with an in-depth essay on: 

I would argue that Brad Peyton’s 2015 blockbuster San Andreas, in addition to serving as something of a celebration of knowing what to do when disaster strikes, is, more importantly, a showcase of just how important it is to surround yourself with and/or defer to people who know more than oneself. This is because the knowledge such individuals possess can frequently provide one with a greater chance of survival when a natural disaster, such as the earthquakes that happen throughout the film, occurs. I would also argue that not being around or knowing someone with greater expertise than yourself is far more likely to get oneself or others seriously hurt, or in worst-case scenario, killed, during crises such as what is depicted onscreen.

For instance, when the first ‘main’ earthquake begins to wreak havoc in Los Angeles, California, main protagonist Ray Gaines instructs his estranged wife Emma, who has informed him of the situation, to make her way to the roof of the Tate Weston building she’s currently in. What Ray tells Emma to do proves to be the wisest course of action, as it better enables the former, who is in a helicopter, to spot Emma and get her to safety. Conversely, the large majority of people who ill-advisedly try to get to the ground floor of the building instead of following Emma to the roof (so as to not risk being in the structure when it collapses) are inferred to have met unpleasant ends when the Tate Weston finally comes crashing down. Later on, after Ray and Emma have parachuted into the AT&T baseball stadium in San Francisco, another quake begins causing chaos in their immediate vicinity. At first, most of the people around them begin either fleeing in random directions or fruitlessly huddling around parked cars (even as a building before them shows clear signs of being about to collapse), but Ray directs as many of these people as he can to get out of the street and to the side of the AT&T stadium; this ultimately saves the lives of those who heed his directions when heavy debris eventually crumbles to the ground. Additionally, during the climax, Ray notices the bay waters are receding to an abnormal degree, which he identifies as a sign that a tsunami is coming. Instead of trying in vain to outrun the titanic surge of water (as at least two boats can be seen attempting to do in a wide shot of the tsunami wave approaching San Francisco), Ray uses the boat he and Emma have commandeered to get over the forming wave before it peaks, which saves them both from being caught in the subsequent destruction instigated by the tsunami. An article by ScienceDirect pertaining to being prepared for earthquakes establishes that, “Most people will not directly experience a large damaging earthquake in their lifetimes. They instead need to rely on experience of small earthquakes, experience of different disasters, adverse life experiences (e.g. accidents), or vicarious experience.” (Becker et al.) While it is not made explicitly clear onscreen if Ray has had prior experience with earthquakes during his time as part of the Los Angeles Fire Department (let alone anything on the scale of what’s seen in San Andreas), his efficiency at the beginning of the film during the rescue of a young landslide victim, Natalie, suggests to viewers that Ray has dealt with a large variety of perilous circumstances as a member of the department, thus lining up with what the ScienceDirect article details. It is ultimately this experience Ray has obtained that enables him and Emma (who is shown to defer to his judgment) to survive the devastation wrought by the San Andreas Fault.

In contrast, Emma’s boyfriend, Daniel Riddick, serves as a more blatant example of how not being with/knowing anyone who comprehends more than you when it comes to dealing with something on the level of an earthquake can be detrimental not only to your own well-being, but to that of others. For example, when Ray’s daughter Blake gets trapped in the car she and Daniel tried and failed to escape in, Daniel leaves Blake stuck and merely informs a single security guard (who would likely be ill-equipped for such a scenario) about Blake’s dilemma. However, before they can do anything, a piece of the ceiling comes falling to the ground, with Daniel narrowly avoiding getting crushed. Rather than try to recruit anyone else who could be helpful in rescuing Blake, such as a concerned Ben Taylor, Daniel instead resorts to self-preservation, making his way out of the building; this would’ve left Blake to face a grim end had it not been for Ben and his little brother Olie finding and liberating her from the car just moments before the roof of the vehicle gets caved in by debris. Later on, after California has been ravaged to a substantial degree, Daniel and the crowd of people he’s with find themselves in the path of a large dust cloud that’s been produced by the collapsing of a nearby building. Rather than try to find an empty spot in which to take refuge from the oncoming wave, Daniel throws a pedestrian from the part of a structure he’s holding on to in order to claim it for himself; while Daniel survives thanks to this action, it also results in the man whose spot he took becoming one of many civilians who literally get blown away when the cloud of dust finally hits them. If Daniel had someone more knowledgeable (regarding how to address this sudden danger) with him whom he could turn to, a way for him to survive the dust cloud without causing an innocent person to get killed could have potentially been found.

On the other hand, like her father, Ray, Blake herself displays multiple instances of knowing how to approach the challenges encountered by her as well as Ben and Olie. Firstly, after the three of them have escaped from the parking garage Blake had previously been trapped in, she finds out from Ben that no cell phones are working; as such, in order to contact her parents to let them know she’s now safe, Blake has Olie find an electronics store in the book on San Francisco he carries with him. Upon reaching the store, Blake declares, “Anything running on electricity isn’t gonna work, so we have to find a rotary or a push button phone.” After Olie succeeds in finding a push button phone, Blake locates a landline for the device, finally enabling her to get in touch with her parents (and receive instructions from Ray on where to meet, Coit Tower). Had it not been for Blake’s knowledge in this scene, there’s a good chance Ben and Olie would have next to no idea of what to look for specifically in the electronics shop. A short time later, the trio come across a fire truck on their way to Coit Tower; Blake is the first to begin searching through the vehicle’s side components for a supply box, as she establishes that it’ll contain items the three of them can utilize. After Olie finds the box in question, the first thing Blake searches for and retrieves is a walkie-talkie; she explains to Olie, “Every city has a tactical channel that first responders use to communicate on. We can listen in and we can see what’s going on.” Obtaining the walkie-talkie ultimately proves to be beneficial for the triad, as it enables them to learn about the tsunami heading their way in the film’s climax. Later in the second act, when an additional quake occurs, Blake rushes herself and Olie next to an empty car, crouching behind the vehicle with their backs turned to the buildings behind them; Blake also holds Olie close to her, which lowers the chances of the latter getting hit by any debris. Ben, on the other hand, assumes a fetal position nearby a building with multiple glass windows, covering his face with his hands. While this strategy does prevent him from suffering any injuries to his head or face, it leaves the lower half of his body somewhat exposed, which results in Ben getting a piece of glass gruesomely embedded in his left leg after the windows above him shatter due to the earthquake. Fortunately for Ben, after the tremors cease, Blake succeeds in carefully removing the shard, using some of her apparel as an improvised tourniquet in order to stop the bleeding. Had Blake not been there to use her know-how to get the glass out of Ben’s leg, he would’ve been much worse off, as prior to removing the glass fragment, Blake states that, “If you try walking with it, it could cause more damage.” If Blake hadn’t met Ben and Olie during San Andreas’ first act, it’s quite feasible none of them would have made it out of the entire calamity alive, something that Ben himself acknowledges at the end of the movie, stating, “It was more like, she was there for us.”

Finally, in addition to Ray and Blake Gaines, seismologist Dr. Lawrence Hayes has his ‘moments to shine’ in terms of making smart decisions when the earthquakes occur. For example, when the first of the quakes abruptly starts off, reporter Serena Johnson initially takes refuge in the doorway of an office, which would leave her vulnerable to falling debris; however, Hayes is quick to grab her by the hand and hurry her underneath a table whilst instructing everyone else present to, “Drop, cover, and hold on!” It is this course of action (which is repeated later when the second earthquake hits Caltech) that saves himself, Johnson, her cameraman Dylan, and two of Hayes’ students, Alexi and Phoebe, from possible injury or death. Additionally, following the conclusion of the first earthquake, Hayes’ group find themselves in need of a way to get a warning out to the rest of the people of California that the tectonic activity is anything but finished, but Johnson is quick to point out, “There’s no way to upload a signal.” While any other person facing this dilemma might’ve been at a loss for what to do next, Hayes is the one to recruit Caltech’s Media Lab students to hack into one of the media outlets so he and Johnson can broadcast a warning about the upcoming deadlier earthquake to not just Californians, but to the citizens of the rest of the United States; after all, in the broadcast, Hayes cautions, “It will be so big, that even though it’s happening here in California, you will feel it on the East Coast.” Had it not been for Hayes’ expertise and quick thinking, there’s a chance not all of the other four people with him (particularly Johnson and her cameraman) would have survived the whole ordeal or known how to get word out about the imminent, more dangerous earthquake.

According to a Journal of Education and Health Promotion article, “As emergencies and disasters, along with their destructive effects, are rising all over the world acquiring knowledge and its uses are regarded as the most effective way to prevent disasters or reduce its effects.” (Torani et al.) This is a statement that I found applicable to a sizable number of the characters in San Andreas, as their knowledge pertaining to how to handle the assorted disaster-based challenges they are confronted with proves to be invaluable in surviving the catastrophe as a whole. If it wasn’t for Ray, Blake, and Hayes’ savviness in navigating the earthquakes, tsunami, and the other challenges resulting from these natural disasters, several more innocent lives, such as those of Serena Johnson and the Taylor brothers, would have likely been lost. Daniel Riddick, however, is an exception to this, as his questionable actions led to Blake being put in serious danger as well as the death of the man Daniel threw aside to save his own skin, which could have been averted if he had someone with him who knew more than he did about how to manage the situations.

Works Cited

Becker, Julia S., et al. “The Role of Prior Experience in Informing and Motivating Earthquake Preparedness.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 22, June 2017, pp. 179–193., doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.03.006.

Peyton, Brad, director. San Andreas. Performance by Dwayne Johnson, Warner Bros. Pictures, 2015.

Torani, Sogand, et al. “The Importance of Education on Disasters and Emergencies: A Review Article.” Journal of Education and Health Promotion, vol. 8, 24 Apr. 2019, doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_262_18.



Thank you for reading, and I'll see you all in my next review (yes, I'm returning to my usual reviews with this analysis series now concluded)!

2012 (2009) analysis

I would argue that Roland Emmerich’s 2012 is about the contrast between pragmatism and compassion, and which of these two viewpoints humanity should take up in times of crisis. The dichotomy between these two ideologies is notably represented through many of the film’s characters, particularly White House Chief of Staff Carl Anheuser (portrayed by Oliver Platt) and geologist Dr. Adrian Helmsley (played by Chiwetel Ejiofor, who would go on to play Mordo in Marvel Studios' Doctor Strange), respectively.

For instance, after the key White House personnel arrive at the base in China where the arks meant to preserve the human race are located, Adrian notices that several of the people being let onto one of the arks are many of the world’s more powerful and wealthy individuals. He is quick to ask, “These people were chosen by geneticists?”, since Anheuser had previously established that, to select passengers for the arks, “We had geneticists determine the perfect gene pool we need to repopulate.” Anheuser responds that allowing these elites to buy passage onto the arks was necessary in order to raise the money needed to finance the structures’ construction in the first place. Although Adrian doesn’t approve of how morally ambiguous this method of fundraising is, Anheuser sees it as a means to an end (and thus pragmatic) for the sake of humanity’s survival.

On the other hand, there are multiple small-scale examples of humanity’s aptitude for compassion that are showcased throughout the first two thirds of the movie. For example, when a gargantuan earthquake begins wreaking havoc on California, Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) hurriedly manages to usher his ex-wife Kate and their kids to his limo to get to safety. While he could have simply left Kate’s boyfriend Gordon to die in the unfolding chaos (considering the uneasy terms the two men were on at the time), Jackson instead makes sure he gets in the car as well before finally escaping the rapidly deteriorating neighborhood. Later on, after the Curtis family, Gordon, and Tamara are abandoned by Yuri Karpov (who’d bought passage onto one of the arks for himself and his sons), the Buddhist monk Nima is made aware of the group’s presence via his grandmother. While he could’ve just kept driving to rendezvous with his brother Tenzin, Nima, upon spotting Jackson, is compassionate enough to instead stop the truck and allow the latter and the rest of his group to hitch a ride to Nima and his grandparents’ meetup point with Tenzin. When the group finally reach the rendezvous point, Tenzin initially objects to letting Jackson and co. accompany his family. This reluctance is implied to come from a sense of pragmatism, like Anheuser, as Tenzin states to his grandmother that, “My plan will not work for so many”. However, his grandmother insists that their family take Jackson’s whole group with them, having previously stated, “We are all children of the earth” and Tenzin eventually relents.

On a more meaningful note, in the film’s climax, it’s revealed that a massive tsunami will hit the base in less than half an hour, far sooner than originally thought. Anheuser gets the other world leaders to launch the arks ahead of time, even though countless people have not been able to board yet. Adrian, in an impromptu address to the heads of state, implores the leaders not to leave the stranded crowd of people behind, declaring, “To be human means to care for each other and civilization means to work together to create a better life. If that’s true, then there’s nothing human and nothing civilized about what we’re doing here.” Anheuser, however, pushes for the more pragmatic approach to their dilemma, citing the restricted number of resources as well as limited time as justifications for not letting the people onboard. Adrian, however, asserts that, “Everybody out there has died in vain if we start our future with an act of cruelty.” As risky as letting the thousands of people on board proves to be, Adrian stands by his convictions out of a sense of compassion for these imperiled people.

The Day After Tomorrow (2004) analysis

Welcome back to part 3 of my disaster movie analyses! I apologize for the large amount of time since I previously uploaded, I've been preoccupied with a number of things (e.g., my family and I being out of town for a week, my classwork, etc.), but having finally completed the last of my assignments for my remaining college classes, expect my upload schedule to be significantly more consistent. With that being said, on to my analysis of:

One of the most critiqued facets of Roland Emmerich’s 2004 disaster epic The Day After Tomorrow has been, among other things, its perceived lack of scientific accuracy. While I agree with Andrew Weaver’s (a climatologist for the University of Victoria), assertion that a new ice age (like that which overtakes much of Earth’s northern hemisphere by the end of the film) as a result of climate change isn’t possible, I would argue the other calamities that befall various parts of the world throughout The Day After Tomorrow do a solid job of displaying to viewers the possible chaos that could be unleashed if humanity doesn’t start changing its ways (in the context of environmental impacts) in the very near future. This is helped by the fact that there have been multiple instances of weather anomalies occurring in unlikely places in the recent past, albeit not quite on the scale seen in the movie.

For instance, early in The Day After Tomorrow, multiple tornados befall Los Angeles, California, something unheard of in the state’s history. These twisters end up devastating the city to the point that when they finally dissipate, the municipality arguably looks more post-apocalyptic than anything. While the state of California has yet to experience a phenomenon like this in real life, it has recently been dealing with numerous wildfires, of which climate change has played a major factor through what Hayley Smith of the Los Angeles Times refers to as, “The recent heat dome that simmered over the Pacific Northwest.” According to Smith, “One study found that that deadly heat wave would have been virtually impossible without human-caused climate change adding a few extra degrees.”

As mentioned before, while it’s not very likely parts of the U.S. will become frozen wastelands due to climate change as seen in the film, it’s not completely out of the question for there to be colder-than-usual weather in normally warm parts of the world. This was best seen this past February when Texas, of all states, was subjected to a historic winter storm as a result of what an article by Earth.org refers to as, “A blast of cold air coming out of Canada”. This abnormal weather resulted in power failures throughout the state and the deaths of 210 people, according to a recent article from The New York Times. While arguably not anywhere near as bad as the New York death toll suggested in The Day After Tomorrow, the winter storm crisis in Texas and the more recent talk about a 'Code Red for humanity' are clear indicators that what befell Dennis Quaid and Jake Gyllenhaal’s characters and their cohorts could very well happen to our world (albeit on a smaller scale and in different forms compared to what's displayed onscreen) if humanity doesn’t do more to combat climate change ASAP.

Twister (1996) analysis

Welcome back to my disaster movie analysis series, everyone! Today, we're taking a look at:

Upon its release in May of 1996, Jan de Bont’s Twister was seen by some critics as just another example of a ‘style over substance’ blockbuster, with the late Roger Ebert going so far as to declare, "You want loud, dumb, skillful, escapist entertainment? Twister works. You want to think? Think twice about seeing it." However, I would argue this film is more than just spectacle in that it acts as a cautionary tale of how passion, if not regulated, can escalate into downright obsession.

This is accomplished through the contrast between the characters of Jo Harding and Jonas Miller, respectively. Jo works alongside a motley, yet fiercely passionate and loyal, team who chase storms in a colorful assortment of automobiles, whereas Jonas spearheads a force made up largely of uniformed men in (mostly) matching black vehicles. While Jo’s team takes great, open delight in their tornado-chasing (with one of the team members even blasting music from a speaker mounted on his van as they advance on a tornado that’s recently formed), Jonas’ men come off as colder and more strictly professional (in terms of their onscreen activities), yet arguably just as driven.

The main point in which Jo separates herself as a character from Jonas becomes evident in the movie’s second act, when she and her estranged husband Bill’s truck they’d been using is knocked over, with the tornado data-gathering sensors scattered about on the ground. Jo, desperate to finally utilize her “Dorothy” contraption on the nearby tornado, begins trying in vain to retrieve the sensors, though Bill eventually manages to snap her out of this compulsive state by encouraging her to, “Look at what you’ve got right in front of ‘ya.” Although Bill subsequently clarifies that what Jo’s ‘got’ is him, I would argue that Bill also means that Jo has her team and her Aunt Meg, thus reminding her that she still has other things besides storm-chasing to live for; this ultimately gets Jo to see reason and ‘live to fight another day’. In the climax, meanwhile, Jonas, despite being warned against advancing close to a particularly massive tornado by Jo and Bill, is too blinded by his obsession with defeating them to listen to their cautioning and ends up paying for it with his life shortly afterwards. Jonas and what happens to him are an illustration of what might’ve befallen Jo had she not been able to temper her passion for storm-chasing with Bill’s help, as Jonas’ single-mindedness is what ultimately destroys him.

That finishes my analysis of Twister. I found this flick to be a substantial improvement over Earthquake; the 1996 film boasts effects that've aged better in comparison to those seen in Earthquake, a far more engaging cast (especially the dearly departed Bill Paxton and Philip Seymour Hoffman), and much more enthralling disaster sequences (in that as a Kansas native, they hit closer to 'home'). As such, I certainly recommend checking this movie out! See you all in the near future with my next analysis, this time of Roland Emmerich's return to the disaster genre known as The Day After Tomorrow!

Earthquake (1974) analysis

Welcome to the first of my analyses of 'natural disaster' movies! Today, we'll be taking a look at:

I would argue that Earthquake, released in 1974, is an illustration of how times of crisis, such as the eponymous disaster, are capable of people’s true nature manifesting in one of two ways. Either their better selves are put on full display, or their darker, more repulsive sides are enabled to be unleashed by the circumstances they’re confronted with.

A notable instance of such a calamitous situation bringing out the ‘best’ in someone can be seen in the actions of Sam Royce, the father-in-law of the main protagonist Stewart Graff. After the titular earthquake strikes Los Angeles, California, Sam and several of his employees find themselves trapped up in their now-inhospitable office building. With no readily available way down, Sam spearheads his employees in getting out a stored fire hose and tying it around an office chair to cobble together a makeshift elevator down to a safer floor. While he could easily make himself one of the first people to get to safety, Sam instead displays how altruistic he really is by instead seeing to it that every last one of his personnel gets to securer ground on the lower floor before he himself gets to safety. While Sam experiences a heart attack before he can join his workforce and ultimately succumbs to it later, he put the well-being of his employees before his own, showing viewers just how selfless of an individual he was.

Jody Joad, on the other hand, serves as a case of how dire circumstances can result in people’s viler impulses being pushed to the forefront. Early on, he dutifully answers the call for National Guard officers to assemble in anticipation of the earthquake and is later seen helping to navigate the consequences of the disaster. However, it isn’t too long before he begins to exploit his position of authority, enacting vengeance upon his housemates for their mockery of him (which was shown earlier in the film prior to the catastrophe) by gunning them all down, and becoming abusive towards Rosa, even assaulting her and comparing her to a ‘whore’. While he ultimately gets what’s coming to him when he’s shot dead by protagonist Lou Slade, Jody acts as an example of how bad situations are just as capable of bringing out the worst in some people as they are able to bring out the best in others.

That concludes my analysis of Earthquake; personally, I wouldn't call it my favorite of this type of film, but it has solid production design and effects, so I'd say to give it a shot if you want, just don't expect anything mind-blowing. Hope you enjoyed my look at Earthquake, and I'll see you all later this week with my analysis of 1996's Twister! 

Announcement regarding new content coming up

Hey everyone, just wanted to let you know that I'm currently in an online class known as Natural Disasters in Film; part of this class involves doing analyses of the films we're assigned to watch, so I figured my classwork would be perfect material for this blog! Hope you enjoy my coming analyses, and I'll see you all later today with the first analysis on the 1974 disaster film Earthquake, starring the late, great Charlton Heston!

Top 5 unpopular movie-based opinions/hot takes:

The term 'subjectivity' can be defined, according to Google, as, "The quality of being based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions"; as such, not everyone's perspectives on various facets of life will be the same, and this is no different when it comes to popular culture; here are my top 5 unpopular opinions or 'hot takes' pertaining to movies. Seeing as these stem from my perspective, there's a very good chance many of you won't agree with my picks; feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments, but please make sure to keep it civil. With that being said, on to the list!

5. I think Terminator: Dark Fate is the best of the post-Terminator 2 follow-ups. These days, it's a common opinion among Terminator fans that the series should've ended with 1991's beloved Terminator 2: Judgment Day, as 2003’s Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, the 2009 prequel Terminator: Salvation, and the 2015 ‘soft reboot’ Terminator: Genisys have all been subjected to varying levels of scrutiny. Even though it also faced controversy of its own (with some even condescendingly nicknaming it ‘Woke Fate’), I consider 2019’s Terminator: Dark Fate to be just what the franchise needed after the ultimately wasted potential that was Genisys! Firstly, Dark Fate is the first installment in the series since Judgment Day to have an R-rating, and the movie certainly benefits from it, particularly in regard to its action sequences, which come off as significantly more visceral in aesthetic and (arguably) tone compared to what was seen in its 2015 predecessor. Another thing Dark Fate has going for it is the return of not just Arnold Schwarzenegger as the T-800, but also Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor, reprising her role for the first time since Terminator: Salvation (in that movie, it was merely her voice that was used). Hamilton slips back into playing the character with little effort, as though nearly 30 years (that is, between the releases of Judgment Day and Dark Fate) barely even passed; the new characters, Natalia Reyes' Dani Ramos and Mackenzie Davis' Grace arguably could've used some additional 'work' (writing-wise) to give them more dimensionality and differentiate them from previous characters in the series (e.g., Kyle Reese from the original Terminator), but thankfully, the two actresses deliver believable onscreen performances that ought to help even casual viewers get invested in their characters to some degree. In addition, I wouldn't say they're the walking 'feminist propaganda' that some detractors claim them to be; after all, there's not one, but two memorable male characters to 'balance' things out in this movie (the villainous REV-9 and Schwarzenegger's T-800), with the latter receiving a fair amount of characterization whilst also being the 'lens' through which the concept of what'd become of a Terminator after completing its primary mission (e.g., 'offing' whoever it was sent to 'terminate') is explored. While this is an intriguing idea which one could argue feels in-line with some of the notions examined in Judgment Day, I do think more screen time could've been allotted to fleshing out this concept further. While Terminator: Dark Fate is certainly anything but perfect and may pale in comparison to the first two James Cameron-directed films, it's still all-around a step in the right direction compared to the last few movies, and I'm glad I saw it during its time in theaters!

4. I find Captain Marvel to be significantly over-hated. Upon its release in 2019, Captain Marvel proved to be a rather divisive movie; with the titular character herself being among the greatest points of contention; some thought of her as being a worthy addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (or MCU) character roster, while others decried her as little more than a dull, un-engaging, and overpowered 'Mary Sue' (though arguably nowhere to the same extent as Rey from the Star Wars sequel trilogy). However, both times I saw it in theaters, I found myself engaged in/enjoying what was presented onscreen! Maybe I'm biased since I was already a longtime Marvel Studios fan at the time of watching Captain Marvel, but I don't think this flick deserves the sheer amount of criticism it's been subjected to in the 2 years since its theatrical run. For one, Oscar-winner Brie Larson (who plays the titular character) and Samuel L. Jackson have terrific chemistry with one another, and it shows in their characters' interactions, making for a character dynamic on par with the likes of fellow MCU duos Rocket and Groot (from the Guardians of the Galaxy series) and Sam Wilson and Bucky Barnes (as seen in the Disney+ Marvel Studios show The Falcon and the Winter Soldier) in terms of memorability! In addition, I found Captain Marvel herself, Carol Danvers, to be a rather over-hated main protagonist; granted, she's no Iron Man, Black Widow, or Captain America (in terms of character depth, arguably speaking), but she still has enough charisma to get viewers to care about her (and yes, she does smile or at least smirk more than once throughout the movie, contrary to what some may claim). In addition, the supporting characters manage to be interesting enough to get invested in, thanks to both the writing behind them and especially the talented actors bringing them to life (major examples including Lashana Lynch and Akira Akbar as Maria and Monica Rambeau, respectively, as well as Ben Mendelsohn as Talos). In general, while Captain Marvel certainly isn't on the level of such 'solo' MCU films as Iron Man (as in the 2008 original) or Captain America: The Winter Soldier, I nonetheless consider it a solid flick worth checking out!

3. I am actually able to find enjoyment in the Michael Bay-directed Transformers movies (at least the first 4), even Age of Extinction. I'll go ahead and admit it up-front, this may not be the most controversial of opinions these days (as in the past, I've encountered a decent number of people who share my opinion), but seeing what a 'whipping boy' the Transformers franchise (not counting 2018's Bumblebee, which is currently the only live-action Transformers movie to have a 'Fresh' rating on Rotten Tomatoes) has become among critics in particular, I figured this perspective could be considered 'unpopular' enough to warrant a spot on this list. Whilst it's no secret I found a lot to like in the series' 2014 installment, Age of Extinction (which I previously did a review on), the other installments have their own merits as well. Firstly, if there's anything people can agree on positively regarding these movies, it's their visual effects, primarily in regard to how the titular characters were realized, courtesy of the VFX (short for 'visual effects') company Industrial Light & Magic (ILM for short). It's hard to think of any other company to bring the iconic Autobots and Decepticons to life on the big screen, as ILM's artists' craftsmanship when it comes to the numerous parts each Transformer is made up of, as well as making them move in a way that seems believable (among other things), is something most people seem to take for granted these days. To put this in perspective, in CinemaWins' video on the first Transformers, he points out how Optimus Prime, "Had over 10,000 moving digital parts"! In 2009's Revenge of the Fallen, the gargantuan 'combiner' Decepticon Devastator, according to VFX supervisor Scott Farrar in an article by syfy.com, "Is made up of upwards of 80,000 parts. The only thing that saves time is the camera position. The animators only have to transform the parts that are visible on screen." Suffice to say, while the screenplays for these movies (particularly those of the follow-ups to the 2007 original) definitely could've had more time dedicated to refining them, the visual effects are easily a highlight worthy of respect! Another facet of the series I find noteworthy are the number of memorable pieces of music courtesy of composer Steve Jablonsky; the first film gave us such tracks as "Autobots", "Optimus", "Optimus vs. Megatron", and the beloved "Arrival to Earth", Revenge of the Fallen has "Forest Battle" (which accompanies the eponymous action sequence), Dark of the Moon gave us "Battle" and "It's Our Fight", and such pieces as "Lockdown" and "Dinobot Charge" wouldn't exist if Age of Extinction wasn't made. As disappointing as I found 2017's Transformers: The Last Knight to be, it also gave us "Calling All Autobots" (which plays during one of the final scenes of the movie). Although fans of the 1980s cartoon (part of an era that's been dubbed 'G1') will likely disagree with me, I found the designs for the main Transformers to be visually distinctive and creative, especially in regard to the Dinobots in Age of Extinction; while many of the alien robots may not resemble their G1 counterparts, I personally didn't mind such differences; granted, the first live-action film was my introduction to the Transformers brand as a whole (making me somewhat biased), but, for example, the hulking and jagged profile Megatron possessed in the first two movies in particular seem rather fitting for such an intimidating and homicidal alien warlord, whilst effectively communicating to viewers (especially younger ones) that, as obvious as it may be, he's one of the 'bad guys'! Finally, the voice casts assembled to breath life into the 'robots in disguise' is to be commended, as they've showcased the talents of voice actors like Jess Harnell (aka Wakko Warner in Animaniacs) as Ironhide, Charlie Adler (the ill-fated Gazeem in Aladdin) as Starscream, Tom Kenny (the title character of Spongebob Squarepants) as Wheelie, and the legendary Frank Welker (Scooby-Doo, the Cave of Wonders in Aladdin, etc.) as Soundwave and Devastator (among others). Although Welker may be known as the voice of the G1 incarnation of Megatron (and reprised the role in both Age of Extinction (as Galvatron) and The Last Knight), and most certainly fits the role, I really enjoyed Hugo Weaving (Agent Smith in The Matrix and Elrond in The Lord of the Rings trilogy) as Megatron in the first three flicks; to quote CinemaWins, Weaving manages to "Add a whole new level of dominance with that ground-shaking voice." Said voice fits the infamous leader of the Decepticons nicely and combined with said Transformer's imposing profile, makes for quite the onscreen adversary! Finally, if there's one thing Michael Bay and co. did right, it was getting the one and only Peter Cullen to reprise his iconic role as Optimus Prime, and it's a good thing too, as Cullen proves multiple times throughout the series just why he's considered the quintessential voice for the beloved Autobot leader! Overall, whilst the Bay-directed Transformers movie franchise is no Star Wars (by which I'm referring to the original trilogy), I think the criminally underrated YouTuber (whose content I strongly recommend checking out, especially if you're a Jurassic Park fan) Shinobi-03 put it best: "I know the series has problems, but then again, what movie doesn't have problems?"

2. I think Matthew Broderick was a terribly unwise casting choice for older Simba in the original Lion King, and find Donald Glover (from the 2019 version) to be a better fit. As was the case with numerous other young viewers, Walt Disney Animation's 1994 phenomenon The Lion King was a major part of my youth, thanks to its renowned narrative, animation that still holds up remarkably well to this day, an immersive score by the one and only Hans Zimmer (which garnered the composer his first Oscar for Best Original Score), and iconic characters. While this movie has multiple instances of excellent casting (e.g., the voice of Darth Vader himself, James Earl Jones, as Mufasa, Jeremy Irons as the duplicitous Scar, and Nathan Lane & Ernie Sabella as Timon & Pumbaa), the casting department wasn’t completely flawless in their selections; case in point, Matthew Broderick of Ferris Bueller’s Day Off fame as the grown version of the main protagonist Simba. While there are certain instances where he’s okay (at best) in his portrayal, the YouTuber Jambareeqi arguably puts it best: “A lot of the time, he is sounding a bit stilted, awkward, and insincere; it’s just how he reads lines.” Perhaps the most egregious showcase of just how miscast Broderick was can be found in the last third of the film, during the “I killed Mufasa” scene following Simba’s return to the Pride Lands; Broderick's line reading (particularly following Scar foolishly admitting to being responsible for Mufasa’s untimely demise) is arguably facepalm-inducing in terms of how lackluster it is, especially when compared to the more appropriate-sounding voiceover of Jonathan Taylor Thomas (of Home Improvement fame) as the younger version of Simba from the first half of the movie. On the other hand, while the 2019 version of The Lion King has gotten all sorts of controversy over such things as if it was even necessary to make in the first place, one thing I prefer about this version over its predecessor is Donald Glover (aka Childish Gambino, who was also a cast member of the show Community) as Simba; while there could've been other alternatives for the role, and Glover admittedly isn't on the level of Phil LaMarr (aka the title character of Samurai Jack and John Stewart/Green Lantern in the animated show Justice League and its sequel series Justice League Unlimited, to name a few roles), Keith David (aka Goliath in the cult classic show Gargoyles and Dr. Facilier in Disney’s criminally under-appreciated The Princess and the Frog), or Kevin Michael Richardson (Joker in The Batman, Trigon in Teen Titans, Captain Gantu in the Lilo & Stitch franchise, and Bulkhead in Transformers: Prime, among many other roles) in terms of voice acting talent, Glover felt like a more suitable casting choice all-around compared to his predecessor, especially helped by him sounding rather believably like an older version of JD McCrary (who voiced Simba as a cub in the 2019 movie).  

1. I find Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse overrated. Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse was the first non-Disney (or Pixar) animated feature since 2011's Rango to win the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature and was just what Sony Pictures Animation needed after the embarrassment that was The Emoji Movie. With that being said, what's my issue with this critically acclaimed comic book movie (besides what the website TV Tropes refers to as 'Hype Backlash')? Well firstly, despite its incredibly well-realized art style and animation, the action sequences, specifically the fight scenes, feel arguably too fast in terms of their choreography, as the speed at which the characters move can make it difficult to follow exactly what's going on, and thus hard to get fully invested & appreciate the choreography. If the filmmakers had slowed things down a bit, it'd be easier to make out what's happening onscreen, and thus less difficult to get 'sucked in'. In addition, for a movie that Rotten Tomatoes described as having, "Bold storytelling", I had trouble finding anything particularly 'bold' about the narrative (besides maybe the main antagonist's reason for his multi-dimension-scale meddling). Although Into the Spiderverse has received a substantial amount of praise for its music, besides the background music playing during "What's Up Danger" and the Prowler's awesomely ominous theme music, I've found it hard to name any other major musical bits that I'd consider 'memorable' (for instance, Post Malone's "Sunflower", while not 'bad' per se, simply isn't my 'cup of tea'). Finally, while the characters are quite well-casted (with standouts including Nicholas Cage's amusingly over-dramatic vocal portrayal of Spider-Man Noir and comedian John Mulaney arguably sounding like he'd be right at home playing a Looney Tunes character in his voiceover for Spider-Ham), I found various characters in need of additional 'work' in order to properly live up to the considerable praise they've received; for instance, the arc of Gwen Stacy, aka Spider-Woman or Spider-Gwen, a name given by the character's fans (voiced by Hailee Steinfeld from Bumblebee, which, funny enough, came out the same month and year as this movie) and the evolution of her relationship with main protagonist Miles Morales could've progressed in a way that felt more organic/'earned' compared to what we got, and the supporting 'Spider-people' (Spider-Man Noir, Peni Parker & SP//dr, and Spider-Ham) could've had more to them to make them more distinctive from the main 3 'Spider-people' (Miles, Peter B. Parker, and Gwen). Granted, despite all this, I haven't seen Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse in its entirety (not counting bits & pieces I've glimpsed online) since I saw it in theaters back in December 2018. As such, perhaps a viewing of CinemaWins' (a YouTube channel which I HIGHLY recommend checking out) "Everything GREAT About Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse!" video could change my viewpoint of this movie for the better, and warrant a rewatch, this time with a new perspective!

That concludes my list of unpopular movie opinions/hot takes. Like I said at the beginning, don't hesitate to leave your thoughts (regarding any unpopular opinions you may have, among other things) in the comments, but please make sure to keep it civil; after all, there's enough discourse in the world as it is presently! Thank you again for reading, and I'll see you all next time!

Raya and the Last Dragon review

Is Walt Disney Animation Studios’ first original film since 2016’s Moana yet another worthy entry in the Disney Animated Canon, or is it deserving of little more than petrification by the Druun? Time to find out as we take a look at:

I'd been anticipating Raya and the Last Dragon since I saw the promotional trailers and having finally seen it (via Disney+ Premier Access), I'm happy to report it's quite the appealing fantasy adventure, whilst being much more than just simple escapism! With that being said, let's look at what makes this flick worth taking 'the first step'!

Raya and the Last Dragon takes place in the fictional Southeast Asian land of Kumandra, which is divided into five nations named after various parts of the dragons their inhabitants revere (Heart, Fang, Talon, Spine, and Tail). The Heart Land’s warrior princess, Raya, seeks to find the last dragon, Sisu, to put an end to the plague known as the Druun (which turns its victims to stone, multiplying in numbers as a result). Even with Sisu by her side, can Raya save Kumandra, or will it take more than just the last dragon and the fabled Dragon Gem to finally stop the nigh-relentless Druun?

This flick admittedly may not have the most groundbreaking of premises or plot structures, but like its fellow Walt Disney Animation movie, 2016’s Zootopia, Raya and the Last Dragon shines in how the story its world unfolds in is applicable to current events (e.g., the divides in the U.S. involving such matters as right-wing vs. left-wing politics, pro-vaccine vs. anti-vaccine, etc.) as well as to humans on a societal scale. Much like in today’s world, at the time the main storyline begins, the people of Kumandra are starkly divided against one another, to the point that Raya’s initial modus operandi can be summed up as, in her words, “Don’t trust anyone”. However, despite sounding incredibly pessimistic, the film thankfully avoids going too far via its message of the importance of trust. While this may sound like something out of My Little Pony at first glance, what makes such a message worth listening to/’picking up on’ is how applicable it is, especially in times of division like what numerous viewers (e.g., those from the U.S.) are most likely going through. Granted, the message isn’t that one should be trusting toward everyone, as the film does make sure to show the consequences of such naïveté, but it’s also made clear that not trusting anyone isn’t beneficial, either. 

Essentially, this flick appears to advocate in favor of a healthy middle ground; while trust shouldn’t be given with reckless abandon, not affording others some degree of it or not even making an attempt at establishing trust in the first place (such as by providing a gift as a token of good faith, as Sisu proves to be fond of throughout the film) isn’t any better, as trust is a key foundation in forming unity, whether it be between a few individuals (like the movie’s unlikely fellowship of protagonists) or between whole nations. Raya’s father, Chief Benja, sums it up best: “Someone has to take the first step.” Raya and the Last Dragon’s message of the significance of trust may not be communicated in the most subtle of ways, but it’s a message that’s so desperately needed in today’s tumultuous and polarized world that there’s a good chance it wouldn’t be as effective if it weren’t so blunt; to quote John Doe from the 1995 crime thriller Se7en, “Wanting people to listen, you can't just tap them on the shoulder anymore. You have to hit them with a sledgehammer, and then you'll notice you've got their strict attention.”

When it comes to the cast assembled to bring the characters of Raya and the Last Dragon to life, I’m happy to say Disney once again continued their streak of terrific casting in terms of the actors and actresses assembled for this feature film! 

Nora Lum, better known as Awkwafina, voices the titular ‘last dragon’ known as Sisu, and suffice to say, I can see why some viewers have compared the actress’ voiceover portrayal to that of Eddie Murphy as Mushu from Mulan (the 1998 animated original, not the wasted potential that was the 2020 remake) and the late great Robin Williams’ Genie from Aladdin! I’d previously gained something of a familiarity with what Awkwafina was capable of via her scene-stealing supporting role in 2018’s Crazy Rich Asians (funny enough, Adele Lim, one of the screenwriters behind Crazy Rich Asians, helped pen the script for this movie!) and she brings arguably the same sharp-witted comedic timing to her voiceover performance as Sisu, with some of the most noteworthy lines of the film standing out thanks to Awkwafina’s performance! Granted, despite the actress' contributions, not all Sisu's humorous lines 'hit home' (for lack of a better term), but these verbal misfires are thankfully few and far between. Awkwafina succeeds in providing her character with bountiful energy while simultaneously having enough restraint in her vocal portrayal to avoid coming off as obnoxious. This skillfulness also shines through during scenes with a more downcast tone, as Awkwafina manages to convey the analogous emotions called for with solid believability, thus enhancing Sisu’s emotional depth and in turn making the water dragon that much more worth investing in. One of Raya and the Last Dragon’s directors, Don Hall (who previously helmed 2014’s Academy Award-winning Big Hero 6), told CBR.com, “Sisu was written with Awkwafina in mind, and I can't imagine somebody else as Sisu. Awkwafina is Sisu. Sisu is Awkwafina”, and I can’t exactly argue with him!

However, Sisu is merely the deuteragonist of this flick, so let’s cover the actress responsible for bringing the main heroine to life! Kelly Marie Tran, who previously came to mainstream attention with her supporting role in the divisive Star Wars sequel trilogy, voices Raya herself, but funny enough, she wasn’t the first choice for this key role; initially, Cassie Steele was supposed to be the one to play Raya, but in August 2020, Tran was revealed to be taking her place. Despite this, I think it’s safe to say Tran was the right person to replace Steele, as she infuses Raya with an aura of world-weariness that helps viewers to ‘buy’ what a distrustful cynic the princess of the Heart Land has become (which is rather justifiable, considering what it’s revealed she’s been through) by the time the main narrative starts. Despite this, Tran’s portrayal is certainly not all pessimistic, as she communicates the various dimensions of emotions her character displays (e.g., confident, elated, witty, etc.) in a way that feels convincing. She may have started her career with live-action roles, but as the eponymous protagonist of Raya and the Last Dragon, Tran shows audiences she also has quite the promising future in the world of voice acting!

Although Raya and Sisu have undeniable chemistry thanks to Tran and Awkwafina's voiceovers (as well as the script by Lim and Qui Nguyen), it felt as though there weren't enough moments involving the two of them bonding/connecting with one another (though this may be a matter of debate/opinion); if they had one or two additional scenes to display how their relationship (platonically speaking) was evolving, the movie as a whole could've benefitted further; thankfully, these two major characters still possess enough of a believable dynamic (once again, in large part thanks to their actresses) as is to enable viewers to get behind them and their mission!

Add in such names as Gemma Chan (who, like Awkwafina, was also a member of the cast of Crazy Rich Asians) as the Fang princess (and nemesis of Raya) Namaari, Benedict Wong (who played the similarly named Wong in Doctor Strange and reprised the role in both Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame) as the ‘gentle giant’ Spine warrior Tong, and Daniel Dae Kim (who’s previously had voiceover roles in hit TV shows such as the beloved Avatar: The Last Airbender and its sequel series The Legend of Korra, as well as the animated Justice League series) as Raya’s cherished father Chief Benja, to name a few, and you have a talented cast that breathes life into their onscreen characters and play a key role in making them well-realized and engaging!

It’s been nearly 16 years since Walt Disney Animation made their first foray into full-length computer animation, and suffice to say, the progress their animators have made in honing their skills in this type of animation are on clear display in Raya and the Last Dragon! The amount of thoroughness packed into things like the water (particularly as seen in the ‘running on raindrops’ scene) or characters themselves is definitely something to admire, such as in the below image from early in the movie:

There's a clear and painstaking attention to detail present in this still, particularly in the context of the hair on both Raya and Sisu. The fact that one can make out multiple strips of hair on the two of them (more-so on Sisu, though this can be justified by her glowing thanks to the Dragon Gem shard she's holding granting her such an ability) is testament to the meticulousness on the part of Disney’s animators!
Another visual area this movie shines in is the 5 lands that make up Kumandra itself, which each have their own distinctive aesthetic; Tail, for example, is an arid desert environment peppered with mushroom-like rock structures:

Raya’s homeland of Heart, on the other hand, is teeming with lush, tropical greenery topped off with a visually unique mountain, as seen below: 

This variety in the settings enables all 5 territories of Kumandra to stand apart from one another, in turn making for an adventure that feels like it's unfolding in an expansive, yet legitimate 'world' (since our own world also has different environments depending on the countries or continents in question)! While I wish more time was spent in these 5 lands to further flesh them and their inhabitants out further, one could argue the fact that I have this kind of strong response to begin with is testament to the animators' abilities when it comes to realizing a compelling fictional world onscreen! With all this being said, Raya and the Last Dragon is a shining example of how Walt Disney Animation has arguably mastered the art of computer animation on a level comparable to that of Pixar Animation Studios!

The composer behind the music of Raya and the Last Dragon is James Newton Howard, who's previously worked with Disney on films such as Dinosaur, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and Treasure Planet (and, as mentioned on my Top 5 ranking of movie composers, also collaborated with Hans Zimmer on the first two installments of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy). While Howard's score may not be on the level of something like John Powell's scores for DreamWorks' How to Train Your Dragon (another animated fantasy film involving dragons) and its two follow-ups, there's still plenty to love about his work on Raya! This movie's soundtrack is able to be quite unique-sounding thanks to its incorporation of such instruments from Southeast Asia as lutes and chimes, as well as hand drums, skin drums, and rattles, among other instruments. In addition, a chorus can be heard at certain points in the score, such as the tracks "Prologue", "Fleeing From Tail", and the beginning portion of "Storming Fang", to great effect (especially in the case of the latter track). However, a track definitely worth mentioning has to be "Running on Raindrops" (which gets a reprise in the equally, if not even more, memorable "Return") which, turns out, was the first theme Howard wrote for this movie! While the scene it accompanies is visually striking, "Running on Raindrops" greatly enhances what happens onscreen thanks to the enchanting aura it produces, plausibly in the same way as "The Egg Travels" from Dinosaur before it did! While this soundtrack may not be my favorite of Howard's works (Dinosaur holds that title), his work for Raya and the Last Dragon is nonetheless definitely worth listening to and serves as yet another thing the film has going in its favor!

While it certainly has a few 'kinks' that could've been ironed out prior to release, Raya and the Last Dragon is a fantasy adventure film which proves Disney is anything but out of ideas (as some claim is the case)! With likable characters that are well-acted enough to get readily invested in, excellent animation, a compelling setting in the form of the world of Kumandra, and a universally applicable message that's arguably more timely now than ever, this is definitely a movie worth supporting, whether it be in the form of watching it in theaters (provided you feel comfortable doing so, given the ongoing pandemic, of course) or watching from the comfort of your home via Disney+ Premier Access! 

Top 5 Film Composers

When it comes to movies, one thing that can amplify a given work is its musical score (aka 'soundtrack'); while the music a composer produces is meant to accompany what happens in a film, there are a select few of these artists whose music manages to elevate what's taking place onscreen, to the point that just hearing a part of the score automatically enables one to recall the scene that it accompanies! With this being said, today, we're going to give shout-outs to those composers whose music has left an indelible impact on my experiences as a movie-goer. Not everyone may agree with my choices and the order in which I've listed them; despite this, please feel free to list your top favorite composers in the comments below. Without further to do, let's begin the list!

5. Ludwig Göransson 

This Swedish composer made the list thanks to his Academy Award-winning work on Marvel Studios' 2018 smash hit Black Panther and his musical contributions to the Disney+ TV show The Mandalorian. What separates Göransson's compositions from those of his contemporaries is his choice of instruments (e.g., a flute and drums for The Mandalorian's theme, as well as what's known as a 'talking drum' for the track "Wakanda" from Black Panther, among other examples) which are often radically different from what one would expect from a film score. This 'experimentalism' that Göransson brings to his projects is what made him stand out enough to warrant inclusion on this list.

 

Disclaimer: I know The Mandalorian isn't a movie, but it is a show set in the Star Wars (which is obviously a movie franchise) galaxy and has some feature film-level production values, so I therefore figured alluding to the series as one of Göransson's standout projects was okay to do.

4. Steve Jablonsky 

Steve Jablonsky is an American composer whom I know best for his contributions to the Transformers franchise (the ones helmed by Michael Bay, as Jablonsky sadly didn't return to do the score for the 2018 reboot of the movie series known as Bumblebee). And I know what some of you might be thinking, 'He worked on those blots of cinema? How could he be on this list, then?!?' Although the quality of the Bay-directed Transformers movies is certainly up for debate, one facet of them I think everyone can agree was decent was the scores! For the first film from 2007, for example, Jablonsky gave us such tracks as "Autobots", "The All Spark", "Optimus", "Soccent Attack", "Optimus vs. Megatron", and of course, "Arrival to Earth" (arguably the track viewers are most likely to remember from this flick). As divisive as the subsequent movies may be, they still have pieces of music that manage to stand out in big ways; these include "Forest Battle" from Revenge of the Fallen, "Battle" and "It's Our Fight" from Dark of the Moon, "Autobots Reunite", "Lockdown" (the theme music for the eponymous Cybertronian antagonist), and "Dinobot Charge" from Age of Extinction, and even "Calling All Autobots" from The Last Knight. Suffice to say, as someone whose introduction to the Transformers franchise was through the movie franchise that began all the way back in 2007, I, along with many other viewers, owe a lot to Jablonsky for composing scores that are 'more than meets the eye'!

 

Before we move on to the next entry, I just wanted to make a disclaimer: I was torn over which of the following 2 composers would take the #3 and #2 spot (respectively), so let's just consider the next two entries as interchangeable (in that they may switch from #3 to #2 on my list or vice versa depending on how I feel at a given time). With that, let's move on to my #3 entry!

3. John Powell

John Powell first came to my attention with his Oscar-nominated score for 2010's How to Train Your Dragon and has since continued to win me over with his soundtracks for the second and third installments of the How to Train Your Dragon trilogy, as well as his prior scores for 2006's Ice Age: The Meltdown (taking over for David Newman, who was the composer for the 2002 original) and 2009's Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs. What makes Powell's compositions so impactful lies in how they capture the 'mood' of whatever's unfolding onscreen whilst managing to sound memorable to the point that viewers find themselves humming certain musical pieces even after finishing a movie Powell was the composer for; what I especially like about Powell's work is his smart utilization of vocalists/choirs for various parts of his scores, which can enhance the existing music they accompany by either providing a sense of grandness or a foreboding/eerie aura, thus providing for an even more immersive audio-based experience. With all this in mind, John Powell is easily one of the most underrated composers working today, who is quite overdue for an Oscar!

2. John Williams

Of course I couldn't make a list of my favorite composers without including this living legend! John Williams has rightfully earned his reputation as a titan of film scoring, known for his numerous collaborations with equally renowned director Steven Spielberg on such projects as Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, as well as the beloved Indiana Jones movie series. However, what I personally know Williams for is his musical contributions to a little saga readers might know as:

In addition to being the mastermind behind the legendary score for George Lucas' beloved original trilogy (which ran from 1977 to 1983), Williams' music also graced audiences' ears in the prequel trilogy, with such unforgettable pieces as "Duel of the Fates" from Episode I - The Phantom Menace, "Across the Stars" from Episode II - Attack of the Clones, and "Battle of the Heroes" from Episode III - Revenge of the Sith practically branding themselves into audiences' psyches. Although what Williams gave us in the sequel trilogy was (arguably) rather forgettable, it wasn't without its highlights either, such as "Rey's Theme", "March of the Resistance", and what I call the 'First Order/Kylo Ren theme', which all debuted in The Force Awakens (which reigns as my personal favorite of the sequel trilogy as of now). In addition to Star Wars, I also know Williams for his work on the first two installments of the Jurassic Park franchise (the 1993 original of the same name and its 1997 sequel, The Lost World: Jurassic Park), particularly the theme music for said films. With such a decades-long career and 5 Academy Awards under his belt, there's a darn good reason John Williams has made it so far up my list! 

 

Despite such a musical legacy that's given audiences so many memorable scores, though, who could possibly top this musical wizard? That brings us to my #1 pick:

1. Hans Zimmer

As iconic as John Williams may be, Hans Zimmer claims the top spot on this list because of the monumental impact his music had on my youth. Having produced the scores for such staples of my childhood as The Lion King, the Pirates of the Caribbean series, and the criminally underrated 2002 DreamWorks Animation flick Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, Zimmer's music alone contributed to making these and numerous other films he's worked on that much more special for me growing up. Even in more recent times, Zimmer has managed to prove he can still make engrossing pieces of music, as seen with his impressive work on the Kung Fu Panda trilogy (funny enough, he scored the first two films in the series alongside the previously-mentioned John Powell before composing by himself for the third installment), as well as the utterly epic new theme for Wonder Woman he (alongside fellow composer Tom Holkenborg, aka Junkie XL) crafted for the heroine's appearance in 2016's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. If that wasn't enough, Zimmer is also the owner of the film score company Remote Control Productions; its members include the aforementioned Steve Jablonsky and John Powell, as well as such talented composers as Tyler Bates (composer of both Guardians of the Galaxy movies and the John Wick trilogy), Ramin Djawadi (who's composed for 2008's Iron Man, Guillermo Del Toro's Pacific Rim, and the hit TV show Game of Thrones),  Harry-Gregson Williams (composer behind the Shrek franchise and the film adaptation of The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, among other projects), and James Newton Howard (whose work includes the 2000 Disney animated feature Dinosaur, the 2005 Peter Jackson-directed remake of King Kong, and the first two films of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy, which he worked with Zimmer on, as well as the more recent Raya and the Last Dragon). With all this under his belt, Hans Zimmer has, and continues to, have a profound influence on my life, and I don't think I'd want it any other way, hence his place as my #1 favorite composer!

So, there's my list of my top film composers. If you'd put anyone different on the list or want to share your own list/other thoughts, please feel free to do so in the form of comments. Thanks for reading!

Mulan 2020 quick-view

Welcome to the first of my ‘quick-views’, where I examine movies on a (somewhat) more condensed and smaller scale (compared to the usual length of my normal reviews). Today, we’ll be finding out, does this 2020 remake live up to the 1998 Disney animated feature that came before it, or does it bring dishonor upon its predecessor as well as the line of live-action remakes it’s part of?

When it comes to my experience with the original 1998 animated film, which starred Ming-Na Wen (who was more recently in The Mandalorian) as Mulan, I recall watching it several years ago and did like it, but I wouldn’t consider it one of my all-time favorite Disney films, either. With that being said, when I saw some of the promotional media for the remake, I was cautiously optimistic, as while I don’t recall it being a remake everyone was clamoring for, at the same time, I saw potential for it, as unlike its predecessor, the 2020 version of Mulan was doing away with musical numbers and had a cast of (mostly) Chinese-born actors, thus lending a more ‘genuine’ (for lack of a better term) aesthetic compared to its animated predecessor.

Having watched it at last (via Disney+) over the past weekend, I’d overall describe the 2020 version of Mulan as something of a mixed bag (to put it nicely); while it thankfully manages to avoid being merely a carbon copy of the 1998 original (something the remakes of Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King have been accused of), the majority of the characters come off as rather stiff and unmemorable, with the exceptions of Commander Tung (thanks to being brought to life by talented martial artist Donnie Yen of Rogue One: A Star Wars Story fame) and the witch Xianniang, in large part due to her backstory and unique combat style. While the cast try to do what they can with their portrayals, they likely could’ve delivered something truly special if they were provided with better directing for their performances. Mulan seeks to examine women’s roles in society, which is certainly a fascinating topic to scrutinize taking into account such social organizations as the ‘#MeToo’ movement that’ve emerged in recent times. However, the movie arguably wastes this concept in that there are multiple instances where the issue of women’s roles is handled in a decisively less than subtle manner.

 Thankfully, this version of Mulan isn’t all bad, as there are certainly two areas where it makes a positive impact: Firstly, there’s the cinematography; this has to be one of, if not the most, visually striking live-action movies Disney has produced in a long time, as the distinctive visuals of the Chinese landscape are spectacularly realized courtesy of cinematographer Mandy Walker: 

On the other hand, Mulan also shines in its action sequences, whether it be the villainous Böri Khan’s attack on an imperial garrison, the various forms of training Mulan and her fellow soldiers undergo, or the large-scale battle between Mulan’s contingent and Khan’s Rouran forces. What makes these set pieces distinct is the kinetic choreography used to bring the sequences to life onscreen, which involves moves (e.g., running along or even up walls, kicking spears out of midair at enemies, quickly maneuvering around on horseback to fire arrows while facing backwards) that wouldn’t be out of place in Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, yet don’t seem that absurd given the movie’s fantastical atmosphere. With this being said, however, there were multiple instances where it was somewhat problematic trying to make out the choreography being performed onscreen or blows being dealt between combatants. While one could argue that this is to avoid the pushing the violence past what a PG-13 rating would allow, keep in mind that Disney has been able to get away with displaying some nasty stuff in their live-action films before, with the Pirates of the Caribbean movies being chief examples of this (though the PG-13 rating was also likely justified due to the potential nightmare fuel brought about by the hideously grotesque Flying Dutchman crewmembers and the Kraken from the second film in the series, Dead Man's Chest, for instance); as such, I feel that certain parts of Mulan’s action sequences could’ve been redone to ensure what happens onscreen is discernible from start to finish.

In general, Mulan, while being far from the worst live-action film to come from Disney, is nonetheless a clear example of squandered potential thanks to its forgettable characters, a message about women’s roles in a male-dominated society that has the subtlety of a raging avalanche, and action sequences that needed more ‘polishing’ to truly glimmer. Despite this, if you’re not a fan of musicals (which the 1998 Mulan falls under), you might find some enjoyment in the 2020 retelling, as it’s arguably less padded-out than its predecessor due to not having any songs to cram in. While nowhere as insulting or unbearable as something like The Emoji Movie or The Last Airbender (I'm referring to the 2010 disgrace of an adaptation, not the beloved show), I’d highly recommend checking out the 2016 remake of The Jungle Book if you want to watch an instance of a Disney remake done right; to close out this more condensed version of my regular reviews, here’s the one and only Eddie Murphy as Mushu (in a memorable scene from the original 1998 film) to sum up the 2020 version of Mulan in a nutshell when compared to its animated counterpart: