Review: Toy Story 4

Toy Story 4 (Spoilers. No seriously, SPOILERS.)
Cert: 12A / 100 mins / Dir. Josh Cooley / Trailer



Well, the rule of sitcoms has always been that after the difficult third series, you just make a movie where you send the characters on holiday. And since the powers-that-be have started doing that for animated movies now, who are Pixar to argue?

SHORT

Toy Story 4 picks up some short amount of time after the third entry, with young Bonnie now the custodian of the toys and about to start kindergarten. When she fashions a new pal, Forky, made from pipe cleaners and a plastic spork, he's slightly neurotic although begins to fit in with Woody, Buzz and the gang. But things go awry during a road trip when Forky becomes lost, Woody goes on an adventure to rescue him, and meets an old friend in the process...

Clocking in almost a quarter of a century after the first entry, Pixar's fourth full-length chapter in the Toy Story series can hardly be accused of being a quick cash-in. The studio's quality levels are (usually) high, and they're one of the few safe bets when it comes to animated entertainment - not only working to ensure the film takes all the time it needs to be created, but also that it tells a story worth watching.

BANG

Concentrating more on high-adventure this time rather than heart-melting nostalgia, the animation here is better than ever (even if Andy still looks weird), with the photo-realistic scenery and smoothly-moving, well sculpted and weighted models*¹ you'd expect from an industry leader. The pacing is brisk, the stakes are reliably high, Andrew Stanton and Staphany Folsom's script is tight and often laugh-out-loud funny, although it's notable that those moments usually come from the newly introduced characters (Forky, Duke Caboom, Ducky & Bunny). On that subject, it's also good to see Disney/Pixar embracing the idea of more sinister dolls*², although it feels a little Goosebumps at times.

The old gang are present, correct and on-character (as far as they're used - this is very much Woody's show), but tend to bring wry smiles rather than outright guffaws. Despite the frequent action, the film doesn't have the peril of previous adventures (although Toy Story 3 really pushed that to its limit anyway), but it's still great.

Toy Story 4 is an enormous amount of fun, but is it more that that?
More to the point, does it need to be?

CASH

Although it's been asked countless times since the film was first announced, the question isn't so much 'does the Toy Story series need a new chapter?', more 'now that two Lego movies have taken the idea of sentient toys in parallel interacting realities and moved it on a notch, is there still a story to be told with Woody and Buzz?'. The Lego movies don't have the emotional punch of the Toy Story ones, but they seem more adept at making broader, more societal points.

On an entirely smaller level, it feels a bit wrong where the toys band together to control the RV in the final act, wresting control from the human driver. The Toy Story films have always played with the 'just out of sight' motif - it's not as if the toys can't move when people are just watching, they just have the discipline not to - but the tension has previously arisen from the 'OMG will they be seen?' moments. In Toy Story 4, our heroes are pretty much running around in plain sight, and by the end almost causing a fatal traffic accident. If I want that, I'll watch Gremlins, thanks.

BRAVO

There also appear to be a couple of glaring tonal mis-steps in the final moments (even though these are thoroughly cued up by the preceding film). When Woody chooses a life as a 'lost toy' with Bo Peep and is assured by Buzz and Jessie that "Bonnie will be alright", doesn't this completely undercut the final scene in Toy Story 3? Woody was going to be the one toy that Andy kept and took to college, the lone memento of his childhood. He's been Andy's action companion throughout the years who's now earned a comfortable retirement, as adulthood beckons but with one nostalgic eye on the formative past. When Andy sees Bonnie's face light up on discovering Woody at the bottom of the box, he knows that Woody's adventures can now continue in new hands, that it's okay to let his favourite cowboy go knowing he'll be fulfilling his purpose all over again. So then we fast-forward a few months and what? Woody's picking up dustballs in the closet while Bonnie plays with plastic cutlery? Is that all Woody counts for? Is that all the affection Bonnie can manage? She got these toys for free and she treats them like trash, no wonder she makes her own ones from the bin, the entitled little shit. Bonnie deserves to play in garbage. There, I said it.

But it's not just the kid who's to blame here*⁴. With Bo Peep assuring Woody that kids lose toys every day and that Bonnie will quickly get over it, not only is Bo underlining the point above about the kid's attention span, she's also ignoring the very point of the previous three films, surely? Bo abuses the goodwill of her previous relationship with Woody to get him to gainsay his own golden rule - a toy must be there for their kid. Bo's own abandonment issues have morphed into soft-spoken nihilism over the years, and now she's passing on her blithely hedonistic manifesto to any toy she encounters. As a cowboy, Woody symbolises the hardworking optimism which forged America's early days - the truth, compassion and family values which Woody has preached throughout the series. Now Disney (of all people) are showing us how easily these can be disregarded in the 21st century, and ultimately how replaceable we all are*³.

HALLOWEEN H

Don’t get me wrong, I did enjoy Toy Story 4. But I’m happy to join the consensus on this one and be like “Great work guys, now stop”.

Although fair play to Pixar for making a movie showing a young black girl getting lost in a fairground at night then being reunited with her parents, and not having her wear a Michael Jackson's Thriller t-shirt. Don't think I'd have been able to resist, especially with Jordan Peele in the voice-cast...

Well, the Toy Story flicks.



It is.



It is.



It's not but let's be fair, that's a very high bar.



It's possible.



Not that I heard.



Level 1: The voices of Major Bren Derlin and BB-8 are in this, and it shares a writer with Star Wars Resistance.





*¹ And yes, I would totally buy a three-pack of 3¾"-scale Combat Carl figures in their different fatigues. Yes please. ^{[ BACK ]}

*² Although on that subject, I don’t think that Gabby Gabby earns her redemption here. She spends more than half the movie wanting to disable the hero and is just one of those weird old toys to begin with. ^{[ BACK ]}

*³ If you think this is harsh, don't even go near my ideas on what The Boss Baby is really about… ^{[ BACK ]}

*⁴ Although it is largely the kid. ^{[ BACK ]}


DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: The Angry Birds Movie

The Angry Birds Movie*¹
Cert: U / 97 mins / Dir. Fergal Reilly & Clay Kaytis / Trailer



Wow. Pre-trailer ads for U-rated kids' films might just be the worst thing humanity has ever invented, whether they're aimed at the impressionable youngsters themselves or their time-poor, guilt-ridden parents. In my day, toy-adverts were used to sell toys, not insurance. This is not what Ian Palitoy had in mind when he invented the action-figure, I assure you.

Anyway, taking as its basis the ridiculously successful casual-gaming phenomenon that is Angry Birds, the movie iteration focuses on the arrival of The Pigs at Bird Island, and their insidious plot to steal all the eggs*². It's up to the emotionally-unstable feathered friends Red, Chuck, Bomb and Terence to save the day (with a little help, of course), all leading up to a meticulously implemented recreation of the gameplay which made the series such a success.

And happily, the movie is a success, too. It's very sharply scripted for a U-certificate (best line: "I'm tellin ya, something isn't kosher with those pigs..."), and the slapstick and more subtle visual gags will keep audiences of all ages happily occupied. More often than not, the witticisms and asides of the characters work better than the set-gags. Indeed, the consistently chucklesome screenplay serves as an interesting counterpoint to the fact that this is an (albeit belated) marketing tie-in for a video-game, rather than any sort of adaptation-proper.

The visuals are gorgeously animated as you'd expect, with a full and subtle range of facial expressions and twitches backing up the already-unique character design. That said, I saw this in 3D and the extra dimension seems very under-used, particularly since animated features always show this off the best.

The voice-cast are a pleasant surprise here, too. Given the Jason Sudekis/Josh Gad/Danny McBride level of casting, many of the performances are almost understated, and suit their respective characters well. Peter Dinklage gets to turn it up to 11 as Mighty Eagle, but it suits both the actor and the role, so y'know.

Considering the film industry's track record with game-to-movie conversions, and the disposable nature of this particular game itself, Angry Birds has no right at all to be as thoroughly enjoyable as it is.
But it's gloriously silly, and somewhat ironic that a movie as throwaway as this will stand up to a few repeat viewings, at least (and if you've got padawans in the house, you know that's only a matter of time)...

Oh, and there's nothing at the end of the credits. During and mid, yes. Just not after the names start rolling up. I stayed on, so you don't have to ;)



.



Only if you're after the 3D; you won't lose too much by seeing this at home.



It does, although the film knows its limitations and plays safely around them.



Everyone involved can safely put this on their CV.



Nah.



I didn't hear one, but I'd be amazed if there isn't.



Level 1: This movie features the vocals of Bill BB-8 Hader and is also produced by Catherine Winder, who was Exec Producer on The Clone Wars.





*¹ Although the BBFC website lists this as "The Angry Birds Movie", the classification card which comes up before the film says only "Angry Birds". It's the little things like this which wind me up. Where's the consistency, people?

*² With a more 'studio' movie this could turn out to be a parable on immigration or cultural integration, but Angry Birds doesn't attempt to dig that deeply (and to its credit). I mean, obviously the pigs want to eat the eggs which all have baby birds inside, but that's as awkward as the whole thing gets.

DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.

Review: American Ultra

American Ultra
Cert: 15 / 96 mins / Dir. Nima Nourizadeh / Trailer



Well, this might be the most fun I've had in Jesse Eisenber's company since Zombieland (although his character here isn't a million miles away from that other). Like some inspired mashup between Clerks and The Manchurian Candidate, American Ultra tells the tale of Mike Howell, a CIA sleeper-agent turned stoner store-clerk as his worlds collide when he's marked for termination by his superiors.

The film's opening scene sees a beaten and bruised Howell (Eisenberg) in a police cell after the events of the story. What follows is a super-fast rewind of the tale, showing snippets of what's going to unfold and robbing the narrative of at least one point of tesion (Howell's survival) in the process; but it also drops plenty of call-forwards in the process and is an early indicator of the fun to come.

Massively entertaining when it's on-fire, and one of the very few stoner-comedies that didn't irritate me on any level (I generally find them quite self indulgent), American Ultra never quite manages to reconcile its dark-streak as the film's characters are drawn primarily for comedy, and the film's second act sags a little when things slow down and move towards traditional thriller territory. It's much better at being an action-comedy than an action-thriller, although the final showdown is almost Matrix-esque in its brutally slick precision.

As funny as the film is, I have to say that many of the gags from the trailer worked better in the trailer, due to the sharper timing. But, if Hawaiian shirts, gunfire, claw-hammers and astronaut-apes are your thing, there'll be plenty for you in American Ultra…



I probably wouldn't go that far…



If you buy it once it comes down to around £7, it'll stand you in good stead for nights in with friends and the mind-altering chemicals of your choice (legal ones, naturally).



Everyone's clearly having a great time, that's what's important (this really isn't a 'performance' film).



It does.



I won't.



There isn't.



Topher Grace starred in 2000's Traffic along with Benicio Del Toro, who's set to make an appearance in 2017's Star Wars Episode VIII.







DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.