What Dreams May Come

Vincent Ward’s “What Dreams May Come,” released in 1998, is so breathtaking, so beautiful, and so bold in its imagination, that it’s a surprise at the end to find it doesn’t finally deliver. It takes the audience to the emotional edge but it doesn’t push them over. It ends in a curiously unconvincing way – a conventional ending in a movie that for most of its length has been daring and visionary.

Roger Ebert said in his review, “So, yes, I have my disappointments with it. But I would not want them to discourage you from seeing it, because this is a film that even in its imperfect form shows how movies can imagine the unknown, can lead our imaginations into wonderful places.” It has heartbreakingly powerful performances by Robin Williams and Annabella Sciorra. The movie is so good because it shows us how it could have been better: It appears to go for a great leap, we can see it coming, and then it settles. If Hollywood is determined to short-change us with a necessary happy ending, then it shouldn’t torture us with a movie that deserves better.

Ebert admitted, “I hesitate to reveal too many secrets, but the film's set-up has been so thoroughly publicized that by now you probably already know certain key facts. Save the review until later if you don't.”

People knew from the ads and the trailers that Chris and Annie, played by Williams and Sciorra, have a Cute Meet when their boats crash on a Swiss lake. They marry, have two children (Jessica Brooks Grant and Josh Paddock), and are happy, but both of the children are killed in an accident. Annie has a breakdown, and Chris nurses her through, art works as therapy, they are somehow putting their lives back together, and then Chris is killed.

The film follows him into the afterlife and creates it with visuals that seem borrowed from his memories and imagination. Ebert said, “In one sequence that is among the most visually exciting I have ever seen, he occupies a landscape that is a painting, and as he plucks a flower it turns to oil paint in his hand. Other parts of this world seem cheerfully assembled from the storage rooms of images we keep in our minds: Renaissance art, the pre-Raphaelites, greeting cards, angel kitsch (cherubs float past on plump clouds). Later, when Chris ventures into Satan’s home, the images are darker and more fearsome--Bosch crossed with Dali.”

There is a guide in the next world named Albert, played by Cuba Gooding Jr. Is he all that he appears to be? Ebert said, “Now we have ventured beyond the information in the ads, and I will be more circumspect. The story, inspired by a novel by Richard Matheson, is founded on the assumption that heaven exists in a state of flux, that its inhabitants assume identities that please themselves, or us; that having been bound within one identity during life, we are set free.” Heaven, in one sense, means becoming who you want to be.

And Satan’s home? “It is for those who don’t know they’re dead,” says Albert. Or they know they’re dead but don’t know what the deal is. Or they won’t go along with the deal. Many of those in Satan’s home are guilty of the greatest sin against God, which is despair: They believe they are beyond hope.

After the death of her children and husband, Annie has gone into depression, commits suicide, and goes to Satan’s home. Chris wants to find her: “I’m her soul mate.” Albert says that’s not possible, “Nothing will make her recognize you.” However, he acts as a guide, and Chris goes into Satan’s home, which, like heaven, has been realized with a visual intensity and originality that is astonishing. In this film, the path to Satan’s home is paved, not with good intentions, but with the faces of the doomed, bitter, and complaining (the face and voice of Chris’s father are played by the German director Werner Herzog).

What happens then, what happens throughout the film, is like nothing you have seen before. Ebert noted, “Vincent Ward is a New Zealand director whose works have not always reached a large audience, but have always dared for big ideas and bold visuals to express them. He made "The Navigator" (1988), about medieval Englishmen who tunnel to escape the plague--and emerge in the present. And then, in 1993, he made the great "Map of the Human Heart," about the odyssey of an Eskimo boy from Alaska in the 1930s to London in the war, and from a great love affair to high adventure.”

Ebert continued, “"What Dreams May Come" ends, like "The Navigator," with the characters seeking their destiny in a cathedral--but this one, like many of the film's images, is like none you have seen before. It is upside-down, the great vaulted ceilings providing a floor and a landscape. Since I have mentioned Herzog, I might as well quote his belief that our century is "starving for great images."” This film provides them and also provides quiet moments of pleasant human nature, as when a character played by Rosalind Chao explains why she appears to be an Asian flight attendant, and when another, played by Max von Sydow, explains the rules of the game as he understands them.

Robin Williams somehow has a quality that makes him seem at home in imaginary realms. Remember him in “Popeye,” “The Adventures of Baron Munchausen,” “Toys,” “Jumanji,” and as the Genie in “Aladdin.” Ebert said, “There is a muscular reality about him, despite his mercurial wit, that anchors him and makes the fantastic images around him seem almost plausible.” He is good, too, at emotion: He brings us along with him. In Annabella Sciorra, he has a co-star whose own character is very unhappy and yet touching. Her sin of despair was committed, we believe because she loved so much and was so happy, she could not exist in the absence of those feelings.

Ebert said, “And yet, as I've suggested, the movie somehow gathers all these threads and its triumphant art direction and special effects, and then doesn't get across the finish line with them. I walked out of the theater sensing that I should have felt more, that an opportunity had been lost.” “What Dreams May Come” takes us too far and risks too much to turn conventional at the end. It could have been better. It could perhaps have been the best film that year. Whatever its shortcomings, it is a film to treasure.

This is one of those tear-jerker movies, but I wouldn’t be surprised if people cried while watching it. You should see this movie because it is very emotional and you will love it. I remember seeing a part of this movie with my sister years ago, but when I went back and saw the whole film, I had no idea it was “this” emotional. Check it out and have a good cry.

Next week I will be looking at another comedy in “Cuba Gooding Jr. Month.” Sorry for the late response. I took a nap, not realizing it, and woke up having to rush through stuff.

Jerry Maguire

I was going back and forth on what I should review for this month. After much consideration, I have decided to review movies I have seen that have Cuba Gooding Jr. in them. Let’s not waste any time. Let’s jump in with the 1997 classic, “Jerry Maguire.”

­Seeing his world – mainly as a sports agent – shattering around him, Jerry Maguire, played by Tom Cruise, writes a mission statement during a nervous breakdown asking for a gentler way to business. This causes him to get fired, but he manages to save one client – football player Rod Tilbrook (Cuba Gooding Jr), and assistant Dorothy Boyd (Renee Zellweger). Jerry is about to learn a lot about life.

Adam Smith said in his review, “If you don't walk out of Jerry Maguire with a goofy grin the size of Alaska plastered across your face, check your pulse - you're probably dead.” Director Cameron Crowe has written and directed a smart, funny, shamelessly upbeat romantic comedy and the icing is that this was the finest performance of Tom Cruise’s career.

Jerry is a sports agent on the edge of a breakdown. He’s rich, successful, and has a love life that falls under “rampant.” However, he’s not happy. He looks around and sees a business sinking into sarcasm. A world where a kid can’t ask a sports player to do so much as autograph a baseball card without endorsement deals and counter-deals racing to the front. In one long lonely night of the soul, he writes a “mission statement” demanding a more genuine approach, delivers it to his colleagues, and is instantly terminated from his job.

Smith noted, “With only one desultory client left, Rod Tidwell (played with screwballish energy by Gooding Jnr.), a second rate footballer with a surfeit of energy off the field but precious little on it, Maguire decides to go it alone, failing to persuade any of his colleagues to accompany him apart from lovestruck single parent from accounts Dorothy Boyd (the excellent Zellweger). Things don't run smoothly (natch) for the isolated couple: Maguire is screwed by both ex-colleagues and clients, and although he is attracted enough to his partner and her sprog to smooch, shag and finally wed, the marriage is in trouble within weeks with the outside world's cynicism and Jerry's escalating emotional crisis leaching in and poisoning the familial nest.”

Smith continued, “That this doesn't degenerate into an experience akin to being hit full in the face by the Tate & Lyle express is a testament both to Crowe's (director of Say Anything and Singles) script and direction plus a new maturity and confidence in Cruise's performance. Crowe takes a dessicated and predictable genre and invests it with a delightfully off-beam sensibility.” Scenes never go exactly as you expect. Take the opening montage where a boxer-shorted Cruise narrates his dive into extreme doubt while simultaneously weakening the corniness by admitting that this is all a little “touchy-feely.”

Then there’s Cruise, who for the first time in his career may not have required defense. Smith said, “Not satisfied to deliver the kind of by-the-numbers winsome romantic lead that a few years ago he'd probably have been satisfied with, here he fleshes Jerry's struggle with a developing disgust for the world to the point where it's finally possible to forget that this was the man who made Cocktail and Days Of Thunder.”

Other casts included in this sterling supporting performance are Bonnie Hunt as Dorothy’s concerned, distrustful sister, plus a ruffle-haired kid, played by Jonathan Lipnicki, who’ll, as Smith put it, “have anyone leaning towards broodiness, repapering the box-room and spending a fortune down Mothercare.” Also, comedian Aries Spears plays Cuba Gooding Jr.’s brother.

“Jerry Maguire” is that rare movie that reminds you why you like movies in the first place. Be nice to yourself. Go see it.

This film is famous for the lines, “Show me the money,” “You had me at hello,” “You complete me,” and “Help me help you.” I remember this movie was talked about a lot when it was released, but I didn’t see it until about 10-11 years ago. This movie had Tom Cruise not playing his typical self but was quite different from any role he had played at the time. If you haven’t seen it yet, you’re missing out. This is a film that is not one to be missed.

Look out next week when I review a tear-jerker in “Cuba Gooding Jr. Month.”

Uncle Buck

Uncle Buck, played by the late John Candy, is the type of character that no American suburb should exclude. Everything about him hurts middle-class behavior, fashions, and wants. Though his antique car needs a muffler and drives around in its permanent cloud of exhaust smoke, Uncle Buck is refreshing.

Besides making a deal off and on, and going to the racetrack, Uncle Buck does not believe in work. He loves cigars that smell and wears clothes that don’t match, either him or each other. Vincent Canby said in his review, “He is the embodiment of all things uncouth that people in the suburbs hope they have left somewhere else.”

In “Uncle Buck,” released in 1989, John Hughes had the good sitcom idea of putting Uncle Buck in the middle of the perfect suburb (Winnetka, IL), in the middle of Hughes’s idea of an average American family. Canby pointed out, “The results are sometimes funny and, in the way of small-screen entertainment, so perfectly predictable that one could mail in the laughs.”

When his brother (Garrett M. Brown) and sister-in-law (Elaine Bromka) are called to Indianapolis, Uncle Buck leaves his superbly good-for-nothing life in Chicago to take care of his two nieces and nephew. The two younger children, Miles (Macaulay Culkin) and Maizy (Gaby Hoffman) are at first shocked by his different methods and then impressed.

The eldest child, Tia, played by Jean Kelly, is a teenage beauty separated from her parents. She is consecutively embarrassed by Uncle Buck’s simple ways and furious at his nosing in her romance with a boy who’s up to no good, played by Jay Underwood. Canby advised, “You don't need a diagram to know how that will come out.”

Canby noted, “As in ''War and Peace,'' it's not the plot that counts.” In “Uncle Buck” it’s watching John Candy dealing with a clown, played by Mike Starr, who arrives for Miles’s birthday party drunk and driving a Volkswagen with large mouse ears. “In the field of live home entertainment,” says the clown, “I am a god.” Says Uncle Buck, “Get in your mouse and leave.”

John Candy is at his best when is sneaky and, at the beginning, completely cruel to the children. So is the film. Canby said, “When ''Uncle Buck'' goes sweet (complete with Chaplinesque music), fun flees. ''Uncle Buck'' is a movie in which saying ''I love you'' to Mom or Dad or Uncle Buck solves all problems except, perhaps, acid rain.”

Canby continued, “Although Mr. Hughes has had huge success with his theatrical movies about teen-agers (''Sixteen Candles,'' ''Ferris Buehler's Day Off,'' among others), he may be the first real auteur of television-style entertainment.”

He knows exactly what he’s doing and does it with attention to necessary detail. The outside of a house in a Hughes film immediately sets up the sentimental nature of the characters within along with the type of movie it is. He can write funny lines. He comes up with charmingly strange situations. Canby said, “Yet there is something unnerving about the way he denatures real life.”

Canby continued, “One doesn't notice this in the limited confines of the small screen. In a movie theater, too many Hughes images are simply big and empty. They are filler material. Dead. Though he likes to shoot on location, the world he records seems phony or, at best, consistently trivial.”

The cast is good, especially Jean Kelly, who not only looks great but may also be an up-and-coming actress. Amy Madigan does well in the very short role of Uncle Buck’s steady if impatient female friend. It is John Candy who gives the film what size it has. He is an entertaining actor through thick and mostly thin.

Believe it or not, this is another movie I knew about for a while and had been thinking about watching it. A few months ago, I found this on Netflix and saw it while exercising. This is another classic that everyone should see. It’s one of Hughes’s funniest films. This film came out before “Home Alone” when Culkin got very popular, so seeing this before that, he did a good job. As stated before, this is mainly a classic due to John Candy, who was a real force to be reckoned with. Check it out and have a great time.

All right, everyone, we have reached the end of “John Hughes Month.” I hope everyone enjoyed the classics I have reviewed of his and hopefully everyone has seen these classics by now, if they haven’t already. If you have, you might be in the same boat as I am where I just thought a film was good or ok.

Check in next month to see what I will review next.

Ferries Bueller’s Day Off

Here is one of the most innocent movies in a long time. A nice, warm-hearted comedy about a teenager who skips school so he can help his best friend earn some self-respect. The therapy he has in mind includes a day’s visit to Chicago. After we’ve seen the Sears Tower, the Art Institute, the Board of Trade, a parade down Dearborn Street, architectural landmarks, a Gold Coast, and a game at Wrigley Field, we have to allow the city and state film offices have done their jobs: If “Ferries Bueller’s Day Off,” released in 1986, fails on every other level, at least it works as a travelogue.

However, it does work on at least a few other levels. The movie stars Matthew Broderick as Ferris, a smart high school senior from the North Shore who feigns illness to spend a day in town with his girlfriend, Sloane (Mia Sara), and his best friend, Cameron (Alan Ruck).

Initially, it looks like skipping school is all he has thought of – especially after he talks Cameron into borrowing his dad’s repaired red Ferrari, a car the father loves more than Cameron himself.

Roger Ebert said in his review, “The body of the movie is a lighthearted excursion through the Loop, including a German-American Day parade in which Ferris leaps aboard a float, grabs a microphone and starts singing "Twist and Shout" while the marching band backs him up. The teens fake their way into a fancy restaurant for lunch, spend some time gawking at the masterpieces in the Art Institute, and then go out to Wrigley Field, where, of course, they are late and have to take box seats far back in the left-field corner.” (The movie gets that detail right. It would be too much to hope that they could arrive in the third inning and find seats in the bleachers.) There is one great moment when the teens visit the top of the Sears Tower, lean forward, press themselves against the glass, look straight down at the small cars and little parts of life down below, and begin to talk about their lives. Subtly, that introduces the buried theme of the movie, which is that Ferris wants to help Cameron get self-respect in the face of his father’s materialism.

Ferris is a little like a preacher. He says the famous line of the movie, “Life goes by so fast that if you don’t stop and look around, you might miss it.” Ebert said, “He's sensitive to the hurt inside his friend's heart, as Cameron explains how his dad has cherished and restored the red Ferrari and given it a place of honor in his life - a place denied to Cameron.”

Ebert credited, “Ferris Bueller" was directed by John Hughes, the philosopher of adolescence, whose credits include "Sixteen Candles," "The Breakfast Club" and "Pretty In Pink." In every one of his films, adults are strange, distant beings who love their teenagers, but fail to completely understand them. That’s the obvious issue: All of the adults, including an awkward high-school principal, played by Jeffrey Jones, are dim-witted and one-dimensional. The movie’s solutions to Cameron’s problems are very simplistic. However, the film’s heart is in the right place, and “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” is small, quirky, and sweet.

I know people love this movie and consider it one of the great classics, but I just thought of this as good. I like the movie; I just don’t love it like everyone else does. I still say you should check this out because you might like this movie a lot, maybe more than I did. You have Ben Stein in here constantly saying, “Bueller,” and a cameo appearance by Charlie Sheen in a police station. See this one if you would like.

Stay tuned next week when we end “John Hughes Month” with another classic film. Once again, I would like to apologize for the late posting as I completely forgot what day of the week it was.

Pretty in Pink

Roger Ebert started his review of the 1986 film, “Pretty in Pink,” by saying, “Although "Pretty in Pink" contains several scenes that are a great deal more dramatic, my favorite moments were the quietest ones, in which nothing was being said because a boy was trying to get up the courage to ask a girl out on a date, and she knew it, and he knew it, and still nothing was happening.”

To be able to listen to this silence is to understand the main problem of adolescence, which is that their dreams are much larger than their confidence. “Pretty in Pink” is a movie that pays attention to these matters. Even though this is not a great movie, it has some moments when the audience is likely to think, yes, being 16 was exactly like that.

The movie stars Molly Ringwald as Andie Walsh, a poor girl from the bad side of town. Her mother abandoned her when she was a child, and she lives with her unemployed father, played by Harry Dean Stanton, whose first words after she wakes him one morning are, “Where am I?” Ebert noted, “Andie works in a record store in a downtown mall and wears fashions that seem thrown together by a collision between a Goodwill store and a 1950s revival.”

Andie goes to high school where most of the kids are from wealthy parents, and she has a crush on a rich kid named Blane, played by Andrew McCarthy.

Ebert mentioned, “Her best friends are Duckie (Jon Cryer), who is a case study of the kind of teenage boy who thinks he can clown his way into a girl's heart, and Iona (Annie Potts), a 30ish sprite who affects one radical hairstyle after another.”

The movie’s plot is very old. It’s about how the rich boy and the poor girl love each other, but the rich kid’s friends are snobs, and the poor girl doesn’t want anyone to know what an untidy home she lives in, and about how they find true love after all. Ebert said, “Since the basic truths in the movie apply to all teenagers, rich and poor, I wish the filmmakers would have found a new plot to go along with them.”

Ebert continued, “Perhaps they could have made the lovers come from different ethnic groups, which wouldn't have been all that original, either, but at least would have avoided one more recycling of ancient Horatio Alger stories.”

Ebert went on, “There is one other major problem with the movie, and that involves the character of Steff McKee (James Spader), the effete, chain-smoking rich snob who is Blane's best friend. He has been turned down several times by Andie and now pretends to be appalled that Blane would want to go out with such a "mutant."” His snobbery almost ruins the romance.

Steff does have one great line of dialogue: “Money really means nothing to me. Do you think I’d treat my parents’ house this way if it did?” But, as played by Spader, he looks much too old to be a teenager, and his scenes play restlessly for that reason. Ebert said, “He seems more like a sinister 25-year-old still lurking in the high school corridors, the Ghost of Proms Past.”

Those problems mentioned, “Pretty in Pink” is a heartwarming and most truthful movie, with some nice moments of humor. Ebert noted, “The movie was written by John Hughes, who repeats the basic situation of his "Sixteen Candles," which starred Ringwald as a girl who had a crush on a senior boy, and learned to communicate with the class geek. But Ringwald is becoming an actress who can project poignancy and vulnerability without seeming corny or coy, and her scenes here with Cryer and Potts have one moment of small truth after another.”

The nicest surprise in the movie is the character created by Potts. Ebert mentioned, “The first time we see her, she's dressed in leather and chains, but the next time, she wears one of those beehive hairdos from the early 1960s.” She is always testing her “look,” and when she finally settles on conservative good taste, the choice seems like her most radical so far.

Ebert said, “"Pretty in Pink" is evidence, I suppose, that there must be a reason why certain old stories never seem to die.” We know all the cliches, we can predict half of the moments. However, in the end, when this boy and this girl, who are so obviously meant for one another, finally get together, there is great satisfaction. Ebert ended his review by saying, “There also is the sense that Ringwald just might have that subtle magic that will allow her, like the young Elizabeth Taylor, to grow into an actress who will keep on breaking and mending boys' hearts for a long time.”

This is another movie that I have been thinking about seeing for some time. Recently, I found this film on Paramount+ and decided to watch it. This is a classic that I cannot believe I have never seen. Check it out if you haven’t. You will love it, I promise.

Next week I will be looking at another classic that I just found to be good in “John Hughes Month.” Sorry for the late posting. I had completely forgotten about the day because I had family over and I was tired from work.

The Breakfast Club

In “The Breakfast Club,” released in 1985, five students at a Chicago suburban high school vent their problems to each other during nine hours of detention one Saturday in 1984.

Their main topic, as they open up, is their parents, who don't understand them and make their lives terrible by paying too much attention to them or not enough.

“My home life is unsatisfying,” says a student. Another says, “Well, everyone's home life is unsatisfying. Otherwise, nobody would ever leave home.” Someone asks, “Are we gonna be like our parents?” The reply: “It's unavoidable. When you grow up, your heart dies.”

The father (Ron Dean) of the jock (Emilio Estevez) does his thinking for him. The brain (Anthony Michael Hall) has thought of committing suicide because his father (John Hughes) demands straight A's. The harsh father of the rebel (Judd Nelson) beats him.

When they finish explaining what's wrong with their parents, they analyze their other big problem: peer pressure. These five kids -- the three boys and two girls, an upper-middle-class princess (Molly Ringwald), and a genetic loner (Ally Sheedy), acknowledge they are prisoners of a student caste system that segregates them.

Joseph Gelmis said in his review, “It should be clear, at this point, that "The Breakfast Club" is a group therapy variation on an otherwise familiar collective portrait of a high school class. Virtually the entire movie takes place inside the lofty school library and a few other rooms in the building.” The two adults in the school are the principal (Paul Gleason), a jailer and bully for a day, and the janitor (John Kapelos), a realist who knows too many of the school’s secrets to be a critic.

Gelmis mentioned, “Given the simplistic treatment of subject matter and the dramatic limitations of confining the cast and action to a single set, "The Breakfast Club" is slightly more interesting than one might expect. Writer-director John Hughes, whose previous film was "Sixteen Candles," choreographs the moves and verbal sparring and intimate disclosures of his young performers like a ritual tribal ceremony.”

Gelmis continued, “Nelson, as the troublemaker Bender, is very effective in the role of the provocateur who disrupts the orderliness of the detention session and leads the others in defying the rules. ("Being bad is fun, huh?" he says with a leer, before turning them on with pot.)” Nelson has the best lines in the movie. When he first enters the detention room, he insults the principal: "Does Barry Manilow know you raided his closet?"

Bender and the principal are sworn enemies. Gelmis noted, “And Bender's inflammatory disrespect goads the dean into a sanctimonious fury. It takes a few beers in the basement with the janitor, apparently a contemporary of his, to cool the dean down.” "If you were 16," the janitor asks the principal, "what would you think of you?" The principal shakes his head.

As each of the five students does his or her emotional venting, we have to respect their pain. Gelmis noted, “To share the growing pains of troubled kids is to become a godparent. You owe them your goodwill and best wishes.” Finally, that's all these five students can suggest. Nothing changes. You hear nothing you haven't heard before. However, you know that for them it is happening for the first time, and they deserve compassion. Gelmis ended his review by saying, “I'm not sure that's a good enough reason to see "The Breakfast Club".”

My sister and I tried to watch this on Netflix some years back, and we couldn’t watch it after about 45 minutes. I did go back and rewatch after a couple of years past as, if I remember correctly, a rental from the library, but I’m not a fan. People consider this film a classic, but I thought it was ok. Maybe if I had grown up around the time the film was released, I would have had a different thought about it, which is why I just think this is an average film. If you want to watch this, it is currently streaming on Max, but I don’t highly recommend it.

Next week I will be looking at another classic film in “John Hughes Month.”

Megamind

Tonight, I watched “Megamind vs the Doom Syndicate,” but first, I should let everyone know of the first “Megamind,” released in 2010.

Mayer Nissim started his review by saying, “When it comes to animated flicks, studios must be tempted to cobble together a cliché-laden script, toss in some pop culture references for the mums and dads, pile on the celeb names, stick it in 3D and hope that the punters will roll in.” Often enough, that works, so it’s nice when a group of people try to make something a little more special. “Megamind” might be cast with big names, it does have the odd mischievous nod for adults – and it is made in inglorious 3D – but it’s also got a screenplay overflowing with charm, intelligence, wit, and a real spark.

We start at the beginning, with Megamind (Will Ferrell) and Metro Man (Brad Pitt) flying to Earth in pods that look like something out of Superman. After the prologue, we see that Metro Man gets a happy life with wealthy parents, while Megamind is raised in a nearby correctional facility. Skip to the present and the two ruthless enemies wage their superhero fight over Metro City. However, the one-sidedness of their fight makes it a little sad. Megamind and his spikey fish sidekick Minion (David Cross) regularly kidnap news reporter Roxanne Ritchi (Tina Fey) from under the nose of her colleague Hal (Jonah Hill), Metro Man saves her and throws Megamind in prison. Rinse and repeat. Then, somehow everything changes, throwing up an existential crisis for our protagonist. Stuck without a rival, he injects the hopeless Hal with some superpowers, naming him “Tighten” to bring back the old good/evil fistfights, but things don’t go exactly as planned.

Megamind’s bad guy with a heart of gold isn’t the most surprisingly original character in movie history, but Ferrell voices him with real emotion to win you over from the beginning. Fey, Cross, and even Pitt succeed by actually playing well-done parts, rather than animated versions of themselves. Nissim said, “Of course, Hill's Hal looks just like him, and his character isn't a million miles away from his usual on-screen persona either. That's a small quibble considering how well-deployed his co-stars are, though, and naturally it's a job he does pretty well.”

There are some smart themes about identity, the nature/nurture debate, and good guys and bad guys, but you never feel as if the film gets too smart for its good. Nissim noted, “There are gigglesome set-pieces, witty sight gags, clever one-liners and references that actually skewer their original source rather than just replicate them for the recognition factor - Megamind's Obama-like 'No You Can't' posters get a laugh every time they pop up on screen.” What makes “Megamind” enjoyable is that it never goes through the motions. You can probably guess at the end from very early on, but it’s really enjoyable getting there.

I think my brother had told me that I should see this movie because he said it was a great DreamWorks movie. When I checked it out a few days ago on Peacock, I couldn’t believe that I never saw the film. Now I can say I saw it and I think everyone should as well if they haven’t seen it. You will like this film, even though there are things in the film that you will question. Still, it’s a good movie for the entire movie to see.

I was surprised to see that they made a sequel this year. However, they did, and it was released on Peacock four days ago, “Megamind vs the Doom Syndicate.”

Seeing how this was written by the same team that wrote the first “Megamind,” it’s no surprise that “Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate” has fingerprints of the charm and humor that made the original a cult film.

Unfortunately, they’re too few and far between. Most of “Megamind’s” sequel is a cliched bore and has a lot of plot holes in regards to the first film that it’s hard to take this seriously as a proper sequel at all.

In “Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate,” the previously evil Megamind, voiced by Keith Ferguson, is no longer evil. He’s now Metro City’s hero, keeping the citizens safe and stopping villains from committing crimes. When Megamind’s old evil group hears about this in the news, however, they think Megamind is simply pretending to be good and visit him, and Megamind has to pretend to still be evil, while thinking of a way to beat his old villain team.

The continuity errors from the first film are shocking. Not one character mentions the Doom Syndicate throughout the first film, but Megamind used to be their leader. The syndicate claims they’ve been waiting patiently for a signal from Megamind, but somehow missed the events of the first film when Megamind took over Metro City. This sequel also claims that villains have been appearing since Metro Man’s defeat, but the only villains we saw in the first movie were Megamind and Titan, and Metro Man was defeated at the beginning of the film.

Joey Rambles said in his review, “Even disregarding the continuity errors, though, Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate is mostly just a slog to get through.” The animation is a step down from the first film, and aside from one scene in the final act, there are no interesting camera angles or movements, either. That’s mainly because the first film had great action scenes of characters flying or controlling contraptions, the Megamind sequel doesn’t have a lot for the characters to do.

Instead, it’s mostly just Megamind doing his best to make the façade of him still being evil, and a predictable subplot of Minion (now called Chum) quitting being Megamind’s sidekick and excelling in his new job at a diner. The setup for this sequel feels more like a comedy than the first movie, and the jokes work a lot less. Rambles said, “The majority of them are pretty groan-inducing, especially the ones that get repeated ad nauseam, and the new characters are too one-dimensional to be any fun watching.”

Rambles said, “There are a few jokes that work here, however, and not just work, but boast traces of the witty writing from the first film.” They’re not on the same level, but they do show both screenplays were made by the same people, which is also evident in the way the returning characters are written.

Rambles said, “Megamind, Chum (Josh Brener), and Roxanne (Laura Post) aren’t nearly as fun this time around — and their voice acting isn’t nearly as good, either — but they also don’t seem too far removed from how they were in the first film, and a lot of the jokes that work stem from an understanding of these characters’ personalities.”

That said, they’ve also lost a large amount of their depth, mostly because they’re not given a lot to do other than try and defeat the Doom Syndicate (Emily Tunon, Scott Adsit, Talon Warburton, Chris Sullivan, and singer Adam Lambert). “Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate” also serves as the pilot of the show “Megamind Rules!”, and because of that, most of the movie feels restricted by the need to set up a follow-up. Rambles said, “There can’t be any intriguing character arcs since this is mostly just a glorified prologue, and what it’s setting up isn’t compelling enough to make you want to watch the show.”

Whether it be as a pilot of a show or a sequel film, though, “Megamind vs. the Doom Syndicate” has little to offer viewers that’s worth watching, especially if you’re a big fan of the first film.

As you might have guessed, this film does not hold a candle to the first film. It doesn’t seem like a needed film or if they needed a sequel to serve as a pilot to a show. If they wanted to make the show, they could have done it with no problem. There was no need to make this film. I don’t know how good the show is going to be as I don’t think I will see it. I don’t think people should see this on Peacock because they will not like it.

Thank you for joining in on this review tonight. Stay tuned on Friday for the continuation of “John Hughes Month.”