Tangled Ever After/Frozen Fever

If you are a fan of “Tangled,” you will not want to miss the chance to see “Tangled Ever After,” a short released in 2012. If you saw “Beauty and the Beast” when it was re-released in 3D, this was shown right before the feature. That was the only way you could see this film unless someone posted it on YouTube or somewhere you could see it online for free.

“Tangled Ever After” lasts for 6 minutes. It stars Zachary Levi and Mandy Moore reprising their roles from the movie. This sweet short shows Rapunzel marrying Flynn. Maximus has a small problem with the rings and has to run all around town. He ends up in a dress, with a hat on, and looking downright funny!

Mandy Robinson admitted in her review, “As a fan of the original movie 'Tangled,' I was so glad to see this flick stay true to the original.” It is the same characters and just a nice addition to the story Disney girls already adore! If you could find this short somewhere online, I highly recommend everyone does. Check it out because you will be glad you did!

Now we come to the next short that came out earlier this year. After the award-winning, world-favorite performance, here comes the latest short. “Frozen Fever,” the 2015 animated short that was seen in theaters before Disney’s live-action remake of “Cinderella,” gives “Frozen” fans exactly what they want – and, exactly on purpose, nothing more than that for the time being, at least.

Robbie Collin said in his review, “The centrepiece is Making Today a Perfect Day, a tuberculotically catchy new song from the writers of Let It Go, sung by Idina Menzel’s snow-queen Elsa as she arranges birthday celebrations for her sister Anna (Kristen Bell). Elsa is valiantly fighting off a viral infection – “a cold never bothered me anyway,” she trills, in a line that will give parents everywhere neck-moistening flashbacks to rival Martin Sheen’s in the prologue to Apocalypse Now. But the pressures of cake-decorating and present-hiding are taking their toll, and when she sneezes, beautifully designed, spooky-cute little snow-creatures, like Arctic cousins of the tree spirits in Princess Mononoke, pop into existence around her head.”

The song itself seems determined to be as much of a birthday-party addition as the ice-blue and moss-green polyester dresses that have been coming out of Disney Stores everywhere since last November. “For everything you are to me and all you’ve been through,” Elsa sings, “I’m making today a perfect day for you.” Collin admitted, “It’s a lip-smacking confection, dusted with pure icing sugar, and suggests that songwriters Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez are capable of coming up with something special for the forthcoming feature-length Frozen sequel.”

As the song goes one, Elsa and Anna go back to moments from their previous movie – jumping alongside paintings in Arendelle Castle’s galleries, skipping on the balcony of the astronomical clock where Anna and Hans sang Love is an Open Door, and leaping down the now-legendary “why have a ballroom with no balls” hallway. There are cameos from Olaf the snowman (Josh Gad, a former correspondent on “The Daily Show”), Sven the reindeer, Oaken the shopkeeper (Chris Williams) and even Kristoff (Jonathan Groff) with one or two others. Collin mentioned, “Most of the things that made Frozen Frozen are seen, glimpsed, or referenced: only the outfits are completely new, magicked up with an elegant swish of Elsa’s fingertips.”

Because “Frozen Fever” is happy to diversely rest on and revive past beauties, there’s no sign of where “Frozen 2” might be headed other than a passionate reappearance of the general “yay sisterhood” theme. Seeing Elsa and Anna back again for eight minutes is great for the fans, pulled off with no little confidence, and with a surprisingly touching payoff where the roles of older and younger sister are temporarily and nicely reverse. However, to maintain a second movie, you think they’ll have to be separated again, and their relationship put to the test.

If you haven’t seen these two shorts, I highly suggest that you see them when you get the chance. Find them online if you can, or I’m sure they are available somewhere. However, these get a high recommendation from me. You will love them, I promise you.

Well, now we have come to the end of “Disney Sequel Month.” I hope all of you enjoyed my reviews and I hope I made some good recommendations. Happy New Year’s Eve guys! I’ll see all of you next year for more exciting reviews.

The Lion Guard: Return of the Roar

“The Lion King” still is one of the great animated films of all time. So great, in fact, that it had two direct-to-video sequels, a TV spinoff and a Broadway musical, all with unstable degrees of success. Now, Disney is giving an all-new cartoon special that aired at the end of last month, “The Lion Guard: Return of the Roar,” which takes place after the original film and in the middle of its sequel “The Lion King II: Simba’s Pride.” Thankfully, it looks like the series is back on track for a new generation.

In “The Lion Guard,” which will start as a cartoon series in January, we meet Kion (Max Charles), the second-born cub of Simba (Rob Lowe) and Nala (Gabrielle Union). However, while Kion’s older sister Kiara (Eden Riegel) is on the path to become the Queen of Pride Rock, Kion himself has yet to find out who he will grow up to be. That is until he unleashes the power of the Roar, which indicates his leadership of the Lion Guard – sworn protectors of the Pride Lands.

Max Nicholson said in his review, “Perhaps the most enticing part of the special is how it introduces new lore into the Lion King world while also shedding new light on old characters.” As Simba explains to Kion, the previous Lion Guard was led by Scar, who, as it turns out, also had the power of the Roar. However, when the Guard refused to help Scar overthrow Mufasa, Scar used the Roar to destroy them and, in doing so, lost the Roar completely. Basically the Roar is the Force of the Lion King universe. It can be used for both good and evil.

From the start, it’s cool to see the show pay tribute to the original Lion King. In addition to placing Scar and Mufasa into the history of the Lion Guard, the series includes fan-favorite characters like Timon (Kevin Schon), Pumbaa (Ernie Sabella), Rafiki (Khary Payton) and Zazu (Jeff Bennett). Though most of the original voice cast is not back for this special, it does include many A-listers: Rob Lowe, Gabrielle Union and Ernie Sabella. However, the showstopper here is James Earl Jones, who returns to voice the spirit of Mufasa in a small but central role. Nicholson mentioned, “That's not to mention the little references to the movies, like Timon and Pumbaa's bug-eating habits and Kion's mention of "Can You Feel the Love Tonight," which he and his family call "the talk."”

As for the new characters, well, they’re definitely targeted at a younger audience, particularly Kion’s honey badger friend Bunga, voiced by Joshua Rush, whose crazy incidents are rasping from the start. Meanwhile, the series’ main villain, a teenage hyena named Janja, voiced by Andrew Kishino, doesn’t come off nearly as the same threat as Scar or Zira. Nicholson said, “Mainly, he just gets laughed out by his henchmen while various insects crawl all over him.”

However, it’s important to say that “The Lion Guard” is an original work from Disney Channel’s sister network Disney Junior, which means the series is mostly targeted towards children. Nicholson said, “Obviously, I can't speak to how much a kid will enjoy The Lion Guard -- I suspect a lot -- but I doubt that most adults will want to tune in week to week.”

Nicholson went on to say, “In terms of the special, though, I'd say The Lion Guard is worth checking out, especially if you're a longtime fan of The Lion King.” For TV, the artwork is beautiful, and the hand-drawn line quality definitely gives a sense of nostalgia to the series (Nicholson noted, “despite the occasional CG element or Flash-looking animation”). The special also has three original songs (composed by Beau Black), which are both catchy and a lot in maintaining with Elton John and Tim Rice’s songs from the original film.

As a followup to “The Lion King,” Disney Junior’s “The Lion Guard: Return of the Roar” is a fun-filled, if younger-targeting, hour of television (unlike the original movie, which was meant for children and adults). All of the favorite characters and locations are here, including some of the original people, and the art direction and music is solid. Nicholson noted, “There's even some interesting history to the eponymous Lion Guard that fleshes out characters like Mufasa and Scar.” That said, some of the new characters don’t quite taunt with the classic look of the 1994 movie, and the special doesn’t have a convincing villain, although small children will still likely enjoy the special.

My family watched this special together and all of us absolutely loved it. Like I have mentioned before in my other posts about “The Lion King” sequels, this one is strong as well. If you missed the special when it aired, you should see it again if it airs again. If not, try and find it somewhere, like On Demand, or somewhere else. You will love it, I promise you. I'm not sure if I will be watching the series yet, but we'll see.

Well, since I misjudged when I was going to post the reviews, for the final day of “Disney Sequel Month” tomorrow, I will be reviewing a couple of shorts that you could say are sequels to the recent movies, even if they are shorts.

The Little Mermaid - Ariel's Beginning

We now have finally arrived at “The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning,” released in 2008, which doesn’t have the warm energy of “The Little Mermaid,” and the songs aren’t nearly as memorable. However, the animation, while obviously cheaper, is as animated as ever, and in the world of Disney direct-to-video sequels, one out of three isn’t bad.

Actually, as the title tells, “Ariel’s Beginning” isn’t a sequel to Disney’s classic work, but a prequel, revealing an early adventure of Ariel. (David Cornelius said in his review, “There's no telling where this fits in with the 1992 "Little Mermaid" TV series, itself a prequel, but it doesn't really matter here.”) The story opens when Ariel is just a little mermaid; her parents are happy rulers of Atlantica. However, Disney can’t go a year without killing off one of the parents, so really soon the queen, voiced by Lorelei Hill Butters (speaking) and Andrea Robinson (singing), is killed when a pirate ship crashes. (Cornelius informed, “Don't worry, parents: it's delicately handled off-screen.”)

Strangely, this is the last we’ll see of the pirates, that gives no other importance of the story. Instead, we watch as King Triton, voiced by Jim Cummings, heartbroken over the loss of his beloved wife and desperate to hide himself from anything that will remind him most of her, orders the music is banned from the kingdom.

Fast forward a few years. Ariel, voiced by Jodi Benson, is a rebellious teen, the most problematic of the king’s seven daughters (Tara Strong, Jennifer Hale, Grey DeLisle and Kari Wahlgren). The manipulative Marina Del Ray, voiced by Sally Field – a sort of downgraded Ursula – is the princess’ nanny, a job she hates. She’d rather kick the beloved crab friend Sebastian, voiced by Samuel E. Wright, out of the kingdom and take over as Triton’s representative. At Marina’s side is Benjamin, voiced by Jeff Bennett, a soft-spoken manatee who’s friendlier to be a villainess’ right-hand man.

With Ariel, she sneaks out one night, meets our favorite fish friend Flounder, voiced by Parker Goris, and finds an underground nightclub that Cornelius says, “where music thrives, a sort of speakeasy where tunes are the vice of choice. A hip calypso/jazz band tears up the joint, and surprise: Sebastian's the lead singer!” Ariel tells her sisters, who also want to enjoy the music. This, for a Disney cartoon, is very rebellious in its own little way, with girls sneaking out to do some dishonest excitements – especially since we’ve seen the original movie and know Triton will eventually allow music back in the kingdom, meaning the girls are right to convince their father that this isn’t wrong.

The actual story is quite slim: the girls get caught; Ariel and Sebastian run away, Marina gets power hungry, etc. Cornelius said, “What a movie like this needs, then, is a collection of great songs to keep pushing us through the so-so story. Unfortunately, what we get instead is a series of bland originals (for the life of me, I can't remember how a single one goes, let alone leave the movie humming); the only real keeper here is a cover version of the old school calypso favorite "Jump in the Line (Shake, Senora)," which is peppy and fun, even if the movie repeats it throughout the feature, as if to dilute its kicky glory.”

Screenwriter Robert Reece previously worked on “Cinderella III,” while co-scripter Evan Spiliotopoulous helped write “The Lion King 1½.” For all their mistakes, both those films delivered a nice amount of in-joke play, and that sense of for-the-fans fun is in here. “Ariel’s Beginning” works best when it lets go with the flashing humor, as in one excited part where Marina struts her stuff, allowing the filmmakers to parody an iconic shot from “The Little Mermaid.” This sort of knowing goofiness is much welcome, and it prizes the intelligence of kids who will excite the chance to spot the references. Cornelius credits, “Better still, first-time director Peggy Holmes has a knack for quick-paced physical comedy, as she fills the screen with mugging characters, appealing visuals, and a nice, steady flow.”

Cornelius goes on to say, “But that goofiness often gets buried too often underneath a blah story that's much too run-of-the-mill to allow the emotional oomph of the characters' plights to truly impact.” Triton’s sadness is less about character and more about plot, which is good enough if you just want to make a harmless movie collection of video shelf filler to make a few dollars until the next direct-to-video work comes around, but not enough if you want to allow your project to transcend the dreary expectations of the genre. There’s enough going on in “Ariel’s Beginning” that works – kids will enjoy it enough while parents won’t object a lot – but there’s just not enough to make it memorable.

Most Disney direct-to-video sequels are terrible, this we know. “Ariel’s Beginning” goes into the second category, the sequel that’s watchable yet not completely memorable. Cornelius ended his review by saying, “Most grown-up fans will do fine to merely Rent It, but, keeping parents in mind, I'll add that kids will want to rewatch it enough to make a purchase worthwhile. Factoring in the solid transfer and decent extras, I'll call it Recommended.”

In the end, if you didn’t like the second movie, this prequel is for you. I personally thought this was better, but I can see why all the critics would say that Marina is a cheap follow up to Ursula, one of the best Disney villains. However, I say check it out because it’s actually enjoyable and you will love it, especially if you have little kids.

Check in tomorrow when I talk about “The Lion King” pilot movie to their new cartoon series, which will be the final pilot movie in “Disney Sequel Month.”

Cinderella III: A Twist in Time

For many years, Disney set the level with family movies. Edward Perkis stated in his review, “They were the iPod and everyone else was, well, one of those mp3 players that has two percent of the market.” That began to change with the appearance of Pixar, Dreamworks, and a few other studios that constantly created inventive, smart, amazing animated films. It also helped that Disney mixed out some serious trash during the same time. However, Disney has got to make money somehow, and they have a large logbook of beloved characters. This is pretty much why films like the 2007 direct-to-DVD “Cinderella III: A Twist in Time” exist.

The Disney direct-to-DVD sequel list has a basic pattern. Take a familiar character and have their son, daughter, or other related relative or close friend, and put them through a situation which resembles the original theatrical release. Which is why in “The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea,” Ariel’s daughter is stuck on land, but really wants to be a Mermaid. Similarly, “Lady in the Tramp II: Scamp’s Adventure,” Tramp’s son wants to be a junkyard dog. Sequels to “The Lion King” and “Peter Pan” also followed that formula. You really have to applaud the writers of “Cinderella III: A Twist in Time” for giving a small amount of creativity into the story of this sequel.

The movie starts one year after the Prince (Christopher Daniel Barnes) has slipped the glass slipper on Cinderella (Jennifer Hale) and everyone is celebrating their happy life and love in an opening musical number. Perkis mentioned, “This is a full blown musical animated feature and the songs are only mediocre. That sounds bad, but some of the sequel music has been downright awful, so this is a step-up.” Cinderella’s step-sister Anastasia (Tress MacNeille) spies on the celebration and ends up stealing the Fairy Godmother’s (Russi Taylor) wand and giving it to her mother (Susan Blakeslee). The evil Lady Tremaine uses the wand to reverse time to the famous slipper fitting scene in the first movie and causes the slipper to fit Anastasia, leaving Cinderella crying on the side for not marrying the Prince.

The rest of the movie and songs deal with Cinderella trying to meet up with the Prince to show that true love and not the slipper were what brought them together. Anastasia begins to doubt that a love brought about by trickery is rewarding. The main mice from the first movie, Gus (Corey Burton) and Jaq (Rob Paulsen), are back for comic relief and fight with their old enemy, Lucifer the Cat (Frank Welker).

Perkis said, “On the very low standards of direct-to-DVD sequels, this movie isn't as awful as some. The plot is somewhat inventive and there is a healthy dose of humor.” Some characters, mainly the Prince, the King (Andre Stojka), and Anastasia, go through personality growing in the year between the original movie and the events of this movie. Anastasia also goes through a vocal transformation, since her musical lack of skill is a comic point in the original, but she has a nice vocal number in this sequel.

Perkis admitted, “This movie wasn't created and released for middle-aged men (at least not straight men). If you have an animation loving daughter in the target age range of this product (three to nine years old) then you can probably add two stars to my rating.” It’s quick (runtime of an hour and 14 minutes) and while the animation is an obvious downgrade from what you see in theaters, it’s a step (or two) up from bad TV animation. It will keep your children entertained until “The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning” was released the next year.

I’m sorry, but this film is not good at all. I know that people loved this movie over the second one, since this one holds a 71% on Rotten Tomatoes, but I don’t see anything good about this one. It’s really bad and I feel like they tried to redo the first movie, like a lot of the sequels were doing, so I say avoid this one at all costs. However, if you see this one and like it over the second, then that’s fine, but my advice would be not to watch this one.

Check in tomorrow when I finally talk about “The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning” in “Disney Sequel Month.”

The Fox and the Hound 2

There was a time not that long before this where sequels to classic Disney movies were a bad idea. At the end of their stretch, however, they got a little better. That was pushed by the success of the “Lion King” sequels, and it had dropped down into other franchises like “Lilo & Stitch.”

However, there’s still a lot to overcome with the direct-to-DVD sequels, and “The Fox and the Hound 2,” released in 2006, doesn’t quite do this. It’s not nearly as bad as “The Little Mermaid II” or “Mulan II,” but it’s nowhere close to as good as the original.

This sequel follows the same path we saw in sequels to “The Lion King,” “Tarzan” and “Bambi.” Instead of being a proper sequel that takes place after what happened in the first film, or being a prequel to the original, this takes place in the middle.

Tod the fox (Jonah Bobo) and Copper the hound (Harrison Fahn) are friends as pups. They haven’t learned yet that they are meant to be sworn enemies. With the life-threatening danger shown at the end of the first film, it would be hard to put something that dangerous in a story telling the middle part of their lives. Kevin Carr noted, “Instead, the writers gave the movie its own spin of friendship angst that seems more appropriate for a show on the CW network than in a Disney cartoon.”

Tod and Copper go into the county fair to encounter a singing group of dogs. Dixie, voiced by one of the greatest singers and star of her own show, Reba McEntire, is the star of the show, singing the lead and stealing the show. However, when Copper runs into her during one of her meltdowns, the band decides he should be the new lead singer. This brand new fame causes Copper to end his friendship with Tod, leaving him to be his weak backup. Soon Tod and Dixie team up to set things back to the way they were.

Part of what gave the original that charm was the country care with which it was put together. The animation style worked for the then-falling look of the studio textures. The story was small and independent, and it managed to stay real even though it had talking animals.

This sequel tries to be bigger than it should be, going for an epic style but never going farther than the county fair. This story is a little weak, feeling a bit forced. Carr stated, “In several ways, it reminded me of “Lady and the Tramp II” in both its look and flavor. However, there’s no real danger in the show, which softened any emotional attachment I felt.”

The guest star voices of the film include McEntire, who sings a few too many songs on the soundtrack, as well as Patrick Swayze and comedian Jeff Foxworthy. Carr mentioned, “This isn’t exactly the A-listers in animated voices. Still, for a family film, you can do a lot worse.” Kids who are fans of Disney dogs should like this film well.

“The Fox and the Hound 2” is never going to leave the mark as the classic, but it isn’t terrible. It falls somewhere in the middle when you look at the Disney DVD sequels.

I have to admit, as a sequel about a fox and a hound dog as friends that takes place in the middle of the story, the plot felt random. Copper can sing? Where did that come from? This felt really weird and I don’t think that I can figure out what they were thinking when they made this movie. What’s safe to say is that this one can be avoided since I wouldn’t recommend it. Seeing how this is a sequel to one of my most watched, if not “the” most watched, Disney movie, pass it. Or if you want to watch it, only watch it once.

Alright everyone, the wait is finally over. Tomorrow I will be looking the third and thankfully final sequel in the “Cinderella trilogy” for “Disney Sequel Month.”

Brother Bear 2

Now we arrive at another good direct-to-video sequel, “Brother Bear 2,” released in 2006. Traveling to a banquet of berries far off, bears Kenai (Patrick Dempsey) and Koda (Jeremy Suarez) are stopped by Nita (Mandy Moore), a human who Kenai once fallen in love with when they were kids. Looking to break a curse that’s preventing her from marrying, Nita requests the bears help her cross the countryside. On their journey, the connection between Nita and Kenai starts up again, leaving Koda to think if Kenai should really live as a bear, or would he be better if he was human again.

Brain Orndorf said in his review, “Admittedly, it was an animated production glued together by scraps from other Disney hits, but 2003's "Brother Bear" knocked me down in ways few of the Mouse House's offerings have been able to do since I was 10 years old. It was a splash of thrilling autumnal colors, jubilant character development, and confident storytelling that ignored many Disney crutches (chiefly a villain, along with singing and dancing), and preferred to lead with its heart. Over the years I've revisited the film several times, and today find it to be one of the stronger entries in Disney's towering animated empire.”

Though it’s not racking up huge box office numbers in America, “Brother Bear” did well enough on DVD to make a direct-to-video sequel, which is both a promising and terrible idea. While the first film was an animated feature, the sequel is simply a cartoon.

Orndorf noted, “First and foremost, "Bear 2" is missing the majestic hand-animated woodsy vistas to backdrop Kenai and Koda's adventure; the nuanced and trembling voice work from Joaquin Phoenix; the layered, widescreen score by Mark Mancina and pop song interstitials from Phil Collins (Melissa Etheridge substitutes here); and a penetrating story about friendship and the mystical wonders of life that elevated "Bear."”

What we’re given in the end in “Brother Bear 2” are elements that show a downgrade in effort from the first film, but still gives time to be spent with favorite characters. The film remains a charmer, even with a delicate acting job from Patrick Dempsey and a Saturday morning cartoon level of animation. “Brother Bear 2” is a small amusement, and the filmmakers have lightened up the material considerably to interest to a younger crowd. Orndorf mentioned, “Let's put it this way: the original film took its time with the Inuit characters, respecting traditions (even the invented ones), and placing emphasis on careful animation to express the splendor of the spiritual world.” “Brother Bear 2” brings in lesbian comedian Wanda Sykes to play a village elder.

Regardless of the relaxed standards, “Brother Bear 2” still affects with its story of resting romance, intelligently finding ways to challenge Kenai’s decision in the last film to become a bear. Agreeably voiced by Mandy Moore, the addition of Nita adds the only difference the film needs. Orndorf said, “Again, the absence of a mustache-twirling villain is truly something praiseworthy.” Equally hard to resist are returning moose Rutt and Tuke, who Orndorf says “played to the McKenzie Brothers hilt” by Dave Thomas and the greatly missed Rock Moranis. Since the theme of love is in the air, the boys have their own moose’s they’re in love with, played appropriately by some more “SCTV” cast members, Andrea Martin and Catherine O’Hara.

Orndorf admitted, “As money-grabbing animated product goes, "Brother Bear 2" rests nicely on a lowered expectation level, and is hardly an offensive affront to the first film.” The texture and polish is greatly missed, but the characters are so strong and engaging, it’s still entertaining.

In the end, this is another direct-to-video sequel that I recommend watching. If you loved the first one, then you should see this one because it’s watchable and entertaining. You will like this movie, I promise you. No, I’m not making it up, it’s actually good.

Check in tomorrow when I look at a sequel to one of the Disney movies that I watched a lot as a child for the next installment in “Disney Sequel Month.”

Star Wars Holiday Special

Well guys, I saw it. This might quite possibly be the worst Christmas special I have ever seen and I wish that I hadn’t seen it. For those of you who may not know what it might be, it’s the “Star Wars Holiday Special,” released on television in 1978. When you think about it, this should be good. It’s not like they got some of the cast members back for this special. Everyone from the first movie came back. After this was aired for the first time, George Lucas went out of his way to make sure that no one ever sees this horrendous movie. Apparently it was so bad, that Lucas himself is personally ashamed of this. The only reason why I know of this is because I first heard it from James Rolfe when he was reviewing all of the Star Wars movies and said that he wouldn't talk about it. Then he mentioned it again when he was reviewing the Ninja Turtles Christmas Special (yes, they made that one too). When I saw Nostalgia Critic's review of this, I felt the pain he was going through when he was reviewing it. You really want to know how bad it is. Well, since I just finished watching it, I will have to make you sit through this torture with me. Don’t even think of closing this blog. All of you need to feel the pain that I just succumbed to.

At first, it looks like it will be nice since Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) and Han Solo (Harrison Ford) are in the Millennium Falcon running from Star Destroyers since Chewbacca needs to get home to celebrate a Wookie holiday called “Life Day.” What is “Life Day” you ask? If you want to know, you will not be able to learn about it. This special gives us the torture of never explaining the stupid holiday!! What is the point of making a holiday special if you’re not going to explain the holiday to the viewers that do not know it!?

Then it cuts to a nice looking painting of a tree house on the planet Kashyyyk, where Chewbacca’s family, which includes his wife Malla (Mickey Morton), father Itchy (Paul Gale), and son Lumpy (Patty Maloney) are waiting for him. If you thought that there will be subtitles to let us know what these Wookies are saying, you are far from mistaken. Because THESE JERKS DO NOT PUT IT IN THINKING THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE WOOKIE LANGUAGE!!!! Your ears will also bleed with the constant Wookie screams, which gets ANNOYING REALLY FAST!!! Granted it would get annoying at moments when Chewbacca did it in the Original Trilogy, BUT TO HAVE AN ORCHESTRA OF IT CONSTANTLY!?!?!?!? To keep Lumpy occupied so that he doesn’t keep asking where his father is, Malla puts on some sort of a Ringling Brothers hologram that I don’t understand what is going on.

Malla tries to scan the area of any ships, but none come in contact so she contacts Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), who is working with R2D2 (Kenny Baker) on a motor, who both assure her that since Han and Chewbacca left on schedule, they should be on their way but got hung up in something. Malla even contacts a local human trader named Saun Dann, played by Ed Norton from “The Honeymooners,” the late Art Carney, who tells her through a worded message that Han and Chewbacca should be arriving, and he’ll be coming to drop off a package. So Malla puts on a cooking show to try and cook a Life Day meal, which has the late Harvey Korman from “The Carol Burnett Show” on here playing Chef Gormaanda, who looks like Lady Tremaine’s other galaxy relative. Boy are you going to be in for some annoyance because this Chef keeps repeating “Stir, Whip, Stir, Whip, Whip, Whip, Stir, Beat” over and over and over again until your eardrums pop off!! SHUT UP!!!!

When Saun Dann arrives, he puts on some sort of virtual reality “fantasy” segment for Itchy, which has Diahann Carroll in it, and boy are you in for some unclean, discomfort moments for this part. If you think seeing Leia in Jabba’s slave uniform was disturbing, this came before which is “far” worse, if you can believe that. Then you have the part when Leia (Carrie Fisher) and C3PO (Anthony Daniels) contacts Malla to see if Han and Chewbacca are there, and C3PO has to translate to Leia everything that Malla says. Why does he have to do that!? How come Wookies can understand English very well, but Leia cannot understand the Wookies!?!? Are they really that hard for her to understand or was C3PO bored that he felt like he needed to do something by translating to Leia everything Malla says!?!? What is the point here, special!?!?!? Thankfully, Han and Chewbacca are not that far off from Kashyyyk, but they notice that Imperial Soldiers are on there, so they land up north and walk. Lumpy thinks they are home, but when he opens the door, two Stormtroopers and an officer barge in.

The officer is searching for Chewbacca, but Saun Dann and Malla distract him by cooking some food and putting on a Jefferson Starship music video that looks like MTV was on some kind of heroin injection, since that’s what early music videos used to look like. After that, the officer demands searching Lumpy’s room, so they put on a cartoon for Lumpy, which actually is interesting. This segment people remember from everything else in this terrible special, especially since Boba Fett, voiced by Don Francks, makes his first appearance. Actually, why wasn’t the whole special an animated segment? I mean, granted it does look like the early Fast Food Cartoon Commercials, but it still would have been engaging.

Also, call those Troopers heartless jerks for trashing Lumpy’s room and making him go upstairs to clean it up just to keep him busy. Man, do I want to hurt these people. However, Lumpy decides to put on an instruction video with Harvey Korman as some kind of malfunctioning droid that looks like he was drunk while doing this. This part is so boring that it will instantly put you to sleep. In fact, this whole special is boring!!! Nothing about this special will keep your interest!!! I mean, Lumpy is trying to fool the soldiers by faking a transmission message for Stormtroopers to evacuate the area, but do we really need to see this instruction video!? Especially since Harvey Korman gets bored of it himself and falls asleep at the end.

Next up is a news segment on the Mos Eisley Cantina on Tatooine. Alright, is this special trying to be a sketch comedy segment? If they are trying to be like Saturday Night Live, MadTV, The Muppets Show, Second City Television or In Living Color, it failed miserably! Harvey Korman is in this one as Krelman trying to give a flower and hit on the bartender, Ackmena, played by Maude Findlay in “All in the Family” and “Maude” and Dorothy Zbornak in “The Golden Girls,” the late Beatrice "Bea" Arthur. To Bea Arthur’s credit, she was making a good effort of playing the bartender. However, why does the Empire all of a sudden want to put Tatooine on a curfew? That makes no sense! Also, the song “Good Night, But Not Good Bye” sounds like the poor man’s version of Mary Hopkins “Those Were the Days My Friend.” It's completely ridiculous how at the end of every verse is "friend." That shows no originality.

Thankfully, Lumpy fakes the transmission to get everyone out and Han and Chewbacca arrive. However, they grab some crystals and are transported to outer space going through a bright light to the Tree of Life wearing red robes like they are part of some sort of choir. I feel like the Wookies are going to do “Bohemian Rhapsody.” Leia then breaks out into a speech before singing a cheesy “Life Day” song. WILL THIS SPECIAL JUST END ALREADY!?!?!? HOW LONG ARE YOU GOING TO DRAG THIS OUT AND TORTURE EVERYONE!?!?!? WE JUST WANT THIS TO END SO WE CAN GO BACK TO OUR LIVES!!! Did I also forget to mention that Carrie Fisher was doing drugs in the late 1970s, and it's quite evident when you look at her on screen in this garbage?

Seeing how this special is only 97 minutes long, it feels like forever. It’s one of those annoying, boring, irritating, pestering and aggravating specials that you are just torturing yourself watching from first second to last. In fact, this film should be a new form of capital punishment since it feels like it. How is any of this entertaining? Why did George Lucas decide to make this holiday special a year after the original movie came out? Was the first movie "that" successful that they needed to make a holiday special between Episodes four and five? What were you all thinking? Especially since James Earl Jones only says like five lines throughout this special for Darth Vader. How can you do that to one of the greatest villains?

If you think the song is the end, think again. They are just dragging it with Chewbacca flashing back to the original movie like he wants them to know that he’ll come back to them and cutting to him sitting at the table with his family holding hands and bowing their heads in prayer. Maybe they are praying to never appear in any other Star Wars spinoffs since this one was so painful to go through.

George Lucas did a good job keeping this special away from everyone. However, thanks to the birth of the Internet, everyone can see this and shed light to everyone on how horrendous this special is. And people think the Prequels are the worst thing to have the “Star Wars” label on it? THIS IS AN INSULT TO THE STAR WARS NAME!!! And this is coming from a lifelong “Star Wars” fan. Believe me, this is worse than the Prequels, which I still say are not as awful as everyone says they are. Just do yourselves a favor and never try and look for this special online. If you do, you will regret it, I promise you that. You will never feel so bored in your life than seeing this monstrous special.

Oh boy, what a relief. Well, Happy Holidays and Season’s Greetings my online readers. Hopefully everyone had a splendid Christmas and I hope that all of you saw some great Christmas Specials that will be timeless and watch every year around the Christmastime. Merry Christmas, and I’ll see all of you tomorrow on the next entry of “Disney Sequel Month” with another good sequel.

Bambi II

There is a speck of debate going on between fans of the classic Disney animated films. Kevin Carr stated, “It surrounds the question “To sequel or not to sequel.”” Some believe that the classics are eternally amazing and unable to be improved. Those on that side of the ballpark criticize the sequels to all kinds of Disney films.

On the other side of the spectrum, people seem to just want more of the characters they are familiar with and love. They don’t think a sequel will impact the original – no matter how bad it is. Instead, they would rather have a fresh entry of DVD animation for their kids.

Carr admitted, “I used to fall on the side of “not to sequel.” Then I had kids. Like so many other aspects of your life, having kids changes everything.”

Carr goes on to say, “However, I’m not a fan of just any animated sequel that comes down the pike. There have been some real stinkers out there, namely “The Little Mermaid II” and “Mulan II.” However, some of them have been rather sweet or funny (like the “Lion King” sequels) or even comparable to the original (like the “Lilo & Stitch” sequels”).”

“Bambi II,” released in 2006, doesn’t entirely live up to the original, but how could it? The original “Bambi” was an achievement of animation back when it was released in the 1940s, and it holds up to many current animated films – without the use of all that CGI and modern photographic methods.

What made the first “Bambi” so great wasn’t the story, the characters, or even the animation. It was the heart in that film. “Bambi” had such passion and love behind it that it is a classic film in bad feeling of a tortuous story and long musical numbers.

“Bambi II” is given at least some of that care from the Disney studios. Carr mentioned, “I think the filmmakers were forced to use that care. After all, they were making a sequel to the original classic. They couldn’t take the job lightly.”

The story follows young Bambi (Alexander Gould) after his mother (Carolyn Hennesy) is shot and he must go into the forest to live with his father (Patrick Stewart). It takes him through the long winter and into the spring, while he’s still a fawn. Like “The Lion King 1½,” most of the film takes place in the middle of the original, so clearly you know that nothing serious is going to happen to the characters. Carr asked, “Otherwise, how would they return in the spring and get twitterpated?”

The plot doesn’t have a very strong basis, considering there isn’t a lot more to show in development of Bambi outside of the first film. He just saw his mother shot by hunters…how can you top the sadness of that?

Instead, the plot takes a nicer route, showing the Great Prince trying to get used to raising his son. Along the way, Bambi’s friends (Brendon Baerg, Nicky Jones and Andrea Bowen) come out of hibernation to play a little bit, and there’s a rival young deer named Ronno (Anthony Ghannam) who trying to get Faline’s (Bowen) attention. Carr said, “I imagine that this is the same buck that Bambi fights in the original, but the issue is left for assumption.”

Carr went on to say, “I always felt the original “Bambi” was lean on plot and more of an animation calling card for the Disney studios. However, that doesn’t take away from its lovability. My kids love the original, and they are quite fond of the new chapter.”

Isn’t that who this film was made for?

“Bambi II” won’t be marked in Disney history like the classic original, but it will be enjoyed by kids who are fans of the original. However, Disney has the vault which holds our beloved classics, but when they get released; there is only a limited time for people to buy the DVD or you will have to wait until they release it again. If “Bambi” is not in the vault, I say go out and buy it along with the sequel.

In all honesty, when I saw this sequel, I thought that it was nice. This is another sequel that I say check out because I think there is a loving meaning behind this film. Definitely see it because I don’t see this as a disappointment.

Now, there is a certain Holiday Special that I’m thinking of seeing later on today, which many consider to be one of the worse, or the absolute worst special ever. Stay tuned later today because I have to see it to see how bad it is. Although I’m sure that I will regret it later.

Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens

As I stated this morning, I went to see the new “Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens,” which was released on the 18^th, today. Now that I have seen it, I will review that right now.

The wait is over. The most hyped movie this year has come out. Peter Travers stated in his review, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens, number seven in the series for those who wouldn't know a Jedi from a Jar Jar, emerges bloody with unrealistic expectations but gloriously unbowed.” It’s everything we go to see in the theaters – marvelous adventure that leaves us surprised, scared and overjoyed. This one not so much since we could practically predict what was going to happen after the first few minutes. Anyways, let’s do our Chewbacca impression for director J.J. Abrams who takes us back into the world that George Lucas created in his previous six installments.

However, this film doesn’t really do anything new. This is pretty much an updated remake of “Star Wars: A New Hope,” the 1977 original that changed what movie space epics do and made us become the Force. Three decades have passed. Our protagonists have aged, which consist of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), Princess Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher) and Han Solo (Harrison Ford). It’s nice that Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew), C3PO (Anthony Daniels) and R2D2 (Kenny Baker and Jimmy Vee) look exactly the same. The newcomers in here are Rey (Daisy Ridley), a desert searcher abandoned by her family on Jukku, Finn (John Boyega), and AWOL stormtrooper who hates murder, and Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac), a pilot working for Leia, who is now a general leading the Resistance.

Now wait a minute. Didn’t the 1983 classic “Return of the Jedi” have the Ewoks celebrating the death of Darth Vader and the end of the Empire? True, but a “Star Wars” movie would be nothing without Sith Lords. That’s why Abrams and cowriters Michael Arndt and Lawrence Kasdan (co-writer of “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Return of the Jedi”) give us a thrill. Travers noted, “A fresh malevolence called the First Order has emerged from the ruins of the Empire.” Supreme Leader Snoke, played by Andy Serkis doing his famous motion capture, giving orders from a space station that Travers describes, “makes the Death Star look like a Lego.” His young Padawan learner in this one comes in the form of Kylo Ren, played by Adam Driver, who Travers says is, “a masked figure who communes so regularly with Vader's mangled helmet that a long future in therapy is a given.” The obvious attempt to clone Vader, one of the greatest villains in film history, is completely obvious, but Driver, masked and unmasked, gives him fascinating and memorable shapes.

As any “Star Wars” fan knows, bloodlines are essential to the plot. There are moments when everyone is related in some sort of a way. (The Lucas template has been taken from sources as varied as the Bible, Shakespeare, Oedipus Rex and Road Runner cartoons.) Evil stuff occurs to those who give spoilers about this franchise. Travers admitted, “But I will say this: The action, from lightsaber duels to X-wing dogfights with TIE Fighters, is explosive and buoyed by John Williams' exultant score.” The movie is fairly entertaining. Abrams knows how to build a laugh and fill the emotional moments between words. He’s a fanboy who knows what fanboys want, but he also gives the best for everyone else. Putting a black actor, a white actress and a Latino as the stars of the movie is the right idea that could have been completely wrong. Instead, it’s quietly making history.

Travers credited, “Isaac oozes flyboy charm, Boyega, bracingly comic and cunning, is a find, and Ridley (both she and Boyega are Brits) is a star in the making. Rey is the kind of can-do woman of heart and mind who can make a franchise. I'm not just talking marketing. Her scenes with the equally purposeful Leia have a femcentric wit and warmth.” The new actors are all amazing. However, the one that cannot have a steal stolen is BB-8, a droid that is orange-and-white. No one, except for Ford who kills this film form his first crooked smile. If you don’t laugh when Ford’s Han Solo reenters the Millennium Flacon, who Rey also says that the spacecraft is garbage (rude!), you deserve to be with the Sith Lords. “Chewie, we’re home,” is his first line. That is so true that it has never been said before.

As much as I liked this film, I do feel sad that Abrams didn’t give us anything new. I wanted a new story and everything different, but he just satisfied the fanboys who hated the Prequels, that I still think are not in any way atrocious like everyone else says. Then again, none of the “Star Wars” movies are perfect films because those don’t exist. However, it was fun, entertaining, and the space scenes and lightsaber fights were incredible. I rate this movie, like I have with the rest of the movies, a solid 10+. You should definitely go to the theater to watch this movie because I think you will love it. Don't be surprised that you can predict what is going to happen after the first few minutes. I'm not giving any spoilers since the film has only been out for almost a week. The reason we went today as opposed to opening weekend was because we were afraid that the tickets were already going to be sold out and we didn't buy it in advance. However, the spoiler with Han I was told by a friend, but I won't say what happens to him, although I think you already know.

My brother said that Disney, since they own the rights to this franchise now, is planning on keep making sequels to this film. I don’t see a reason to. I say stop after nine, but you never know because plans might change. We have a planned five movies in the next five years, which sounds like fun, but don’t try and do what Marvel did because it may not work. Just leave it to one franchise and don’t try it with anything else. Actually, I’m curious as to how DC does it with the Justice League franchise.

Alright, now that I have said all of this, stay tuned tomorrow for the next installment in “Disney Sequel Month,” which is another good sequel.

Kronk's New Groove

Now we come to a fairly entertaining sequel, Kronk’s New Groove, released in 2005. The basic story is that Kronk (Patrick Warburton) finds out that his father (John Mahoney) is coming to visit him, so he tries everything he thinks of to impress him. After every single one of his plans go bad, his friends try to help him give his father what he wants. Kronk then figures out that his friends and family are more important than anything else.

To be completely honest, this is one of the selected handfuls of Disney sequels that I enjoyed watching. Anna Catherine admitted in her review, “I watched it directly after watching The Emperor's New Groove, so I caught a lot of inside jokes and other funny stuff.   In other words, I was a giggly mess for almost four hours.”

Kronk, the right hand man/wannabe chef from the previous film, is now a chef and is happy with his job at Mudka’s Meat Hut. He’s doing what he dreamed to do as head cook of the restaurant and has many friends in the townspeople. Once he receives a letter that his father is going to visit him, he freaks. He tells the waitress, voiced by Patti Deutsch, one of his childhood memories.

Kronk tells waitress that when he was a child, his father never appreciated him. Kronk’s only wish was to be a chef and Kronk’s father never supported him. His father wanted for him to do was to settle down with a wife and children in a big house on a hill. Obviously, Kronk was not able to do that. He lied to his father in every one of his letters about his large house and his family just so he can make his father happy. Kronk tells the waitress that he almost had that.

Yzma, the villain from the last movie, reprised by Eartha Kitt, now is back with her schemes. She recruited Kronk’s assistance to sell “youth potions” to the people at the senior home. When the seniors don’t have any more money to buy them, they sell the senior home to Kronk. Kronk does get his dream home on a hill. After finding out that the “youth potion” was only a scam, he gives the senior home back.

At Camp Chippamunka, Kronk meets Miss Birdwell, voiced by Tracey Ullman. At first, the two are immediate enemies. Later, after finding out that they have same interests, they fall in love. When Tipo, one of Kronk’s squirrel recruits, voiced by Eli Russell Linnetz, cheats in one of the contests, Kronk takes the blame. Miss Birdwell is angry, and the two break up.

When Kronk’s father shows up at Mudka’s Meat Hut, everyone agrees to help him out with his dishonesty. Pacha (John Goodman) agrees to let his wife (Wendie Malick) and his children Chaca (Jessie Flower) and Tipo play as the wife and children and Pacha disguises as the mother-in-law, causing confusion and chaos. Kronk eventually has to confess that he did not have what his father wanted him to have. You have to watch the movie to see if his father still accepts him for the way he is.

Catherine admitted, “Though not quite as funny as the original, Kronk's New Groove still had me giggling the entire way through!” Unlike the first movie, this move has more of a moral to the story. This film tells you to be yourself, which is actually a hard thing to do, but that’s how you need to live your life. Catherine ended her review by saying, “Also, you'll probably want to bake after this, so pull out your favorite spinach puffs recipe!”

I do think that the first movie was more enjoyable than this, but this one is entertaining in its own way. Also, David Spade comes back as Emperor Kuzco in a smaller role, since this movie’s main focus is on Kronk. When I saw this movie, I was laughing throughout and I don’t think it’s as bad as everyone thinks it is. So I’ll say to watch this because you will have an entertaining time throughout the duration of the movie.

Heads up everyone: I’m going to be seeing the new Star Wars movie today, so I will be reviewing that later on. That is right for this month since this is, as I stated after every review, “Disney Sequel Month.”

Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has a Glitch/Leroy and Stitch

Kevin Carr started his review out by saying, “When it comes to “Lilo & Stitch,” I have to admit that I’m a bit biased. I really think the characters are cute. It’s one of the most clever, original and warm Disney films in the past decade. I loved the original movie, including its style and animation.”

Carr goes on to say, “Even the television show is fun to watch. Normally, these Disney-films-turned-television-shows are an excuse for substandard animation and weak stories. And while the “Lilo & Stitch” television show isn’t as slick as the feature, it’s still a great little show.”

Now comes the 2005 sequel, “Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch Has a Glitch.” Now you might be wondering why this has a “2” in the title when technically “Stitch: The Movie” was the second in the series? Here’s the reason: this movie takes place before “Stitch! The Movie” and the cartoon show.

In this film, Stitch (Chris Sanders) is starting to act strange around Lilo (Dakota Fanning) and Nani (Tia Carrere). At first, Lilo insists that his goodness level is still high. However, when Stitch bugs out and starts creating issues, he’s sure his badness level is rising. With the help of Jumba, voiced by David Ogden Stiers, they find out that his molecules are losing energy because he was never fully charged at all. (Carr says, “I know this is kinda weak, but work with me here. It’s a kid’s show.”)

Even though Lilo is having problems living up to her mother’s skill at hula, Stitch is slowing losing his mind. Jumba is hysterically trying to find some way to recharge Stitch while Pleakley (Kevin McDonald) is desperately trying to help David (Jason Scott Lee) form his relationship with Nani.

The story is kind of fragile, but the real charm of “Lilo & Stitch” is the characters and their interactions. By having it take place in Hawaii, there’s a number of great scenery and chances for Lilo to go on about Elvis. The best parts of this film are when Lilo and Stitch are together.

As I stated before, Disney got the great child actress Dakota Fanning to voice Lilo. Carr admitted, “While I’m a huge fan of this little girl, she is a bit wasted in this role. I don’t see much of a difference between this Lilo and the Lilo in past shows. She does a great job with the role, however, and offers the same energy and fun I’ve grown accustomed to with Lilo.”

It’s nice to see one of the Disney animated franchises keep its spirit with every sequel and television show. There’s no insane hamster in this movie, but hold on tight. He appeared in the next sequel: “Leroy & Stitch,” which came out in 2006.

You want to know how that one is. Well, here are my thoughts:

“Leroy & Stitch” is the third sequel to the classic “Lilo & Stitch” within a short four years, taking place after “Lilo & Stitch 2” and “Stitch! The Movie” (there was also a cartoon show and a DVD Game). As you might have thought, the film has basically been targeted mainly to the fans of the show – though the surprisingly impressive animation and addition of random parts of humor basically makes sure that the movie never really becomes a complete bore. The film takes place around the efforts of Lilo (reprised by Daveigh Chase) and her three alien friends (Stitch, Pleakley and Dr. Jumba) to stop the evil Dr. Hamsterviel, voiced by Jeff Bennett, who – with his creation of an evil Stitch clone (also Chris Sanders) – has plans on, you guessed it, universal control. If that’s not all, “Leroy & Stitch” never really feels like the unnecessary sequel that one now categorizes with the Disney studio. David Nusair stated in his review, “There's a continuing storyline at work here, and it's clear that viewers who've been with the series since the very beginning will get a whole lot more out of the movie than neophytes.” With that mentioned, it seems really obvious that – when looking at animated classics like “The Lion King” and “Beauty and the Beast” – these films are mainly meant to satisfy only the younger children (who will obviously have fun with Stitch’s wide-ranging incidents). Thankfully, the movie’s end looks like it will not have any other sequels that are planned – a sigh of relief, that’s for sure.

I do say that you should watch “Lilo & Stitch 2,” but I would say not to bother with “Leroy and Stitch.” I guess the reason why I didn’t really get into this one is probably because I never saw the animated series, so that’s why I wasn’t fond of it. However, with that said, this concludes my reviews on the “Lilo & Stitch” franchise.

Check in tomorrow when I talk about another sequel that I found entertaining, but people hated. Entertainment is essential to these movies in “Disney Sequel Month.”

Mulan II

Walt Disney’s corpse has been rolling around in his grave for the last decade as the incompetent people managing his famous animation department have slowly but surely dug his legacy in his grave with him. It was a lot to hope that “Mulan,” the one movie that was able to move Disney studios forward since the days of “Beauty and the Beast” and “Aladdin,” might stand clean and idle. Scott Gwin said in his review, “Instead, like so many other Disney classics, Mulan has been unceremoniously dumped into the sequel mill only to be spit back out like sausage links in little overly-processed, bite-sized, turd-shaped lumps.” The story of Mulan and crew starts exactly where the first movie ended. Mulan (Ming-Na Wen) has returned home and picked up doing her household chores, Shang (B.D. Wong) has finally decided to propose to Mulan (Gwin said, “well, I say finally, but the two have only been a couple for a month when he pops the question”), and everything is well in China. Yes, everything is well, except for Mushu, Mulan’s guardian dragon. He is told that if Mulan gets married, his job of protecting Mulan will be passed over to Shang’s family ancestors, making Mushu to be laid off and going back to banging the ceremonial family gong.

As Mushu goes to find a way to break up Mulan and Shang’s relationship, the two are called by the Emperor of China, voiced by Mr. Miyagi himself, the late Pat Morita, to complete a very important mission to once again save China. This time, the Mongols are threatening to invade. The only way to keep the Mongols out of China is to create an alliance with the really small, and apparently less smart northern nation of Qui Gong. If that plot point doesn’t make sense, don’t worry. The whole movie makes even less sense. The only way to create an alliance is for the Emperor’s three daughters, voiced by the hot Lucy Liu, Sandra Oh, and Lauren Tom, to marry the three sons of the lord of Qui Gong. Obviously, in order for the marriages to occur, Shang and Mulan must safely escort the three imperial princesses to Qui Gong and their new fiancés. Gedde Watanabe, Harvey Fierstein and Jerry Tondo return as Chien-Po, Ling and Yao.

The biggest problem in the plan comes, not from outside the group, but from within. The three princesses, out of their duty to China, have agreed to marry three men they have never met. Gwin notes, “This doesn’t rest well with the extremely touchy-feely Mulan who believes the princesses should marry whom they wish, no matter how much danger it means for the entire nation of China. All of this is eclipsed by Shang and Mulan’s premarital problems as they discover, thanks to Mushu’s meddling, just how opposite their personalities are. Thank goodness for the Chinese wisdom of Yin and Yang showing them that no matter how different they are, they can still wear really cool matching necklaces to remind them of it.”

I agree with Gwin when he says, “Mulan II is a direct-to-DVD disgrace that takes everything excellent about its predecessor film, rips it to shreds, and uses it for rat cage lining. The honor and culture of the ancient Chinese people is gone, the songs are asinine, the dialogue contrived and the characters unrecognizably contorted into simplistic caricatures.” Should we be surprised? No, after all this is Disney we’re talking about. Should we be disappointed? More than ever. The land, music, story and characters that were so charming and enchanting the first time around have been reduced to complete absurdity. Now the first film was meant for all ages, this sequel, like so many others, is simply meant for kindergarten students.

Gwin said, “In that respect Disney has succeeded in creating a ridiculously infantile movie that parents will be able to put on eternal repeat play for their youngsters. That is, so long as they don’t mind their kids learning the questionable lesson that you can live your life however you want to, regardless of the law or the promises you’ve made. It won’t matter because your magical dragon will always be there to clean up the mess and make you look like you were right all along.”

Most of the famous voice actors from “Mulan” have returned except for Eddie Murphy, who has been replaced by Mark Moseley, who seems to imitate Murphy flawlessly. The animation and artwork are also pretty good for a low budget sequel. Sadly, those are the only things that help this complete waste of animation talent. Disney should be ashamed, but we know they won’t be. As they’ve shown repeatedly, their profits from a straight-to-video sequel will always be worth more than the truth of their storytelling.

As you might have guessed, this sequel is an insult. I didn’t really like Mushu in this movie, and overall, I can't really give them credit for trying. I don’t recommend this, and I strongly think everyone else should avoid this. This sequel insults the original and fans of the original movie, like myself, will be enraged after seeing this. Everything that made the first movie so epic was just tarnished in this sequel, and Mulan looks as though she didn't learn anything from the first movie. Instead, they took her from a brave, fearless warrior to a girly-girl, which is just embarrassing. With no Eddie Murphy, which is good since he probably was being paid more by DreamWorks to continue voicing Donkey from the Shrek franchise.

Look out tomorrow when I review the remaining two “Lilo & Stitch” sequels in “Disney Sequel Month.”