The Day the Earth Blew Up: A Looney Tunes Movie

Tonight, on Max, I saw “The Day the Earth Blew Up: A Looney Tunes Movie,” released theatrically in March, but released yesterday on Max. As a fan of the Looney Tunes, seeing how they were probably the first cartoons I saw as a child, I had to see this. How is this, seeing how this is getting pretty good reviews.

It’s strange to see that the Looney Tunes cast – the crazy cartoon characters who become identical with the name “Warner Bros” – has never starred in a fully animated feature-length movie before this new one.

Sean P. Means said in his review, “Then you watch the movie, which is packed to the gills with inventive gags and features two of the troupe’s most engaging characters, and see that sustaining the Looney Tunes’ antics for 90 minutes isn’t as easy as it looks.”

The movie tells us the origin story of Porky Pig and Daffy Duck (Eric Bauza, the current holder of Mel Blanc as the voice of many characters), brothers from another species who are raised since babies by friendly Farmer Jim (Fred Tatasciore). They live together in the house Farmer Jim left them, which has become the bane in the neighborhood – and is dilapidated after a sudden meteorite made a huge hole on the roof before landing just out of town.

An astronomer, voiced by voiced by Tatasciore, sees the meteorite and follows it to where it crashed, and realizes that it’s not a meteorite but a UFO. Before he can call the police, the green goo from the UFO turns him into a zombie, told to spread the brain-altering goo to all of Earth. How he is able to do that is through the town’s gum factory – where Porky and Daffy just landed entry-level jobs.

The story, which is a lot, starts when Daffy convinces Porky that there’s something evil about the factory’s new gum flavor. They ask the help of the factory’s taste tester scientist, Petunia Pig, voiced by Candi Milo, who doesn’t like the new gum flavor. The three find themselves going up against an alien, known only as the Invader, voiced by Peter MacNicol, who says he only wants Earth’s most precious resource. (No spoilers, but it is funny.)

Director Peter Browngardt and the 11 writers credited with the screenplay show how much they love the classic Looney Tunes characters and vibe, and largely succeed in showing that classic feel to a new audience. Means notes, “The movie opts to show Daffy in his more manic phase — the live wire of Robert Clampett’s shorts, rather than the cynical con artist of the Chuck Jones era — to match Porky’s nervous energy.” (One Easter egg comes when Porky and Daffy eat at a diner named after Clampett, and the waitress is voiced by Clampett’s daughter, Ruth.)

Means points out, “It’s notable that while Warner Bros. Animation made “The Day the Earth Blew Up,” Warner Bros. Pictures — who shelved the already completed “Coyote vs. Acme” as a write-off — turned over distribution to a smaller company, Ketchup Entertainment. It’s another sad sign that the corporate overlords at Warner Bros. have no love for the movies.”

Means continues, “The movie’s length exposes a paradox: The plot requires passages where the action slows down and the audience can take a break from that manic energy — but it’s that mania that makes the Looney Tunes who and what they are, so those slower moments expose the cracks in the facade.” When the Looney Tunes can create perfect stories in eight minutes, taking 90 minutes feels like a superfluous bonus, no matter how many jokes they can insert into that realm.

You have to see this on Max. If you’re a Looney Tunes fan, this is one for you. You will love this film a lot, as this is fully animated and no live action actors are put into this film. If you have Max, then find this and put it on because you will have a great time laughing at it, especially with the twist at the climax of the movie. I promise you, there is nothing in this movie that will upset anyone, hopefully.

Thank you for joining in on this review tonight. Stay tuned next month to see what I will review next.

Basic Instinct 2

“Basic Instinct 2,” released in 2006, resembles its heroine: It gets off by living dangerously. Here is a movie so shameful and ridiculous it is either 1. Suicidal or 2. Aching with a horrible fascination. Roger Ebert leaned towards the second option then said, “It’s a lot of things, but boring is not one of them. I cannot recommend the movie, but … why the heck can’t I? Just because it’s godawful? What kind of reason is that for staying away from a movie? Godawful and boring, that would be a reason.”

Ebert continued, “I have here an e-mail from Adam Burke, a reader who says, “I’m tired of reading your reviews where you give a movie three stars but make sure we know it isn’t a great movie. You always seem to want to cover your butt, making sure we know you’re smarter than the movie.” He has a point. Of course I am smarter than most movies, but so are you. That doesn’t always prevent us from enjoying them. What Burke doesn’t mention is my other maddening tendency, which is to give a movie 1-1/2 stars and then hint that it’s really better than that.”

Which brings us full circle to “Basic Instinct 2.” It has a daring plot that depends on 1. A psychopathic serial killer being able to manipulate everyone in her life, or 2. A woman who unbelievably seems to be a psychopathic serial killer, while there is 3. An alternative explanation for everything. Ebert said, “True, (a), (b) or (c) are equally impossible, but they’re the only possibilities, I think.” That leaves us feeling cheated at the end, which is how everyone in the film feels, so we end up there together.

So much for the plot. Now for Sharon Stone. She must have gotten some of the worst reviews in years, but she delivers the goods. Playing Catherine Tramell, a terrible novelist who plays with life, death, and love while doing “research” for her next best seller, Stone brings a compelling fascination to her performance. You don’t believe it, but you can’t keep your eyes away. She talks bad better than anyone in the movies. She can spend hours working her way through “every position in Masters and Johnson,” she sighs regretfully, and forget all about it in a week, “but I’d remember it if a man died while making love to me.”

She says this, and lots of other things, to a shrink named Dr. Michael Glass, played by David Morrissey. He’s selected by the courts to evaluate her mental state after the car she is driving goes off a bridge at 110 MPH and her passenger, a soccer player, dies. In court, we see she has a “risk addiction” so severe that “the only limit for her would be her own death.” They say with any addiction you have to hit bottom. Death may be taking it too far.

Outside the courts after unlikely legal procedures, she comes slobbering after Dr. Glass, who badly accepts her as a client. Also involved in this disaster are his ex-wife (Indira Varma), a gossip writer (Hugh Dancy) his ex-wife is currently in a relationship with, a Freudian in a wig (Heathcote Williams), a fellow shrink (Charlotte Rampling) who warns Glass he is playing with fire, and a cop (David Thewlis) who looks around the case convinced that if something fishy is not currently happening at this moment, it was happening not very long ago.

Some of these people die horribly during the course of the film, possibly giving Tramell something to remember. Some of them are suspected of the murders. The details are not very important. Ebert said, “What matters are the long scenes of dialogue in which Tramell mind-whacks Dr. Glass with speculations so detailed they rival the limerick about who did what, and with which, and to whom.”

The Catherine Tramell role cannot be played well, but Sharon Stone can play it better than any other actress. Ebert said, “The director, Michael Caton-Jones, alternates smoldering closeups with towering dominatrix poses, and there’s an extended Jacuzzi sequence in which we get the much-advertised full frontal nudity — which does not, somehow, manage to be full, frontal and nude all at the same time. First a little nude, then a little full, then a little frontal, driving us crazy trying to load her simultaneously onto our hard drive.”

Ebert described, “Dr. Glass is played by David Morrissey as a subdued, repressed basket case who listens to Tramell with a stony expression on his face. This is because he is either (a) suppressing his desire to ravage her in lustful abandon, or (b) suppressing delirious laughter. I’ll bet there are outtakes of Stone and Morrissey cracking up.” How else does someone respond to dialogue like, “Don’t take it so hard – even Oedipus didn’t see his mother coming.”

Ebert said, ““Basic Instinct 2” is not good in any rational or defensible way, but not bad in irrational and indefensible ways. I savored the icy abstraction of the modern architecture, which made the people look like they came with the building. I grinned at that absurd phallic skyscraper that really does exist in London. I liked the recklessness of the sex-and-speed sequence that opens the movie (and, curiously, looks to have been shot in Chicago). I could appreciate the plot once I accepted that it was simply jerking my chain. You can wallow in it. Speaking of wallowing in the plot, I am reminded of another of today’s e-mails, from Coralyn Sheridan, who tells me that in Parma, they say, “The music of Verdi is like a pig: Nothing goes to waste.” Those Parmesans.”

Ebert ended his review by saying, “Of Sharon Stone, what can I say except that there is within most men a private place that responds to an aggressive sexual challenge, especially when it’s delivered like a lurid torch song, and Stone plays those notes like she worked out her own fingering.”

This is a terrible sequel. Why did they see a need to make a sequel to “Basic Instinct?” Was there really a story to tell in the sequel, especially since the first one didn’t end in a way that would hint a sequel. Don’t make the mistake of seeing the sequel because it is just awful. You will not like it at all. They were talking about making a third one, but thankfully that has been scrapped.

Alright everyone, we have now ended “Sharon Stone Month.” Hopefully everyone enjoyed this month. Sorry I had to end off on a terrible note, but that’s what happens sometimes. Next month, I will be bringing in some more reviews.

The Mighty

“You need a brain, I need legs – and the Wizard of Oz doesn’t live in south Cincinnati.”

This is said by a handicapped child named Kevin to a tall boy named Max, in the 1998 movie, “The Mighty.” They’re both in seventh grade in Cincinnati – Max for the third time – and they’re both loners.

Roger Ebert pointed out in his review, “Max, known to his cruel classmates as the Missing Link, feels like Godzilla as he lumbers down the school corridors, and says, “Sometimes seems like the whole world has just seen me on `America’s Most Wanted.’”” Kevin has Morquio’s syndrome, which causes his bones to stop growing despite his organs continuing to grow, until finally, with what is said in the movie, “his heart will get too big for his body.” Ebert said, “Kevin and Max are the heroes of Freak, the Mighty, a best-selling children’s book by Rodman Philbrick that has been embraced by kids who feel they stand out like sore thumbs. (And what kid doesn’t?)” This is a story about how two friends can work together to stand up to everyone, and it’s about how Kevin’s example helps Max fix a life that started when his father murdered his mother.

At first, it’s not a friendship that will end up being close. Kevin moves in next door to Max, who spies across the back fence at the little kid, who wears braces and glasses, test flies a model flying machine he calls an “Ornothopter” (“I gave birth to a 7½-pound dictionary,” his mother says with a sigh). In gym class, a bully, played by Joe Perrino, throws a basketball to knock Kevin off his crutches, and Max is blamed for that. Strange when Max goes for remedial reading lessons and finds out that Kevin is his tutor. “I didn’t throw the basketball,” Max tells Kevin, who calls Max a chump for taking the blame for someone else.

They read King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, and it is Arthurian courage that Kevin believes will help their friendship. Soon they arrive at a deal that will help them both out: Kevin rides on Max’s shoulders, and they even play basketball that way. Ebert noted, “The extra height is great for lay-ups. (Did the book’s author see “Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome,” where another giant and another dwarf teamed up to create the character Master-Blaster?)” We meet their dependents. Kevin’s mother, played by Sharon Stone, struggles to keep Kevin out of “special schools” and help him lead the fullest possible life. Max’s grandparents, Gram and Grim (Gena Rowlands and Harry Dean Stanton) are raising him, not without love, after his mother’s murder and his father (the late James Gandolfini) with to prison.

Ebert pointed out, “The last third of the movie involves derring-do that’s highly improbable, especially a makeshift toboggan ride.” However, for the children audiences the movie is targeted at, these journeys will be exciting and not too violent, and they do give both boys a chance to use the code of the Round Table in their lives.

“The Mighty” is an emotionally touching movie (Ebert noted, “much like the recent and somewhat similar “Simon Birch,” which is about a friendship between a fatherless boy and a dwarf”). It is a little stronger in its main theme, which is we all have flaws, we are not perfect, but together we can be more than the total of ourselves.

Much of the film’s charm comes from the performance. Ebert mentioned, “Elden Henson, with his big, round Scandinavian face and football lineman’s body, brings a shyness and vulnerability to Max. He’s stronger than the bullies who pick on him, but he has retreated into himself.” Kieran Culken, as Kevin, looks like his older brother Macaulay but doesn’t play the cute kid as much and has a nice unsentimental persona when he levels with Max. Finally, the adults sensitively do what their roles ask without trying to steal the movie from the protagonists. (There’s also a nice supporting role for Gillian Anderson as a woman whose stolen purse sets up the movie’s climax.) Ebert said, “What I liked most about the movie is the way it shows that imagination can be a weapon in life.” At the first reading lesson, Kevin tells Max that every word is part of a picture, every sentence is a picture, and you put them all together in your head, if you have an imagination. Max has never thought of that, and when reading about King Arthur is taken to a place outside his basement bedroom and lonely school life, and learns of decency and romance. No child is completely a prisoner of a sad childhood if he can read and has books. They are the key to what can be, and that is the main message of “The Mighty.”

I remember when I was a kid, I saw my brother watching this movie. I don’t know if he got it from the library, or Blockbusters, or if it was maybe playing on TV, but I remember seeing a little bit of the film with him. I had completely forgotten about this movie for years until a few years back, I looked up online a movie about a kid who dies of an enlarged heart and “The Mighty” came up. I didn’t know this was based on a book, but when I saw this film on YouTube, I thought this was really good and very emotional. No one seems to talk about this and it is very underrated. Check it out and see for yourself. You will love this movie, I promise.

Next week I will end “Sharon Stone Month” with the “Basic Instinct” sequel. Never heard of it? Neither did I until I looked it up and you’ll see what a mess of a sequel it was next week.

Basic Instinct

The beginning is a rough combination of intercourse, nudity, and violent ice pick damage as retired rock star Johnny Boz, played by Bill Cable, is murdered by a blonde woman. San Francisco Police Detective Nick Curran, played by Michael Douglas, gets the homicide investigation, which must be handled carefully, as Boz was a civic-minded sponsor to the mayor’s election fund. Curran immediately investigates the girlfriend, Catherine Tramell, played by Sharon Stone, who is cruelly sarcastic, tricky, charming, overconfident, and a professional at mind games and pulling strings. Mike Massie said in his review, “But Curran is determined to uncover her secrets, and he’s certain that his sauce-riddled, alcohol-fueled, accidental tourist-shooting, internal affairs-muckraked past won’t get in the way.”

Tramell soon becomes the only suspect, especially when they find out that she wrote a book the year before about a rock star who is murdered by his girlfriend…with an ice pick. Massie noted, “A simple ride from her house to the precinct for a routine interrogation reveals her incredible control over words, her psychological prowess with cat-and-mouse games, and her ability to beat a lie detector test. She’s cold, calculating, and mysterious; whether or not she’s a psychopathic obsessive or a vicious killer with the perfect alibi, all the clues point in her direction alone.” As nick works over his difficult past, his unstable relationship with departmental therapist Beth Garner, played by Jeanne Tripplehorn, and an increasing obsession with Catherine, he learns of her teaching at Berkeley and the death of a professor there who was, quite creepily, stabbed to death with an ice pick.

Massie mentions, “If it’s 1992, why does everyone have giant blocks of ice and picks in their homes? Michael Douglas turns in one of his finest performances as the bewitched detective, with convincing expressions, natural delivery, and a range of startling emotions. Stone is just as effective, despite appearing a touch contrived with her conspiratorial approach to allurement and fast-and-loose attitude towards her opponents. The main source of intrigue, however, comes from writer Joe Eszterhas’ tricky dialogue – a screenplay that was apparently written in just a few days and sold for an unheard-of $3 million. Jerry Goldsmith’s suspenseful, noirish score compliments every aspect just as sharply, and would pick up an Academy Award nomination for its significance.”

Everything in “Basic Instinct,” released in 1992, is a little much, from the blood-spilling violence to the revealing nudity (including the infamous scene of Stone uncrossing and crossing her legs, showing what was then assumed to be too risky for an R rating) and even to the romance. Obviously, this excessiveness is a trademark of director Paul Verhoeven. Massie mentioned, “Like the jagged surfaces of freshly cracked ice chunks, all of the details of the characters and their relationships are rough around the edges, muddied up to prevent anyone from being undesirably clean cut.”

Verhoeven is skillful at psychological thrillers with role reversals, mysterious camerawork duplicating previous shots, and tortuously complex plot twists. Massie said, “Even while he’s pushing buttons and stretching the boundaries of conventionality, he still incorporates artsy filmmaking techniques.” Changing from his previous two films, “Robocop” and “Total Recall,” both equally playing with the censors despite being very intelligent science-fiction films, this fearless director has created a huge controversial, huge erotic murder/mystery that has become an architype of the genre.

I remember years ago on YouTube; I saw WWE spoof the infamous interrogation scene for a promo to WrestleMania. I did see the actual scene on YouTube later, but never saw the film until years later when I was exercising. This is not what I was expecting from this film, but it is one that has to be seen to be believed. Currently, this is streaming on MGM+ and Paramount+, so you can see it on there, if you want to. If you want to see this, make sure that there are no children or your parents in the room, given how risky of a film this is. This film was going to be given an NC-17 rating, but because of some scenes that were removed due to the MPAA, it was given an R rating.

Next week, I will review a film that I remember seeing my brother watching when I was a kid, forgot about it, then looked up the film and saw it on YouTube, which is an emotional one that everyone should see, in “Sharon Stone Month.”

Total Recall

This month, I will be looking at all the films I have seen that have Sharon Stone in it. Let’s get started with the 1990 sci-fi classic, “Total Recall.”

There may be people who overlook Arnold Schwarzenegger’s performance in “Total Recall” – who think he isn’t really acting. However, the performance is one of the reasons the movie works perfectly. He isn’t a superhero this time, but he fights like one. He’s a confused and scared innocent, a man betrayed by what he thought was reality. Roger Ebert said in his review, “And in his vulnerability, he opens the way for “Total Recall” to be more than simply an action, violence and special effects extravaganza.”

There is a lot of action and violence in the movie, and almost every shot seems to represent some type of special effect. Eber noted, “This is one of the most complex and visually interesting science fiction movies in a long time.” However, the plot, based on a story by science fiction writer Phillip K. Dick, is about an exciting idea: What would happen if you could be supplied with memories? If your entire “past,” right until this very second, could be inserted in you, replacing the experiences you had lived through? That’s what seems to happen to Quaid, played by Schwarzenegger, however sometimes neither he nor we can be completely sure. We meet him in a future society where he lives in a comfortable apartment with his beautiful wife, and goes to work every day at a construction job. He life looks relaxing, but he keeps having dreams about Mars – dreams that finally inspire him to sign up with a weird travel agency that gives him the memory of a vacation instead of a real one.

Ebert notes, “What they do is, they strap you into a machine and beam the memories into your mind, so that it seems utterly convincing to you that you’ve been to Mars and done some dangerous spying there, and fallen in love with the brunet of your specifications (Quaid specifies she be “athletic, sleazy and demure”). Before long, sure enough, Quaid seems to be on Mars, involved in some secret-spy stuff, and in the arms of his custom-ordered brunet (Rachel Ticotin).”

Ebert continued, “But is this a packaged memory, or a real experience? The movie toys tantalizingly with the possibilities, especially in a scene where a convincing doctor and Quaid’s own wife (Sharon Stone) “appear” in his dream to try to talk him down from it. Meanwhile, the plot – dream or not – unfolds.” Mars is in the middle of a revolutionary war between the army of Cohaagen, a greedy captain of industry, played by Ronny Cox, and a small group of rebels. There is a mystery involving a giant reactor that was apparently built by aliens on Mars so long ago, and has been discovered during mining operations. On top of that, can the brunet trust Quaid – even though he doesn’t remember that they were once in a relationship? “Total Recall” goes back and forth between different versions and types of reality, while at the same time giving the runtime a future world with so much detail. Ebert said, “The red planet Mars is created in glorious visual splendor, and the inside of the Mars station looks like a cross between Times Square and a submarine.” Strange aliens appear, including mutants, a three-breasted lady (Lycia Naff), and a team of hitmen led by Richter (Michael Ironside), Cohaagen’s most ruthless lieutenant.

Ebert said, “The movie is wall-to-wall with violence, much of it augmented by special effects.” Even in this future realm, people haven’t been able to improve on the machine gun as a weapon of murder, despite people thinking that every type of firearm would be banned inside an airtight dome. There are actually so many scenes where characters are sucked outside when the air seal is broken, but that doesn’t stop the movie’s villains from demonstrating the one unavoidable fact of movie marksmanship: Villains never hit their target, and heroes never miss.

Not that it makes any little difference, but the science in this movie is laughable all around. For example, so much is made of a scene where characters finds themselves outside on Mars, and immediately begin to expand, their eyes popping and their faces swelling. Ebert noted, “As Arthur C. Clarke has written in an essay about his 2001, a man would not explode even in the total vacuum of deep space.”

(What’s even more unlikely is that after the alien reactors are started and quickly give Mars with an atmosphere, the endangered characters are secure from explosion.) Ebert said, “Such quibbles – and pages could be filled with them – are largely irrelevant to “Total Recall,” which is a marriage between swashbuckling space opera and the ideas of the original Phillip Dick story. The movie was directed by Paul Verhoeven, whose credits range from “The Fourth Man” to “RoboCop,” and he is skilled at creating sympathy for characters even within the overwhelming hardware of a story like this.” That’s where Schwarzenegger is such a help. He could have followed and frowned through this movie and become a figure of fun, but instead, by allowing himself to look confused and vulnerable, he gives a sympathetic center for every high-tech display.

This is one of those Schwarzenegger movies that hold up very well today. You should see it if you haven’t because I think everyone will enjoy this and have a good laugh. There are many memorable moments, like when Schwarzenegger ripped the tracking device from his nose, and some of his lines that are the most quotable. Check it out and have a fun time.

However, I cannot be done with this review without talking about the 2012 remake. The two biggest differences between the remake and the 1990 original are that no scenes are set on Mars, and it stars Colin Farrell instead of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Ebert said, “Mars we can do without, I suppose, although I loved the special effects creating the human outpost there.” This movie has its own reason you can’t go outside and breathe the air.

However, Schwarzenegger, now, is another matter. He’s replaced as the protagonist Quaid by Colin Farrell, who you could say is probably the better actor. However, Schwarzenegger is more of a movie presence and better fitted for the role of a wounded man going around in the realm of his memories. Ebert said, “The story involves a man who is involved without his knowledge (or recollection) in a conflict between a totalitarian regime and a resistance movement.” Both films open with him happy and cluelessly married (Sharon Stone in the original, Kate Beckinsale in the remake). In both, he is unhappy with his life. In both, he finds out that everything he thinks he knows about himself is fictitious, and all of his memories have been inserted.

Ebert said, “The enormity of this discovery is better reflected by Schwarzenegger, who seems more wounded, more baffled, more betrayed — and therefore more desperate.” In Farrell’s performance, there’s more of a sense that the character is being taken along with the events.

The originality of the plot, inspired by a Philip K. Dick story, is handled well in the remake, directed by Len Wiseman, and in Paul Verhoeven’s 1990 version. In both, there are parts where Quaid has no idea what to believe and must decide which of different characters can be trusted. Ebert said, “Both films are top-heavy with non-stop action, but there’s more humanity in the earlier one, and I think we care more about the hero. A film that really took this premise seriously would probably play more like Christopher Nolan’s “Memento,” following a man adrift in his own timeline.”

However, enough about 1990. Ebert noted, “In the new film, Earth is uninhabitable because of chemical warfare, except for two areas: a federation centered on the British isles and a colony on the former Australia. Workers from the colony provide factory labor for the federation, which sidesteps the commute time by linking them in what looks to be a tunnel straight through the Earth. That’s a lot of effort to go to in order to get cheap labor; Quaid’s factory job involves tightening two screws on the breastplates of robot soldiers being manufactured by the federation. These robots have a neat design, are sleek and shiny black and white, but are apparently doofuses. I can’t remember a single robot doing much more than marching in step and getting itself destroyed.”

Ebert continued, “The film does a detailed job of creating its cities, which in the federation is a towering futuristic marvel, and the colony seems to be countless small hovels endlessly stacked on top of one another, like the dwellings you can see clinging to the sides of other buildings in Hong Kong. Quaid gets involved in chases in both places, which require the ability to jump from great heights without breaking his ankles, or (it seems to me) his legs.” One smart chase sequence involves his character and a resistance member named Melina, played by Jessica Biel, jumping onto and off a maze of vertical and horizontal elevators. It’s somewhat an action version of 3-D chess.

“Total Recall” is well-made, high energy sci-fi. Like all stories inspired by Philip K. Dick, it deals with interesting ideas. Ebert said, “It never touched me emotionally, though, the way the 1990 film did, and strictly speaking, isn’t necessary.”

This is one of those remakes that is actually nice. You can check this out, but I prefer the original. I don’t know how many people will think the same thing, but my opinion aside, this is one remake that I recommend everyone seeing. Check it out and see which version you like.

Next week, we will be looking at another Verhoeven movie that is very controversial but is still one to see.

Karate Kid: Legends

Today, my sister and I went to the theaters to see “Karate Kid: Legends,” which came out four days ago. She was really eager to see this movie, especially since “Cobra Kai” was an amazing show. However, since we got this sequel after much years of talk, how is it compared to the last few sequels? Is it any better than the last few sequels or does it deserve the negative reception a lot of critics have been giving it?

Will this current release of nostalgic movies, with the live-action Disney remakes and other sequels, going strong, bring in the large box office numbers for this latest “Karate Kid” sequel? Maybe.

The film has the only pizza shop in New York City’s Chinatown (the film was mainly shot in Montreal) where the manager is a former boxer who owes money to the mob. Beginning in the Beijing dojo of Shifu Han (Jackie Chan), where student Li Fong (Ben Wang) trains against the orders of his mother, Dr. Fong (Ming-Na Wen), and is suddenly told that she has accepted a job in New York City. James Verniere said in his review, “Living in an oak wood adorned spacious Chinatown apartment, Li, who speaks fluent, accent-free English, is dubbed “Stuffed Crust” by the former boxer pizza shop owner Victor Lipani (Joshua Jackson) and becomes interested in his daughter Mia (Sadie Stanley), who is also Vic’s sharp-tongued, pizza shop coworker.”

Directed by Jonathan Entwistle and written by Rob Lieber based on the original 1984 underdog film’s screenplay by Robert Mark Kamen, “Karate Kid: Legends” is another sequel no one asked for. Everyone from the 1980s knows the original film’s plot points and lines of dialogue and has shared them with everyone. There have been three “Karate Kid” sequels, a 2010 remake, and a Netflix series “Cobra Kai,” which can from 2018 to 2025. The original “Karate Kid” was directed by “Rocky” director, John G. Avildsen, and had an animated series along with a lot of merchandise.

Verniere noted, “Although likable at times, especially for its cast, this new film reeks of cost-cutting and formula at every turn. Li is introduced to a Chinatown fighting school, where the film’s one-note, single-expression villain, Conor Day (Aramis Knight), knocks out all his sparring partners with a leg sweep to the head.” Li shares how his older brother, played by Yankie Ge, taught him a move called “the dragon kick” before he was stabbed one night after winning a tournament. Verniere admitted, “After that scene, I felt like I knew exactly how the film was going to end (I did).” As the respected Mr. Han, Chan is the film’s replacement for the late Pat Morita, who was nominated for an Academy Award for his cleverly funny and memorable performance as Mr. Miyagi in the original film (if you remember in my review, I noted how Miyagi was very similar to Burgess Meredith’s grouchy boxing trainer Mickey in “Rocky”).

In this new film, Li is coached by both kung-fu master Mr. Han and karate champion Daniel LaRusso, reprised by Ralph Macchio, an old friend of the late Mr. Miyagi, and asks for his help with this training. Chan and Macchio have some fun arguing about their different fighting styles. While Li and Mia share a difficult romance, Victor trains with Li for a boxing comeback match, setting up the third-act tournament between Li and Conor. I guess everyone can predict how everything will end.

Verniere ended his review by saying, “As Li’s eccentric SAT tutor Alan, who plays the Backstreet Boys’ millennial hit “I Want It That Way” on guitar, Wyatt Oleff (TV’s “I Am Not Okay with This”) is a refreshing relief from the film’s dull formula. Mia amusingly refers to Li as the “Chinese Peter Parker.” Why couldn’t they fit in a flirtation between forty-somethings Wen and Jackson, whose characters are both notably single and attractive? It’s a real lost opportunity given how much we like these actors. Chan is effortlessly charming as Mr. Han, although the iconic Morita is a hard act to follow. Li exudes good guy vibes as the film’s torn protagonist. But the corn is high and commands the view. Cue the (corny) freeze frame ending.”

I don’t agree with anything the critics are saying about this film. This is not a corny sequel with a dull or boring formula. I think there are some things that are similar to the previous films, but it does not copy it beat for beat like the 2010 remake did. Sure, I can understand some problems, like Macchio and Chan not having enough screentime together, the training montages not including everything familiar that we love, and not knowing about the villains in the film. Still, I think this was an enjoyable sequel that was funny and kept you engaged. I never felt bored or annoyed when watching the film. Check it out in the theaters and have an enjoyable time watching it, especially if you’re a “Karate Kid” fan.

Thank you for reading this blog tonight. Stay tuned this Friday to see what I will review this month.

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters

“Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters,” released in 2013, is the second in a planned trilogy based on the novel franchise by Rick Riordan.

Robert Roten said in his review, “The story concept is very similar to the Harry Potter films and the “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” TV series.” Like those stories, here is a youthful hero born with great power and great responsibility. You also have a magical world which is combined with the world we know and is kept secret from the non-magic people. Anthony Head from “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” is in this film as Chiron the centaur.

Percy Jackson, reprised by Logan Lerman, saved everyone in the first film but he can’t get any respect from the other demigods at the training grounds. He is often made fun of by the daughter of Ares, Clarisse La Rue, played by Leven Rambin. His friends are a satyr, Gover Underwood (Brandon T Jackon), and the daughter of Athena, Annabeth Chase (Alexandra Daddario).

In this sequel, Percy finds out he has a half-brother, previously unknown to him, a Cyclops named Tyson, played by Douglas Smith. Percy, Tyson, Clarisse, and Grover go on a quest for the golden fleece, located in the Bermuda Triangle. They go on a scary ride in a magical taxi which might remind you of the Knight Bus in Harry Potter. They also make a stop at a UPS headquarters run by Hermes, played by Nathan Fillion. There, they get information and magical material to help them on their journey. Roten noted, “Fillion has a funny show business joke here referring to a cancelled series that he starred in, “Firefly,” which later became the basis for the movie “Serenity.””

The golden fleece is needed to save a magical tree, but it is also being found by Hermes’ son, Luke Castellan, played by Jake Abel, whose evil plan is to release Kronos and destroy Olympus. Not just wanting to stop Luke from getting the Golden Fleece, the movie goes for the epic finale between Percy and Kronos, voiced by Robert Knepper. As you think, there are a lot of interesting special effects here.

There is plenty of action, the acting is good, and the story is good enough to watch. Roten noted, “As Logan Lerman aptly demonstrated in “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” his acting ability is far greater than is required for this role.” It is not a bad film, but might be just like the first film. There was supposed to be a third film, but that was scrapped.

Still, I found myself enjoying this film just the same as the first one. I think I got this film from the library and my sister and I saw this. I remember we both enjoyed it and I think everyone should give it a watch on Disney+. If you don’t like it, I get it, but at least give it a chance and judge it based on your own opinion. I hear the show is a lot better and I might check it out one day.

Alright, we have reached the end of “Greek Mythology Month.” I hope everyone liked this and hopefully everyone will check out every film I reviewed, especially if their a Greek Myth fan, like myself. Stay tuned next month to see what I will review next.