Saturday, November 30, 2024

The Wizard of Oz Retrospective: The Conclusions


THE WIZARD OF OZ RETROSPECTIVE: THE CONCLUSIONS

The Wizard of Oz has a hold on the American psyche that will never be broken. The tale of little Dorothy Gale, swept into a magical, fantastical world filled with wicked witches and talking scarecrows, is so ingrained into the American culture that it hardly seems like there was a world before L. Frank Baum began the first of fourteen Oz books. The Oz franchise is thoroughly and uniquely American, built out of the world of the Midwest that always was expanding. You can find Oz's roots in European fables, but could any of them have come up with flying monkeys? 

I think only an American, who held to an optimistic spirit, could have created the world of Oz. In a curious way, Baum reflected that westward expansion that pushed the pioneers onwards; born in New York, then moving to the Dakota Territory and later Chicago before settling in California, L. Frank Baum, probably unconsciously, held to that desire to explore what was over the rainbow.

As I looked on the various takes of Baum's works, I think that they do reflect the American past and its desire to reinvent, to take what has come before and have it fit for the times the new creations were made. It is impossible to not think on the 1939 musical version when we think of the world of Oz. 1939, to my mind, is the greatest year in film, where so many perfect films were released. The Wizard of Oz is one such film from that miracle year.

The music is perfection, as I've said it is one of the most literate songbooks committed to film. It helps that Judy Garland's rendition of Over the Rainbow is filled with such longing, such yearning, such richness and beauty that it truly is one of if not the greatest song written for film. The impact and power of The Wizard of Oz is so great that even those who may not have seen it will probably understand such expressions as "Ding-dong, the Witch is Dead" and "I'll get you my pretty, and your little dog too". 

Will Wicked, the modernist reimagining of Oz with the Wicked Witch of the West being center stage have that kind of impact? It has on certain audiences who I think feel a kindred spirit with Elphaba, our not-so-wicked-witch. I do not think, though, that its songbook will play outside a niche audience. Apart from Popular and Defying Gravity, I think most people would not know or recognize these songs, let alone from their source material. 

The same goes for The Wiz, which took Baum's story and transplanted it to Harlem. The all-black version is probably better on the stage than the film version. However, it too managed to have a couple of songs that have entered the popular consciousness. A Brand New Day (Everybody Rejoice) and Ease on Down the Road are in the spirit of Baum and his work. In them, I find them to carry that sense of optimism and joy at finding the power of friendship and the joy of home and family. 

Two other musical adaptations: The Muppets' Wizard of Oz and VeggieTales: The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's also build on those themes of strength in unity and the need for home. 

Conversely, other adaptations make an almost fierce or apologetic effort to not have any songs. Both Oz the Great and Powerful and Return to Oz kept far from making music part of the experience. More than likely to try and establish their own identity as well as copyright issues, their ways of avoiding songs was interesting. The former took a mostly amused manner to things, suggesting such things were silly. The latter was in my view rather dark, making things almost depressing. 

If we lose sight of something from time to time, it is the brilliance of L. Frank Baum, the originator of this fantastical world. He was The Dreamer of Oz, but I think at times Baum's creativity and imagination get lost or forgotten in an effort to build up a myth around him. Did he have ideas that were wrong then are still wrong now? Yes, but before we condemn a man for being the product of his times, we should also look to how Baum was also a man of virtues as well as faults. He supported women's suffrage at a time when such ideas were not in the mainstream. Dorothy herself can be seen as a positive role model. She had the courage to face her fears and was the leader of the other figures. Granted, they had to rescue her, but I doubt anyone would have been able to escape a horde of flying monkeys.

As I finish up the Wizard of Oz Retrospective, I give my own quick views as to why The Wizard of Oz and its various adaptations, reimaginings and spoofs continue to have a hold over us. I think the story appeals to our collective childhood yearnings to find something beyond our own backyards, to find strength and safety among friends, and to overcome great evil with courage we did not know we had. The story, with its fantastical characters and theme of searching for a way back, hits us all. 

The Wizard of Oz, in all its forms be they books, movies, musicals, what have you, will live on for as long as children have imaginations.  

Thursday, November 28, 2024

Moana 2: A Review (Review #1904)

 

MOANA 2

Unlike Gladiator II: The Next Day, Moana 2 waited a mere eight years to give the first film a return visit. Moana 2 is an acceptable follow-up, with some wonderful animation, pleasant-enough songs but a sometimes-meandering plot. 

Moana (Auli'i Cravalho) is still finding new islands and seeking new people but always returning to her native Motuniu. She has more reason to with her adorable little sister Simea (Khaleesi Lambert-Tsuda), who are devoted to each other. On one of her searches, Moana finds a mysterious piece of pottery with symbols, which in an island ceremony grant her a vision of the legendary Tautai Vasa (Gerald Faitala Ramsey), a long-gone way-finder.

His vision tells her of the evil god Nalo, who has sunk the mystical island of Motufetu, which had connected all people together. Moana, the new Master Wayfinder, must raise the island from the sea. For that, she needs a crew to sail with. There is Pua, her pet pig, and Heihei, the very eccentric rooster. As for the humans, Moana recruits three crewmen: blabbermouth handywoman Loto (Rose Matafeo), grumpy farmer Kele (David Fane) and storyteller Moni (Hualalai Chung), the biggest Maui fanboy in the universe.

As for the demigod Maui (Dwayne Johnson)? He is being held prisoner by Nalo and his henchwoman, Matangi (Awhimai Fraser), in Nalo's massive lair. Eventually, the two groups meet, thanks in part to the Kakamora, the coconut pirates from the first film. Maui informs them that humans were not meant to be in this world, so they will die even if successful. Encouraged by Matangi to Get Lost, Moana is determined to find another way. Will this motley crew be able to take down the wicked Nalo and raise Motufetu?


Moana 2 is surprisingly shorter than Moana. That is very strange given that Moana 2 has a mid-credit scene hinting that a Moana 3 may take place. Moana 2 has the same virtues and the same flaws as Moana too, so that may color your view on how you look at Moana 2.

You have some elements that teeter on the brink of pushing it down a bit. Some sequences, such as Moana's visions and the fight with a giant sea monster, may make it a bit too intense for younger children. You also have a character briefly die, and while the character does return, I think it ran a bit too long to not cause alarm among the younger set.

Moana 2 also has perhaps too much contemporary elements for its own good. Moni's total fanboy manner with Maui is fine for a while, but it soon becomes slightly eye-rolling.  When the coconut pirates ask him to translate something he's written, he replies, "That is fanfic". Maui makes a comment about Moana perhaps being wrong about hearing a call for her mission. "Unless it's a butt dial," he quips, adding that the reference will make sense in 2,000 years. Just as a "tweet" quip in Moana, this "butt dial" thing might sound funny, but it will date the film in a few years. 

Moana 2 did struggle in putting Maui into the overall story. I think audiences would be waiting for our megalomaniac demigod to pop up; I wonder, however, if Jared Bush and Dana Ledeux Miller's screenplay might have worked better if it had held back Maui's return to build up anticipation. I think it might have been funny to have the group of mortals first come upon Maui literally bound. 

The film also doubled down on some characters that maybe were a bit too much. I liked the coconut pirates from the first film. I do think that in Moana 2, maybe the film relied on them too much. I'm reminded of the aliens from Men in Black. Fine in a small part, perhaps too much when you want to make them to take a more prominent role. 

I also wonder if we needed a mid-credit scene. If we are going to hint that Moana will return, the scene should have been shown sooner. The only reason that I saw it at all was because I was still gathering my things before leaving. Had I been ready, I would have missed this brief bit altogether.


However, there are other elements that keep Moana 2 afloat (no pun intended). The little sister Simea is meant to be adorable and appeal to kids. In that, Simea did what was expected. The bond between "big sister" and "little sister" works very well. The same can be said of the Kakamora coconut pirates. They were meant to be cute in Moana. They are still cute in Moana 2, though perhaps this is a case of less is more. 

Some of the animation is also quite beautiful. In some cases, it is almost life-like. The visions Moana has of Tautai Vasa are quite impressive. I thought well of at least the first two songs in Moana 2. We're Back, the opening song, is a fine way to start our adventure. Beyond, Moana's big power ballad and its version of the first film's How Far I'll Go, works well in expressing her views. I also think Get Lost is not bad, though ironically it gets a bit lost amidst the production design. 

The others were not terrible but not great. What Could Be Better Than This? is to my mind filler but I think kids will find it cute. Johnson's big number, Can I Get a Chee Hoo? is at least mostly talked/rapped than sung, so that is a plus. 

When watching Moana 2, I have to remember the target audience: children and their parents, especially fans of Moana. Will they like Moana 2? I think they will, though at least one child did ask her father near the end of the film, "Is it almost over?". Moana 2 is fine, pleasant enough, neither damaging the original nor adding much to it. I thought it was enough to please those going. Yes, it could have been better, but it was fine and cute enough. I can't fault Moana 2 for being acceptable when that was what it was aiming for. 

Wednesday, November 27, 2024

Moana: A Review

 

MOANA

Polynesian myths and legends come to life in Moana, an original tale with South Seas origins. With pleasant songs, some wonderful animation, good voice work and a plucky heroine, Moana is quite a delightful romp. 

Long ago, the goddess Te Fiti brought life to the world. Things were going well until Maui, the demigod of wind and sea, stole Te Fiti's heart. With that, the mother goddess faded and in came Te Ka, demon of earth and fire. In the ensuing battle, the shapeshifting Maui lost both the heart and his magical hook, with all disappearing from history.

Now on the island of Motunui, the chief's daughter Moana (Auli'i Cravalho) has a wanderlust to go beyond the reef. This is firmly opposed by her father, Chief Tui (Temuera Morrison) but quietly encouraged by her beloved Gramma (Rachel House).  Moana has a special connection to the ocean since childhood, which her grandmother knows of. Gramma also has Te Fiti's heart, which she urges Moana to take. 

Motunui soon begins to suffer decay due to Te Fiti's long absence. Before she goes to the spirit world, Gramma urges her granddaughter to see How Far I'll Go. With that, our heiress presumptive sets sail to fulfill her mission. Her task is simple: find Maui and make him return Te Fiti's heart back to the goddess. How hard could that be, especially with her oddball pet rooster Heihei with her?

Obviously, it is not easy, as Maui (Dwayne Johnson) is arrogant and egocentric. He has no desire to help Moana and is interested only in finding his magic hook. Unfortunately, he has no choice and cannot get rid of this girl. With that, first they must find the hook and then go to Te Fiti's island. It will not be without dangers, but also not without encouragement from the spirit of Gramma. With our demigod and princess finding strength they never knew that they had, they face off against Te Ka to save their Polynesian world. 

At a little over an hour and a half, Moana never wears out its welcome, though I would argue that it might actually have been shorter. I say this because I found one or two sections in the journey that seemed to stretch things. Granted, I found the attacking coconuts as cute as Moana initially did and part of me would probably keep them. 

The section where Moana and Maui must find his hook, however, seems a bit longer than I think it should be. It does not help that the villain here, the giant crab Tamatoa (Jemaine Clements) seemed almost as filler for the film.

Add to that how Tamatoa's song, Shiny, is probably the worst number in Moana. I still struggle with Lin-Manuel Miranda's lyrics in Shiny: "Maui, now it's time to kick you in the heinei, ever seen someone so shiny?". I cannot imagine how someone thought rhyming "heinei" (as in "buttocks") with "shiny" was anywhere near good. 

That does lead me into another issue that popped up in my mind while watching Moana. There seems to be a bit too much adult humor in the film. At one point, Moana is attempting to learn about wayfinding from Maui, who teaches her that the warmer the water gets, the closer she is to her desired destination. She puts her hands in the water and comments that it is cold, then how it is suddenly getting warmer. It is quickly established, however, that Maui has helped raise the water's temperature in a way that, even as obliquely as Moana has it, seems a bit tawdry. 

Moana may also be at times too contemporary to be truly mythical. While cute, there is one child dancer clearly meant to echo a young Michael Jackson. In perhaps the worst moment of Jared Bush's screenplay (with story by seven writers), Maui decides to autograph Moana's oar, convinced that she is a fan who has come to meet him. He grabs Heihei to write out his symbols and remarks, "When you use a bird to write with, it's called tweeting". While Moana is only eight years at the time of this writing, this joke now makes it sound dated. 

One particularly off moment is when Moana finally finds Maui. While the cocky and uninhibited egocentricity of our demigod is amusing, I do not know if we needed Dwayne Johnson to belt out a song. There is nothing bad about You're Welcome, a nice and amusing song that reveals Maui's thorough self-aggrandizing worldview. I just wish that Johnson had been dubbed by a professional singer.  

Those seem hiccups and missteps in a film that overall I found myself enchanted by. Moana has some excellent animation sequences that are beautiful to look at. The scene where Gramma returns to encourage our heroine is a wonder to look at. It is also a deeply moving moment that did hit me on an emotional level.

The songs were on the whole good, Shiny notwithstanding. The standout was Moana's How Far I'll Go, the Oscar nominated number that is clearly inspired by big Broadway numbers. Where You Are, describing the world of Motunui, is also good. I could hear Lin-Manuel Miranda's voice coming through in We Know the Way, which speaks of the voyager ancestors. I guess he could not resist a chance to give himself a musical number despite not playing a character in the film. 

The characters are on the whole quite positive and enjoyable. Cravalho is a delight as Moana, a young girl whose love for her family and for wanderlust blends beautifully. She is strong and resourceful but not a Mary Sue. She is also at times unsure, unaware and even fearful. Moana stays within the familiar Disney themes of princess who forges her own path. Cravalho does a wonderful job in the role, making Moana a positive role model for girls while still being flawed in her hesitancy and fears.

Johnson makes Maui into a highly pleasant and comical character. Maui is outwardly arrogant but allows moments of vulnerability to come through. In some ways, Maui reminds me of Prometheus, who also went against the gods to help mankind. 

House's Gramma and Morrison's Chief Tui allow for moments of tenderness and strength from the characters. Their motivations are presented in a rational manner, born out of deep concern for their community and family. Children, I think, will find Heihei and the pet pig Pua delightful and nice comic relief, though I would have liked to have seen more of the latter.  

Moana is a strong family film, filled with some beautiful animation and a pleasant musical score. Moana herself may insist that she is not a princess, but Moana makes the case that she is, and one of Disney's stronger ones. 

Tuesday, November 26, 2024

Rosita: A Review

ROSITA

Since film began, stars have struggled with typecasting and taken measures to change their image. Mary Pickford, one of the first film stars, was beloved as The Girl with the Golden Curls and America's Sweetheart, her Canadian birth notwithstanding. Rosita was a step in Pickford's efforts to be more risqué, culminating with her alliance with up-and-coming filmmaker Ernst Lubitsch. Rosita showcases Pickford's skills as a silent film actress and worth watching for that alone.

The randy King of Spain (Holbrook Blinn) is no stranger to decadence and debauchery. However, the good citizens of Seville seem to outdo their merry monarch in the libertine lifestyle. Either shamed into taking action or himself being shocked at how Seville is licentious, His Majesty sneaks into town to investigate things himself.

There, he spots the beautiful and popular street singer Rosita (Pickford). She is pretty and slightly risqué, but it is her anti-King song that gets her into hot water. His Majesty finds her very pretty, but his troops will not allow this act of lese-majeste to take place. As he is incognito, the King cannot stop his troops from arresting her or Don Diego (George Walsh), the army captain who defends Rosita.

She and Don Diego fall quickly in love, even if she has no idea who he is. The King, seeing an opening for a new seduction, using all his powers to get Rosita to submit. Perhaps in jest, perhaps in cruelty, the King has Rosita and Don Diego marry, albeit blindfolded to stop one from knowing who the other's spouse is. The King will also have Don Diego executed. Will Rosita and Don Diego truly reunite? Will the Queen (Irene Rich) find herself playing a hand in the torrid love lives of our group?

Rosita, from what I understand, was an effort by Mary Pickford to expand both herself artistically and work with the very best people around. Pickford was best known at the time for playing literal children, to where she was thought of in almost childlike terms rather than the shrewd businesswoman who was one of the founders of United Artists. Rosita therefore was a chance for Pickford to be more adult, almost alluring. It therefore is a mystery as to why Pickford decided against preserving Rosita when she was meticulous about preserving her filmography. 

It is impossible to decide why Pickford opted to have Rosita fade away given how good she is in the film. Perhaps she had so embedded herself as "America's Sweetheart" that something as risqué, even in a somewhat tame manner as Rosita, was too much for her. History, however, decided to spare Rosita from being a lost film, which is a good thing in that the film is a showcase for both Pickford and Lubitsch. 

Mary Pickford is quite strong as our street urchin. She is still the plucky figure that audiences had grown to love. However, Pickford showed a fun and flirtatious side to herself, wryly amusing and amused at how she can make the King frustrated. She, however, could handle the dramatic parts too. Late in the film, Rosita clearly wants to assassinate His Majesty for sending Don Diego to be executed. You can see in Pickford's eyes that desire for murder, making for a genuinely tense moment. 

Lubitsch for his part created a world of delightful decadence in Rosita. He was able to get his actors to play the parts well, even if Walsh's Don Diego had that silent overacting for which silent films are usually mocked for. Lubitsch used some surprisingly advanced techniques in Rosita, such as shots of people spying on others with mirrors and flashes of color during the Carnival sections of the film. 

Rosita has at least one flaw that was driving me a bit bonkers. The constant "will he or won't he kill Don Diego" was getting on my nerves. To my mind, you can pull the rug from the audience only so many times before it becomes repetitive and irritating. That is curious given that Rosita is only 90 minutes long. However, because it seemed that poor Don Diego kept getting dragged in and out of executions that I soon found myself wondering if we were ever going to settle things one way or another.

It should not have been a surprise to see how things went, as Rosita is supposed to be something of a romantic comedy. Exceptionally well-acted by Mary Pickford, ably directed by Ernst Lubitsch, Rosita is a strong film that works on almost every level.

DECISION: B+

Monday, November 25, 2024

Gladiator II: A Review

GLADIATOR II

When Gladiator was sweeping the nation and then the Academy Awards, I never thought that we would need, let alone get, a sequel. I liked Gladiator well enough as good popcorn entertainment. However, had I been the one deciding things, I would have voted for Traffic as the Best Picture of 2000. Now, after almost a quarter of a century, we have Gladiator II, which goes into the tale of the original film's child character. Gladiator II is indeed an epic, an epic disaster. Boring, blank and at times cringeworthy, Gladiator II makes the case that the dead should remain buried. 

Sixteen years after the events of Gladiator, we find ourselves in Numidia, 200 A.D. A young man known as Hanno (Paul Mescal) lives in relative peace with his female companion. Into his city sweep the Roman army, bent on conquest. Leading the troops is General Acacius (Pedro Pascal), who kills Hanno's beloved and takes him, along with other men, prisoner.

It is off to fight as gladiators for the captured men, where Hanno and his compatriots face off against bad CGI baboons. Hanno defeats them, in part by biting one of them. Looking on is former gladiator and trainer extraordinary Macrinus (Denzel Washington), who takes Hanno under his wing and into Rome itself. Acacius is being feted by twin Emperors Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Caracalla (Fred Hechinger), who are pretty bonkers but who want to celebrate Acacius. For his part, Acacius just wants to return to his wife, Lucilla (Connie Nielsen). 

Hanno has sworn revenge against Acacius, but there are twists to endure. There are the machinations of Macrinus, who is plotting to overthrow the emperors and assume power. There is the hidden legacy of legendary gladiator Maximus, whose own legacy is tied to Hanno. Finally, there is Hanno's connection to Lucilla, for we discover that Hanno is really Lucius Aurelius, grandson of Marcus Aurelius and the son Lucilla sent away after the events of Gladiator for his own safety.

I guess Lucilla did not do a good job of keeping tabs on her only child, for he ended up in the backwaters of Numidia, facing off against sharks both metaphorical and literal. Lucilla perhaps was too busy plotting yet another overthrow of the imperial system to give much thought to what ever happened to her son. Still, will we get a mother and child reunion? Will Hanno/Lucius face off against Acacius? Will Macrinus succeed in his plot to ascend the throne or will some pipsqueak thwart his plans?

It was probably no more than fifteen minutes into Son of Gladiator that I asked myself, "are we getting the same beats to Gladiator"? We start Gladiator and Gladiator II: Judgment Day in the same way: our lead character, devoted family man, is taken prisoner to serve as a mysterious warrior, angry and thirsting for vengeance in this life or the next. David Scarpa's screenplay (from a story by Scarpa and Peter Craig) is a Gladiator remake in all but name. There is not one original idea in Son of Gladiator, for everything that was in Gladiator somehow found itself into Gladiator II

A warrior who became a slave. A slave who became a gladiator. The gladiator who defied an emperor! You could sum up the plots to both Gladiator and Gladiator II: Electric Bugaloo in the same way. The only real tweaks between the two films are that Lucius was technically not a general (though he did lead armies) and there were two emperors. Apart from that and the Proximo character being a villain there was very little difference between the first and second film. One could make the argument that Gladiator's Maximus was split between Lucius and Acacius, but that is not a big point. 

Think of it: Lucilla is not only still meeting in secret to try and restore the Roman Republic, but she is still working with the same people, like Sir Derek Jacobi's Senator Gracchus. You would think that after decades of working at something, the conspirators would either get it right or just give up. Instead, we have to drag Lucilla and Gracchus into things because Gladiator II was too lazy to come up with something remotely original. 

As a side note, in what is meant as a climactic moment, you can spot out of the corner of your eye Sir Derek holding a large spear looking totally confused and unsure of what is supposed to be doing. A quick glimpse sees him killed off and I think, "Is the Shakespeare denier that hard up for work that he agreed to be in this drivel?". 

Few films of 2024 have been this lazy, this poorly thought out, and frankly this embarrassing to almost all concerned. Ridley Scott, returning to helm this fiasco, appears to have decided that the people in front of the camera did not have to actually "act". Instead, they just had to look all sad, though my guess is that they looked that way because they realized that they were in Son of Gladiator

The only other film that I remember Paul Mescal from is All of Us Strangers, where he played the ghost whom Andrew Scott had sex with. Ghost sex, as laughable as it may sound, apparently is surprisingly common in Hollywood franchises. I can think of another sequel in 2024 that featured ghost sex or at least the suggestion of it. I figure that "ghost sex" is different than "ghosting". 

If Son of Gladiator is meant to be his big budget breakthrough, I think it will be anything but. His Hanno/Lucius is dull as dishwater, bland, boring and personality-free. He comes across as a stubborn idiot, permanently morose and devoid of any personal magnetism. We never get to know him other than with large brushstrokes: he lost his love, has no sense of humor or tragedy and apparently is simultaneously aware and unaware of his true identity. The idea of him inspiring his fellow gladiators into battle when we never see him interact with anyone, let alone his dishwater personality, makes the whole thing laughable.

Matching him is Pedro Pascal as the Maximus-like Acacius. He is a reluctant warrior, but he too has nothing to make anything think he'd inspire the Praetorian Guard to select him as the next Emperor. 

As a side note, I might not be the only person who confuses "Mescal" and "Pascal", so I hope I got the names right.

Connie Nielsen was dragged out to tie Gladiator to Gladiator 2: Freddy's Revenge, but she was just as bad as everyone else was in Gladiator II. Perhaps it is a bit unfair to condemn the actors given their awful dialogue. "Brother, let's not kill each other for their amusement," Hanno tells someone early in the film. Such grandiose, pompous things to say make things more ridiculous. At that previously climactic moment, she tells her son, "Go, my son". I wanted to shout in the theater, "Lady please, you should be dead. You ain't gonna be talking, let alone spouting out grandiose statements". The Two Emperors are so unimportant to whatever is laughingly called "the plot" that they were more distractions in their wild overacting. When one of them is killed, there was actual chuckling from some in the audience. Make that of it what you will.

Much praise has been thrown Denzel Washington's way as the scheming Macrinus to where he is held as an almost prohibitive frontrunner for Best Supporting Actor. To be fair, Washington seemed to be having himself a whale of a time, devouring the scenery with delightful abandon. He, I figured, understood that Son of Gladiator was not going to be good. Therefore, why not have fun with it all, and fun he did have. It does take a lot of skill to not start laughing when he is appointed Second Consul after seeing the First Consul be the surviving emperor's pet monkey.

Nothing in Son of Gladiator works. The visual effects are shockingly awful: the CGI baboons beyond dreadful to where I question Ridley Scott's sanity in approving them. The score uninspiring. The cinematography as bland as Mescal. I get that the final climactic arena match is supposed to be at night, or at least it looked that way. I don't care, it's all awful.

I have been criticized, with some accuracy, of my habit of being hung up on details. For the life of me, I simply cannot understand why Maximus' quote, "What we do in life echoes in eternity", which is etched on his tomb, is in English. It is literally written out in English. I sat there thoroughly flabbergasted in seeing it written out in a language that did not even exist at the time. Were those behind Son of Gladiator so lazy that they could even bother trying to write it out in Latin? Are audiences that lazy that they cannot be bothered to accept ancient languages set in ancient times? 

Gladiator II is as much as sequel to Gladiator as Grease 2 is a sequel to Grease. I love Grease 2, but even I concede that its connection to Grease is extremely thin. In the same way, Son of Gladiator takes on the carcass of Gladiator and desecrates its predecessor. At one point, one of the characters says, "What is my purpose here?". I think that captures my sentiments on everything connected to Gladiator II. 

DECISION: F

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Wicked: Part I. A Review (Review #1900)

WICKED: PART I 

Few modern-day musicals have held fans in almost unhinged fandom as Wicked, the retelling of the L. Frank Baum series with the Wicked Witch of the West as our protagonist. I cannot explain why Wicked is adored by so many people, but it is. After a long gestation period, we have Wicked: Part I, the first of a two-part adaptation of the mega-hit Broadway show. I think Wicked fans (Wickies?) will love delving into this world. Those of us not familiar or enamored of what came before Dorothy fell from Kansas will find things to like but may still be unsure why there is such fervor.

Let the joyous news be spread: the Wicked Witch of the West is dead. The Munchkins are thrilled and celebrate that No One Mourns the Wicked. Into the celebration floats Glinda, the Good Witch of the North (Ariana Grande, billed as Ariana Grande-Butera). She expresses joy that the Munchkins are free, but when one asks her if it is true that Glinda and the Wicked Witch were once friends, Glinda then begins recounting the origin story.

The Wicked Witch of the West was Elphaba Thropp (Cynthia Erivo), the product of an adulterous liaison between the Munchkins' Governor's wife and a mystery man. Whoever her birth father was, it caused her to have green skin, horrifying all. Elphaba manages great powers when angered but is protective of her younger sister Nessarose (Marissa Bode). Nessa, the apple of her father's eye in part because she is not green, is now off to Shiz University. Ostensibly there just to see that Nessa settles in, the ridicule that Elphaba receives by the hoity-toity Shiz students unleashes a great display of power.

This intrigues Madame Morrible (Michelle Yeoh), a powerful sorceress who runs Shiz. It also intrigues Galinda Upland (Grande), the Elle Woods of Shiz and unofficial Queen Bee. Morrible insists that Elphaba stay on and receive personal training. Galinda, desperate to get on Morrible's good side, very reluctantly agrees to share her formerly private suite with Elphaba. Things grow more complicated with the arrival of Prince Fiyero (Jonathan Bailey), the luscious Winkie prince that sends everyone's hearts and loins aflutter. I mean everyone: male, female, maybe even the animal professors. Elphaba herself is mixed on Fiyero, but Galinda is determined to use her feminine wiles to land the dream man. 

Eventually, Galinda and Elphaba form a bond, with the former determined to help the latter become Popular. Elphaba is distressed about the Ozian animals losing their rights and literal voice but then is thrilled when she receives a request for an audience with the Wizard of Oz himself. It's off to the Emerald City for Elphaba, who brings her BFF, now self-christened Glinda, along. Thrilled at the sights of the Emerald City, Elphaba hopes that the Wizard (Jeff Goldblum) will save the Ozian animals. However, to her horror, the Wizard and Morrible are the ones stripping the animals of their rights and voices. They want Elphaba to use her extraordinary powers to help them in their planned destruction of the animals. She, however, will not join in this plan. Instead, she will defy them and be Defying Gravity to fight the Wizard and Morrible. She has an accidental army of flying monkeys to use and asks Glinda to join her. Glinda, albeit reluctantly, opts not to join her bestie, and with that, Elphaba flies out of the Emerald City on her broom.  

I perhaps should not have been surprised to see people wearing Wicked t-shirts and other paraphernalia at the Wicked screening that I went to. I was, however, surprised to find many children attending. I figure that the adults who took them were taken in by how Wicked is somewhat of a Wizard of Oz prequel. I do not know what they thought of slutty Munchkin First Ladies, talking animals being hauled out of classrooms and a pretty young thing arousing everyone's desires in a big musical number. 

As someone generally unfamiliar with either the Broadway musical or the Gregory Maguire novel on which the musical was based on, I can only speculate on how close or far the film veered from the source material. My sense is that Wicked may be perhaps too slavishly loyal to the original show, for it seems that almost nothing was cut. Whether that is a good thing or not I leave to individual audience members. I can say that Wicked feels long and a little bloated. 

This is especially true for me when Elphaba and Glinda (who changed her name in honor of her goat professor's accidental mispronouncing) arrive at the Emerald City. Once they meet the Wizard and are offered the chance to participate in the machinations, things feel very rushed. It is strange given that it took an hour for Prince Fiyero to pop up. I could not shake the idea that Wicked was stretched out. I don't think it was, as I understand that Part I covers the first act of the two-act musical. Curiously, the entire Broadway musical runs two hours and forty-five minutes including a 15-minute intermission. Wicked Part I runs approximately that long. I am thoroughly puzzled why Wicked is that long. 

I suppose Part I will set up Part II, meaning that Nessa's romance with Boq (Ethan Slater), a Munchkin student at Shiz, will be more explored. However, as they were not a major point in Wicked Part I, I did forget about them for long stretches. I do not know if screenwriters Winnie Holzman and Dana Fox or director John M. Chu considered cutting some numbers or trimming story elements (for example, cutting down the arrivals at Shiz University). It might have helped.

It isn't as though Wicked does not have some major positives. The film does an excellent job in capturing this Ozian universe. The production design and costuming are top notch, creating this fantastical world in believable ways. 

The performances were on the whole quite strong. Erivo, who showed she could handle dramatic work in her Oscar-nominated turn in Harriet, showcases her powerful vocal range as Elphaba. Her renditions of the Wicked songbook, culminating in a bravura rendition of Defying Gravity, dominate the screen. When she is not singing, Erivo makes Elphaba someone with a permanent chip on her shoulder. I figure that is how the character is, so I cannot complain too much. I do think that it is late when we get any sense that she might have shifted to a more positive figure had circumstances come that way. It is a good performance overall.

As a side note, I confess after a while on giving up trying to get Elphaba's name right and started calling her "Alfalfa". I also thought Wicked made her look like the Ozian version of Carrie to where I was expecting her to go on a murderous rampage at the Oz Dust Ballroom.


I do express some perplexion on why Ariana Grande is being tapped to win Best Supporting Actress. Again, I figure that her Galinda was played as the character was meant to be. She was appropriately fluttery, vapid, vain and cartoonishly exaggerated. She came across as a slightly more self-centered version of Elle Woods, complete with the obsession for pink. She handled the singing well, though I figure that original Galinda Kristin Chenoweth or a younger Sarah Brightman would have done better. Again, it was fine, but nothing that overwhelmed me.

I am more perplexed by why Michelle Yeoh was cast. She is a legend, but she did not sing The Wizard and I so much as she talked the lyrics to a melody. Goldblum was on screen too briefly in my view, but he did well as the sham Wizard. Bailey's Fiyero did fine as the uber-hunky Winkie prince who may be causing a divide between Elphaba and Glinda. The scope of Wicked gave Slater and Bode very little to do.

I figure Wicked fans will enjoy the cameos by Chenoweth and the original Elphaba, Idina Menzel, during the One Short Day number. You even get to see them interact with their counterparts. I think, however, that One Short Day captures a bit of why I am not as enthusiastic about Wicked as others are. Everything felt overproduced. The dance number felt too big, too choreographed, slightly forced in its attempt at grandness. There is a lot of underscoring in the film that I found distracting.

As someone not attached to Wicked as this life-altering experience, I cannot say that I was moved to tears or overwhelmed by some almost mystical spirit while watching the film. It was fine. It was respectable. It was long. I found Wicked Part I to be neither tragically beautiful nor beautifully tragic. 












The Wizard of Oz Retrospective: The Conclusions

Thursday, November 21, 2024

Mona Lisa: A Review

MONA LISA

There are some films that feel longer than they perhaps should be. Other films fly so quickly that you would not mind if they ran a bit longer. Mona Lisa is in the latter category. With standout performances and an engaging story, Mona Lisa is a surprisingly optimistic film amidst the world of the criminal.

George (Bob Hoskins) has just left prison after a seven-year stint. He wants to reconnect with his daughter Jeannie (Zoe Nathenson) but finds fierce opposition in his ex-wife. In need of work, he reconnects with his old boss, Mortwell (Michael Caine). The crime boss gives him a job as a chauffeur to Simone (Cathy Tyson), a high-end escort. George struggles with his job, having contempt for the posh Simone as well as with such cumbersome technology like beepers (which he calls bleeper). Simone, for her part, finds the working-class George uncouth and boorish.

Nevertheless, they soon start bonding over their mutual lowly positions and a friendship starts. George finds himself wanting to make it more than a friendship but is puzzled why Simone insists on driving past the seedy King's Cross area to see the other working girls. She soon reveals that she is searching for Cathy, a friend and fellow hooker whom Simone is worried about after having lost contact. George soon agrees to search for Cathy when he is not on the clock.

George eventually finds Cathy (Kate Hardie), who is terrified of her pimp Anderson (Clarke Peters). There is more going on underneath: kinky goings-on, violence and danger for Simone, Cathy and George. Will the trio manage to survive with Anderson and Mortwell after them? Will George manage to extract himself out this life to be a good father to Jennie?

At one point in Mona Lisa, Jeannie asks her father, "Are you still a bad lot?". I think this is the central theme of Mona Lisa: George's ultimate redemption. He knows that he has done bad things and is part of a dark, seedy world. At the same time, he seeks to protect Simone, save Cathy and be a good father to Jeannie. George is a common man in almost every way possible: working-class in his manner but also in his ethics. He finds the demimonde of sex workers and pornography vulgar. In a certain way, George is almost an innocent in this dark world.

Hoskins makes George a fascinating figure to follow in Mona Lisa (the title coming from the Nat King Cole song, one of the standards that George prefers to listen while driving or waiting for Simone). At heart, George is very traditional in his outlook: disdainful of the updates in technology, of the posh world of the elegant hotels Simone meets her clients. The gruff exterior hides a principled man, and Hoskins plays the part exceptionally well.

Writer/director Neil Jordan also reveals much in George's evolution in Mona Lisa. In one wonderful scene, Simone takes the very puzzled and reluctant George shopping for more appropriate clothes to change the loud outfits he prefers. He wears them, at first reluctantly and then acceptingly. Near the end, however, when he plans to help Simone and Cathy escape Anderson and Mortwell's clutches, he has gone back to the loud shirts that he came in with. This reveals that despite his best efforts, George is a working-class bloke, but one who has his standards of decency.

Jordan even allows a little bit of humor to sneak through. Late in Mona Lisa, Simone spies Cathy and Anderson at a clandestine meeting, with George accompanying her. George asks why it took place at a church. Simone replies, "It's the one place no one ever goes". 

The other performances are also quite strong. Tyson's Simone was a mix of fragility and strength. "They can have me, but they can't hit me," she yells at George when he strikes her in a rage over a sex tape he discovers. Tyson makes Simone a survivor, one who cares about her girlfriend Cathy but who also comes to rely on George as a confidant and shoulder to cry on. Hardie's Cathy is more tragic, such as when she begs George, pretending to be a client, to tell Anderson that she made him happy. 

Michael Caine may seem a strange choice as Mortwell insofar that it is a very small role. However, in his few scenes, he made Mortwell menacing in his ability to control others. Peters' Anderson too did well as this amoral pimp. Robbie Coltrane too did well as Thomas, George's friend and a mystery novel enthusiast. 

I will say that I was not sure if Thomas merely read mystery novels or wrote them. I think people might get lost with some of the accents, so subtitles are advisable. 

Mona Lisa earned Bob Hoskins a Best Actor Oscar nomination, but I was a bit surprised that In Too Deep by Genesis was not nominated. I believe it was written specifically for Mona Lisa, but there it is.

"Being cheap is one thing. Looking cheap is another," Simone tells George. The gap between appearance and being is an underlying theme in Mona Lisa, a tale where those in the underbelly of society display a quiet nobility and strength. It is a film that despite its neo-noir manner, has a happy ending, at least for some. 

DECISION: B+

Wednesday, November 20, 2024

Lynch/Oz: A Review

 

LYNCH/OZ

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" is one of the many memorable lines in 1939's The Wizard of Oz. It has now become a saying for whenever one suspects that there is chicanery going on, that there is something rather plain behind a grand image. Could that expression, however, apply to one of the most avant-garde filmmakers around? Lynch/Oz explores the connection between the quintessential children's fantasy and the filmography of one David Lynch. Could The Wizard of Oz be the inspiration for Mulholland Drive? Lynch/Oz makes that case, along with how The Wizard of Oz finds itself occurring and recurring amidst tales of murder, lost souls and psychopathic supernatural monsters.

Director Alexandre O. Philippe divides Lynch/Oz into six chapters with seven filmmakers in voiceover sharing their views on Lynch the man and the artist, The Wizard of Oz, the connections they see between the two and how both Lynch and Oz have influenced their own works. In order of presentation, the chapters and interviewees are Wind (Amy Nicholson), Membranes (Rodney Ascher), Kindred (John Waters), Multitudes (Karyn Kusama), Judy (Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead) and Dig (David Lowery). After a brief and appropriately creepy presentation by "the lounge wizard" (Sid Pink), Lynch/Oz allows each of the filmmakers their say.

Wind speculates that in Lynch's films, we see a continuous theme of people going, willingly or not, into eccentric worlds. As with The Wizard of Oz, another film that has our lead character wanting to escape their world only to yearn to return may have touched on Lynch's cinematic world. That other film also became a beloved annual television event: It's a Wonderful Life. Membranes offers that Back to the Future too was like The Wizard of Oz; it too is another tale of a young person finding a world that had doppelgangers to his real world. While Back to the Future is not a David Lynch film, Mulholland Drive is, and there we have a twisted world of doppelgangers, a world where the central character travels to a different world, navigating dreams versus reality.

Kindred suggests that like the films of its interviewee John Waters, David Lynch finds the 1950's far from the halcyon world that that decade's films or memories made it out to be. The 1950's hid darkness beneath its outwardly pleasant visions. That evil lurking behind picket fences emerges in the portrayal of seemingly benevolent figures like Leland Palmer from Twin Peaks. That can be a mirror reflection of the Wizard himself, outwardly dangerous but in reality, a front. Multitudes offers that Mulholland Drive is almost a companion piece and even an inverse of Oz, the repeated themes of lip-syncing in front of curtains being a semi-conscious callout to the Wizard himself. We also hear from Kusama who quotes Lynch when he is asked about The Wizard of Oz after a Mulholland Drive screening. "There is not a day that goes by that I don't think about The Wizard of Oz," Kusama quotes Lynch as saying.  

Judy has our only dual interviewees make the case that David Lynch is in their words, a "populist surrealist", one who shows the American myth versus the American dream. This reveals itself in how in many Lynch films, the women are brutalized and beaten up emotionally and sometimes physically. They see a parallel to how the film industry devoured Judy Garland. There is also a strong use of "Judy" in Twin Peaks: The Return, that keeps emerging. Dig is mostly on David Lowery's own interest in Oz, but he makes the case that despite the surreal, almost despairing Lynchian worlds of Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive, he still finds hope within the dark worlds he paints, of people who can return to the safety of their own Kansas.

Lynch/Oz can be best described as a filmed essay, where the various interviewees offer less a concrete case for their ideas and more a rumination on how one film has had such a powerful hold over a renowned filmmaker. Some of the observations are not unique. Lowery suggests that Lynch has similar imagery running through his films, then Philippe presents a montage of other filmmakers who use the same imagery or hit on the same themes. 

Sometimes too, we hear different filmmakers speculate on a similar point. Both Waters and Benson & Moorhead think Lynch has a secret disdain for the 1950's conformity and outwardly peaceful veneer. How Benson & Moorhead tie the MAGA movement, such as it is, to something like Wild at Heart or other Lynch films, to my mind, is more of them trying to fit something that Lynch may not even care about.

As a side note, it is amusing to hear Waters' rather bitchy take on Glinda the Good Witch of the North. He remarks that she "dressed like she had gone insane getting ready for the prom". 

Lynch/Oz makes much use of split screens to show us how The Wizard of Oz is referenced subtlety or overtly in films like Mulholland Drive or Eraserhead. To be fair, I have yet to see Wild at Heart, but judging from the clips Lynch/Oz shows, Wild at Heart looks like the most overt callout to the Victor Fleming film. The use of curtains, the red shoes, people falling into strange worlds and suffering great troubles to escape back into their original reality. These are fascinating ideas that Lynch/Oz presents us.

The film does cover a lot of ground, making its case on how The Wizard of Oz, this one particular film, resonated so much with young David Lynch that he finds himself by design or by accident repeatedly referencing it or what he drew from it. Even something as notorious as his adaptation of Dune can be vaguely Wizard of Oz like, everything from the sepia-like tones of Arrakis to the hero traversing a strange world to defeat a great evil.

Perhaps that is stretching, which is always a risk when speculating on a topic like whether David Lynch specifically revisits The Wizard of Oz in his films and television projects. It should be noted that outside a few archival interviews, David Lynch himself does not make his case for The Wizard of Oz being the film he draws so much from. Given his mercurial nature and refusal to give definitive interpretations on his films, we may never fully know if Lynch/Oz captures his mindset or is mere speculation. Still, it is hard to not think that Lynch/Oz is on the right track when we see David Lynch himself play Over the Rainbow on the trumpet (not very well in my opinion). 

One may even think that Lynch/Oz is less about what David Lynch himself drew from The Wizard of Oz than on how others see a connection between the two. Many may even think that all this may be a case of reading more into things than intended. I do not know if Wizard of Oz director Victor Fleming or producer Mervyn LeRoy intended or imagined that The Wizard of Oz had some kind of great symbolism behind it. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. That quote, attributed to Sigmund Freud, may not have been uttered by the Austrian psychiatrist, but it might apply to how so many may be putting The Wizard of Oz into this bizarre cinematic universe. Maybe even David Lynch himself may have read more into The Wizard of Oz than The Wizard of Oz intended. 

Lynch/Oz is a fascinating exploration connecting the Lynchian worldview with that of little Dorothy Gale from Kansas. Even I can see connections that were curious not remarked on by any of the interviewees. In Mulholland Drive, the restaurant is named Winkies, just like the Wicked Witch of the West's imperial guard. There is also a great deal of green in the restaurant, almost emerald color. You can find a connection between the filmography of David Lynch and The Wizard of Oz. You could miss it. It won't take away from either. Lynch/Oz makes its case well, but it is up to you if you accept it or want to throw water at its ideas.  

DECISION: B+

The Wizard of Oz Retrospective: An Introduction

The Wizard of Oz (1925)

The Wizard of Oz (1939)

The Wiz

Return to Oz

The Dreamer of Oz

The Muppets' Wizard of Oz

VeggieTales: The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's

Oz the Great and Powerful

Wicked Part I

The Wizard of Oz Retrospective: The Conclusions

Tuesday, November 19, 2024

Nowhere Special: A Review

 

NOWHERE SPECIAL

Nowhere Special is a curious film in that we have a movie that technically is a four-year-old film that has spread slowly around the world, coming to the United States only now. Deeply moving, quiet, and told in a straightforward way, Nowhere Special is a beautiful film.

Belfast window washer John (James Norton) is a single father, his Russian-born partner having bolted back to Russia six months after their son Michael (Daniel Lamont) was born. John does his best to care for Michael, to whom he is a quiet and loving father. John, however, is dying of cancer, with precious little time left. Michael is unaware of how serious the situation is. He also does not question why John takes him to see so many people, mostly couples.

John, with the help of aid worker Shona (Eileen O'Higgins) is looking over prospective parents for Michael. They see wealthy couples, middle-class couples, a single mother and a mixed-race couple who have a mix of biological and foster children. All can offer Michael a good, caring home, are decent people and do want Michael. John, however, hesitates, wanting the very best for his son. John gets encouragement and advise from his own foster mother, Rosemary (Stella McCusker), who sadly is too old to repeat that job with Michael. With time fast running out, John must summon the courage to tell Michael about his own end and find the best person or people to take Michael.

After finishing Nowhere Special, I was reminded of another film about fathers and son and that deep bond between the two. Unlike the original The Champ, Nowhere Special does not involve sudden death but a gradual one. Like The Champ, however, Nowhere Special builds up its characters to where you do like them and become invested in their simple, specific stories. Writer/director Uberto Pasolini takes his time in building up the story, allowing us a chance to know who in specific John is.

John is like Nowhere Special as a whole is: quiet, gentle, steady. John is not flawless or perfect or even at times downright mean. In fairness, the only time John shows a negative side is when he goes back to a job with a very unpleasant client and throws eggs at the man's windows, even the former client's car. This is as gentle a revenge as John can find against a particular unpleasant person. However, this is probably the meanest anyone was in Nowhere Special

One element that elevates Nowhere Special is how ordinary and simple everyone is. As John and Shona visit each prospective family, none of them are either cartoonishly good or bad. They all get their specific moments where they talk about themselves and how they would be with Michael. Each of them is a good person, caring, understanding, willing to help. I think that reflects how people genuinely are in real life. Each of them has either had a child or been a foster/adoptive parent, so each brings his or her own experience to how they would be with Michael. 

In retrospect, only the last couple, a more uptight wife and put-upon husband, might be less than ideal for Michael. Even they, however, are not shown as monsters. They instead, are just not the right fit for John's son.

Nowhere Special has many quiet moments of beauty and sadness that never draw attention to themselves. When John makes a cake for his 34th birthday, he encourages Michael to keep adding candles. Michael, in his innocence, keeps adding red candles. It is when he offers a 35th candle that we get hit hard with John' reality.

The film gets to you even when we do not hear from John or Michael. McCusker's Rosemary tells John about her late husband, noting that she finally threw out his toothbrush last Christmas. Ella (Valerie O'Connor), the sole single woman that Shona presents to John, has a beautiful running story of how she got pregnant at 16 and decided to give the baby up for adoption. In her ramshackle apartment (she being caught unaware that the interview was for that day and not the next as she thought), she tells John and Shona about how she realizes that single parents do not often get the opportunity to foster, but how she has always longed for a second chance.

Those moments are deeply relatable, bringing Nowhere Special to almost feeling like a documentary. That the film is told very simply and quietly, with sparing but effective use of Andrew Simon McAllister's score, keeps things very grounded.

Nowhere Special is probably the best acted film of whatever year you see it in. James Norton gives an absolutely heartbreaking and moving performance as John. This a quiet man, one who loves his son deeply but who also struggles to accept the situation. When asked by Shona and agency head Mrs. Parkes (Laura Hughes) how he wants Michael to remember him, John states quietly, almost resignedly, "That I'm a window cleaner". In his own way, John does not want to face the reality of the situation. Aware that he is a dying man, he will not make a memory box for his toddler son, let alone tell him about his condition. As Nowhere Special goes on, we see how effective Norton is in making John a relatable, believable person.

He is very quiet but not withdrawn. He comes close only once to being harsh with Michael. In most films, I think, the moment when Michael becomes slightly rebellious over the wearing of other pajamas rather than his favorite ones might have been built up to almost operatic heights. Here though, we see that John is actually quite quietly proud of his son's rebellious streak. It is John's quiet manner, down to when he finally, gently, and beautifully tells Michael of what will come that moves you.

If you do not shed at least one tear when John starts looking over what to leave Michael, I question if you have a soul. 

Lamont's Michael too does wonderful work. He is not a cutesy kid, but a sweet kid, one who wants to emulate his father whom he loves, down to drawing marks on his arms similar to John's many tattoos. Nowhere Special is filled with these quiet moments that make things more real.

If I could fault Nowhere Special with anything, it is one scene where Michael has come across a dead bug and asks John why it isn't moving. Maybe the symbolism here is laid on a bit more than needed. That though is such a tiny flaw that it is almost stretching to find fault with the film. Maybe the selected parent was obvious, at least to me. 

I really am struggling to find fault with Nowhere Special. I did not expect to be as moved and touched by this simple, soft, straight story of a father and son.  Nowhere Special is a film that left me in tears, but not without hope. A simply beautiful film that should have a wider audience, Nowhere Special does not quite live up to its name, for it is one of the most special films that I have seen. 

DECISION: A+

Monday, November 18, 2024

The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's: The Television Special

THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF HA'S

I have come across a few curious takes on L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. I very much doubt, however, that the man who spun this yarn of farmgirls swept into magical lands by tornadoes ever imagined that his story would be adapted by Christian vegetables. The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's is an adaptation of the New Testament story of the Prodigal Son geared towards toddlers. With pleasant songs and cutesy animation, The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's works for its target audience.

For those not versed in VeggieTales lore, this is a franchise centered around Larry the Cucumber and Bob the Tomato. Bob tends to be the more sensible of the two, with Larry being the more oddball one. It is a bit like Abbott & Costello, with Bob being a much nicer and more patient Bud and Larry being a less dimwitted Lou. In this story, Bob comments that "Felix Rosenwinkel of Grinnell, Iowa" has written to them about how he is concerned that his father won't love him anymore because he stole something. With that, Bob and Larry recount a variation of the Prodigal Son parable, which is found in the Gospel of Luke, Chapter 15 verses 11 to 32.

Young Darby (Junior Asparagus) wants to go to an amusement park, the Land of Ha's, overseen by a wizard. Darby's father Farmer O'Gill, a farmer raising dental floss, tells him that they cannot afford such a trip now.

Before I go any further, it should be understood that VeggieTales operates on its own eccentric logic, so a dental floss farm where the crops are original or mint flavored dental floss should be seen as perfectly logical in this world.

Darby knows he has money in his piggy bank, but Father insists that the money is for Darby's future. Finding it too much to endure, and with a desire to go Somewhere Beyond the Barn, Darby takes the piggy bank and goes off to Ha's with his pet pig, Tutu. Wouldn't you know it: a tornado sweeps them to a land populated by peas known as Munchies. The fairy queen Splenda (Madame Blueberry) tells Darby that he has crushed the Munchie Muncher of the East. Now, Darby sets off to the Land of Ha's, led not by the Yellow Brick Road but by Yellow McToad, who is an old Scottish yellow toad.

On his way, he encounters a scarecrow, a tin woodsman and a lion, who all go with him. The Wizard of Ha's welcomes them, especially when Darby has enough to pay for a day's outing. There are more wonders in the magical land of Ha's, but Darby is out of money. No prospects, no real friends, no help from the Wizard who is just a guy running an amusement park. How will Darby get back home? Moreover, will his Father welcome him back if he is able to escape the land of Ha's?

As The Wizard of Oz is so engrained into American culture, I wonder if The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's target audience will get the references, such as Darby's three traveling companions and the parody versions of Follow the Yellow Brick Road or The Merry Old Land of Oz. I think that younger children do not have to have seen The Wizard of Oz to get the story. I do not know if they will follow the refrain of "Ohioans and fifers and mares! Oh my!" though. 

What children might not understand is His Name is Darby, the song that the Munchies sing in tribute to Darby's work in getting rid of the Munchie Muncher. The lyrics, which to be fair are meant to be nonsensical, make reference to Dana Carvey and Robert DeNiro. Leaving aside that the pictures of Carvey and DeNiro look nothing like them, at least to me, these references would clearly go over the heads of children. They might even go over the heads of some adults unfamiliar with Carvey, who is not as prevalent as he was when he was on Saturday Night Live

There is another song that does not fit anywhere in the narrative. Again, my understanding is that every VeggieTales episode is supposed to have a "Silly Song with Larry" which is superfluous to whatever plot there is. This episode's Silly Song, Monkey, is again meant to be as the intermission says, a silly song with Larry (the cucumber for anyone who forgot). To the constant refrain of "If it doesn't have a tail, it's not a monkey it's an ape", Larry confers the title of "monkey" or "ape" to every imaginable object or being. Therefore, a kite and a comet are monkeys because they have tails. When Larry and Bob finally spot a creature, Larry proudly calls it a monkey because it has a tail.

Never mind that it is actually a cow. Monkey has an amusing wit and melody to it, not just the song but the presentation. We can "hear" the set being wheeled out and the text "Not a Monkey" flash when we see the cow. Yes, it is silly. Yes, it has no reason for being there. Yes, very young kids will be amused. 

Most of the songs are quite catchy and amusing. Somewhere Beyond the Barn, an obvious nod to Over the Rainbow, is surprisingly moving. The closing song, You Can Always Come Home, is equally moving even if it is underplayed in the closing montage. Other songs, such as Follow Old Yellow McToad, are less silly and more eye-rolling. This is especially true as Yellow McToad plays no real role apart from a sight gag.

The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's does a very good job of putting both the Parable of the Prodigal Son and The Wizard of Oz into a more toddler-friendly mode. For example, Darby does not kill anyone, let alone witches. He merely crushes a Munchie Muncher. We do not see the wastrel life of the Prodigal Son in wild living. It is put in context that kids will understand without having to go into detail about the young man's wasted life. 

Sadly, it does what many retellings of the Prodigal Son do: leave out the dutiful older brother. I cannot fault it too much for that in that The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's is meant to be a primer, not a sermon.

It is also a bit unclear if the Wizard was meant to be villainous or not. From what I saw, he was not a bad man but a businessman trying to drum up business for his amusement park. However, he does cause Darby to become trapped in a dungeon. 

The Wonderful Wizard of Ha's succeeds in what VeggieTales bills itself as "Sunday morning values, Saturday morning fun!". It presents its moral on the Prodigal Son in a cute, amusing way. It even closes with 1 John: 3:1 to reinforce the lesson of God's unbounded love for His children. It is a pleasant parody of The Wizard of Oz, not meanspirited but sweet, if a bit eccentric. 

7/10

The Wizard of Oz Retrospective: An Introduction

The Wizard of Oz (1925)

The Wizard of Oz (1939)

The Wiz

Return to Oz

The Dreamer of Oz

The Muppets' Wizard of Oz

Oz the Great and Powerful

Lynch/Oz

Wicked Part I

The Wizard of Oz Retrospective: The Conclusions