Wow.

WOW!

“Toy Story 2″ is stunning, witty, exciting, enchanting, and very moving. Amazingly, it is even better than the sensationally entertaining original.

The animation is better — the facial expressions of the main characters should qualify the animators for a “Best Actor” Oscar and the backgrounds are more authentically lived in. But most important, the script is better. It is very, very funny, with sly references to Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Jurassic Park and even Rear Window. But it is also insightful and touching, with a sort of “Velveteen Rabbit” theme about the importance a well-loved toy plays in the life of a child.

Woody (again voiced by Tom Hanks) is stolen by Al (voice of Wayne Knight) an evil toy store owner, who recognizes Woody as a valuable collectable. With Woody to complete the full set of toys from a 1950’s television show (deliciously re-created), Al can sell them all to a toy museum in Tokyo. Woody is delighted to find out his origin and value, and to meet up with “Woody’s Roundup” co-stars Jessie (voice of Joan Cusack), Stinky Pete (voice of Kelsey Grammer), and his faithful steed Bullseye. They tell him that he will be better off in the museum than waiting for Andy to outgrow him, and he starts to think they may be right.

Meanwhile, Woody’s friends from Andy’s house have organized a rescue mission led by Buzz Lightyear (again voiced by Tim Allen). After a series of hilarious and breathtaking adventures, they arrive to rescue a Woody who is not sure he wants to be rescued.

In these days when 8 year olds can talk knowledgeably about the extra value a mint tag adds to a Beanie Baby auction on Ebay or the market value of 20 different kinds of Pokemon cards, it is enormously valuable to think about the issue Woody must face. Should he have a brief but satisfying life as the beloved friend of a child who will eventually grow up and leave him bereft? As Jessie says with some bitterness, “Do you expect Andy to take you on his honeymoon?” Or should he remain perfectly preserved and perpetually honored as a museum exhibit? Ultimately, Woody concludes that “I can’t stop Andy from growing up, but I would not miss it for the world.” And Buzz agrees: “Life is only worth living if you’re being loved by a kid.” This is an enormously satisfying and meaningful point for a child — or a parent, especially as we face the holiday season avalanche of ads and gifts. Just as it is important for the toy, it is important for the child to love and respect the few toys that are really precious and think about what it is that makes them so special. As The Little Prince says, “It is the time you have wasted on the rose that makes it so important.”

P.S. As I type this, my Raggedy Ann and Andy, given to me on my 10th birthday, are smiling at me from across the room.

Read this post »

Pixar’s first feature release was the first theatrical released animated entirely by computer and has just been re-issued in a pristine Blu-Ray version that pops off the screen. Although the dazzling technology is especially well suited to a story in which the major characters are made out of plastic, it is the unpretentious imagination and energy of the people behind the story and the outstanding vocal performances that make the movie an enduring classic.

The story is about the toys belonging to a boy named Andy. His favorite is a sheriff from the old west named Woody (with the voice of Tom Hanks). He acts as the leader of the rest of Andy’s toys, including a Tyrannosaurus Rex (voice of Wallace Shawn) and Mr. Potatohead (voice of Don Rickles). All is going well until Andy receives for his birthday an astronaut named Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen of “Home Improvement”). Woody becomes jealous, and in an effort to keep Andy from taking Buzz with him on an excursion, Andy accidentally knocks Buzz out the window. Woody follows, and the rest of the movie consists of their efforts to return home before the family moves away.

Children may relate to the idea of the sibling rivalry between Woody and Buzz, and the movie may provide a good starting point for a discussion of jealous feelings. It may also be fun for parents to point out some favorites from their own childhoods, including Mr. and Mrs. Potatohead, Etch-a-Sketch, Slinky Dog and Barrel Of Monkeys.

NOTE: This movie may be too scary for very young children. The three- year-old with me insisted on leaving less than halfway through, and it got scarier after that. Andy’s next-door neighbor is a vicious and destructive boy named Sid, who mutilates and tortures toys. His room is filled with genuinely grotesque creations made from bits and pieces of toys — sort of Geppeto’s workshop as seen by Stephen King. Sid gets a relatively mild comeuppance as the toys “break the rules” to scare him into being kind to all toys in the future.

Children may also be troubled by the notion that the toys are “real” whenever the humans are out of the room. This is even more confusing because one of the cleverest aspects of the movie’s plot is that Buzz does not know he is a toy, and thinks he really is a space explorer on his way “to infinity and beyond.” Note also that Andy does not have a father, although it is presented so subtly that most kids will miss it.

The two toys have special appeal not only for Andy to use to imagine himself as the fantasy male archetypes of cowboy and astronaut, but also perhaps as father substitutes. Meanwhile, there are no strong female toys, only a simpering Bo Peep who flirts with Woody.

Read this post »

Pixar’s first feature release was the first theatrical released animated entirely by computer and has just been re-issued in a pristine Blu-Ray version that pops off the screen. Although the dazzling technology is especially well suited to a story in which the major characters are made out of plastic, it is the unpretentious imagination and energy of the people behind the story and the outstanding vocal performances that make the movie an enduring classic.

The story is about the toys belonging to a boy named Andy. His favorite is a sheriff from the old west named Woody (with the voice of Tom Hanks). He acts as the leader of the rest of Andy’s toys, including a Tyrannosaurus Rex (voice of Wallace Shawn) and Mr. Potatohead (voice of Don Rickles). All is going well until Andy receives for his birthday an astronaut named Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen of “Home Improvement”). Woody becomes jealous, and in an effort to keep Andy from taking Buzz with him on an excursion, Andy accidentally knocks Buzz out the window. Woody follows, and the rest of the movie consists of their efforts to return home before the family moves away.

Children may relate to the idea of the sibling rivalry between Woody and Buzz, and the movie may provide a good starting point for a discussion of jealous feelings. It may also be fun for parents to point out some favorites from their own childhoods, including Mr. and Mrs. Potatohead, Etch-a-Sketch, Slinky Dog and Barrel Of Monkeys.

NOTE: This movie may be too scary for very young children. The three- year-old with me insisted on leaving less than halfway through, and it got scarier after that. Andy’s next-door neighbor is a vicious and destructive boy named Sid, who mutilates and tortures toys. His room is filled with genuinely grotesque creations made from bits and pieces of toys — sort of Geppeto’s workshop as seen by Stephen King. Sid gets a relatively mild comeuppance as the toys “break the rules” to scare him into being kind to all toys in the future.

Children may also be troubled by the notion that the toys are “real” whenever the humans are out of the room. This is even more confusing because one of the cleverest aspects of the movie’s plot is that Buzz does not know he is a toy, and thinks he really is a space explorer on his way “to infinity and beyond.” Note also that Andy does not have a father, although it is presented so subtly that most kids will miss it.

The two toys have special appeal not only for Andy to use to imagine himself as the fantasy male archetypes of cowboy and astronaut, but also perhaps as father substitutes. Meanwhile, there are no strong female toys, only a simpering Bo Peep who flirts with Woody.

Read this post »

Pixar’s first feature release was the first theatrical released animated entirely by computer and has just been re-issued in a pristine Blu-Ray version that pops off the screen. Although the dazzling technology is especially well suited to a story in which the major characters are made out of plastic, it is the unpretentious imagination and energy of the people behind the story and the outstanding vocal performances that make the movie an enduring classic.

The story is about the toys belonging to a boy named Andy. His favorite is a sheriff from the old west named Woody (with the voice of Tom Hanks). He acts as the leader of the rest of Andy’s toys, including a Tyrannosaurus Rex (voice of Wallace Shawn) and Mr. Potatohead (voice of Don Rickles). All is going well until Andy receives for his birthday an astronaut named Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen of “Home Improvement”). Woody becomes jealous, and in an effort to keep Andy from taking Buzz with him on an excursion, Andy accidentally knocks Buzz out the window. Woody follows, and the rest of the movie consists of their efforts to return home before the family moves away.

Children may relate to the idea of the sibling rivalry between Woody and Buzz, and the movie may provide a good starting point for a discussion of jealous feelings. It may also be fun for parents to point out some favorites from their own childhoods, including Mr. and Mrs. Potatohead, Etch-a-Sketch, Slinky Dog and Barrel Of Monkeys.

NOTE: This movie may be too scary for very young children. The three- year-old with me insisted on leaving less than halfway through, and it got scarier after that. Andy’s next-door neighbor is a vicious and destructive boy named Sid, who mutilates and tortures toys. His room is filled with genuinely grotesque creations made from bits and pieces of toys — sort of Geppeto’s workshop as seen by Stephen King. Sid gets a relatively mild comeuppance as the toys “break the rules” to scare him into being kind to all toys in the future.

Children may also be troubled by the notion that the toys are “real” whenever the humans are out of the room. This is even more confusing because one of the cleverest aspects of the movie’s plot is that Buzz does not know he is a toy, and thinks he really is a space explorer on his way “to infinity and beyond.” Note also that Andy does not have a father, although it is presented so subtly that most kids will miss it.

The two toys have special appeal not only for Andy to use to imagine himself as the fantasy male archetypes of cowboy and astronaut, but also perhaps as father substitutes. Meanwhile, there are no strong female toys, only a simpering Bo Peep who flirts with Woody.

Read this post »

In this episode Mike and Veer explore the world of political films.  Using their 3-2-1 format they look at their 3 favorite political comedies, 2 favorite political dramas, and 1 film that challenged the governmental status quo. 

Give us a listen and we promise to vote for you in the next election.   

iTunes Feed:

http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=343227972

RSS Feed:

http://pamp47.libsyn.com/rss

The Philosopher Extraordinaire

Perhaps I’m mistaken, but I had my expectations set on Confucius the film being a tale of the man himself, one of the greatest and earliest philosophers and thinkers that had vast influence over a number of ideologies today, including the system of ethical governance. The trailer had suggested that besides being a learned man, he’s quite the military strategist as well, like a precursor to Zhuge Liang, which of course is way off the mark as far as I’m concerned.

It seems like director Hu Mei had been influenced by a number of war films set in Ancient China from Battle of Wits to Red Cliff, and had been inspired to do her own, even if it had to involve Confucius. Good thing though she didn’t put the philosopher, played by Chow Yun-Fat, into a suit of armour, but rather, starts off the narrative focused on his ascension to enviable political positions starting with the Law Ministry, before being Acting Interior Minister for the state of Lu.

A tale of two parts, the first half danced along the narrative tread of political intrigue, with court official envy and being the favourite adviser of the ruler, laying the groundwork for some serious rivalry and treachery to be dished out, especially when a talk of alliance with another state goes awry, if not for a Plan B up in the sleeves to bail them out of trouble. But hold on, was Confucius ever a politician to begin with? I do not know, but it didn’t matter much, as there were glimpses of how his mind ticked, with discussions of ideals and ideas with his disciples being some of the highlights that one would have come to the movie for.

The second half though, was a let down. Unappreciated and driven away, Confucius starts his self-exile, and together with a small group of dedicated disciples whom we know very little of save for their names and titles appearing on screen, and most given extremely limited screen time, they wander around the film from city to city, and very much echoed the sentiments of the viewer – when will they settle down and get themselves into some serious classroom teaching? It’s a pity that this section of the film decided to focus on how frail and aged Confucius had become with the passing of time, but little more. Pacing seems a little hurried as well, especially when dealing with subplots involving his disciples, with resolution being only a few minutes after.

Even Zhou Xun’s cannot save the show, as she’s given a combined screen time of not more than 15 minutes thereabout to turn on her charm as the consort of a kingdom that Confucius and his disciples pass through. In other words, a flower-vase role that completely underutilized the talents of this wonderful actress. Chow Yun-Fat cuts an imposing figure of Confucius and probably had what it takes in the first section, before the weak storyline in the later half muted his performance as a senior citizen with major issues to address for himself and his disciples, the first being the basic theories of Maslow in getting food and shelter for his followers.

I figured I would have enjoyed a film about Confucius more if it had taken a more in depth look into his character, his inspiration, his influences (that goes just beyond the churning of learned disciples to execute their like-minded philosophies) and of course, having all these done more through the narrative scenes, rather than through inter-titles which tell a lot more than the film itself. I think one is better off digging out Confucius epics of old, than to watch this spruced by version with very fake looking CGI.

The Last Song Opens Today

Producers of the new Miley Cyrus movie are apparently trying to get a jump on the weekend box office run with a mid-week opening of The Last Song. Of course it’s well known that Cyrus has been dating Australian actor Liam Hemsworth for a while. Now, if you want to see how their relationship started, look no further than this movie which opens nationwide today.

Opening Limited Nationwide

Even though it’s being called a nationwide opening, it’s by no means a really large opening. The Last Song opens on just 2,500 screens. Some may say that seems like a lot of movie screens. However, in way of comparison, How To Train Your Dragon opened on more than 4,000 screens last weekend. Most of what are called major releases open on more than 3,000 screens. Warner Brothers Clash of the Titans opens this Friday on more than 3,600 screens. So, coming in at just 2,500 screens, it’s easy to see those involved with this latest offering from Smiley Miley are optimistic about just how well it will do at the box office. That’s probably another reason it’s opening mid-week instead of the usual Friday opening.

I have a feeling by Friday Miley Cyrus will be lost in a sea of animation and fighting gods with Clash of the Titans.

As for plot - The Last Song is based on The Notebook author Nicholas Sparks’ latest novel. Cyrus plays a teenage girl who leaves New York for the summer to spend time in the South with her estranged father, played by Greg Kinnear. While attempting to mend her relationship with her dad, she falls in love with Liam Hemsworth’s character Will. Of course this is also the movie in which Miley Cyrus is trying to break out of her Hannah Montana type-cast. Time will tell if she’s successful or not.

Enjoy the show!
Dr. Rus

A new Expendables Trailer is online and it looks pretty fun. A little less comical than the trailer released last year, but still made of awesome.

I guess they decided that everyone knew about the Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis cameo right in the trailer. Maybe they filmed that while planning their next Planet Hollywood location?

Looks great. Can’t wait.

Some films don’t need a sequel. But you know if it makes money they will find a way to make one anyways. The Hangover is one of them. A rare gem of a film is that it was funny for how it was presented, the absurd situation it delivered and the actors and characters involved.

But now all players involved in the original Hangover have signed on for The Hangover 2: Hung Harder.

Screen Junkies offers:

Warner Bros never expected The Hangover to become successful enough to lead to a sequel so they didn’t sign the actors up for additional films. Though it’s been expected that Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis would return for another day of delirium tremens, nothing was confirmed until today.

I have no idea how they are going to do another one and have ANY hope of this capturing any of the magic of the original.

Their stories are told. No where left to go but a happily ever after with a satisfying ending off in the sunset.

I have no problem with remakes and reboots, and dont even mind a sequel if the story has room for it. But when there is nothing to sequel off of, its just desperate money grabbing.

I think its great that this film did so well, and that these guys are getting work because of it… but I will have to see what they intend to do with these guys before I consider getting hyped up about a sequel.

Miley Cyrus shows us how her reach exceeds her grasp in “The Last Song,” an attempt to move past Hannah Montana. She has become Disney’s most valuable property through the force of her personality, comic timing, and way with a pop song. But pop princesses grow up, though usually not quite as quickly as they want to. And valuable properties are hard to turn down. So when one of the world’s biggest superstars-turned-brand wants to make a grown-up movie, she gets her way.

That is why “The Last Song” plays like a check-list of everything a 17-year old would like to make as an antidote to the perpetually sunny Hannah Montana rather than a movie that works. After the sugary Disney Channel hijinks, she gets to play something a tiny bit edgy, a sulky teenager with a pierced nose, sent to live with her estranged father for the summer. Nicholas Sparks, for the first time adapting one of his own books, supplies his brand of synthetic syrup — broken hearts must find love amidst devastating losses, preferably through some exchanges of mail, all of this near a body of water with a beach.

Cyrus plays Veronica (Ronnie), a recent high school graduate who is so angry at just about everything and everyone that she is refusing to go to Julliard in the fall even though she is so talented that they accepted despite her refusal to play the piano. They just knew how great she was and accepted her anyway. Her mother (Kelly Preston) drops her off with her little brother Jonah (Bobby Coleman in the film’s most natural performance) at their dad’s beach house. Jonah is thrilled to be there but Ronnie is still angry with their father (Greg Kinnear as Steve) for leaving them and refuses to have anything to do with him as she had refused to read his letters.

Ronnie meets a cute guy named Will (Liam Hemsworth) and they bond over protecting a nest of sea turtle eggs. A falling-in-love montage is quickly followed by a trying-on-clothes-in-the-vintage-shop montage, which at least has the advantage of giving us a break from the dialogue and plot developments. But before long, the screen is littered with complications as Will and Ronnie have to cope with divided loyalties and then with something much more serious.

It’s all pretty enough, and Sparks is an expert at manipulative melodrama. Cyrus has a likable, unforced screen presence but does not have the training or focus to make Ronnie real or show us any change more significant than the switch from black to pastels and the disappearance of the nose stud. The screenplay feels episodic and scattered, like a collection of discount greeting cards. And the movie feels like a very expensive screen test for a star who needs to learn that sitcom skills are not enough to make a movie drama work.

Read this post »

I’ve been anticipating Clash of the Titans since I saw the trailers last year and I was able to catch it in 3D last night. I sure wasn’t disappointed.

Clash of the Titans is a great addition to the canon of epic films Hollywood has produced, the scale is just sweeping and the adventure is a throwback to the great action journeys. The story is centered on Perseus (played by Sam Worthington), a demigod with an axe to grind against the Olympian gods. He embarks on a seemingly impossible mission with a band of soldiers to stop the underworld’s most destructive beast– the mighty Kraken.

Being a fantasy movie, one really has to stop thinking logically to fully enjoy the film. For example, the one thing that can stop the Kraken just dumbfounds me. (I won’t spoil it, but it’s truly head-scratching). The action scenes against the monsters are riveting, except the one with Medusa, which is hampered by its obvious CG-rendering. One final beef I have on the film is that the 3D effect seem to have little impact on the experience.

But over-all Clash of the Titans has action blockbuster written all over it– thanks to the exhilarating action, decent story, and a healthy dose of Greek mythology.

Rating: 3.5/5

Technorati: Clash of the Titans

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

“Crazy Heart” starts out like so many independent artsy films about addiction, illness, fame, talent and aging, or any combination of those elements.  Jeff Bridges plays a washed-up, alcoholic country music star who is now travelling solo in an old suburban, playing bowling alleys, and begging his label to advance him some cash and release yet another “Greatest Hits” CD.   He is old, fat, ugly, and out of luck.  This is familiar Oscar bait territory;  it’s the second cousin of Playing Ugly and the grand uncle of Rain Man Syndrome.  We get to watch a respectable actor puke in their underwear and act, utterly unrespectable.  Maybe it’s poetic justice we crave; we like watching our idols fall.   It worked for Jeff Bridges; he walked away with an Oscar for “Crazy Heart.”  It also worked for Mickey Rourke last year, in “The Wrestler,”  which was a movie very similar to “Crazy Heart,”  only better.

Bridges is Bad Blake, a legendary country music star from the days of outlaw country who bears more than a little resemblance to Kris Kristofferson.  But country music has changed, and left Blake behind;  now the fans want slick and sexy instead of gruff and grouchy, and Blake’s one-time protege, played by Colin Farrel, is all the rage.  “Crazy Heart” seems to bear the promise of some kind of showdown between Bad and his protege, played by Colin Farrel, symbolizing what was once called “outlaw country” vs the stuff they play on the radio, but it never materializes.   In fact, Farrel seems to be in the movie so that there can be a happy ending.  Whether or not Bad deserves this happy ending, whether it’s achieved by selling out, isn’t addressed.

Maggie Gyllenhaal is a music writer in Albuquerque, which is a pretty lousy place to try and make a living writing about music.  She harangues an interview with Bridges, and well, one thing leads to another.   She has a four year old son, and Bridges does honestly seem to adore him;  Gyllenhaal can see this rough-around-the-edges washed up country singer filling in the Father Gap in her little boy, and maybe that’s why she keeps him around.   But then tragedy almost strikes, and it’s Bridges’ fault, or at least seems to be; it’s easy to blame a guy who’s perpetually drunk when something goes wrong.   And the whole thing falls apart.  Hell hath no fury like a single mother scorned.

Bridges is great throughout, never overdoing it, even if he is primarily doing a 2-hour long Kristofferson impression.  And Gyllenhaal, as usual, is excellent.  Their chemistry seems odd – she’s at least 20 years younger than he is – but seems to work on its own terms.   And yet all throughout, “Crazy Heart” feels light and trifling, a little too easy, a little too simple.   The ending comes awfully quickly, and leaves some questions about artistry and integrity hanging;  it feels, when the credits roll, like first-time director Scott Cooper seems more interested in making sure everyone–the audience included– is reasonably happy after two hours than in honestly following the threads of his story where they might lead.   “Crazy Heart” is a pretty good movie, better than many, but it’s an awful lot like “The Wrestler,” which dug deeper, rang truer, and hit harder.  Call it “The Wrestler” lite.

Part of the charm of “An Education,” a bittersweet coming of age story based on a brief memoir by Lynn Barber, is how much we know what its main character does not. Jenny (an incandescent Carey Mulligan) is a teenager in 1961 London, over-protected by her overly-cautious and conventional parents and eager to be independent and to have adventures. She is used to being the smartest one in the class and so even more than most teenagers, she is convinced that she understands many important things her parents cannot possibly comprehend. She is eager to grow up, to seem sophisticated, to be sophisticated. She is innocent, filled with potential, willing to be taught — and she has no idea how powerfully attractive those qualities are to a predatory older man.

But we know that, and when David (Peter Sarsgaard) rescues Jenny and her cello from a rainstorm by giving her a ride home, we know she will confuse urbanity with wisdom, that she will think that because he lies on her behalf he will not lie to her. But the most important thing we know is that like Jenny, London is also on the brink of enormous changes. We know that a world of opportunities she could never imagine will open up to her. Unlike Jenny, we know she is going to be fine. After all, we know she went on to tell her story, in itself a triumph over whatever went wrong and whatever she lost.

Danish director Lone Scherfig perfectly captures London just as it is about to move from the drab, stiff-upper-lip, world of post-WWII deprivation to the brash and explosive era of mods and rockers, Carnaby Street and the Beatles, Twiggy, “The Avengers,” and Joe Orton. Part of what makes David so exciting is that Jenny believes that the only options available to her are teacher and housewife and the only examples of both she has seen appear dull and unrewarding. David gives her a glimpse of a life that is never dull. It is always shopping and parties and travel, pretty clothes and lovely restaurants. If in order to have all of that she must lie to her parents and defy her teachers, that makes it all the more exciting. It binds her to him even more, creating a set of rules that is just for them.

That is how it seems, anyway. The education referred to in the movie title tells us that she will learn some difficult lessons. But its conclusion reminds Jenny and us that it is only the end of her beginning. She thought meeting David was the beginning of her future; she learns that the real beginning only came afterward.

The screenplay by Nick Hornby (“High Fidelity,” “About a Boy”) is sympathetic but insightful, skillful in sketching in each of the characters. Sarsgaard also makes David more than a predator. Jenny is not just smarter than he is; she is stronger, too. As Jenny goes from school girl to dressed-up doll to the beginning of adulthood, from the make-it-do, wear-it-out modesty of her home to Paris hot spots, Production designer Andrew McAlpine and costume designer Odile Dicks-Mireaux show exquisite sensitivity in giving Jenny a look that tells the story. Every performance is a gem: Alfred Molina, proud but fearful as Jenny’s father, Emma Thompson, starchy as the headmistress, and Olivia Williams, a teacher who wants more for Jenny than she wants for herself (it must have been quite a challenge for hair and make-up to turn Williams into such a dowdy character). Rosamund Pike is utterly charming as a dim but kind-hearted party girl. And Carey Mulligan, in a star-making turn, makes this into one of the best films of the year.

Read this post »

Extra, Extra Read All About It…Gerard Butler Makes A Good Career Decision!

Since 300, the stoic actor, who voices a character named Stoick, hasn’t made many good career decision (though I quite enjoyed RocknRolla) since his breakout role as King Leonidas.  The key to his success here was:  a) being heard and not seen and b) playing the supporting role in the film.  Oh, and being the animated equivalent of Leonidas. 

How To Train Your Dragon, at it’s core, is a boy and his dog film.   A boy and his dog film, if the dog was a dragon and the boy was a ninety-five pound Viking warrior wannabe.   Hiccup, voiced by the very talented Jay Baruchel, longs to be a dragon hunter, but is stymied by the fact that he hasn’t the wherewithal to kill anything.  That, and he befriends a dragon and comes to the realization that dragons are really rather peaceful creatures.  In actuality, the film is quite allegorical in the sense that perceptions are challenged when warring factions have to reevaluate why they are at war in the first place.  Palestine and Israel take note.     

The madcap antics, dragon training scenes, and awesomely realized imagery will be enough to tickle tyke’s fancies, but it’s the relationships that blossom that will keep adults in their seats.  At the heart of the film are three main relationships, with Hiccup at the center.  The father/son relationship is explored by showing how disappointed Stoick is with his son, due to a lack of dragon hunting prowess.  A disappointment that is only exacerbated by the next significant relationship, which is the boy/dragon pairing.  Raised to believe that they are mortal enemies, neither is capable of letting their guard down at first, but ultimately learn to appreciate each on a level that hadn’t been previously explored.  While juggling the roles of both dragon hunter and dragon trainer, Hiccup finds a confidant in Astrid, a female Viking that regularly puts him to shame in the toughness department.  Here begins the third important relationship, as we see a mutual respect and fondness grow out of a shared secret.  Amid the amazing visuals and comical overtones, there is real heart to this film.  Something few animated selections allow themselves to have nowadays.  

Now that I’ve brought the house down with my melodramatic interpretation of the film, I’d like to reiterate that it is a comical film, with magnificent animated sequences.  The comedy is spot on, with wonderful delivery from the voice cast which includes not only Butler and Baruchel, but also America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and the always funny Kristen Wiig and Craig Ferguson. 

How To Train Your Dragon is the complete animated package.  Comedy, imagination, and compassion coalesce into a near perfect film that will entertain adults and children alike.