"Nine Lives" Movie Review

Well... This movie certainly did not land on it's feet. 

"Nine Lives" is a family film that unluckily hit theaters the same weekend as "Suicide Squad", which is undeniably one of the most anticipated movies of the summer if not the year. And while critics and some fans have not been kind to "Suicide Squad" in their reviews and ratings, they have definitely been harder on this film. But is "Nine Lives" really deserving of such low ratings? In a way, yes. 

"Nine Lives" tells the story of Tom Brand (played by Kevin Spacey), the billionaire businessman who owns "FireBrand"- some nondescript company that buys things, and builds things, but that's all we really know about it. And FireBrand's big schtick all through the movie is they want to build the world's largest building. Which is one heck of a goal, because apparently people want to throw money at the business that has the biggest building. However, some

Mr. Brand and his daughter Rebecca discussing
birthday gifts. [Found on Google Images]

company in Chicago is constructing a building that is 60 feet taller than the FireBrand building, and that is just the worst thing ever I guess. So, Brand's sleazy right-hand-man Ian (Mark Consuelos) refuses to tell Brand about the height differential, which is "no big deal" to him. 

Then, we are introduced to Tom's wife Lara (Jennifer Garner) and his daughter Rebecca (Malina Weissman) who are moping around the house about how Tom is never home. Actually, Lara is the only one moping over it. Rebecca is just the most optimistic and cheerful Mary-Sue character I've seen since the original film version of "Annie". Anyway, it's the day before Rebecca's 11th birthday, so Lara is pressing Tom to get her something nice, but all Rebecca wants is a cat. Tom hates cats, so he tries really hard not to get one for her, but finally concedes. He goes to this random hole-in-the-wall pet shop called "Purrkins Petshop" run by the eccentric Christopher Walken. Actually, the character's name is Felix Perkins, but really, it's just Christopher Walken in a pet shop. So, Christopher Walken gets Tom to take a fluffy cat named "Mister FuzzyPants" (because of course that's his name), and as Tom is leaving the shop, Walken turns to his horde of cats and says "Let's do this," suggesting that he and the cats have something magical up their sleeves. Boy, are we on the road to disappointment. 

So before he goes back to his home with Mister FuzzyPants for his daughter's birthday, he swings back by the FireBrand building because while at "Purrkin's", he caught a glimpse of a news anchor doing a story about how the Chicago tower is taller than his, so he pulls Ian up on the roof of the building with him and the cat in a rain storm and proceeds to yell at Ian about how he's a failure, and how he's fired, and blah blah blah. Then lightning hits the roof, blowing Tom and Mister Fuzzypants off the side of the building, and Ian just watches Tom and the cat dangle from the side of the building but doesn't want to help them, since he was about to get fired and all. It's amazing how getting fired can change people's minds about letting people fall off buildings. When they eventually fall, however, they crash through a window before they hit the ground.  When Tom wakes up, he sees his body being loaded up on a stretcher, but then he

Perkins (Christopher Walken) talking to
Mister Fuzzypants [Found on Google Images]

realizes he's trapped in Fuzzypants' body, to which his response is, "...Really?". Christopher Walken tracks him down and tells him that in order to be a man again, he has one week to reconnect with his family, or he'll be trapped in the cat's body forever. Oh yeah- Christopher Walken talks to cats in this movie, FYI. 


Normally, I just write a little summary of the plot, and then I move right along with my thoughts on the movie. But for this movie, I felt it was important to explain all of that nonsense, which is what this flick is made up of. This movie was not only painfully predictable, but it is so full of plot holes any rational person can't make it through this film without asking a minimum of 3 questions. The movie literally made no attempt at explaining how Tom becomes a cat, or how Christopher Walken can talk to cats, or what the hell Lara sees in her husband to begin with, or why Tom is so obsessed with his fancy building or anything. At the beginning of the movie we're introduced to Tom by way of showing him and his adult son in a plane getting ready to go sky diving on his way to a press junket. Tom isn't a professional sky diver, or extreme sportsman. In the interior of FireBrand you see panels on a wall with pictures of Tom playing golf and other things, but it's never mentioned if he's an avid sportsman, or if his company could possibly sell sporting equipment, but it never says for sure. So really, not only was the story introducing us to the main character, but also to an endless string of McGuffins that this movie is loaded with. 

"Nine Lives" follows the tired plot of "overworked dad must become an animal to become more human" which has been done to death, even by talking animal movie standards. In pacing, plot and predictability this film is right on par with the 2005 remake of "The Shaggy Dog" starring Tim Allen, which was also a remake of the original 1960's classic of the same name. And I say

Jennifer Garner trying to get her keys from Fuzzypants
[Found on Google Images]

that film is a classic because not only did it come out during the Golden Age of live-action Disney films, it was also one of the first movies to capitalize on the fore mentioned theme before it got ridiculously overused. The movie makes it a point to show the audience how "Tom isn't involved with his family", when really, aside from working too much, he seemed to have really good chemistry with his daughter, son, and wife. Sure he could be a little curmudgeonly about certain things, but what parent or working adult can say they've never been cranky, or overworked, or stressed out and acted out from that?  

And in regards to the cat and the cat humor, even that wasn't very good. During the opening credits there are a ton of phone-shot cat videos but none of them are particularly funny. And don't get me wrong- I am a fan of internet cat videos. But if you're going to take the time to show funny cat videos, actually show funny cat videos. I'm telling you, a little "Shock Kitten" or "Ninja Cat" would go a long way. For the most part, I will give it to them, the cat animation was fairly good, especially since the film didn't come from a major movie studio, but there were a few scenes were the animation left a little to be desired. For example, there was one scene in particular that was supposed to be heartwarming that involved Mister Fuzzypants and Rebecca dancing as they were reconnecting, but honestly, the cat's movements were super awkward, and the look he gave his daughter during the scene with his kitty-cat eyes was

Some of the animation in this film was great. Some
was not....
[Found on Google Images]

a little bit creepy. However, I do have to give the movie kudos on one thing; when Tom becomes a cat, he is a man trapped in a cat's body. I know that idea has been incorporated into every "human-to-animal" movie, but this one actually plays it straight- a man trapped in a cat's body. Let's look back to "The Shaggy Dog"- in that film, after Tim Allen became a dog, he would also inherit the dog's tendencies and animal nature even in his human body; tennis balls would be super interesting, growling at people who angered him was an appropriate expression of disapproval, and chasing a cat is a top priority. However, in this film, Tom is not interested with anything cat related. He's disgusted by cat food, he isn't interested in cat toys, can't land on his feet, and is still into manly things like drinking scotch (Yes. There is a scene where a cat drinks scotch). 



I also can't help but feel that another thing that works against this film is its misuse of Kevin Spacey. The majority of Spacey's screen time isn't actually spent on screen. Instead, he's a voice that's imposed over Mister Fuzzypants, but while this is a talking cat movie, there aren't any moving animated mouths; it's all very much like Garfeild but less humorous. While Spacey does deliver a lot of chuckle-worthy jokes (especially at the expense of his ex-wife), on the

CGI Fuzzypants sharing a dance with Rebecca
[Found on Google Images]

whole, a lot of the jokes are just weak. I can't help but feel that this movie underutilized what is essentially one of the strongest actors in Hollywood. Spacey is without a doubt a heavy-weight in the world of film. This also isn't his first foray into animation; in 1998 he played Hopper in Pixar's "A Bug's Life", and while this wasn't one of Pixar's most-loved films, many people can agree that Spacey brought a lot of weight and character into his role. This film, while earnest, just didn't have too much in the way of interesting characters, even when faced with something exciting; like being turned into a cat, for example. 

And moving on to the cast, really I have to give whoever did the casting in this film a big round of applause for even landing Kevin Spacey for this. He was definitely the highest caliber actor they had in the cast. Jennifer Garner honestly has had better performances, but this felt like she just said yes to get a paycheck. I mean with this film, "Miracles from Heaven" and a multitude of Garnier commercials under her belt, this literally had to just be a pad-the-wallet job. And as for Christopher Walken, I'm pretty sure he just wandered onto set and started playing along with the cast. But on the other hand, this film has a pretty good roster for Internet and App-famous cats. For example, there's Hamilton the Hipster Cat, Lil Bub AND Talking Tom gets screen time and film credits. Talking Tom. Let that sink in for a minute. 

Talking Tom (above) gets actual screen credit in this film... Really??
But seeing Lil Bub (below) on screen was cool, so there's that I guess...
[Found on Google Images]

Honestly, this whole movie felt a lot like a made-for-TV Hallmark movie, and frankly, Europacorp probably would have saved a lot of time and money just making the film that way. But was it really horrible? Well, I've seen worse movies, like "The Shaggy Dog" remake that I am honestly shocked has a higher rating on Rotten Tomatoes- that movie was awful for so many reasons. This movie, while not the best, was at least an earnest attempt at making a fun family movie. And I'm probably being too harsh of a judge, because the other members of the audience were busting a gut and enjoying themselves. Ultimately, this type of movie doesn't appeal to me, clearly. But if you do enjoy movies like this, who knows- you may just fall in love with it. This film was harmless as far as movies go, but it doesn't make a huge attempt to do anything new for the genre, but rather plays it really safe. This film did have a few highlights, but ultimately it all fell a little short.  

The Plague Dogs Movie Review

"The Plague Dogs" is a film based on the Richard Adams book of the same name, that was directed by Martin Rosen and released back in 1982. Adams and Rosen previously worked together to make the animated film version of "Watership Down," which was based on another of Adams' novels. And for those who know what "Watership Down" is, you should have an idea of what to expect in this movie. However, if you are unaware of "Watership Down," you must know that "The Plague Dogs" is an animated film that is bleak and depressing, but also very well done and has one hell of a tale to tell. 

"The Plague Dogs" tackles different subject matter, ranging from vivisection and animal testing, to mental illness, survival, as well as a hard look at the concept of freedom. The movie tells the story of Rowf, a large black mutt (played by Christopher Benjamin) who is kept in an animal testing facility, and is constantly subjected to tests involving being drowned in a large pool of water over, and over, and over again. Because of this, he has developed a loathing and distrust of humans, as well as a deep fear of water. His friend Snitter (played by John Hurt) is a sweet and well-meaning fox terrier who, unlike Rowf, has known the love of humans as he once had a "Master". However, after a tragic accident involving his owner, he ended up in the custody of a animal testing laboratory and has undergone experiments and surgeries on his brain. Due to the experiments, he has visions of prior memories that interact with his present, as well as other psychological and neurological issues as a result of the testing. One night, the dogs break free from the lab and try to live off of the land as wild animals in the English countryside. This proves to be much harder than they originally thought, however, as neither dog is very good at hunting or foraging for food.  Along the way they are joined by The Tod (James Bolam), a fox who is willing to teach them how to be proper wild animals, while at the same time using their naivety to his own advantage. Eventually, local farmers start noticing that their sheep are being savagely killed and eaten, and start trying to hunt the dogs down. However, they soon catch wind that the animals have come from a nearby testing facility and there is a slight chance they have been exposed to, and are carrying the Black Plague. This leads to an all out 'dog-hunt' by the farmers, the scientists from the lab, as well as the British military. By the end of the film, the dogs try and escape being captured by fleeing to the sea and trying to swim to safety, but their outcome is very ambiguous. 

The film itself received modest success in theaters and would later have a small release on VHS; only 8,000 copies of the tape were made. The film can be found on DVD, though in the United States, we only have access to a edited version of the original film. The theatrical release originally ran for 103 minutes, so all we get today is around 86 minutes. Many of the scenes scrapped from the theatrical film were simply to cut down run time. However, there is a scene that was taken from the book and transplanted in the movie that never made it to American audiences because it was so shocking. However, if you reside in Australia or the UK you can easily purchase an uncut version of the film. The original theatrical film has also been uploaded to sites like YouTube, that are well worth looking into; especially if you want to see the full film as it was originally intended.

Our heroes try to avoid being caputured. [found on Google Images]

The movie itself is well animated; it was all done by hand without any aide from computers or rotoscoping. That doesn't sound like much, but once you see how the characters move and interact, it is clearly impressive too see the amount of detail the animators put into this film. Also, the background art successfully adds to the dreary tone of the story without detracting from the action of the film's characters. Both are well balanced to make a solid animated film. 

The acting in this film is also note-worthy. Benjamin and Hurt really give great performances as their characters, as they make you really connect and feel for the dogs' plights. Also, The Tod (my favorite character) adds a bit of levity to this otherwise heavy story. Also, The Tod speaks in a Georgie accent, which is really fun to hear. Speaking of Geordie accents, a lot of the accents in this film are accurate for the areas of the UK the film takes place in. If your not familiar with any other British accents aside from RP (Recieved Pronouciation) you're either in for a treat or bound to be a little confused by what's being said.

Also, as an animal rights activist, I am really moved by how accurately they depict the horrors of animal testing and vivisection but also they are able to display all of the effects of such terrible tests on animals without jumping down the viewers' throats about it or pointing out the obvious. Conveying such powerful fear and pain through the characters' experiences makes a deeper and more lasting impact that continues to haunt the audience after the film is over.

While the the atrocities of animal testing are explored in the movie, as well as the concept of survival, I feel like the underlying theme in this story is all about freedom, and what really makes one free. All through the first act of the film Snitter and Rowf just want to escape the lab 

(rightfully so) so they can achieve freedom outside in the world. But once they're there, their freedom is questionable as they are slaves to circumstance. Eventually, the heroes of the story 

are left without any option for survival, and have to make a decision that could either lead to momentary freedom in the world, or the ultimate freedom that could be experienced in death. Of course, this is just what I see in the film. Another beautiful quality of this film is the creators really leave the audience to draw their own conclusions and parallels which is always the sign of a well thought-out story. 

Having said all that, this film; while it is animated, is NOT for children, and may even be a little hard for some adults to handle. If you've ever seen the animated version of "Watership Down" you will know that neither Richard Adams or Martin Rosen pull any punches when it comes to grim reality. If you have trouble seeing animals being tested upon and harmed, this film is gonna be hard to swallow. Also, if you have a sensitivity to animated blood and violence, this movie may also be a little outside of your realm of comfort. As you may have noticed, I have added very few images to this review. This is partially because of the graphic nature of some of the images I could find, but it's also to not spoil the wonderful art of this film. I will say that if you choose to brave it, and are willing to give the film a chance, it is rewarding and well worth it. Though the film is very sad, it is very meaningful and really amazing to watch. It is a film that leaves a lasting impression on the audience and delivers a well thought-out story that is worth hearing/seeing.

"Strange Magic" Movie Review

For my next couple of reviews I'm going to pay attention to one of the greatest playwrights and poets of all time; William Shakespeare. His words have transcended not only the ages, but also into different parts of our classic and contemporary culture. It's no surprise that The Bard's works would eventually wind up on the Silver Screen either in faithful adaptation or as inspiration for other stories to flourish. "Strange Magic" is one such story that is roughly based on "A Midsummer Night's Dream".

"Strange Magic" was originally a story George Lucas came up with as a romantic girl-friendly version of Star Wars for his daughters. The film itself is a Shakespearean-inspired fairy tale that is also a musical, with all of its songs being made up of different pop and classic rock songs. Think "A Knight's Tale" with added enchantment. Back in 2012 when Lucas sold Lucas Film LTD to Disney, his animation studio was included in the deal. "Strange Magic" was in the middle of production, so Disney also inherited the movie.

The film opens up with a little prologue introducing the land the story will be taking place in. There's the Fairy Kingdom, and The Dark Forest; both are separated by a line of primroses that grow along the borders of the two lands. The leader of the Dark Forest, The Bog King (played by the amazing Alan Cumming), routinely orders the destruction of the primroses as they are a key ingredient needed to make love potions and love is something he detests. In his quest to snuff out love, he has also taken the Sugar Plum Fairy (Kristen Chenoweth) prisoner, as she is the only one who can make love potions.

We're then introduced to the main character of the story, the fairy princess Marianne (voiced by Evan Rachel Wood) who is engaged to be married to a fairy knight Roland (Sam Palladio).

Marianne [found on Google Images]

After Marianne discovers her knight in shining armor isn't who she thought he was, she calls off the wedding and rejects the idea of finding love and turns her focus to being independent and self reliant, while at the same time trying to keep her younger boy-crazy sister Dawn (Meredith Anne Bull) from making the same mistake she had made when it came to love. Dawn's best friend Sunny (Elijah Kelly) is an elf, who is in unrequited love with her, gets tricked by Roland into going into the Bog King's lair and getting a love potion from the Sugar Plum Fairy. The Bog King finds out a love potion was created and was smuggled out of his lair and into the Fairy Kingdom, and he goes to hunt it down, and in the process kidnaps Dawn and holds her ransom until the potion is returned to him. This leads Marianne, Sunny, and Roland and others on a mission to bring back Dawn, but in true "A Midsummer Night's Dream" fashion, hi jinx involving a misplaced love potion arise and add extra chaos to the quest.



It was released in January 2015 from Touchstone Pictures and the film did not do well at the box office and received lukewarm response from audiences and critics alike. While the main focus of the film is love, many felt that this film had little to no heart. All of the romantic tropes presented in the story line really aren't fully explored and in some cases they become more like

Dawn defending the Bog King [found on
Google Images]

stereotypes; which is a missed opportunity because the characters and the story did indeed have a lot of potential. Also, a lot of movie goers weren't too thrilled with the music in the film; all of the songs were covers of different famous songs such as Mistreated, C'mon Marianne, Three Little Birds, etc, and many said that the songs' arrangements were lacking in originality. On top of all of that, this type of story has been done to death in cinema and it really doesn't bring anything new to the playing field that sets it apart from similar stories. All of these complaints are valid; but I do feel there are some really good points to this film that are actually worth checking out.

I feel that while this movie really is a pretty simple love story and an even simpler fairy tale, it's no where near as terrible as a lot of critics make it sound. The animation, for one, is absolutely beautiful. As with any George Lucas movie or story, the world he creates is not only simple in concept (light and dark) but it's really rich and interesting to look at while the characters traverse through it. The character designs are also pretty impressive; while the fairy characters are the most visually grabbing due to their pretty colors, the movie also plays around with cool, psychedelic wing tricks from the characters which is well worth checking out alone, if just for the sake of seeing interesting animation. Also, the best design, character and performance award all goes to the Bog King. Visually, he is so unappealing he's appealing; you can tell the animation team really went to great lengths for coming up with his design. Also, Alan Cumming

not only brings a hard and harsh air to the character, but he also adds a complexity to him that's pretty fun to watch; and as an added bonus, the man can sing and he probably has the best lines in the movie. While the rest of the characters are pretty fun, hands down, I think the Bog King is the best in the film. If anything, you should check out the film just for him. Also, I thought the songs were rather enjoyable. They were a bit like Glee musical numbers, but I don't think that's a bad thing, as the songs add a little more storytelling to the film, in true musical fashion. 

In final prospective, I would give "Strange Magic" a 3.5/5 rating; while it's really not the most original story we've heard before, it's still worth looking into. While it's no where near the level of "Shrek", "Beauty and the Beast" or even "A Midsummer Night's Dream" for that matter, it's also still not bad enough to be lumped together with horrid animated films like"Delgo", "Norm of the North", "Chicken Little", or "Mars Needs Moms". THOSE movies have a special place in animated movie hell. At worst "Strange Magic" could be in limbo.