​“Snow White” stars Rachel Zegler, Gal Gadot, Andrew Burnap, Ansu Kabia, and Patrick Page.  Released on March 21, 2025, the film has a young woman confronting the evil queen’s tyranny.

The film is directed by Marc Webb, who also directed films such as “500 Days of Summer”, “The Amazing Spider-Man”, and “Gifted”.  It is a live-action adaptation of Walt Disney’s 1937 film “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” and loosely based on the 1812 fairy tale by the Brothers Grimm.  One thing that immediately comes to mind when I think of animation is the studio that helped popularize the format: Disney.  Before being overwhelmed by its competitors and obsession with live-action remakes and IPs recently, Disney had dominated the animation game with its number of classics despite some misses, especially ones from the Renaissance era in the 1990s.  Of course, that was before the studio started losing its way due to money and its questionable choices in diversity and representation, but I don’t feel like getting into details about that.  We’re here to talk about the glory days when Walt Disney became a force in the animation department, and it’s all thanks to the fairest of them all: Snow White.  

Known for being the first animated feature film produced in the United States, “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” became a crucial milestone in the industry through its fairy tale aesthetics, technical innovations, and memorable characters.  It set the stage for the golden age of animation, prompting other studios to follow suit, and the rest, as they say, is history.  Given the current status of Disney nowadays, it was only a matter of time before the movie that started the trend would get the live-action reimagining treatment like many others.  But, of course, it’s not without a few controversies plaguing the remake’s potential before it came out.  Those include Rachel Zegler being cast as Snow White, the recreation of the seven dwarfs through CGI, and my personal favorite, Zegler’s viewpoint of the 1937 film.  Isn’t social media fantastic?  Unfortunately for the detractors, those issues didn’t stop Disney from releasing it because the studio needed more money to create more original projects that would likely underperform at the box office.  With that said, let’s see if the live-action version is the fairest out of all the other remakes. 

The story follows Snow White (Zegler), a young princess living in her kingdom with her stepmother, the Evil Queen (Gadot), after her parents die.  Due to the Queen’s tyranny, the kingdom is left with nothing but despair and hopelessness.  Things get even worse when the Queen grows jealous of Snow White being the “fairest of them all”, prompting her to kill her stepdaughter out of obsession.  After escaping the Queen’s rule, Snow White finds herself in a magic forest, where the Seven Dwarfs reside in the cabin.  With the help of a rebel named Jonathan (Burnap) and the Dwarfs, Snow White strives to unite her people against the Queen and save her kingdom.

The Disney live-action remakes are the types of movies people can live with or without, mainly the latter for multiple Disney adults.  While I agree that most of them are as unnecessary as the remakes from other studios, they often have specific merits to delight a new generation of fans.  Even I, too, have soft spots for some of these remakes despite my agreeing that their modern changes won’t win over everybody.  However, with the recent controversies “Snow White” has been getting, it’s abundantly clear that reviewing anything from Disney positively nowadays has become an excruciating challenge, especially the live-action remakes, whether you’re a professional critic or social media influencer.  Yes, the higher-ups from Disney have made some annoying changes recently with its representation and appeasement to its audience.  Still, when it comes to talking about its films positively as a critic, the situation is becoming more and more like a death sentence on social media.  You either pan it to appease the overgrown haters or provide a positive review and get called a “paid Disney shill”.  There’s seriously no in-between.  I guess the Evil Queen isn’t the only person whose heart is full of jealousy and hatred.

So, while I was eager to see the remake due to growing up with “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs”, I was also cautiously concerned about how I review it.  But then I remember the purpose of my reviews, in which I must always be fair, constructive, and honest regardless of the controversies, wokeness, or whatnot.  Of course, the same should be applied to Disney’s recent works, whether people agree with me or not.  Now that I got that out of my system and finally saw the film, it’s time to answer the question everyone’s been waiting for: does it really deserve the poisoned apple?  Obviously, the online trolls deserve it more for how poorly they treated Zegler.  As for the film itself, it’s not bad.  It’s no fairest of them all, but when it comes to balancing the old with the new, “Snow White” is a charming treat that offers a bit of magic and goodwill in its simplicity and slightly uneven approach.

There are many reasons “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” is a timeless classic, including its charming characters, gorgeous animation, and memorable songs.  However, I believe the most crucial element for its success was its definitive reflection of what makes a person pure.  Being the fairest isn’t just about outward beauty, as the Evil Queen believed.  It’s the purity of a person’s heart that makes them genuinely kind.  This quality is reflected in Snow White’s generosity and goodwill towards others, contrasting sharply with the Evil Queen’s cold-hearted personality and greed.  While Snow White may be identified as a damsel in distress waiting for her prince to rescue her someday, she’s also among one of Disney’s finest princesses due to her compassion and unselfishness.  So, it’s unsurprising that screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson wanted to retain that personality for the remake but also provide enough depth to make the protagonist three-dimensional.  It’s far from perfect, but she did a fair enough job translating its timeless themes for the current generation.

Like Disney’s other live-action remakes, “Snow White” offers plenty of nostalgic moments to make audiences reflect on the animated counterparts, for better or worse.  But, its changes and additions to the story to fit with the modern times will heavily depend on people’s tastes.  It follows a similar storyline to the 1937 original, which could lead to many comparisons and predictable narrative beats that are understandably inferior to the animated version.  While that may be the case, director Marc Webb ensured that these scenes have their sense of charm and energy to make the similarities tolerable.  As for its changes, as I mentioned, they’ll depend on people’s tastes in the remakes.  On the one hand, these changes make sense in emphasizing its characters and themes involving inner beauty and kindness over greed, especially in today’s times where we’re constantly overrun by social media tyranny and political outcry.  But I’m sure the online trolls aren’t ready for that conversation yet.  On the other hand, I wouldn’t say that they’re groundbreaking additions to its straightforward plot.  The pacing can be pretty uneven during specific moments, and some of its emotional beats were a bit lost underneath its busy visuals and middling supporting characters.  Besides that, I’d say the screenplay was decent in respecting parts of the animated movie’s themes and expanding Snow White as a pure-hearted and fearless princess determined to fight with pureness.

Similar to the film’s story, the cast was far from unforgettable, but they provided enough moments in their performances to make their characters pure.  While I know the main leads’ personal viewpoints, political or otherwise, I’m also responsible for judging them based on their talent and nothing else.  I want to be a critic who never lets the actors’ “controversial” problems hinder my judgment of their acting.  That being said, I agree with everyone who watched it early that Rachel Zegler was the fairest of them all regarding her appealing performance.  Since my first exposure to her in “West Side Story”, Zegler has impressed me with her acting talents and excellent singing.  Her being cast as Snow White was quite a choice, but there was no doubt that she would be a delight to witness, and she did not disappoint.  The movie also saw Gal Gadot trading her Wonder Woman outfit for the Evil Queen’s wickedness, and the result was…not entirely bad.  I know that people love to jump on the hate wagon regarding her acting, and while I do see that her performances in other movies weren’t outstanding, her role as the Evil Queen was something I didn't mind, even if it’s not perfect.  The Evil Queen is known for her intimidating aura and cruel personality, especially in her subtle yet commanding mannerisms, and that identity remains in the remake.  When she’s speaking in a calm yet menacing tone, Gadot fits the bill quite nicely.  However, when the Queen does something that requires her to yell, things get a bit too silly to take seriously.  But, at the very least, her villain song, “All is Fair”, was tolerable to listen to.  Regardless of the leads’ controversies, I would admit that Zegler and Gadot did what they could to elevate the remake, and what they did was fine enough.

As for the supporting cast, they did all right in making their presence worthwhile.  Andrew Burnap assumes the role of Jonathan, a rebel created exclusively for the remake, and replaces the Prince as Snow White’s love interest.  His performance was all right, even though his line delivery was a bit stiff at times, but his singing more than makes up for his character’s hit-and-miss personality and lackluster group of rebels.  Unfortunately, I would also say that Ansu Kamia was the weakest of the cast in terms of his heavily restrained performance as the Huntsman.  But what about the Seven Dwarfs, you ask?  The ones with the “hideous” CGI makeover?  Well, the voice actors behind the goofy-looking Dwarfs, including Jeremy Swift (Doc) from “Ted Lasso” fame and “Pirates of the Caribbean” star Martin Klebba (Grumpy), delivered a similar amount of charm and heart as the ones from the animated version, with Swift being one of the highlights as the Dwarfs’ leader.  Andrew Barth Feldman, known for co-starring in “No Hard Feelings” with Jennifer Lawrence, also did a surprisingly good job making Dopey more than just a silent comic relief, although the one slight change to his character may not make the original’s fans as happy as…well, Happy (George Salazar).

Regarding the CGI effects for the Dwarfs, I feel like I’m one of the few people who didn’t mind this approach.  Sure, it would be nice to have actors with dwarfism portray them, but regarding the feedback, it’s another lose-lose scenario that won’t please everybody.  They may look a tad creepy, but at the same time, they also fit with the storyline’s storybook-like aesthetics and are distinctive with their identities.  Even the animals looked adorable in CGI form.  The presentation had a similar approach to Disney’s other live-action remakes regarding its “degrading” colorization.  However, that doesn’t make it even less magical.  The forest scenes and even the “Heigh-Ho” sequence are where the visuals actually attempt to be a bit more colorful, even with its yellowish saturation for the magic forest’s tranquility.  Despite being seen as another “lifeless” remake by most people, I can take the vibrancy of the film’s forest scenes over the “Lion King” remake’s barren wastelands any day.

Finally, we have the musical numbers.  The remake included four songs from the original version by Frank Churchill and Larry Morey, including “Whistle While You Work” and “Heigh-Ho”.  Those who grew up with “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” would be as delighted with these classic songs returning as I was, and the new cast did pretty well in capturing the spirit of these toe-tapping tunes, especially Zegler’s rendition of “Whistle While You Work”.  However, the real topic was the new songs created just for the remake, as they were written and produced by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul, who previously wrote new songs for the “Aladdin” remake.  Regarding the show-stopping and captivating appeal of the songs, Pasek and Paul never fail to impress me with the musical finesse in their previous films, and I was expecting their work on “Snow White” to generate that similar success.  While some of them were anything but Oscar-worthy, they’re serviceable enough to warrant their existence, with Zegler’s “Waiting on a Wish” being my favorite.  I would also credit the musical numbers for their lively choreography provided by Mandy Moore, known for her work in several dancing competitions like “Dancing with the Stars” as well as the 2016 film “La La Land”.

Overall, “Snow White” has enough fairness in its narrative beats and magic to deliver a visually charming update to the animated classic despite being poisoned by the issues seen in Disney’s other live-action remakes.  Regarding some of its changes, uneven pacing, and predictable plot elements, the 2025 remake of Walt Disney’s first animated feature film is understandably far from the fairest of them all.  However, it is also far from the poisoned apple many detractors claimed it was, especially when I remove the overdramatic controversies surrounding the movie from my brain and review it for what it was.  Rachel Zegler made another delightful presence due to her performance as Snow White, and director Marc Webb made a decent effort to capture most of the endearing and magical aspects of the 1937 film.  Along with its serviceable visual effects, toe-tapping music, and solid approach to its inspiring messages, the movie is another watchable, if not inferior, remake that I can take or leave.  Of course, considering the film’s reflection on kindness and its mindless controversies, it’s another example of people needing to focus on something else for a change instead of wasting their energy being grumpy online.  If you’re interested in seeing this regardless of the reviews, you go right ahead and judge it for yourself.  If not, then don’t bother and focus your energy on supporting the original films playing in theaters instead of being "Evil Queens" online over something you can't control.  Regarding everything that’s happened with the film and even the current events surrounding our planet, I think we all need a hint of kindness now more than ever.

​“Plankton: The Movie” stars Mr. Lawrence, Jill Talley, Tom Kenny, Bill Fagerbakke, Carolyn Lawrence, Clancy Brown, and Rodger Bumpass.  Released on Netflix on March 7, 2025, the film has Plankton’s world changing when his plan for world domination is thwarted.

The film was directed by Dave Needham, an art director known for films like “Penguins of Madagascar”, “The Lego Batman Movie”, and “Trolls”.  It is the second film in a series of SpongeBob SquarePants spin-off films.  Love can be pretty complicated sometimes, maybe even dysfunctional, but it always prevails when they truly admire each other.  However, none can be just as complex and dysfunctional as the love between the most villainous plankton in Bikini Bottom and his computer wife.  Plankton and Karen usually have their beef with each other throughout the “SpongeBob SquarePants” franchise when it comes to their plans for world domination, similar to every couple imaginable.  But, despite their quarreling and annoyance, they stuck together through thick and thin in their quest to take over Bikini Bottom.  However, their latest quarrel might end up being their last.  Despite the critical failure of Sandy Cheeks’ spin-off adventure last year, Nickelodeon and Netflix continue their goal of expanding the popular franchise through its spin-offs centering on its supporting characters.  Although SpongeBob’s presence still lingers because, why not?  This latest addition to the trend puts the spotlight on SpongeBob’s frenemy, who’s pitted against the biggest challenge of his life: his technological wife.  Was it able to correct the mistakes of the previous spin-off, or does it become another example of Nickelodeon milking this sea cow dry?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Plankton (Mr. Lawrence), the antagonistic owner of the Chum Bucket, striving to steal the Krabby Patty secret formula from his business rival, Mr. Krabs (Brown).  After his unsuccessful attempt, Plankton discovers that his computer wife Karen (Talley) turned the Chum Bucket into a successful Mexican-themed restaurant.  Upset that Karen’s plan isn’t evil enough to his liking, Plankton burns the restaurant down, causing immense tension between the two.  Fed up with Plankton’s disrespect, Karen takes matters into her own hands by plotting world domination without him.  With a rogue Karen on the loose, Plankton must enlist the help of SpongeBob (Kenny) and his friends to subdue his computer wife’s rampage and fix their marriage.

There’s no doubt that I was willing to check “Plankton: The Movie” out due to my love of SpongeBob SquarePants.  However, I also couldn’t help but be a little cautious with how the franchise handles its spin-off movies.  “Saving Bikini Bottom” may have its absurd moments like the television series, but regarding its story and CGI animation, it didn’t hold a candle to the first two theatrical film adaptations we got in its earlier years.  I would even say that “Saving Bikini Bottom” was one of the franchise’s weakest efforts, if not the worst.  This film also ran into a similar issue of being leaked online a year before its release, like Sandy’s solo adventure.  Fortunately for us, “Plankton” has the benefit of having better reviews than “Saving Bikini Bottom”, indicating that the developers may have gotten their priorities straight in developing their spin-off features.  But does that mean I also see it as an enjoyable addition to the long-running franchise?  Well, yeah, it surprisingly does.

Compared to the other SpongeBob movies we have so far, “Plankton: The Movie” may not surpass the theatrical films on a cinematic and sentimental level.  However, regarding the spin-off films on Netflix, I’d consider “Plankton” a well-deserved improvement over "The Sandy Cheeks Movie".  One reason is the story, which focuses on Plankton and Karen’s relationship.  “Saving Bikini Bottom” does get credit for giving Sandy, one of the franchise’s popular supporting characters, her due as a main character despite SpongeBob lingering beside her.  However, the only problem holding that potential back was its run-of-the-mill and underwhelming screenplay, which lacked depth and heart in Sandy’s personal journey.  It was tolerable, but as both a streaming film and a SpongeBob movie, Sandy’s adventure was a complete washout.  “Plankton” offers a similar structure that puts SpongeBob’s frenemy into the spotlight, but again, SpongeBob is still front and center throughout his quest for world domination.  The result is a surprisingly effortful yet understandably fundamental recipe for success.

There’s no doubt that Plankton is a selfish and self-proclaimed “evil genius” who’s obsessed with taking over the world, but that’s also why we adored him in the show.  Plankton serves as an example of an over-the-top cartoon villain whose hatable persona is packed with genuine charm and slapstick humor, mainly due to Mr. Lawrence’s vocal performance.  While his evilness still reigns in the movie, there’s also a hint of empathy that forces him to confront his selfish desires.  In addition to reprising his role as Plankton, Mr. Lawrence also took charge of its screenplay and story alongside Kaz and Chris Viscardi, and it’s very easy to tell that he loves his character and Karen.  Through the story’s flashbacks, the film explores Plankton and Karen’s relationship further from their humble beginnings to their first attempt at world domination, highlighting Plankton’s endeavor of regaining the villainous and loving spark he and Karen once had.  In short, there was an attempt at providing a story worthy of Plankton’s adventure compared to Sandy’s spin-off film.

Some of its jokes, visual gags or otherwise, may not pop as many laughing bubbles as others, although the one involving the college was pretty funny.  The screenplay also doesn’t offer much beyond its made-for-streaming quality in terms of its themes and narrative structure, resulting in it being pretty barebones sometimes, especially when it combines several moments from specific episodes, such as Karen’s “Gal Pals”.  However, it usually compensates by doing the one thing “Saving Bikini Bottom” failed to accomplish: making me care for its supporting characters, mainly Plankton’s marital issues.  Additionally, the film is described as a musical, with original songs written by Bret McKenzie, Linda Perry, Mark Mothersbaugh, and Bob Mothersbaugh.  Given the show’s wacky nature, I wasn’t expecting the songs to be as memorable as the ones from “Wicked”, but I was hoping they would be catchy enough to tolerate them.  Thankfully, the songs weren’t too bad to listen to, with some being on par with the IP’s comedic and vibrant tone.  However, I can’t say that they’re fantastic, either, but I can see that the writers had some fun with them regardless.

Much like the previous films, the main cast from the show reprised their roles as their respective characters.  However, the only difference was that “Plankton: The Movie” didn’t include a single celebrity in the cast, leaving only the main cast to do the heavy lifting.  Those who are tired of the SpongeBob films being overrun by A-list celebrities would undoubtedly be relieved by this change.  Personally, I felt indifferent about it, as I’m only focused on judging their performances.  Unsurprisingly, the cast was once again superb in injecting lively and vibrant vibes into the characters, including Mr. Lawrence, who continues to dominate as the mischievous yet charismatic Plankton.  Jill Talley also deserves credit for conveying the heart and soul of Karen’s computerized appearance, further emphasizing her substantial role in the show’s later seasons.  Considering how much I’ve enjoyed Karen’s increased depth in the recent seasons, it’s no surprise that this film continues to take advantage of this change.  But, of course, I can’t forget about Tom Kenny, whose joyful and energetic performance as SpongeBob still shines despite occasionally overshadowing Plankton in his own movie.

Finally, we have the film’s animation.  Like “Saving Bikini Bottom”, “Plankton: The Movie” resorts to CGI as the primary animation style instead of the show’s usual 2D format.  While it didn’t hold a candle to the source material’s iconic traditional animated flair, I would say it did a fair job of translating the show's rubbery, cartoony, and colorful aesthetics in 3D.  Even though the animation quality sunk lower than an anchor, it did have a silver lining that made the movie stand out from “Saving Bikini Bottom”: the flashback sequences.  Those scenes utilized many different animation styles to showcase different points in Plankton’s life, with one example being his childhood years resembling a rubber hose style from the 1930s.  The flashbacks were undoubtedly the film’s highlight, as its experimental approach to the distinct formats offered a refreshingly fun reflection of the source material’s far-fetched and zany appearance.  The fact that Plankton’s movie puts more effort into the visual gags and styles than Sandy’s out-of-water experience showcased how much the SpongeBob team improved themselves.

Overall, “Plankton: The Movie” dominates with a straightforward and vibrant addition to the iconic franchise, but its small scale in the quality and storytelling is easily squish-able by cinematic standards.  Regarding SpongeBob’s trend of direct-to-Netflix spin-offs, Plankton’s undersea adventure was an enjoyable and serviceably animated improvement that fixes most of the mistakes “Saving Bikini Bottom” left on the streaming surface.  However, it’s also an undemanding and fundamental family movie whose story mostly swam through its narrative basics without much sentimentality in its core.  In terms of its entertaining voice cast, hit-and-miss plot, and experimental animation styles, the film came close to having the exact formula needed to take over Netflix’s charts, which would likely satisfy most of the franchise’s fans.  However, if you’re still weary about the IP churning out spin-offs, this may not change your mind, but there’s a good chance you’ll feel the same way I did.

​“The Day the Earth Blew Up: A Looney Tunes Movie” stars Eric Bauza, Candi Milo, Peter MacNicol, Fred Tatasciore, Laraine Newman, and Wayne Knight.  Released on March 14, 2025, the film has Daffy Duck and Porky Pig saving the world from an alien invasion.

The film features the directorial debut of Pete Browngardt, who’s known for developing “Looney Tunes Cartoons”, on which the film is based on.  “Looney Tunes” has been regarded as one of the most influential and creative cartoons ever to hit television screens.  With its memorable characters, absurd slapstick, and imaginative animation, the media franchise has continued to inspire and delight multiple generations of kids and adults through short films, video games, television shows, and movies.  Despite some controversies and misses in the media department, “Looney Tunes” shows strong signs that these looney characters aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.  However, on the theatrical film front, the Looney Tunes have only graced the big screen through its compilations and by sharing the spotlight with live-action actors like Michael Jordan, Brendan Fraser, and LeBron James.  Not counting the direct-to-DVD catalog, there hasn’t been an attempt at a fully animated feature film involving the Looney Tunes on an original big-screen adventure without any live-action humans interfering.  At least until recently, as Hollywood finally decided to give these characters that opportunity.

Following the conclusion of the franchise’s recent iteration, “Looney Tunes Cartoons”, the show’s creator, Pete Browngardt, took the approach of continuing the series with its film adaptation.  Of course, it’s not without an uphill battle to actually get it out into the world courtesy of David Zaslav’s dismissal of animation.  Thankfully, that struggle concluded with indie studio Ketchup Entertainment handling U.S. distribution rights to the movie instead of Warner Brothers.  Considering the recent state of traditional animation in theaters, I would consider this a win for the animation department.  It would also be nice if Ketchup Entertainment purchased distribution rights for the unreleased “Coyote vs. ACME” film, but I guess that would depend on this movie’s reception.  Until we know for sure, we can at least celebrate the fact that we finally have an original and fully 2D-animated Looney Tunes film playing in theaters.  But is its story looney enough to warrant this out-of-this-world occasion?  Let’s find out.

The story centers on Daffy Duck and Porky Pig (Bauza), two best friends attempting to save their childhood home from demolition.  Their antics to earn money leads the two to the town’s bubblegum factory, where Petunia Pig (Milo) is working on creating the gum’s new flavor.  They then uncovered a terrifying plot within the facility, in which an intergalactic being known as The Invader (MacNicol) seeks to dominate Earth via mind control.  With their planet in danger of being enslaved by the otherworldly visitor, Daffy, Porky, and Petunia join forces as their home's last line of defense to overthrow The Invader’s scheme without driving each other crazy.

If there’s a project involving the Looney Tunes, whether a television show or a movie, there’s no doubt that I would be checking it out on day one.  Unsurprisingly, “The Day the Earth Blew Up” is no exception.  I’ve been watching the iconic franchise ever since I was little, especially when I needed a break from watching plenty of Disney cartoons and movies occasionally.  Of course, that includes the theatrical movies based on the property, like “Space Jam”, its sequel, and “Looney Tunes: Back in Action”, with the latter being the first adaptation I watched in theaters.  Sure, these movies were technically live-action/animation hybrids, but they hold a special place in my kid-shaped heart due to their cartoony antics and charming aesthetics.  So, there’s no way I would pass up a Looney Tunes theatrical movie like this, especially since it’s 100% traditional animated, a long overdue format that's welcoming for animation fans longing for more 2D animated features in theaters.  The early praise it received from the Annecy and Los Angeles premieres also got me more hyped for the film.  

But, as usual, despite my love for Looney Tunes, I am also responsible for judging it as a movie based on its quality and execution.  After all, I didn’t let my looney fanboy persona get in the way of reviewing the “Space Jam” sequel, so I was expecting myself to repeat this action for “The Day the Earth Blew Up”.  So, after months of anticipation, does the film actually live up to the looney expectations?  Honestly, yes.  In fact, I would even say that they finally nailed the cinematic formula that the franchise has been searching for for years.  “The Day the Earth Blew Up” offered the usual looney and dynamic antics these characters have been known for since the beginning, along with its small hint of heart and cinematic flair, and the result was exactly what I expected it to be.  As a fan of the Looney Tunes, I was immensely satisfied with the love and effort the animators put into this project, making for an easygoing and satisfyingly entertaining experience, even for the looniest of fans.  As a film critic, I would classify “The Day the Earth Blew Up” as a proper introduction to newcomers that effectively combines cartoonish antics and genuine heart.

Without any of the cameos hogging the spotlight, live-action or animated, “The Day the Earth Blew Up” was tasked with injecting interest in characters other than Bugs Bunny, mainly Porky Pig and Daffy Duck.  These two became the surprisingly delightful duo that elevated “Looney Tunes Cartoons” when it first aired five years ago.  Regarding its sci-fi theme, the two also appeared together in the “Merrie Melodies” shorts “Duck Dodgers” and “Rocket Squad”.  I was initially skeptical when they introduced Porky and Daffy as the new duo for the current Looney Tunes iteration.  However, after a few episodes involving them, I started to come around to their offbeat chemistry, with Porky being the brains of the duo and Daffy as the wacky one who messes everything up.  That alone was enough for me to see if their dysfunctional friendship could withstand the weight of their cinematic endeavor.  Unsurprisingly, it did.

The premise, which was inspired by the sci-fi B-movies from the 1950s, was a straightforward cartoon stretched into a 90-minute film despite having multiple writers on board.  Seriously, there were eleven writers who worked on this film, including its director Pete Browngardt.  Trust me, I counted.  Usually, when a movie has this many writers, it can be seen as a bad sign for its story, and it could risk being messy and cluttered with redundant ideas.  Fortunately, “The Day the Earth Blew Up” is the exception to this rule, as the writers ensured that the plot was balanced with jokes and ideas that felt necessary to the narrative.  More importantly, this is also the most heartfelt Looney Tunes movie of the franchise, where its emotional core felt more genuine than manipulative.  Its heart comes from Porky and Daffy’s friendship, where their vow to stick together is threatened by not just the Invader’s mind control scheme but also Daffy’s uncontrollable personality, causing Porky to have doubts toward him.  This reflects the film’s messages involving friendship and trust, in which the duo must put their faith in each other to save the planet and their friendship despite their differences.

Was it predictable sometimes?  Yeah, pretty much, besides the one twist I wouldn’t give away.  Was the plot’s simplicity executed well enough to be a fun, energetic, and wholesome choice for all ages?  Undoubtedly, yes!  Regarding the current state we’re in involving cash-grabbing sequels, mindless pop culture gags, live-action remakes, and an abundance of CGI, “The Day the Earth Blew Up” serves as a welcoming return to form for traditional storytelling and old-school 2D cartoony shenanigans.  Although it does have a few modern jokes thrown in there, they didn’t dampen the remaining pieces of delightful slapstick humor, along with some instances of clever adult references sprinkled on top of it.  The result is a constantly hilarious and wacky depiction of looney mayhem that both kids and adults can endure.  But, of course, its zany tone won’t be for everyone, as its fast pacing, straightforward plot, and abundance of cartoon humor can be a bit much for those looking for a multilayered masterpiece in the animation genre.  If you’re not expecting it to be a perfect animated film, then you might be able to tolerate it just as well as I did.

The voice cast was also excellent in their respective roles, including Eric Bauza, whose performance still shines as the zany Daffy Duck.  Bauza also gets massive credit for voicing Porky, as he effectively conveyed the pig’s mannerisms and personality previously provided by Bob Bergen.  If that amount of talent isn’t enough to convince people that Eric Bauza is the perfect addition to the Looney Tunes family, then I don’t know what else to tell them.  Candi Milo replaced Lara Jill Miller as the voice of Petunia Pig, and I thought she did a fantastic job filling in the shoes of Porky’s love interest.  However, the real highlight of the cast was Peter MacNicol as The Invader.  If MacNicol’s goal was to make this seemingly intimidating villain as outlandish and over-the-top as the looney heroes, I must say that he accomplished that objective easily through his vocal performance.  MacNicol has been no stranger to animation work, but I was shocked to see that he’s the same person who played David Langley in “Bean” alongside Rowan Atkinson, which is a film I occasionally watch whenever it’s on streaming or cable.  Man, I love doing research on movies when it comes to these tidbits.

Finally, we have the film’s animation.  While it can be a delight to finally see 2D animation on the big screen, the only thing that matters is whether it’s well-handled enough to warrant this format.  To no one’s surprise, the animation profoundly resembled the classic aesthetics that the franchise is known for.  The lighting, the colorization, the character designs, and the vibrant slapstick action all reflect the traditional Looney Tunes style we have known and loved for years, with just a hint of cinematic essence thrown in there to avoid resembling the cheap quality seen in other direct-to-video projects from Warner Bros. Animation.  The character designs were inspired by the style of animator Bob Clampett, who worked on the franchise and “Merrie Melodies” during the 30s and 40s, emphasizing the love and creativity the animators possessed in paying tribute to the franchise’s history presentation-wise.  Like the film’s characters, the 2D animation is just as quirky, far-fetched, and vibrantly dynamic as one would expect from a Looney Tunes project, and I wouldn’t trade it for anything else.   

Overall, “The Day the Earth Blew Up: A Looney Tunes Movie” is fast-paced, zany, and surprisingly heartfelt enough to avoid bursting the iconic franchise’s own bubble.  While its story can be a bit predictable, and the outlandish tone may not work for everyone, the film still reflects the genuine passion and respect of those who love the Looney Tunes inside and out.  It succeeds as a rewarding tribute to the beloved characters we grew up with and a playful jab at the sci-fi B-movie genre from the 1950s.  But, more importantly, it also succeeds as a consistently entertaining and dynamically colorful family film whose clever slapstick is suitably balanced with its genuine heart.  Regarding its superb voice cast, great animation, hilarious gags, and simple yet engaging story, this looney movie is an out-of-this-world treat for the franchise’s fans and maybe also plenty of general moviegoers.  Considering the current state of the animation industry, it’s great that we got a fully 2D animated film in theaters that met or surpassed our expectations, especially one that involves the Looney Tunes.  It's too bad that it also might be another movie families will skip out on in favor of another carbon copy CGI kids film or live-action remake of a classic animated movie.  Hopefully, that won’t be the case as long as animation fans and Looney Tunes followers make sure their support won’t be for nothing.

"Novocaine" stars Jack Quaid, Amber Midthunder, Ray Nicholson, Jacob Batalon, Betty Gabriel, and Matt Walsh.  Releasing on March 14, 2025, the film has a bank executive rescuing his girlfriend from bank robbers.
​
The film is directed by Dan Berk and Robert Olsen, who also directed "Body", "The Stakelander", "Villains", and "Significant Other".  People tend to go far and beyond to save someone they love the most.  To quote a line from the Disney classic "Hercules," people always do crazy things when they're in love.  One person is no exception to this case, but he has one advantage on his side to help him accomplish this dangerous mission: his immunity to feeling pain.  It sounds like a concept seen in almost every superhero comic book in existence, but I can assure you that this character is anything but an actual superhero.  This latest action comedy offers a concept that can be hit or miss depending on the execution but could deliver action-packed fun for its audience regardless of its quality.  Was it able to deliver that potential or provide a dull experience that's as painful as stepping on a nail barefoot?  Let's find out.

The story centers on Nathan Caine (Quaid), a mild-mannered introvert working as a bank executive.  He's diagnosed with congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP), a rare disorder in which, you guessed it, he cannot feel any pain, no matter how much damage he receives to his body.  This caught the attention of his co-worker, Sherry (Midthunder), resulting in them forming a relationship.  However, their relationship takes a sharp turn when a group of robbers infiltrate their bank and kidnap Sherry as their hostage.  This prompted Nathan to do the unthinkable: run headfirst into danger to rescue Sherry, with his disorder being his only weapon in his battle against the robbers.

When I first saw the trailer for "Novocaine", I knew that this would either be dumb in a fun way or just plain dumb.  You have the usual concept taken from other action thrillers involving protagonists rescuing their loved ones from bad guys, which is commonly straightforward for audiences who like these types of movies.  However, instead of a formerly skilled hero like Jason Statham or Liam Neeson, it's an ordinary and overly timid guy whose only weapon is his invulnerability to pain.  But knowing me, I'm usually in a good mood for a silly, undemanding action film, and "Novocaine" seems to have met that criteria.  Plus, it has Jack Quaid attempting to join the everlasting line of young action stars outside his superhero shenanigans via "The Boys".  Then again, with his character's diagnosis, he could also be a superhero in his own right.  But are these elements enough to make this film less painful than what it seemed to be?  Surprisingly, yes.

Was it a groundbreaking feat for the action-comedy genre?  Absolutely not.  Was it a fun, action-packed treat that utilized its "lack of pain" concept?  Yes, it was.  While "Novocaine" lacks much depth in its storytelling, the film delivers plenty of thrills, charm, and laughs to emphasize its refreshing approach to its genre tropes.  Regarding the story, screenwriter Lars Jacobson offers a narrative that, unsurprisingly, takes the pages straight out of other action thrillers, most notably the protagonist with a secret saving their love interest from the bad guys.  On paper, this seemed like another typical action thriller that focuses more on the spectacle and less on the character-driven substance.  While that may be the case for some viewers, "Novocaine" is one occasion where its cliches help drive its entertainment value instead of dampening it.  One reason was its protagonist, Nathan Caine, a sheltered and generous introvert whose only pain is loneliness until his encounter with Sherry helps him step out of his comfort zone to be her hero.  With his disorder, this would've been a case of having a seemingly indestructible hero, causing the audience to be less interested in its narrative stakes.  Thankfully, that's not the case, as Nathan does have a regular chance of dying like the rest of us despite not feeling pain.  So, at the very least, Lars Jacobson didn't categorize this disorder as a tool for Nathan's immortality.

There's also Nathan's girlfriend and co-worker, Sherry, whose appearance and personality scream "damsel in distress".  You know, since she got captured by a trio of bank robbers dressed up as Santa Claus.  But, to my surprise, it managed to provide something for her character that makes her more tolerable than I thought she would be.  I won't give away what it was so you can watch it yourself, but I will say I was glad they took this route instead, even if its sentimentality in the characters' relationship didn't pack a more potent punch.  Another issue I had with "Novocaine" was its runtime.  For a concept about a seemingly "normal" guy embarking on a rescue mission, this movie could've been a breezy 90-minute experience that never lets up on the action.  Instead, it surprisingly and needlessly stretched itself to 110 minutes, twenty minutes longer than I had initially anticipated.  This is due to the pacing in the first act, which focuses on Nathan and Sherry's developing relationship.  While the main characters' charm nearly saved it, I felt like the first act went on a bit too long.  Fortunately, the movie managed to inject itself with adrenaline just in time once the bullets started flying.

Besides those flaws, I would consider "Novocaine" to be a pleasant surprise for the genre for several reasons.  One of which was its cast, mainly Jack Quaid as Nathan.  Outside "The Boys", Jack Quaid got off to a great start this year with "Companion" back in January, showcasing that he can play someone outside his likable and charismatic characters.  Unfortunately, not enough people went to see that one.  "Novocaine" sees Quaid returning to that status quo as a kindhearted yet withdrawn bank executive attempting to be an action hero.  The result is a delightfully amusing turn for Quaid, as he injects plenty of charm and humor into a benevolent character determined to rescue his love.  Would I see him as the next action star?  Well, it depends on how well the film does at the box office, but based on his performance, I could definitely see more of Quaid getting more roles like this in the future.  Amber Midthunder made an impressive first impression as a lead role in the "Predator" prequel, "Prey", so it made sense that she was chosen to star in this film as Sherry.  While her performance here wasn't as memorable as her role of Naru in "Prey", she did put in enough effort in her talents to make her character watchable.  Jacob Batalon also delivered some decent moments as Roscoe, Nathan's friend, and Ray Nicholson, who gained recognition from his role in "Smile 2", served as an enjoyable cameo as Nathan's fan.

Another reason was the action scenes, which were fun enough to take advantage of Nathan's condition and the film's squeamish moments.  Filmmaking duo Dan Berk and Robert Olsen had the task of ensuring the stakes originating from Nathan's fight against the robbers while also infusing a sense of silliness with the idea through its tone. Based on my experience, I thought they handled this challenge pretty well.  This is one of the movies that isn't meant to be taken seriously, like a Liam Neeson thriller.  Can you even imagine Liam Neeson having this disorder instead of Jack Quaid?  That would've saved him a lot of trouble after surviving many gunfights.  If Berk and Olsen's purpose were to entertain the audience through the film's ridiculous premise and comical appeal, I would say that they did a good enough job at handling this tone regarding their direction.  The action may not be as memorable as the other great action movies like "Mission: Impossible" or "John Wick", but it did invoke a smile on my face whenever Nathan's "pain" becomes the robbers' pain.

Overall, "Novocaine" is a pleasantly entertaining action comedy that didn't feel as painful to watch as one might assume.  Its screenplay didn't offer much else in its characters and tropes to elevate its usual "rescuing the hostage" premise to new heights, and the runtime can be a bit too lengthy for its straightforward plot.  Regardless, the film is a welcoming approach to the action thriller formula that's fun, humorous, and gleefully violent without being too far-fetched in its concept.  Jack Quaid makes for a compelling main lead full of charisma and amusement, which helps make its formulaic narrative more diverting, with Amber Midthunder following suit.  Along with its enjoyable action sequences and Berk and Olsen's approach to its tone, the movie overcomes its wounds to deliver a painless option for action comedy fans to endure this month.

"In the Lost Lands" stars Dave Bautista, Milla Jovovich, Arly Jover, and Amara Okereke.  Released on March 7, 2025, the film has a witch joining forces with a hunter to retrieve a magical gift.

The film was directed by Paul W. S. Anderson, who also directed films such as "Mortal Kombat", "Event Horizon", "Resident Evil", and "Monster Hunter".  It is based on the short story by George R. R. Martin.  If you're looking at heading into the most dangerous place in the world, it's crucial to have some of the powerful beings by your side.  If they happen to the people who battled zombies and space aliens, the chances of surviving would depend on how you feel about their filmography.  We've come across another month that doesn't have many movies to be excited about besides a couple of options, but that doesn't mean they don't have some merits that invoke my desire to take a look.  One of those options is the latest fantasy film from the actress/filmmaker couple who took a stab at our favorite video game franchises and made their fans mad in the process.  After fumbling the ball with their "Monster Hunter" adaptation during the pandemic, Paul W. S. Anderson and Milla Jovovich reunite to bring one of George R. R. Martin's works to the big screen.  Fortunately for us, it's not "Game of Thrones".  Instead, it's his short story that's part of Amazons II, an anthology of fantasy stories edited by Jessica Amanda Salmonson consisting of works featuring female protagonists by mostly female authors.  At least it's something different other than another video game adaptation, but does that make it another tolerable addition to their catalog?  Let's find out.      

The story centers on Gray Alys (Jovovich), a formidable witch feared by everybody.  She's tasked by the desperate queen (Okereke) to find and retrieve a mystical gift from a shapeshifter that can transform into a werewolf.  The artifact is located in Skull River within the "Lost Lands", a dangerous, post-apocalyptic realm filled with dark creatures and merciless enemies.  Her journey leads her to confront a mysterious hunter named Boyce (Bautista) with an unknown motive of his own.  Despite their differences, Gray Alys and Boyce join forces to survive the dreaded "Lost Lands" and confront the shapeshifter.

This is one of those moments where the genre and the names involved are enough to get me interested in a movie.  One name I was familiar with was George R. R. Martin, the man behind "Game of Thrones", which transformed into a global television phenomenon until its final season butchered itself near the finish line.  While Martin wasn't technically involved in the film adaptation of his short story, and I haven't watched "Game of Thrones", seeing his name did get me interested in how it's translated as a feature film.  Additionally, despite not watching the trailers, the movie's plot synopsis and main actors had enough appeal for me to see if they warrant my time.  What can I say?  I'm easily invested in films involving post-apocalyptic fantasies and action-packed chaos.  It's my strength but also my weakness if a movie doesn't deliver on its apocalyptic merits.  "In the Lost Lands" is part of that weakness, which may or may not be enough to question my cinematic curiosity.

Do you remember that one meme of a person holding up a sign that says, "My expectations for you were low but holy fuck” or something along those lines?  That meme best describes my experience with "In the Lost Lands", a murky and painfully tedious imitation of past epic fantasy films that failed to meet even the lowest expectations.  Regarding Dave Bautista's involvement, the fast-paced action, and the source material's religious undertones and world-building, this film should've been another piece of crowd-pleasing entertainment.  Instead, it became something that would be better off as a streaming movie.  To give Paul W. S. Anderson the benefit of the doubt, he was responsible for providing us with some cheesy guilty pleasures in the '90s and 2000s, including "Mortal Kombat" and "Resident Evil", especially with his approach to the fast-paced action and stylized presentation.  Unfortunately, he seemed to have lost that appeal afterward, giving us miss after miss after miss.  I hold no grudge against the filmmaker for doing his job, but at the same time, I feel that Anderson may have been past his own prime unless he finds his "corny fun" groove again.

"In the Lost Lands" serves as yet another addition to Anderson's losing streak, mainly regarding his direction.  If you've seen Anderson's other films like "Resident Evil" and "Death Race", you'll know what to expect from his style.  It's swift in the action and editing, stylized in the framework, and visually busy in the production designs.  He's like Zack Snyder but with a B-movie-like essence.  That being said, it's not just about the directorial vision that makes a movie watchable, it's also the storytelling and whether it's worthy of fighting alongside its presentation.  While I can see the potential in its style and action, they were sadly bogged down by Anderson's inability to combine them with his characters and narrative.  It's like he's taking the visionary efforts of Zack Snyder, Robert Rodriguez, and Denis Villeneuve and rolling them up into one big lump of dough, hoping it'll become a tasty epic fantasy bread.  Instead, we got a messy, visually ugly, and pale copy of other films from the same genre.  Even the action scenes, while rapid and stylized, lacked any sense of fun and urgency due to the film's serious and uncharismatic tone, weak suspense, and choppy editing.  As for the visual effects, they certainly have an essence needed to provide a nightmarish fantasy akin to "Mad Max" and "Resident Evil", but as mentioned earlier, they wind up resembling something more displeasing than appealing.  The CGI looked fine, but the lighting effects were an absolute eyesore, especially during the daytime scenes, adding to the settings' faux and unappealing appearances.  Seriously, the sight of the color saturation made my eyes strain a bit.  Anderson has provided us with some bad yet watchable guilty pleasures over the years, even when he doesn't intend to, so it's unfortunate he couldn't offer the same aspect for "In the Lost Lands".

Its screenplay by Constantin Werner was also the reason for the movie's failure, providing similar themes and elements that were done better in other films.  The script provided audiences with its protagonist, Gray Alys, who is haunted by her loneliness due to her cursed abilities making her an outsider, with no one she can trust but herself.  Hunted down by a corrupt religious group, Gray sees herself facing that trauma when she teams up with Boyce, who may be seen as the only cure for her isolation.  While familiar in personality, Gray's quest would've served as a suitable reflection of hope and trust in a land filled with despair, corruption, and discrimination.  Unfortunately, it failed to deliver that type of sentimental momentum in its iffy dialogue, forgettable characters, and bland world-building to compensate for its tedious and repetitive plot elements.  Regarding the characters' journey through the "Lost Lands", this could've been structured better as a limited series to branch out its lore further.  Its 100-minute runtime isn't enough to manifest this type of society, but at the same time, it's also a bit too much for its insipid tone and repetitive structure.

But what about the actors themselves?  Surely, they have enough star power in their performances to carry this lackluster fantasy excursion, right?  Well, not exactly.  Like the film's tone, the cast's performances lacked much pizazz and interest to inject life into their one-dimensional characters, including Milla Jovovich as Gray Alys.  She may be a badass in the "Resident Evil" movies, but that doesn't make her a great actress, in my opinion.  Her performance resembled Gray's mysterious persona and formidable presence to a tee.  Sadly, she didn't provide enough oomph for her acting talents and Gray's charisma to put this witch at the same level of appeasement as Alice.  I would also point out that Dave Bautista didn't impress me that much in his role of Boyce.  I assumed that Boyce would be another rough and tough character with a hint of charm hidden inside their personality, but that didn't appear to be the case, as there was none of that…at all.  It's a shame, too, especially considering how much I enjoyed Bautista's charismatic presence in his previous movies.  Arly Jover and Amara Okereke were also pretty tame as Ash and the queen, respectively.

Overall, "In the Lost Lands" got too lost in its visually murky and soulless imitation of previous epic fantasy films to escape its narrative wasteland alive.  Regarding Paul W. S. Anderson's works, this should've been another "so bad, it's good" type of film, whose lackluster quality makes for an enjoyable experience with friends while drunk.  What we got instead is something that's better described as "so bad, it's boring".  It's not boring in a humorous way.  It's boring in a way that makes me want to watch something else instead as if it doesn't put much effort into making the characters and story more interesting to warrant my full attention.  While the presentation isn't without its moments of style, they're not enough to overshadow its uncharismatic cast, dull direction, mediocre screenplay, and unappealing visuals, mainly the color saturation.  Out of the films I've seen from Anderson, I have to say that this is the poorest level of effort I've seen from the filmmaker so far, which is enough to be concerned about his upcoming film adaptation of "The House of the Dead".  If you're still curious about this one, I recommend you wait until it's on streaming for free, especially if you're a fan of Dave Bautista. ​