Connect with us

Movie Reviews

A Seven Year Old’s Review of ‘Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie’

Published

on

A Seven Year Old’s Review of ‘Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie’

Look, I’m a realist: I recognize that no one on the planet cares what I — or any Old for that matter — thinks about Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie. Nor should they. This is the second film based on the impressively durable TV series (and affiliated merchandising program) about the adventures of a group of talking puppies who drive (or fly) color-coded vehicles in order to help and protect the citizens of Adventure Bay (or, in the movies, Adventure City). This time, the Paw Patrol pups get super powers and become the Mighty Pups. And there you have it. Film critics need not apply.

If anyone is clicking around the interwebs for information on this film, they’re people like me: Parents who have endured years of their kids’ Paw Patrol unshakeable obsession and want to know: Should I pay the outlandish ticket prices to take my child to see The Mighty Movie in the theater? Will my kid like it? Is it too scary? Do I need to make sure I’m at the theater early so I don’t miss the Dora the Explorer short that’s playing before the movie? And so on.

But again, my opinion here is irrelevant. (If you really must know here it is: This Paw Patrol movie is just as painless, and just as shameless in its attempts to sell new Paw Patrol toys to kids, as the last one.) The person you really want to hear from about The Mighty Movie is a Paw Patrol fan like my seven-year-old daughter Riley. She’s been watching the show for years and has a bin full of Paw Patrol pups and vehicles in her toy room.

Below you will find the unabridged transcript of our conversation about Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie on our subway ride home from the press screening, right down to the parts where she got distracted by what was going on outside the train window. It is about as pure and honest — and informed! — an opinion on this motion picture as you will find.

So what did you think of the movie?

Advertisement

Great.

It was great?

Yeah.

Which was better, the first one or this one?

This one.

Advertisement

Why was this one better?

Because Skye was really cool. And she has three powers: She can fly, like, really fast, she could float — it wasn’t really flying to me, it was more like floating because there wasn’t really gravity, so I would say that’s floating. And lifting up really heavy things. And destroying meteors.

Was she your favorite in the movie?

Yeah.

Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie
Paramount

READ MORE: 10 TV Cliffhangers That Were Never Resolved

Advertisement

What did you think the message of the movie was?

That even if you’re small you can make a big difference. Like, kids. They might be small at first. Everybody is. But you can grow really quick and become someone who does the right thing.

That’s great. Did you have any favorite moments in the movie?

When there was a flashback to when Skye was a little puppy. [A spoiler-related discussion follows.]

The first movie had a lot more Chase. This movie did not. Were you okay with that?

Advertisement

Yeah. Chase was the star of the last movie. I think there’s going to be more different movies about different pups, to tell their story, kind of.

Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie
Paramount

Is it upsetting that Everest isn’t in the movie? I know you like Everest.

No. I like Liberty. And Liberty was pretty cool in the movie.

What did you think of her power?

Yeah, how couldn’t I have guessed that? Because she’s a hot dog pup!

Advertisement

That’s right. Do you know the name of that kind of dog that Liberty is?

Uhhhh…

A dachshund. That’s the kind of dog.

She was so fun.

Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie
Paramount

Oh, they showed that Dora the Explorer cartoon before the movie. What did you think of that?

Advertisement

Uh, it was okay.

Just okay?

Yeah. It seemed more for little little kids. Paw Patrol is more for kids.

So you think this Paw Patrol movie one was better than the first one?

Yeah.

Advertisement

If you could only watch one Paw Patrol movie right now, which would you pick?

Probably this one. Because there were the crystals, and I just liked it a lot.

Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie
Paramount

What did you think of the villain in this one? The mad scientist character?

She said she wasn’t mad, Dad!

Okay, but she kind of was anyway. Did you like her as the villain? Or do you still prefer Mayor Humdinger?

Advertisement

She was really funny. She was a good villain, but Humdinger is funnier.

I hear one little girl near us getting a little upset at one point toward the end. Did you think the movie was too scary?

Nah. It got a little scary, but not too scary.

Let me ask you this: Why is there only the Paw Patrol who are in charge of protecting this entire city? Why don’t they have any policemen or firefighters?

Well, it’s because … well, there are. The Paw Patrol — when there’s a hero in a town, you don’t really need them.

Advertisement

Oh I see. So there are policemen in Adventure City, we just don’t ever see them in the movie?

Yeah, because we only see the Paw Patrol. They’re the main characters. You always pay attention to the main characters.

Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie
Paramount

What did you think of those three junior Paw Patrol trainees? The new characters they added in this one.

They were so cool. Because they might have been small, but they were part of helping at the end.

Hey, how do the dogs control all their vehicles if they don’t have thumbs? 

Advertisement

Oh, their paws — no, no, so — they push their paws on the pads. They put their paws on the paw pads and they like [motions pushing downward]. You can do that without thumbs.

Oh okay. You don’t need thumbs to fly a plane.

Well, this is … this is make believe, Dad.

True. That’s a good point.

But their vehicles have paw pads. And puppies have small paws, so they can push and turn. It’s easier for them.

Advertisement

Now let me ask you this: Were there any parts of the movie you didn’t like?

[pause] It was all really great. It was a little sad, the part with Skye as a puppy.

Yeah. But that was definitely supposed to be sad. It was sad on purpose.

Yeah. It was so sweet! But it was sad. I didn’t not like it. But it was sad. [pause] I love the Paw Patrol but the one thing I would change is they should add more girls.

Paw Patrol: The Mighty Movie
Paramount

Yeah, there’s just Skye and Liberty. That’s true. Okay, if you could have any of the powers which would you want?

Advertisement

Any power in the movie?

Yeah, sure. Any power.

[Gets distracted as the subway crosses the Manhattan Bridge.] Does Mom go on this train sometimes?

Sometimes.

Ooh, there’s someone on a bike. They’re going fast!

Advertisement

Yeah.

Another train!

Yup, another train. Okay, do you have a decision about your super power?

Not sure. What would you want?

Um, I’d want to fly.

Advertisement

Like Skye?

Yeah. I don’t even need to be super strong like her. I just want to fly around.

Then you would be Skye. Wait: Electricity or super-strength? If you could only pick one.

Super-strength.

Then you would be Skye.

Advertisement

Let me ask you this. Would you go see this movie in the theater again?

Yeah.

What if they made another Paw Patrol movie. You’d still want to see that too?

Of course I would.

The Worst Movies Based On Good TV Shows

Sometimes horrible movies happen to bad television series. Here are the worst offenders.

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

Sookshmadarshini Review: A Cleverly Written Thrill

Published

on

Sookshmadarshini Review: A Cleverly Written Thrill

BOTTOM LINE
A Cleverly Written Thrill

RATING
3/5

CENSOR
U/A, 2h 22m


What Is the Film About?

Ammachi (granny) goes missing from Basil Joseph’s home, and his neighbor Nazriya Nazim starts suspecting him for several reasons. Basil Joseph claims that Ammachi’s disappearance is due to her Alzheimer’s disease, but Nazriya remains unconvinced. Is there more to her suspicion? What serious turn does the story take, and what is the real reason behind Ammachi’s mysterious disappearance? These questions form the core plot of Sookshmadarshini.

Advertisement

Performances

Basil Joseph and Nazriya Nazim compete with each other in running the show with their seamless performances, delivering exactly what a thriller drama needs.

Both carry the film on their shoulders through the cat-and-mouse, tit-for-tat narrative. Though Sookshmadarshini is a thriller, it stands out in their filmography due to the superb balance and finesse they bring to their performances.

The styling and performances perfectly complement the story, as expected from a quality Malayalam film.


Analysis

Advertisement

Sookshmadarshini is directed by MC Jithin, who previously directed Nonsense, a film that also grabbed the attention of Telugu OTT viewers.

In Sookshmadarshini, director MC handles a simple plot with a suspenseful hook but needs to tightly guard the secret and maintain the viewer’s attention until the very last scene.

While the first half feels simple and slow, and the director seems to be trying too hard not to reveal even the slightest hint, the mix of humor and suspense keeps the narrative engaging.

By the time we reach the interval, the story pulls us in, yet the success lies in the fact that nothing is really revealed.

At the same time, it feels like the buildup in the first half raises high expectations for the second half, which must deliver big; otherwise, it risks becoming frustrating.

Advertisement

The second half introduces more intrigue through a sister character, and the suspense around the ‘secret’ driving all the drama becomes even tighter.

Although most of the story takes place in a neighborhood between two houses, the quality technical work -be it the camera or the background score -elevates the suspense as the director pushes the story forward.

It might not a perfect thriller but offers enough to keep you hooked, especially in the second half.

Some exaggeration or logical misses in Nazriya’s character might be noticeable, but they don’t affect the viewer’s engagement, which is the best part.

Also, the director successfully breaks away from the regular beats of a typical comedic thriller, adding a sense of freshness.

Advertisement

Overall, Sookshmadarshini is a cleverly written, smart mix of comedy and suspense, with the director maintaining the secret until the climax through an engaging narrative. The film also offers superb, fresh BGM and visuals that perfectly match the theme, making it a satisfying watch.


Performances by Others Actors

Sookshmadarshini is a film that relies on its supporting cast as well, and their selection is flawless.

Actors like Manohari Joy who plays Ammachi (granny), Kottayam Ramesh, Deepak Parambol, and Sidharth Bharathan, along with the female cast -Akhila Bhargavan, Pooja Mohanraj, and Merin Philip -may not be familiar to Telugu audiences, but their performances clearly demonstrate how perfectly they fit their roles. Each one proves to be an asset to the film.


Music and Other Departments?

Advertisement

First and foremost, the background score by Christo Xavier is terrific, we must say. It is one of the best BGMs of the year. It’s neither too loud nor too soft; instead, it sounds fresh and, most importantly, perfectly matches the situations, elevating them to a whole new level. He has justified every single penny of his remuneration.

Camera work by Sharan Velayudhan is perfect. The film moves between two houses for the most part, but the camera angles and visual quality never feel boring or low-budget. He has done full justice to what the film requires.

Editing by Chaman Chakko could have been sharper. Though Sookshmadarshini is an engaging watch, it does feel like it could have been sharper.

Though the small VFX work handled by Black Maria Studio is slick, especially showing WhatsApp conversations as text on screen, it came out trendy and of good quality.

Production values by Happy Hours Entertainment and Ava Productions are quite adequate and immersive for the simple setup it requires, pulling it off with quality.

Advertisement

Highlights?

Superb BGM that enhances most scenes

Sustaining suspense until the end

Engaging writing and narrative

Performances by Nazriya and Basil Joseph

Advertisement

Drawbacks?

Logical flaws or occasional exaggeration

Feels forced at times to keep secrets until the end

A bit of a slow first half


Did I Enjoy It?

Advertisement

Yes, it’s an engaging mix of humor and thriller.

Will You Recommend It?

Yes, without hesitation.

Sookshma Darshini Movie Review by M9

This Week Releases on OTT – Check ‘Rating’ Filter
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Margaret Pomeranz: The 10 films you should watch, but probably haven’t

Published

on

Margaret Pomeranz: The 10 films you should watch, but probably haven’t

MP: Well, I don’t think we truly gelled for about five years because I was so nervous, and it took me time to be able to relax in front of camera.

Fitz: So you became an iconic duo, just like Roy and HG. In their case, they never socialised much off-camera so as to keep their on-air stuff fresh. Did you spend much time with David Stratton when the cameras weren’t rolling?

MP: We did, but never excessively, apart from when we went to things like the Cannes and Venice film festivals, when we would certainly see a great deal of one another. Back in Australia, we saw a bit of each other until he moved up to the Blue Mountains, which I was really shitty about, actually …

Fitz: And how do you judge the current state of the movie business globally and in Australia?

MP: Well, I think the Australian film industry is really healthy. It’s almost like it’s got the confidence in itself. Globally, on the one hand, I’m sick of those Marvel Comics being translated to the screen, but on the other hand, you can get really good ones, like the one that Taika Waititi directed, Thor: Ragnarok. That was terrific. So you can’t be narrow-minded about such films. Some are extremely good.

Advertisement

Jeff Bridges in Peter Weir’s brilliant Fearless.Credit: Warner Bros

Fitz: And where are your professional energies going right now?

MP: Nowhere! I am trying to get out of stuff, not into stuff.

Fitz: Two more quick questions, then we can rip in. I read a blurry report that you might have had a cameo role in Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. Is that correct?

MP: Yes, but blink and you’ll miss me, right? I had known the director, Stephan Elliott, for some time, and he said, would I play a part in his film? And I said, “All right, as long as I’m not playing anybody’s mother”. Not long afterwards, I was in Venice at the film festival, and a fax arrived for me, saying he wanted me in Priscilla, indeed playing someone’s mother, but … “You’re playing Guy Pearce’s mother”. So I said, “Oh, all right!”

Advertisement

Fitz: Meantime, I loved your review on Charlie Pickering’s The Weekly on ABC of Married at First Sight where you said, “It’s a groundbreaking social experiment in which mentally fragile halfwits marry toxic fame tarts”. Is there anything you’d like to add to that? Or is that about it?

MP: [Laughs.] No, that’s about it.

Fitz: OK, let’s get to the nub of it. Can you please gimme the 10 films few of us have seen yet, but bloody well should?

Dannielle Hall and Damian Pitt in <i>Beneath Clouds</i>.

Dannielle Hall and Damian Pitt in Beneath Clouds.Credit: © Bunya Productions

MP: Well, my first one is the Australian film Beneath Clouds (2002). That was Ivan Sen’s debut feature about two Indigenous kids, played by Damian Pitt and Dannielle Hall, who accidentally join up as they head for various reasons to Sydney from country NSW. Sen had made a series of really fantastic shorts when he was at the film school, and once he was out he made this. It looks fabulous. It’s heartrendingly great, but very little seen. I’m always moved by the final image in a film, and in this one, it’s just heartbreakingly good. Have you seen it?

Fitz: No, never heard of it, but I will see it soon! Next?

Advertisement

MP: OK, going down the list, I loved Locke (2013) by Stephen Knight. Tom Hardy gives an outstanding performance in this film in which he is the only presence on screen. He plays a man driving to a construction site who takes 38 phone calls from various people as his life falls apart.

Fitz: Hang on, just one actor? So when the screen credits roll for actors, there’s one person?

MP: Yes, apart from voice actors.

Fitz: That sounds like that famous first film by Steven Spielberg, Duel, with the menacing truck being the key presence monstering the poor bloke in front. Go on, next?

MP: Number three is Fearless (1993), by Peter Weir, starring Jeff Bridges and Rosie Perez as survivors of a plane crash who each experience the impact of the aftermath. Have you seen that?

Advertisement
The 1997 film <i>Gattaca</i> imagines a future class divide between the enhanced (as played by Uma Thurman) and the unenhanced.

The 1997 film Gattaca imagines a future class divide between the enhanced (as played by Uma Thurman) and the unenhanced.Credit: Getty Images

Fitz: No! Look, if it’s not Shawshank Redemption or the like, you may presume I haven’t seen it, but want to. I want you to educate me and mine on the finer things in films so we can say to our friends, “I can’t believe you haven’t seen those wonderful films, Beneath Clouds, Locke and Fearless! What kind of bogan ignoramus are you?”

MP: [Small groan.] Number four is District 9 (2009). This totally original, low-budget science fiction film from South African writer/director Neill Blomkamp has it all – a wild imagination, drama, pathos, compassion, with a few laughs thrown in, as a man organising the relocation of a camp of segregated aliens becomes one of them.

Fitz: You see, Margaret? Don’t despair, I’ve heard of it!

MP: So is that all right?

Fitz: Yes, please go on.

Advertisement

MP: I’ve chosen Nashville (1975). A gigantic tapestry of music, betrayal and politics set in the country music capital of the world and is the work of director Robert Altman. It has a multi-character cast and was the film that excited me most when I first saw it. It is still my favourite film of all time. I fell in love with Robert Altman when I saw it in Sydney, even though it was on screens for just a week, and it was gone. I dragged people to it, and then it disappeared.

Fitz: If you say it is your favourite of all time, that is some recommendation. Next, please?

MP: Gattaca (1997). This debut science fiction film from New Zealand born writer/director Andrew Niccol explores the ethics of genetic engineering. Niccol wrote The Truman Show, but when he went to Hollywood, they wouldn’t let him direct it and gave him Gattaca to direct instead. It stars Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman and is riveting.

<i>Lust, Caution</i>, directed by Ang Lee, is set in China during the Japanese occupation.

Lust, Caution, directed by Ang Lee, is set in China during the Japanese occupation. Credit:

Fitz: Not that you care, but I broadly hate sci-fi. Still, I will give it a go.

MP: The Hill (1965) is a gruelling portrayal of men struggling to survive a military prison camp in North Africa during World War II, and it stars Sean Connery in one of his best performances. I don’t like prison movies much, but this one has stayed with me.

Advertisement

Fitz: I like Shawsha … actually, never mind. Does The Hill have a happy ending? You’ll despair to hear, Marge, my tastes are so plebeian: I genuinely like films where the hero and the heroine go through lots of struggles and get to kiss in the final frame – with the exception of Brokeback Mountain, where it was the two heroes.

MP: [Small pause.] I absolutely adored Brokeback Mountain. I saw that in Venice, and when everybody else was rushing off to the next screening, I just stayed sitting there alone, still absorbing it, it was so wonderful. But, moving on. I love tough films. And the one that I love most is The Lives of Others (2006), the debut film from German writer/director Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck about the impact that Stasi agents, East Germany’s secret police, have on a group of artists and intellectuals. A really powerful cinema experience.

Fitz: Next?

MP: Lust, Caution (2007). Ang Lee’s beautiful, emotionally powerful film is set in China during the Japanese occupation. It’s about a young student’s relationship with a high-ranking collaborator despite the fact that she’s part of a group that aims to assassinate him. And the next one after that is a soft one for you, Peter. I’ve chosen Chef (2014), written, directed by and starring Jon Favreau. It’s the story of a celebrity chef in an upmarket restaurant who loses his temper as he’s not prepared to conform. So he starts up a food truck with the help of his son and estranged wife. And you’ll be thrilled to hear, Peter, this one has a happy ending.

Loading

Advertisement

Fitz: Excellent! And that’s our 10. So the last thing is this. We’ve talked about films that you know are great, that should be more widely celebrated. What about films where everybody loves them except you? I hate to say it, but the best example for me is the one you’re in: Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. Yes, all the actors are great, and Hugo’s a personal friend. But I just never understood the level of acclaim it received.

MP: [Laughing.] Of course it was the one I was in! But, yes, I don’t always like what everybody else likes. I don’t necessarily like what David Stratton likes. I actually talked to him this morning about the list I just gave you, and I think he approves of just about all the ones on my list, but not all. Generally, I think that within seconds of a film opening, you know whether you’re in good hands with a director or not, and it’s really weird that some films just scream: “I am no good!” from the very beginning.

Fitz: And the blockbuster that you detest?

MP: A really popular film that everyone else loved was the remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It’s only one of the two films I’ve ever walked out of.

Fitz: And what is the other, please?

Advertisement

MP: I will tell you, but it’s not for publication. [We go into the Cone of Silence.]

Fitz: Oh! Oh, I see … Thank you, indeed. I, and my readers, shall report back before Chrissie on what we think of your list. In the meantime, we are in your debt. At least we hope so.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie review: Wicked – Baltimore Magazine

Published

on

Movie review: Wicked – Baltimore Magazine

There’s been a curious trend in the promotion of movie musicals lately. The trailers and commercials have obscured the fact that they are musicals. This was true of the Mean Girls trailer, which made the film seem like a highly redundant note-for-note remake of the Lindsay Lohan original. And it was also true of Timothée Chalamet’s Wonka, a particularly baffling choice since the original was itself a musical. Both those films did well at the box office but I would argue this was in spite of, not because of the sneaky marketing strategy.

Musicals are having a moment. It’s an extension of fan culture—that is to say, culture—with musical theater nerds loudly and proudly staking their claim among the other fandoms on social media. When I went to see The Outsiders on Broadway, there was a large group of teenage girls screaming for Ponyboy and cheering in anticipatory excitement before all the big numbers. When I caught a preview of The Great Gatsby, the screams were so loud you would think star Jeremy Jordan was Harry Styles.

Certainly among the most enduringly popular musicals is Wicked, the girl-power reimagining of The Wizard of Oz, which made co-stars Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth stars—or at the very least, god tier among musical theater nerds.

Happily, Universal Pictures didn’t try to obscure the fact that Wicked is a musical, but that’s not to say the production was without controversy. Everyone agreed that Cynthia Erivo, who won the Tony for The Color Purple and was Oscar nominated for her turn as Harriet Tubman in Harriet, was perfect for the part of misunderstood witch Elphaba, but mega pop star Ariana Grande as Glinda? When there were deserving musical theater professionals out there in need of a big break? Additionally, the promotion was not above its own bait and switch. Never seen in the commercials and trailer is the fact that the nearly three hour film is merely part one. Part two is due next year.

Let’s get those “controversies” out of the way first. Ariana Grande is a marvelous Glinda—pampered, entitled, but secretly kind—like Alicia Silverstone in Clueless if she had pipes for days. Anyone who has seen Grande on Saturday Night Live already knew she was funny—and here, her stellar comic timing is aided by her adoring sidekicks played with gleeful “you can’t sit here” bitchiness by Bowen Yang and Bronwyn James. As for the film being a part one? I wouldn’t fret it. It ends perfectly. You feel satisfied with what you just saw, while eagerly anticipating the next installment.

Advertisement

So yeah, Wicked is good. Almost great, although I couldn’t quite warm up to all the CGI sets and backdrops. I understand that director Jon M. Chu worked hard to create a built environment, even going so far as to plant 9 million tulips to recreate Emerald City (reader: I thought they were fake). But, despite his best efforts, the film still has that slightly glossy, uncanny feeling of AI. Give me cheesy, hand-built sets any day.

Still there’s a lot to recommend here, as the film is filled with wit and cleverness and verve. Erivo, as expected, makes for a heartbreakingly vulnerable, yet fierce Elphaba, and her belting out of “Defying Gravity” feels like cinematic catharsis at its finest. There are also excellent supporting turns, including Jonathan Bailey as the dashing but romantically conflicted Fiyero; Michelle Yeoh as the glamorous professor of the dark arts, Madame Morrible; the voice of Peter Dinklage as the wise and kindly goat professor, Dr. Dillamond; and Jeff Goldblum as the Wizard. (I mean, of course, Jeff Goldblum is the Wizard of Oz. It’s casting as inevitable as it is perfect.) Also, look out for a few smartly placed cameos. (Can you say: Adele Dazeem?)

Directed and performed with flair and obvious affection for the source material, Wicked is a wickedly good time at the movies. And yes, I imagine it’s going to be popular, as I’m already thinking of shelling out 15 bucks to see it again.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending