Zaire Owens

The past year was fraught with challenging moments, yet none proved as excruciating as the 90-minute stretch one endures until the credits roll in this regrettable reboot. What could have been a timeless Disney favorite now stands as a disheartening disappointment. Spoiler alert for the uninitiated! Lacking character development is among the most glaring issues. The 1998 animated Mulan skillfully portrayed the internal conflicts faced by Asians navigating high-context cultures that often dismiss individual identity. In stark contrast, the 2020 Mulan, portrayed by the talented Hua Mulan, gulps down an entire pitcher of Kool-Aid, gaining "unmatched chi" and the uncanny ability to bicycle kick an arrow mid-air – a far cry from the subtle, empowering journey of the original character. Who needs character development when you have the mystical "Chi" to rely on? The characters' inconsistency and, at times, sheer foolishness further mar the viewing experience. As Mulan pledges support to her comrades before a crucial battle, she promptly abandons them during the actual fight, leaving them to face charging tribesmen while she pursues ten random individuals. The film's relentless pursuit of deviation from the source material introduces a new character, "birdwoman," with the power of a Disney villain but the intellect of, well, a bird. This character inexplicably chooses not to intervene during a critical moment, opting instead for a theatrical rescue involving flapping wings and intercepting arrows. The lone redeeming quality surfaces in the portrayal of filial piety, offering a glimpse of down-to-earth Asian familial values. However, this comes with the realization that while real-life Asian moms might unleash fury for leaving a Tupperware at a friend's house, Mulan's parents appear remarkably unfazed by her grand transgressions, including theft, running away, and neglecting a presumed family treasure. In conclusion, this live-action remake stands out as a considerable disappointment, ranking among the worst in the genre. The lack of character development, inconsistent portrayals, and unnecessary deviations from the original narrative leave audiences yearning for the magic of the animated classic rather than appreciating the attempted reimagining.

My assessment of the 2019 live-action Aladdin film leads me to express mixed sentiments. While the movie held promise, the color palette chosen appeared somewhat bland and veered towards darker tones, particularly noticeable in the portrayal of "A Whole New World," which lacked the vibrant flair anticipated in a live-action adaptation. The portrayal of the Genie, a character immortalized by the late Robin Williams, left much to be desired. Despite the attempt to infuse a unique twist, it felt more like an imitation lacking the exuberance and charm that made the original so iconic. The CGI implementation for the Genie was, unfortunately, subpar, easily discernible as green screen work, detracting from the overall visual experience. The musical aspect of the film, while adequate, fell short of the brilliance achieved in the animated classic. The songs, though passable, did not capture the same magic as their predecessors. The depiction of the evil villain, while technically proficient, lacked the captivating performance and depth needed to establish a truly memorable antagonist. The portrayal seemed to lack the nuanced touch that could elevate the character into the realms of a formidable antagonist. In my estimation, the film sits somewhere in the realm of mediocrity, earning a modest 4 out of 10. While it does have its moments, the overall execution leaves room for improvement, especially in terms of visual effects and character depth.

My experience with the live-action 2023 Peter Pan and Wendy left me utterly dismayed. From the very first trailer, the film emanated an uncomfortable cringe factor, coupled with an odd grounding that pervaded the entire viewing. The color palette, unfortunately, leaned towards the bland and failed to capture the fanciful essence one would expect from a journey to a whimsical sea land. In the pursuit of inclusivity, the addition of girls among the lost boys felt forced and unnecessary. While attempting to modernize the narrative, the fundamental change in their name to the "lost boys" seemed out of place, as a more apt moniker like "lost kids" could have conveyed the message more effectively. Peter Pan himself emerged as a character with zero personality, leaving the viewer yearning for a more dynamic portrayal. The actor's performance fell short, lacking the charisma required to bring the iconic character to life. Tinkerbell, unfortunately, was forgettable and failed to capture the enchanting essence that has endeared her to audiences over the years. The overall narrative proved to be a tedious and unengaging experience, exacerbated by CGI that was glaringly easy to identify as cheaply made and visually unappealing. The story lacked the depth and intrigue required to elevate it beyond mediocrity, resulting in a film that failed to leave a lasting impression. If I could assign no stars to this cinematic endeavor, I would. This adaptation, attempting to balance similarity and divergence, ended up as the worst in my opinion. Critical elements from the original story were either altered or omitted, deviating from the essence of the classic tale. The characters' interactions were discordant, and the attempt to modernize the narrative felt forced and unconvincing. The cast's performances, particularly those of Peter and Tinkerbell, left much to be desired. Tink's transformation into a character void of her signature sassiness and charm was particularly disappointing. The unnecessary changes, including the addition of a boarding school plot and the alteration of Tinkerbell's design, contributed to the film's overall downfall. In summary, this adaptation of Peter Pan and Wendy warrants a resounding 1 out of 10. It failed to capture the magic and essence of the original story, leaving the viewer with an overwhelming sense of disappointment and frustration. The director's choices, especially in character portrayal and narrative alterations, underscore a lack of understanding of the source material.

My review of the live-action 2022 Pinocchio movie unfolds with a mix of initial optimism and eventual disappointment. While the movie started on a promising note, the scene featuring the classic characters' clocks veered into cringe-worthy and annoying territory. The CGI, unfortunately, failed to meet expectations, and the songs, regrettably, proved forgettable. On the positive side, Pinocchio's voice actor delivered a commendable performance, bringing depth to the character. However, the depiction of the cricket came off as creepy and less than great, contributing to the overall impression of a film on a constrained budget. The attempt at a luxury rendition of the original masterpiece classic Pinocchio fell short, missing the essence of the story's core message. The narrative seemed to deviate from the fundamental theme of Pinocchio learning to discern right from wrong, making choices, and facing consequences. This departure from the original storyline, particularly in Pinocchio's deceitful actions, left a sense of confusion and missed opportunities for a more profound exploration. The visual portrayal of characters like the fox and the cat, while photo-realistic, leaned towards the creepy side. The scene in Pleasure Island, though visually appealing, lacked the depth required to fully capture Pinocchio's transformation. Unfortunately, the CGI during the donkey transformation scenes was notably subpar, detracting from the overall viewing experience. In terms of the voice acting, there were instances where the delivery felt forced and unnatural, impacting the emotional resonance of crucial scenes. The addition of new characters appeared unnecessary, contributing little to the overall narrative and failing to enhance the story's depth. The movie, regrettably, falls short of expectations, earning a rating of 1 out of 10. The lackluster execution of both visual and narrative elements, coupled with questionable casting choices, leaves much to be desired. As a viewer, I would recommend revisiting the original Pinocchio for a more satisfying and authentic cinematic experience. Highly do not watch this movie watch the original one

My review of The Lion King (2019) brings forth a mix of excitement and disappointment. Anticipation surrounded this live-action remake, fueled by the promise of cutting-edge CGI that indeed delivered on a photorealistic visual spectacle. However, while the technology used was undeniably impressive, it somehow fell short in conveying the depth of expression one would expect from the beloved characters. The design of the backgrounds left much to be desired, appearing generic and lacking the vibrant allure that could have elevated the film's visual appeal. Furthermore, the omission or lackluster execution of several iconic scenes and dialogues from the original left me yearning for the emotional resonance that defined the classic. The pivotal moment when Simba loses his father, a scene once laden with poignant emotion, now feels somewhat hollow and generic. The songs, a cornerstone of the original's charm, failed to captivate in this rendition, seemingly mirroring a copy-and-paste approach that left the viewing experience somewhat lackluster and, dare I say, tedious. News of a potential sequel raises hopes for redemption, but the initial offering felt like a subdued echo of the animated masterpiece. In my assessment, The Lion King (2019) earns a modest 3 out of 10, acknowledging the stunning CGI while lamenting the missed opportunities to capture the spirit and magic that defined its predecessor.

My review of The Little Mermaid 2023, experienced on the big screen in , was an absolute delight. Among the recent live-action adaptations, this film quickly secured its place as my favorite. Halle Bailey's portrayal of Ariel was nothing short of amazing; she truly embodied the character with finesse and authenticity. While the design of Sebastian resonated with me, Flounder fell short of expectations, and the rendition of Scuttle left me cringing. However, Ursula's presence, though not as commanding as the original, still held its ground, particularly in the "Poor Unfortunate Souls" sequence. The magic of Halle Bailey's rendition of "Part of Your World" was simply breathtaking, showcasing her vocal prowess and adding a layer of enchantment to the film. The CGI elements presented a mixed bag, with some scenes executed impeccably, while others seemed a bit wonky. The connection between Prince Eric and Ariel was a standout feature, adding an adorable and heartwarming dynamic to the narrative. The theatrical experience was heightened by the enthusiastic audience, making the movie thoroughly enjoyable and easily rewatchable. However, a few minor grievances linger. I missed the scene where Sebastian evades the clutches of the kitchen, and I yearned for more underwater sequences. Despite these minor quibbles, I would rate the movie a solid 9 out of 10. The CGI, though occasionally imperfect, was largely commendable. My primary qualm revolves around Ariel's hair color – a tad less reddish than desired. A nitpick about the color palette being more vibrant aside, the film stands out as a truly remarkable cinematic experience.