onye

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This film essentially takes a complex literary device and bases an entire film on that. Its the idea that a person's grief and guilt takes the shape of a being that won't leave them alone until they finally confront it and do some kind of action to settle it once and for all. As cerebral and thought provoking as that sounds, this film simplifies and confuses that idea rather that provide any thought provoking interpretation of it. It lays out all of the parts of it's story as if you're being prepared for the events that will take place. The story is told in a natural sense, as in context is understood through familiarity expectations and inductive reasoning, You can see all of this through the film's events, dialogue, characters, setting, etc., none of it has to be told to the audience. However, the issue is in this film's story having nothing other than that context combined with more context of a woman going through grief, and having that be an entire film. That's all the film is - context. There was an idea to tell a story but none of it manifests into actual understanding of what was actually happening in the film. The family in this film had gone through a lot of tragedy and pain. They lost their father, their mother had a broken leg and was depressed, the children were stuck in a neglectful home that's falling apart, and they all dealt with grief that couldn't be processed in any positive way. Their father dies in an accident, that leaves the mother depressed and bedridden which keeps her from finding work or keeping up with the home, which forces the children to be stuck in a lonely depressing home without any guidance or positive outlook. The family is in a dismaying situation without many options of a better outlook. It makes sense that they would be so mentally unwell, and the woman in the yard is a representation of that grief. The story is told naturally in that sense, but everything else about it is just events happening without actual text to understand. You won't really understand anything about these people or how they live. The mother's leg is broken and you're to understand that's difficult for her through a few facial expressions. You understand the guilt and trauma of her husband's death through the memories she has with him, but that doesn’t show how she’s dealing with losing him. The children are trapped in a broken home but no effort is put into fixing their home, or making the situation better or even finding a family member or family friend they can stay with. The children are confused as to why they can’t find help from any neighbors or authorities, and there is nothing that explains why that can’t happen. Whatever psychological or living situation issues these people have are never really understood. The film is about the framing of a family dealing with trauma and tragedy, not a definitive understanding of their experience. It’s set up like a haunted house you would visit to view all the things that would make a family go crazy, not an actual story of what is happening to them. It goes through the effort of trying to make the cinematography and special effects imaginative and creative, but all of that is just to hide the lack of story. This film isn’t worth seeing and not worth the effort of making. It’s a terrible idea that came from an awful conception. It’s all just bad stuff.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Superman 2025This film opens with a timeline of events from the point superpowered beings first appeared on earth, to the moments of superman's defeat against his evil clone, ultraman. I'm not sure what this first scene is supposed to do. We're told a history of superman's being on planet earth,, but that isn't enough to understand Superman's character. We're told he's some godlike figure that originates from great events without actually seeing why he or these events are great. That is where this film fails in telling the story of Superman. We are meant to believe Superman is important but that sense of importance is not actually crafted. I think the best way i can describe James Gunn's style of filmmaking is to hide flat storytelling under quirky, zany direction. His style of filmmaking is to craft off-beat scenes where exaggerated characters plot through uncomfortably awkward dialogue and perplexing events, all set against a backdrop of aesthetically stimulating cinematography and effects. His films are entertaining and they leave an impression, but during the entirety of this film, you can't ignore the sense that the story is told in a flat rhythm. Everything moves at the same tempo, and there's not a lot of detail stands out that you can distinguish from the rest. James Gunn compensates for this by adding his own quirks and comedy, but it is still very restrained in how it is shown to us. This works in the films favor if all James Gunn wanted to do was tell an overarching plotline of a Superman story that includes all the important parts and smooths over any details, but it makes the film very forgettable. This film doesn't really leave an impression in our minds except for the weirdness of it. A lot of this film doesn't make sense to me, and it disturbs me to think about it in any way that does. Why did Superman's planet explode killing everybody but he barely escapes? Why does he pretend to be a normal person when he deals with things normal people never deal with? And if he wants to be a normal person, why does he live alone in a crystal fortress in antartica? Why is he fighting an evil clone of himself? Why are monsters constantly appearing out of nowhere to destroy Metropolis? Why are there pocket dimensions where people are kept prisoners in? How are we supposed to understand what black holes and anti-matter rivers are when those things are just theories in our world? Do any of these things even make sense? I don't think so, and it'd be scary if they did. James Gunn is ambitious with his storytelling to try to fit all of these ideas in one movie, but this film isn't able to show why Superman or the events surrounding him are so great. James Gunn took on a gargantuan task of showing how one man can represent abstract truths that most people don't even comprehend. Sure we understand these things in our own ways, but saying one person represents them is absurd because those definitions will change in our minds. We'll see multiple things as "truth" or "justice" or "the American way" that all contradict each other. How can we expect one man to represent all these contradicting things? I'm not sure how any director is supposed to show that. I criticized this film for James Gunn's style of director, but considering the story he's trying to tell, what could we really expect? Superman comics are incredibly large stories that go over the heads of most people. How should he have translated any of this into films we can understand? The comic book medium is very different than films. There's a level of realism we expect in films that we don't in comic books. I think James Gunn made the best attempt he could, but it'd be impossible to satisfy everyone with this film. Without James Gunn's sensibilities that make this film lively, sincere and not overly self-serious, a Superman story would be very uncomfortable and insane like the Zack Snyder DC verse. Personally, I don't need to see anymore from superhero comics in general, but this film definitely deserves a A for effort and quality. It's excellently made and incredibly entertaining, and every single person involved did an outstanding job. I'm happy to watch this again, or anything James Gunn is making. But I have an uncomfortable feeling about this film that won't go away no matter how much I try to like it. As much as I enjoy silly, imaginative things, I don't think I can ignore how silly and weird all this is. All power to you smarty-pants that are fans of this kind of stuff. But as someone who failed upper level physics (like an honors program for high school), never understood anything about chemistry, only passed trigonometry because my teacher was kind hearted, and has no idea how he passed calculus (don't ever ask me what a derivative is), I don't think this stuff is for me. And honestly, I'm ok with that.

Spring Breakers (Movie)This film is shot like a documentary capturing the everyday lives of the four college girls it follows. We're supposed to be examining them and understanding the psychology of the people that would do these kinds of things. I don't think this film does that well however, because it shows them to be stereotypes of young adults rather than actual people with their own ways of life. Its as if we are seeing them perform actions that check off a list of traits that classify drug, sex and partying obsessed college kids. The beginning of the film shows them in their quiet thoughtful moments, and we are meant to understand that they have their own private thoughts and feelings about their lives, but I don't think that's enough to understand these people. They keep their thoughts and feelings to themselves, and they share an understanding with each other that you would understand if you relate to them, but it's the lack of reactions to anything else that makes them seem airheaded or just crazy. 3 of them Candy (Vanessa Hudgens), Brit (Ashley Benson) and Cotty (Rachel Korine) care about nothing else but being excited and satisfying whatever stimulating feeling has their attention in the moment. They seem to feel moments of sadness or depression or being bothered, but those feelings pass without any care taken for those feelings. They feel these things in the moment and then move on from them as if these girls don't have genuine problems to be feeling them. They'll realize they're discontent with their lives, but that's only teenage angst. They're overly stimulated with music, television, drugs, partying, momey, sex, and danger, and they don't know what to do with that energy. They can see they should be living a structured, meaningful life but they don't know how they fit into that. They try to make sense of all of these things, and its all too confusing. It's much easier to ignore any responsibility or perspective of their lives, and satisfy the desires they feel in the moment. Everyone goes through this at their age, its normal to make sense of the kind of person you're meant to be. But when these girls do that, they come to the wrong conclusions and that's the material this films uses to be made. However, this film presents these people as if they are true representations of any person which is farthest from the truth. These women behave crazy for the sake of being crazy which is not insightful or perceptive at all. It seems like that is all this film wants to say - That young adults can make bad decisions with their lives and be crazy. There should be much more to these people than that. We see them in moments in their lives that imply the kind of people they are, but everything else is skipped over or not shown. The only character that considers doing something else with their lives is Faith's (Selena Gomez) character. In her religious group, she laughs about it with other members there, but still tries to take it seriously. She goes to meet with those girls after the group, but still talks to the other members there. When she's told how dangerous the other girls are, she pushes back on the idea but still considered other people's perspective of them. These are small things but they show the kind of person she is. We have an idea of her other than just wanting to party and do drugs. The other 3 girls don't care about anything else, and when anything important does come up, it never seems important to them. Angst is more than being overly stimulated, there should be some urgency to their state of mind that we see affects the people they are becomming. This film wants to be realistic but we're not seeing what makes them like this. This film should be relatable somehow in that we've all gone through what they've gone through. But instead, it wants to paint caricatures of people because that's just easier to understand. Its fair to want to make an enjoyable viewing experience, but its not satisfying because we can't understand how the other girls think. Its a film about a bunch of wild people doing crazy things. That's interesting, but not a deep or profound artpiece that the A24 studio has gotten a reputation for making. I believe this film lets down on expectations, and won't be considered one of their best when compared to their other works. Without those expectations, this film is interesting but forgettable.

The opening of this film establishes how a family with care and love for each other, and a bright and sunny spirit in their living, is forced to literally plunge into the depths of the earth and keep an ancient evil spirit of the dead sealed from this world and forever petrified in the darkness. The contrast in tone is a good indication of what you will have to make sense of for the next family that deals with this evil. Encapsulating the arc of the plot that the main characters will go through in the opening prepares us for what we will see in the rest of the film, and helps in orientating the audience in a horror film that can be very confusing without prior context. Ancient Egyptian mythology and culture is well known, but not understood by the average western person. In pop culture, we've seen mummies can rise from the dead, but them possessing living people is an original concept. Combining these ideas can be very confusing. I believe the creators of this film understand the nature of the story they are telling and wanted to make a thoughtful experience. However, this film has nothing to do with Egyptian culture or mythology. There is nothing specific about this entity possessing anyone, and it has no personality of its own. This is not someone rising from the dead, it is just an evil spirit that wants to harm others. James Wan is known for popular horror series like insidious and the conjuring where the horror comes from a supernatural entity inflicting pain and death on it's victims. The evil entity will terrorize with supernatural events meant to keep its victims in a state of fear and shock. In this film, the evil entity creates a horror of disturbing physical and mental states meant to utterly destroy it's victims. This entity does not murder anyone. It creates an atmosphere of hatred, anger, fear and paranoia that leads to the destruction it's victims. It is like being afraid of a disease or mental illness. It is a sense of dread that is obvious in its wrong, but not felt in its intensity until it's too late. It makes the mundane full of terror as it's memory leaves you in fear of it ever arising again. This kind of horror is very effective in leaving you in suspense, and creates an urgency that something must be done before unbelievable torment and death. When these terrible events do take place, it creates emotions bitterness and regret as you wish this horror never happens again. However, I don't believe this kind of horror works. It is not exciting or stimulating, it is a slow, dreadful fear that something is wrong as you anticipate inevitable suffering. To do that, you need to understand who the characters are, and what this evil has done to them, but that isn't shown. The introduction to the main characters, the Cannon family, contrasts how we are introduced to the first. The first family was one that had time for each other and seemed to get along well. We see the Cannon family in their intimate moments that show that while they love each other, they still have their personal problems of getting along or being happy. This family is a little more grounded in how they live their lives, and you can see the cracks where that evil entity will force itself into their lives and tear them apart. When understanding the terror of this family and the last, you have to consider the shock of dealing with such evil as such average people doing the best they know how. These are just average people that do not understand what they are dealing with, and their ignorance is exploited by an evil made of nothing but malicious intent. This film takes care to share how terrifying that experience can be, but how the conflict is introduced is not well done IMO. All within a few mins, we learn that they live in Cairo, Egypt, the mother Larissa (Laia Costa) is pregnant with another child, the father Charlie (Jack Reynor) has gotten an anchor job to travel back to America, the daughter Katie (Natalie Grace) is friends with the daughter from the family in the opening, the mother of that child (Hayat Kamile) has been secretly speaking to Katie for some time, the father finds out about this and then she gets kidnapped. All of that is so rushed you're left just wondering what will happen, rather than anticipating what these character's stories will be. That is an entertaining viewing experience, but you lose the immersion of understanding what to expect from this film's premise. We can understand that an evil entity is plaguing this family, but we don't understand how that affects them personally which takes away from the actual horror of this film. You aren't sure what they are suffering from the entity, or what to expect from their suffering. This film should leave you feeling sick to your stomach, but you don't see that in them. I personally don't enjoy this kind of film and think its only for people that are satisfied with the suffering of others, but even still I can see this wasn't the greatest attempt.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The film opens with Eleanor Sung-Young's (Michelle Yeoh) perspective. Her and her family had just trekked through the pouring rain to reach the Calthrope hotel. When she speaks to the hotel manager telling him that her family would like to be taken to their rooms, the manager tells them that they are mistaken to believe that they belong there, and asks them to leave. Eleanor makes one phone call Lord Calthrope and he informs the manager that the hotel has been passed from his family to the Young family as the rightful owners. Eleanor's grandchildren see this and feel satisfied that she's shown the hotel manager they are people to respect. I believe this scene symbolizes the idea that Asian communities have proven themselves to be somebodies, and not people to disregard. The thing is however, this was a rich family that flew from the other side of the world to take ownership of a hotel they purchased. The hotel manager not knowing they were rich people is ignorant on his part, not a mistake from them. There was no need for them to prove anything because it would have been sorted out eventually. There is no need for them to prove themselves because the film begins with them already being rich people. There is nothing they had to overcome or any challenge where they had to prove their worth. These are not people that are looked down on because they started from nothing like other communities. These are people who have found success through their own means, and people from other cultures are unaware of that. What is the superiority you feel from correcting other people's ignorance? This scene seems like a cheap trick to garner sympathy from the audience. It is understandable to feel good of correcting people's incorrect racist views, but there's no truth in this idea. The western world may be ignorant to Chinese culture, but their people are not looked down on for having nothing or facing challenges. Chinese people are not considered some lesser people of western society in any stereotypical way. This is not a story of downtrodden people who have to prove themselves by overcoming their obstacles and challenges; this is a wealthy people that want to show off their extravagance for the world to see regardless of who they are flaunting it in front of. That is something I find surprising about this film. Crazy Rich Asians is about a group of people entertaining us with a show of their excessive wealth, luxury and fabulous living because they believe that is what entertains a western audience. There is no care put in to what the audience watching this actually thinks. They believe showing a story of excessive wealth and great living is all it takes for a western audience to like them. The thing is, you can never like a people if you can't relate to them as people. Western audiences care about the traits of the characters they watch because that means something to them. The idea of the film is they are putting on a show for the western world to see, but they don't realize western audiences want to actually like the people putting on the show. Respect in the characters they watch doesn't come from external things like wealth or powerful influence. They respect characters that are strong willed, intelligent, charismatic, ambitious, charming, romantic, funny, honest, selfless, compassionate, open-minded, etc. Its things like this that a western audience cares about in a people, and Crazy Rich Asians misses that completely. These are some of the most vapid, vain materialistic people you have ever seen. It is light hearted and playful in nature but the underlying message of the film is these are people to respect. Every scene is staged and shot beautifully with perfect framing. All the characters are dressed lavishly with all the expensive clothing and jewelry at their disposal. Everywhere they go is the nicest and most popular places to eat or stay. The characters live Exorbitantly and there is no compromising. It is all just a display wealth from a people no one looked down on or demanded anything from. The film is a little disgusting how we are all expected to just love these people for being better than us. That is a strange thought when this film could be viewed by anyone from around the world. It's not just western audiences that would see this, people from all over the world would have an opinion on how these people are living so who do they think they are fooling? When people from impoverished countries watch this movie, should they just love them for being rich? There are US citizens who believe that Chinese influence is deceitful and harmful to the country, and are poised not to like Chinese cultures for completely unrelated reasons. In my home country, Chinese influence is selling old generators to our people as our main source of power instead of our government investing in our power grid. To us, their culture is a people that exploit others when they see opportunity.

The tone of this film is a strange one because the concept of the film is supposed to be silly, but the tone is so serious and dramatic It's difficult to tell if you're supposed to be laughing at what you're seeing or just captivated by the performances and grandeur of it all. In my opinion, the tone is so conflicting, it makes the film unpleasant to watch. As wild and action packed as this film is, you can't help but be confused as to why the characters are doing all these wild actiony things. The major plot points of the film are established quickly and without question. All of the characters proceed through their actions so assuredly and without a second thought, there is no time for the audience to orientate themselves as to what is going on. The only thing the audience has to understand is a basic explanation that there is a man, Adam Clay (Jason Statham), and a woman, Mrs. Parker (Phylicia Rashad), who platonically care for each other until that woman is wronged, and the man must go on a violent killing spree to avenge her from the ones responsible. There is nothing else you understand about the main character. He tends to his bees, he does work around the woman's property, he seems to have special training in something, he squeezes his own orange juice and makes his own honey. That seems to be it. The rest of the film seems to be a wild rollercoaster of insane actions scenes. They are incredibly entertaining but there isn't much to tell from them as if you're not supposed to. The main character is so laser focused on doing his acts of revenge, there is no greater perspective to anything happening in the film. It is almost droning watching him go on in this murderous rampage. If you can buy into the film, you can enjoy how huge and stimulating these action scenes are. But the editing and stylization of the film will make it difficult to have any other opinion on what's happening other than if you like what you are seeing or not. There is no greater perspective on the film's story. The dialogue is always explaining what you need to understand in the simplest terms. There are no scenes of anyone or anything else other than who is involved in Adam Clay's rampage, and where it will take place. You are only shown what you need to see to understand the story progressing. There is nothing in the film the audience needs to interpret and understand themselves, everything in the film is purely external spectacle. The production of the film is large, but the film feels small as if there is no greater world outside of what you're watching. Jason Statham is an entertaining actor, and the entire cast does an excellent job, but it isn't enough to make a complete film. This may work as a series where we see Adam Clay's story play out through multiple storylines that show the different sides of his character, how he handles different situations, and the differences in how people interact with him. But as it is now, it's an unpleasant watch, as if you're stuck on some wild rollercoaster that you can't get off of.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

This is a strange movie to me. The beginning of the film focuses on the intimate lives of the main character and his family. We see him leave his job to be the care taker of his children while his ex-wife and her boyfriend go to visit her parents. The beginning of the film tries to create an intimate sense of the struggles of family bonds and being a good example of what is right and wrong. This intimate close up look is fascinating to see because the characters behave like believable people to each other, but their reactions to what is happening in their world is subdued. The characters speak to each other like they have an interest in each other, but when the aliens attack, its like they don't care about the destruction, killing and disturbing nature of it all. I tried to wonder if there is any thematic significance to the beginning portion. It seems like the main character is a part of something larger in every sense, and has everything to lose in the invasion. If the aliens invading only seek to destroy our world and everything we hold dear, the main character has every reason to fight against that and protect the people and home he loves. We can see these characters struggle to preserve the intimate bonds they have with each other, but I don't see any other commentary than that. Humanity has to use everything it can to preserve our way of life against a foreign invader, and it takes all of us being united to achieve that. Personally I don't like the style of the film or the writing of the characters. The dialogue and directing is believable, but I can't get past how the characters are with each other. The main character and his family show a lot of care to each other, but its as if no one is willing to relate to each other. Each of them have their own distinct personalities and they are comfortable showing them, but they don't turn their personalities down to understand each other. All of them will get energetic and talkative when something is important to them, but they'll talk past each other when none of them are willing to listen and understand the other person. It feels like these characters are always on display for the audience, and not sharing with what is happening to all of them enough. That is true with the central conceit of the film as well. Every person in this film is going through an insane experience with aliens invading their planet, but they still talk to each other like everything is normal. Everyone is so calm and relaxed through this without ever considering the implications of an event like this. No one's reality is **** or knowledge of the world forever questioned. It is hard to place yourself in their shoes to see how you would react in their situation because the average person would have a much more shocked reaction. The film has such an unfamiliar feel, you'll feel like you never really understand what's going on. You're never anticipating what will happen next in the story, or relating to the characters, or feel like you have a sense of the overall plot. The film feels very foreign and alien like it's title, and I honestly can't say I understand why. It reminds me of an M. Night Shyamalan film where all the characters act strange and you never really know why. The film wasn't very enjoyable to me but I believe there was a good message in it.

In these main character's lines of work, anticipation is always felt when moving closer to the capturing of their targets. The film does a thorough job of creating that kind of tension. Character's expressions and reactions are focused on in close up shots when they are thinking about their next mission, and considering the twisted outcomes of stopping such horrendous people. However, I believe this film is more about the dramatic feelings of the characters rather than a realistic perspective of what DEA agents fighting crime is really like. The opening shot should have been a focus on the mission ahead of these agents and the anticipation of where their headspace is at. It should have focused on the environment they were in like shots of them driving through a barren desert without much infrastructure, industrial development or communities around. We should have been seeing these agents prepare for that raid like how they handle their guns or focused in thought of praying that they make it home after this. Instead what we get is a close up shot of the anxiety of Kate's (Emily Blunt) face and Reggie's (Daniel Kaluuya) empathetic anxious reaction towards her.That is good in getting into the headspace of these characters to understand that it is a tense moment, but we don't see the tension of the situation because most of that is saved for the shock value of the action scenes. The actions scenes happen quickly without much ambience or atmosphere. These scenes are somewhat boring to watch because they don't create a real tone. There is action happening on screen but the camera doesn't follow it enough. So much time is spent on what the characters are feeling and the expressions on their face, but not enough time is spent on what the agents are doing. More tracking shots would have been helpful to see what these characters are feeling in the moment of their raids. The film isn't so much about the jobs they do, it is about the emotional weight of how these characters feel about what they do.Unfortunately we never get in the headspace of these agents to understand how they get through these horrific experiences. When this could have offered a realistic depiction of the mental anguish and coping these people go through, instead we're seeing a melodramatic show of these specific character's reactions to scenes of pure shock value. This is a much less valuable view of the subject matter made by people who probably know nothing of the real life experience DEA agents actually go through.That makes this film feel like less of a film of the everyday experiences of DEA agents, and more of a film to show off scenes of wild things happening. I believe what the film cares more about is the shock value of being law enforcement against dangerous cartel murderers and killers. The film doesn't show the everyday lives of these people or the conscious moments of their missions. It focuses on showing them going through the motions of their feelings, which is only interesting if you're invested in the characters. This film isn't about what it's like to be a DEA agent, it's just about characters reacting to crazy things happening.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

When I first heard about this film, I assumed she took this role as a fun project just to show that she could. After watching this, that can't be the case. There is nothing fun about this film, and the only glamourous parts are the few short scenes of Christy spending her money. This is a very grounded and gritty look at the life of a female fighter who couldn't find acceptence anywhere but the ring. Its a very far departure from Sidney Sweeney's previous roles. This isn't a piece of eyecandy young girls are supposed to find relatable or young men are supposed to want to f*ck. Its a very sensative and vulnerable perspective into this person's life, and it doesn't hold any punches. Sydney Sweeney is an incredible actress who doesn't get the love and praise she deserves. The kind of emotion and depth she has to dig into for this role is shocking. To gear your mind into the shape of a boxer isn't easy, but to do so with as much emotional baggage as Christy Martin had to deal with is increibly difficult. To carry that kind of anger and aggression with you isn't something you just turn off. The pain of being rejected by everyone you love, and feeling thrown into a life that is so intense feels so real through Sydney Sweeney's eyes. The things she goes through in some scenes leave you silent when you understand what it takes to go through what her character does. Again, this is not a fairytale story. It is a very real depiction into a person's life. In terms of Christy being a biographical film, I think it does an excellent job of showing what her life was like and the kind of person she was. Nothing about it seems exaggerated. The most embellishment you'll see from this film is the depth of emotion Sydney Sweeney shows as Christy. From what I could understand about this woman from the film, Christy was an incredibly honest, sincere and focused woman who stood up for what she believed in. She was an incredible woman that got a lot of unfair **** from everyone in her life. I believe this film can show Christy's great character to an outside perspective she couldn't have found in her everyday life, and Christy Martin would be proud of how she was depicted by Sydney Sweeney.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Oh. What. Fun. more like Oh what rich people problems lol. Nah but seriously this is a pleasant Christmas film that wears its influences on its sleeve. From the beginning it references other classic Christmas films to let you know this will be like those but with a female bent. The inciting incidents/major plot points don't make a lot of sense. The Felicity Jone's character choosing not to spend next Christmas with her mother came out of nowhere. I don't understand Claire's (Michelle Phiffer) breaking point. It's not clear to me why she is losing her **** being with with her family. She says she wants to be respected and appreciated by her family, but that is not accurate to her family life in the film. Her family is loving and kind to each other. They all get along and none of them mistreat her. They are just selfish people sometimes, but no more than you would expect in any other family. Also Michelle Pfeiffer doesn't seem like the kind of character she's meant to be portraying in this film. Her performance is outstanding but she comes off as too much of a high class woman to be a stay at home mom. Like she wouldn't care about the things she's complaining about in this film. Personally I found the family dynamic at home more interesting than following Claire's character. The family is introduced to have their own individual quirks and feelings about each like many families would. If you've ever had family drama between siblings and or lovers/spouses, you may find them venting their pent up frustrations and working out their feelings about each other more interesting than the conceit of the movie. If that had been the conceit of the film it may have been a more entertaining and captivating experience, but as it is, the entire conceit of the film isn't very strong. This film ends up being a nice movie that doesn't leave a strong impression. Honestly it would be a waste of my time if it weren't for the cast.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Soul has great visuals and direction, but what is most important about this film is its message to its viewers. This film serves to be an exhibit of the grander questions and ideas people have about our origins and the meaning of our existence. It does this excellently but at the cost of simplifying these ideas for the Disney audience. Out of all of Disney's films, I believe this film suffers the most from the "Disneyfication" effect. That is when Disney takes broad and complex concepts and simplifies them to be easily understood and entertaining to its audience. They usually do this by personifying literally every possible subject matter in the film, and giving them human personalities, characteristics and traits they would never have otherwise. For example, the Great Before being a fun happy summer camp like place is incredibly corny. Nobody is born with an inherent desire to do anything with their lives. It takes lived experience to find something we love in this world. Although they do depict the main character going through a lot of rejection before he can find his happiness, his love for music is implied to be given to him in life, instead of a desire that emerges based on his decisions in life or the influences around him or the parenting that raised him or any of the many other factors that influence the way we think. There are people in this world that will never find a passion in this world. There are people who's lives are laid out for them by their family, but still go completely off their path. Saying that everything you are in life is because you were given it untrue to many people's actual life. Ideas like that cheapen human experience for the sake of making cute films that children will cherish without any complicated truths. The Disneyfication of this film's direction aside, it is excellent in an incredible amount of ways. Its art and animation is incredibly detailed and vivid. It most likely used computers and software to create the models and animation instead of by hand, but the result is an incredibly compelling visual art piece. Even with its simplistic storytelling, at the core of this film is a profound message with heartfelt intentions that leave you with a sense of wonder. Its characters are full of personality that could be developed further than what we see in the film, which is a result of the depth of the films writing. And of course, grand ideas combined with Disney's ability for filmmaking creates a special quality of film that isn't quantifiable. I think they call it Disney magic. Overall this film is great. If you can look past its corny messaging you'll see something special.