5 CHILDREN & IT -- John Stevenson, dir

©2004
production company: Sandfairy, Capitol Films, Endgame Entertainment, Jim Henson Productions
studio: Warner Home Video
dir: John Stevenson
cast: Tara Fitzgerald, Freddie Highmore, Alex Jennings, Jonathan Bailey, Jessica Claridge, Kenneth Branaugh, Eddie Izzard
screenplay: David Solomons
based on the novel by Edith Nesbit

'It' is a Psammead (voiced by Eddie Izzard), an ancient, ugly and irritable sand fairy the children find one day on a secret beach at their uncle's mansion. It grants them one wish per day, lasting until sunset. But they soon learn it is very hard to think of really sensible wishes, and each one gets them into unexpected difficulties. Magic, the children find, can be as awkward as it is enticing.

#####

I was so looking forward to this movie, and it really disappointed. It didn't hold true to the book as I thought it might, and it was really nothing more than a bunch of various kids' movie ideas lumped in to one, with a couple of ideas from Edith Nesbit's book thrown in.

Initially the CGI Psammead was great, but then I got to thinking it was a bastard cousin of the CGI Grinch from that dreadful movie. The wings on the children were poorly done, considering what era we are in and what people are able to do with special effects these days.

What the hell is that kid doing with a really bad mullet haircut in the 1914 era?!

Based on this movie, I didn't see the need to call it "5 Children and It" but rather "1 Child With Brothers and Sisters & It."

The movie itself is fine for kids, but it's definitely NOT a movie to see if you are looking for something as unique and original as Edith Nesbit's novel.

FIREFLY (Complete Television Series) -- Joss Whedon, creator

©2002
created by: Joss Whedon
regular cast: Nathan Fillion, Gina Torres, Alan Tudyk, Morena Baccarin, Adam Baldwin, Sean Maher, Ron Glass, Jewel Staite, Summer Glau
production company: Mutant Enemy, 20th Century Fox Television, Fox Television Network

Plot Outline: Five hundred years in the future, a renegade crew aboard a small, mobile, spacecraft tries to survive as they travel the unknown parts of the galaxy and evade warring factions as well as authority agents out to get them.

Plot Synopsis: In the distant future, Captain Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds is a renegade former interstellar officer now turned smuggler/rogue whom is the commander of a small spacecraft with a loyal hand-picked crew making up of first mate Zoe Warren; pilot Hoban 'Wash' Washburn; gung-ho grunt Jayne Cobb; engineer Kaylee Frye; fugitives Doctor Simon Tam and his psychic sister River, where they travel the far reaches of space in search of food, money, and anything to live off on.

#####

I really enjoyed this series. I can see where it is a cult favorite. I was hooked in to it very quickly, and wish there were many more episodes to watch.

Some parts of it seem a little on the goofy side -- almost too much of a "western in space" feel (guns with bullets, robbing trains, horses, etc.) but the intrique that was set up over who the characters really might be was wonderful! Why do so many people seem to think that the "Shepherd" isn't really a "shepherd" after all? What kind of psychic powers does River really have? Are the "Companion" and the captain going to get together? Will Kaylee and the doctor get together?

While only a short-lived series, they already did a great job of balancing both serious, dramatic shows with humorous episodes. I laughed through the episode in which "Jayne," the slow-witted, macho man who sleeps with his guns, is afraid to be recognized on a planet only to discover that he's become a folk hero and people sing ballads to him.

And yet the episode with the recurring villian torturing the captain, "Mal," is also quite powerful.

A wonderful series that I highly recommend.

COMIC BOOK VILLAINS -- James Robinson, dir

©2002
studio: Lions Gate
dir: James Robinson
cast: Donal Logue, Cary Elwes, Michael Rapaport, Natasha Lyonne, DJ Qualls, Eileen Brennan
screenplay: James Robinson

Told from the point of view from Archie (Qualls), a comic book collector, this is the story of a rivalry between two comic book shop owners. One (Logue) does it for the love of comics, while the other shop, run by a husband-and-wife team (Rapaport and Lyonne) are in it strictly for the money. The situation brews to a head when a sneak collector, Conan (Masterson) discovers a large collection of perfectly-preserved classic comics, leading the two shops to vie to acquire them, along with a "villain" (Elwes) who hopes to steal them first. [from IMDb]

#####

I think, perhaps, that it is not possible to make a good movie about comic book collectors. The people in this movie are pathetic. Writer/director Robinson tries valiently to make Archie a like-able person, but he's still a "nerd" and no one really cares much for him. Everyone else in the film is about half a step up from being despicable.

I wondered if anyone connected to the movie even knew anything about comics as the comic book lover and owner of the "good" shop, Raymond, spent time in his shop smoking a pipe. I can't imagine anyone who handles comics that regularly would infest them with smoke.

The violence was completely out of character, and I never once believed that Raymond had it in him to kill anyone.

Eileen Brennan does a great job, but her reason for hanging on to the comics seems slightly far-fetched.

This is a film to avoid.

SINGIN' IN THE RAIN -- Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly, dirs

©1952
studio: Warner Home Video
production company: Loew's Inc., Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM)
dir: Stanley Donen, Gene Kelly
cast: Gene Kelly, Debbie Reynolds, Donald O'Connor, Jean hagen, Millard Mitchell, Cyd Charisse, Rita Moreno
screenplay: Betty Comden and Adolph Green
Musical

A silent film production company and cast make a difficult transition to sound. [from IMDb]

#####

I like this film. I'm a tremendous fan of Gene Kelly, and of course this movie is a classic.

The story isn't great, but it serves the song and dance numbers adequately. The whole "modern number" bit for the transformed silent-to-talkie film is waaaaay over the top, but again, it serves to get the dance numbers in to the film.

Because it's a classic, it deserves watching. The title song deserves the attention it has received, as Kelly does it well, and almost anyone who has discovered they are in love can understand and appreciate his mood and playfulness in the song.

Is it Gene Kelly's best? No. But on a whole, all the idividual parts come through quite well.

Recommended.