decalderonne Reviews

Gaslight (1944)

So-called "Style" over Substance

[4/10 · 6 August 2023]

Clearly, the majority of fans have always been completely carried away by all the Film Noir STYLISTIC choices that Cukor and his production team have suffused the entire film with - replete with all the trademark MGM glamour and the MGM budget that helped elevate the film's look and feel above the more B studios' film noir offerings. There is no real SUBSTANCE when you strip away all the glamourized conventions of the noir style however, and a few of the more honest reviewers here have already pointed out some of the GLARING PROBLEMS with the way the story actually plays out from start through finish.

The credibility of the script is so strained that if it weren't for big names like Ingrid Bergman and Charles Boyer - whom most Classic Hollywood film buffs automatically adore because of other films they've been conditioned to revere like silly "Casablanca" - anyone would be able to point out the AMATEURISH HOLES in the plot and the delineation of the main characters. The most embarrassing and most ludicrously risible sequence in the film, which UNDERCUTS *THE WHOLE THING* is the attic sequence where we finally see the villain rummaging through everything - the villain has been up there for months and months on end, and yet the way it's presented is as if it was his very first time up there as another reviewer mentioned. So it makes the villain look utterly ridiculous, and makes it seem like everything the heroine has undergone was simply an excuse to be able to submit Ingrid Bergman to the Academy Awards for a histrionic performance that appealed to erstwhile audience's sick fascination with caricaturized "female hysteria". Ingrid does rise to the occasion in her final confrontation scene with the villain and justify her status as an iconic Hollywood actress, but it doesn't really ring true in the context of the story up until then because if she was capable of being so robust, she would never have been reduced to the mess she was before IN HER OWN HOUSE. So it feels more like a soap opera where plot and consistent characterizations don't mean anything, versus an A-grade Hollywood motion picture.

I'm normally a big fan of George Cukor, but this film is a disappointment because it relies solely on "mood" and "stylistic conventions". The script should have been heavily revised first and foremost, but Cukor's execution of what ended up being authorized on the page and onscreen is more what you would expect from a USC undergraduate cinema major than the man who directed such masterpieces as THE WOMEN in 1939 and A WOMAN'S FACE just a few years prior. It's as if Cukor was at his most cynical here, knowing that the mere presence of Bergman (and Boyer), and a PAINT-BY-NUMBERS 1940s Film Noir gallery of tricks would please the undiscerning, easily misled and duped masses.

I didn't want to give away any explicit spoilers here as the review is written as much for folks who are on the fence about seeing this - trust me, you aren't missing anything phenomenal by ANY means, despite all the hype. Do not trust Hollywood hype - not even 'Classic' Hollywood hype, ok? There are so many other, better films to watch. And how could anyone POSSIBLY overlook Joseph Cotten's EGREGIOUS AMERICAN ACCENT which makes him look like Yankee Doodle PLAYING PRETEND at Scotland Yard?? How could Cukor possibly have allowed such an ABOMINABLE CASTING CHOICE? If they were so desperate to have Joseph Cotten here, they should have rewritten the role to be an American aristocrat in London who has friends at Scotland Yard or something like that. As it stands, Joseph Cotten's speech is AN INSULT to even a 3 year old British child's intelligence.

The die-hard fans who worship this film to the death are not deep thinkers, nor do they know much about acting. They are simply swept away by some misguided notion of "the 1940s' cinematic mise-en-scene" and don't care at all about logic or reason or scrutiny or analysis or believability or anything of the sort. Nope, they are just like the people who will blindly worship the new 'Barbie' movie just because they somehow find Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling charismatic, and/or because they have been conditioned to think that anything that screams feminism (even plastic feminism) is to be applauded.

Jesus of Nazareth (1977)

A VERY STRANGE and VERY UNEVEN screen adaptation

[4/10 · 6 June 2023]

The main thing this miniseries can be applauded for is the effort taken to try and recreate a palpable sense of the historical settings and the cultural milieu. I also applaud the director for the Classical, British style of acting and delivery which is infinitely greater than the more modern, 'method' kind of American Acting that has cheapened Cinema and TV over the decades.

However, the biggest problem here is the WRITING/SCRIPT. What they chose to portray from the Biblical accounts and what they chose to ADD as well as SUBTRACT is completely unwieldy and sometimes absolutely perplexing!! There is also NO COGENT SENSE of the narrative. The miniseries is called "Jesus of Nazareth" and yet there is so much time spent on Joseph, the husband of Mary in the beginning, for instance, that when he dies, the rest of the show NEVER feels the same again because the audience was so heavily invested in Joseph as a primary character. Robert Powell is a terrific actor, but he lacks the warmth of the actor who played Joseph, and so Joseph emerges as a more likeable and sympathetic protagonist than Robert Powell's version of Jesus, which should not have happened.

It was very unnecessary to make up a fictional "backstory" for Mary and Joseph, as if they were an amorous couple from 'Fiddler on the Roof', when this goes against the traditional understanding of Jesus's mother and foster father, and then Mary is reduced to a sober widow as the story progresses. They go to great lengths to portray how joyous and festive Mary and Joseph's betrothal and wedding were, but then they make the MOST BAFFLING DECISION of omitting the entire WEDDING OF CANA later in the miniseries, which is one of the most well-known episodes from the New Testament - it was actually the First Miracle that Jesus performed in public, at Mary's behest. It makes zero sense to leave such a significant and beloved story out of this screen adaptation! In fact, I don't think Mary and Jesus ever even speak to each other here after Jesus becomes an adult, except when He is on the cross. Very bizarre, and makes no sense at all in light of the great lengths taken by Franco Zeffirelli to depict how Mary and Joseph became a family in the first place (above and beyond what the Bible tells us).

Mary Magdalene is introduced as a formidable character, but we barely see her with Jesus either except in one scene. We don't even see Jesus casting the seven demons out of her. What drew her to Jesus in the first place after living the kind of lifestyle she did is only hinted at, and there is NO TIME spent showing her integration into the community of Disciples. Hence, her last scene with the Apostles seems very discordant and strange - the director seems to want to make the point that the Apostles were misogynistic and didn't take her seriously, but it could have been depicted in a more nuanced and polished way. When Mary Magdalene storms out in anger at the end, it completely undermines the whole message of love and forgiveness that Jesus had spent so much time preaching! It's as if the director prioritized making some Unbiblical, Angry Feminist statement, over what would make logical sense in the context of the actual narrative. If most other things about Jesus and the Disciples were not portrayed in a modern revisionist kind of way, it makes no sense to take a modern revisionist position with Mary Magdalene at the end.

Also, Anne Bancroft's performance begins brilliantly, but becomes weak and amateurish as the story reaches its conclusion. Mary Magdalene definitely wouldn't have smiled EVEN ONCE at the foot of the Cross, whereas here they concoct some ridiculous moment where she is ALL CHUFFED that the Roman soldiers' attempts to keep her away are thwarted by the Virgin Mary 'agreeing' that she is Family. Anne Bancroft looks more like a child who managed to get ahead of the queque at a lemonade stand in that scene. And the scene where she relays the Resurrection to the Apostles is enacted in a way that can only be described as COMICAL. Perhaps she was trying to be all grand and Shakespearean, but it makes her look so ridiculous that you can't blame the Apostles for not taking her seriously.

They clearly dubbed Olivia Hussey when she is shown crying and wailing over the Body of Jesus after he dies. That does not sound like her voice, and it's also not synced with her mouth at all. The fact that Mary would break down like that AFTER Jesus died also doesn't make sense, when the director depicts her in a more stoic manner in the moments leading UP to his death for the most part. The Virgin Mary of all people would have known about the Resurrection of Jesus, but here she acts as if she will never see him again. Doesn't fit the portrayal of Mary up until that point, who understands the message of Jesus so well, that in this miniseries it is SHE who says that anyone who does the will of God is the brother, sister or mother of Jesus (which is something that Jesus himself says in the Bible). So again, very unwieldly and incoherent.

The series is ALL OVER THE PLACE in the end. I can go on and on, but you should get the idea. Even the RESURRECTION OF JESUS is very ambiguously depicted at first, and then suddenly there's a brief concluding scene of the Risen Jesus talking to the Apostles which feels like it was just tacked on at the last minute and is ANTI-CLIMACTIC. It also feels like He sent Mary Magdalene to tell the others He was risen for nothing, because we don't see Peter and John run to the Tomb after what Mary says, as presented in the Bible!! Instead, here the viewer is left with the erroneous and totally inexplicable sense that Jesus sent Mary to tell them what she saw - they don't believe her, she gets angry and storms off - only for Jesus to just appear there later on, and completely ignore the frustration that Mary Magdalene had just undergone a little while ago (for no reason apparently). Again, this is not what happens in the Bible. John and Peter confirm that the Tomb is empty THEMSELVES in the Bible, having taken what Mary Magdalene said to heart.

The MUSIC/SCORE is not only repetitive and quite grating after a while, but it's also SO OMINOUS AND EERIE more often than not, that it totally undermines the fact that Jesus came to spread *GOOD NEWS*. The Gospel literally means Good News, and this is supposed to be the Gospel story here, because Jesus of Nazareth and the Gospel/Good News are synonymous, but the music score here makes you feel like this is only a few steps away from being a HORROR story. Even Mel Gibson's "Passion of the Christ" proves to be much more spiritually uplifting than this!!

The 'horror' element is also unfortunately present in the depiction of Jesus Himself from childhood to adulthood. As a child, he just stands around SILENTLY AND CREEPILY as if he were Damien the Demon Child from THE OMEN - which makes zero sense. In the Bible, it's JOSEPH of Nazareth who doesn't actually say a word, but instead here we get an INCESSANTLY TALKATIVE Joseph from the beginning all the way through his death scene, while the Boy Jesus doesn't speak one word except in the Temple. The director was clearly aiming to evoke a sense of REALITY and *VERISIMILITUDE* in this miniseries, so having a creepily mute Boy Jesus for so long only generates the effect of a VERY DISCONCERTING HORROR-STORY-IN-THE-MAKING.

Robert Powell himself - again, despite his prowess as an actor - does not exude the LOVING, HEAVENLY persona that Jim Caviezel embodied to PERFECTION in all the flashback scenes in 'The Passion of the Christ'. While Powell has his moments, they seem to be few and far between, because he either enacts Jesus as some mysterious, practically ominous otherworldly being/Angel of Death type of figure......inexplicably staring into space and acting like he is in a trance (whereas Jesus in the Bible went away from everyone to PRAY ALONE when he needed to commune with God the Father).....or he goes the complete opposite direction and acts like a British Bonvivant from the modern era, such as in the scene where he is eating and drinking with the Pharisees. The way he contrasts himself with the ascetic John the Baptist there also seems to completely miss the mark - Robert Powell acting like he's suddenly unleashing his INNER PARTY BOY and as if he almost PITIES John the Baptist for having been so austere, whereas in the Bible, Jesus is simply calling out his opponents for their "damned if one does and damned if one doesn't" attitude.

I really don't want to go on and on, because it would be very easy to do so, but although it's worth seeing this once through, it is *A FAR CRY* from the definitive screen adaptation of Jesus of Nazareth. NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!! It seems to be a strange attempt to merge the secular with the spiritual, accomplishing neither one nor the other in the last analysis, and the effort to try and make it seem like Pontius Pilate was the ultimate, villainous arbiter of Jesus's Crucifixion is also BLATANTLY FALSE in light of what the Gospels present. The director tries to be a Historical Revisionist at some points, while also trying desperately to maintain fidelity to the King James Version of the Bible in his next breath, resulting in a DISJOINTED DEPICTION of the narrative.

Please also watch the late 1920s silent film version 'King of Kings' (Cecile B. DeMille) and 'The Passion of the Christ' etc, if you watch this. They are far from perfect, but they flesh out a lot of things which this miniseries only glosses over, despite arriving at such a BLOATED LENGTH of over 6 hours. If a miniseries is going to be as long as this, one must be EXTREMELY JUDICIOUS about what is portrayed and what is not - but those decisions seem to have been made in a THOROUGHLY HAPHAZARD AND ARBITRARY way here. We barely even get a sense of the extent of the Suffering that Jesus underwent on the way to the Cross and on the Cross.

Sabrina the Teenage Witch (1996–2003)

Seasons 1-3 are the best, after which the show becomes unrecognizable

[6/10 · 26 April 2023]

Seasons 1-3 deserve at least 8 stars, and sometimes as many as 9 or even 10 stars because of the superlative degree of wholesome comedy, innocent teen drama, wry imagination, and straight-up entertaining plotlines and adventures that often feel close-to-home and relatable despite the very colourful world of high fantasy and magic!! In many regards, the first 3 seasons were the perfect form of feel-good television, and represented everything that was great about the 1990s (the decade that so many Millenials grew up in).

Also, the CHARACTERS in the first 3 seasons that the Sabrina and the Spellman family interacted with were FAR AND AWAY THE BEST. Libby was perhaps the greatest and most complex teenage character here - an arch-rival to Sabrina who was a three-dimensional person with her own vulnerabilities, brought to life in a pitch perfect manner by the talented actress Jenna Leigh-Green. She was hilarious, but wasn't a generic, stereotypical cheerleader. Her friends Jill and CeCe were more stereotypical cheerleaders perhaps but they too were played with a great deal of humanity by those actresses, making Libby and her posse one of my favourite elements of the series!

Harvey was the quintessentially adorable boyfriend for Sabrina, thanks in no small part due to the earnest portrayal by Nate Richert, while Valerie proved to be the most adorable best friend in Seasons 2 and 3 (thanks to the very wholesome energy of Lindsay Sloane). Yes, it was very annoying that Jenny - her best friend from Season 1 - left without a trace, together with the highly memorable and much loved Mr. Poole from the 1st season, but as much as they were missed, Valerie and the other new characters introduced in Season 2 such as Mr. Kraft and even Ms. Quick were so in keeping with the spirit and tone of the show that most viewers were able to move on and keep going without feeling like the overall quality of the series had been compromised. The Quizmaster was another truly iconic and super cool supporting character. Tuning in to each episode was nothing short of a sheer delight right through the end of Season 3, due to this spectacular SUPPORTING CAST.

Unfortunately everything went COMPLETELY DOWNHILL from Season 4 onwards. Most of the supporting high school cast that audiences had grown to love disappeared completely, and the absence of Libby and Valerie in particular was *EXCRUCIATINGLY FELT*. I really didn't mind the addition of Dreama and Brad - in fact it was nice to see Harvey have a friend like Brad - but the introduction of Josh was one of the most HORRENDOUS "developments" I've come across on any series!!!! He was a terrible, mean, sadistic character who came between Sabrina and Harvey - completely devoid of the fun qualities that Harvey's former rival Dashiell the young warlock had - and the fact that Sabrina chose to lust after Josh and cheat on Harvey with him COMPLETELY RUINED THE TITLE CHARACTER from that point onwards. Had Libby been there, she would surely have called Sabrina out on her hypocrisy and fake moral superiority, while Valerie would never have endorsed such a betrayal either.

The only entertaining element in Season 4 for me was the AUNTS - whom I enjoyed even more than the ultra-popular Salem, especially AUNT HILDA who was played to perfection by Caroline Rhea, one of the *MOST HILARIOUS* AND MOST NATURAL COMEDIENNES ever to grace a screen. She convinced you that she WAS Aunt Hilda, and not merely 'playing' one of the Aunts.

However, by the time Season 5 rolled over, and Sabrina started college - which she should have started in Season 4, because Season 1 depicted her as a sophomore, rather than a freshman in high school - it felt like not even the Aunts or Salem could keep the show afloat. The college setting was so DRAB - perhaps a reflection of the show moving from ABC to the cheaper WB - and her new 'friends' like Morgan, Roxy and Miles took a long time to get used to. I also despised the fact that they felt the need to portray Sabrina as the sitcom equivalent of Carrie Bradshaw from 'Sex and the City' at this point, dating various different guys. Melissa Joan Hart seemed desperate to break away from the wholesome image Sabrina and Harvey had cultivated during the first few seasons, and this just made the character UNLIKEABLE and UNSYMPATHETIC to me - a WANTON WITCH, versus the WHOLESOME WITCH that we had been introduced to in Season 1!

I really can't give the 4th and 5th seasons more than 3 stars out of 10, for the reasons listed above, even though Season 4 may have felt a little bit more like the classic, golden years because the show was still on ABC with the high school set and everything. The attempt to write Harvey out of the show at the end of Season 4 resulted in a backlash, and so they were compelled to bring him back later in Season 5, although Season 5 ended with Sabrina officially dating the AWFUL JOSH. Season 5 had also lost MOST of the magic and charm of the first few seasons, and while Season 6 admittedly did a lot to bring back quite a bit of that old-timey charm and magic (after all, hello, the show has the word "witch" in the title, which the WB network seemed to forget at first) - the fact that Sabrina and Josh were now presented as some kind of super-couple was EXCEEDINGLY NERVE-GRATING and ruined this season as well for me. I would maybe give it 4 stars out of 10, and the best thing that happened that season was Josh LEAVING the series forever at the end (not because Melissa Joan Hart and her mother wanted him to, but because the actor David Lascher chose to pursue something else).

By the time Season 7 rolled around, it was clear that Paula Hart, Melissa's mother and executive producer, ERRONEOUSLY believed that MELISSA was the reason everyone kept tuning into the show, and that the success/popularity of the series hinged only on HER. Nothing could have been further from the truth. She was just the title character in an ENSEMBLE CAST. The Aunts were now gone, and although it made sense on the one hand to depict Sabrina trying to live as an adult on her own two feet at long last, without the constant comfort and guidance of her aunts, the fact that 2 iconic characters who had been around for 6 seasons were now gone left yet another hole (an ever-increasing void, that began with iconic characters like Libby and Valerie being let go after Season 3). Still, I was very relieved to see Josh gone, and would take his replacement character - Aaron - over Josh any day of the week, and so I'm inclined to rate the final season at least 5 stars out of 10. Unfortunately Sabrina herself had become an almost INSUFFERABLY OBNOXIOUS character by now - no doubt because Melissa Joan Hart believed she was the undisputed star by now, when she actually wasn't - and the character's treatment of Salem was abominable (she treated him like he was less than a person, and merely the butt end of a joke who could even be tormented/tortured for the sake of a laugh).

I found the Scorch magazine setup quite refreshing after the horrendously dreary college set we had been subjected to throughout Seasons 4 and 5, and I thought those characters were much more in keeping with the spirit of the show from Seasons 1-3 (including Annie the boss). Roxie had become another insufferable and unbearable character to me by now, however, although I had acquired rather a SOFT SPOT for Morgan, by and large, and as annoying as she could occasionally be, I looked forward to seeing her more often than not. She was the only character who could fill the gaping hole left after the elimination of old-time icons like Libby and the Aunts - although, like I said, Aaron himself was quite a viable rival for Harvey!

It made zero sense that Sabrina would try to marry Aaron while hiding the fact that she was a witch (even worse than Josh never finding out that she was a witch), of course, and there were other huge problems that plagued the show during the latter seasons such as Sabrina's mother still not being allowed to have a relationship with her by the Witch's Council (which was originally only supposed to last 2 years). It would have been far better to show Sabrina at least having her MOTHER drop by every once in a while, after the Aunts were gone. Anyhow, all things considered, I can't rate the series more than 6 stars out of 10 in the final analysis, due to the WIDELY VARYING qualities of entertainment and credibility the show embodied across the different seasons.

In some ways, Seasons 4-7 should not even be considered canon, because as mentioned earlier, Sabrina was supposed to FINISH high school at the end of season 3. Instead, we were given an extra year of high school - presumably to drag out the "teenage witch" factor for as long as possible - but then she, Roxie and Morgan ONLY SPENT 2 years in college before "magically" graduating (and I use the word sarcastically here, obviously), so the last few seasons really make ZERO COMMON SENSE when you combine these factors with the other issues I pointed out previously.

I hope Melissa Joan Hart realizes at least now that this wasn't just some ego trip for her, but rather, other actresses like Jenna Leigh-Green/Libby, Lindsay Sloane/Valerie, Caroline Rhea/Hilda and Beth Broderick/Aunt Zelda were JUST AS RESPONSIBLE for making the show so iconic as she herself was!!!! I don't think Melissa and her mother Paula got THAT MEMO while the show was still on air, which is why the series declined horrendously from Season 4 onwards.....

But at least we all have the TERRIFIC MEMORIES from Seasons 1-3, and although the latter seasons DO always tarnish the full enjoyment of the early seasons upon rewatching, because you KNOW the horrors and writing gaffes that are down the road, the fact that Sabrina and Harvey end up together in the end does compensate for SOME of the atrocities committed by the producers and writers. Far from a perfect ending, but it was something!

Sabrina the Teenage Witch (1971–1974)

A better version of the character than Melissa Joan Hart

[7/10 · 24 April 2023]

Jane Webb does a beautiful job as the voice of the protagonist Sabrina here, who is written ALMOST PERFECTLY, which is quite surprising for a Saturday morning cartoon. They pulled off the feat of making her magical/otherworldly but also very relatable and down-to-earth at the same time. The Melissa Joan Hart version of the character became utterly insufferable from the 4th season of the live-action sitcom onwards, and THIS SATURDAY MORNING CARTOON version of the character could have taught her a number of things about REAL MORAL FIBRE and maturity (because yes, the Melissa Joan Hart version become increasingly immature and immoral as time went on).

Jane Webb also BRILLIANTLY VOICES almost EVERY SINGLE FEMALE character on this show - a feat which is practically unequalled. The lady was an absolute genius, and I can't believe she is practically forgotten today. The rest of the voice cast is also brilliant - with a special shout-out to John Erwin, who would go on to become famous as He-Man/Prince Adam. Here he is Reggie Mantle, portrayed as an utterly three-dimensional human character, despite all the ludicrous and zany antics he gets entangled in, because John Erwin is so amazing. Despite the arrogance and condescension that characterize Reggie, you can't help but love him here!

I think it was a stroke of genius not to have a recurring, standard villain/rival for Sabrina in the form of a "mean cheerleader" or some other female nemesis - but rather, Reggie was depicted in the DEEPLY COMPLEX manner of a FRENEMY. This is something a lot of children would have done well to learn from.......how someone could be a friend on the one hand, or at least be a part of your friends group/social circle, while still sometimes being out to "expose" you if they believe you have a secret. It wasn't BLACK OR WHITE on this show, and that was brilliant.

Another reviewer said the series was witless and lacked imagination, but I must disagree. The moral ambiguities and endless grey shades of magic/witchcraft are openly displayed here - with some characters like Aunt Hilda and Miss Della the Head Witch going out of their way to HURT people with magic sometimes, and yet those characters are not presented as EVIL or as VILLAINS........rather, the motif of witchcraft and all its implications are used here to teach children that some people, even some adults who are in positions of familial responsibility and great authority (people that you're expected to look up to) can use their powers for less-than-noble aims. Again, there are almost never any clear-cut villains on the show, and so children are presented with a much more TRUE-TO-LIFE (ironically, despite all the magic and wackiness) depiction of moral complexities than the straightforward, simplistic and much more ubiquitous "good vs evil" formula that Disney cartoons had long since established.

Not all the episodes and stories are created equal of course, and some are quite hard to watch because some of them are more overtly infantile (like a number of the Groovy Ghoulies episodes), while the "high school" episodes can also be hit or miss depending on the degree of juvenility the writers decide to employ, but taken as a whole, this is a UNIQUE and VERY MEMORABLE series. They do a terrific job of setting up a very specific world - a mood - a MISE-EN-SCENE if you will - which honestly transcends the standard Saturday morning cartoon formula. This is all the more impressive considering the Sabrina show was an off-shoot of the already existing Archies series.

Sometimes you feel like you are watching a cartoon version of the 1963 BYE BYE BIRDIE film musical with Ann-Margaret - and I mean that in a VERY POSITIVE WAY - while on some occasions, they manage to evoke the entertainingly creepy/spooky ambience of the B-list horror and thriller films from the 1960s and early 1970s that have become cult classics. And there are PLENTY of legitimately witty, laugh-out-loud funny moments that transcend age.

You cannot watch this with any degree of cynicism, and like I said some of the episodes are real doozies, but I am very very glad I own the collection on DVD to pop into my player and watch whenever I need to get a nostalgic cartoon kick (nostalgic in the sense that it evokes a distinct bygone time period SO PERFECTLY that I feel like I own a little time capsule). It ISN'T just a generic Saturday morning cartoon, although some of the Groovy Ghoulies episodes do weigh it down in that direction, and if you don't want to get the DVD you can watch this for free on YouTube as well. I just like having the DVD set because I like owning a tangible, hard copy that is its own collector's item. :)

All About Eve (1950)

Anne Baxter is a Star among Stars here!

[8/10 · 24 April 2023]

The only reason I'm not giving this film 10 out of 10 stars as some fans have is because it would have been nice to receive a bit more information about Eve's background - perhaps even a flashback or two. As perfect as the revelation scene between Eve and Addison is from an acting standpoint, there is a bit of a disconnect between the brewery episode mentioned and Eve's dramatic aspirations. Was the brewery an interruption of her acting ambitions, or did she fall back on her acting dreams after leaving the brewery?

That aside, I think this is ultimately ANNE BAXTER'S movie, not Bette Davis's, and I'm so glad Ms. Baxter decided to go for the Best Actress Oscar alongside Ms. Davis (even though Bette would rather have been the only Best Actress contender from this film). Not to say that Bette isn't marvelous and legendary here, obviously, but Anne does something really DELICIOUS with this role. Yes, some of her acting choices are very mannered and might seem too overtly phony by modern standards when she's pretending to be innocent and sweet, but considering how naive and sheltered characters like Lloyd and Karen are, it all somehow fits. And in the end, I firmly believe that ANNE'S HISTRIONICS are what steal the show - rather than Bette's.

Marilyn Monroe also sparkles in the very limited screen time she is given. Absolutely gorgeous, and proves even this early in her career that there are NO small parts, but only small actors. One rarely comes across cameos like this in modern films.

What ULTIMATELY makes this film an enduring classic is the fact that it's an ENSEMBLE CAST STORY where the ENTIRE ENSEMBLE is practically pitch perfect. Anne Baxter may be the star among the stars here, in my estimation, but no one else misses a single beat, and they all ensure that the ship remains afloat every passing minute. George Sanders and Celeste Holm are especially brilliant - convincing you that they ARE the characters and not simply "playing" the characters.

Bette Davis's real life marriage to Gary Merrill would prove disastrous, not only for themselves but also for Bette's real-life daughter B. D apparently, so some of the behind-the-scenes action here serves as a CAVEAT. Getting involved with a co-star is almost never a good idea......and I'm sure Eve herself would have told Bette that much. ;)

Carmen Jones (1954)

A mostly brilliant cinematic rendering by Preminger

[8/10 · 18 April 2023]

I cannot believe the amount of shade that seems to be thrown in the direction of this film that has been beloved by so many for its utterly groundbreaking, often jaw-dropping (in the best way possible) qualities. Some of the earliest examples of negative/mixed critical reviews reeked of racism - the very thing Otto Preminger was so adamant to shatter with this venture (and Oscar Hammerstein II in his own way) - while modern "critics" who diss the film seem to be utterly lacking in imagination.

First of all, I must point out that I am an Operatic Baritone Singer who has portrayed the role of Escamillo in Bizet's ACTUAL French Opera 'Carmen' onstage, and I have also co-directed excerpts from the opera. I know the original inside and out - both the first incarnation with all the spoken French dialogue in between the arias, as well as the other version that is pretty much entirely sung (the version that became popular in countries like America). I have also followed the trajectory of different productions over the decades and seen how the interpretation of both the characters and the music has shifted over the course of time. This film adaptation actually represents a very intriguing TIME CAPSULE in the history of 'Carmen' - on the one hand, we see Otto Preminger doing his best to veer into the realm of realism by going back to the Propser Merimee novella that inspired the opera (a trend which late 20th and early 21st century productions of the opera would also start taking to heart). In that sense, Preminger was actually quite AHEAD OF HIS TIME!! On the other hand, we also see the unmistakable influences of the 'Carmen' performance traditions that had dominated the first half of the 20th century, some of which are almost never seen/heard today - for instance, the interpolated high note that closes Micaela's big aria, recreated here by "Cindy Lou". That note was not in Bizet's original score, and yet sopranos had got into the habit of interpolating it for what they perceived as "added effect". Usually, I must confess that it sounds overblown and obnoxiously showy in the recordings of older sopranos who played Micaela, but in this film, it's handled so exquisitely that you would swear Bizet had always meant it to be sung that way!! :)

I must admit that Oscar Hammerstein II's lyrics are VERY MUCH HIT OR MISS, and the fact that all the songs somehow end up working in this film is more a testament to the skill of the actors and singers who most admirably and remarkably manage to make the bulk of it look and sound rather natural and authentic....whereas in a number of instances, Hammerstein's lyric is contrived and shoe-horned into Bizet's glorious music in embarrassing, occasionally even AMATEUR ways!! There are some marvelous exceptions though. Hammerstein's reconceptualization of the world famous Toreador Song - one of the top 3 most instantly recognizable operatic arias in the world - is actually *GENIUS*, with UTTERLY BRILLIANT NEW LYRICS. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that Hammerstein alternates between sheer genius and amateur shoe-horning of new lyrics in this score.

The ULTIMATE BRILLIANCE and even Genius in this film however, once again, lies in the hands of deft and nimble director Otto Preminger, the cast and the singers who dubbed many/most of them!! I really don't believe that Oscar Hammerstein's Broadway musical would be remembered as anything more than a piece of curios were it not for THIS film adaptation - a glorious vision that Mr. Preminger managed to bring to fruition with the help of the great Daryl F. Zanuck. I actually think that in its own way, this film can go toe to toe with the celebrated 1980s film version of the OPERA 'Carmen' starring Placido Domingo and Julia Migenes-Johnson - even though this is a "popular", "musical" version, as far as its CINEMATIC QUALITY goes, it's right up there, which is all the more remarkable considering its very limited budget!!!!!! Preminger clearly believed wholeheartedly in this project, and gave it his 300% which was no easy feat at the time when almost no other director/producer would have taken a chance on an all-black venture like this.

So much has been said about Dorothy Dandridge's iconic performance here that I don't need to say too much. She makes the character come to life in a flesh-and-blood way that would be the envy of most singers who play the role in the actual opera onstage!! The dubbing by Marilyn Horne is actualluy SHOCKINGLY GOOD. I'm not a fan of Marilyn Horne, especially not after she pivoted from being a self-admitted "light lyric soprano" to a "mezzo" - which I will not get into here - but she really went out of her way at this young stage of her life to match the speaking voice and style of Dorothy Dandridge, whom she must have really looked up to. This film really reminded me why there was such a controversy with the dubbing in MY FAIR LADY exactly 10 years later - because apart from Julie Andrews being passed for the role of Eliza, the discrepancy between Marni Nixon's voice and Audrey Hepburn's voice became GLARINGLY APPARENT by the end of that film, robbing the title character of her credibility as a result. In this case, it's VERY MUCH THE OPPOSITE of what happened with 'My Fair Lady', and I am very very surprised (most pleasantly) after having been initially very skeptical of a White classical singer dubbing a Black nightclub singer.

Harry Belafonte also lip-syncs brilliantly to the tenor who dubbed him, with genuine and profound emotive power!! I totally disagree with the reviewer here who said that his lack of acting training shows. NOT AT ALL. Don Jose is rarely a sympathetic character in the original opera, but Harry does make this version legitimately sympathetic here courtesy of a very heartfelt and moving internalization of 'Joe'. Together with the screenwriter and Otto Preminger, Harry crafts a very solid emotional ARC for the character that is credible and convincing - and so I totally disagree with those who say the story here is just "melodramatic" or "over-the-top entertainment". It's not.

I personally found the BLEND of Cinematic Realism and the Heightened Operatic sensibilities of the score to be MASTERFULLY handled by Preminger and the cast. Only those who are not accustomed to hearing operatic music regularly would find it jarring. Moments like this version of the Toreador Song - perhaps we should call it the Boxer Ring Song here - are actual showstoppers, along with Cindy Lou's song!! If you are fine with the film adaptations of SHOW BOAT, I don't see why you would take issue with this film at all.

I was privileged to see this on the big screen at the TCM Film Festival here in Hollywood where I live, and I feel like I will NEVER miss a chance to view it on the big screen again!!!! An UNDER-VALUED CLASSIC that ranks among Otto Preminger's finest work. Hats off to the entire cast, crew, and singers!!!!!!!

My Little Pony: The Movie (1986)

A little piece of paradise

[7/10 · 12 June 2022]

I didn't watch this feature-length film until I was an adult, although I have been one of the BIGGEST fans of the TV series that followed the film, since the age of 5 (I'm now in my mid-30s). Hence, I have no nostalgia associated with the movie specifically, the way so many other reviewers seem to, and this allows me to be a little more objective in my own appraisal. Let me start by saying that this was a terrific introduction to the Flutter Ponies - one of the most alluring elements of the entire G1 MLP franchise, and the way they roll back and eradicate the Smooze at the end of the story by the power of their fluttering wings is ABSOLUTELY *EPIC* - a truly and uniquely spectacular sequence in cartoon film history. I would much rather watch this than the generic action sequences in modern, so-called 'real' films like "The Batman". The Flutter Ponies are immeasurably cooler than anything in the DC or Marvel mega-franchises today.

I don't find Baby Lickety-Split NEARLY as annoying as a lot of people seem to, although you WOULD be advised to turn down the volume on your DVD towards the end of her first song "I'll Go It Alone". It's the much more petulant equivalent of the old standard "By Myself" (popularized by the likes of Judy Garland), and although the so-called grand finale where both Baby LS and Spike sing 'in harmony' (ahem) will test even the most ardent G1 MLP fan to put it kindly - I still find the song a lot more original and authentic and yes, even entertaining (bar the ending), than her second song "What Good Could Wishing Do?" which is a much more generically schmaltzy song (the kind you would find in any late 20th century musical). The idea of the supposed Wishing Well singing back to her, in a play on Snow White's wishing well song from the 1937 Disney film, is clever, but I found this to be the MOST GRATING melody for the most part because it sounds like the composer was trying to outdo both Stephen Schwartz and Kander & Ebb at their generic worst!!

The rest of the score is mostly REALLY REALLY ENJOYABLE, MEMORABLE and JUST DARN GOOD, so I completely disagree with everyone who has dissed all the songs. And no, "Nothing Can Stop the Schmooze" is FAR from the musical highlight - it's an attempt to add some levity and comedy to the Witches' vile plot to bury everyone and everything in Dream Valley forever, not unlike the way Shakespeare's Richard III juxtaposed outright villainy with almost ridiculously comedic lines - but the TRUE WORTH of the score lies elsewhere!!!

The Witches' first song "An Evil Witch Like Me" is MUCH MUCH MORE CLEVER AND DELICIOUS than the title would have you believe, both lyrically and sonically, as Hydia contextualizes everything within the framework of her proudly "despicable" family tree. There's such a rich mythology woven into just that one song, making the viewer LONG to see some of Hydia's ancestors like the deceptively beautiful Lucretia and Bad-Ass Grandma Alexis featured in their own stories. The cackling within the song is also superbly and musically/rhythmically timed, enhancing the number in a way that's both hilarious and true to the character. I've watched just this song on its own countless times on YouTube.

"I'll Do the Dirty Work" is also more on the generic, late 20th century American musical theatre side of the spectrum, at least as far as the MELODY goes, but it's a genuinely effective CHARACTER PIECE that certainly transcends the contemporary Broadway genre. If anything, it plays out like a subversion of the standard musical theatre trope, where you would normally have 2 LIKEABLE characters sing this kind of tune, but in this case it's a DASTARDLY DUET.

I really don't understand the people who have dismissed and disparaged THERE'S ALWAYS ANOTHER RAINBOW - true, it may not be the single most original song ever conceived of, but I think it's a truly worthy and legitimately epic ANTHEM for this movie, which Tammy Amerson belts out terrifically and with great conviction and sincerity. It's a song that we should all TAKE TO HEART - not just the ponies in the story - because it's so easy to lose hope and succumb to despair and negative thinking, especially today (all these decades AFTER the film was made and released). Seriously. It's a bona fide NOTE TO SELF moment for any viewer, regardless of whether they're a child, or an adult. I think the song can give 'Tomorrow' from Annie a run for its money......although this one is much more symbolic and metaphorical. On the one hand, Megan is referring to the magical rainbow featured in the story, but it also applies just as powerfully to the optimism and positive thinking we all need in REAL LIFE, on a day to day basis!

I think Mr. Moochik's song HOME is another indisputable winner! Yes, it's ultimately plugging the "Paradise Estate" playset to children, but the way the lyricist and composer GET to that is really really ingenious in my opinion, taking both the fictional characters and the real viewers on a tour around the world.......far more effective than Disney's magic carpet ride from Aladdin, to be perfectly frank!!! The song absolutely and brilliantly drives home the point about having/living in a home that fits your own temperament and personality - no matter what the rest of the world may say (literally in this case) - and the fact that Megan is so empathetic and sympathetic as to be COMPLETELY IN SYNC with the Ponies' preferences and needs is such a moving and heartwarming touch. I know that a lot of critics, and viewers to this day, criticize the fact that the movie was supposed to sell toys, but the American media is all about selling things to people no matter WHAT they're watching - and at least in this case, it's as if the children in the audience are being told that EVEN IF they can't visit Egypt, Italy, and all the places the Moochick whisks Megan and the Ponies to over the course of the song......they JUST MIGHT be able to own a 'little piece of paradise' in the form of the Paradise Estate playset.

At the end of the day, I do believe that this movie is a little piece of paradise in and of itself. The fact that the Grundles get to have their own home/semblance of a kingdom again in the form of the compromised Castle in Dream Valley is like ICING ON THE CAKE as the story reaches its conclusion. That was very generous of the Ponies, and 1000% appreciated by the Grundles, who are really neat characters in their own right themselves. Danny DeVito is one of the best actors of all time - I have seen him do a live play here in Los Angeles - and he proves the maxim that there are no small parts; only small actors.

On the subject of actors, I will say that I am personally not CRAZY about Cloris Leachman as Hydia, or Madeline Kahn as Draggle. I think Tress McNellie and Jennifer Darling were VASTLY SUPERIOR in the TV series as those characters, when we see Hydia and her daughters return to get their revenge on the Flutter Ponies. I don't know whether Cloris Leachman did her own singing as Hydia here - but the singing was preferable to her spoken lines on the whole. There were a lot of times where it seemed like Cloris was trying to underplay the dialogue, or make it sound more 'realistic', but this didn't match what the animators were doing on a few glaring occasions. I guess she wasn't exactly familiar with the animation medium, although she DOES really really 'sell' Hydia's defeat, as the old witch bellows and yells hopelessly against the magical might of the Flutter Ponies.

Megan, Molly and Danny REALLY shine here as three-dimensional characters - George Arthur Bloom did a brilliant job writing them as a REAL FAMILY - and for that matter, I think ALL THE PONIES here are portrayed as three-dimensional, relatable characters. I couldn't disagree more with those who have said that the Ponies were just cardboard cutouts and that it wasn't until the 2010 MLP 'Friendship is Magic' reboot that the equine characters started to have personalities. WHAT UTTER BALDERDASH!! It's those G4 versions that are one-dimensional and obnoxious and annoying in my serious opinion. I tried watching that "updated" series, but grew tired after a few episodes. There are WAY MORE characters in the G1 MLP franchise, including this feature film, and I thought George Arthur Bloom did a really really admirable job balancing the rather vast array of players, and fleshing them out in the process.

P. S - This was never meant to be a Disney Classic type of film, but considering the fact that it was the feature film adaptation of a toy line for children, I think they REALLY CREATED *SOMETHING FOR THE AGES* here with A *LOT OF GENUINE HEART AND SOUL*.

The morals and messages here are plentiful if you are not a hardened cynic, and so is the humour. And no, the humour is not all slapstick. The morals are not heavy-handed either. When Megan tells the Grundles that they are really beautiful, you know that she sees them for the endearing beings they are. The Grundles also disabuse anyone of the erroneous notion that this is a cloyingly, sickeningly cute movie - I think the opposite is true.

Yes, it's a flawed movie, but SO ARE THE BEST DISNEY ANIMATED FILMS in my opinion. Please don't buy into the myth that Disney = Perfection. This is an UNEXPECTEDLY RARE GEM, which isn't just a cash-grab, and even today - over 35 years later, when all the toys and playsets are no longer as readily purchasable as they were in the 1980s - I think the film still holds up, overall, in a rather sublime way.

West Side Story (1961)

Flawed Classic

[6/10 · 17 March 2022]

I don't think anything will ever beat the energy, intensity and sheer power of the original 1957 Broadway production, but it's still THIS film adaptation that will be remembered over and above the recent Spielberg version. What the film does best overall is straddling the heightened sensibilities and aesthetics of the Classic Hollywood era alongside the nittier, grittier dynamics of the modern Cinema Verite era. No other musical seems to strike that balance so effectively and memorably.

The stars of the film, from my point of view, are George Chakiris and Natalie Wood. You will never guess that Chakiris had played Riff in the original London stage production, and he plays Bernardo like the part was written with him in mind. He is the SOUL of the film, and for someone who was a virtual Hollywood novice, he COMMANDS the screen with an EFFORTLESS CHARISMA and SEARING SINCERITY which not even the best Classic Hollywood leading men at the time could pull off.

Natalie Wood is not only one of the most naturally gorgeous women to ever grace any screen, but she actually acquits herself superbly as the heroine Maria! Rachel Zegler (who is half-Polish) may have done her own singing in the new version, but she could not *POSSIBLY* compete with Natalie's charm, poise and EXPERIENCE (coming fresh off 'Splendor in the Grass'). Ms. Wood tugs at the viewer's heart strings throughout the story, and of course eventually breaks your heart. Who cares if Marni Nixon dubbed the vast majority of her songs? Natalie still enacts each and every song EXPERTLY, to the nth degree - utilizing her entire body to convey the soaring sentiments and passions of Bernstein's semi-operatic music.

Incidentally, Marni Nixon NEVER SOUNDED BETTER than she does right here. I'm not sure whether Bernstein inspired her in a way that no other American composer did, or whether she happened to feel a greater connection to the character Maria than to Eliza Doolittle and Anna Leonowens, but Marni showcases the full spectrum of her vocal range from top to bottom with astounding bravura. By contrast, her voice ended up taking a horrid acidulous quality in some of the 'My Fair Lady' songs a few years later - which wasn't so pronounced in 'The King and I', and is somehow entirely absent in THIS film, thank goodness!! Her most successful dubbing assignment by far, in my estimation.

I am one of the very few people who was NEVER a fan of Rita Moreno's Anita. I think she was excellent and endlessly memorable as Tuptim in 'The King and I', but she is endlessly ANNOYING and obnoxious as Anita here. Chita Rivera, the original Anita, had such a sultry speaking and singing voice that gave the character such strength and gravitas - whereas Rita Moreno had an *INSUFFERABLY* high speaking cadence at this point in time, which when combined with her EXAGGERATED LINE DELIVERIES makes her dialogue *PAINFUL* to listen to. Her Anita was not a character that I could root for at all......and while she does manage to evoke some genuine sympathy after Bernardo dies, she does not SUSTAIN the sympathy for very long.

The film also made the extremely bizarre choice of having 3 different voices as Anita - Rita Moreno's own, Marni Nixon (during the harmonies in the 'Quintet'), and Betty Wand for "A Boy Like That" (which is just HORRIBLE compared to the tour-de-force performance of Chita Rivera on the Original Cast Album). Whatever 'reasons' or 'excuses' have been presented to explain this over the years does not obliterate the fact that the depiction of Anita was SEVERELY COMPROMISED in this film, both dramatically and vocally. The only thing I will grant Rita Moreno is her dancing.......although she obviously was NO CHITA RIVERA on that front either, any more than she was vocally and dramatically!! She is such a *PALE SHADOW* of Chita, and I feel like overall, Rita's Anita COMPLETELY *MARRS* this picture for me. Yes, she may have won the Best Supporting Actress Award, but Oscars mean NOTHING at the end of the day, considering all the UNDESERVING actors and actresses who have won over the years for reasons that had little to do with their actual skills. Natalie Wood should have won BEST ACTRESS that year for 'Splendor in the Grass' - which was such a seminal performance, and the fact that she could do a project as radically different (and equally challenging) as 'West Side Story' right after is a testament to her really quite EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS.

But I digress. I am not a big fan of Russ Tamblyn's Riff either, although I think his OWN VOCALS were vastly superior and more robust than his dubber's. I will never ever understand why Robert Wise insisted he be dubbed for the Jets' Song. There has also been criticism that the character of Riff is undermined by getting him to sing the buffoonish 'Gee Officer Krupke' - a song that the character was NOT meant to sing at all in the original version, and although I understand the narrative reason for bringing this song forward to the first half of the story......it didn't do Russ Tamblyn any favours endearing his Riff to me. It's true that Bernardo was never meant to sing 'America' either, likewise, but at least the sentiments he expresses in the film version of the song are true to the character as originally conceived (plus, George Chakiris was obviously almost infinitely more charismatic than poor Russ Tamblyn).

On the one hand, it does make more sense for a group of teenagers to deal with their grief and shock via sarcasm through a song like 'Gee, Officer Krupke' rather than the very cerebral 'Cool' which was brought into the second half of the story in this film, but I understand them not wanting to disrupt the mounting tragedy in the plot. I DO miss the 'Somewhere' Ballet though - yes, in theory it sounds like it could never have worked in the more "realistic" film medium, but I think it could have actually been deeply touching had Jerome Robbins been able to adapt it for the screen. I would definitely much rather have seen THAT, and less of Rita Moreno's Anita. *ahem*

There are many merits that I don't have time to extol in this review, which do balance out the flaws at the end of the day - but really, when all is said and done, this is a VERY HAUNTING film that will stay with you forever once you see it. Yes, the Spielberg version will always stay with you too, but THIS film is the *CLASSIC*, needless to say. And I would take Richard Beymer's "bland" Tony over the arrogant, egotistical depiction of Tony in the Spielberg version ANY DAY!! Richard Beymer was completely *DEVOID* of ego, and lent his sincerity and simplicity to the role in a way that actually heightens the ultimate tragedy......whereas Spielberg's Tony was *FULL OF EGO* (I never bothered to register that pompous new actor's name) and thereby completely undercut the sense of tragedy.

I just wish there had been a way for CHITA RIVERA to play Anita here, because if anyone ever deserved to immortalize their Broadway stage performance on the silver screen, it was HER!! I don't care if she had 'harsher' facial features than Rita Moreno - she was actually 2 years younger than Rita, and with the right makeup and lighting, combined with the right wig, Chita could have been incandescent onscreen!!!!! That is perhaps the biggest tragedy - that Chita Rivera's Anita was usurped by an UNDESERVING Rita Moreno.

Care Bears Movie II: A New Generation (1986)

I'm a huge Care Bears fan but THIS FILM IS REALLY QUITE *AWFUL*!!!!!

[2/10 · 11 October 2021]

If you are not a Care Bears fan to begin with, then this film should be AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS, because it's the *ABSOLUTE WORST* version of the 1980s franchise. It completely justifies why so many people became COMPLETELY CYNICAL about the Care Bears, which is TRULY TRAGIC considering how extraordinary the franchise can be when it's presented properly. The first Care Bears movie from 1985 was not the best by any means but it is still *INFINITELY BETTER* than this - and so is the 3rd movie, 'The Care Bear Adventure in Wonderland'. I really don't know WHAT Peter Sauder the writer and the rest of the "creative" team were SMOKING, DRINKING AND/OR SNORTING when they made this egregious 2nd film.

For the record, I actually *USED TO LIKE THIS FILM* some time ago, and looked back on it with FOND MEMORIES while acknowledging general corniness. However, I just re-watched all 3 of the 80s Care Bear films back to back, with objectivity, and was absolutely stunned and perplexed at the *VAST CHASM* in quality, style and substance between this film and the other 2 - which apparently never quite jumped out at me the same way before, as I had watched each film at different points in my life. Everyone keeps harping about the songs here, so let me get those out of the way first........they are some of the MOST *INSUFFERABLY* INSINCERE songs ever written, especially when you take off the blinders of nostalgia and compare them with the songs in the other films. The "sentiments" expressed in the songs are PHONEY BALONEY *BULLSHIT*!!!!

For instance, one of the songs goes on and on about the power of "colour" - which is UNFORGIVABLY HYPOCRITICAL when you consider that ALL the human characters/children in this story are WHITE. Seriously???? You're going to have a song about HOW SPECIAL AND WONDROUS *COLOUR* is and yet you don't even have a SINGLE child/character of colour?? This would be possible to overlook if they didn't have the DAMNED COLOUR SONG. I guess they were only interested in merchandising the toys to white children......and the only "colour" they cared about are FANTASY COLOURS, not actual skin colours and hues that make up the beautiful diversity of human beings. They could have made such a powerful statement with the colour song if they featured children of colour in the story, but no no no no no........that would require them to actually *CARE* (pun intended), which they DO *NOT*. The songwriters and creators were simply SPOUTING *TRIPE* in a disgustingly cynical attempt to give the (white) targeted children demographic and their parents whatever would PULL THE WOOL OVER THEIR EYES. Apparently it worked, given how many dolts here still praise the film well into adulthood. They have basically "sold their souls to Dark Heart" - there, I said it, for everyone who militantly and vociferously declares that they love this film so much.

It is also UNFORGIVABLE that the creators, starting with write Peter Sauder, would *COMPLETELY IGNORE* AND DISREGARD the entire first film when concocting this garbage story. Seriously?? What does that say about their OWN SELF-RESPECT, to eradicate THEIR *OWN WORK* with a single stroke of Peter Sauder's pen? The toy manufacturers decide they want to release a "cub" line of the Care Bears and their cousins, so just like that they are willing to ERADICATE the entire first film's story and continuity - even though the first film was made JUST A YEAR AGO!!!! You cannot reboot a whole franchise one year after you yourself created the original which did *JAW-DROPPINGLY WELL* at the Box Office. The First Care Bears movie was THE MOST SUCCESSFUL NON-DISNEY ANIMATED FEATURE FILM *EVER MADE* at the time - so much so that EVEN DISNEY could not believe their eyes - and yet, the deplorably greedy toy manufacturers together with American Greetings and Nelvana decide that they are going to SPIT ON THEIR OWN *MONUMENTAL SUCCESS* from the previous year, and revise the origins of the Care Bears and their Cousins in a PATHETICALLY NONSENSICAL way. That's right, this "rebooted" origin story does NOT EVEN MAKE ANY SENSE, which shows you how cynical the writer and the creative team were - they were just going through the motions and churning out some CRAP in order to placate American Greetings and Kenner the toy company.

I don't expect Peter Sauder to have read Aristotle, but the CONCEPT OF TIME in this "story" is BEYOND LOONY TOONS LEVEL. True Heart and Noble Heart go chasing the 'shadow' of Dark Heart around the world for.................how long exactly, for starters???? Months? YEARS? They make such a big plot point about moving the cubs to the allegedly "much safer" Care-a-Lot and the Forest of Feelings from the Kingdom of Caring, to protect them from Dark Heart, but Dark Heart FINDS THEM in Care-a-Lot WITH *ZERO EFFORT*. The children down on earth remain the EXACT SAME AGE despite at least a couple of years spanning between the beginning of the film and the end - during which time the Care Bear and Cousin Cubs have reached full maturity up above - which makes THE LITTLE BOY in particular seem like he's *STUNTED*. And really, True Heart and Noble Heart who are supposed to be the older, wiser guardians of all the Care Bears are portrayed as *BUMBLING IDIOTS* to have not realized that they were being sent on a wild goose chase by Dark Heart for...........again, GOODNESS KNOWS HOW LONG - we are talking AT LEAST months upon months on end, if not years. Apparently the writer thought that the viewers would be JUST AS IDIOTIC not to notice the discrepancies and glaring, gaping holes in the story.

And don't even get me STARTED on the SICKENINGLY CREEPY *SEXUAL SUBTEXT DYNAMIC* between Chrissy and Dark Heart!!! These are supposed to be pre-pubescent children - well, one is actually a FRICKING EVIL DEMON *PRETENDING* to be a young boy - and they keep shoving this DISGUSTING ROMANTIC/SEXUAL TENSION between them throughout the story. It reaches a PARTICULARLY HEINOUS crescendo as the Demon "redeems himself", and then we finally see him SHIRTLESS with Chrissy in the lake......after which they hold hands together in their very last scene. YUCCCCCCCCKKKKKK. How any sane parent could allow their children to watch this and be okay with it speaks to the DEPRAVITY AND MORAL BANKRUPTCY of those so-called parents. So much for "caring" - apparently you care NOTHING for your children's moral well-being to allow them to be SUBLIMINALLY *SEXUALIZED* in this manner, looooooong before they have even hit puberty.

I could go on and on, but as other viewers have already touched on the other horrors to be found in this mockery of a film - including the INFAMOUS "Peter Pan/Tinkerbell" rip-off which is handled *SO OBNOXIOUSLY* that you can hear the voice actor's cynicism during the calls for caring - I will conclude by urging everyone reading this to SPEND THEIR TIME MORE PRODUCTIVELY than watching this. Last but not least, the voice acting itself is *ABYSMAL* here, whereas the voice acting in the first film was *ABSOLUTELY TOP NOTCH*. The same voice actors who did such a great job with Nicholas in the first film sounds *RIDICULOUS* as Dark Heart here - coming across as a RANK AMATEUR particularly in his attempts to sound "evil".........it sounds *EXCRUCIATINGLY EMBARRASSING*, to the point where it feels like you would be better off going to see a Kindergarten Play!!!!!!! Even the voice actor who brought Brave Heart to such GLORIOUS LIFE in the first film and in subsequent incarnations of the franchise sounds like he is *PHONING IT IN* cynically here, and I really can't blame him given the BLATANT *COMMERCIALISM* that pervades this entire "project".

I firmly believe that it was THIS ATROCIOUS FILM that signaled the downward spiral of the Care Bears franchise, which could have otherwise reigned supreme well into the 1990s, given what a ROARING SUCCESS the first 1985 film was. But nope........the powers that be GAVE INTO THEIR *GREED* and their MOST *BASE INSTINCTS* in order to create a "requel" (which is basically a reboot and a prequel combined), thinking that they could cash in DOUBLE, but in fact, this film barely made ONE THIRD of the profits made by the first film, so the joke was on them!!!!!!! It is pathetic and tragic that so many people continue to praise and defend the film all these years later, JUST TO CLING ONTO some semblance of their childhood - but that is a *FALSE AND UTTERLY DANGEROUS* FORM OF NOSTALGIA which should have no place in the mind of a sensible, smart and morally sound adult.

The Care Bears Adventure in Wonderland (1987)

ONE OF THE MOST UNDERRATED animated films - DISNEY COPIED from this when they made 'Aladdin'!!!

[9/10 · 10 October 2021]

First of all, before I talk about DISNEY'S ABOMINABLE COPYING from this film, I have to reassure everyone that this film is 10000% better than the 2nd Care Bears film ("New Generation") which was so lamely put together that, apart from some striking animation, took the world of the Care Bears in such a bad direction that it precipitated the decline of the franchise. In stark contrast, THIS film - the 3rd one - breathes such *MARVELLOUS AND REFRESHING NEW LIFE* into the Care Bear Universe. Yes, it is only part-Care Bear movie, while the other half of the film is concerned with an updated take on Lewis Carroll's Alice/Wonderland saga, but what sets this film apart from other such crossovers is that it's A BRAND NEW ADVENTURE - it's not "the Care Bears acting out Alice in Wonderland" but rather the Care Bears finding themselves IN a FRESH VERSION OF WONDERLAND, helping the protagonist of the film (a modern day Alice) to overcome her insecurities and appreciate both herself and the life she already had.

And now, before I go into THE VIRTUES OF THE FILM ITSELF, I have to talk about the elements that DISNEY RIPPED OFF from it, without being held accountable!!!! I will never understand how the critics and audiences in the late 1980s became SO CURMUDGEONLY AND CYNICAL AND JADED as to completely dismiss and ignore the film, when it was obviously SO ARTISTICALLY MERITORIOUS as to induce Disney to steal the concepts for the Evil Wizard here and the Mad Hatter........which they would retool and reuse in their 1992 version of ALADDIN. Yes, that is correct. Only the most blind Disney loyalist would pretend like JAFAR is not a *TOTAL RIP-OFF* of the Evil Wizard here IN EVERY WAY - the character design/physical appearance, the VOICE/vocal acting, the mannerisms, and even the PLOT of an Evil Vizier who PRETENDS to be in support of the established monarchy while secretly plotting to take the crown himself. Please keep in mind that there was no such character in the original 'Aladdin' story, where the villain was NOT a part of the Princess's Court, nor trying to become King - all of that was blatantly STOLEN from THE CARE BEAR ADVENTURE IN WONDERLAND when Disney made 'Aladdin'........right down to the climactic part of the story where Jafar banishes Aladdin to THE HILLS OF A FROZEN, ARCTIC WASTELAND, which is *EXACTLY* where the Evil Wizard in *THIS* film sends ALICE!!!!! You simply cannot miss all the parallels.

Remember, THIS MOVIE came out 5 years before Disney's Aladdin, and apparently Disney decided that they could get away with stealing from it, simply because it didn't do well at the box office and didn't take off. Nelvana believed that there were simply too many Care Bear movies/sequels being released in rapid-fire succession, and that this is what led to the film under-performing so woefully at the box office, and they may be correct, but Disney decided to EXPLOIT this to their advantage. Seriously, watch this film and try to mentally substitute Jafar for the Wizard here - or better yet, the next time you watch Disney's Aladdin, substitute the EVIL WIZARD here for Jafar, and you will see what a BLATANT RIPOFF Disney pulled off - starting from the physicality and vocal performances, right down to the details of the villains' plots like I said.

But that is not all that Disney stole from THE CARE BEAR ADVENTURE IN WONDERLAND.........they also basically LIFTED THE CONCEPT FOR *THE MAD HATTER* here and repurposed it for THE GENIE in Disney's Aladdin. The Mad Hatter here keeps changing not only his physical appearance, but also his PERSONALITY and his VOICE to match whatever hat he wears - resulting in a LONG SERIES OF *HILARIOUS IMPERSONATIONS*.........which was THE EXACT SAME GIMMICK they used for the Genie in Disney's Aladdin, with the only obvious difference being that the Genie didn't wear different hats. But the endless "character impressions" and different voices and personas that the Genie keeps adopting for comedic effect is WHAT NELVANA FIRST DID HERE WITH THE MAD HATTER CHARACTER!!!!!

Shame on you, Disney. You deserve to have a fiery hole burn through your Burbank studios, and take all your Aladdin animators and executives straight down to Hades for profiting off the beautiful ruins of Nelvana's Care Bear franchise - because let's face it........Disney's Aladdin would NOT have been a hit AT ALL if they had not used Nelvana's Evil Wizard and Mad Hatter concepts for their own JAFAR and GENIE, which are the two characters that got the whole world's attention!! In fact, knowing how unscrupulous Disney is, I wouldn't be surprised if they used their influence and clout to deliberately SABOTAGE the success of 'The Care Bear Adventure in Wonderland' - which may be one of the main reasons it hasn't been released on DVD here in America - because astute fans will see how they STOLE FROM IT.

For the record, the animation here is RIGHT ON PAR with Disney's "Alice in Wonderland" and similar features - it is so lifelike and vivid and colourful and vibrant and evocative and fantastic. What is MOST ADMIRABLE about the animation is how every single 'location' in the story is rendered FLAWLESSLY - from the Cloud Kingdom of the Care Bears through all the locations on Planet Earth that they visit (not just Alice's neighbourhood, but also the dozens of other places they go to during "Has Anybody Seen This Girl?") all the way to both the PSYCHEDELIC, ZANY parts of Wonderland and the BEAUTIFUL, ENCHANTING, DAINTY aspects of the Queen of Heart's Palace Quarters (not to mention the top of Goodbye Mountain, which offers the perfect "oasis reward" for the person who climbs those mercilessly treacherous slopes - in this case, Alice).

The fact that Alice overcomes both INTERNAL/PSYCHOLOGICAL *AND* EXTERNAL/PHYSICAL OBSTACLES here makes her one of the greatest heroines in any animated film. Seriously, not only does she overcome her personal hang-ups, but she actually climbs Goodbye Mountain - the kind of thing which traditionally only a male hero would do!!!!! It might seem like a bit much for some, but the whole purpose of the story is to stretch a person to their limits and see how they can come off with flying colours, upon discovering strengths and capabilities they never knew they had, because they weren't put in those situations to prove themselves before. And for anyone who criticizes the Wizard's methods here.......it's actually TOTALLY IN KEEPING with the whole *POINT* of Alice's story arc that he doesn't just use magic against her or anything like that, but rather, he FIRST TRIES TO *UTTERLY UNDERMINE AND DESTROY* whatever little self-confidence he has to begin with (in other words, attacking her from the INSIDE).......before he sends her to the perfidious and perilous slopes of Goodbye Mountain in the hopes of destroying her PHYSICALLY, after Alice comes to believe in herself psychologically and morally.

There is an *IDIOT* on YouTube called Nostalgia Critic who TOTALLY MISSED THE WHOLE POINT, and thus criticized the Evil Wizard's methods here......this same person also wanted to know how Alice was able to climb down the Mountain so easily again, with a cup of water in her hand. This is an enchanted kingdom, and the way it should be understood is that once the individual has PASSED THE TEST and successfully made their way to the top and obtained the water from the well, they would be able to descend the mountain down a much easier slope which wouldn't be revealed or accessible UNTIL THEN. Seriously, these idiot critics need to USE THEIR IMAGINATION - but apparently they don't have one, and neither did the critics who ravaged this film back in the late 1990s.......and CERTAINLY Disney had no imagination, which is why they RIPPED THIS FILM OFF to make their version of 'Aladdin' successful.

This whole feature is a testament to the power of the imagination - which it will definitely fortify in any child's mind. The SCORE is ABSOLUTELY *BRILLIANT* - and the songs are *INFINITELY BETTER* than the atrocious songs in the 2nd Care Bear movie, which would make even Barney puke!!!!!! They are more whimsical than the songs in the first Care Bear movie, but they are PERFECT for this story. Hearing them again as an adult was nothing short of *EXHILARATING*, and they still hold up ASTOUNDINGLY even in 2021..........whereas the horrendous score of the 2nd Care Bears movie ("New Generation") is DISGUSTINGLY DATED. Don't get me wrong, the score here is still *BRIMMING WITH NOSTALGIA*, but it also has an IRREFUTABLY *TIMELESS* QUALITY which the 2nd Care Bear movie's songs could not even BEGIN to approach.

The Mad Hatter's song might strike the adult viewer as superfluous and not really advancing the plot on the one hand, but it is very much in keeping with the THEME OF *IMAGINATION* I mentioned - plus, it is the comedic manifestation of the advice given to Alice by the Princess at the end of the movie: "You're as special as you THINK you are!" (i.e: using one's HEAD/MIND). And after all, a Crown itself is a hat/head-piece when you think about it....... THE ULTIMATE HAT even, one might say......so the Mad Hatter serves as a zany, comic relief embodiment of THE QUEST FOR THE CROWN which is what the film's plot is all about - the Evil Wizard wants it and craves it desperately, and Alice doesn't think she could ever be worthy of it, but the Queen of Hearts and the Care Bears are determined to convince her and show her that she IS in fact worthy of wearing "the ultimate hat".

Some have criticized the denouement of the story, claiming it's a cop-out that the Princess herself makes the flowers bloom rather than Alice, but the Princess had to do SOMETHING to "earn the Crown", seeing as how it was ALICE that had done all the HEAVY LIFTING by climbing Goodbye Mountain for crying out loud!! Making the flowers bloom was just the icing on the cake.......the finishing touches.......but Alice had ALREADY PROVEN THAT SHE COULD *BAKE THE CAKE ITSELF*. ;)

The Care Bears Movie (1985)

VASTLY SUPERIOR to the 2nd film - this one is QUINTESSENTIAL!

[7/10 · 10 October 2021]

I just re-watched this one and the 2nd film ("New Generation") back to back, and although I used to have positive memories of the 2nd film too, I can see now that there is really no comparison - THIS film, the original one, is vastly superior in virtually every conceivable way!!!!! They really seemed to *CARE* (pun unintended) about creating a COMPREHENSIVE and all-encompassing kind of story here, that could represent the franchise in a *HIGHLY MEMORABLE AND MEANINGFUL MANNER*, whereas the 2nd film seemed to be hastily put together just to capitalize on the RESOUNDING SUCCESS of this feature!

Yes, obviously it has its very apparent flaws, but even at the age of 34, I am able to overlook the flaws in light of the SURPRISING NUMBER OF *STRENGTHS* herein. The Animation sequences of Care-a-Lot, the Forest of Feelings, the Cloud Kingdom River, the Evil Spirit/Book and even the Circus/Amusement Park are TRULY MAGICAL - totally transporting you to the world of the story, making it very easy to suspend your disbelief, and evoking both the GOOD and the EVIL "atmospheres/mise-en-scenes" here *MOST VIVIDLY*. :) Of course, the scene where the children at the magic show are fighting each other was not depicted in a credible manner, probably because they didn't want to depict actual violence, but one definitely gets the sense of what's at stake there, for the story to continue......

It really does NOT seem like all the Care Bears and their Cousins are thrown in here JUST TO SELL ALL THE TOYS, as some have asserted - rather, I think all these characters have been *SEAMLESSLY, NATURALLY AND EFFORTLESSLY* WOVEN INTO THE VERY FABRIC OF THE NARRATIVE. I definitely cannot say the same at all about the 2nd film - quite the opposite, to say the least, which is shocking because I think they both had the same writer!!!!!! This is definitely the quintessential Care Bear movie, and so it is very fittingly called just that - THE CARE BEARS MOVIE - nothing boring or unoriginal about the title, when you consider how admirably and cohesively it encapsulates both the world and the individual characters of the Care Bears (and their cousins).

The Villain here is also LEGITIMATELY SCARY AND OMINOUS from start to finish - nothing hokey about her depiction, unlike the ridiculous "Dark Heart" from the 2nd film who was about as hokey and lame and cartoony as one could get. The voice actress really transcends the genre here with her vocal performance, and this does not surprise me given her Shakespearean background. You are really left with the sense that this is an Evil Spirit that could be out there somewhere, especially if you are a spiritual or religious person. There were comparisons made between her and the Wicked Queen and Magic Mirror in Disney's 'Snow White', and I have to say, this villain is FAR SCARIER. Right from the word go, the viewer literally fears for the young magician Nicholas's soul, because they REALLY DO NOT HOLD BACK on what a BONA FIDE *THREAT* HER PRESENCE is. The animation, the voice acting, and the superb score all come together to accentuate this - to the point where it feels like a REAL LIVE-ACTION MOVIE, and not "just a cartoon" AT ALL!

The songs here are also EXCEEDINGLY SUPERIOR to the cringey, sickening tripe we get in the 2nd film!!!!! They do not talk down to children, nor do they try to FORCE-FEED the messages with the horrendous faux-fervour of the 2nd film's songs. Carole King's "Care-a-lot" perfectly straddles sensitivity to the target children demographic along with a mature sensibility that adults can tune into just as easily!! And all the FUN Care Bear/Care Bear Cousins songs also have a *GENUINENESS* that seems to flow VERY ORGANICALLY from the story itself, which cannot be said at all for the songs in the 2nd film.

The one song I found TOO ON THE NOSE was John Sebastian's "Nobody Cares Like a Bear", although it seems like he was aiming for a Vintage Disney 'Jungle Book' kind of vibe there - which I was not quite a fan of, but I can see why it was done that way, and it's certainly very valid in its own right. In fact, the film definitely evokes Disney's 'Pinocchio' as well during the Nicholas/Fettucine/Circus storyline scenes, and I think THAT nod to Vintage Disney was BRILLIANTLY HANDLED - bringing that sensibility to the 1980s REALLY ARTFULLY, and not at all in a heavy-handed manner.

The contrast between the "humdrum" world of most human beings, and the UTTERLY ENCHANTING world up in the heavens with the Care Bears and their Cousins was also masterfully depicted here. Only the most miserable cynic in the world would keep dissing a film like this - someone who has been left bereft of all their innocence AND their imagination (if they ever had any). I really do not find this feature to be CLOYING in any way, although again unfortunately the 2nd film would take the word "cloying" to disgustingly perverted proportions.

So if you are new to the vintage Care Bear franchise, watch THIS film *WITHOUT FAIL* - I can confidently recommend it because the pluses outweigh the minuses - and SKIP the 2nd film ("New Generation"). The only other film in the franchise that matches or even exceeds this one is THE CARE BEAR ADVENTURE IN WONDERLAND - which is brilliant and an all-time favourite of mine, but is ultimately not the quintessential Care Bear movie because it's as much about Wonderland and Alice (the world of Lewis Carroll), whereas THIS film is all about THE CARE BEARS and their mission on EARTH. :)

Jem (1985–1988)

Truly Outrageous (in the best way) - 7.5 stars

[8/10 · 25 February 2020]

First off, the animation itself. Shows like 'Batman the Animated Series' get so much praise, but even though this series belongs to a completely different genre, it far surpasses the animation of the Bruce Timm shows that would go on to be glorified in a totally undue manner. Let's look at something fundamental - the characters' CLOTHES/ATTIRE. While everyone always wore more or less THE EXACT SAME CLOTHES in 'Batman: TAS', from episode to episode, the characters on JEM can boast an *INFINITE VARIETY* when it comes to their wardrobe and accessories, making them seem like *ULTRA REAL STARS IN THE POP/ROCK MUSIC WORLD*. Billionaire Bruce Wayne had only one suit, by contrast, in Bruce Timm's universe. Haha. This is an especially astounding feat on JEM, considering the huge number of characters in each episode - 4 or 5 Holograms, 3 or 4 Misfits, plus the supporting cast. Even the hairstyles change beautifully over the course of the series, which results in the viewer feeling like they are watching animated versions of REAL PEOPLE, versus 'stock animated characters' which is what we saw 95% in the over-hyped 'Batman: TAS'. The only reason I keep referring to 'Batman' is because that is upheld as the pinnacle of animation in the 20th century........not so!!!! We haven't even started to talk about the visual artistry of the music videos in JEM - and there were 3 music videos in each episode.

The fact that the script-writers and the song-writers were able to fit 3 music videos into each episode, while also delving into the emotionally poignant story arcs of their fully developed characters over the course of each episode, is something that goes way above and beyond the scope of a series that was ultimately meant to advertise dolls. Even by the end of the first season, 26 episodes in, you feel like you know all the characters intimately from your own life. Jem and the Holograms feel like your sisters and friends, while the Misfits feel like your clinically crazy cousins, the black sheep of the family.

The trick to watching this series is to be aware of the fact that Science Fiction, Soap Opera and Action all co-exist here. People are so used to watching each of the above genres in isolation that some grown-up viewers seem to lose it when they watch how the writers combine all those genres into a single show. The result is that both girls and boys can enjoy the series equally - and for that matter, grown-ups and children can enjoy the series equally as well. The very unique central love triangle between Rio, Jerrica and her alter-ego Jem may frustrate adult viewers because the characters come across as emotionally/psychologically immature at times - but that is part of what makes these characters so human at the end of the day (they are all deeply flawed), and of course, it provides a child-friendly soap opera experience for the young viewers (a.k.a the show's target audience at the time). Some Youtubers seem to be under the misapprehension that this was meant for 30-somethings living in the 21st century - NOT THE CASE.

The character Rio gets a lot of unnecessary flack, when in fact he only ever shows interest in 2 different 'versions' of the SAME PERSON - whereas Jem/Jerrica is actually the more morally ambiguous character, who occasionally indulges other flirtatious men, and ultimately falls for Riot/Rory herself. Children can enjoy all this on a more surface level, but grown-ups can appreciate the psychological complexity of the show's title character - as Jerrica, she is "dependable" as Rio once put it, but as Jem, she is able to explore her subconscious fantasies and desires - including her attraction towards other men besides Rio, such as Riot. Jem is literally her 'alter ego' (other self), and the transformation is as psychological (not to mention sexual) as it is physical. Much more complex and nuanced than Bruce Wayne's transformation into Batman, Clark Kent's transformation into Superman, or Adora's transformation into She-Ra etc etc.

I love how certain characters like Aja (one of the Holograms) and Clash (the Misftis' groupie) are explored much more fully in Season 2, with Aja being given a love interest, and Clash's vulnerabilities being exposed in the most unabashed manner. Not to mention the supporting character Danse, who had no less than 3 episodes devoted to her over the course of Season 2 - reminding the viewers that there is a whole world out there besides the one occupied by the main characters. They did kind of drop the ball on Raya (the 5th Hologram) - who was introduced in the most compelling manner at the beginning of Season 2, but then they failed to really tap into all the facets of the character as the series proceeded. Overall, she was the kindest and most caring of the Holograms, however, so her presence was always very comforting, even if she was tragically under-used following her 2-parter introduction. The new Misfit, Jetta, by contrast had a lovely story arc in Season 2 - at a time when story arcs weren't even a thing - as we follow her being exposed as a liar (even by Misfit standards, which is saying a LOT) by the end of the 2nd season.

By the 3rd and final season, it was unfortunate perhaps that we no longer saw characters like Shana's boyfriend Anthony Julian - I realize the show was wrapping up, and they wanted to focus on The Stingers (the newest rock group), but it would have been fun to see Anthony go head to head with Riot at some point, having seen him stand up to Eric Raymond in Season 1. It is not an easy feat to introduce a whole new group into an enormously successfully, dearly beloved cartoon after 52 episodes of only the Holograms and the Misfits - but the Stingers were woven in quite deftly into the world of the show, so that they felt like a breath of fresh air, rather than a jarring imposition. The way Christy Marx handled the love quadrangle between Jerrica, Rio, Jem and Riot was very CLUNKY at the beginning of Season 3, I must admit - it's almost as if she suddenly forgot about Jerrica at one point, and made it Rio/Jem/Riot - although fortunately a different writer had a far better handle on the quadrangle situation in the Greece episode. This is actually one of the show's strengths. Certain fans used to worship Christy Marx as the be all and end all of Jem, since she developed the characters and the premise of the series, but she was just as fallible as Jem/Jerrica herself, and while some of the other writers left something to be desired, there were also plenty of writers who BUILT ON Marx's show bible and actually CLARIFIED things that "creator" Christy Marx herself neglected to.

JEM the series was a team effort if ever there was one - and the dictionary definition of the word 'syngery'. All the music and singing was done in New York, with little to no interaction with the writers and voice actors in Los Angeles, but the end product was absolutely seamless. In fact, you can't even tell that the speaking and singing voices of Jem, and of Pizzazz, respectively, are totally different women. If only Audrey Hepburn had such luck when Marni Nixon dubbed her in 'My Fair Lady' - Hahahahahaha - maybe she could have been at least nominated for Best Actress that year, but I digress. All this to say that the show's production team was really on the ball, and strove to create something truly outrageous and truly unforgettable.

As long as you don't watch this from a 21st century lens, and are able to put yourself into the mindframe of the 1980s - all the while realizing that is ESCAPISM, rather than a documentary - you will enjoy the show tremendously, and begin to appreciate even the flaws and faults as part of the cartoon's crazy, 'outrageous' charm.