Herbie Rides Again (1974)

 

The inevitable sequel to the highly successful 1968 Disney original (now a classic) 'The Love Bug' which revolved around an apparent sentient 1963 Volkswagen Beetle.

The story follows on from the original movie with Herbie now residing with a little old lady in the same old 1892 firehouse in San Francisco. Said little old lady, Mrs Steinmetz (Helen Hayes), is the aunt of Tennessee Steinmetz (Buddy Hackett) in the original movie. Tennessee is said to be back in Tibet with his teacher, whilst we are told that Jim Douglas (Dean Jones) has since moved to Europe to continue racing; presumably the idea that led to the third movie. 

In this cute adventure Mrs Steinmetz's firehouse comes under threat from construction/demolition tycoon Alonzo B. Hawk (Keenan Wynn) who wants to build a huge skyscraper on the very land where Mrs Steinmetz's old firehouse still sits. Failing to get the land Hawk sends his kind-hearted nephew Willoughby (Ken Berry) to try and get Steinmetz out. Unfortunately for Hawk, over time, Willoughby sees things from Mrs Steinmetz's point of view and also starts to fall in love with local neighbour Nicole (Stefanie Powers). All together, along with Herbie, they must defend the firehouse from the potential pending doom of Hawk's bulldozers.

I think the main thing to hit you with this sequel is the fact that it's taken a much more kiddie-friendly approach in terms of hijinks. Of course the original movie was very silly in places, but this movie goes one step further and really gets a bit goofy. Straight away I'm now unsure about this particular 'universe' as it were because now there are lots of sentient vehicles (and other things) everywhere. San Francisco is full of sentient Volkswagen Beetles apparently, and they can communicate with each other. We also discover there are sentient trams and jukeboxes too! I guess these various sentient beings hide themselves away from the majority as no one seems to know about them other than the odd lucky (excentric) person.

As said the goofiness is turned up a notch this time. Herbie is seen chasing birds on the beach like a child (I guess Herbie is supposed to have the mind of a child?). He is seen surfing in the Pacific whilst also getting tailed by a shark (sharks eat cars?). Herbie can fit in external lifts for window cleaners, he can also fit along the ledges of tall buildings. Herbie is able to drive through a swanky restaurant causing no hassle at all. In a dream sequence we see dancing Herbie's in Native American attire (indeed). We also see multiple Herbie's with gaping monster maws leaping over fences (instead of sheep). We see tiny flying Herbie's attacking a giant Hawk atop the Empire State Building in a homage to 'King Kong' (pretty cool little idea). And finally, in probably one of the stupidest sequences, Herbie drives up the metal cables of the Golden Gate Bridge (with Hawk's lawyer goons in tow on foot!), and then reverses back down the same way! Obviously I think we can all agree these metal cables probably aren't the right width to allow this (mental note, silly kids flick).

Along with these moments of utter madness we unfortunately also see some pretty ropey special effects. Now don't get me wrong, back in the day these were probably pretty sweet looking. Heck I remember loving these Herbie flicks as a kid and loved the effects. So I'm sure kids these days won't mind (Marvel movie CGI aside). But yeah the effects have dated badly in places, as is to be expected. Of course there is a tonne of bluescreen and rear projection which is obvious. Although repeat rear projection shots inside Herbie with characters driving are all part and parcel of the movie and the charm. On the other hand there are some nice little moments like the model work inside a warehouse. There are also those glorious technicolour-looking matte paintings that many old live-action Disney movies had (probably the same artist). These shots always look good and kinda cozy at the same time. The shots (both exterior and interior) of the old firehouse are lovely.

Alas it has to be said that Herbie feels more like a side character in his own movie this time. Yes of course there's plenty of Herbie action but he's still relegated to the background somewhat as Keenan Wynn stole the show as Alonzo Hawk. This guy is like a live-action version of Yosemite Sam and just as enjoyable. At the same time the love story between Willoughby and Nicole, plus the subplot of Mrs Steinmetz meeting a random old drunk guy who resembles her dead husband, kinda puts Herbie in the background really. 

Have no fear as the grand finale is a full frontal attack of Herbie's with Volkswagens aplenty showing up to fight back against Hawk's demolition team. Definitely a cute sequence for sure seeing all these multicoloured Beetles, including a junkyard Beetle that feels more like an undead Herbie, night of the living Herbie. The whole thing is of course all rather stupid because the Beetles don't actually do anything. Hawk fears the Beetles (a phobia almost) and runs off but he didn't need to get off his bulldozer because he was 100% safe. At the same time all Hawk's men drive off when they see the Beetles, why? They're all in huge construction vehicles, what are a few VW Beetles gonna do?

In the end Hawk gets arrested because he's a nasty grumpy villain, oh and the police think he's a wack job. Nicole and Willoughby get married and Mrs Steinmetz and the old drunk guy presumably live happily ever after in the old firehouse with the sentient tram and jukebox. Although, what happens when Hawk gets back from the cop shop? Has he reformed? Will he continue his quest for the land the old firehouse sits on? We shall never know. That being said this movie came along after Walt Disney's death in 1966 but despite that you can still feel his creative input from the original and those snug agreeable classic Disney vibes. This will easily please kids (presumably) and it still pleased me after all these years. Clearly not as good as the original (that had a more exciting plot and cast) but it's still a solid and worthy sequel, just about.

6.5/10

Angels in the Outfield (1994)

 

There was a period in time when the mighty Disney churned out lots of small-fry family sports movies because they were having much success with them. 'The Mighty Ducks', Air Bud', 'Cool Runnings' 'Little Big League' etc...This spell of sports flicks would continue into the 00's but with more grown-up features based on actual events and people.

This sports flick is a remake of a 1951 movie of the same name but with some changes, the most notable being the baseball team in question is now the LA Angels (which didn't exist back in 51 but I'm sure they would have been used had they existed) instead of the Pittsburgh Pirates. Plus the Pirates coach is a foul-mouthed bully who abuses his players. In this Disney version the movie centres around a young foster boy and his best friend who (after his deadbeat father tells him his family will next be back together when the Angels win the pennant) ask angels to help their favourite team win. As if by magic angels actually turn up and start to help the team. This in turn leads to the short-tempered Angels coach (Danny Glover) to somewhat take advantage of the kids thinking them to be lucky mascots.

As you might expect this movie has a pretty predictable game plan which you could literally tick boxes to as it plays. Coach Knox is having a hard time as his team flounders every week and slide down the division. The two main kids in question turn up, Roger (played by a very young Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and J.P., and Roger starts seeing angels helping the team here and there which leads to Knox wanting to keep him around despite his scepticism. Eventually Knox gets on board with the angels theory (no one can see them but Roger) and gradually starts to believe, as does the rest of the team. The team start to really pick up with a stream of wins leading them to the top of their division. The finale is of course the big championship game but this time the angels cannot help and the team must do it themselves. Do they have the self-belief? (of course they do!).

The angels themselves are of course all CGI but with real actors faces stuck on. As you can imagine these early 90's effects are pretty ropey these days, heck they were ropey back in the 90's. The design for the Godly helpers of course being rather whimsical, cliche, and overall very predictable (what do you expect?). They all wear long white gowns, glow all over in a soothing heavenly white and gold colour scheme, have big feathery wings, and a golden crown of light surrounds their heads to represent halos. Christopher Lloyd as the main (or head) angel is the perfect choice here as I think everyone likes this guy and his quirky fun mannerisms.

The Angels team are again you're predictable bunch, a motley crew of weirdos and wannabes (makes you wonder how they made it to the professional level). Think 'Major League' but for kids. You got the big fat guy who eats all the time. The odd guy who just behaves oddly (played by Neal McDonough). The skinny quiet guy (played by Adrien Brody). The mouthy Latino guy. The good-looking blonde guy (played by Matthew McConaughey). And you have the older has-been guy plagued with injury (played by Tony Danza). This is rounded out with Taylor Negron as the team assistant and Jay O. Sanders as the Angels sportscaster and easily the best part of the movie. Again think of Harry Doyle (played by Bob Ucker) in 'Major League' but a more grumpy version. But how about that cast folks! You don't get lineups like that anymore no Sir.

Despite the entire feature being one massive predictable cliche I can't deny it still works on many levels (seeing as some players had their own tiny subplots). The story of the two young foster boys is well-worked and does hit you in the feels from time to time. The potential of Roger and J.P. getting split up towards the end is definitely a brief sad moment, brief being the key word because you know damn well they won't get split up. Coach Knox slowly going from grumpy violent guy to children-loving father is a nice story arc. Easily the saddest little subplot was the moment we find out has-been player Mel Clarke (Danza) is going to die due to a lifetime of heavy smoking. This actually made me teary-eyed because it was unexpected and quite impactful. It was also really nice to see Knox give him the chance to play one last time and contribute to the team's victory (even though it was down to a tip from Roger seeing angels).

The team winning was obvious from the start yet had me divided simply because they essentially cheated to win, they got divine help from above! How can anyone compete with that? Yeah I know they still had to win the final game on their own but they shouldn't have been there in the first place really. What about the other teams that fought hard and got no help? This Angels team took the spot from another team that actually deserved to be there (I'm looking into this too much I know). And personally I think Ranch Wilder (the sportscaster) got a raw deal because he didn't actually do anything wrong.

Anyways this is Disney all over, but back in the days when Disney was actually still quite enjoyable and not just a franchise consuming political messaging machine. It's definitely a feel good movie you can sit down with at any time with anyone and just engage, relax, and smile. You don't even have to like sports or baseball to like this (although it probably helps a bit). The real location shooting makes everything look authentic and adds to the Americana experience. You do find yourself looking forward to seeing what the angels do in the games. And there is a nice sprinkle of emotion. The conclusion is inevitable and formulaic for sure but you just can't help but just like this. 

7/10

Haunted Mansion (2023)

 

The burning question I'm sure you're all asking, is this 2023 version of 'Haunted Mansion' better than the old 2003 Eddie Murphy vehicle 'The Haunted Mansion'? Well the original 2003 version was reasonable but something of a disappointment only being a loose adaptation of the iconic rides story (not concrete in itself), and of course merely a comedic vehicle for Murphy. 

This new reboot actually goes the whole hog this time and follows the, admittedly loose, Disney story for the ride. Obviously if you've never been to any Disney theme park and never gone inside any of the Haunted Mansion attractions then it won't really matter to you. Plus you won't pick up on many of the little easter eggs and visual touches dotted throughout the movie that hark back to the ride. A shame but what can you do.

As for the plot, well it's a very simple affair mostly because it dates back to the 60's when Walt and co came up with it. Just outside New Orleans sits Gracey Manor which has just been purchased by widow Gabbie (Rosario Dawson) and her son. She intends to turn it into a B&B but has discovered a ghost problem. Said ghost problem prevents them from leaving the mansion because the ghosts relentlessly haunt anyone who leaves until they return. Recent widower Ben (Lakeith Stanfield), an astrophysicist, is hired by Father Kent (Owen Wilson) to go to the mansion due to his invention of a camera that can essentially see ghosts (not overly important in the long run). 

Over time Bruce the historian and professor (Danny DeVito) and Harriet the psychic join the fray also trapped in the house due to the same 'curse'. With the help of a ghostly psychic trapped in a crystal ball (Jamie Lee Curtis), they must all unravel the spooky mystery of why they are trapped inside the mansion. Why are all the ghosts also trapped in the mansion, including an eerie malevolent ghost, and what is this malevolent ghost up to.

Character wise this new version offers more but falls down on the final product. The characters we get are all fine with adequate casting, although some more mature eccentric stars could have been used. The characters themselves are too conflicted and we the audience don't know where they are coming from, or they're just too corny. Widower Ben is generally solemn half the time because of his loss, which is understandable and drives his story but overall it's very cliche. Harriet the psychic appears to be a grifter at first, then she's the real deal but just no good, then outta nowhere she's actually really good. Father Kent is actually a solid character right from the start until we discover he's a fake and pretending, which was pretty disappointing really. Bruce the professor comes across as an obstruction to the cause at first, then sorta helping, but eventually being pretty useless and not needed. Gabbie is a widow...but that never seems to bother her, okay then I guess.

Visuals this version wins wins and wins again. The mansion is exactly as it should be, a lovely antebellum-style mansion with a French quarter New Orleans-style exterior complete with sprawling spooky tree-lined grounds and cemetery. The interiors are also exactly as you would expect with thick wood decorating everywhere, rows of ancient cobweb covered books, dimly lit long hallways, creepy busts, huge portraits etc...Everything is pretty much like the attraction with all the various famous ghosts present and correct. 

The movie actually holds the line between a soft ghostly tale for kids and something with a bit more bite for adults. This isn't a scary movie but its definitely quite creepy in places with lots of nice sinister and phantasmal scenery and sequences. All the CGI supernatural ghost effects look decent which was surprising. In fact, it all kinda got me thinking about how much it looked like a Ghostbusters movie in places and how this plot and movie would have made a pretty solid little Ghostbusters sequel (instead of that farm-based bore fest). The comedy was weak and pathetic so no comparisons there. Just try to ignore the horrendous amount of product placements scattered throughout. 

So in a shocking development that I didn't even see coming, yes I did actually enjoy this movie and yes it is actually better than the 2003 version. Obviously that's not a high bar to clear but nevertheless. Overall this movie is perfectly satisfying if you're into light ghost tales that won't give you a heart attack. I found myself engaged and enjoying the hijinks. At times it's quite dark, at times it's a bit Scooby-Doo-ish, at times it's corny, but overall it works fine.

6.5/10

Shazam! Fury of the Gods (2023)

 

So the original Shazam movie was quite a reasonable stand-alone flick, only one problem, I saw it ages ago and can't really remember that much about it. And here lies the first problem for this sequel, you kinda need to remember stuff from the first movie and you definitely need to have seen it (to a degree).

So straight away I had a problem. The wizard character (played by Djimon Hounsou) seemingly died in the original movie, well he's back now. Secondly, these two female characters (played Helen Mirren and Lucy Liu) appear outta nowhere and appear to be the new baddies for this picture. No idea who they were supposed to be, where they come from, what they want, why they kill innocent folks, why they want the staff thingy from the first movie etc...They're just there and they're based on characters from Greek Mythology (or at least named after them), because we haven't seen that before (ugh!).

 Firstly these new villains look, act, and sound boring. Both are massively unexciting and hugely derivative. Two girl boss villains? Oh gee! I mean seriously, this trope is getting way way outta hand. The only original aspect of these two is that they are mature women. I just felt completely lost for the first half of the movie! This was supposed to be a direct sequel but apart from the Shazam gang (Shazamily? Really?) none of it was familiar at all and the villains had no explanation other than...being Greek Gods or something? Also it is eventually explained that their realm (the Greek realm? Pfft!) was apparently destroyed by Humans? And now they want revenge, highly original concept I know. No real idea why this happened or whatever, I dunno maybe I missed it.

Yeah so the movie flicks back and forth between moments with the Shazam gang which are admittedly relatively amusing, to moments with these extremely boring Greek God villains who merely talk about their plans all the time. The Shazam gang literally have to research the villains cos they dunno who they are, much like me on Wiki whilst watching the movie. There's also a cliched love story between one of the Shazam gang and this young girl (Rachel Zegler) who, shock horror! Turns out to be the third evil girl boss villain simply stringing him along all the time because...actually I don't think there was any real reason for this deceit.

There are loads of fantasy elements to this movie that all involve classic Greek mythology because for some reason that's a thing in this Shazam sequel (and every other teenage fantasy flick). You've got the golden apple that seeds the Tree of Life. When said tree is planted in the Earth realm it spawns lots of monsters from Greek mythology for some reason, and they're all evil. There's a magical Harry Potter-esque sentient pen (don't ask me why), unicorns, dragons etc...The unicorns in question are originally evil but get tamed by a pack of Skittles, yes Skittles, those chewy hard shelled sweets.

Naturally this being a superhero comicbook flick there's lots of CGI. Yep, lots and lots and lots of really obvious and fake-looking CGI action (zzzzzzz). All the characters are literally indestructible so they spent all their time throwing themselves all over the place causing lots of massive damage. Yep, I just love watching invincible superhero characters punching, kicking, and hurling each other all over the gaff with zero repercussions, zero stakes, and all in glorious fake-looking CGI. How much do cinema tickets cost these days?

But the really funny part at the end is when Wonder Woman turns up outta the blue to virtually save the day when the others kinda failed. Jesus Christ! I mean, this begs the question, where was Wonder Woman this entire time?? She could have turned up earlier and stopped all the trouble quite easily, apparently. And this is where comicbook flicks fall down. Eventually, at some point, you have the problem of all these characters and their stories merging, so eventually they should all be in every story together. Because where else would they be when there is a massive threat? The fact Wonder Woman pops up in this cheesy-ass cameo totally ruins this already crap movie.

DC had a little gem on their hands with the first movie which was reasonably original, well made, well thought out, decent cast, and a reasonable villain. This sequel is totally the opposite of that, it feels like the powers that be had no idea how to move forward with it. Everyone is just repeating what they did the first time which works a bit but generally feels tired. Shazam is a teen in an adult's body, okay we got that, can you expand on that a bit without the same childish gags? There is more Shazam family here but again it all felt very repetitive with familiar beats, lowkey comedy, and the usual outcomes (no stakes!). As said the CGI is just plain poor and I don't know why. And I really hated the whole Greek mythology angle because it's been done SO many times. This felt more like a 'Percy Jackson' concept than anything else. The whole feature is the definition of a generic cookie-cutter release that we've all seen time and time again.

3/10