Miracle on 34th Street (1947) Review – Santa Claus Almost Destroys Society

Brass Monkey!

Miracle on 34th Street has such a sense of brevity and good humor that it is believable why it is a holiday classic, while also being extremely clever and layered in its messaging. This is all tied together with very solid performances. In the same way the film characters ask each other if Santa is or could be real, the actors never let into the absurdity of this, often taking it seriously. Doris Walker, played by Maureen O’Hara, tries to be pragmatic and open to all sides, while hard leaning to her view on child rearing that you should not lie by saying Santa is real. The film politely and confidently mocks her for whenever she insists on removing the sense of imagination kids have. Her and her daughter Susan, played by Natalie Wood to my surprise, in turn come off a little cold. Still, they aren’t treated as completely wrong.

John Payne as Fred Gailey acts not unlike a child and is rewarded for it. He has a strong sense of loyalty for Santa. Many characters in the movie talk about being honorable or moral, only to crumble when it’s more convenient for them to do something else. Fred is important as he is the one who doesn’t break to others. While no one in the movie is less than stellar, they simply do not compare to the big bundle of joy that is Edmund Gwenn as Kris Kringle. It isn’t explained why anyone believes he is Santa, but the inferred reason is that he is so positive and joyful that everyone can’t help but feel uplifted. He even resonates to the audience in how wholesome and unphased he is through various trials and tribulations. This effect is damaged by a brief section of the film, but he is always positive and constructive otherwise. He and others don’t forget to add some comedy, like when he analyzes psychologist Granville Sawyer or demonstrates to Doris his mental and physical health. Both are also necessary scenes to the plot, with the film avoiding elements that only serve to be filler.

There are two major themes at play. One is pushing to do the right thing vs. profit. There is an interesting symbiosis between the two. Everyone being initially too business minded is shown to hurt everyone, like when Macy’s intends to always pressure customers into buying their own products, even if they simply don’t have what they want. Kris’ desire to always do the right thing both benefits the company and people, though he went against the store’s rules in doing so. Once everyone knows and likes Kris to the point he’s part of the business, people start compromising their own values to protect him, instead of doing so to shut him down. Either option of doing the right thing or profit comes with risks.

While the picture clearly says what is right is to accept Kris, it is still in the best interest of Macy’s and the parents to make sure whoever is going to be interacting with their children is safe. Requiring such inspections, even when gratuitous, do serve to make sure it’s harder for nasty people to get through. Still, sometimes taking a chance or breaking the rules works, like when Doris needs a new Santa at the last minute, so asks Kris to play the part. Imagine if Kris was some drunkard that did something obscene on the float? Such rule breaking would not be looked on so positively, even when it at other times is celebrated.

The other theme is pragmatism vs. following what would be better off true. Just looking at Doris, she comes off as a bit vicious and cold in her business-minded world. If everyone did act like her, as they somewhat do in the court scenes, society would to a degree be more hostile and less enjoyable. Belief in Santa certainly does give children joy, though the movie sadly doesn’t comment on whether or not it’s a good thing for them to believe. Kris frees some people from their colder way of thinking by being so nice, but this is in a sense manipulation. No one wants to be a bad guy by shooting him down or they really accept him due to not wanting to accept someone so nice is really such an issue. Doris in turn struggles with thinking he could be threatening and delusional vs. how positive of an influence he is on her daughter and everybody else. It also is often difficult to be so astute as to be always doing the logical thing. Doris was letting her daughter hangout with Fred when he very well could have been bad. At the very least, he and Doris have conflict from disagreeing on what is best for Susan.

The film looks very cozy and Christmas-y, just determined to become a classic. Things like the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade become cinematic in how grand and busy it is, with Kris sitting atop one float like a God among men. While the movie never drops playing as a straight drama that happens to be about something ridiculous, there are a few opportunities for jokes. “But if you do, remember this: you can count on getting just two votes, your own and that district attorney’s out there.” “The District Attorney’s a Republican.” There’s also, “That baseball player sure looks like a giant to me.” “Sometimes people grow very large, but that’s abnormal.” “I’ll bet your mother told you that, too.” Finally, “Sometimes I wish I married a butcher or a plumber.” “My dear, if I lose this hearing, you may very well get your wish.”

SPOILERS

It is bizarre Santa would get so angry at Sawyer and even assault him. It does betray much of what the story is going for. Seeing as Sawyer was so accusatory to Kris, what if he felt so offended by Kris that he injured himself and claimed Kris did it? Or he witnessed Kris do something with his cane that was perfectly fine, but he saw it from such an angle that it looked bad? It’s in turn really weird seeing Kris briefly give up. Was he going to stay in the hospital forever and just let Christmas go because of such a minor matter? Fred cheers him up with some pretty obvious logic that he should’ve come to on his own. Only now, Kris has basically forced Fred to get in the heat of things to help him out. Even ignoring how this contradicts my interpretation of this movie, logically shouldn’t Kris hitting Sawyer prove Sawyer right? This does go to show the stupidity of trusting in anyone that they will do no wrong. Legally declaring Santa false at the trial, which was partially the fault of Kris, is said would have drastically negative outcomes for society.

The reason Kris gets out of his legal situation is because Fred advocated for him at great personal cost, which introduced to many people’s minds that Santa could be real. At that point, Santa’s existence is decided more over money and branding. Certain people admit to not believing Santa can be real in private, but then go out in public and at least say they aren’t sure. Children are used to manipulate those that don’t want to accept that they have lied about his existence, which does go to show how strange it is that we live in a society that would be dishonest about such a thing. Just like in real life, the public needs something that could pass as “proof”. Once they get it, they just jump on accepting this wild concept with bizarre implications instead of being more critical. In fact, the reason the trial became more about proving or disproving Santa is because Fred’s claim about doing so made for a great headline.

Kris is right that it’s better for Susan to be less serious and more about the absurdities of life, like pretending to be a monkey, as that is what makes life worth living. Susan is right that it’s better to have something useful like a house than toys. In being hard to convince of the validity of Kris’ claim of being Santa Claus, Kris is in turn more persistent in trying to prove her right and thus arranges for Susan and Doris to get the house the former wants. If they already were believers, he might not have seen the need. She and her mother aren’t any perfectly logical beings however.

At the end, Doris tells her impressionable child about believing in faith. Even if it is true that some concepts are so complicated that sense probably can’t reach them, so you only get there through faith, that still can often lead to trouble. We don’t see Doris do much transitioning from thinking Santa is definitely not real to thinking he is, which goes to show how people trust in emotions and concepts over facts, just like how she originally trusted strongly that Kris should be the parade Santa because of desperation. This even gets turned around on the audience as Kris never offers proof of being Santa Claus. We essentially have to take his word for it, which is arguably the point of the film.

OVERVIEW

This film wears the cloak of the courtroom dramas of the time. A commonality is for whatever we’re seeing to become a much bigger deal than originally hoped as. Miracle on 34th Street uses this convention to make a thoughtful and funny story about the strange places the human mentality can take us. As stated in the movie, sane people can end up in wards and crazy people can remain free. No matter what can be interpreted, the picture never forgets to be jolly and lighthearted, with Gwenn and the script exuding an infectious joy in how all the problems are very nice and the villains easily swayed. Regardless, the message of the ending is that anyone, even those that think out of the box or follow authority or try to do the right thing even when it can cost their livelihoods can do something insane under the right circumstances.

One Hundred and One Dalmatians (1961) Review

How many dalmatians are in this movie again?

Interestingly, One Hundred and One Dalmatians never drops a lighthearted tone, but still maintains its very morbid stakes. From the get go, the film goes for a quaint and funny style. It doesn’t deny itself flavorings of the 60s, Britain, and “charmingly offbeat and unrealistic”. Many shots look like a still painting, where pans are achieved with the image just moving across the screen. The characters also have a slight lack of fluidity, though this all adds to a surreal effect that matches the dialogue and narrative. Initially, the spirits of our leads are consistently high, with an arguably unnecessary part of the story serving to establish this world.

The proper story is about how the one hundred and one doggies will escape doom, but the beginning covers the romance of Roger Radcliffe, played by Ben Wright, that is barely even in the film once the stakes increase. His characterization is very flat, with him not much of a character. He is colored by a few moments. A favorite is when he offers the soaking wet Anita, played by Lisa Davis, a handkerchief, not realizing that he and thus the handkerchief are also wet. The other highlight is when he lays lyrics about Cruella de Vil on the melody he just wrote, singing about her like he personally knows and despises her, despite him only knowing of her that she’s a little rude. None of this really matters and it leaves you to wonder how Rog thought of as many lines as he did, but of course all of the movie has cute humor like this. There are many such flourishes to the narrative that do little more than get laughs, but are nice. Lisa also isn’t much of a character.

The film commits to being about either the scenery, the tone, or the story. As an example, the opening wastes no time pushing along to the point where the two lead dalmatians have puppies. Afterwards, two very expressive characters “Jasper and Horace Baddun” push their way into the story, with Roger’s maid making absolute sure you comprehend the gravity of the situation to the plot. Martha Wentworth acts her heart out with the music matching her. This scene only manages laughs instead of genuine dread. Afterwards, the heat is on. We don’t get inside anyone’s head. In fact, the scenes of all the various animals working together removes much individuality or personality to them. They are solely about this mission. One even says he’ll bark all night if need be. The effect of this is removing a sense of watching a real story, but the adventure being so exciting makes up for that. It takes the impotence off the characterization and puts it onto the action.

There are a few seeming exceptions to this, like when Rod Taylor as Pongo narrates the beginning of the movie. We see his wit and perspective, such as in considering Roger to be his pet. He also successfully pushes Roger wherever he feels is best. This dynamic and relative focus doesn’t last long. In fact, even Betty Lou Gerson as Cruella de Vil, who is often characterized as campy and manic, doesn’t ever have fun or not be all about serving her role in the story. She is simply extremely hotheaded and quick to yell. Cruella barely does anything when you’d expect her to stop to be memorable. Jasper and Horace at least go for laughs. People seemingly have projected more onto her, especially because her design is very distinct and her voice like that of someone like Bette Davis. Davis and Cruella would have a similar fanbase of film students and drag queens.

The best three roles here have got to be Sergeant Tibbs, the Captain, and the Colonel. The three have a humorous dynamic and back-and-forth, with various little gestures and novelties given to each, which does finally offer at least a bit of realism. You do have to extend your disbelief to accept that all these dogs will dedicate themselves to sending the message of the dognapped puppies, but those three cover how that would actually work. They carry honest souls and this natural aversion to the horrors they witness. You can tell by their expressions and actions that they feel like that if they fail then a real tragedy will have occurred. They take their role pretty seriously, though humorous things still happen. Their banter and even distinct appearances color them. The fact this is a dog, cat, and horse instead of all being dogs suggests they’ve somehow come to form a really unique and charming bond. They’re beyond any sense of tribalism.

We get a wonderfully lengthy and detailed look at how the events play out. The fun of the movie is in seeing what little issues the characters will be written into and how they’ll get out. Along the way are many quick jokes that serve as texture. This includes the dognapping apparently making the paper; Cruella’s pen exploding on Roger, giving him spots; some of the puppies unable to understand why they’d be asked to get dirty; and an apparent dog tv show and commercial, as if some human tv producers are out there feeling a need to give airtime to a show for dogs and also sell products to them. The threats are not particularly serious, but are very entertaining. There is arguably a logical explanation, the reason why issues befall Jasper and Horace is because of how idiotic they are, so it makes sense they would struggle to do anything meaningful. The movie commits to and pulls laughs from how silly they are, so their stupidity never feels convenient.

OVERVIEW

One Hundred and One Dalmatians is a tonally consistent and solid blend of adventure and comedy. It plays best as a warm and quirky Christmas tale that never takes itself too straight, though note it does a little just to get you invested. You’re taken to a strange new world where a large group is nice to each other and works together for free. Not a world I know!

Just thought I’d add in that Roger and Anita not caring about their place getting covered in dirt is hilarious.

The Adventures of Hal 5 (1957) Review

“You go after him, I’ll get the tea.”

The Adventures of Hal 5 does play as an AI generated result of what a 50s children’s film would be like, at least from a pool of those with a bit more knowledge of what these movies were actually like. Still, you can’t deny how comically wholesome this adventure is. Everyone is extremely moral, with constant smiles, other than one overly villainous person and one scene of a group of kids being mean. You got to love just how chipper the characters are, as if not really having much of a care in the world. No one here appears an exceptional amount, with us seeing different characters and essentially little segments of their days, which typically at some point relate to “Hal 5”. There are scenes dedicated to children exercising, which could be seen as some degree of encouragement for the viewers to do the same.

Despite not being billed highly, William Russell as “The Vicar” is the closest thing to a main character. He brings good spirits and charm that is guiltily infectious. The scene of him jumping a fence to confront some kids that caused trouble, only for them to only care about the fact his jump was so impressive is very funny, though not in the right way. It seems this was supposed to be serious. There’s cute lines like, “That was a very silly thing to do.” For part of the conversation, both parties are talking about different matters without acknowledging the other’s side. “Now, what’s so interesting about this gate?” The child actors are better in this scene than you’d expect.

The other actors are amusing, as well. David Morrell as Mr. Dicey seems like this extremely lovable person with a passion for machinery. John Glyn-Jones as Mr. Goorlie is blatantly ill intentioned and buffoonish, with his plans only ever to nickel-dime people out of relatively small amounts of money, which could be seen as a critique of such an economic structure being so necessary and also manipulable. The two main children, despite often being with the Vicar, functionally do nothing and would probably annoy if they weren’t so easy to ignore. Speaking of recurrent, but underused characters, Hal 5 is apparently a living car, with a creepy face that periodically appears and disappears from the radiator. Hal never speaks and seldom acts, though once in a blue moon will take someone to a place they don’t want to go. Mr. Dicey calling Hal 5 his friend implies he knows the car is alive, but many others treat it as if it’s not.

There is a severe lack of intrigue to the narrative. One way to better this is to have it kept a secret that Mr. Goorlie is a baddie until later, or at least to have something the audience doesn’t know. Alternatively, when we see people negatively impacted by this behavior, they should behave in a way other than what would be most obvious. At the very least, include more scenes that are funny or have something stimulating going on, like the gate one. The most intense scene here is just of someone asking for their money back.

SPOILERS

To add to the insane wholesomeness, the villain even admits to his acts for no reason, only to have more likable characters that always do the right thing instated in his job. This idealist view of the world is demonstrated to mostly only function if most people are good natured and those that aren’t easily identifiable. The child leads then pick Mr. Goorlie’s replacement and this doesn’t seem to cause any upsetment of what anyone else is doing with their life or wants. The chosen Mr. Dicey admittedly was already shown to love this sort of garage work. In the garage he’s having the time of his life. He is happy for the Vicar and company to finally have a car that is working properly. Though seeing as Hal 5 originally belonged to Mr. Dicey, who never wanted to get rid of it, why not have him get the car back at the end?

OVERVIEW

While the main plot of the Vicar with the car and the b-plot of a race are essentially unrelated, the race does create a warmer feeling for the story. The Vicar’s life isn’t just this darn car that won’t work, he’s a busy man! Despite how much I like William Russell, it might’ve been better to give some more screen time to others, so this “world” felt more inclusive to other people? The Adventures of Hal 5 isn’t much of anything, not having much drama or even comedy. It seems designed to be forgotten, leaving only the impression of the final image of smiling faces and clean morals always winning out in the end against those that want to hurt others, who always make that obvious. If it asks to not be remembered, we shall grant its wish.

WALL-E (2008) Review

One of my favorite shots of the film

The greatest strength and weakness of Wall-E is its simplicity. The way that that’s a problem is how basic the story and its structure are. The lack of innovation there makes for a movie that is a little dull, due to lacking many tricks up its sleeve, as you pretty much always know what’s going to happen next. The best types of family movies have more that can appeal to an adult. This film does provide that, just not in the storyline. The animation and by extension aesthetic are very pretty, reminiscent of classic sci-fi, while giving its own twists. The dark subject matter it depicts has a soft edge to it, like it’s something a child would imagine, which creates a very unusual and extremely relatable feeling. Someone that worked on the movie said a planet filled with trash is the type of dystopia a child would imagine.

It is arguably a little strange seeing a robot character, the protagonist of Wall-E, be so much like a human child. An added “edge” to make him feel more distinct, but still inspired by that would help a lot in making him interesting. His almost complete lack of speaking makes for an endearing character, especially as we can sense whatever it is he’s thinking or feeling. Especially to a fan of silent cinema, this is not new, but it does add to the otherworldly and innocent sense. If this movie was made for adults with a human lead, you can imagine them doing something like getting hurt and cursing, which would create a very different vibe and make it too human. Also, as someone with difficulty speaking, I’ve always found Wall-E very relatable.

The character of Eve does have a few particularly sharp moments, such as when she is at her most vulnerable. Her character development is otherwise weak, with her dramatically switching from her more aggressive self to being a lot softer. The first thing she does when she meets Wall-E is too out of character with how she later is and makes her harder to relate to. There’s no reason she couldn’t have been simply neutral when meeting Wall-E, instead of how she is. Their romance is also very straightforward and uncomplicated. While not “realistic”, it mirroring a child’s understanding of a relationship is heartwarming. Thus, it works. Some of the character development the leads do have is emphasized very nicely with the romance. In fact, the scene of them where Wall-E has a fire hydrant is so warm and cinematic as to capture an undefinable sense of joy and love and be the best scene of the whole movie. It’s a work of art.

The vintage sounding song playing over a shot of space at the beginning sets the mood very well. Wall-E and the humans only have these artifacts to grasp to in terms of understanding their society and their future. This leads to contrast as the positive music continues over shots of the trash. Shots like the overly pristine ship and the planet of trash are very memorable images that also tell us about how the characters and their worlds are. It’s believable why Wall-E might be reluctant to be cleaned after living on a dirty planet, as it’s familiar to him and not apparently wrong. Seeing as he may be lonely, Wall-E just sorting things works as a way for him to ground himself and keep busy.

The appearance of old footage of live action people suggests this movie is set in the future of our current society. The intended message is that this is the future if we don’t take care of the planet. Otherwise, it is a little confusing why there would be live action people here. The little comedy moments throughout the film come off as forced and really aren’t needed.

SPOILERS

“A moment to be loved a whole life long.” playing as Wall-E sleeps alone in his dark place is really saddening. It doesn’t make much sense why Wall-E would fall for Eve, who is so hostile, so it seems likely he’s just falling for the first robot he sees. Wall-E accidentally destroys a lot of stuff and gets him and Eve labeled “rogue robots”. This really could’ve gotten Eve in a lot of trouble. This seems to go into a more common theme of the misfit robots seeing Wall-E as a leader, with them all essentially saving the day, showing the common but effective narrative of outcasts being what is ultimately needed to straighten out society. The complacency of humans has made them fat and apparently reliant on computers, which could’ve stopped them from ever feeling fulfilled. In fact, the antagonist is a well intentioned robot following humans’ now outdated orders.

When Eve shoots a “halt” sign, I hope she wasn’t killing a fellow robot. After never talking loudly, it’s chilling to hear Eve shout “No!” when Wall-E is injured. The humanity of her comes out here more than ever. Interestingly, if Wall-E was a human, he would’ve been killed by his injury, though instead he makes a full recovery later. Wall-E briefly being reset at the end doesn’t amount to anything. It just seems designed to tug on the heart strings. Admittedly, it does work at making you feel sad. It also mirrors the beginning when Eve was cold and Wall-E had life to him. The ending could’ve gone for something that plays off of the themes of the narrative before and not be so random feeling.

OVERVIEW

One reason the leads have so much personality is because they barely talk, which gives a pretty and surreal vibe throughout the whole story. WALL-E does work best as a movie for kids. It thrives off of the sense of innocence and simplicity the story and tone have, with things frankly not ever being too serious. A strong message is sent with what we learn. Adult media could easily have been too heavy handed. Still, it would’ve been very much ideal to have a bit more depth here, at least some twists so you don’t really know what’s going to happen next.

A Christmas Carol (2009) Review

My cameo in the film

A Christmas Carol can dazzle when its visual effects are at their best, but also suffer when a tone or spirit needs to be captured. It evokes an amusement park ride due to this. The visual aesthetic benefits from rich colors. It’s not like real life, but the browns and whites amplify the film more than if they were like real life. The film basically wins at being at least tolerable due to not looking quite like anything else. The movie beginning with an establishing shot where the camera captures the antics of the whole town exemplifies this. If you actually look at those characters and put yourself in their world, everything can seem silly. Everyone is so overly joyous and content that there’s no humanity here. Their inability to be anything except their best is a little creepy.

The movie is not a comedy, but there’s the occasional odd moment of it. Those moments can feel randomly selected, like after a dramatic sequence, Marley’s jaw becoming disconnected mid-conversation. That in particular is also strangely disturbing. Jim Carrey mostly does a straightforward Ebenezer Scrooge and he does a decent job at it, though when his vocal or physicalities channel Ace Ventura or other Carrey roles, it feels jarring, as if he felt a need to be comedic right then and there. The “dance with me” scene is one notable example, as it removes from the dramatic potential of the situation. One scene around the middle really needs a strong dramatic actor, but it being in the middle of the insanity of the special effects sequences and the plainness of Carrey’s acting make it flat. At least most of the movie can be appreciated for its high octane bits. They’re gratuitous, but that’s at least something.

The dialogue of the characters, main or not, is played too straight, making the story hard to take seriously. They might have worked better in a book or on a stage, where you can imagine better performances or be sucked in with the live experience. The characters’ faces and vocals are relatively subdued, while there also being some unintentional ham to the deliveries. Their acting only works on the level of being a novelty. “How extremely cheery or diplomatic or stingy can we get?” There’s no sense that that was intended, as the film is trying to just do the story as expected. One example is a scene of Colin Firth as Fred, who speaks and acts like he’s doing an audition and can’t handle his overly theatrical lines. Jim Carrey as the Ghost of Christmas Present is the best performance, having a lighter heart to this whole thing. Maybe if more people seemed like they were just having fun with this, the final product would be better? The lack of realism in the CGI could’ve made a nice contrast with realistic performances, alas not.

The visual effects have major weaknesses. Many characters, especially Marley, look as though they weren’t rendered properly. Their faces can be still when they should be very expressive. Certain characters’ feelings don’t come across clearly due to a lack of emotion on their face. Gary Oldman as Bob Cratchit is a prime example. The point of that character seems to be to show a way to demonstrate how someone closer to, but tolerant of, Scrooge would handle him. Such a character necessitates not only hearing what they’re saying, but seeing in their expression what they’re thinking. Characters like the Ghost of Christmas Past are uncanny and liable to make you uncomfortable due to awkward animation. Perhaps the main fault of the movie is the pacing. It can be so fast that nothing is tangible. It feels like just some stuff happens for a little, then it moves on suddenly to the next thing. We should see how and that the events affect the protagonist. As an example, the segments showing the past could’ve been longer.

SPOILERS

What was the point in Scrooge being shot into space? Visuals like that seem to just be here so as to be memorable or stimulating, without adding to the narrative. It seems Scrooge isn’t all bad, his humanity and kindness is suggested by his strong emotional reaction to Tiny Tim’s death. Characters like Fred and the mistreated Cratchit both seem to have a respect for him. The message of bad people being redeemable is an admirable one. One of the better funny moments is when Scrooge’s maid is shocked and horrified by Scrooge being nice.

OVERVIEW

Due to the visual aesthetics, A Christmas Carol can be a novel viewing, but don’t expect to take anything deep or meaningful from it, which seems to have been its hope.

The Snowman (1982) Review

A frame from the film

The Snowman is a sweet film about a boy and a snowman. It’s not a movie to watch if you want a strong plot. It only really concerns seeing the misadventures of the two leads. Perhaps a more cynical mind would ask for a little more to the story. What are the logistics of things like the snowman going inside a house? Will he track water or mud on the ground? Can he smell, breathe, speak? That sort of analysis may very well be the fun of a movie like this for someone. For others, it’s simply for the little journey the boy, James, and the snowman go on. There is no conflict, just an excursion. This could pass as a litmus test for when a person gets too old to really appreciate a film like this. A child might be fascinated by what happens, especially the last third, while an adult might take it more as children’s fodder lacking in much substance.

It’s hard not to appreciate the music, a nice orchestral score. It compliments the visuals nicely, though it can get stuck in your head! The visuals are even better, being drawn like a children’s book that’s animated. The ending is also a little more interesting than you might think and a surprise based on the tone of most of the movie. A debatable criticism is that the first few minutes follow James’ day before the snowman comes alive. If you want snowman action, it can seem like filler. As a minor note, did we have to see James’ butt? Also, how is James not freezing cold touching snow with his bare hands and not wearing a jacket?

SPOILERS

How did the fire in the house not begin to melt the snowman? Also, why wouldn’t the family put it out before bed? How did the cat not wake up the parents, or the various other noises? The snowman at one point falls down right next to the parents and they continue to sleep. The snowman puts on James’ father’s pants and they’re too big. A moment later they fit perfectly. The dad is also clearly skinnier than the snowman. There’s a cool effect of words starting to be sung when the snowman flies. The song is alright, but the instrumental segments are more ethereal and dream-like. Perhaps a better song would make that diversion better? One funny moment is when a girl sees the snowman flying by and seems confused why he doesn’t look like Santa.

A male snowman appears to at one point hit on a female one, suggesting snowmen (snowpeople?) have gender roles. Seeing as the clothes of the main snowman were apparently chosen by James, if he had dressed the snowman femininely, would the snowman act feminine? Maybe not, as the snowman tries on James’ mother’s makeup and hat and his dad’s pants, suggesting he likes both types of presentation. He seems to be impersonating a farmer, so perhaps the makeup is for the red sunburnt-look and the hat for its large brim. If you gave all the snowmen access to masculine and feminine forms of gender presentation, would they try on a mix of styles or lineup with whatever gender they were dressed as? Would the distribution of who likes any given amount of what match human being’s distribution for such things? What if they’re initially dressed with a mix of the two? Would they be non-binary snowmen?

Seeing as James and the snowman go to a party of snowmen and meet Santa, maybe Santa has something to do with this? What if he makes the snow magical so it will in fact come alive and also know how to get to the party? What is the reason for the party, do they always bring a human with them? Are they doing it for humans? Seeing as James is the only child present, who made the other snowmen? What if all the other snowmen were created by a person, but they didn’t like the person so left without them? Scenes like the aforementioned “hitting on” could mean they have the thinking capacities of at least animals. They want to reproduce and go to parties. This is made tragic by the end. The snowman melting is honestly an emotional moment. The scene is made especially poignant by James having Santa’s scarf, proving what he experienced was not a dream. The final frame captures a somber tone in how sad he looks, being completely still, contrasted by the bright background. If Santa was the cause of this, why would he make them so they would just die? What is even the point?

OVERVIEW

While not more interesting or worthwhile than a lot of the famous Christmas animated shorts, The Snowman has some heart and is a good thing to compliment the Christmas spirit, even for an adult.

The Beach Boys Miscellaneous Christmas Tracks (1964 & 1977) Review

Ultimate Christmas’ funny album cover

As is common with albums, not every song is going to make the cut. The Beach Boys made two Christmas albums. The first, The Beach Boys’ Christmas Album, was released in 1964. The second, Merry Christmas from the Beach Boys, was never released. Some of its tracks, the first album, and some other Christmas works were released in 1998 on the Ultimate Christmas compilation album. With one exception, all of these tracks were cut during the Merry Christmas sessions and most were likely intended for the album. They didn’t make the cut and turns out the album didn’t either. It made Ultimate Christmas, so they can now be enjoyed.

“Santa’s Got an Airplane”

This is another silly song. Merry Christmas featured some, but I guess there was a limit. We once more cover an absurd premise of Santa Claus needing to get a better ride. The whole group sings on the track and very well… except for Mike Love, but it’s easy to ignore him. It’s a shame, because everyone else has energy and spirit in their voices, but Mike drops the ball. It’s almost like they really want you to know that Santa’s got an airplane. They sing lines like “Fly Away!” in a spirited and warm way. It helps paint the picture of the story. Their voices are raised, as is Santa, because he’s in the sky. The instruments serve a very small role in the song, but they’re not really needed. This song works well carried by its vocals. Perhaps the easy to miss instruments are easy to miss as they were recorded in 1969. Why not rerecord them so they match the ‘77 vocals better?

“(I Saw Santa) Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree”

The instruments and lead vocals work well. Al Jardine does a good job of expressing the song with his singing. This is imaginably due to him co-writing the piece. The lyrics aren’t great by any means, but they are written in a way where they can be sung well. The song’s interrupted by spoken word from Al’s kids, Matt and Adam Jardine. They do kill the pacing, but the use of them provides a little more Christmas spirit.

“Melekalikimaka” (aka “Kona Christmas”)

I was banging my head on my hand for part of this one. It’s the sum of the faults of the band at this point. How am I going to spend Christmas? By surfing of course! and in Hawaii. It’s stupid, but not in a fun way. This song’s almost depressing. Since the 60’s, the group has tried to hold onto relevance in the culture. One way this is done is by doing throwbacks to old songs that were successful, like their surfing songs. You can tell there’s no passion or care here. This is a bunch of pandering garbage, once again sung by uninterested Mike and it’s not worth anyone’s time.

“Bells of Christmas”

This song is once again standard, alright vocals and instruments, but there’s an interesting aspect to the piece. Biblical references are frequently brought up. There’s many references to God throughout the Beach Boys’ discography. This song is one of the expressions of that. I was surprised that Brian Wilson didn’t write this one as he seems the most interested in this element of life. These first four songs have all featured Al in a writing and lead vocal role, though he usually shared with others. I wonder if he was interested in the subject of Christmas or perhaps there’s another reason. Some of these songs aren’t as bad as some that made it on the main track listing. On Merry Christmas, only two songs feature an Al writing credit. Why was he writing so many of these songs and then they weren’t featured? The group could’ve used some of this stuff. Al seems to care the most about this album of the lot, based on his songwriting and singing. Overall, no one seemed very interested in the Christmas project, so why even bother?

“Toy Drive Public Service Announcement”

Here’s some more actual creativity. In this short ditty, the band is telling people that some kids don’t have toys due to a lack of money, so bring your’s to “Crystal Ship”. However, they aren’t saying it… they’re singing it. Someone might listen to this on the radio, think it’s a normal song, and perhaps get inspired to help. The Beach Boys do well when taking a little concept and playing with it. One problem that may be the fault of the recording I heard is that some of the lyrics were difficult to make out. A big criticism for many of their Christmas songs is that there’s little about them to differentiate them from any other Christmas song. Here, their charm is making this their own… and it’s just a little PSA.

“Dennis Wilson Christmas Message”

This piece is similar to “Auld Lang Syne” from Christmas Album. The whole gang’s singing, only for that to shift into background noise so Dennis Wilson can do spoken word. He’s telling us to donate toys so kids can get them. A.) We already did this last song and B.) Dennis’ voice is so creepy. Due to all the drug and alcohol abuse, his voice is raspy and dry. In “Auld Lang Syne”, his voice was much nicer to listen to. Maybe the group wanted to uphold that tradition. For the sake of the album, why not get Al or Brian to give this message as their voices are a lot softer and friendlier. Brian sounds like your nice grandpa. The background music wasn’t too bad, though it’s very hard to hear (by design) for most of the piece. I wouldn’t mind hearing it without the Dennis part.

“Brian Wilson Christmas Interview”

I was looking forward to the one non-70s track for this whole Christmas excursion. Hopefully, Brian would give some interesting insight. When I finally reached it, I was disappointed as it’s just Brian having a quite boring conversation about their 1964 Christmas album. This seems like standard promotional material that comes with albums and movies. However, near the end, Brian talked about The Four Freshman briefly. Despite how briefly he was on the topic, it was so nice hearing Brian give love and praise to a band he loves so much. He called them, “one of the greater vocal influences in the world”. This is a good way of contextualizing Brian and maybe this whole band. They wear their influences on their sleeves.

OVERVIEW

Christmas albums are hard to pull off in general, but The Beach Boys certainly didn’t do the concept justice in the 60s or the 70s. There are some good ideas, but they are unrealized and rushed typically. It makes for a difficult listening experience.

Doctor Who (Modern) Series 8 (2014) Review

The three most prominent characters, left to right, Clara, The Doctor, and Danny

Matt Smith, the Eleventh Doctor, has just left Doctor Who. Now it’s time for Peter Capaldi to give it a go at the role of The Doctor. The companion of last season, Clara, continues on in the series. Notably, this season focuses more on her than last season. One episode of it briefly showed her as a school teacher. In Series 8, numerous episodes focus on her school and her at it. We see her frustration at the Doctor’s alien qualities and her developing relationship with another teacher named Danny Pink. If Doctor Who didn’t exist, then Series 8 came around and Clara was listed as the main character, it wouldn’t feel too out of place. There are numerous times in the franchise where it’s more about how the companion sees things than how the Doctor sees things. In the revived series, this was the case with companions Rose, Amy, and Clara as mentioned and even in the classic series, the show started with companion Ian Chesterton as the focus. When his actor left the show, it focused on the Doctor. This is an interesting idea. It’s important to focus on the Doctor, the protagonist, but there’s no reason this can’t be done through the lens of his companions. In the famous novel, The Great Gatsby, the story is from the perspective of someone who is not the protagonist.

I had trouble determining why I was a little underwhelmed by this episode and other good NewWho. I realized that the NewWho formula was the issue. It just sticks out so much to me. Good ClassicWho is generally good at hiding its formula, though I admit it’s almost always there. Just as I’m enjoying something different in NewWho, the formula hits me in the head and slots itself in where I know it will go. It’s extremely frustrating. I think if I decided to binge every NewWho episode I liked, then maybe the formula wouldn’t be so clear. I guess I can’t be sure.

This season has twelve episodes and while I wanted to review all of them, not all appealed to me enough. This will be detailed later.

Episode 1: Deep Breath

I wasn’t looking forward to this after the disappointing Series 7. Fortunately Deep Breath was good. Many of the actors are giving their best performances up to this point and the newbies are knocking it out of the park. Some of the humor and special effects are quite good as well. One joke about the character of “Handles” from The Time of the Doctor got a really strong laugh from me. I loved the scenery, the cinematography, and the costumes. A surprise cameo at the end annoyed me in the past, but it actually works well in a pretty good scene. Many of the little surprises work very well.

Just like lots of Doctor Who, there are annoyances. Some of the humor is poor. When it’s bad, it’s insufferable. Clara acts out of character, such as at the end, just to move the plot along. Some of the ways in which the antagonists act is nonsensical. It’s a bit formulaic at points in how the plot movies, but overall it’s still a fair episode.

I was terrified when watching the second episode, Into the Dalek as it gave me nothing to talk about. There’s nothing developed or interesting to say. Anything it posits as little or no connection on the rest of the season. This sentiment also applies to Episode 3, Robot of Sherwood. Even if we aren’t focusing on their impact, the episodes themselves are not very good.

Episode 4: Listen

This is actually something different. Listen is a cute, subtle mystery. It’s a mystery of what’s going on with the Doctor. The Doctor wonders why we fear what’s under the bed. If we turn around and it seems something like our cup of joe has vanished, where to? The audience surrogate is Clara. She’s on a date with Danny Pink and the Doctor keeps interrupting in order to take her places in an attempt to discover this mystery. Something of note is how strange the Doctor acts. It is true that he acts like a child at times, but it just seems logicless here. Whenever the Doctor has acted so strangely in the past, it’s been to fool someone, like an enemy, but here he’s only with Clara and one other person who isn’t villainous. There’s a bit of an explanation at the end… 

SPOILERS

Clara discovers that the Doctor, as a child, had bad dreams. She accidentally grabbed him from under his bed. Once he’s relaxed a bit, she gives the child Doctor a monologue about how it’s okay to be afraid.

So this episode is telling us that the Doctor never before thought to pursue this quandary of his? It makes sense that it would pop into his head right before the episode started and he can’t help but think about it, but how did this not happen sooner?

OVERVIEW

The sudden kid show lesson at the end feels out of place with the tone and style of the show, which is at least a few years older. The different kind of style for the episode was appreciated, but the payoff doesn’t really work.

In Episode 5, Time Heist, The Doctor doesn’t know what high heels and make up are, despite referring to make up in the last episode and being over two thousand years old. There are numerous times in the season where he seems unfamiliar with pretty basic things. In Episode 7, Kill the Moon, he can’t tell how old a child is.

Episode 8: Mummy on the Orient Express

This episode was good. Parts of it are annoyingly formulaic, but actual character and heart make up for it. The horror of the Mummy is felt in the audience. The idea of having to face your death digs into the core and sends a chill up the spine. Mummy’s main success was how it developed the Doctor and Clara’s shaky relationship. This is personified in the episode itself.

SPOILERS

The Doctor was arrogant uncharacteristically in the episode and thus pushing away Clara. It turned out to all be part of a plan that surprisingly made sense. It says a lot about the Doctor not being too emotional at the people’s death. He’s trying to get to business and solve this problem.

Episode 9: Flatline

Flatline is filled with conveniences. It’s very convenient that the Doctor’s spaceship, the TARDIS gained or lost power whenever it did. It’s convenient that the right people were around.

SPOILERS

The Doctor deems the villains of the episode as bad without knowing much about them. This is a character that’s often curious to learn new things and understand the unfamiliar. He even admits that they could have positive intent, but then just kills them as they seem dangerous and can’t be communicated with. This is very out of character for the Doctor. There’s virtually no attempt to learn or understand them. It seems the only reason that he showed up and killed them was that the episode was almost over and it needed to be wrapped up.

Episode 10: In the Forest of the Night

It’s quite funny how the Doctor speaks to a child named Maebh. He is interrogative and acts like an intellectual. While it’s a little thing, it’s a moment of good comedy which is lacking in the season. This episode is filled with Clara’s students. All I can say is don’t include bad child actors in your show, they can’t act and these kids can’t act.

Forest is like a fairy tale, not a good idea for Doctor Who. The whimsy and child-like innocence roughly matches with the more serious tone of Who. The plot of what to do with the dangerously-large amount of trees that suddenly grew seems like it’s plucked straight from a children’s book. To add to the problems, it’s a very obvious social commentary on caring for forest preservation. Social commentaries are not a bad thing, but a recurring issue with them is a lack of subtlety. This episode is not subtle at all. The Doctor gives a speech criticizing humans for wanting to cut down trees. The trees are shown as misunderstood. The story basically stops for this. The other half of the episode focuses on Clara, Danny, and the Doctor relationship. Despite this connection to the main plot, In the Forest of the Night is very much a filler episode. It’s like an episode needed to be produced quickly for a younger audience.

SPOILERS

Maebh mentions recurringly that her sister went missing. In the last seconds of the episode, that sister appears with the aid of magic. The day is also saved by Maebh telling the whole world to not destroy the trees as they will in fact save the world by shielding Earth from a solar flare. Then, as the trees protect Earth against the flare, the excess of trees are destroyed and there’s no damage. Is the absurdity of that not obvious?

OVERVIEW

I find it difficult to believe that that ending or even this whole episode was made for people older than ten. It panders so much to the youngins’ that it seems to block out everyone else, even those who are trying to enjoy the season’s story. Forest is alienating and skippable.

Episodes 11-12: Dark Water & Death in Heaven

This whole affair is very melodramatic. Actors act like they’re in a soap. In some ways it’s like they’re on stage. When Clara and Danny are upset, they’re near sobbing. When the villain is making a scene, they’re making a scene. Characters overreact to an extreme degree. The villain is so hammy and silly that I couldn’t take anything they did seriously. There was clearly an idea for them, but it wasn’t executed well. The character moments are nice. The villain mostly strips away their humor for Part 2 and has a serious talk with the Doctor. That’s a really good scene. This is also the case with Danny and Clara, they get actual time to be people.

SPOILERS

The episode starts with Clara on the phone with Danny, who is on a walk. While on said walk, Danny gets hit by a car and dies. Sudden, huh? Clara meets the Doctor and relatively calmly asks to go to a volcano. She walks around the TARDIS collecting various hidden keys. She then asks the Doctor for a “sleep patch” as she says she’s been struggling to fall asleep. After he does so, Clara places it on the Doctor. There’s a cut to the two of them by a volcano. Clara says that Danny is dead and she knows that saving him would cause a paradox, but they have to do it anyway. The Doctor eggs her on and she destroys all the keys. Clara then wakes up in the TARDIS and the Doctor reveals the whole thing to not be real. It was a “telepathic test” to see how she would act under her situation and she never actually hit him with the sleep patch. This whole scene is a lie. It would be fine if Clara never threatened or in fact threw the keys in the lava as there would be no bating for the audience’s attention, but it’s not good that the creators tried to make us think the keys were gone when they actually weren’t. They’re being dishonest to get drama. This is something I hate to see in movies and shows. I will say, the close up on Clara when the Doctor asks what he can do for her is great. It’s very dramatic.

The Doctor has got to kick Clara out. What if she tries something again and actually messes something up? Also, how are we supposed to like Clara after seeing this? She comes off incredibly selfish. She’ll possibly destroy reality for her boyfriend. I now don’t want that character to continue travelling with the Doctor. This story doesn’t just make Clara look bad. Later, the Doctor discovers that someone he’s talking to is a recurring villain, the Master. The Master insinuates to her employee that she’s going to kill him. After a long, annoying sequence, she does so. Why did The Doctor just let the man be killed? He doesn’t even react to the situation after it happened.

Danny’s death was so rushed. This two-parter doesn’t much develop it, namely because it comes out of left field. If it happened a few episodes earlier, we could’ve had the time to feel the pain of Clara. Admittedly, it seems like it would be difficult to fit that and the rest of the season into just twelve episodes. Perhaps the Danny arc should’ve taken two seasons.

The Cybermen, a recurring villain, appear, but they don’t act like Cybermen as they barely do anything in the story. The plot doesn’t focus on them very much. I don’t mind as it’s something new that’s interesting and inventive, but I just wish that the episode never bothered to even attempt to make them a threat. They’re not a threat, so don’t try to sell us that. In the episode, just have them used as a mindless force and go on with business. Perhaps it would’ve been better to come up with a new monster.

Part 2 just loves to kill. There are tons and tons of mindless, inconsequential deaths. So many could be cut out and you’d have a better paced story. There’s so much death that the dead come alive as Cybermen. Danny returns as one. He isn’t entirely transformed and much of his time in the story is spent with him having a talk with Clara. The action stopping for actual human interaction is very alleviating. This is ironic seeing as Danny has transformed into a cyborg. The biggest tragedy of this season is the lack of development for Danny and Clara’s relationship. They go around in circles for the season, then it all doesn’t matter when he suddenly dies. Him kind of coming back doesn’t solve this as the two never get to be together. Ultimately, the dead go back to being so. It’s all a big shame. Anytime we learned something about Danny or Danny learned something about the Doctor and Clara, it didn’t mean anything. It was also dropped and the plot shifted to the dead thing. These Danny moments don’t enlighten the main characters either. The parts that affect Clara are their relationship and Danny’s death. There’s plenty of other things, like Danny being a soldier, which aren’t important. Clara lied to Danny by saying her adventures with the Doctor weren’t dangerous. That doesn’t matter either.

OVERVIEW

In general, this season has choppy, broken stories.

The Doctor gives lots of speeches which are over dramatic. They’re trying to convey a deep message of how the Doctor is or how people are, but they develop from nowhere and don’t serve much of a purpose to the plots. This season wants the Doctor to be more special than he is. In one episode, the Doctor leaves for a time and it’s dreadful for everyone else involved. It’s great in past seasons when we see his weaknesses sewn in. This season gives him none, but then slaps some weaknesses on him at points with no class or subtext. The episodes are now screaming “The Doctor is weak!” The characters in this season are such a mismatch of tropes and ideas.

Most stories in Doctor Who’s revival series suffer from being too short. The classic series stories could be virtually any length. Thus, things are not often underdeveloped. NewWho characters, plots, and ideas are often underdeveloped as those elements and much more have to be crammed into forty-five minutes. Guest characters often fall in certain character types. There’s someone who is under respected/appreciated that gets along well with Clara. There’s someone skeptical to the abilities of the Doctor and/or the seriousness of the situation. There’s someone who is innocent and silly. There’s characters with few lines that just get killed and that’s their whole character.

I hate the quippy dialogue characters have. When the head of U.N.I.T., Kate Stewart, disturbs a villain’s plan, she has quippy dialogue intended to get a laugh. Clara does this frequently as well. These moments remove the tension and seriousness of scenes. Can you stop wasting time and get on with the plot? The jokes are so tacked on. They’re probably attempts to appeal to people that like such humor.

This season is such a wreck. Even though Series 7 is worse, that one could at least stay focused. Series 8 is a million concepts blended together and writing about it is exhausting. Onto Series 9, unless I can’t stomach it.

The Christmas That Almost Wasn’t (1966) Review

Paul Tripp, the writer and primary actor of the film. Photograph taken in 1961.

I needed a little break from searching for Christmas films. The last two have had a minimal relation to Christmas. December has started, we got to get at least one real Christmas movie going! This movie is super Christmassy. It’s set in December, there’s Santa, elves, his house at the North Pole, however, his wife isn’t there. Maybe she wanted a man who wasn’t paying rent. That’s right, in this film Christmas is threatened as Santa can’t pay his bills. His Credit Score must be terrible. I remember those old, fond memories in May 2017 of watching this movie as part of Mystery Science Theater 3000, a show which hosts generally poor films. It was terrible, but lovely for so many reasons. I had to see it again to know if it was a true masterpiece of stupidity.

The English dubbed version, which is easier to find, is not as bad as one might think. The physical portrayals that the actors give matches up well with how the English voice actors are speaking. The dubbing often doesn’t match the lip movement of the actors. This isn’t too big a deal as it’s easy to not pay attention to that. The acting generally works for what the film’s intention is. The main character, Sam Whipple, is written and performed like everything is lovely and joyful. Is that realistic to a person? No, but that’s what the film is going for. Whenever something unfortunate happens, we see that the character’s actor can give a performance other than pure bliss. Santa Claus’ actors are the best in the film. While it’s not masterful, we do see a real range. It’s weird to see Santa Claus looking depressed, but it’s a developed facial and vocal expression that makes sense. Later on, Santa is at a toy store with some kids and he seems genuinely happy.

The most interesting performance is that of Rossano Brazzi, who plays Phineas T. Prune, the villain. His performance is over the top to an incredible degree. He’s Santa’s landlord who hates Christmas and children. He will do anything to stop Christmas from happening for no other reason than that he hates children that much. He even says that Santa can choose to not pay rent and live in his home for free if he stops doing Christmas. He even shouts about how villainous he is. There is no attempt to have an actual character (except at the end). It’s honestly a site to behold. His performance got me thinking… my thought while watching the film is that the absurdity adds to the production. Other movies like Blazing Saddles are so good because of how the absurdity works and fits in the concept, but does this film’s absurdity add or subtract? There’s nothing in the film that’s enhanced by the absurdities other than how it enhances the entertainment for the audience at home, laughing at how stupid it is. Blazing Saddles winks at the audience and its stupid elements are brilliant in how they add to the narrative. I seem to have had mistaken The Christmas That Almost Wasn’t as a good movie taking advantage of the bad instead of a bad movie that’s enjoyable.

In terms of a so bad it’s good movie, this succeeds by quite a bit. There’s often a lot of fun here and there in the film. One part that was lacking was the songs, which typically weren’t written or performed well, but they don’t subtract too much from the overall film. The villain’s desire an urge to stop Christmas goes to lengths much farther than most would, as if he has nothing better to do. The character’s arc is nonsensical, but hilarious. It serves as a terrible way to finish the story, but it is indeed very Christmassy. The reasons for the start and end of the conflict is supported by a thin piece of thread. In terms of a silly movie filled to the brim with Christmas and joy, this film has got you covered.

The movie’s theme song is also a banger.

Battle for Dream Island Season 1 (2010-12) Review

The season’s cast (the Host is not included)

I watched the first two seasons of Battle for Dream Island as a kid and I really loved them. They led me to the cult of “Object Shows”. Now seems like the time to check out the original season again after many years. I’ve rewatched all twenty five episodes and all four hours in one day and it’s time to write about it! The premise of the show is simple. A group of (gendered) objects compete in challenges hosted by “the Announcer”. For a time, the contestants were in teams. Each episode, someone is voted out until one stands and they win dream island. The thing special about this show is that the viewers at home vote for who is eliminated and the beginning of each episode features the results and elimination set up last time.

The following paragraph headers are quotes from the season.

“A Teardrop Family Reunion!”

At the start, things felt rushed. There should be at least a little more subtlety in the characterization of the cast and the show. Fortunately, as soon as Episode 2, Barriers and Pitfalls, starts, the show gets more steam. Some jokes had me laughing quite a bit, though some jokes, like the “Needy” one, were annoying. People frequently refer to a character named “Needle” as “Needy” and she doesn’t like that. That’s the whole joke. Some of the characters eliminated early in the game lack a character to them. They’re basically filler. Fortunately, eliminated contestants often make guest appearances. While deep characterization is nice, such a cast allows for some thin characters that are good as they are. As an example, characters like Teardrop and Rocky work perfectly well without much character. Teardrop is a “straight man” comedy character and Rocky is the quiet, innocent character. At many points, the show is too fast paced. Even though every episode has character moments, there should’ve been more that aren’t covered in the show. There are some animation errors, such as characters with arms being briefly seen without them, with the most likely reason for that being the animators forgot to include them.

I love how stats are referenced in the show. Pencil seemingly keeps track of who hasn’t received an elimination vote and Golf Ball tracks her chances of being eliminated, which almost always would be the same number for all the other contestants. The show’s creators, Michael and Cary Huang, commonly feature projects on their YouTube channels that involve graphs, numbers, stats, etc. You can see their interest in this show. One of the best aspects of the show are the “budget cuts”. Sometimes they go against the laws of physics and it’s hilarious. It’s a humorous parody of how shows can go through budget cuts and lose things that could be needed.

“Icy, because you have no arms, I’ll have to sit on you.”

The characters being certain objects is relevant. It affects how they progress. There’s jokes related to what they are. This gives more flavor to this series. Some characters, such as Bubble and Firey, easily die due to how their bodies are. Bubble is often popped. Sometimes this would require others to run to a “Recovery Center” to revive them. Golf Ball and Tennis Ball have no arms. This was a really clever way of showing the difference in characters and adding drama. If one relied on Bubble, they would be taking the risk of her popping. In Episode 14, Half a Loaf Is Better Than None, armless characters got sympathy points in a contest, which arm-having characters did not receive. However in Episode 16, Bowling, Now with Explosions!, the armless characters were not allowed to compete specifically because they were armless, but they could still receive the punishment of said episode. Like with Episode 16, sometimes factors out of the contestant’s hands (or feet) lead to them getting an unfair advantage or disadvantage. This generally didn’t work well as an unfair game isn’t as gripping or interesting.

As the show progressed, episodes were less eventful. A noteworthy example is Episode 24, Insectophobe’s Nightmare 2, it mostly just sets up the last episode and doesn’t have its own individuality. For the bulk of the episode, the remaining contestants chase bugs (which is not a competition) and the elimination results of Episode 23 take place at the end of the episode. It’s all filler.

SPOILERS

“So it looks like another ball is going home.”

There’s lots of things that don’t work here. Disappointingly, the friendship between two characters, Leafy and Pin in Episode 1 Part 1, Take the Plunge, lost relevance as soon as Episode 1 Part 2 started, due to them being on different teams. Why not explore that by having them miss each other or learn and change in some way? In Episode 18, Reveal Novum, Pencil wins fair and square, but is ultimately eliminated by having 105 points on a two-digit points system. The number in the hundredth place can’t be included, so she only has five points. This isn’t funny and it creates unnatural developments in the story. If the creators wanted Pencil on the block, she should’ve just lost so hard that she fairly got into that position. In Episode 9, Insectophobe’s Nightmare, a team, the Squashy Grapes, are disadvantaged by being split in half, despite not having done something to constitute that.

The relationships that the characters have is one of the most interesting parts of the show. If a certain character is eliminated, it’ll have some impact on the people that knew them. When Blocky was eliminated, Pen and Snowball were upset. Unfortunately, Tennis Ball didn’t react much to his best friend, Golf Ball, being eliminated. Match’s elimination led to a shift in Pencil and Bubble’s alliance. Ice Cube replaced Match in said alliance, but when Pencil was eliminated, Ice Cube divorced from Bubble in the alliance (despite having no reason to). Ice Cube was always less involved in the alliance than Pencil and Bubble. The series shifted to being about the characters of Bubble, Firey, and Leafy. Bubble and Leafy have a rocky relationship, while Firey and Leafy have a rocky, romantic relationship. It’s clear that the creators wanted Bubble to not be tethered to the alliance which had mostly been about Pencil and Match and instead have her play off of Leafy and Firey. It’s unfortunate that it was shoved off to the side and ignored unceremoniously.

“We choose the barf bag!”

Over the series, characters have been inconsistent with characterization. In Episode 15, Vomitaco, Pencil tastes vomit without any reason to, despite having been revolted by it earlier. Throughout the series, she goes from a valley girl type to more of a doer and “tomboy” for lack of a better term. She cares less than in the beginning about hurting people’s feelings. In Vomitaco, she deliberately pops Bubble as she’s annoyed by her. She wouldn’t have done that earlier on. She used to be portrayed as stupid, but got smarter. While the creator’s probably just stopped liking the initial character, this inadvertently shows character development. The creators often seemed afraid to set up something long term like character development. If they start the ball rolling, then that character is eliminated, the scenes dedicated to them changing are more or less redundant. It became somewhat obvious who would make it to the end, as these characters were the most popular, so they likely wouldn’t be voted out.

In Episode 25, Return of the Hang Glider, Firey and Coiny, both enemies, befriend each other, even though there is a reason, it doesn’t make sense. The two have nitpicked problems to have of the other person in the past. This suggests they felt a need to dislike each other. Admittedly, Firey did mature quite a bit once Coiny was eliminated and who knows whether Coiny’s personality changed once out of the game? If Coiny was to grow, we should’ve seen it. He actually gets more character development in Season 2. The Announcer initially said eliminated contestants would be sent home, but it was later revealed that even from the beginning, they were actually sent to the TLC, the Tiny Loser Chamber. Was he lying? What is even the point of the TLC. On another note, why is he giving away Dream Island? Why does he want to befriend Leafy and Firey in Episode 20, Gardening Hero? Many of these questions aren’t answered. Leafy often switches from being nice to mean, sometimes in the same episode. In Episode 17, The Reveal, she gives Bubble a gift… but takes it away later. Vomitaco features her giving Pen a taco, but only for an absurd amount of money. There should’ve been a reason for Leafy’s character shifts, but none was ever given. In the end, it seemed she was the antagonist, but that was seldom made explicit. She was nicer in the beginning of the show, when no one was getting character development. She was just “a nice one”.

“Wow, it’s been eleven hours and still no one has blinked.”

It’s not an issue to have contestants joining/rejoining the game if done sparingly, but near the end it became way too common. The episodes where someone joins or rejoins are numbers 9, 14, 18, and 21. Things began to matter less as there were so many chances to rejoin. What’s it matter if someone’s kicked? They might be back next time! The characters of Flower and David both weren’t interesting or developed and were eliminated briefly after (re)joining. There was also a very large gap of time in which they were absent, so you don’t care about those characters as you haven’t been following them. This can happen with a show so dependent on how the viewers vote/think, but it doesn’t make good storytelling. It doesn’t make sense from a storytelling aspect to jam in characters that don’t do or add much. Flower served the purpose of showing that not being interesting gets one eliminated. She was the first person eliminated in the show. She was an example of how the format of this atypical show works. That’s all.

“Twenty-two cakes have come and gone, but none of them are nearly as magnificent as the Grand Cake.”

The last episode solves certain things and leaves other things open. Firey wins Dream Island. He then lets everyone in Dream Island except Leafy. Firey’s reasoning is that Leafy didn’t like Firey’s ferris wheel from Episode 24 and this means that Leafy is hateful. However, the only reason Leafy didn’t like it is due to a lava fall that painfully killed her. I can understand Firey getting offended, but he is a very forgiving person. In this same episode he forgives Coiny and lets him on the island. How could something so little cause Firey to not let in the person nicest to him? Did the episode just need a conflict or a comeuppance for how she treated Bubble? Leafy then secretly buys Dream Island, is caught, and is revealed to be a Football. That is completely out of nowhere. Next we see of Leafy, she’s a leaf again. What’s the point in the football? Why not pick something at least the same shape as a leaf? The contestants then suggest Leafy be killed and almost every contestant turns into a mob out for blood. This contradicts some of the characters, who seemingly wouldn’t do such a thing. Firey saves her before anything happens. Firey then says he doesn’t care about Dream Island, but he does care about Leafy. While this likely doesn’t happen based on the events of Season 2, one would think that Firey and Leafy go to and live in Dream Island happily ever after. There’s also a jarring shift as earlier in the episode, Firey was terribly offended by Leafy. We never saw him change his mind on that.

If the writers wanted Firey to stop being cool with Leafy, why not have Bubble tell Firey of how much of a jerk Leafy has been to Bubble? This would tie that loose plot thread into the episode. Leafy was quantifying how nice Bubble is as a person for some of the season. That would suggest a deep lack of respect Leafy has for people. While this would call for carefully crafting the story, what if Firey thought that he liked Leafy so much he couldn’t let her in? Leafy is also not the kind of person that would be vindictive enough to steal something like Dream Island from a bunch of people who didn’t do anything. Furthermore, some characters criticize Flower for killing some characters and their Recovery Centers, but then they’re fine with killing Leafy? Almost all the characters with varying opinions and personalities, turned to obsessing for revenge over something. These character flips are all over the place.

A subtle aspect of the ending is quite nice. Everyone except Firey, Leafy, David, and the deceased end up where they initially were. That’s a nice way to bookend the series. Note that in Episode 1 Part 1, the characters were just hanging out on this big, mostly empty plain.  The Announcer also ends up with his people, an alien race, which presumably he was with prior to the series starting. If you ignore Leafy and Firey’s odd blip in friendship, it is nice how they get together, which built over the course of the season.

OVERVIEW

“Oh no, I’ve been dulled!”

This season lost a lot near the end. I wonder if the creators became eager for it to end or if they wanted free time, so they rushed together the stories. I appreciate how original it all is and Battle is a fun watch. It’s fascinating looking into the minds of Michael and Cary Huang, who were two kids that crafted this whole world. Battle for Dream Island sadly isn’t as good as I had thought and I doubt that most who bother to give Battle for Dream Island the 3 hours and 50 minutes will get anything more from it than I did. If anything, longer episodes would probably help the season by giving more time to story and character development. The show’s still okay, regardless.