‘Cloudy’ brighter than expected (3.5/5)

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs

Starring: Bill Hader, Anna Faris, Bruce Campbell
Directed by: Phil Lord, Chris Miller
Rating: PG for brief, mild language.
Running time: 1 hour, 30 minutes

I wasn’t in a big hurry to see “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” for a couple of reasons.

1.) I like to think that I’m open to movies, but truthfully, I’m highly biased against any recent animation that doesn’t come out of Pixar Studios (or, to a lesser extent, Pixar’s owner, The Walt Disney Co.). Before “Cloudy with a Chance,” Sony Pictures Animations has been responsible for such bombs as “Open Season” and “Surf’s Up.”

2.) It’s based on one of my all-time favorite childhood books, and the catastrophes that were “The Golden Compass” and “Where the Wild Things Are” have left me wondering why the imaginative spirit that those books inspired within me seemed to skip over anyone in the movie industry. (I refuse to watch “Bridge to Terabithia” for that very reason.)

But it’s hard to say no to 11-year-old sisters (especially when they have a vice grip on the remote and disturbing knowledge of a young adult’s pain threshold). And so I found myself last Saturday nursing a hand with a Wii-remote-shaped bruise and watching “Cloudy with a Chance.”

Thankfully, it got me laughing right away — a banana falling on the Columbia Lady was hilarious and put me in just the right mood for the film.

The charm and originality of the book are preserved in the movie, as well. Flint Lockwood (Bill Hader) is the typical socially-awkward-but-wants-to-make-a-difference nerd (he actually reminded me a bit of Hiccup from “How to Train Your Dragon”). His inventions, such as the spray-on shoes, are pretty cool, but often backfire.

Despite his father Tim’s requests for Flint to give up the science act and join his side at the local bait shop, Flint soon comes up with a way to turn the flavorless island town of Swallow Falls (where everyone eats sardines) into a regular smorgasbord — a machine that can transform water molecules into food.

When the machine is accidentally launched into the atmosphere, wonderful (and delicious) things begin to happen — mostly in the form of cheeseburgers.

Flint finds himself in the company of a junior weather reporter, the beautiful, vibrant and overly perky Sam Sparks (what a great name for a weather reporter) played by Anna Faris.

Swallow Falls used to be a pretty OK town — until the Baby Brent Sardine Canning factory closed down. Now, Mayor Shelbourne (Bruce Campbell) is determined to find a way to put Swallow Falls back on the map — and with Flint’s invention, he believes he has found a way. But the effects of gluttony catches up to him in many ways, and soon the machine becomes a danger to the town’s residents and tourists.

With the help of Sam and his pet monkey, Steve, Flint must shut off his best invention before it destroys the island.

Flint, Sam, and the formerly famous “Baby” Brent must all come to terms with who they actually are — which leads to many hilarious, heartwarming conclusions.

Flint’s pet monkey Steve (voiced by the ever-hilarious Neil Patrick Harris) is 100 percent the best part of this movie. I only wish that he was the main character — that’s one spinoff movie that I could actually get behind.

Maybe my one major complaint with “Cloudy with a Chance” is how easily it lends itself to becoming a video game — it was hard to forget that I wasn’t sitting on the couch with an X-Box remote in hand at times. The visuals and plot were great, but I wondered at the motives at times.

Overall, this is one literary adaptation that didn’t make me want to scream — an accomplishment in its own right. There’s no doubt that “Cloudy with a Chance” is aimed for the young, but I think it will also appeal to those young at heart.

3.5 of 5 stars

‘Toy Story 3’: Pixar wins again (4.5/5)

Toy Story 3

Starring: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Joan Cusack
Directed by: Lee Unkrich
Rating: G
Running time: 1 hour, 43 minutes

Be prepared to be taken “to infinity and beyond” once again.

Pixar has pulled off the impossible: Meeting (and exceeding) the challenge of concluding a beloved storyline.

I have no shame in admitting that I was heavily skeptical going into the latest Pixar production. I wondered how the minds behind such groundbreaking and adored films as “Toy Story,” “A Bug’s Life,” “Monsters, Inc.,” “Finding Nemo,” “The Incredibles,” “Cars,” “Ratatouille,” “Wall•E” and “Up” could excuse this apparent slip of creativity.

But I am exorbitantly happy to say that in no way is “Toy Story 3” a mistake.

Many “kids” my age feel a certain ownership over Andy’s toys. (After all, I was only 9 when “Toy Story” came out in 1995!) Woody, Buzz and the gang were as much a part of our childhoods as they were his.

And in a hugely unanticipated way, this sense of investment is exactly what makes “Toy Story 3” spectacular.

While Andy is preparing to leave for college, he faces the heart-wrenching decision of what to do with his old toys. Through a series of mistakes and misunderstandings, rather than ending up in the attic, the whole gang finds themselves at Sunnyside Day Care.

There they are taken under the wing of Lots-O’-Huggin’ Bear (who is animated so wonderfully you just want to pick him out of the screen and squeeze him). Lots-O’ turns the toys’ feelings of abandonment into joy as he explains that at the day care, they will always be played with and never be outgrown.

The ever-loyal Woody (Tom Hanks) insists that they belong to Andy and that it was a mistake that brought them to Sunnyside, but the other toys quickly fall in love with their new surroundings.

Woody sets out on his own to return to Andy and runs into a handful of others who inform him that Sunnyside is no place for a toy, a fact that Buzz (Tim Allen), Jessie, Hamm, Rex, Slinky Dog, the Potato Heads and the rest soon discover.

“Toy Story 3” is full of hilarious antics, from Barbie and Ken to Buzz’s Spanish mode and the aliens’ continuing obsession with “the claw.” The script is wonderfully clever and overflowing with quotable lines. Director Lee Unkrich walks the fine line between heartwarming and corny with ease, never for a moment slipping into the “groan zone.”

Having watched (thousands of times) and loved the first two “Toy Stories” only made the third that much more meaningful. I felt a real connection with Andy’s poignant decision that transformed “Toy Story 3” from just another installment into a bittersweet conclusion (be sure to take some tissues; I certainly needed them).

Although this movie is absolutely appropriate for all ages and should be enjoyed by those 2 to 102, timid children may be frightened by a few of the new characters (namely a freaky baby doll and a terrifying cymbal monkey).

The 3-D aspect is a nice complement to the latest adventure (save the obnoxious glasses) and ties in nicely with the always impeccable animation of which Pixar is constantly capable. But if you have to wait for the film to come out on DVD, the loss of 3-D will not impede on this incredible film in the slightest.

Pixar has absolutely outdone itself again. “Toy Story 3” is a wonderful sendoff for our small, plastic friends and a loving gift from Pixar to its loyal audience. From beautiful animation to a captivating story, “Toy Story 3” is superb from beginning to end and is a lesson in the magic of moviemaking.

4.5 of 5 stars

Soaring ‘Dragon’ enchants (4.5/5)

"How To Train Your Dragon"

Starring: Jay Baruchel, Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson.
Directed by: Dean DeBlois, Chris Sanders.
Rating: PG for sequences of intense action and some scary images, and brief mild language.
Running time: 1 hour, 38 minutes.

Time to get fired up.

In an industry lately devoid of charm and originality, Dreamworks Animation pulls through with the hugely entertaining 3-D animated flick “How to Train Your Dragon.”

It’s the most fun you’ve had in the movie theater for far, far too long.

From offbeat names, hilarious dialogue, beautiful scenery and a dynamic and exciting plot, “Dragon” will leave you wanting to harness your own oversized reptile and fly off to adventure.

Forget overdrawn title sequences and pompous entry credits — “Dragon” tosses you straight into the fray of a viking town under attack by a swarm of the winged beings with unexpected humor and excitement.

It’s in the middle of this chaos that we meet Hiccup (Jay Baruchel), our young protagonist. In a town full of oversized, brash, battle-hardened vikings (not the least of whom is Hiccup’s father, Chieftan Stoick the Vast, voiced by Gerard Butler), our small, thin, sarcastic hero doesn’t quite fit the mold. The other vikings, including Stoick, doubt Hiccup’s ability to grow into a dragon-killing warrior. And with his untraditional weaponry skills, Hiccup doesn’t help himself out too much.

But when Hiccup brings down the stealthy and dangerous Night Fury, a feat no other viking has accomplished, his life changes in ways that he (and the audience) never expected.

You’ll learn all this in the first minute or two, but I hate to give away more. “Dragon” is a film best entered into with a clear mind and no expectations. It’s a movie to be enjoyed moment-by-moment (for each moment holds a treasure) instead of waiting in anticipation for that one plot point, or that one scene from the trailer.

A wonderful supplement to the already superb storyline and eye-catching graphics is the impeccable voice cast. Notable performances include Christopher Mintz-Plasse (“Superbad,” “Role Models”) as the nerdy Fishlegs, whose dragon knowledge is reflected in certain role-playing game terms; Jonah Hill (“Superbad”) as the rude Snotlout; and Craig Ferguson as Gobber, the hilariously crass trainer of dragon-killer recruits.

One of the first movies truly worthy of watching in 2010, “Dragon” is a heartwarming film that will leave you soaring long after you leave the theater. You’ll find yourself rooting for Hiccup through the very end.

It’s fun, it’s enchanting, and it was made with such obvious care that I may need to retract my previous doubts about the plummeting, money-driven industry.

The few downsides include that “Dragon” is based on a book, and so is not quite as original an idea as it may appear, and that the actors’ distinctly Scottish and American accents coupled with a soundtrack of Celtic overtones ignore the predominantly Nordic ancestry of Vikings (though the script does include lines devoted to the Norse gods).

But these meager flaws don’t even begin to hamper the beauty of “How to Train Your Dragon.”

Although parts of “Dragon” may frighten very small children, I would recommend this movie as a must-see film for adults and kids alike.

4.5 of 5 stars

One-dimensional ‘9’ falls flat (3/5)

9

Starring: Elijah Wood, John C. Reilly, Jennifer Connelly.
Directed by: Shane Acker.
Rating: PG-13 for violence and scary images.
Running time: 1 hour, 19 minutes.

“9” had a lot of potential.

Its unique visual style is nothing short of amazing. The look of the characters themselves is enough to draw in the audience.

Unfortunately, these should not be the sole aspects that keep an audience interested through the film’s short running time. But, in the case of “9,” it almost is.

It goes without saying that most of the characters are one-dimensional. In fact, that’s almost the point. But it comes across as shallow and not at all as the profound plot device the creators intended.

“9” came on the heels of the successful “Coraline,” both produced by Tim Burton and under the oversight of Focus Features, and actually the very beginnings of both movies are exceptionally similar.

But where “Coraline” excelled in ingenuity and the exploration of a dark fantasy, “9” just leaves its audience wanting.

The movie takes place after the destruction of mankind. Before his death, a scientist created nine “stitchpunks” (as director Shane Acker calls them) because, he says, “life must go on.”

Each of the stitchpunks is made from piecing together various bits of fabric and material (zippers, camera lenses, canvas, etc.) and has a numeral hand-painted on its back.

When 9 awakens, he finds himself apparently alone in a desolate and bleak world. After leaving the dead scientist’s room, he soon finds the other stitchpunks, as well as a terrible, metallic dog-like monster.

Each of the stitchpunks has its own unique traits:

1: The oldest and leader of those stitchpunks that have not struck out on their own. His favorite sayings include “We have rules” and “Questions are pointless.” Blames 9 for many of the events that transpire after 9 awakens.

2: An old inventor who is fascinated with creating things.

3 and 4: Shy twins who live by themselves in a library. They soak up all of the knowledge they can and, lacking the ability to speak, are able to use their eyes as projectors.

5: A healer and a mechanic, 5 is also a devoted friend as seen with his attitudes toward 2 and 9.

6: Possibly insane, 6 draws the same forms on paper after paper. Lives with 1 but is mostly in a world of his own.

7: The “female” of the group, 7 is the warrior. She has abandoned 1’s ways of avoiding the metallic monster and instead seems to take it upon herself to try and destroy that which attacks the stitchpunks.

8: 1’s personal bodyguard, 8 is mean and seemingly clueless.

9: 9 is the character who most leans toward having any sort of depth. He is the “seeker of truth” and is very curious and sincere.

Like “District 9,” “9” began as a 10-minute short film created by Acker. This short film can be found on YouTube under the title “9,” but don’t watch it if you intend to watch the feature film. Watch it as a supplement instead. This short film has an astounding similarity to the feature film, but, while it may work as a 10-minute artistic venture, it just doesn’t function as well as a full-length motion picture.

A major problem with this film is the apparent lack of a target audience. I think here they tried to be the next “Finding Nemo” and appeal to people in all age groups, but somehow “9” just didn’t work out that way. Its fantastical elements, animated style and simple script would largely lend itself to younger viewers; however, the PG-13 rating and nigh-terrifying imagery would leave that crowd with nightmares. But the movie just doesn’t push enough boundaries to be that appealing to the older crowd, either.

It’s a wonderfully creative, imaginative idea. Unfortunately, the end product falls far short of the intended target.

‘Coraline’ realistic in more ways than one (4/5)

Coraline

Starring: Dakota Fanning, Teri Hatcher, Keith David.
Directed by: Henry Selick.
Rating: PG for thematic elements, scary images, some language and suggestive humor.
Running time: 1 hours, 40 minutes.


Coraline Jones is a typical “my way or the highway” 11-year-old girl — she whines, she complains, she’s too curious for her own good, she’s quick to make judgments and, frankly, she’s just a little brat.

But it’s refreshing to have a little girl actually behave like a little girl — not like the Pevensie kids from “Chronicles of Narnia,” who were obnoxious, too, but more in the “I’m so wholesome” kind of way.

And maybe her gumption is also why I like her. I was a little girl not too long ago (and, though I just turned 23 on Monday, many would still like to label me as such).

And not that her cheeky nature is all her fault. After all, much of Coraline’s poor attitude stems from her parents’ seeming indifference to her existence.

Coraline (voiced by the talented Dakota Fanning) and her parents moved from Michigan to an old, large, insect-ridden home in Oregon. Here her preoccupied mom and dad (Teri Hatcher and John Hodgman) immediately begin work on their gardening magazine — without ever setting foot outside. Instead, they remain intently glued to their computer screens, barely acknowledging Coraline when she tries her best to disrupt them.

While boredly examining the house, Coraline comes upon a half-sized door in the living room concealed by wallpaper. After much harassment, her mother relents in return for quiet, breaks herself away from her work, and opens the door for Coraline — who only discovers a bricked-up hole.

That night, Coraline is wakened by a mouse in her room. She chases it downstairs and sees it dash into the half-sized door. Expecting to trap the mouse, Coraline pries open the door and finds a long tunnel.

With fear obviously not being one of Coraline’s strong points, she immediately crawls through the tunnel only to end up — back at her house.

But instead of finding her tired, workaholic parents, Coraline discovers her “Other” parents — attentive, loving, button-eyed reflections of her real mom and dad.

Here’s where things really start to get weird. While Coraline’s “new” family, home and neighbors seems like everything she could want, things quickly take a dark turn when her “Other” mother insists on exchanging Coraline’s real eyes for buttons similar to everyone else’s in the “Other” world, and keeping Coraline in the “Other” world forever.

Though technically an “animated” film, “Coraline” plays out as a fairy tale nightmare sending unexpecting adults spiraling back into the bad dreams of childhood.

But, of course, as is the sad tale of many blockbuster hits these days, “Coraline” is not an original concept. In fact, it is a relatively short book written by Neil Gaiman, the oft-fantasy, oft-horroresque author of “Stardust” and “Neverwhere” fame.

It’s no surprise, really, that the unconventional Tim Burton would pick up “Coraline” and find it a good match. He even caught back up with director Henry Selick, whom he had worked with on “The Nightmare Before Christmas.” In fact, the introduction to “Coraline” may remind some of Jack Skeleton’s bony fingers. Tim Burton’s style is difficult to miss, but always a joy to see.

The amazing stop-motion in Coraline and the optional 3-D viewing show that animation has come a long way since Disney’s 1950 “Cinderella” and may be steps away from breaking into the realm of “serious” movies for real.

A note of caution for parents of young children: This is not a Disney movie. The aesthetic and imaginative story line could easily lend themselves to a kid-friendly movie; however, with Selick’s dark undertone and the generally nightmarish storyline, this is a film that could haunt kids long after bedtime. Heck, it even unnerved me a little, but, maybe I’m still just an 11-year-old girl at heart.

4 of 5 stars