Sammy's Adventures: The Secret Passage

Sammy's Adventures in glourious 3D

I was a kid once.

I could barely remember what it was like to go on an adventure of a lifetime then emerge from it all bubbly and excited.

Which in a nutshell is what Sammy's Adventures: The Secret Passage is about.

Little Sammy the sea turtle (his mommy must have named her brood while in the egg - one by one by one by one...) hatches from his egg to begin an epic journey, the journey of life - complete in 3D animation.

Along the way, he chums with best pal and jellyfish slugging Ray (one of his supposed many brothers, who looks a suspiciously different breed, ie. colour of turtle); takes 'flying lessons' from hungry seagulls; gets caught by humans and joins the hippy movement; and goes on a hunt for a secret passage that brings him to the south pole. And of course at the end of it all, he finds his long lost love Shelly.

It's all good kiddy fun.

Too bad I'm not a kid anymore.

Life through the eyes of a turtle - an eagle's eye view....

Oh crab!

Enjoying life in the sun - in a makeshift luxury yacht....

Seriously, I wouldn't have watched this movie if I hadn't been asked to do a review. Though to be fair, there is no doubt whatsoever who the target audience is - children - and more specifically those below the age of 12.

And it was telling, sitting amongst an adult audience, that there was hardly any laughter throughout the screening of the preview. On my part, I peaked at a grand total of one good chuckle - when the baby eaglets were pecking away at Sammy's cute bald head.

If you're looking for a good balance of adventure and intelligent humour like say in Finding Nemo, Sammy's Adventures simply will not fit the bill.

The writing is too uninspired for that. Everytime Sammy loses Shelly, a new character pops up to tell him where she is. Deus ex machina in a cartoon? No need to explain to the kids....

Not to say there aren't any saving graces.

Sammy's Adventures proves once again that 3D belongs best for now, in animation rather than in god-awful epics like Clash of the Titans.

The technology isn't perfect. Landscapes and individual objects still look like those cut outs from 3D picture books (to which by the way, there is a wonderful nod during the end credits). But the renditions of sand and water and waves can somtimes border on the sublime. The producers too, make full use of the 3D animation to produce some stunning 'in your face' visuals - the unforgettable image being that of a menacing and inquisitive snake.

And for a kid's film, the movie also brought up a few environmental issues facing the world today - the threat and pollution of oil spills; the problem of whaling etc. These can certainly be appreciated by a young and impressionable audience.

All in, Sammy's Adventures: The Secret Passage can be a fun and unforgettable ride for little children, but adults sans kids may not be too eager to catch this cute animated turtle.


Moometer Reading:
Moo-o??

Query for:

? Being a kid's film: Being a movie primarily targeted at children, it would be unfair to judge it with adult eyes. And yet there are easily plenty of animation films - Finding Nemo among others that are funnier and that appeal to both adults and children. Sammy's Adventures thus gets a generous Moo-o when its rating could easily have been worse.

? Poor Scripting: It seems pretty clear that the writer was thinking: It's for kids! Who cares? Well, I did for one.

The Karate Kid (2010)

The Karate Kid kicks on - in China....

There is practically no karate in this new Karate Kid.

But aside from that little wistful desire that America should finally get the rest of the world right, there is really little doubt that the former Fresh Prince of Bel Air, Will Smith, has served up something of a gem, while officially presenting his son and heir apparent, Jaden Smith, as a future and upcoming heartthrob and superstar.

Simply put, Jaden is his father's son. Adorable at such a young age, the boy nevertheless displays an irresistible charm and an uncanny flair for humour that his father is so famous for.

Sure, he still lacks a little something in the emotive department, but like his character Dre Parker quips while being trashed in table tennis by a Chinese man (???), "Dude! I'm only 12!"

JS & JC - striking up a fine camaraderie....

Jackie Chan takes on a bunch of kids... ouch - for them....

Jaden Smith - your up and coming action superstar?

But enough of that for now. How fare this 2010 version against its 1984 original?

The film is essentially a remake of the 1984 Karate Kid starring Ralph Macchio and the famous Pat Morita. In essence however, this 2010 film is actually quite different in tone.

What sets this apart from its predecessor is the injection of quite a bit of comedy, and in a sense, it works very well.

Jackie Chan delivers some of the most hilarious deadpan lines as Mr Han, the kungfu master masquerading as a local apartment caretaker.

Equally funny, though perhaps unintentionally, is the sight of the legendary Jackie Chan pitted against a bunch of Chinese kids (all smaller size than him), when Mr Han tries to save Dre's skin. Somehow I can picture a bunch of white kids ganging up on Pat Morita's Miyagi, but here? I don't wonder if JC himself wasn't embarrassed with the match-up.

The Karate Kid (2010) IS funny, I give you that. And to be fair, the representation of Chinese Kungfu, especially showcasing a trip up the mountain (Mt. Wudang perhaps?), is excellent.

But I cannot help but suspect that the comic element is both a boon and a bane. What worked well as a coming of age movie as the 1984 original was, seems to now have been lost amidst all the laughter and levity.

Ralph Macchio & Pat Morita from the original - a more coming of age experience....

I remember one of the original film's iconic moments, when Daniel (Macchio) adopted the crane stance against his opponent - that was quite something else.

But while that scene is repeated in the remake, it ended up being more funny than actually inspiring.

The story may be the same, but the setting and tone are certainly very different. Perhaps it is a reflection of the times we're in. But in no way should those detract us from an otherwise entertaining, and fairly successful remake.


Moometer Reading:
Moo-o..

A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010)

"One, two... Freddy's coming for you...."

Oh please no more Nightmares.

The highly successful franchise has seen a total of seven sequels to the original A Nightmare On Elm Street, so the producers decide it is time to do a remake and reboot - a reflection of current film making trends I'm afraid.

But how do you take a novelty idea from 1984 and rejuvenate it for today's audiences when it has all but worn thin?

The idea of course is to reinvent, to update on the original to fit the times. Unfortunately, this 2010 version fails on both counts, making for an ultimately plodding storyline with cheap and predictable scares.

To be fair, this is indeed a basic remake, with only a few major changes from the original. The characters are more or less the same. The major difference is the serial child killer in the original has been relegated to a maybe only child molester (I know, what in the world...?).

And of course there is Freddy Krueger, the masterful and iconic Robert Englund now replaced by Jackie Earle Haley, who was himself incredible as Rorschach in Watchmen.

I still remember as a kid, how a classmate of mine fervently did his own impression of that scissorhand arch villain - complete with hat, glove and claws - and he called himself Freddy.

This was the effect Freddy Krueger had on scores of young lads throughout the world for a good decade and more.

This new Freddy unfortunately, lacks character. The face looks too plastic, though that is supposedly done to more closely match those of burn victims.

No teenager or otherwise is going to be inspired or truly frightened by this Freddy, certainly not when Freddy lookalikes, parodies and caricatures have been around for over two decades.

Yes. Hide that face a bit more, because Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy Krueger doesn't quite... cut it....

Rooney Mara and Kyle Gallner play the only two characters in the film with any personality at all....

Do not fall asleep in class, or Freddy's gonna get you....

While there is little to take away from this reboot, the production value is nonetheless quite decent. The cinematography and sets are also pretty good, though an over-reliance on poor CGI tends to let the film down.

The supporting cast are forgettable, underdeveloped, or just plainly Freddy fodder. Only the two leads, played by Rooney Mara as Nancy and Kyle Gallner as Quentin, give any favourable performances at all.

Reviewers slam Mara's "wooden acting", but I disagree. I have known girls like that - shy, hesitant, unsure of how to express themselves - and to see two atypical teenagers fighting off a nightmare villain is exactly how you want you want horror flicks to be.

And the jury will have to be out on the new Krueger. Clearly the new makeup has created a stumbling block, but Haley is a talented actor, and had there been an expansion on his backstory, his performance just might have worked.

Unfortunately, the film chose to introduce precisely that, then inexplicably abandon it in the end for a silly twist that fooled basically no one.

Haley is signed on as Freddy Krueger for another two installments, so I'm hoping he really gets to make that role his own, to give it a new lease of life.

Because otherwise, like a broken record that keeps on playing, this could be one reel Nightmare that really never ends....

Moometer Reading:
Moo?

Query for:

? No sense of direction: Seriously, Director Samuel Bayer has to take responsibility for this one. The story was already there, all he needed to do was to plan some new and interesting scares and kills. How is it possible that one could visualise a story actually worse than the original? And while it's fine to create a darker, more serious Freddy, what about giving this Freddy some meaning for being so? It's one thing trying to fill a big pair of boots, quite another to just make a simply bland and boring film.