The Force Awakens review

The Force Awakens is a definite step up from the prequel trilogy (I liked Revenge of the Sith quite a bit and Attack of the Clones somewhat). The focus is back on the storytelling in the search to find Luke before the new form of the Galactic Empire, the First Order, led by Kylo Ren, General Hux and Leader Snoke do, and I like the characters of Kylo Ren and Hux as villains quite a bit.

We get some new characters here, and I do like them. I liked the older Han Solo the best, though; when I first saw this film in Kerrville, I thought it was a bit slow until he shows up. Then the characterization, action, and emotion build from there to a great climax at the First Order's Starkiller Base.

I also saw this in the D-Box seating gimmick at the Santikos Palladium AVX in northern San Antonio today, and, let's just say, it's like riding Star Tours at Disney World/Disneyland for two hours, but not too rough to make you lose your popcorn. That was a lot of fun, and I recommend you see this film, and in D-Box or IMAX if you can. Drive 5 hours if you have to.

Disney Editorial: Inside Out Edition

I just came back from watching the Pixar movie Inside Out, and I was very impressed with the concept.

Then I realized, Disney, you need to use Inside Out in the Imagination pavilion in Epcot. Have it be in the theater that housed Captain EO. I wouldn't completely remove Figment's ride, since he's become an iconic character in Epcot, but you can integrate him into Inside Out's Emotions.

I mean, this is common sense. And on that note, I think we need an updated Cranium Command. Inside Out's director, Pete Docter, did work on that.

My RT review of Tomorrowland.

Oh, boy. This is going to be the most complicated review I've written on Rotten Tomatoes yet. Head's up.

First off, while I like George Clooney as an actor, he came across as a bit too much mean spirited when he shows up halfway through the film. Blasting the girl with the door was a bit too much for me. Plus, he doesn't have enough chemistry with the other actors besides Hugh Laurie to be effective as Frank Walker.

But, why did we need all the end of the world stuff? I saw a preview of this movie in the Captain EO theater in the Tomorrowland zone in Disneyland last May, and the sneak preview looked really cool. It detailed how Frank Walker got to Tomorrowland, and I think a story of him growing up and putting his mind to work there would have been a cool, inspirational story to tell. Sadly, it looked like the scenes from the Disneyland sneak preview were the best scenes in the film, as it shifts tone for probably the wrong reasons to being an on the run urban movie, and it takes too long to get back to the fantasy. We didn't see enough of Tomorrowland to really get how that world works, and I think that's a missed opportunity.

The story also committed another sin in regards to the future world's existence, and this is where the film could be considered as having nuked the fridge. We start to talk about the end of the world through several means, including but not limited to global warming, icecaps melting, tornadoes, flooding, nuclear explosions, to name a few. Putting this particular plot point in, I think, was a big mistake.

Some of the characters need work too. You don't particularly care for the ones who die, and they are not written cleverly enough. It all leads to an unenergetic climax and ending, which really let me down.

And of course, the movie had a massive budget. This is the third Disney film in recent years to suffer this problem after John Carter and The Lone Ranger, which I have not seen. If you're going to have a James Cameron-sized production, the writing and action needs to be on the level of Titanic and Terminator. Tomorrowland wasn't.

Disney was hoping for a futuristic, invention themed film, but after seeing this, I'm afraid they have instead crafted their own equivalent to Universal's Waterworld, which is a very bad thing. Yeah, this film has the same potholes as 1995's Waterworld. Amazing how mistakes people have made back in the 90s are resurfacing now.

If you're just interested in decent action, you may want to give Tomorrowland a shot, but it's got the same style-over-substance problems from Waterworld, along with the overbudget from it and 2005's Sahara to match. I'm not going to really recommend it. Skip to after the end of the world with Mad Max if you DON'T take your kids, or go for a second dose of Avengers if you do.

Disney Editorial And Suggestions 2

Another recommendation I would like to make to Disney President Thomas Staggs is the addition of a water park in the Disneyland Resort.

But not just a normal water park.

I would strongly suggest an indoor water park.

So, why my suggestion?

Well, it seems the next logical step to add a water park to Disneyland now that the renovations on Disney California Adventure are now complete, and we have had time to enjoy the fruits of Disney's labor. Someone on the Internet once compared Disney World and Disneyland by citing Disney World as a desktop computer, and Disneyland as a laptop. That makes sense to me, seeing how much power a desktop and how much room Disney World can grow, while it's more convenient to navigate Disneyland due to it's smaller size. But Disney World DOES have two water parks, plus several resorts with elaborate pools, and the Yacht and Beach Club, which have the quintessential mini-water park, Stormalong Bay. Topping that in Disneyland will be tough, but the challenge is part of the fun.

As for it being indoors, that's both to allow the park to be used regardless of the weather, and to give it an edge by having several levels of pools in a giant multi floored building, each with a Disney theme, and slides that would go down to the lower floors. The themes I would suggest are as follows, but let's keep others in mind.


1. Fantasia and Fantasia 2000

2. The Little Mermaid

3. Pirates Of the Caribbean

4. Finding Nemo

5. Frozen


I have also heard that other companies have built indoor theme parks elsewhere on Earth, and I do feel it's time for Disney, the industry leader, to join the fray.

So, I would build the water park on the Simba parking lot. That is the closest lot to the resort hotels, and the only one within the general rectangle that the resort is shaped like. I am unaware if there may be parking problems, so I WOULD build an extension to the Disney & Friends parking garage before closing the Simba parking lot and initiating the groundbreaking on the water park.

Last, but not least, the name.

Let's call it:

DISNEY MARINE WATER PARK

If Disney were to pull the feet I'm am suggesting off, it would be yet another innovation and technology accomplishment for Disney Imagineers and The Walt Disney Company, and will revolutionize the industry.

This challenge is up to you, Thomas Staggs, and all the wonderful people at Disney!