A Very Harold and Kumar 3D Christmas

Friends Make Christmas Better

There aren't too many people who haven't at least heard of Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle. I personally enjoyed the movie, but did not see it's sequel, the name of which I do not even remember. Still, I became interested in seeing the third because of what I expected from the 3-D, which is what I got. It's solid 3-D, and very gimmicky, taking every opportunity to not only exploit it, as well as make fun of the fact they were exploiting it. Surprisingly enough, this is a 3-D film that takes place mostly at night, but the 3-D still works, and it is never hard to see what is happened on screen, a problem that a lot of 3-D films have not realized can and will happen.

The plot of the film is this. Harold (played by John Cho) wishes to impress his father-in-law (Danny Trejo), and promises to decorate the Christmas tree that his father-in-law has grown for a total of eight years. Harold's old friend Kumar (Kal Penn) comes over to bring a package left at the old apartment they used to share. The tree ends up being destroyed by accident, and the two have to find a replacement. That's the plot. That's the fun thing about films like this. The plot is made to be extremely simple, but everything that happens to the main characters is nothing short of over-the-top and ridiculous. Everything that can go wrong, and more, will go wrong.

The jokes are mostly about disgusting subjects. One man gets excrement thrown at his car window, Harold gets this nether regions stuck to a pole, and we get the most gruesome claymation sequence I have ever seen. If these are the kind of jokes you like, than you will have a ball with the film, and I can attest to that. It's a typical stoner flick, where at least one character spends most of the film either doing drugs or on drugs, and the film knows how to not make this just a cheap joke, it just goes as far as it can with what it is doing.

I saw the film in 3-D, and I recommend in the most in that format. So in 3-D, I'd say it earns itself a 3.5 out of 5. But by itself, the movie is a solid 3 out of 5 stars. It's a really fun film, and I suggest you check it out while you can still watch it in 3-D, even it the means making Christmas feel a little early.

Alice in Wonder (2010)

Ohh Pretty.... Bad.

Last year, I had several friends who had gone to see Tim Burton's version of Alice in Wonderland, a film I had little interest in. The trailers gave me a good impression of the film, it was either going to be interesting or bad. My friends all really enjoyed it, so I bit the bullet and gave the film a chance. I will upfront say I did not see the film in 3-D, but from what I have heard about the 3-D, and the way the film looked in 2-D, I saved money with good reason. People who saw the 3-D version paid extra money for absolutely nothing.

People seem to be divided about the film, which is actually how I first felt when I saw it. The look of this film is incredible, there is no denying that. The world of Alice in Wonderland has always been stylized, even in the original book. Burton's style works terrifically for this film. It's one of the darker version of Wonderland you'll ever see, and it works because of that. The giant mushrooms look cartoony, and the beasts are completely bizarre and frightening. I love the way this film looks.

 

 

But the dark aspect also gives one not so small negative. This film was given a PG rating, and that is an utter joke. Children under the age of twelve should not see this film. TWO scenes features a river filled with severed human heads. Yes, in one shot they are made of cement, but that is a facade revealed in a later scene. The heads are real, and the river is actually blood. This is at least PG-13, and I will not argue with those who think the film deserved an R. I am the type of person who fights for more G-ratings in darker children's films, knowing children can handle more than the MPAA seems to be thinking nowadays, but this is way too far for me. I repeat, do not let children under twelve see this picture. It's disgusting it got away with PG, don't let it fool you.

 

 

Another negative is the look of the film doesn't work for one character, The Mad Hatter, played by Johnny Depp. The Hatter looks like a drag queen, there is no going around it. It's ridiculous, inane. This is the ugliest, least flattering Mad Hatter costume I have ever seen, and most likely will ever see. I hated it in the trailer, and was really the reason I lost interest in the film originally. My friends tried to convince me otherwise, but I stand by what I thought then, and I still think it is a horrible design.

 

 

I would like to point out that this is a Disney film. Similar to A Christmas Carol (which I have not seen), this is an adaptation that Disney has already done. I will take this time to say the original animated version of Disney's Alice in Wonderland is a masterpiece of animation. Disney should not have tried to do another adaptation of the book, they did it perfectly the first time. Please look for the film if you are one of the few people who has never seen it, you will not regret it, it's beautiful.

 

 

This film on the other hand, has a wonderful style but absolutely no substance. While that can work for some films, it fails miserably in this one. This film is a very low two out of five stars. Part of me actually hates the film, but not enough to rank it any lower. It's a bad film, that had no reason to be made.