REVIEW: Flow

Some call it a film for children; others criticize it as lazy and aimless storytelling. Some even find it boring. But after watching the animated film “Flow,” I can see why it has captivated audiences worldwide. 

“Flow” follows a cat trying to survive in a post-apocalyptic world where the water is continuously rising. The film’s protagonist, simply known as Cat, must work together with a group of animals to stay alive, including the Labrador, the Lemur, the Capybara and the Secretarybird. 

The film’s plot is loose and meandering, reflecting its unconventional creation process. Director Laila Bērziņa chose to forgo traditional storyboarding and worked without any deleted scenes, allowing the narrative to develop organically. This stream-of-consciousness approach lends the film a natural and almost dream-like quality that some viewers may find aimless. Yet for others, it’s this unpredictability that makes “Flow” feel so authentic, like a visual diary rather than a structured story. 

One of the most striking elements of “Flow” is its complete lack of dialogue. Instead, the film relies entirely on music and sound to convey emotion and progress the plot. The absence of spoken words forces the viewer to pay attention to the soft, pastel visuals in order to keep track of what is happening. This makes it impossible to absentmindedly scroll on your phone — you have to be present. The score, composed by Latvian musician Ilze Kalniņa, heightens the immersion with its haunting melodies. Through this unique combination of visual storytelling and sound design, “Flow” proves that a film doesn’t need dialogue to be moving.

The animation style of “Flow” is just as unique as its storytelling approach. Entirely created using Blender, a free and open-source graphics software, Flow stands as a testament to the power of independent animation. The decision to use Blender not only gave the film its signature fluidity and hand-crafted feel, but also demonstrated how accessible tools can produce Oscar-winning results.

The film’s critical success is undeniable. It won the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature and Best Original Score, impressively beating out Disney’s Inside Out 2 and Studio Ghibli’s Kaze no Uta. These wins marked Latvia’s first-ever Oscars, and the country erupted in celebration of the country’s recognition. Latvians hailed “Flow” as a victory for both the nation and the animation team.

Despite being an animated film, and therefore often perceived as child-oriented, “Flow” resonates with audiences of all ages. Its mix of tension, tenderness and visual beauty makes it not just a film to watch but a film to experience. While it might not appeal to everyone, “Flow” undeniably pushes the boundaries of what animation can achieve and challenges us to see storytelling through a new lens.

REVIEW: Mary Poppins

I had fond feelings but not much memory of Mary Poppins (1964), so when the Michigan Theatre showed this iconic, classic film, I was excited to re-explore the magical wonders and musical adventures the movie took me on in elementary school. At first, I feared the story would be too childish to enjoy, but I had a rather pleasant experience even as an adult.

The story takes place in early 20th-century London and around Jane and Michael Banks, the troublesome and ill-mannered children of George and Winifred Banks. Though wealthy and of respectable status, George and Winifred are emotionally distant parents. After Jane and Michael keep chasing away the nannies Winifred hires, George decides to take matters into his own hands and find the strictest nanny possible. Against his expectations, Mary Poppins arrives and immediately captures the innocent hearts of Jane and Michael with her rosy cheeks, magic items, and mysterious background. With Bert, a cheerful and kind street musician who works multiple odd jobs, Mary Poppins brings the children on unimaginable journeys while instilling discipline and moral principles through fun songs. Though written for children, the musical quality and melody of the songs in Mary Poppins, such as “A Spoonful of Sugar,” “Feed the Birds,” and the legendary “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious,” captivate audiences of all ages.

I was most surprised by Mary Poppins’ stoic, strict, and prideful personality because I imagined a nanny to possess a more soft-spoken and gentle quality. However, actress Julie Andrews’ portrayal of confidence and quiet kindness brought to life the perfect nanny for Jane and Michael, who did not have a consistent adult figure in their lives. In contrast to Mary’s authoritative demeanor, Dick Van Dyke’s character, Bert, is goofy and nurturing in his own way. His Cockney accent and regular fourth-wall-breaking antics bring a lighthearted energy and make each scene more immersive.

I can see why this movie made such a deep impression on me as a kid. For younger audiences, Mary Poppins is a film that fosters imagination in the mundane scenes of daily life, inspires hope for a more exciting future career, and helps children identify the simpler joys in even doing chores. On the other hand, for adult viewers, this movie serves as an example of good parenthood and an exploration of family dynamics, specifically highlighting how misunderstandings and emotional neglect can influence children. This thematic element encourages adult viewers to evaluate the method and significance of nurturing emotional bonds within their own families.

Although the storytelling starts strong while setting the scene and introducing the main characters, the plot grows frustratingly slow without much character development or world-building, which is when I had to remind myself that children are the target audience. Even though this movie does not demand a re-watch, Mary Poppins deserves its name as a beloved classic and enjoyed best as a leisurely, nostalgic experience.

REVIEW: Mufasa: The Lion King

Despite the many negative reviews surrounding the musical drama film Mufasa: The Lion King, I actually really enjoyed it. The storyline acts as both a prequel and a sequel to the original animated The Lion King. While it’s not life-changing or particularly essential, it’s a fun film that adds to the world-building of the original in an endearing way. Perhaps it’s because I had low expectations and didn’t know exactly what to expect, but I found the online reviews overly harsh for a movie primarily directed toward children.

The plot begins with the lion cub Kiara, Simba’s daughter, who is frightened by a large thunderstorm. She doubts her capabilities and expresses that she could never be brave like her grandfather, Mufasa. In response, Rafiki, an elderly and wise mandrill, tells her a story to encourage her. He recounts how Mufasa was at her age and how he grew up to become the great king we saw in The Lion King. Mufasa, who we originally see as proud, confident, and courageous, is depicted as more vulnerable and dispirited in his youth. He struggles to believe in himself or accept praise, which seems hard to believe given his personality in his adult form. Through the animals Mufasa encounters on his journey, the film explores themes of family, belonging, and love. His journey proves his worthiness as king and highlights the qualities that make him a true leader. The plot is a coming-of-age story, fitting for its intended audience. This aspect resonated with me, and I believe many children would connect with it too.

The narration is engaging, with the story progressing at a good pace. However, while Mufasa’s character development is well-paced, the development of other characters either lacks depth or, particularly toward the end, feels rushed. As the movie reaches its climax, the character arcs become hurried, especially in the conclusion, which makes their actions seem almost out of character. One factor that held the character development back was the CGI animation. While the visuals were strikingly realistic and beautiful, the realism made it harder for characters to express themselves facially or display more creative body language. It also became difficult to differentiate the lions, as they generally shared the same appearance aside from slight changes and their voices. While these details may stick out more to adults, younger children may not notice them as much, meaning a cartoon version might have appealed to a wider audience.

This placed a greater emphasis on the voice acting and music, which I think the film did well. The instrumental soundtrack was a great homage to the original, with many elements inspired by or directly recreated from it. I also appreciated that there was often music playing in the background. In addition to the bright sunshine and natural scenery, this contributed to the triumphant and joyful emotions in the film. However, one disappointing aspect was the singing, which I felt could have been of higher quality, as it could have been another opportunity to express the character’s personality. 

I think the film’s weaknesses largely stem from the characters not feeling as relatable. However, most of the movie’s strengths lie in its overarching messages and foreshadowing of events that occur in the original. I think it would be a great film for young children to understand self-growth, confidence, and friendship. Though it may be an unpopular opinion, I don’t think it is a waste of time or detracts from the original The Lion King in any way, unlike other prequels and sequels I’ve seen. I would still recommend it to people of all ages, but it’s important to approach it with an open mind. 

REVIEW: Wicked

After several disappointing movie-musical adaptations in recent years, I was skeptical that Wicked would be any different. As the first musical I had ever seen, and on Broadway in New York no less, I had especially high expectations. However, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that the hype surrounding the movie was justified. Under the guidance of director Jon M. Chu, with a talented main cast including Ariana Grande (Glinda), Cynthia Erivo (Elphaba), and Jonathan Bailey (Fiyero), Wicked offered a refreshing take with a charm that still retained the essence of the Broadway play that sparked my love for musical theatre.

Based on Gregory Maguire’s novel Wicked, the story is a prequel to The Wizard of Oz. The main character, Elphaba, grows up experiencing hardships due to her unusual green skin. Ostracized by even her own family, she is nonetheless loved by her nanny. Because of this, she grows up with a pure heart. When she sends her younger sister to Shiz University, Elphaba catches the eye of Madame Morrible, played by Michelle Yeoh. Morrible is a famous magical history professor and the object of admiration for Glinda, a beautiful and popular girl who has lived a life essentially the opposite of Elphaba’s. As the story progresses, it explores the complex relationship between the two women. Their character development is one of the highlights of the story, touching on themes of friendship, values, purpose, and societal expectations. Grande and Erivo’s chemistry, both on and off screen, brought this relationship to life brilliantly. 

Despite both the musical and the movie running for roughly three hours, the movie only covers half of the original story. I did feel that the pacing dragged at times, with the plot progressing slowly—almost frustratingly so. However, this slower pace gave more creative freedom to the director and actors. Compared to the stage production, Elphaba and Glinda felt more alive in this version. Their characters were more developed and complex, which created a deeper connection with the audience. I particularly enjoyed Glinda’s nuanced portrayal, whereas in the play, she seemed more ditzy and one-dimensional.

Though I find live singing and dancing more impactful, the movie was still incredibly immersive. The film’s close-up shots of the characters, their costumes, and facial expressions added a level of intimacy that the stage production can’t match. The lighting and camera angles also contributed to a richer atmosphere. The movie was visually striking and the vivid colors truly brought the fantasy world of Oz to life. These added details allowed for more foreshadowing, extensive world-building, and deeper character development. It never felt like a simple recording of the play. 

A friend of mine, who is more versed in musical theatre techniques, also offered some insightful commentary on how film is a unique medium. On stage, only those sitting in the front row get to see the actors’ faces clearly, and even then, it’s impossible to catch all the small details. It’s difficult to compare movies and theatre because they offer different experiences and strengths. Perhaps that’s why I remain skeptical about many movie-musical adaptations retaining a high quality—they’re often unfairly compared to the original. Nevertheless, Wicked is proof that a great musical-movie adaptation is possible.

REVIEW: Wicked

Good news! Wicked, the film adaptation of the first act of the smash hit Broadway musical of the same name, is wonderful.

Directed by Jon M. Chu, Wicked is a prequel to The Wizard of Oz. Based generally off of the novel by Gregory Maguire (Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West; unlike the rest of involved properties, decidedly not PG), as well as the 1939 movie, Wicked centers around Elphaba (a standout performance by Cynthia Erivo), who will become the Wicked Witch of the West, and Glinda (Ariana Grande), who will become the Good Witch of the North.

Wicked is a movie-musical, and unapologetically so. The chorus is vast and excellent. The choreography (by Christopher Scott) ranges from crisp and upbeat to gentle and heartfelt; and, when it’s happening, there’s a good balance between close-up shots and larger crowd shots. All of the songs from the Broadway musical’s first act are included, though almost all have been expanded (one, in service of a fun, fan-service cameo, so much so that it essentially constitutes a new song). The sets and costuming are minimally CGI, vast, bright, and colorful. Like many musicals, the whole effect can be a bit campy, but it’s not garish, and it doesn’t shy away from darker aspects of its plot.

The movie opens in the “present day” of the Wizard of Oz, after Dorothy has killed the Wicked Witch. Glinda arrives in her bubble to a town in Munchkinland, whose residents are rejoicing that the Witch has just been killed (“No One Mourns the Wicked”). After a short flashback detailing Elphaba’s birth, Glinda confesses that she did, in fact, know the Witch: the two went to school together, at Shiz University.

Grande is at her weakest musically in her opening number: this is the most “legit” (pseudo-operatic) piece for Glinda, and Grande lacks the technique to pull it off. Her voice sounds overly thin and weak, particularly on the higher notes. Presumably to compensate, the autotune and sound editing, generally tasteful, are palpably stronger here. Grande does make a much better showing for herself in the rest of the film, though. Most of Glinda’s singing is more pop than classical, which Grande does with aplomb; her performance in “Popular,” an upbeat number in which Glinda decides to give Elphaba a makeover, more than makes up for “No One Mourns the Wicked.” Grande also has impeccable comedic timing, aided by her sidekicks Pfanee (Bowen Yang) and Shenshen (Bronwyn James), and her chemistry with Erivo is impeccable. Erivo is the stand-out here, with a wry, rich, nuanced portrayal and a glorious singing voice. Her “Defying Gravity,” which ends the film, is a show-stopper in more ways than one.

While there are darker political machinations happening in the background, the heart of the film is Glinda and Elphaba’s relationship, and its slow shift from enemies to friendship. It feels real, and it’s refreshingly imperfect. They hurt each other, but there’s a sweet and genuine core to it, which heightens the stakes when the two must eventually break apart to Good and Wicked. 

REVIEW: Anora

Oh, Mikey Madison. What can’t you do?

From the start of “Anora,” the actress that is so soft-spoken in interviews blasts into the picture as Anora– nicknamed Ani– with her brazen confidence and strong Brooklyn accent. A 23-year old sex worker, we are first introduced to Ani in element working at the club. Between vape puffs, Ani charms wealthy visitors into buying dances from her, until her boss pulls her to a guest who requested someone who speaks Russian. 

Ani speaks some Russian, and is then introduced to Ivan, who says she can call him Vanya (Mark Eydelshteyn). The next day, she visits his mansion for a private booking, where he tells her that he comes from a very wealthy Russian family. He offers her $15,000 in cash to be his “girlfriend for the week,” and so the whirlwind of sex, drugs and alcohol begins. It culminates with a shotgun wedding in Las Vegas so Vanya can stay in the United States. 

Ani and Vanya get married. Courtesy of Neon.

It seems like a happy ending for Ani, who now has access to all the riches she could ever imagine – but unfortunately it is never that easy. While she takes the marriage very seriously (“We are mah-rried and we are in love!”), when Vanya’s godfather and chaperone Toros learns he got married, the jig is up. The “muscle” – Garnick (Vache Tovmasyan) and Igor (Yuriy Borisov) —  arrives at the mansion’s front door, and a panicked Vanya sprints out the door, leaving Ani alone, confused and angry.

Toros arrives, and after a long sequence of fighting and overlapping yelling in Russian and heavily accented English, Ani is convinced to help them look for Vanya. And off we go into our second genre. 

The movie is described on google as a comedy/romance. Where is drama in that description? This genre-bender begins with a whirlwind Cinderella-story romance between Ani and Vanya and transitions into a situational comedy with “Home Alone” style injuries of the sterotypical “Russian goon” as the four look for the spoiled oligarch across the city and eventually in every night club. The final act of the movie – once a blackout drunk Vanya is finally found and is dragged to confront his parents – has a much darker tone. 

The four search for Vanya throughout New York. Courtesy of Neon.

This rollercoaster of a plot left me in tears at the very final scene, alongside Madison on the screen. From the barrage of sex scenes at the start to the dry ironic comedy of the middle, the ending is quieter, more subdued, and sad. And honestly, this was the best possible way to conclude the story. A classic “rags to riches” tale is so on the nose, and at first, that was where I expected it to go. When Ani leaves the club, for example, she carries a clear pair of heels and even explicitly says that she feels like Cinderella. For a moment, I feared it might veer into a clichéd rom-com, but it took a turn I didn’t expect.

One unique aspect of the movie was the constant interchange between English and Russian. For most of the Russian spoken, there were subtitles on-screen, but occasionally there was some Russian left untranslated. Madison said in an interview that she didn’t know any Russian before this role, and learning how to speak Brooklyn-accented Russian was even more difficult; but to someone who doesn’t speak any Russian like myself, it all sounded the same. 

Madison is spectacular as Ani. She portrays Ani as tough-as-nails but also vulnerable, both in key moments and with subtle expressions. Eydelshteyn also acts with incredible nuance; the sincerity that he adds to the immaturity of Vanya makes it believable that a street-smart Ani would fall for his promise of genuine love. 

“Anora” is both sadly ironic and darkly funny. Don’t underestimate the serious merit of this film from the flashy trailers; it will leave you with both more laughs and more thoughts than when you came in.