The film follows the swashbuckling feline (played once more by Antonio Banderas) who's on the search for some magic beans that he's been searching for ever since he was a kitten. With these beans, Puss hopes to grow a giant beanstalk and retrieve golden eggs created by the golden goose. In his efforts to steal them from Jack and Jill (played by Billy Bob Thornton and Amy Sedaris), he comes across a female thief known as Kitty Softpaws (played by Salma Hayek). Softpaws leads Puss to an old friend of his, Humpty Dumpty (played by Zach Galifianakis), who says that he wants help him retrieve the beans, as it had been just as much Humpty's dream as it was Puss's. Puss doesn't trust Humpty at first, as he had betrayed him many years ago, but they decide to put their past behind them and venture to steal the magic beans and retrieve those golden eggs.
You might be noticing at this point that I'm not complaining about how Dreamworks is still milking the Shrek franchise despite them saying that Shrek Forever After was going to be the final chapter. Why? Because this film stands on its own. Apart from Puss's character traits and the idea of mixing fairy tales together, there's literally no connection to the Shrek movies whatsoever. Then again, perhaps it does that a little too well. Remember how, in Shrek 2, Puss explained that his mother was sick and his father lived off of garbage? Here, he's an orphan. It's highly inconsistent, but I'm willing to forgive it.
Call me Captain Obvious if you will, but this film is not the least bit deep or compelling. The motivation Puss and Humpty have at retrieving the golden eggs is nothing more than childish greed. The connections Puss makes with Softpaws, Humpty, and the orphanage's owner aren't developed or even that well-established. Because of all this, a lot of the emotional twists sent out throughout the plot are shocking, but not exactly heartbreaking.
Nevertheless, all of that is forgiven due to the film being a lot of fun. It's pretty standard for Dreamworks to be more humorous than serious, and this time around, it really works. In terms of comedic timing, extravagant style, and surreal images, it's at least half as witty as Rango. The swashbuckling action scenes are well-constructed, the animation is bright and colorful, the score is extravagant and riveting, and the dialogue, while not entirely consisted of cleverly hidden adult humor, is so well-established and well-delivered by its fantastic voice cast that it should entertain the whole family. Now, I saw this film in 3D, as I've heard some great things about the 3D in other Dreamworks films like How to Train Your Dragon and Kung-Fu Panda 2 and didn't want to miss another opportunity, and I will say that the 3D isn't half bad either. It's not exactly on the same level as Avatar, but unlike with Toy Story 3, I never forgot that I was watching it in 3D, and it has a certain appeal.
So, do I recommend it? Well, let me put it this way. As long as you don't expect anything other than a really fun time, I would say this film is worth checking out. I saw this film over all the other choices for this weekend because I didn't want to see another Roland Emmrich film..... EVER; I wasn't sure if I would have enough to say about Rum Diary to write a review, as I didn't have a whole lot to say about Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas; and I was iffy about In Time after it got the rotten mark on RT. I'm happy to say that I don't regret that decision.
This film is worth $13 out of $20.
No comments:
Post a Comment