ElMaruecan82
Joined Nov 2004
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings2.1K
ElMaruecan82's rating
Reviews2.1K
ElMaruecan82's rating
Season 2 of The Simpsons kicks off what is arguably my favorite chapter of the series. While many consider the show's "golden age" to begin a season or two later, I find the leap in animation quality-and even writing-between the first and second seasons to be the most striking. This particular episode centers on Bart Simpson, the mischievous icon of American entertainment at the time. From Do the Bartman to his pervasive pranks, Bart had already cemented his place as the show's poster child. Critics, however, were quick to label him a bad influence on children.
This episode shifts the focus to Bart's struggles in school, exploring his difficulty in concentrating and putting effort into his education. The plot revolves around a history test that could determine whether Bart advances to the next grade or repeats the year-a classic "make or break" scenario. While there are plenty of comedic moments (including one-liners from Homer and a clever parallel between his inability to follow Dr. Loren Pryor's advice and Bart's inability to focus on Mrs. Krabappel's lectures), the episode balances humor with genuine emotional depth.
Bart's journey begins in his typical fashion-winging it. After Martin Prince delivers an impressive review of Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea, Bart improvises a disastrous summary of Treasure Island, embodying his carefree attitude toward school. When his usual tricks-faking illness and trying to crib answers from Milhouse-fail, Bart is forced to confront his academic shortcomings. In a surprising twist, Martin agrees to tutor him, adding layers to his character as an isolated, gifted child. But when Martin abandons him mid-process, Bart is left to face his challenges alone.
Desperate, Bart even turns to God, praying for a miracle. In a heartwarming and clever turn, Springfield is blanketed in snow, buying Bart one more day to study. The parody elements here, including a nod to The Grinch and the over-the-top joy of a snow day, are hilarious yet subtle. Bart's determination to finally buckle down and work, even slapping himself into focus, is both relatable and inspiring.
The climax is one of the most poignant moments in Simpsons history. Bart gives the test his all, genuinely trying to do his best, only to receive an F once again. His breakdown is deeply moving-this is the same Bart Simpson who made kids laugh and adults groan, now bringing viewers to tears. The scene where Mrs. Krabappel comforts him with a gentle "There, there" adds another layer of depth, showing her as a teacher who truly cares about her students.
The resolution is masterfully done. Rather than focusing on grades alone, it emphasizes that education is about truly understanding and applying knowledge, not just memorizing facts. This message manages to reconcile critics of the show, proving that The Simpsons can set a positive example while retaining their signature humor and heart.
This episode doesn't deserve an F. In fact, there's no grade high enough to match its impact. Season 2 is filled with warmth, depth, and laughs, but this installment stands out as a masterpiece that redefines Bart's character and The Simpsons as a whole.
This episode shifts the focus to Bart's struggles in school, exploring his difficulty in concentrating and putting effort into his education. The plot revolves around a history test that could determine whether Bart advances to the next grade or repeats the year-a classic "make or break" scenario. While there are plenty of comedic moments (including one-liners from Homer and a clever parallel between his inability to follow Dr. Loren Pryor's advice and Bart's inability to focus on Mrs. Krabappel's lectures), the episode balances humor with genuine emotional depth.
Bart's journey begins in his typical fashion-winging it. After Martin Prince delivers an impressive review of Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea, Bart improvises a disastrous summary of Treasure Island, embodying his carefree attitude toward school. When his usual tricks-faking illness and trying to crib answers from Milhouse-fail, Bart is forced to confront his academic shortcomings. In a surprising twist, Martin agrees to tutor him, adding layers to his character as an isolated, gifted child. But when Martin abandons him mid-process, Bart is left to face his challenges alone.
Desperate, Bart even turns to God, praying for a miracle. In a heartwarming and clever turn, Springfield is blanketed in snow, buying Bart one more day to study. The parody elements here, including a nod to The Grinch and the over-the-top joy of a snow day, are hilarious yet subtle. Bart's determination to finally buckle down and work, even slapping himself into focus, is both relatable and inspiring.
The climax is one of the most poignant moments in Simpsons history. Bart gives the test his all, genuinely trying to do his best, only to receive an F once again. His breakdown is deeply moving-this is the same Bart Simpson who made kids laugh and adults groan, now bringing viewers to tears. The scene where Mrs. Krabappel comforts him with a gentle "There, there" adds another layer of depth, showing her as a teacher who truly cares about her students.
The resolution is masterfully done. Rather than focusing on grades alone, it emphasizes that education is about truly understanding and applying knowledge, not just memorizing facts. This message manages to reconcile critics of the show, proving that The Simpsons can set a positive example while retaining their signature humor and heart.
This episode doesn't deserve an F. In fact, there's no grade high enough to match its impact. Season 2 is filled with warmth, depth, and laughs, but this installment stands out as a masterpiece that redefines Bart's character and The Simpsons as a whole.
Having had the opportunity to watch "Chaos" by Coline Serreau, I share the viewpoint that despite the commendable acting and the director's laudable intentions, the film ironically suffers from its chaotic narrative structure. The film attempts to tackle four dramatic themes that could each independently sustain a compelling narrative: the decay of bourgeois couple relationships, the breakdown of family ties within the same social class, the tragedies of young Maghrebi women forced into marriage, and a crescendo into the oppression of women universally, across all ages and backgrounds.
However, the execution falls short as these themes are delivered in a jarringly mixed tone-shifting between comedy, drama, and even action thriller elements, ending in a tone of pseudo-humanistic denunciation. The mishmash of genres and tones results in a convoluted film, where potentially powerful ideas clash rather than coalesce into a cohesive narrative.
One particularly troubling scene involves a young girl being inspected like livestock to underscore the idea that Eastern women are enslaved and owned by men, a depiction that dangerously skews towards caricature rather than a nuanced portrayal of reality. Such a portrayal not only disrupts the narrative but also misrepresents complex cultural issues, risking credibility for the sake of provocation.
In summary, "Chaos" is a film that cannot be ignored but is plagued by a bewildering script and an overly audacious controversy that is too extreme to be taken seriously. The film's sole focus seems to be a systematic denunciation of the male gender, presented in a resolutely feminist critique that almost borders on manicheism. This film is a clear example of how a narrative can become lost when it tries to juggle too many themes without a solid structural foundation.
Having had the opportunity to watch "Chaos" by Coline Serreau, I share the viewpoint that despite the commendable acting and the director's laudable intentions, the film ironically suffers from its chaotic narrative structure. The film attempts to tackle four dramatic themes that could each independently sustain a compelling narrative: the decay of bourgeois couple relationships, the breakdown of family ties within the same social class, the tragedies of young Maghrebi women forced into marriage, and a crescendo into the oppression of women universally, across all ages and backgrounds.
However, the execution falls short as these themes are delivered in a jarringly mixed tone-shifting between comedy, drama, and even action thriller elements, ending in a tone of pseudo-humanistic denunciation. The mishmash of genres and tones results in a convoluted film, where potentially powerful ideas clash rather than coalesce into a cohesive narrative.
One particularly troubling scene involves a young girl being inspected like livestock to underscore the idea that Eastern women are enslaved and owned by men, a depiction that dangerously skews towards caricature rather than a nuanced portrayal of reality. Such a portrayal not only disrupts the narrative but also misrepresents complex cultural issues, risking credibility for the sake of provocation.
In summary, "Chaos" is a film that cannot be ignored but is plagued by a bewildering script and an overly audacious controversy that is too extreme to be taken seriously. The film's sole focus seems to be a systematic denunciation of the male gender, presented in a resolutely feminist critique that almost borders on manicheism. This film is a clear example of how a narrative can become lost when it tries to juggle too many themes without a solid structural foundation.
However, the execution falls short as these themes are delivered in a jarringly mixed tone-shifting between comedy, drama, and even action thriller elements, ending in a tone of pseudo-humanistic denunciation. The mishmash of genres and tones results in a convoluted film, where potentially powerful ideas clash rather than coalesce into a cohesive narrative.
One particularly troubling scene involves a young girl being inspected like livestock to underscore the idea that Eastern women are enslaved and owned by men, a depiction that dangerously skews towards caricature rather than a nuanced portrayal of reality. Such a portrayal not only disrupts the narrative but also misrepresents complex cultural issues, risking credibility for the sake of provocation.
In summary, "Chaos" is a film that cannot be ignored but is plagued by a bewildering script and an overly audacious controversy that is too extreme to be taken seriously. The film's sole focus seems to be a systematic denunciation of the male gender, presented in a resolutely feminist critique that almost borders on manicheism. This film is a clear example of how a narrative can become lost when it tries to juggle too many themes without a solid structural foundation.
Having had the opportunity to watch "Chaos" by Coline Serreau, I share the viewpoint that despite the commendable acting and the director's laudable intentions, the film ironically suffers from its chaotic narrative structure. The film attempts to tackle four dramatic themes that could each independently sustain a compelling narrative: the decay of bourgeois couple relationships, the breakdown of family ties within the same social class, the tragedies of young Maghrebi women forced into marriage, and a crescendo into the oppression of women universally, across all ages and backgrounds.
However, the execution falls short as these themes are delivered in a jarringly mixed tone-shifting between comedy, drama, and even action thriller elements, ending in a tone of pseudo-humanistic denunciation. The mishmash of genres and tones results in a convoluted film, where potentially powerful ideas clash rather than coalesce into a cohesive narrative.
One particularly troubling scene involves a young girl being inspected like livestock to underscore the idea that Eastern women are enslaved and owned by men, a depiction that dangerously skews towards caricature rather than a nuanced portrayal of reality. Such a portrayal not only disrupts the narrative but also misrepresents complex cultural issues, risking credibility for the sake of provocation.
In summary, "Chaos" is a film that cannot be ignored but is plagued by a bewildering script and an overly audacious controversy that is too extreme to be taken seriously. The film's sole focus seems to be a systematic denunciation of the male gender, presented in a resolutely feminist critique that almost borders on manicheism. This film is a clear example of how a narrative can become lost when it tries to juggle too many themes without a solid structural foundation.
I never really cared for the Disney sequels trend, nor did I care for a sequel to "Cinderella" for that matter. To put it simply, I'm a product of the Disney Renaissance era and I grew up with all the classics. By the time I reached my early twenties, I couldn't care less for modernized versions of classic fairy tales. As far as I was concerned, "The Jungle Book" ended with Baloo and Bagheera cheerfully leaving the village while singing "The Bare Necessities" and Mowgli never came back (and the sequel didn't change my mind!)
You get the point-watching a Disney sequel was never a necessity (bare or not), and my bumping into "Cinderella III: A Twist in Time" was purely accidental. But some accidents are pretty fortunate. Watching the sequel for the second time, I realize that Cinderella was actually a perfect candidate for a sequel. It ended up having two, and the 2007 one, with a twisted premise and a more promising title than the insipid "Dreams Come True", gloriously concluded the trend of direct-to-video sequels. Although these sequels weren't exactly highlights in Disney's history, "A Twist in Time" was certainly a fine conclusion. In fact, the film stands alone as one of the most enchanting and entertaining Disney films.
The story is the kind that, with just a simple pitch, could spark enthusiasm in any writer's room. I imagine the screenwriters discussing the problem of going back to the end of a fairy tale and picking up from there. After all, "they lived happily ever after" is such a definitive statement that it seems to forbid any exploration of what comes next. They tried with "Cinderella II", but I barely remember enough of it to form an opinion. How do you continue a story that found the perfect closure with the villain defeated and the princess and prince living happily ever after? Well, one of the writers must have come up with the solution: "Hey, how about we go back before the resolution and change the outcome?"
That's quite simple: a twist in time. And that's why the film immediately grabbed my enthusiasm. I'm a sucker for alternate realities, timelines and history-rewriting plots. The premise of Cinderella not putting her foot in the slipper, while one of the stepsisters does, was exciting. It allowed for a villainous triumph with Lady Tremaine telling Cinderella she's too late. We didn't grow up cynical, but the fairy tale format is so codified that anything subverting the tropes is welcome (this is probably why we enjoy fairy tale parodies so much).
So, when Anastasia gets hold of the Fairy Godmother's magic wand, giving Lady Tremaine the power to alter history, the film had already hooked me. The first two minutes with the singing are a bit fluffy, but the story kicks into gear right after that when Anastasia steals the magic wand and Bobbidies the Fairy Godmother into stone, the rest is history (re-history actually) and Lady Tremaine takes her daughters to the castle. But let's pause for a moment on the pivotal shoe scene.
You've got to love how Lady Tremaine manipulates the Grand Duke to rush through the process, knowing that Cinderella will eventually show up. She doesn't even bother investigating how Cinderella escaped her locked room; instead, she uses the advantage of time. Her reaction when Cinderella arrives too late is a clever callback to the iconic "Gotcha!" moment from the first film, when Cinderella revealed the other slipper (which in an ironic twist of fate gets broken in the new reality).
The rest of the film builds on its exciting premise. It gives much-needed depth to Prince Charming, a character who was rather one-dimensional in the original. When he sees Anastasia wearing the slipper, he finally comes to the realization even the most passionate fans of the story have: any girl could fit the slipper. But then, Tremaine uses the magic wand to alter his memory, intensifying the conflict. Now, it's up to Cinderella to reclaim her love and earn her happy ending. After all, she didn't have much to do in the first film. Here, we get a more determined, proactive Cinderella willing to do everything to get her prince back, revealing a stronger side of her personality.
In a way, choosing Cinderella for this alternate-reality story was perfect. It allows her to overcome her passivity from the original. Despite being a Disney film, Cinderella didn't rely on life-threatening situations, so "A Twist in Time" could turn Lady Tremaine from an ordinary villain into a powerful one with a magic wand -in other words, a witch- highlighting her true evil nature. Even with this potential for failure, the film works because it gives one key character some added depth... and it's quite the deiightful coincidence to have another Anastasia pretending to be a princess.
Anastasia, who once tormented Cinderella, steps into Cinderella's shoes- literally and figuratively. The scene where she realizes that Prince Charming is genuinely kind to her becomes a touching moment of epiphany. Oddly enough, I stopped focusing on her physical appearance and found something deeper and more sympathetic in her character. Maybe she's just your average girl who doesn't have the beauty of a Disney princess but dreams of finding her own prince.
It's no easy feat to create a film about alternate realities, or a fairy tale, or an action movie, but "Cinderella III" subverts expectations and delivers a wonderful redemption arc for Anastasia, while allowing Cinderella to grow beyond her stereotypical pretty princess status. Every character wins something, even the King. Some characters, like the mice and Lucifer, don't change much, but they're still delightful in their familiar roles. The magic of this film lies in its human characters and emotional depth, and it shows us that there's more creativity and fun to be found in rewriting a classic than in simply writing a new story.
You get the point-watching a Disney sequel was never a necessity (bare or not), and my bumping into "Cinderella III: A Twist in Time" was purely accidental. But some accidents are pretty fortunate. Watching the sequel for the second time, I realize that Cinderella was actually a perfect candidate for a sequel. It ended up having two, and the 2007 one, with a twisted premise and a more promising title than the insipid "Dreams Come True", gloriously concluded the trend of direct-to-video sequels. Although these sequels weren't exactly highlights in Disney's history, "A Twist in Time" was certainly a fine conclusion. In fact, the film stands alone as one of the most enchanting and entertaining Disney films.
The story is the kind that, with just a simple pitch, could spark enthusiasm in any writer's room. I imagine the screenwriters discussing the problem of going back to the end of a fairy tale and picking up from there. After all, "they lived happily ever after" is such a definitive statement that it seems to forbid any exploration of what comes next. They tried with "Cinderella II", but I barely remember enough of it to form an opinion. How do you continue a story that found the perfect closure with the villain defeated and the princess and prince living happily ever after? Well, one of the writers must have come up with the solution: "Hey, how about we go back before the resolution and change the outcome?"
That's quite simple: a twist in time. And that's why the film immediately grabbed my enthusiasm. I'm a sucker for alternate realities, timelines and history-rewriting plots. The premise of Cinderella not putting her foot in the slipper, while one of the stepsisters does, was exciting. It allowed for a villainous triumph with Lady Tremaine telling Cinderella she's too late. We didn't grow up cynical, but the fairy tale format is so codified that anything subverting the tropes is welcome (this is probably why we enjoy fairy tale parodies so much).
So, when Anastasia gets hold of the Fairy Godmother's magic wand, giving Lady Tremaine the power to alter history, the film had already hooked me. The first two minutes with the singing are a bit fluffy, but the story kicks into gear right after that when Anastasia steals the magic wand and Bobbidies the Fairy Godmother into stone, the rest is history (re-history actually) and Lady Tremaine takes her daughters to the castle. But let's pause for a moment on the pivotal shoe scene.
You've got to love how Lady Tremaine manipulates the Grand Duke to rush through the process, knowing that Cinderella will eventually show up. She doesn't even bother investigating how Cinderella escaped her locked room; instead, she uses the advantage of time. Her reaction when Cinderella arrives too late is a clever callback to the iconic "Gotcha!" moment from the first film, when Cinderella revealed the other slipper (which in an ironic twist of fate gets broken in the new reality).
The rest of the film builds on its exciting premise. It gives much-needed depth to Prince Charming, a character who was rather one-dimensional in the original. When he sees Anastasia wearing the slipper, he finally comes to the realization even the most passionate fans of the story have: any girl could fit the slipper. But then, Tremaine uses the magic wand to alter his memory, intensifying the conflict. Now, it's up to Cinderella to reclaim her love and earn her happy ending. After all, she didn't have much to do in the first film. Here, we get a more determined, proactive Cinderella willing to do everything to get her prince back, revealing a stronger side of her personality.
In a way, choosing Cinderella for this alternate-reality story was perfect. It allows her to overcome her passivity from the original. Despite being a Disney film, Cinderella didn't rely on life-threatening situations, so "A Twist in Time" could turn Lady Tremaine from an ordinary villain into a powerful one with a magic wand -in other words, a witch- highlighting her true evil nature. Even with this potential for failure, the film works because it gives one key character some added depth... and it's quite the deiightful coincidence to have another Anastasia pretending to be a princess.
Anastasia, who once tormented Cinderella, steps into Cinderella's shoes- literally and figuratively. The scene where she realizes that Prince Charming is genuinely kind to her becomes a touching moment of epiphany. Oddly enough, I stopped focusing on her physical appearance and found something deeper and more sympathetic in her character. Maybe she's just your average girl who doesn't have the beauty of a Disney princess but dreams of finding her own prince.
It's no easy feat to create a film about alternate realities, or a fairy tale, or an action movie, but "Cinderella III" subverts expectations and delivers a wonderful redemption arc for Anastasia, while allowing Cinderella to grow beyond her stereotypical pretty princess status. Every character wins something, even the King. Some characters, like the mice and Lucifer, don't change much, but they're still delightful in their familiar roles. The magic of this film lies in its human characters and emotional depth, and it shows us that there's more creativity and fun to be found in rewriting a classic than in simply writing a new story.