thereeltea - Tumblr blog

[thereeltea]

A Midsummer Night’s Dream

Hello my friends! Because this is my last blog, I wanted to tackle a more difficult adaptation. Yes, this means I will be reviewing a Shakespearean adaptation! Today, I will be reviewing “A Midsummer Night’s dream”, the 2017 version. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

In this play, Puck and Oberon interfere with the two couples not only for amusement, but for balance. This balance is restored when Lysander’s love for Helena is diminished, and Demetrius remains in love with Helena. Thus, there are two couples, one with natural feelings, and the other with help from a love potion. In the film, there is a short scene that explains why Demetrius abandoned Helena for Hermia, which was the tip of Cupid’s arrow that he touched. Evidently, the first person he saw after being in contact with the arrow, thus his love for Hermia. I liked this change because it explained in an easy to follow story why Demetrius abandoned Helena, and doesn’t paint him as shallow as he is in the play. Plus, this scene was aesthetically pleasing.

Another small alteration that I noticed in the film was the little animation that they included while explaining the love potion flowers. I do admire that they used visuals for the explanation, because you don’t want this type of important information to fly over the heads of the audience, which was a problem that I will get into later. It was a cute little animation that I couldn’t help but admire.

Not so Admirable Changes  

Although this movie’s dialogue took directly from the play, this movie was set in modern times. Just like Baz Luhrmann’s “Romeo + Juliet”, the dialogue with the modern setting just screwed me up. When reading Shakespeare, your brain eventually gets used to the type of english you are reading. However, because this movie has Shakespeare dialogue but modern visuals, it makes it hard to understand what is being said in scenes. Specifically, the static scenes where you can’t use context clues in the actions. To me, this movie reminded me of the “Sims” game. You feel like you should be understanding what they are saying, but it’s just gibberish, and the only way you know what they are talking about is when they have little visuals surrounding the conversation!

The following was probably the most unsettling change of them all. In the play, Bottom’s head gets turned into one of a donkey by Puck. In the movie however, Bottom’s head gets turned into an actual butt. Not only is this visual disturbing, but is used as an easy joke. Butt jokes are way over done, so when I saw this change, it made me uncomfortable looking at it, and to hear the snoring be farts was nothing but elementary humor. 

Character Correlation

Puck, played by Avan Jogia, was by far the best character. Just like his play counterpart, he was mischievous, humorous, and likable. Jogia’s most popular role, Beck from the Nickelodeon show, “Victorious”, was sarcastic and real, similar to his character Puck. Jogia did such a great job playing this character, I can’t even think of better person to play the role.

Overall Thoughts

The movie was enjoyable, especially considering the amazing cinematography and editing, the chemistry between the actors, and the passion that I could feel emitting from this film and its cast and crew. May I just honorably mention the soundtrack of this film! However, I think this movie would have gotten a lot better of a score on Imdb if they had simply made the dialogue modern english. They could have even included some lines from the play, but having the whole script in this modern context just looked plain ridiculous. 

And that’s Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

Stand By Me

Hello my friends! Today I will be reviewing “Stand by Me”. This 1986 film, based on the novella, “The Body” written by Stephen King, is considered one of the many film gems to come out of the 80s. (Fun fact: A Novella is not just a soap opera like I thought, but is also used to describe a short novel or long short story.) This may have been a movie masterpiece, but how good of an adaptation is this film? Without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

In the book, after the boys escape the junkyard man and his dog, they realize how hungry they are. Gordie ends up buying food at a local market, and gets into a heated argument with the store owner about the pricing. This part of the book seemed to be longer than it needed to be, so when they didn’t include this conflict in the movie, I was relieved that I wasn’t going to have to sit through it. This debacle didn’t really seem to serve any purpose in the book except bringing up Gordie’s late brother.

The humor in both pieces was undeniably fantastic! However, there were more humorous moments in the film than in the movie. One of my favorite parts of the whole film was the sequence of the boys keeping watch over the course of the night. It was light and seemed natural for the characters, which fit them well. This change couldn’t go unrecognized, because it was just a great addition.

Not so Admirable Changes

Each of the boys in this book have problems at home, and in a way, are trying to escape them through this spontaneous adventure. For Gordie, he is trying to escape his home where his parents are torn apart by the loss of his older brother. In the book, their relationship was not really significant, causing the death of his brother to feel like more of a stranger’s. So when I saw what a big impact he had on Gordie in the movie, it threw me off guard. I think having this weird relationship with his brother made more sense considering the age gap and their different interests.

Another blaring change in this adaptation was the whereabouts of the boys after the film. All of the boys died before 1972, except for Gordie. It was a definite answer as to why they were not friends anymore. However, in the film, Chris was the only one to die. Knowing that Vern, Teddy, and Gordie were all around the same place, but still didn’t talk, didn’t provide closure. Despite writing they were the best friends he had had, he still didn’t reach out to them? Seems a little weird to me! 

Character Correlation

Chris was by far my favorite character from both the movie and the book. Having to prove himself to others strictly based on his lineage is a real, genuine struggle that a lot of people can relate to, which is important to a likable character. This role was portrayed by the late River Phoenix, who did a phenomenal job capturing such a sympathetic and loyal friend. 

Overall Thoughts

I think this was a really good movie. As much as I liked the book, I don't think it flowed nearly as well. This piece was an hour and 30 minutes, but it didn't feel that way. Plus, it is a movie that I see myself rewatching from time to time, which means it’s a good film. This film definitely deserves the “iconic 80s movie label”. If anything, this adaptation deserves more recognition for being such a great coming of age story. Not nearly as spooky as other works by Stephen King!

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

The Cat in the Hat

Hello my friends! This week I will be reviewing the 2003 adaptation of Cat in the Hat based on the book by Dr. Seuss. I honestly would have forgotten about this movie if it weren’t for the memes. Before the memes, the movie seemed like a weird fever dream. Today, I will be explaining why this movie was so forgettable. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes 

One addition that can never go wrong, is a furry friend! Although there wasn’t a dog in the original book, I think this addition was harmless and fun.

I may have not remembered the majority of the movie and the plot, however one character that I do remember was Mrs. Quan. Mrs. Quan, the old, lazy babysitter, was an iconic part of the movie. She was the perfect addition, because she wasn’t focussed on too much. Not to mention how funny it was to see her being thrown around like a rag doll without being woken up.

Not so Admirable Changes

As much as I love musicals, I do not like random musical numbers in movies that don’t need them. Sadly, this movie had two unbearable music numbers that had no purpose except to extend the duration of the film. “The Cat in the Hat” is not a very long book, and doesn’t really have a structured plot, so basing a film off of it doesn’t make total sense. Especially if you are trying to make a standard hour and thirty minute movie.

Now, this is somewhat of a broad gab at the movie, however it needs to be said. The screenwriting was absolutely horrible. The jokes just simply weren’t funny. The only “comedy” that was presented in this movie were jokes that the target demographic couldn’t even understand. This includes the jokes about contracts and lawyers, innuendos, and references to “Amazing Discoveries”.

Character Correlation

The Cat in the Hat was by far the most annoying character. That’s right! The cat is out of the bag! Not only was he loud and annoying, but his jokes just didn’t land. Not to mention his horrible attempt at a catch phrase, “Oh, yeahhhhh!!” that was repeated in the script 10 times. In the book, the cat in the hat is a flawed character, however, in the movie, it seems like he is nothing BUT his flaws. He was just an annoying character that just made me aggravated.

Overall Thoughts

I used to love this movie as a kid, but after rewatching it, I realized there is nothing special about it. When I watched a movie enough as a kid, I didn’t forget the lessons that it taught, or the interesting plots and songs. With this movie however, the plot was bland, and whatever the message that the movie was trying to convey, was completely unknown. My movie watching experience differed from the first Dr. Seuss book adaptation, “How the Grinch Stole Christmas” because not only did it have Jim Carrey in it, but it also had an actual message. This movie will forever remain an abomination, which is apparent by the 9% rating on rotten tomatoes. No wonder the widow of Dr. Seuss didn’t let any more Dr. Seuss book adaptations.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

Am I the only one that wanted one of these? 

[thereeltea]

Captain America: The First Avenger

Hello my friends! Novels are fun, but I decided this week, to delve into another type of book: a comic book. Today, I will be reviewing, “Captain America: The First Avenger” and comparing it to the origin story of the actual comics. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

Everyone has a best friend, and there was no exception for the super soldier Captain America. Bucky Barnes, played by Sebastian Stan, is Captain America’s friend from the very beginning of the movie. After Captain America rescues Bucky, they work side by side to save 400 soldiers captured by the Nazis, and go on many other mission shown in a glorious montage. What many movie watchers may not know, is that in the comics, Bucky Barnes was only 15 when he started as his sidekick. I liked this change, because it gave us someone that we knew from Steve Roger’s past before he became Captain America. And it would be pretty weird if Steve Rogers’ wingman was a teenager.

We all cannot ignore how muscular and tall Chris Evans is, so seeing him appear in the film as short and frail, is weird. This is because these scenes took place before he was injected with the super soldier serum, or before he became swoon material. They made him appear frail with CGI, and short with camera angles and other tricks. However, in the comics, he was not described to be short, but simply just too frail for the military. Having him appear shorter not only makes the results of the serum more jarring, but we also got some funny scenes and jokes out of it.

Not so Admirable Changes

In the comics, the super soldier experiment, or Operation: Rebirth, is conducted with simple injections and an oral serum in front of observers in Dr. Reinstein’s laboratory. These observers actually see the miraculous physical changes of Steve Rogers body. In the movie however, he is cast inside of a large, tomb-like chamber to turn him into Captain America. I would have liked to have actually seen his body morph into Captain America. And I know that is doable because they have done similar things with the Hulk. At least this scene wasn’t boring. I don’t think that it is a coincidence that Chris Evan’s rock-hard abs are in the center of the shot. 

Many movie goers may have wondered at one time or another, why the government didn’t create more super soldiers like Captain America. I mean, just because the doctor died, doesn’t mean that they can just look at his work and recreate it, right? Well actually, in the comics, Dr Reinstein did his work strictly by memory, so when he died, the way to make the serum died with him as well. This should have been emphasized more in the movie, because if it isn’t then there is going to be apparent plot holes. This explains why Captain America is one of a kind. 

Character Correlation

When these comics first came out in 1940, during WWll and a year before the United States joined the war, Captain America was a smash hit. Captain America inspired patriotism, and instilled hope in the youth of America. This movie shows the admiration that people had for Captain America at the time, by showing kids making their own shields, and pretending to be like the hero. I think this movie did well in capturing how much Captain America boosted the moral of the United States, which was much needed in the time of war.

Overall Thoughts

Comic books are pretty easy to adapt into film, compared to a full-fledged novel. The origins of Captain America were different in some ways, but I think that they captured the overall desperation that the United States had for a solution to the end of another world war. The movie was very enjoyable for me, and seeing the reviews online, serious comic book lovers seemed to like it as well. This overall seemed like a good origin story for Captain America. I cannot wait to see him appear in the upcoming “Avengers: End Game” movie; however, I have a feeling I will shed a few tears.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

The Maze Runner: Death Cure

Hello my friends! This week I come back to you with the a review of the book adaptation of the last installment of “The Maze Runner” series, “The Maze Runner: Death Cure”. Last week, I released my wrath on the second part of the trilogy, and for this movie, I had very low standards. Today, I will conclude once and for all what was the real problem with the last two movies and why they couldn’t get higher than a 43% on Rotten Tomatoes. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

Surprisingly enough, there were two solid admirable changes they made to this adaptation. In most teen dystopian book adaptations, one of the most lazy storytelling devices used is the pathetic narration that is only in the beginning and end of the movie, to establish characters and background. I noticed while watching these films, that they have avoided this type of establishment, which is nothing but admirable. I truly do respect the fact that they can tell a story, with a clear plot, without using a narration device to pick up the slack of bad writing.

One of the many several times that I shed tears in both the book and movie was the death of Newt. Someone’s mind deteriorate due to a incurable virus is one of the worst ways to go in my opinion. In the books, Newt gives Thomas a note, and tells him to read it when the time is right. The note is later revealed to order Thomas to kill him, so he doesn’t have to live as a monster. In the film, there is no note, but a letter that Newt gives Thomas minutes before he dies, which comforts both Thomas and the audience. I think this was a nicer letter to end with, and showed clear understanding to the plot, and the many characters. The note seemed like something Newt would do, both in the movie and book, so I didn’t mind this change.

Not so Admirable Changes

Now, just like the previous film, there were many things that were changed, to the point that it seemed completely different to its book counterpart. There would be too many changes to explain, because the plot was so distorted, but I will talk about two of the main conflicts with this adaptation that are the most disrespectful to the novel.

The main problem that is presented in the second and third installment is “The Flare”, or an incurable airborne virus that has rapidly turned into the most devastating pandemic. After the teens escaped the mazes, they were being told that they were part of finding the cure to this horrible disease, and that they were really close to finding it. However, towards the end, it is revealed that they are nowhere near finding the cure, and that there really isn’t going to be one. In the film however, after Brenda takes a serum that used Thomas’ blood, she is cured, meaning Thomas is the only known cure to the disease. This plot change just makes it seem like Thomas is this irreplaceable being that will save everyone, when in the books, this situation is so complicated, that they don’t even know if studying the immune is a way to find the cure.

Teresa, arguably one of the most disliked protagonist of the whole series, dies in the last movie and book. In the book, it is a quick, sacrifice to save Thomas, while the building is crashing down. In the movie however, Teresa and Thomas are being saved from the top of a burning building. Thomas jumps and gets to safety, but Teresa just freezes, takes one last look at her friends, and goes down with the building! I did not understand this motive in the slightest. This was like the Titanic all over again. She could have jumped and made it to safety, but because the writers knew they had to kill her off, they decided to do that in the weirdest, dumbest action movie cliche.

Character Correlation

Besides Newt and Chuck, Minho was one of my favorite characters in the book series. Sure there may have been times when I wish he would know when to shut up, but he has an addictive personality, and a sarcastic humor to him, which is nothing but admirable. In the films, he is portrayed more as a cautious, and serious leader. This character change made him less likable, because the character that they wrote came off as bland and humorless. It is tough to watch, because the actor who plays him, Ki Hong Lee, is a pretty good actor, and it is obvious he is trying to play the character to the best of his ability. Which is why it is so sad to see good actors play bad characters with bad dialogue. 

Overall Thoughts

I do think that this film series set itself apart from other teen dystopian dramas, which was thankfully lacking the love interest plot points that take away from an interesting concept, along with excluding a narration device by the main character. Even though these movies took a different approach on the dystopian genre, I could not bring myself to enjoy the film, knowing that they could have made it so much more interesting if they had followed the basic outline of the book plot. The book plot was just perfection, and knowing what this film had the potential to be, but was not, is disappointing. I’m sure that if you were to stick to the movies, and never read the books, then these movies could be enjoyable. However, I don’t recommend doing so, considering how much better the books were compared to the movie, and knowing that a better story awaits.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

*Are we not going to talk about how cute all of them are? Casting 11/10 ;)*

[thereeltea]

Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials

This movie is the visual embodiment of a headache. Intrigued? Hello my friends! This week I will be reviewing the abomination of a sequel “Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials”. The differences are very apartent, and spoiler, over 90% of the changes are not good.(Yes, I did the math.) Today, I will be sharing my theory as to why this book adaptation is one of the worst I have ever seen. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

In the first installment of the series, we meet many likable characters such as Alby, Chuck, Minho, Newt, Frypan, and Winston. In the book, Winston, the one in change of the slaughter house, dies in one of the storms as they are running through the desert. In the movie, Winston is bite by a Crank, which causes him to become ill and in the beginning stages of the Flare. Then, they leave him with a pistol and he ends the misery himself. This scene is very sad, and actually gives you time to feel emotion. The novel is so fast paced that you don’t have time to feel bad. This change is very cinematic.

One thing that I was never a fan of in the books was the inclusion of girl drama for Thomas, such as the weird crush triangle between Thomas, Brenda, and Teresa. Luckily, in the movie, it was understood that there wasn’t much time to dwell on that, so they just brushed it off. I wish that James Dashner would have understood that nobody that is reading a dystopian novel, really wants to have any love drama added to the mix. But that’s just my opinion when it comes to Sci-Fi, dystopian romances, as they seem out of place.

Not so Admirable changes

Now we get into the knitty gritty. Sadly, if I were to rip this movie to shreds and point out all the blaring differences, I’d have a novel myself. I will just be focussing on two very apparent differences that must be talked about.

One thing that I didn’t expect to be a major change, was the fact that this whole movie is turned into an escape mission and not a “trial” that the title of the book and movie lead you to believe. I think this was one of the worst changes they could have made, strictly because the title literally says “trials” but it isn’t a trial. I don’t think I would have minded the change, but the fact that it is the title, and doesn’t follow it, is very upsetting.

In the first thirty seconds of the film, I knew instantly I was going to be in for a long ride. And boy was I right. The movie starts out with a recovered memory of Thomas’ which was not at all in the book. Next, they reach the building that they will be staying in, and they are running in there for their lives. In the book, they are supposed to be reassured that they are safe and that they won’t have to endure anything similar to it again, then to get that sense of security abruptly taken away from them. Then, when they reach inside, they meet the other people from the different mazes. In the book, we are only aware of the other trial, but with all girls instead of all boys. The movie makes you believe that there were more trials than believed, and there could even be more under testing. This whole mess of the first thirty minutes just made everything all the more confusing.

Character Correlation

Thomas, the main character of the films and books, is described as cautious, intelligent, serious, along with zero sense of humor in these types of situations. In the movie, there are some clear differences. In the film, he is very reckless and impulsive, as seen in the multiple run ins with the cafeteria guards. Compared to the last movie, he seems much more annoying, and definitely does not have a way with words. In the movie, he speaks in short sentences, and seems like every other word that comes out of his mouth is Teresa.

Overall Thoughts

The amount of creative liberties this movie took was appalling. I guess I will never understand the reason why they decide to change the whole plot of the book for the sake of film and screenplay, because the plot from the book is really good. The first movie may have had some differences, but for the most part, the overall plot was present. This movie however, was so different when it came to considerations with the book. I did some digging and found out that there was only ONE screenplay writer for this movie, compared to having three in the previous movie. The problem with having only one person work on the screenplay, is the fact that there is not really any second opinion or perspective, which results in all the characters sounding similar. So, the next time you see a trash movie, look to see who and how many screenplay writers there are. That is why there are some bad movies with notable directors. It all comes down to the writing, which tells the story, which can make or break the narrative. This movie is the perfect example of what NOT to do with a book adaptation. This was probably the worst adaptation I have seen, that it is surpassing the Percy Jackson movies.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

*this was part of my notes while reviewing this movie. This is my thought process*

[thereeltea]

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

Hello my friends! Today I am going to be reviewing “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” which was directed by Tim Burton and based on the book by Roald Dahl. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

Grandpa Joe, one of the four grandparents Charlie has living in his house, was the lucky one to go with Charlie to the chocolate factory. As his grandfather had explained, the chocolate factory was closed to the public after spies were stealing the secret recipes they got while working there. In the film however, Grandpa Joe actually worked there at the factory, but was sadly one of the employees to be let go. I think this minor change made the chocolate factory a little more personal to Charlie and the rest of the Bucket family.

The final moments of the film express a charming moral about the importance of family. Although this is not at all how the book ended, I think this was a good ending, considering that there wouldn’t be a sequel. At the end of the book, it paves the way for the sequel, “Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator”. So, this ending was a good way to end it. 

Not so Admirable Changes

One thing that I didn’t like about the movie, was the amount of flashbacks that Will Wonka had about his troubled past with his dad. As much as I love the reconciling of family relationships, I think that this doesn’t necessarily fit well with the rest of the film. It seemed like a waste of time.

Backpacking on my previous not so admirable change, I think the screen time that was used on the flashbacks could have been used to display more of the candy inventions. Don’t get me wrong, there were plenty of examples, however, I would have liked to see more in the imagination of Tim Burton. I appreciate the Burton style of films, but when I was a little kid, the style really spooked me! Anyone else?

Character Correlation

In the book and the 1971 version of the story, they didn’t go into depth about Willy Wonka’s past. I think this made the character more mysterious and made you focus more on the character during the duration of the film, rather then concerning yourself with his past. Other than that, I think that Johnny Depp did a good job portraying this character, with his tone deaf communication skills, to the way that Willy Wonka would have carried himself. It is also impossible to ignore how Johnny Depp can immerse himself so well in a character, you don’t even know it’s Johnny Depp! 

Overall Thoughts

As much as I love this movie now, I vividly remember being terrified by it as a kid. I may find the flashbacks of Willy Wonka overkill, but I think the imagination of Tim Burton will always be superior to any flaws. There is an odd charm to the movie, despite some of the morbid imagery. I think having someone like Tim Burton to direct this film was brilliant, considering how crazy Tim Burton visions can be, which matches the bizarreness of the book.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

Hunger Games Mockingjay Part ll

Does anyone else remember this image everywhere when the hype around this movie was at it’s peak? Hello my friends! Today I will be finishing off my review for the last installment of the Hunger Games series by reviewing, “Hunger Games Mockingjay Part ll” So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea. 

Admirable Changes

In first part of the novel, Katniss has a set of demands before she agrees to be the mockingjay. These demands being pardoning the victors that were imprisoned, hunting privileges with Gale, keeping Buttercup for Prim, and the honor of killing Snow when he is captured. However, the demand to killing President Snow is withheld until part ll, and is demanded during the vote for putting the Capital’s children in their own Hunger Games. I think that this demand makes more sense there, rather than one of her starting conditions.

District 13 does not mess around, especially when it comes to combat. In the book, Katniss and Johanna go through training to be apart of the fighting. In the movie however, Katniss sneaks off when Coin tells her no. When Coin finds out, she sends the camera people to make the squad that Katniss will be apart of into a PR squad. I think that this was a good change because it saves a lot of time, and even builds up Coin’s growing resentment towards Katniss. 

Not so Admirable Changes

Haymitch and Effie play big roles in the first two books and movie and send a lot of time together. In Mockingjay part ll, Effie and Haymitch share a kiss! Normally I wouldn’t mind a change like this, and at first I didn’t. However, when I really started to think about it, it didn’t make any sense. In the last two movies, they barely encounter each other, and if they did, this wasn’t shown in the movie. So when the kiss happened, I felt like I had missed some off screen chemistry. I think showing or hinting the coupling up would have made more sense than just putting it there without context. Context is important!

The ending of the book and movie was almost spot on, and for that, I appreciate the director. However, there was something that rubbed me the wrong way, that I will never forget. In the end, Katniss and Peeta end up together with two kids. However, they decide to CGI Katniss’s face to make her “look like she is in her 30s”. I cannot emphasize how bad this decision was. There are other ways to age characters. Take Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part two for example, they gave them more mature haircuts and clothes, facial hair, a little bit of makeup, or different body proportions. No need for CGI.

Character Correlation

Plutarch, played by the belated Philip Seymour Hoffman, was understandably not present as much in the movie as he was in the book. However, the way that they worked around it was well done. They replaced some of his scene’s with letters, or having other characters cover for it. Plutarch was a lovable character, and was portrayed excellently by Philip Seymour Hoffman. Rest peacefully my friend.

Overall Thoughts

After all is said and done, these movies were both very entertaining. As much as I didn’t like “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” or “Twilight: Breaking Dawn” being split into two parts,(I may or may not review those in the future.) I think splitting the “Hunger Games: Mockingjay” made sense. These parts were really detailed and full of important plot points that would have been lost if it were to be squished into one movie. The adaptation would not have held as true to the book. This last installment was split into two in the last book, so it’s not like it came out of nowhere. I do not like movies being split, but I would take two long and accurate movies over one semi accurate movie. Even though the split worked with this franchise, doesn’t mean it works with all movies. Splitting a book into two movies seems like a cash grab, but with this series, I think it came out of love for the books and the desire for accuracy. And for that, I applaud everyone involved with the production.

And that’s the Reel Tea. 

May the odds ever be in your favor. 

[thereeltea]

Hunger Games Mockingjay Part l

Hello my friends! I reviewed “The Hunger Games” and “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire”, so I think it’s about time I finish off the Hunger Games franchise. I will be reviewing Part l this week, and then review Part ll next week. In today’s blog, I’ll conclude once and for all if these adaptations for this book needed to be split in two. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

In the Hunger Games, many of the districts rebel and there are many examples of riots that are sparked because of the mockingjay inspiration. In the film, they added another riot, which was were men attacked the peacekeepers and climbed up trees chanting, “if we burn, you burn with us.” I like showing the specific effect of Katniss’s words. It is difficult to show a different perspective like that, or to just talk about it in a book. So, this addition in the film was a good one.

In the Hunger Games series, we are introduced to Avoxs, which are servants of the capital who have their tongues cut off. In the film and book, we are introduced to Pollux, the Avox. There is this one part of the film where he sees Katniss for the first time and signs to his brother, than Katniss is beautiful. The only reason that I knew this was because my mom was watching with me, and told me what it meant. I think this was a cute little thing to add, and if you get the joke it’s pretty funny. Next time you guys watch the movie, look out for it!

Not so Admirable Changes

In the beginning of the book and film, it is established that there are several people who are missing, whose life status is unknown. In the book, it is confirmed that Katniss’s stylist was executed, Peeta and Johanna have been kidnapped by the capital, and that Effie Trinket is nowhere to be found until part ll In the film, Peeta and Johanna are still kidnapped and Cinna was executed, however, Effie is found in District 13 in a jumpsuit. As much as I love Effie and her character, I think having her in District 13, and take the roles of Venia, Octavia, and Flavius, was a cheap way to get her in Mockingjay part I.

Effie being present in this movie was a major change, but the next one I am talking about is going to be a little change, that is still significant. In the book, it is said that District 13 temporarily tattoos people’s schedules. In the film, this detail is excluded. I don’t think that this needed to be taken out, because it’s so simple to explain. This schedule is a visual clue to how structured District 13 is, and how everyone has a role in running the society.

Character Correlation

In Catching Fire, we are introduced to Beetee, the outstanding inventor and victor from District 3. After the second book, he is revealed to be working with the rebellion, and ends up in District 13 to help out with inventions and other protections. In the movie, he is present more frequently, and is shown to help with the campaigning for the rebellion. I think having him appear more was ideal, considering he has got to be one of the brightest minds in all of Panem.

Overall Thoughts

As much as some people may not enjoy the first movie, I think this movie was well done. I think it showed the true time and campaigning that goes to a political campaign. Some may argue that this movie lacked a lot of action, but I think that this movie had the best of both worlds. There were plenty of intense action scenes, and serious ones, that we impressively not boring. As many people know, the next book is filled with action, and I expect a lot of that in the next film. Stay tuned for next week’s blog, where we will conclude if this book needed to be stretched out into 2 movies.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Hello my wizarding fellows! I’m glad to say that today I will be reviewing “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix” which was directed by David Yates. It doesn’t come to a surprise of anyone that there was recently a Harry Potter marathon, so I thought doing another Harry Potter book would be a fun blog post. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

One of the many things that our lord and savor J.K. Rowling introduced to us through this series is Quidditch. To many booklovers, Quidditch is considered their favorite sport! However, this movie did not contain one minute of Quidditch. As much as I love the sport myself, it probably wouldn’t be appropriate considering the darker theme of the movie.

Another thing that was altered in the movie, was the discovery of Room of Requirement. In the book, Dobby tells Harry where the Room of Requirement is, and also helps scout the area outside of it so they don’t get caught. In the movie, Neville is walking passed it, and the doors magically appear. I think this is a nice way to introduce it, because the Room is supposed to be there when you need it. And this the DA’s case, they desperately needed a place to do practice their magic.

Not so Admirable Changes

Thestrals are presented to us in this movie and book. Thestrals are only able to be seen by those that have seen death first hand. Harry is able to see it because of his parents, Luna because of her mom, and Neville because of his grandfather. In the movie however, they decided to rule out Neville’s ability to see them. I honestly don’t understand why they would rule this detail out, considering it is so small. I think him having this ability is a way to see more into his character, like we were able to do with Luna.

Another not so admirable change that I noticed had to do with Hagrid. In the Order of the Phoenix, Hagrid is sent on a mission with Olympe Maxime, another fellow giant. While on their quest, Hagrid finds and houses his half brother Grawp. In the movie however, it is not really explained how he got his brother, and the mission plot line is discarded. I think for those that haven’t read the books, this detail would have been helpful. But on the other hand, who HASN’T  read the books at this point?

Character Correlation

Professor Umbridge was so perfectly terrible, just like her novel counterpart, made her almost as easy to hate as Voldemort. Whether it be by punishing students in detention, to the numerous proclamations, she was easy to hate, and I loved it. Just like in the book, she isn’t given a reason for being so horrible, she just is. The actress that played Umbridge, Imelda Staunton, was exactly how she was described in the book to have short curly hair, a wide slack mouth, and to be short and stout.

Overall Thoughts

Overall, the movie was pretty dark, with some light hearted scenes that lightened it up a little. There were some details that didn’t need to be cut, because it would just add another two lines to the characters, so there wasn’t any need to exclude them. Other than that, the movie was enjoyable and just as intriguing as the book.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

The Hunger Games

Hello my friends! Today I will be reviewing “The Hunger Games” by Suzanne Collins. “The Hunger Games” happens to be my favorite dystopian trilogy. I reviewed “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” all the way back in September of last year. And so when the first book adaptation was playing on the TV, I knew I had to review it. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

As the symbol of the whole trilogy, and the main protagonist’s mascot, the mockingjay was an important detail in both the film and novel. The symbol was introduced to the reader when Madge, the daughter of District 12’s mayor, gave the pin to Katniss to wear when she’s at the games. And I know that some people may disagree with me on this, but I think having the pin find its way to her, instead of it given to her by an acquaintance, is a little more of a foreshadowing. Even though Madge is a character in the trilogy, she isn’t a main one, so I think excluding her isn’t the worst thing they could have done.

Not so Admirable Changes  

The Hunger Games is brutal and the inhumanity is sickening. So, it is no surprise that there would be some discontent for this type of mercilessness. However, these uprisings are not supposed to occur in this book, but rather is supposed to be the main focus of the second and third books of the series. In the movie, there was a massive revolt in District 11 after Rue was killed. Even though this was heartbreaking, it didn’t cause an outbreak of protest until Katniss and Peeta go to visit District 11. I think sticking to the main plot line of the book is important, so adding a premature uprising is a little confusing, considering this isn’t the first time that a young child has been killed in the Hunger Games.

This trilogy was known not for the disturbing dystopian plot line, but the main character’s love triangle in these circumstances. One of the main tensions in this series was the miscommunication between Peeta and Katniss about what constitutes as real in their relationship. Both become very confused when their TV personalities get blended into their real lives, and causes them to question whether their relationship is authentic or not. I mean, if I had to fake a relationship for the rest of the world in order to survive, I would also be confused about whether or not my partner loves me, and if I really love them. However in the film, this conflict isn’t really addressed, when it should be, considering the other books are more focussed on the revolution than anything.

Character Correlation 

When you think comic relief in the Hunger Games trilogy, the person that comes to mind is Haymitch. I think he was the best portrayed in this movie. He was played as the drunk, yet surprisingly thoughtful person. I think an interesting characteristic that is never explained, but understood is the reason why Haymitch comes off as cold. The reason he seems disconnected and defeated is because as the mentor, he has trained and given advice to people, and all those have died in the Hunger Games. In his mind, as long as he doesn’t get attached, he won’t suffer the loss and despair. He drinks constantly to forget, and I think that Woody Harrelson did a good job at playing this broken character.

Overall Thoughts

I think that this was a really good book adaptation. The movie was really enjoyable, and at times, I forgot that I was supposed to be reviewing it. Even though there were things that were changed, I think the movie could have been a lot worse. I’m sure the reason why they didn’t include some of the elements I wanted, was because the movie was 142 minutes long. And I am happy to say that I enjoyed every minute, and is forever grateful that I do not live in such a messed up society.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters

Hello my friends! Today I am reviewing “Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters” which is based on the novel by Rick Riordan. These books were my everything in middle school, so you can imagine how disappointed I was when I watched the first movie. When I thought things couldn't get any worse, I saw the second movie. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Change

In both movies it is very apparent that the main characters are way older than their book counterparts. And as much as I disliked this change, they did stick with it. In the movie, it is said that the Great Prophecy, which shouldn’t have been revealed until “The Last Olympian”, will go into effect when Percy is at the age of 20. In the book, this prophecy was supposed to come true when Percy is at the age of 16, when he is clearly an adolescent teenager, not an adult. I do admire that they didn’t backtrack and try to claim the actors were younger than they clearly were, and stuck with their questionable creative choice.

Not so Admirable Changes

Now, this is where things get interesting, and where I get probably the most upset. Tyson, the son of Poseidon, brother of Percy, and a cyclops, is first introduced in both the book and movie. However, it is the way that he is introduced, which is completely different. In the book, Percy meets Tyson when he is off at school, and hangs out with Tyson, who is his only friend there. It is understood early on that Percy and his mom find themselves very protective over Tyson. When Percy gets to camp half-blood, it is revealed that Tyson is his brother. Their bond is not changed, and even though it might be strained every now and then, they still love each other. In the movie, Tyson, is this obnoxious attempt for a comic relief, and is just thrown at Percy out of nowhere. So not only does Annabeth feel uncomfortable around him due to her past, but Percy sees him as a burden, an annoyance, which should never be the intention with any character.

Not only did they totally mess up Tyson and Percy’s brotherhood dynamic, but they completely left out one of the main obstacles of Percy and Annabeth’s quest to find Grover. In the book, Annabeth and Percy end up on Circe’s island and resort, which is later revealed to turn males into guinea pigs. In the movie however, it is explained that Circe built an amusement park which also happens to conveniently be the home of the cyclops Polyphemus, the cyclops that has captured Grover. This movie just made all the problems in the book so easily avoidable and non-challenging for the characters, giving no tension or stakes whatsoever.

Character Correlation

Annabeth Chase. She is by far one of the most complex and level headed characters in the book series. However, even in the first movie, she was diluted, and not given all the props she should have gotten. Just like in the last movie, she was supposed to be smart, and well trained. However, Percy was still coming up with all the solutions, and even beating her in combat with lack of any training. This is another example of useless female characters in hollywood. It would bother me in a normal, run of the mill movie, but the fact that this character is based on a vital protagonist in the novel, makes it all the more upsetting.

Overall Thoughts

Just like the previous movie, this was not an example of a good book adaptation. It somehow managed to be even more further from the books than the previous film, and that made it much worse. The first movie was hard to watch, but tolerable. But I cannot lie, this film was unbearable. I recommend reading the books to cleanse your eyes from watching it. I think this movie is a perfect example of what not to do in a book adaptation, especially considering the massive cult following of the novels.

And that’s the Reel Tea

[thereeltea]

To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before

Hello my friends! Today I will be reviewing “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before” based on the novel by Jenny Han. The romantic comedy blew up last year. After watching the movie, I took an interest in the books. Just like every week, I’m going to review the movie to see how well they correlate. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

I know that a lot of people don't like these types of movies, but as a hopeless romantic, with no experience with relationships at all, I'm a big fat sucker for rom coms. In the final scene where she confessed her love to him on the lacrosse field, and then them walking on the field together during the end credits, gave me the same vibe as sixteen candles. I know this wasn't the ending from the book, but I think that adding this little cliche to this movie wasn't all that bad. I think we could all use a little hollywood magic.  

Another thing that I admired from the film was the alteration in the circumstances that Lara Jean had her first kiss. In the movie Lara Jean's first kiss was a result of a spin the bottle game, where Peter landed on Lara Jean. However, in the book, it was a spontaneous, random moment of passion when they were in the seventh grade. I think having Genevieve be upset over something so minuscule and stupid made her all the more repulsive.

Not so Admirable Changes

One thing that I didn't like was the choice to reveal information about who sent out the Lara Jean's letters wasn't as fun as it could have been. In the book, you didn't find out it was Kitty until the end. In the movie, you know beforehand. I think leaving a little mystery in the movie would have been a little more exciting.

Character Correlation

One character that I thought could have been improved was Kitty. The typical mischievous younger sibling character was achieved in both pieces, however I think she was way more annoying in the movie. In the book, she was around 8 or 9. In the movie, she is 11! She should know better then to send out your older sister’s personal love letters. Her being 9 in the book, gave her the “naive” excuse, but her being older in the film just came off as cruel, making her more annoying than feisty.

Overall Thoughts

The novel was really cute, and the movie was too. The movie had great cinematography, and Lara Jean's outfits were adorable. The movie was so good, I didn’t even have another not so admirable change. I would recommend the book if you liked the movie, strictly because it had the same energy and overall vibe. After I had seen Netflix’s previous attempts at rom coms, I was a little hesitant to watch this one. However, I would 100% recommend the book and movie.

*sooooo cuteeeee*

[thereeltea]

Love, Simon

Hello friends! For Christmas I received a lot of books. Because this was during winter break, I had a lot of time for reading. So, one of the novels that I stumbled upon was “Simon vs. the Homosapien Agenda”. This book was really good, and I hope that it’s movie counterpart “Love, Simon” does this book justice. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

ADMIRABLE CHANGES

The first thing that I liked about the movie was the title change. Although the title of the book is a clever reference from an email between Simon and Blue, it is still really long. I think shortening the title was a good idea. The title is named after how he signed off his letter to the public about his sexuality. Both the titles held some sort of significance to the story, which i appreciated.

Another thing that I admired was the civility between Simon and Martin. In the book, Simon does not bother to talk to Martin after he outed him. This is understandable considering how Martin ruined a big part of Simon’s life. In the movie, even though Simon is upset at Martin, he is not hostile, and doesn’t want to hold a grudge, because he is happy now. Blue is now his boyfriend, his friends are talking to him again, and he isn’t hiding any secrets from his family anymore. This really shows the his character, and how he doesn’t have time for grudges because he’s happy.

NOT SO ADMIRABLE CHANGES

Despite the changes that I admired, just like every movie adaptation, there were some that did not sit well with me. One change that I was not fond of was the reveal scene for Blue, on the ferris wheel. When I saw the movie, way before I knew the book even existed, I found it a little weird that the reveal was in public for everyone to see, and made it not so enjoyable for me or Simon to watch and experience. In the book however, the moment was private, and to me, more sentimental and intimate. It was right before the carnival was about to close, and they were alone for the most part. I don’t think it needed to be a big, hollywood reveal, and they should have stuck to the original part in the book.

Another thing that didn’t sit well with me, was the absence of Bram halfway through the movie. In the film, Bram was a strongly established character that just disappeared after the party in the movie. This made the ending a little more predictable. In the book, he was a character that was consistent throughout the whole movie, and if I hadn’t seen the movie before hand, the ending would have been shocking.

CHARACTER CORRELATION

Usually when you watch a movie adaptation, the characters could be unbearable or annoying, compared to their movie counterparts. However, they made Lea, who was obnoxious and tempered in the book, into an understanding and kind person. While reading the book, I really tried to see her point of view, but I couldn’t. She was just plain rude and mean for no reason. So reading about this character was really weird, because the director made her so much more likeable. I did not mind the change at all, but it was interesting to see the same character act totally different.

OVERALL THOUGHTS

This movie was really fun to watch, and the overall aesthetic was fantastic. However, I wouldn’t call it a direct movie adaptation, due to it being very loosely based on the book. I admire how both pieces were easily able to spark important dialogue about the LGBT teenagers of today. Despite society’s progression with acceptance in the past twenty, thirty years, it doesn’t mean that there isn’t still discrimination and struggles that these teenagers have to go through. Either way, I think the movie did a good job capturing the mind of a closeted teenager that was expressed in the book, and to me, that is all that matters.

Love, the Reel Tea

[thereeltea]

Wonder

Hello my friends! I was scrolling through Hulu, and I came across “Wonder” directed by Stephen Chbosky, and thought that I would watch it, and compare it to the novel written by R.J. Palacio. This movie came out in last year, and it got a lot of attention, followed by good reviews. Today, I am going to determine how critically acclaimed this movie really is.

Admirable Changes

One thing that I really admired about this movie, was the way they portrayed Auggie’s appearance. In the beginning of the book, it is mentioned that Auggie does not want to describe what he looks like, and in a way, leaves his image to the imagination of the reader. Some people’s concerns for the movie adaptation, was giving the faceless kid, a face. However, I don’t think that this was as big of a concern as people make it out to be. The whole point of the book is how we shouldn’t care about appearance, but personality and character. This mentality should carry over to the movie as well, and the biggest concern shouldn’t be his face.

Another change that I liked was the family dynamic. Although there was good family moments in the book, I think that the movie displayed even more. The family is very loving, and even though they bicker sometimes, they still, in the end, love each other very much. Chbosky somehow captured even more family moments than the book, making the movie even more family oriented.

Not so admirable changes

One change that I was not fond of was the choice to include Julian’s parents in an interview after Julian was caught in the middle of a bullying scheme. His mother, without a doubt, was absolutely disgusting. Not only did she refuse to believe that her son was the bully, and even after the undefiable evidence to support her son’s bullying, but she justified it by saying that he has been mentally scarred by Auggie. This was not at all in the book, and I don’t think this horrific scene should have been included in the film. Although it did explain Julian’s upbringing, the email that was in the book was more than enough to show his arrogant parents.

Character Correlation

One character that I enjoyed a lot from the movie was Auggie’s mom. She was the definition of super mom, and was just the sweetest. One part of the movie that sold it for me, was showing how much Auggie’s mom missed August, by having her a little teary eyed, when looking at where she used to homeschool her son. She was a powerhouse, and was a very understanding and caring character. I did like that in the movie, she still didn’t hesitate to be upset with her son when he did something wrong. I think that treating him just like a normal kid, was the best character trait she had, which carried well from novel to film.

Overall Thoughts

I really enjoyed this movie; so much that I only had one “not so admirable change”. This is probably the only time that I have ever said this, but I think that I enjoyed the movie more than the book. The movie went above and beyond to portray this novel in the best way possible. I could not have envisioned it any better. The cinematography, the evident family dynamic, and the loveable characters was the icing to the cake. I am always going to recommend to read the book, but I think you can still get all the details and message by just watching the movie. I think this film deserved all the good reviews it got and more.

And that’s the Reel Tea.

[thereeltea]

Fahrenheit 451

Hello my friends! Today, I am reviewing “Fahrenheit 451” directed by Francois Truffaut, based on the novel by Ray Bradbury. “Fahrenheit 451” has to be one of the most intriguing novels out there. It is my mission today to figure out whether or not the movie is just as thought provoking as the book was for me and many others. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

One thing that I admired was actually at the very end of the book. In the last scene of the film, there is a compilation of shots where the “book people” are reciting the books they memorized. It is a very inspiring scene, that leaves the audience with a sense of hope that there will be change soon. In the book however, the reader is left with questions, dissatisfaction, and uneasiness. 

Another part of the movie that I enjoyed was the inclusion of the firemen trainees. I may have missed this detail in the book, but there was definitely attention on these firemen in training. I think showing how these firemen train, think, and problem solve was a good choice on the directors part. It really emphasized the seriousness of this field of work, that you don’t really get the sense of in the book.

Not so admirable changes

There were many changes to the movie, and sadly, some of those changes were not executed in the best way possible. One aspect of the movie that I was not fond of was the lack of reasoning behind Montag’s actions. In the book, the driving factor of his rebelling is the tragic old lady’s demise, where she burned and perished along with her books. This sparks wonder in Montag, as to why someone would die for this thing that he is meant to destroy. What is so important in those books, that someone would die with them? This results in Montag starting to read the books he has been hoarding, and eventually leading him to acting irrationally in front of his wife’s friends. In the movie, there was nothing that flipped the switch in Montag’s mind. The only thing that I can think of is his interactions with Clarisse.

Another aspect of the movie that I didn’t like, was the exclusion of the Hound. In the book, the Hound is used to track down Montag after he murdered and committed crimes against the state. The Hound is described to be able to track anyone, and has thus far, not been inaccurate. So, while Montag is running away to the river, there is a lot of tension with him escaping, because this 100% efficient tracking hound is chasing him. In the movie however, Montag simply jogs his way to the river, paddles across it in a canoe, and follows the tracks until he finds other “book people”. There was no suspense in this scene, making it almost uninteresting.

Character correlation

Despite the many changes made in the movie, most of the characters were pretty accurate to their book counterparts, except for one. This character was Clarisse McClellan. Not only was she in the movie way too much, but she was also the wrong age. In the book, she was supposed to be seventeen and “crazy”. Her age was important, because we got insight into the youth that she was surrounded by, and got to be fascinated by her thoughts, ideas, and attention to detail. She is supposed to be beyond her years. In the movie, she is a teacher in her mid 20s on probation for being too much of a fun teacher. She still is an oddball, but it just doesn’t convey the same character. Not to mention that Clarisse was supposed to die within the first part of the book. I would have liked to have seen more accuracy with this character, and for everyone to realize, that characters can still be a big part of the narrative, and have a big impact, without being present.  

Overall thoughts

The movie was very different to the book. There were many changes, that I wasn't particularly fond of. There were many key plot points missing, and quite a few changes in the order in which events occured. I don’t think that the overall “chill factor” that I got from the book was lost, but without a few details enhancing the intensity, it fell short. I still think that the movie was thought provoking. Just like the book, it makes you wonder how close our society could be to this future. Especially in 2018, where topics, books, politics, people, and religion are more sensitive than ever. Overall, I don’t think the movie was bad, and did like the sense of hope that it left me with.

And that’s the Reel Tea.  

*love the firemen truck. Didn’t imagine it like this, but it is AMAZING! 

[thereeltea]

The Polar Express

“MERRYYYY CHRISTMASSS”. It is now the 2nd of December, meaning it is the best time of the year. There are already decorations set up in my house, and lights on all the houses on the street. In honor of this glorious month, I have decided to review my second favorite Christmas movie,(the first being Home Alone one and two)”Polar Express”. “ The Polar Express” was directed by Robert Zemeckis and based on the book by Chris Van Allsburg. The book is VERY short, so I’m going to delve into how they made this five minute read into a 100 minute movie. So, without further ado, let’s spill the Reel Tea.

Admirable Changes

One part of the movie that I admired very much was the choice to bring out and focus on some characters. This being the “friends” that the narrator was referring to in the book. I think emphasizing the people that he shared this once in a lifetime experience with was a very smart move. These kids bonded over the most bizarre experience, that not many children get to embark. The narrator’s journey was a unique one in the book, so wouldn’t you want to share that adventure with some new friends?

Another aspect of the movie that I absolutely adored was the hole punching of the tickets. There were no mention of any tickets in the book, however, in the movie, it is a big deal. The conductor ends up hole punching words into each kids ticket, telling them something they need to improve on/learn or a trait that they have, and should treasure. I think this change just added to the christmas magic that is emitted off of the whole movie.

Not so Admirable Changes

Marionette puppets. Do you find them creepy? So do I. So when they included them in the movie, I was a little uneasy. Then, they decided to bring them to life! No thank you! I know a lot of my other friends found this part unsettling as a child. This made kids not so fond of the movie. This detail was not included in the book, and I think it sound have stayed that way.

Another change that I was not particularly fond of was the ghost guy that lived on the train. As much of a funny character he was, I don’t think that he really needed to be there. He was the mischievous character, but as a kid, I didn’t really like him. As I got older, I could appreciate his purpose, and the message he was their to share. But as a kid, you don’t really pick up on that kind of stuff. Because this movie’s target demographic is children, I think having a character that you don’t understand until you’re older is not the best decision.

Character Correlation

There was one character in particular that I did appreciate. The conductor, was by far the funniest character in the movie. I did really like that he gave him a personality in the movie, because in the book, he was simply there to usher the kids on and off the train. He was very quirky, and a perfectionist, which was probably the best personality trait they could have given him, considering it was mentioned in the book that he had a pocket watch. Not to mention how he was the one to help the narrator truly believe in Santa and the magic of Christmas.

Overall Thoughts

There were many things added to the movie, considering the book is a 5 minute read and the movie is an hour and 40 minutes. They may have put in some musical numbers, quirky characters, plenty of obstacles, and some details that I didn’t admire. However, the most important detail of Christmas and the movie, “believing”, was not lost.  

And that’s the Reel Tea

*heres a good meme for those that love the triggered meme, and for those that love the movie*