The Movie You Saw Last

[Queen of Liars]

Chungking Express and Fallen Angels, which were both absolutely fantastic. I think between those two and the Days of Being Wild/In the Mood for Love/2046 trilogy Wong Kar-Wai has become my favourite director. I'll certainly be checking out his other stuff soon.

Edited June 6, 2014 by Cheshire Cat

[Hodor]

Watched Army of Darkness again. This time, watched the Primitive Screwhead fan-edit- the one based on the theatrical ending, to be exact, and not the original. Still probably my favorite fantasy flick, even more than Conan and LotR, honestly.

[Vakama-san]

Stephen King's IT. That was just bizarre.

[Vorahk1Panrahk2]

Kingdom of Heaven (directors cut)-

 

From a technical standpoint, I think this is some of the finest work to come from the Scott. The Jerusalem siege at the end of the film is the perfect demo reel to show filmmakers today why real sets still matter. For the siege he actually built a wall of Jerusalem and two siege towers at 1:1 scale! That dedication to production is the reason why it was such a wonderful, visceral set piece. He takes no short cuts for the rest of the movie either, and all of it works to transport the viewer to (an admittedly romanticized version of) early Crusades era Jerusalem.

 

The film isn't entirely without faults, though. The goal of Scott and Monahan was to take the tensions and conflicts of the time and use them to make statements on contemporary conflicts and politics. And by showing the good and bad of both sides I think he starts to head that direction. Unfortunately, with so much of the story focussed on Balian, I think it looses some of that perspective. It's not that the story wanders, it's just not entirely focussed where it should be. Nevertheless, the film is a wonderful visual experience with just enough thematic weight to justify a viewing.

 

Home on the Range-

 

On my quest to watch all 53 films in the WDAS canon, I knew I would have to come across this one eventually. Today, finally, I bit the bullet and watched it. It often gets a bad rep for being one of the worst Disney films ever made, but I couldn't help but wonder how much of that was hyperbole. Well... it's not. The film is bad. The plot is simple enough: a few cows set out on a journey to save their homeland from being purchased by a greedy land baron.

 

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that premise, but the execution is awful. The characterization of all the characters is weak, and the movie easily could have done without one or two of them. The villain's motivations are underdeveloped. But the worst aspect is that the story wanders. At first the cows have one plan to save their home, then that plan changes into something completely different. A note to screenwriters: If your characters start their journey by stating a plan and a goal... stick with that and don't change it arbitrarily. Aside from that, Alan Menken's talents are wasted on this movie. He did the best he could with Glenn Slater's middling lyrics, but even he couldn't make the songs very interesting (except for "Will the Sun Ever Shine Again" which is actually quite beautiful, and the only high point of the movie).

 

On top of that, there's an obnoxious amount of juvenile humor. The jokes aren't clever. The movie just isn't funny. And on top of all that the art style is dull. Shapes are too simple, colors too dull, and everything too static. Wheat fields have textures like rocks, and there is very little moving elements in the environments.

 

So, all in all, nothing about this movie works. It's visually dull, boring to watch, sometimes confusing to watch, and overall forgettable. It might not be the worst in Disney's animated canon, but when I watch them all I'm sure it will come pretty close.

Edited June 17, 2014 by Vorahk1Panrahk2

[Collector1]

I saw the LEGO Movie after a long wait to see it.

[Kaleidoscope Tekulo]

I saw The LEGO Movie again. Soooo worth it.

 

Before that I saw Frozen with friends for like the tenth time. The wickedly talented Adele Dazeem never gets old.

 

And earlier that same night I rewatched Frozen, I met with my friends at the theater to see The Fault in Our Stars. From what I heard, it's very accurate to the book. I wanted to cry it was so good. I never cry at movies, but a few of them make me come close. Those are the really good ones.

[Voltex]

I saw 22 Jump Street on friday and How to Train Your Dragon 2 just now. Both are very good, although I don't think either quite matches their predecessor.

[Calvirick]

I saw How to Train Your Dragon 2, but I wish I watched The Amazing Spider-man 2 again. Cause if you compared the

 

 

deaths

 

 

Spider-man out rules Dragons by over 9000.

[Vorahk1Panrahk2]

The Fox and the Hound-

 

In my continuing journey to view all 53 Disney animated canon films, I decided this one was next. I wasn't sure what to think going into it. Some reviews I read where quite middling. Some reviews were pretty glowing. As I starting watching the film I was initially very impressed. By the end of the film I found it to be one of the stronger entries in the canon, arguable right up there with the other greats.

 

For the uninitiated, The Fox and the Hound is the story of the relationship between a fox (Tod) and a hunting dog (Copper). They start out as friends, but as the grow older and Copper is trained as a hunting dog their relationship is naturally tested. I think the movie was such a success in my eyes because it explores a friendship completely. The first third of the movie (approximately) shows the two meeting, and playing together, and these moments are very well done and very poignant, and it only makes it all the more heartbroken when the two are forced at each other's throat for the second half the movie. This is their falling out. Many friendships have them, and sometimes they don't recover.

 

The reason the movie successfully taps these beats is because it spends time developing them. We see Tod and Copper playing and getting close in the beginning the film. We see the relationship fall apart. We see how they deal with it independently. Lots of time is spent making us care deeply about these characters and showing us how their relationship progresses. It's what Frozen could have, and should have, done.

 

The climax of the movie is what you would expect from the subject matter, and ultimately the viewer is left with the question of how this relationship could possibly resolve itself. And it does in a way that's unconventional for animated films. I don't want to spoil it, you should watch it for yourself, but the only thing I can compare the ending to is that of Toy Story 3. It's an inevitably that we don't like to think about but the movie forces us to confront.

 

The movie also shines technically. The character animation isn't great, but the backgrounds themselves are very beautiful and do a great job creating the right atmosphere. Where I also have to praise this movie is for its use of silence. There's no intrusive score here and voices are kept to a surprising minimum. It was a great directing choice and the movie is stronger for it.

 

All that said it's not a perfect film. There are two bird characters who's only purpose in the movie is to try and catch a worm. Their interaction with Tod and Copper are minimal and their importance to the plot is nonexistent save for one scene in the opening. One could argue that they represent the type of friendship that Tod and Copper could want but could never have, but that's possibly grasping at straws. One could also argue that there isn't enough of Copper in the film. He's not the main character (Tod is), but a little more screentime could have been beneficial. It could also be said that there's a little too much inspiration taken from Bambi, but I think the stories these two films tell are different enough for Fox and the Hound to the appreciated on its own. All in all, though, these are minor criticisms. They don't kill the film in any real way and I think it succeeds beautifully in spite in them.

 

EDIT: Man I totally lied, Atlantis: The Lost Empire was the follow up to Home on the Range... my bad.

 

Atlantis: The Lost Empire-

 

This film tends to get a bad rep. It came out during the darker ages of Disney when box office results and critical reception where weaker. Atlantis, more so than other films, did badly at the box office and got bad reviews. One can't change box office, but ultimately I think the bad reviews are a little harsh.

 

Atlantis is about a university janitor/boiler room manager who, upon being given a journal, deciphers some clues and leads a team to the lost city of Atlantis. What follows is a combination of Indiana Jones, Journey to the Center of the Earth, and Disney, and I think it mostly works. Tonally the movie is a bit of a mish mash, and I think with such violent action set pieces the Disney-esque one liners could have been kept to a minimum, but it's not ear-gouging awful. The characters all have memorable, unique personalities and all them at some point deliver some genuinely entertaining dialogue. And they were all a joy to watch even if their development was fairly minimal.

 

I guess if I have one complaint, it's that not nearly enough time was spent in the city of Atlantis. The set designs and spiritual elements were all very beautiful to look at (even if the animation is a bit simplistic at times), and I would have really liked to see more of it. The journey to get to the city (which I think takes half the film) could have easily been cut short to make room for more of the city.

 

So is Atlantis a great movie? Maybe not. But I don't think it's as bad as people make it out to be either. It's got great action and adventure, memorable characters, genuinely amusing one liners, and a knock-out setting in the location of Atlantis. Sure it falls short in that last one a bit but I still think it's a legitimately entertaining film.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Vorahk1Panrahk2

[Axilus Prime]

Full Metal Jacket. The first 45 minutes were the most interesting part of the movie by far. The rest was rather uninteresting. Not much of a plot either.

[bls999]

I watched Oblivion. Too much Tom Cruise.

[Master Inika]

I watched The LEGO Movie on DVD. I still love it.

[Hodor]

Clerks.

 

Kevin Smith's directorial debut is probably his best work, or perhaps his second best, depending on how much you like Chasing Amy or Dogma. While the movie is very much dated to the early/mid-90s, especially with Randal working in a video store, I feel the movie itself is still a very entertaining and interesting watch. It's kind of amusing to sit through the credits of this movie, since it promises the characters of Jay and Silent Bob to return in Dogma.

[Axilus Prime]

Edge of Tomorrow. The plot was amazingly good. Definitely the most unique plot I have ever seen in a movie, and it was well executed.

[Vakama-san]

"What's Up, Doc?"

 

Watched it a few times when I was little, and hardly remembered it. Watching it again, it was funny, but that Judy Maxwell character is annoying beyond belief. Overall, it was pretty mediocre.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Definitely the most unique plot I have ever seen in a movie

 

Oh really?

 

 

It's not like it hasn't been done before, in a better way.

 

Last movie I saw was Days of Future Past. Blink's special effects were amazing, and Quicksilver was pretty funny. Overall, very enjoyable, and it was very successful at being the first comic-book style reboot. A few parts just didn't make a lot of sense though...

 

- Wait, so Wolverine got his adamantium claws back? When? My guess is that Magneto just rearranged the adamantium in his body so that he could have shiny claws again, but was that really so hard to put in the movie? Just like one line of dialogue would have solved it. At the beginning Kitty could have said, "I thought you lost your metal claws." And Wolverine could have said something like, "Magneto helped out with that."

 

- So apparently Magneto's locked up in the Pentagon for killing Kennedy, and Quicksilver gets him out. Okay. But Wolverine's created a new timeline; how did Magneto get out originally?

 

- They got another actor for Stryker? Geez. Couldn't they have just gotten the dude from X-Men Origins to play Stryker again? Okay, so DofP takes place in 1973, X-Men Origins takes place in 1990, and X2 takes place in 2006. That means this guy turns into this guy who turns into this guy. Eh, I guess you can say they sort of look like each other, but still... kind of silly.

 

- My memory of Origins is hazy, but didn't Wolverine and Stryker meet in the middle of the Vietnam War rather than after it? If so, shouldn't Stryker have recognized Wolverine the second they ran into each other?

 

-  Okay, so hold on. When Wolverine agrees to go back in time, he's basically saying, "This is the last time I'll ever see you guys again the way I've always known you." Then he goes to 1973 to live out the next 50 years of his life all over again. Why is it then that, when 2023 rolls around in the new timeline, he suddenly wakes up and is amazed to find himself in a happy world? Why has Wolverine's brain reverted from new timeline to old timeline? Does it have something to do with Kitty's powers?

 

- Speaking of that, in terms of Kitty's power, do the past and present coexist? As in, if Wolverine spends five minutes walking down the street in 1973, does that mean Kitty has to have her power on for five whole minutes? Or is five seconds of Kitty's power enough to generate five minutes worth of time travel? This is a strange problem because Wolverine spends well over 24 hours in the past; Kitty certainly couldn't have been using her power for that long.

 

- Man, Rogue wasn't in it enough. Remember that part where Kitty gets stabbed by Wolverine? Did you wonder why they bothered putting that scene there in the first place? Well that's because Kitty was supposed to start dying a lot sooner. Then there would have this awesome scene where the X-Men broke Rogue out of prison or something and had her absorb Kitty's powers. Then Kitty would drop dead, and Rogue would continue to keep Wolverine in the past. But some shmuck working on the film said, "Well, shoot! That'd be ten whole minutes without Wolverine in the movie! We can't have that!" Thankfully, the director was nice enough to finish special effects for that scene, and said he'd put it on the home video release, but still... kind of disappointing.

 

- What's this? A post-credits scene? Come on, Singer. I know all the other comic book movies are doing it, but at least they're doing it well (well, maybe not The Amazing Spider-Man). In the Marvel movies, post-credits scenes are unique because they preview the next film as well as advancing the plot ever so slightly (for instance: Iron Man, The Winter Soldier, The Dark World, and The First Avenger). Don't waste time with a five-second post-credits scene that leaves everyone in the audience confused.

[Axilus Prime]

I haven't seen that one, Skeleton.

 

The poster does tell me the plot is a bit similar, but at the same time it tells me the movie is not a superior execution of the idea.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

I haven't seen that one, Skeleton.

 

The poster does tell me the plot is a bit similar, but at the same time it tells me the movie is not a superior execution of the idea.

 

That poster is actually the worst representation of the movie possible. It is not, in fact, about a man who lives in a clock. It's hilarious. I'm sure it's miles better than Edge of Tomorrow.

[Axilus Prime]

 

I haven't seen that one, Skeleton.

 

The poster does tell me the plot is a bit similar, but at the same time it tells me the movie is not a superior execution of the idea.

 

That poster is actually the worst representation of the movie possible. It is not, in fact, about a man who lives in a clock. It's hilarious. I'm sure it's miles better than Edge of Tomorrow.

 

I know it's not about a man who lives in a clock, I read the tagline.

 

...Wait, you're sure it's--you haven't seen Edge of Tomorrow at all, have you? Don't tell me you're one of those people who will expect a movie to be bad without even seeing it.

 

And Edge of Tomorrow is almost certainly better execution if this is just a lighthearted comedy film.

 

Then again, the point of this conversation is questionable. We have very, very different taste in movies, judging by your previous posts. I have a feeling this will become a heated argument if we continue it much further.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

...Wait, you're sure it's--you haven't seen Edge of Tomorrow at all, have you? Don't tell me you're one of those people who will expect a movie to be bad without even seeing it.

 

No, I can't say I've seen it. I'm not interested in explosion-fests, and judging from the trailers it looked like exactly that. Unfortunately, I have a tendency to judge a movie by its trailer; mostly because that's what's supposed to make me see the movie in the first place.

 

I'm probably not missing anything anyway by not seeing it.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TheSkeletonMan939

[Vorahk1Panrahk2]

And Edge of Tomorrow is almost certainly better execution if this is just a lighthearted comedy film.

 

 

 

Without having seen Edge of Tomorrow, and having seen Groundhog Day, it seems to me the two films really only share the premise, and are otherwise completely different in tone, setting, and genre. To say that one executes the premise better because the other "is just a lighthearted comedy film" is just genre bias. Any premise can work well with any genre. Look at The Magnificent Seven, Seven Samurai, and A Bug's Life. Three completely different genres with three completely different audiences in mind, but they all use the same premise*. And they are all very good films that were well received by audiences. I imagine that Edge of Tomorrow may be compared similarly with Groundhog Day, assuming it makes a lasting impression.

 

I would encourage you to throw aside your preconceptions of Groundhog Day. It's a comedy, sure, and it has it's lighthearted moments (and it's dark ones), but it's very well scripted and acted. There's a reason it's considered a comedy classic.

 

 

* One could argue that both A Bug's Life and Magnificent Seven were remakes of Seven Samurai, and as such share a lot more than just a premise, but I think the point is still valid.

Edited June 23, 2014 by Vorahk1Panrahk2

[TheSkeletonMan939]

Without having seen Edge of Tomorrow, and having seen Groundhog Day, it seems to me the two films really only share the premise, and are otherwise completely different in tone, setting, and genre. To say that one executes the premise better because the other "is just a lighthearted comedy film" is just genre bias.

 

Yeah, you've got a point. Overall it's pretty unfair for me to say that Groundhog Day does it better without having seen Edge, given that in tone they're completely different movies.

 

One of the charming things about Groundhog Day was that it was never really explained why Bill Murray kept reliving the same day for a zillion years (though I think in an old script his ex-wife cursed him or something, but that was dropped in later versions). I have heard that in Edge of Tomorrow alien blood makes you travel back in time or something, which makes me wonder why the aliens have been able to wage war at all while bleeding all over the place; couldn't soldiers just roll around in alien blood and win yesterday? Anyway, like I said, I haven't seen it, so I really have no idea what I'm talking about.

Edited June 23, 2014 by TheSkeletonMan939

[bls999]

About thirty seconds of The Lego Movie, that counts...right? Haha 

[Vorahk1Panrahk2]

Prometheus (3rd time)-

 

When the film was first announced/hinted at/rumored, I was ecstatic. I love the alien franchise (mostly) and a return to it was very welcomed. And Ridley Scott helming! The man who brought us the original classic! What could go wrong? Well, for one, follow up announcements stated that the the film would not be an Alien prequel. But it was advertised as such. I went into this having no clue what to expect.

 

Turns out the confusion was actually kind of warranted, as the script doesn't really know what it wants to be. In one way the film is a direct prequel: it makes a reference to the Xenomorph at one point, blatantly displays one at end of the film, and includes directing choices that strongly invoke the original Alien. But in other ways it is not a prequel. It does not in any way set up a scenario that the original film can be a reasonable follow up on. Scott stated initially that he didn't want it to be a prequel, and I think if he had followed up on these desires than the film would have been stronger. As it stands, though, it still leaves me a bit confused. On top of this the characters in this movie display questionable levels of intelligence that really take you out of the movie.

 

All this aside, there's still a lot to like here. Scott's eye for good camerawork and his tendency to use large scale sets pays off once again, with environments that fully engross the audience in the movie. There's nothing earthly about these locations*: You are on a foreign planet. And the film's exploration of faith was very interesting. The religious undertones could probably turn off a lot of the potential audience, but I enjoyed it. Overall it's not perfect, but there's a lot to like.

 

Pocahontas (Disney)- 

 

I don't know what people were expecting when this movie came out, but when they heard Disney would be tackling American history to tell a love story eyebrows probably should have been raised. The movie is well intentioned, and I think there's good messages about conflict avoidance, but overall Disney probably would have been better off by being more history and cultural sensitive. Or, more ideally, make a movie that doesn't have historical people as characters. There's no rule that films have to be this way (Scott played pretty loosely with history in Kingdom of Heaven), but given how relatively close these events are in history, it's just too jarring. And I don't think the message is strong enough to justify the changes.

 

Technically the movie is somewhat problematic as well. The voice acting is surprisingly bad for a Disney film, and like other Disney films of the 90's the animation is at times pretty shoddy. Where the film exceeds greatly, though, is in the background art and other elements of art design. The backgrounds invoke a gorgeous and appropriately romanticized scapes of colonial age Virginia. Alan Menken was also at the top of his game, providing a top tier Disney score.

 

Overall, not a great movie. It has it's strengths, but there are also lots of weaknesses, mostly in the script.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Vorahk1Panrahk2

[Sardrox: Will of Makuta]

Last movie seen at home: The Lego Movie, today. Third time I've watched it; still as awesome as ever.

 

Last movie seen in theaters: Godzilla, don't remember the day, but it was my 2nd time. Being a Godzilla fan, it was a total gushfest, but I think non-fans would enjoy it too. Just one thing: needs more Godzilla.

[Dark_Stranger]

Finally got around to watching Minority Report (only twelve years late!) the other night. A rather strange film (not as strange as Oblivion, but definitely one of Tom Cruise's odder vehicles), and not without its plot holes, but overall quite enjoyable.  

[Hodor]

Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon.

 

Really fun and enjoyable horror/comedy. I'd recommend it.

[Axilus Prime]

Saw Age of Extinction earlier today. I can sum it up in one word. Amazing.

 

The movie is loaded with robots. I think this time they actually managed to make more scenes with robots present than without. The human cast isn't annoying now, and all the crude humor is gone. There's different humor now, some good, some bad. For a comparison, take the dog humping scene in ROTF and compare it to this.

 

Cade: (Steps into barn, intending for Lucas to follow) Lock the door.

Lucas: (Steps in and closes door with a confused expression) It doesn't have a lock...

 

The jokes range from chuckle-worthy to no reaction at all. Never once do they cross into "ugh, why is this even here" territory.

 

The Autobots definitely have more emotion and character this time around. Optimus is actually very relatable throughout the movie. Obviously none of us have experienced being hunted down, but what he is feeling is clear, and most of us can probably sympathize or empathize with that.

 

The action is nothing short of amazing. Can't say much more than that, you've got to see it yourself.

 

The plot definitely has more depth now, taking influences from G1 and Animated in some areas, and completely surprising you with things created exclusively for the movie in others. It sets the stage well for Transformers 5, which is coming in...2016 or 2017. They haven't been very clear on that matter, but due to the movie's plot there has to be a fifth installment.

 

AOE took out what I didn't like about the first three movies, improved what I did like, and threw in plenty of new twists along the way. (A Dinobot pushes my top 5 list of movies one space over and burps AOE, placing it in first)

 

If you hated the first three, don't expect this to satisfy. But if you liked them to a point, or loved them like I did, AOE delivers.

[Spiderus Prime]

See Age of Extinction,and it's way better than the 3 Previous TF Movies combined. Plus Knight Dinobots.

[Dapper-Sama]

I finally finished watching Princess Mononoke after all these years. Gotta say, I wasn't expecting that ending.

[Elissa]

Edge of Tomorrow...it was really good! Tom Cruise, if you find his voice annoying for whatever reason, it seems like he hardly talks in this movie (although he does talk a good amount) because he's mostly kicking butt. 

[Dark_Stranger]

I saw The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug for the second time over the weekend, and, frankly, I liked it a lot better the second time around. When I first saw it in theaters, I thought the pacing was way off...but, in hindsight, I was feeling rather sickly at the time, which made the last hour or so seem way longer than it actually was. I still feel they didn't need to add quite so much to the original storyline, but it's still an immensely enjoyable story that remains true to the spirit of the source material and its companion works, unlike some other adaptations I've seen (cough, Voyage of the Dawn Treader, cough).  

So, I guess the moral of this story is "Don't watch a new movie while you're sick.*" I'm sure this lesson will serve as an invaluable guidepost for us all.

 

 

 

*Also, "Don't watch Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Period."   

[The Legendary TNT]

Just saw Thor: the Dark World for the first time. The ending left me a bit confused.

[Axilus Prime]

Just saw Thor: the Dark World for the first time. The ending left me a bit confused.

That was the intention.

[PDPsi HAN]

Age Of Extinction. 

 

Definitely deserves the 16% rating and I only paid 4 bucks for it. I wouldn't even see it for free. It was terrible and awful. I gave it a shot after hearing a lot of flak about it and the criticism is definitely deserved. 

 

I feel like some reboots just can't get it right. Godzilla is far outclassed as a monster movie by Pacific Rim, Abrams Star Trek is terrible, and now AoE happened and ruined the movie franchise even further. 

 

TMNT needs to not suck too. 

[Toa Kayn]

Batman '89

The Jack Nicholson Joker is my favorite. The change in the character throughout the film is the coolest

[Noxryn]

how to train your dragon 2

 

toothless will always be precious ~refrains from spoiling things~

[Kessen]

The Lego Movie. It was AWESOME!!!!

Edited July 8, 2014 by Onua39

[Dark_Stranger]

My older brother kind of guilt-tripped me into watching Superman II the other night, and I'll probably be lambasted for saying this, but...it was awful. The character-driven moments were boring, the action scenes were even more boring (complete with what feels like a solid half-hour of super-breath shenanigans), nothing happens for most of the movie, and the villains seem less like credible evildoers and more like bored teenagers wandering around aimlessly destroying things for kicks. Lots of stuff doesn't make much sense ("You'll never be able to get your powers back! Oh, wait, never mind.") And don't get me started on the part where Superman straight-up murders Zod after de-powering him into helplessness. Really, all this movie did was make me question the intelligence of anyone who ever criticized Man of Steel.    

Edited July 8, 2014 by Solomon Kane

[Vorahk1Panrahk2]

In my continuing quest to watch all 53 WDAS films:

 

Bolt, Byron Howard and Chris Williams - 

 

Released in 2008, Bolt didn't make a lot of bank at the box office, but the strong critical reception was a hint that Disney was starting to return to at least some form after the semi-debacle that was 2001-2007*. The story is about a dog who gets separated from his person, and the journey to get back to her. And he also thinks he has super powers on account of the fact that he's the star in a show where he has superpowers. It's a really cute movie, and it has a lot of great moments in it. But it's all very familiar and doesn't make any deviations from the 'journey home' format. The characters are fun, though, and Susie Essman stole the show as a sassy cat named Mittens who is kidnapped by Bolt to assist him on his journey.

 

Melody Time - 

 

One of Disney's package features, this one shows animation accompanied by a variety of sources from poems, to songs, to folk tales. It's much more eclectic than features like Fantasia and Make Mine Music, but I like it that way. It keeps it fun and interesting to watch. I'd say it's one of the stronger package features, behind the two Fantasias.

 

That leaves only nine more in my journey. Home stretch!

Edited July 23, 2014 by Vorahk1Panrahk2