Mission: Impossible 4: Ghost Protocol

RATING: B

Here's one of those movies that was never expected to actually succeed... but then it went and beat the odds anyway. At this point in the franchise's history, it was definitely on thin ice. The movies were making money, but not necessarily standing out from the crowd. The one prior to this--the third one--was actually pretty good, but would still probably have ended up forgotten in the depths of movie sequel history if this franchise hadn't exploded onto the scene with this movie (and its follow-up). 

In this fourth installment... when a IMF infiltration goes awry and the Kremlin gets blown up, Ethan Hunt's team is blamed and the entire IMF is disavowed. The IMF secretary privately orders Ethan to continue his mission (basically, finding the actual person responsible). The only problem? No help from the rest of the IMF or CIA this time. All Ethan's got is Benji (Simon Pegg), who was introduced in the previous movie; and newcomers Brandt (Jeremy Renner) and Carter (Paula Patton), and a lone train car full of IMF tech. And that's about it. 

Here's the thing about this movie: it's definitely got a couple of the more fun scenes in the franchise, namely the Dubai "scaling the giant building" part. And this one's less focused on Ethan than previous movies, which often works to its credit. The problem? It's got the most cliched bad guy and evil plot of the entire series. The bad guy's plan? Start a nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia. Never heard that one before, right? And his reasons, motivations or backstory? Uh... I have no idea. And Michael Nyqvist certainly isn't as prolific as Phillip Seymour Hoffman or even Jon Voight from previous movies. Although in his defense, he's not given much to work with. 

That said, it's not like this movie's not enjoyable. It's a tad slow at times earlier on--it takes 45 minutes to actually get to the part where "Ghost Protocol" is initiated and the plot really starts moving. But the pace is pretty slick from there. Aside from the signature Dubai sequence, the climactic act stands out due in part to its more visceral nature. The sandstorm chase scene (also in Dubai) is pretty nice as well. 

Ghost Protocol may likely be the most overrated movie in the series. But it's still pretty difficult to not like. It might've been better if the villain hadn't been so inconsequential (heck, even the terrible second movie's villain was somewhat more interesting). But what we get is still pretty enjoyable. And it's not often that a franchise with this many sequels actually continues to do well, so that's a positive mark on them.  

The Spiderwick Chronicles

RATING: B+

This film might be one of the more improbable successes of the past decade or so, if you think about it. Sure, it didn't get a whole lot of money or attention when it was released; it wasn't that kind of success. The success here is it actually being good. And really, this movie should never have worked. This is adapted from a series of five rather short children's books. And it's all squashed into one movie with no intention for a sequel that's barely 100 minutes. With that much possible material being squashed into that relatively short of a movie, it's a wonder this movie did not turn out incomprehensible and sloppy. 

This came out during the age when movie adaptions of children/young adult fantasy novels/series were all the rage; we hadn't quite hit the young adult dystopia trilogy phase yet. This particular one involves a fantasy world in which the actual fantasy world is actually right there in the real world with us--just invisible to the eye. Unless you get the veil lifted, that is. Then you come across a world of fairies, "brownies/boggarts," goblins, and one ugly shapeshifting ogre. Some guy named Arthur Spiderwick uncovered all this information (somehow), and stuffed it all into one "field guide"--which his descendants Jared, Simon and Mallory discover eighty years after his disappearance. And of course, the not-so-nice creatures of this unseen world--namely the previously mentioned shapeshifting ogre--want this "field guide" for themselves for nefarious purposes. 

So how exactly do you squash five books (short ones; about 150 pages each, if memory serves) worth of mythology into one movie? Well, obviously you don't include everything. It's been a *long* time since I read the books, and I only did so once. But I do recall that there are plenty of creatures that get left out entirely. And in a sense, the whole plotline of the books is somewhat changed. In other words, if you're actually a fan of these books and are hoping for a faithful adaption... well, good luck. 

Surprisingly, what we get is actually pretty good. Things are explained surprisingly concisely and there doesn't end up being a whole lot of confusion. The plot itself is pretty exciting; there's plenty of pretty exciting fantasy action scenes. The sibling rivalry between Jared and Mallory is rather annoying at first; and it makes no sense how the former gets blamed for some of the early chaos when that is straight up impossible. But that's really the biggest gripe here. The CGI is sometimes a little obvious, but other times it's quite good. There's a pretty decent cast; Freddie Highmore does impressively considering he plays both Jared *and* Simon (who are twins). Mary Louise-Parker doesn't get to do much, but David Straithairn fares better. There's some good voice casting too, with Seth Rogen and Nick Nolte--the latter being well-cast for the ogre Mulgarath. There's also a surprisingly touching ending thrown on that definitely wasn't in the books. 

As previously mentioned, this movie really should not have worked. Combining five short books into one movie is a recipe for disaster; a lesson they probably should've learned from the film adaption of Series of Unfortunate Events. But this one actually really works. It's an exciting film that blends modern fantasy tropes with hints of elements from such films of years past (ex: some of the goblin scenes might bring to mind Gremlins). Credit to director Mark Waters for being able to pull that off, especially considering that basically the rest of his entire filmography is more comedy oriented rather than fantasy or even just action. Spiderwick Chronicles is certainly no classic, but given what it had to do in a short amount of time, it's a pretty impressive piece of work. 

Tomb Raider

RATING: C

Despite all the failures of video games movies over the years, Hollywood still keeps cranking them out. Even though most of them don't even make that much money. But they keep trying, hoping something will stick eventually. And so far... nothing really has. Some might say Warcraft did, but basically anyone who hasn't played the game and still saw the movie will say otherwise. Which is kind of the problem for some of these movies: they don't make much effort to allow people who haven't played the games to understand the movies. 

This particular video game turned movie is actually one we've already seen before. Yes, it's a reboot. We already had two Lara Croft: Tomb Raider movies back in the early 2000's with Angelina Jolie. I have not seen those, but my understanding is they're a bit campy. This new iteration of Tomb Raider is just the opposite. I don't know which version comes closer to the games... because I've never played them. But I will say that this movie feels more like a female-led version of Indiana Jones. 

Because origin stories are a thing these days, this is indeed an origin story. Alicia Vikander takes the lead role of Lara this time. And Lara isn't exactly in the tomb raiding business yet. Here, she just stumbles upon some long-lost clues regarding her father, who's been presumed dead for seven years. And wanting to find out what happened to him, she sets sail for some random hidden island her father was looking for. Some random island that is supposedly hiding the resting place of some random Japanese queen with supposedly supernatural powers. Why is her father (named Richard Croft) looking for this guy? Um... good question. There's kind of some conflicting answers/possibilities there. But he's not the only one, because as it turns out some evil hidden organization not named the Illuminati that wants to use supernatural power for controlling purposes is *also* looking for this supposedly supernatural corpse. 

Like I said before, I don't really know much the Tomb Raider franchise. And thus, I wasn't really aware of the supernatural stuff. Which helps to give the film an extra point of interest, I suppose. But for the most part, it's still too much like Indiana Jones or even National Treasure for its own good. But then it kind of cops out on the whole supernatural thing late in the game, giving us a weird twist that wants to be clever but is instead kind of dumb. And yet... the manner in which the bad guys are dispatched still kind of feels Indiana Jones-esque, only a little less gruesome. 

Tomb Raider is kind of an oddity at times. It's got a better story to tell than usual for a video game movie. There's some kind of confusing parts and a few wasted opportunities, but at worst it's more unoriginal than anything. It's also actually got some decent action scenes here and there; the film gets off to a slow start, but once we hit the island the pace picks up. And really, even if the film feels a little familiar at times, we still don't see this type of movie too often. So it has that going in its favor as well. 

In a way, the film's tone is the biggest issue. It's serious, but not serious or dark enough to actually move us. Also, the film is almost totally devoid of levity. Perhaps they were worried about either being too dark or too light-hearted. That is a dilemma some other franchises have grappled with in recent years, but this film doesn't even seem to have an answer. It's just kind of stuck in the middle, and it does suffer for being that way at times.  

Tomb Raider is certainly above average for a video game movie. The problem is, that's really not saying much. There is actually some room for decent material going forward, but they might need to get a better director. And that's assuming there will even be a sequel. But like I said before, these things almost never make that much money relatively and they *still* get at least one sequel! So who knows? I can't say I care a whole lot one way or the other whether we see another Vikander Tomb Raider movie or not. But at least they didn't totally bomb this one. 

Pacific Rim: Uprising

RATING: C

In a way, I suppose it was inevitable that this film was not going to be as good as the first one. The fact that the first Pacific Rim was that great was a bit of a miracle. I mean, this is a movie where the general concept is basically Transformers vs. Godzilla monsters. And while that sounds like a pretty fun concept... these kinds of popcorn action movies typically never get past the "good but not great" stage if they're lucky. Because while the action and visuals are typically pretty awesome, the story and characters just aren't there. While those elements didn't necessarily carry the first Pacific Rim, they were good enough that the movie itself was genuinely enjoyable--and not even as a guilty pleasure. One might compare it to Independence Day, only with a less strong cast, in terms of appeal. (Heck, both films had iconic pre-battle speeches--Pacific Rim's was courtesy of Idris Elba and included the gem "Today we are cancelling the apocalypse!") 

Perhaps the first mistake here is Guillermo del Toro not directing again. While I'm not necessarily a fan of most of his work, it's undeniable (especially now that this sequel is out) that he was part of the reason the first one was that good. He actually made a quite coherent movie, and came up with some pretty excellent design and battle sequences. But unfortunately, I'm not certain that even del Toro's involvement would have elevated this one a whole lot. There are problems that go beyond handing the director position from del Toro to a random newbie. 

One of the actual first mistakes is the fact that there's a way too large time skip in this sequel. There is a five year gap in between the release of the two movies, and yet this movie takes place *ten years* after the first one. And it took me a while to figure out what all was going on in this new world ten years later. Despite the war with the Kaiju monsters having ended ten doggone years ago, they've still been keeping the Jaeger robot bases running... for some reason, even though there's no reason to believe they'll come back other than the fact that this movie exists. And now the Jaeger defense forces have a competitor in the form of a manufacturer of drones that could replace the Jaegers... again, even though there's no reason to believe they'll even really need said drones for Kaiju purposes. And of course, the Kaiju do come back... in a few unexpected ways. 

If it wasn't already clear, this movie is definitely not as good as the first. For one, it's less coherent. There seem to be more subplots going on this time, and it doesn't help that they tried cramming those subplots into a movie that's 20 minutes shorter than the first one. Oh and guess what? Much of the sound and fury here ends up being ended a bit abruptly so they can set up another sequel which will probably never happen. Much like Independence Day 2, really--but I actually liked that one more than I did this. 

But the biggest issue is that we get introduced to a ton of new characters this time around and almost none of them are likable, nor do any of them have interesting backstories or even a backstory in the first place. The only returning characters are Mako (who gets very little to do) and the two scientists. John Boyega is the lead this time around. His character--Jake Pentecost, the son of Idris Elba's character from the last one--does not do much to make you want to root for him. If anything, sometimes it's the opposite. And also, while Boyega has done well in Star Wars, his acting is stunningly wooden and emotionless most of the time.  

And the other new characters? Not much dice there either. Amara's really the only one that's that interesting at all--she did manage to build a small Jaeger on her own, and her backstory is at least somewhat interesting. But I don't even remember any of the other cadet's names. Scott Eastwood's character? A jerk most of the time. Jing Tian's character is alright, but still manages to stand out if only because she's not annoying unlike almost everyone else in this movie. In general, most of the acting performances in this movie just aren't that good or memorable. Charlie Day is the only one who really stands out--and his character is oddly enough the only one (besides maybe Amara's) that has anything interesting going on with them. 

What about the action, then? It's still generally pretty fun, I suppose. Oddly enough, there seems to be a bit less of it in this one, but it's pretty no-holds-barred when it does happen. Probably the best most memorable bits are the two scenes where a Jaeger fights a rogue Jaeger. The finale is fine enough; though it should be noted that it's so insanely destructive that even Michael Bay would probably raise an eyebrow. Take from that what you will. 

For all of the story issues, the main plotline regarding the Kaiju's return is actually a bit of a clever one. I was concerned they wouldn't handle it well, but they surprised me there. They actually manage to pull the rug out from under us a couple of times with a plot twist or two. And while these moments are pretty good... it makes you wonder why the rest of the movie's writing and plotting is so mediocre. 

Pacific Rim: Uprising is probably the kind of film the first Pacific Rim would have been if del Toro hadn't directed it. It's kind of depressing too, because the first film showed that this kind of movie can actually be well done and at least written well enough. Here, it just feels like not as much effort was put into this one. The result is a movie that has some traces of good material in it... but ultimately wastes them. 

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

RATING: B

Let's start with full disclosure here: in general, the Jurassic Park/World franchise is a pretty fun one. Bringing dinosaurs to life with very convincing animatronics/CGI and having them run around and chase people is a cool little niche. The main problem with it is, there's generally only so far one can go with such a franchise. For one thing, just having dinosaurs chasing people over and over again will probably only draw people so many times if not a whole lot interesting is happening beyond that story-or-character-wise. (This was part of the reason that Jurassic Park 3 sucked.) 

But the other problem is that the more these movies continue to happen, the more their existence depends upon the insane stupidity of the characters within them. You would think eventually these people would learn their lesson about messing with these dinosaurs. But they haven't. This is the interesting deal, though: while Fallen Kingdom depends upon that issue as much (if not even more so) as any of the other movies, it's also the first one to actually take things in a different direction. 

In this installment, it's been a few years since the events of the first Jurassic World, where that particular park got laid to waste. While the dinosaurs there have been left to their own devices for a while, now there's a new wrinkle: the volcano on Isla Nublar is about to erupt. Which would kill every single dinosaur on that island. And despite the fact that these are predators (well, mostly predators) way higher on the food chain that would kill us at a moment's notice, you still have people fighting for the dinosaurs' lives. No, seriously. 

Now, a somewhat more pragmatic solution is offered: rescue some of the dinosaurs and move them to a new island which will *not* be a park--just a sanctuary where they can roam free undisturbed by humans. Owen and Claire from the last movie get wrangled into this operation because of their previous experience here. The problem? Turns out these guys planning the operation have other plans. Because of course they do. This is a Jurassic Park/World movie, and things never go as planned in these movies. This franchise is the epitome of Murphy's Law. 

Here's the deal. Fallen Kingdom is probably the most ambitious film in the franchise since the original one. It takes the series to places we haven't seen before, and ends on a very different kind of note. But the problem is to get to that point where they can be ambitious, we have to wade through a stunning amount of stupidity on the part of the characters. The villains are cartoonishly evil, and that's a phrase I almost never use to describe villains. Really, Owen and Claire are the only characters that are that likable (the former more so). There's also the little girl Maisie... but more on her later. Everyone else's stupidity and (in some cases) evilness is just so over the top at times. It's to the point where you're almost rooting for the dinosaurs. And not to mention the fact that the first half of this film kind of rips off The Lost World: Jurassic Park, only with an erupting volcano thrown in. (The eruption and escape sequence is pretty cool, but still.) 

The second half is where the film becomes a whole different kind of beast, and where director J.A. Bayona really gets to shine. After the dinosaurs have been wrangled, things inevitably go wrong and we have a few loose dinos running about. What we get is a whole different kind of setting for the series: a haunted house of dinosaurs. And that includes another unholy hybrid dinosaur, who ultimately gets taken out a little easier than the Indominus Rex did... but is still far more threatening than the latter, bordering on demonic. All of this brings the franchise back to its horror roots a bit more. Some of the scenes featured here are brilliant; they're intense, the set pieces are excellent, and the direction/camera work is strong as well. (Some have noted more of a "gothic horror" theme here during these sections... and I can kind of see that. Definitely interesting territory for the franchise.) 

Perhaps the biggest surprise of all here is the latest kid featured in these movies, Maisie. Generally, the kids in these movies aren't very memorable. They're just there to run and scream, and provide some extra terror for viewers because "oh no, kids are in danger of getting eaten by a T-Rex or something." Sometimes they also provide a classic case of deus ex machina. But this one is actually likable from the get-go, and actually ends up being critical to the plot in a twist that may seem inevitable but still helps take the franchise to new territory. Credit should be given in part to newcomer Isabella Sermon who portrays her. 

And then there's the ending. Due to spoilers, I can't say much; but once again it takes the franchise into some new territory and gives the next installment a good amount of possible material to work with. And it's really the first time any of these movies have ever ended on any sort of a cliffhanger. And it works. Despite how many times I rolled my eyes in the first two-thirds or so, I'm very interested to see what they do with the next movie. 

Fallen Kingdom is a strange beast of a film. It's rather frustrating/annoying at times early on due to the stupidity of everyone involved. And as previously mentioned, it does feel more like a retread early on. But then things go in a whole different direction in the second half and the film ends up becoming a focal turning point for the series. As a whole, it's not as good as the first Jurassic World. But this one still impresses in some major ways. The franchise is in a good position right now, because the third JW movie won't necessarily be a retread now--if they play their cards right. And if they do play their cards right, Fallen Kingdom will end up being a major part of the path taken to get there. For all its flaws, Fallen Kingdom may have just been what the franchise needed in some ways.

The Incredibles 2

RATING: B

The first crime about this film is that we had to wait this long for it. No other Pixar movie was as tailor-made for a sequel as this one; and yet in that time three other Pixar movies got sequels (or prequels), plus two "threequels." Heck, as time begin to wear on, few movie sequels in general were as highly wanted and anticipated as this one. And yet it took fourteen years. And considering the time gap between the movies and what's happened to the superhero genre since then--plus just how good and groundbreaking the first one was--boy, did Brad Bird have his work cut out for him. 

It was for these very reasons that despite the original Incredibles being one of my favorite movies of all time, I tried to keep my expectations as tempered as I could. And as it turns out, that was probably a good idea. Cutting straight to the chase, The Incredibles 2 is a pretty good and fun movie. But it pales quite a bit in comparison to the original. Now strap in, because despite the fact that I did enjoy this movie, I'm about to spend quite a bit of time tearing it to shreds. 

Let's start with the plot. The first Incredibles had a great plot with an excellent villain. And that movie was a lot more nuanced and complex in general, throwing in a bit of clever social commentary; really, it was one of the most intelligent movies of its type. This one? Well... pretty much the entire plot of this movie is the Supers trying to make being super not illegal anymore. And that's about it. The rest of the film is just the family trying to juggle hero work and raising a family--a case in which the roles of the last movie are reversed for the first half or so of this one. That's not to say the plot is bad, because it isn't. It's just not up to par with its predecessor's plot, or even most of Pixar's better plots in general. 

Oh sure, there's a new villain in Screenslaver, who looked rather promising in the marketing. However, that villain is probably actually the biggest disappointment of this whole thing. Syndrome was excellent because he was a former fan-turned-enemy that Mr. Incredible inadvertently created--a concept which was rather new and different at the time--and he was also quite the tech genius. However, the Screenslaver's motivations are far less interesting and even a tad more cliched. And really, in the end the villain does not even feel actually as threatening--like they're actually someone to be feared that much. The best thing about the Screenslaver is one or two thought-provoking speeches it delivers--which unfortunately are never really expanded upon and actually have little to do with the villain's main plan. 

Another problem is the lighter tone of the movie. I'm more inclined to blame that on Disney, because they decided they have to give everything as light a tone as they can nowadays. But the first movie had a relatively darker tone and higher body count than most kids' movies. While that did make it a riskier watch for toddlers, that "relatively darker tone" was still part of what made the first one stand out from the crowd. This one feels like it's holding back a bit more, and the action sequences are toned down as well. The end of the first one involved the family fighting a gigantic rogue robot in a downtown metropolis in a finale that would've fit right with any other superhero movie. This movie's final act? Stakes definitely feel lower. The only thing that one feels is at stake at that point is the reputation of the Supers, because given how the rest of the movie has gone, one knows that no one else is in any danger at that point.

While those are the biggest core issues, there are some other minor things as well. Let's start with the opening of the film (which is an awesome opening, by the way). Remember the Underminer? That's right, this film literally picks up where the last one left off. He's ridiculously one-note, unfortunately--and is quite literally forgotten by the movie eventually. Also, a couple of the main characters both have character arcs that aren't always at their best in the first half. They improve over time, though. And finally, Jack-Jack is kind of overused this time around. It kind of makes sense in context, but he's still strictly comic relief at this point and as such should be used sparingly instead of being part of the action. But oh wait, I forgot, we have to make even the action as light-hearted as possible because here at Disney we have to avoid taking a dark tone whenever possible. (Infinity War is the rare exception to that current rule.) 

I've spent quite a bit of time kind of tearing this movie to shreds by now. Unfortunately, that's kind of the way it is with a lot of Disney-made movies nowadays. Even if I'm enjoying them, there are still way more noticeable issues that warrant discussion here. Case in point: I was one of the people who liked Star Wars: The Last Jedi a lot (more than this movie), and yet I still spent an unusual amount of time discussing flaws for a movie that I ultimately really liked. The Incredibles 2 is not that much different. To be clear once again, this is a movie that I did enjoy. But its flaws warrant more discussion than usual, due in part to the inevitable comparisons to the predecessor. 

There are still some pretty good action scenes. The opening is one of the best ones, and there are some other good ones throughout. My personal favorite is probably one where Violet brawls with a brainwashed superpowered person, in one of the few battles that doesn't feel like they held back much. Violet shines a bit more in action in this one in general compared to the first one, mainly because she's learned some more creative things to do with her force-fields, with often awesome results. Still, the others get their fair share of good moments as well. Frozone seems to have a little more screen time here, and it doesn't go to waste. And while I noted earlier that one source of comic relief was a little overused, this movie is still undeniably pretty funny. 

And really, it's just great to see these characters again after all this time. In general, they still are what you'd expect them to be. While the marketing kind of painted Elastigirl as the main focus this time around, that's really only the case for the first half. As with the first one, part of the main draw of this franchise is the family dynamic tying in with the superhero deal, and that is still indeed the case. The Incredibles are still The Incredibles, and as long as that remains true, this film still carries merit--even if elements of the plot and setting these characters are put into are not what they could be. 

So to sum up, this is a sequel that definitely is not up to the standards of the original. The characters are as good as ever, and anybody who loved the first one will be glad to see them again and enjoy their return. The deal is: the first movie had excellent characters put into an excellent superhero movie. This one has excellent characters put into an average superhero movie. I suppose that's kind of enough, and this will still probably still be a movie I return to now and again. But I have to admit, I couldn't completely shake the feeling of "...that's it?" when the credits started rolling. 

The Sorcerer's Apprentice

RATING: B-

Some movies get sequels that they shouldn't; or they get way too many sequels. Then there's always some movies that maybe could've done with a sequel... but it never happened. This is one of those such movies. This one has a rather odd source material; it is indeed based very loosely off of the old Fantasia cartoon. Which does sound like a pretty dumb idea. I mean, how can you make a movie based off a 10-minute cartoon that's not even related to said cartoon? 

The only thing the movie shares with the cartoon is a scene where the "apprentice" in question uses magic (without a hat, mind you) to make brooms and mops clean up the place for him. It's really just meant to be a parody homage sequence and while it's kind of amusing, it also doesn't really fit in that well with the movie. 

This movie has more in common with Harry Potter than anything. However, it is more based off Arthurian legend... to a limited degree. Merlin and Morgana le Fay exist, but that's about it. Balthazar Blake, the "sorcerer," has been looking for a long time for his apprentice--the Prime Merlinian, who can wear Merlin's ring and is thus (somehow) a descendant of his and the only one who can keep Morgana and her minions (mostly Horvath) from carrying out a generic "destroy the world" plot. The only problem? The "apprentice," awkward college student Dave Stutler, isn't entirely a willing apprentice at times. 

This film is kind of an interesting case. It's a fantasy-action-adventure flick, but it's also kind of a comedy in some ways that doesn't always take itself seriously. (Heck, one of the best scenes in the movie is a self-aware Star Wars reference.) And there's also the romance subplot involving Dave and his crush which is kind of corny, but it works given the intended parallelism with Balthazar's own past/backstory. 

As both an action and comedy, it generally works. The action is pretty fun, with the highlight being a car chase scene that involves magic (namely the sorcerers being able to turn their cars into other cars). There are a good handful of pretty funny moments as well. And the plot, while having some narrative issues here and there, is still engaging enough.

Part of the strength of this movie is some of the casting. Nicolas Cage is the main star, and this is one of his more laid-back performances--but he does it pretty well. However, Alfred Molina gives the best performance, playing Horvath with a certain mustache-twirling quality and the occasional hamming it up (no, seriously: Molina hams it up more than Cage in this movie, the latter of whom only does it once), while still imposing himself as a threatening presence when needed. I prefer Jay Baruchel's voice acting in the How to Train Your Dragon series, but he still has his moments here. Monica Bellucci and Toby Kebbell are also in this and aren't half-bad. 

Aside from a few slower or cornier moments, one of the biggest problems here is some narrative mistakes (as mentioned earlier). The first mistake is actually doing the flashback backstory as the very first scene; it would've been more effective to have us learn the story as we went. Then there's some further expansion on the backstory not included in the flashback that's reflected on very briefly and then totally forgotten; and a couple of throwaway lines that feel like they should be pretty significant but also aren't brought up again. And then there's a couple of other mistakes. One is Horvath getting dismissed way too easily in the final act in favor of Morgana and oddly not showing up again until a post-credits scene. Then there's Abigail, another minion who appears rather briefly and is way underused, despite being a historical adaption figure (yep, it's *that* Abigail from Salem) and being rather creepy. (But perhaps they wanted to keep the PG rating and using the "creepy child" more would have been too much--which is odd, considering this movie already straddles the PG line as it is.) 

Despite those issues, The Sorcerer's Apprentice is still a surprisingly decent and fun movie which unfortunately went rather unnoticed at the time of its release. Getting a sequel out of this doesn't feel like too bad of a prospect, especially since they could've expanded more on the backstory a bit that way. But while that will likely never happen, we still have this movie; flawed yet quite acceptable.