"Willow" (1988)

That was not great. A bit of a mess. But I think the upcoming Disney+ series has potential, and I wanted to be caught up. It wasn't an amazing two hours. But that's all it took to be up to date on the franchise. This fantasy world being so self-contained until now is a very good thing, and made it easy for that reason.

I think Warwick Davis is a very underrated actor. Peter Dinklage is awesome because he refuses to do demeaning role for dwarves or little people. He possesses a strong sense of dignity, and isn't gonna be anybody's cuddly Ewok.

But the truth is, Dinklage's principles aside, somebody HAD to play those roles, and Davis is so valuable, not just because he fits in the leprechaun costume, but because he's also a good actor. He's not merely the best they could find. He turns in legit solid performances in every thankless role he's given.

Willow is his biggest movie role of his career, and I'd argue it's paradoxically his most thankless role at the exact same. How else can you describe it when Davis is given the lead role, the role the entire flipping MOVIE is named after, and his name is still billed third in the cast after Val Kilmer and Joanne Whalley? I get that Kilmer wound up playing Batman once. I can't dismiss that. But I will argue that Davis wound up with a better and more memorable career than Kilmer did. And he's still third fiddle to Kilmer and Whalley simply because Hollywood was bigoted towards little people in 1988. I now fully appreciate how big a deal Peter Dinklage's name being first in Game Of Thrones' credits is after seeing that Davis had to be billed third in his most visible role, and one of the few he was allowed to do without heavy prosthetic make-up on. It's not fair, and it's not right.

Couple of things to note before I give my mediocre grade of two and half stars. Well, before them, I should point out that although Bavmorda seems defeated at the end of the film, the prophecy of Elora growing up to destroy her is such a big deal in the film, I don't see how it was permanent. Thus a sequel was necessary. However an IMMEDIATE sequel in the early 1990's would make little sense. But in 2022 when Elena is a grown woman and the prophecy can be fulfilled? This is the precise franchise that was MADE for a decades later relaunch and I'm glad we're getting it, whether I liked the movie or not.

The other thing to note is the strong vibes I got of The Lord Of The Rings. Of course, the Nelwyns bring to mind the Hobbits, but if that merely were it, I'd just see parallels from the book. However the film reminds me more of the Peter Jackson films than the J.R.R. Tolkien books. Mostly the New Zealand vistas. I think Ralph Bakshi always wanted to sue Peter Jackson for ripping him off. Has anybody contacted Ron Howard or George Lucas' lawyers? Bakshi actually has a better case, but Howard and Lucas would have a pretty strong one too.

Fun fact you probably already know: This film contains one of the very earliest examples of CGI morphing technology, which James Cameron sort of perfected and made famous in Terminator 2: Judgement Day. But Howard and Willow actually got there first. It's definitely a curiosity of a film for this reason, even if the effect looks a bit primitive by today's standards.

So I'm looking forward to the TV show, even though I could take or leave the movie. I just sincerely hope Warwick Davis is billed first in the credits on the show, as he should be here. **1/2.