Ridley Scott and the value of life: part one

Alert: Spoilers below for Alien, Blade Runner and Prometheus

Science-fiction is a genre which invites writers and directors to explore deeper topics and philosophical questions. No other director working today has better used Sci-fi for this purpose than Ridley Scott, renowned for AlienBlade Runner, and Prometheus. 

We see the human race as the world’s axis.  Our species continues to grow and consume at an unsustainable pace, placing our demands above all other forms of planetary life. Western religion claims that we are the pinnacle of creation, moulded in the image of God. Outside the West, other philosophies and religions share the belief that humanity alone has been imbued with a soul, placing us apart from the rest of creation.

AlienBlade Runner, and Prometheus are each a different premise where Scott questions our beliefs, and our hypocrisies about the value of human life.

Alien and ‘intelligent life’ 

Around 400 years ago, people still believed the solar system revolved around the Earth. Humanity has moved on since then, but we still perceive the universe from a self-centered perspective.

Today the world balances on the axis of humanity, and the universe revolves around our pull. In popular culture our forays into space commonly belong to three types: conflict, contact or isolation. In film, typically, humanity is found by another species with a familiar system of civilization and technology to our own. The arriving species may invade our planet, or guide us, or we attack them. The final two types are contact and isolation. Humanity comes into contact with something incomprehensible like the monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey or we wander the galaxy, completely alone.

Few have depicted a universe where humanity is inconsequential, even unnoticed. These works belong to Cosmic Horror, a genre formed by H.P. Lovecraft. Cosmic Horror topples the assumption we have held, from biblical times and beyond, that we have some measure of control on the world. Western thought has developed the idea that we were designed for a purpose, that we can master everything both tangible and intangible. Plato’s The Republic is the earliest work I know that claims we will eventually understand everything, becoming gods in our own right. Plato’s concept of the Philosopher-King, just like Nietschze’s Ubermensche, shares the belief that humanity’s pre-destined superiority over the world, and the universe, will arise.

Cosmic Horror challenges humanity’s sense of purpose and superiority. Across Lovercraft’s works, in the Universe beyond our understanding, characters come across forces far more powerful than ourselves. Humanity’s divine trajectory to masters of the universe is shattered, our species is shown to be at the whim of random, and often chaotic forces beyond our grasp.

Alien and Prometheus both draw from Cosmic Horror, although in different ways. Prometheus upends the Christian belief that humans were purposefully created. Instead humanity, just like Frankenstein’s monster, is the product of an experiment gone awry, feared by our creator, who is bent upon destroying us. While Prometheus challenges humanity’s purpose, Alien questions our superiority.

Alien exists in a future where space, the last frontier, has become tamer than a front lawn. The crew of the Nostromo are not daring adventurers, but space truckers who want to get home and get paid. The Nostromo’s crew stumble upon a life form that is the polar opposite of human beings. It makes no attempts to understand the crew, the alien is designed to kill and is driven to survive, at the cost of all other life.

The alien is not a monster, but the first intelligent life this universe has come across. The most chilling scene in the film is when the android Ash, gurgling from his detached head, admires the alien as superior to humans. To Ash, the alien is not a monster, but the ‘perfect organism… designed to survive… unclouded by delusions by remorse… or delusions of morality.’

Ash’s final words reveal the true horror of Alien. A being emerges from the depths of space, shattering the belief in our own dominance in the universe. Despite our technology and brainpower, the lifeform butchers the Nostromo’s crew in a few hours. By the end of Alien, humanity is no longer the masters of space, but weaklings in a universe where darker beings, just like the alien, may be lurking on forgotten planets. Space no longer tanatalises us with the chance of discovery and progress. The optimism we held for space in the 1960’s has been replaced, with a dread of what lies beyond our planet.

The alien is, like Ash states, intelligent life. If a being like an alien did exist, it would challenge what we consider to be intelligent alien life. It does not have our intelligence, or social structures, but it lives and strives to survive above all else. How would we value such a being, and more importantly, how would we deal with it?

By Saul Shimmin




Song to Song (2017) – Teaser

Outlook: promising

Song to Song is the latest film by American auteur Terrence Malick and will continue Malick’s blend of gorgeous cinematography and editing while contending with emotional and philosophical themes.

Malick has accrued an ensemble cast once more for his latest film, boasting Michael Fassbender, Ryan Gosling, Mara Rooney, Natalie Portman and also the legend that is Iggy Pop. Hopefully old Iggy’s role will be more substantial than a concert cameo.

Song to Song’s plot revolves around two love triangles between bandmembers in Austin, Texas. Michael Fassbender’s lust for Gosling’s girl, played by Mara Rooney, sparks off the whole affair. I have never seen Shame, but Fassbender strikes me as someone who could comfortably play a seedy lothario.

Malick’s filming style changed between The Tree of Life and his previous film, Knight of Cups. Malick’s approach in The Tree of Life alternated between sweeping landscapes to an intimate focus upon characters, cropping out of other portions of those individuals that were not necessary. In Knight of Cups, Malick seems to use wider angles and a steady-cam, giving the film a more immediate grounding in the story. Song to Song is a mix of both styles, and I am eager to see how Malick’s style has changed once again.

Ryan Gosling provides vocals during the trailer for Song to Song, and following La La Land audiences will be eager to hear Gosling deliver another musical performance. Gosling continues to eschew typecasts, flitting between the tougher persona of an action hero in Drive, to a comedic performance in The Nice Guys, to more dramatic roles in A Place Beyond The Pines and Blue Valentine. Gosling’s motivation may lie in his struggle to overcome typecasting as a child actor, but he has become one of the most versatile actors in Hollywood, and in terms of awards, one of the most overlooked.

By Saul Shimmin

For the trailer, see below:

T2 Trainspotting

Score: 5 out of 5 (Classic)

Directed by Danny Boyle, director of the original Trainspotting, and sporting the same cast, T2 returns to Edinburgh, revealing what has happened to the original gang in the past 20 years.

T2 is a rarity in cinema, a sequel which stands alone from the original as a complete whole, bearing the hallmarks of a classic film in its own right. In an era where films are not tales which begin, develop and end, but form a conveyor belt of Easter Eggs and teases, T2 is a refreshing anomaly.

The original Trainspotting captured the zeitgeist of the 1990’s. T2 also shares the nostalgia of Renton (Ewan McGregor) and Spud (Ewen Bremner) for that lost era, while presenting the failure of British society to realise the optimism of the 1990’s. Across Edinburgh, the haunts of the working class have disappeared. The pubs and estates of Trainspotting are gone, replaced by upscale bars and high-end apartments. Sick Boy’s (Jonny Lee Miller) pub, a family business which holds more memories than customers stands amidst a sea of redevelopment.

T2 begins with Renton, but the narrative truly focuses upon Spud and Begbie (Robert Carlyle), two characters who are stuck in the past. T2 delivers a more sympathetic portrayal of both Spud and Begbie. Spud is a man whose life has been consumed by Heroin, leaving him at rock bottom. Begbie, although never stated within the film, has become institutionalised during his imprisonment after the first film, fixated upon revenge against Renton. During T2 we come to understand Begbie, although I cannot divulge any more details. It is a testament to the original film that I never noticed how one sided both Begbie and Spud were, playing the role of thug and fool respectively.

Boyle is the best British director alive today, as proven by T2. He splices the real world with CGI effects and projected images, letting us see the memories and internal struggles of the main cast. Boyle makes us understand and sympathise with characters without resorting to dialogue.  This accomplishment is remarkable because the main cast are unlikable people who often betray one another for self-gain. Boyle expertly uses shadows and flashbacks to show how Renton has not overcome the life he lead 20 years before. Renton’s shadow transforms into the profile of his dead mother when he returns to his family home. When T2 concludes, a younger Renton returns home. Personally, young Renton’s appearance at the conclusion signals that Renton is only now ready to move on with his life, despite his 20 years away from home.

John Hodge, the writer of T2, alongside Danny Boyle’s directing, temper the dark subject matter of T2 with humour, leading to scenes which will cause audiences to laugh out loud. These comedic moments are bolstered by the acting of the main cast, especially Robert Carlyle in his portrayal of Begbie.

The best scenes in the film revolve around Spud and his attempts to overcome his heroin addiction. Boyle uses special effects and camera work to flesh out his character. Spud’s life has been consumed by heroin, shown by the empty and soulless council flat he calls home. Spud’s addiction is both a friend and a monster, at times appearing as Spud’s double or a black shadow on the wall lunging for heroin, invoking  the spirit of Nosferatu.

T2 is the sequel which Trainspotting fans had been hoping for, delivering a satisfying finality to the story and the characters. T2 also stands by itself and can be enjoyed without having to watch the original.

Target audiences: Everyone and anyone over 15.

By Saul Shimmin

For the trailer see below:


P.S: Please watch Boyle’s Steve Jobs,  a hidden gem which starred Michael Fassbender as the legend behind Apple. For the trailer see below:

John Wick: Chapter 2

In this sequel to 2014’s sleeper hit, John Wickthe action picks up where the original ended. John Wick (Keanu Reeves) is still tracking down his 1969 Boss 429 Mustang, the car that Russian thug-prince Iosef Tarasov (Alfie Allen) stole after killing Wick’s puppy. Wick quickly dispatches the remainder of the Russian syndicate and attempts once again to retire from the assassin brotherhood. However, the loathsome Italian mob boss, Santino D’Antonio (played tremendously by Riccardo Scamarcio) recalls a debt from the night of Wick’s “impossible task” that allowed him his freedom. The boss, Viggo Tarasov, alluded to this night in John Wick and how his freedom had a price. In exchange for his prior aid, D’Antonio demands that Wick assassinate his sister, Gianna, who is about to become the head of the Camorra, a title which her brother desires for himself.  

I will stop there because I don’t want to give too much away.

Movie Score: Five out of Five (Classic)

We at Title Roll Reviews, try to reserve this “Classic” ranking for only the most superior movies, but I have to bestow this title on John Wick: Chapter 2. It not only made me incredibly happy, but its director, Chad Stahelski , also kept the action tight while keeping the atmosphere lighthearted despite the gratuitous gore.

My favorite aspect of Wick Chapter 2 was that the producers and Stahelski refused to recycle the first movie for some easy money. Instead, they expanded the world of Wick, adding restraints to the deadliest man on the planet. Wick Chapter 2 also mimicked the exoticism of earlier Bond films.

The first movie’s scale was small: Local Russian mob v. Wick. While its body-count was extremely high, the writers set the movie exclusively in New York. The characters hinted at a larger assassin network and it was this well-established world with smartly funny rules that provided John Wick with a solid foundation that set it apart from increasingly boring action movies like Jason BourneThe Mechanic, and any recent Arnold Schwarzenegger (The Expendables, The Last StandSabotage, etc.) Wick 2 expanded its scope, revealing the intricacies of Wick’s world and some of his past while maintaining Wick’s intrigue (I pray they never make a prequel).

Also, Stahelski and writer Derek Kolstad showed impressive restraint in both John Wick’s resources and in the amount of violence in certain scenes. For example, instead of jumping right into Wick’s famous double-tap, in the first action sequence Wick only uses hand-to-hand combat. This trend of restraint continues throughout the movie. Wick constantly running out of ammunition, adding a sense of realism to the world.  We all know that guns have to be reloaded and ammo is not just laying around downtown NYC, a fact that most action movies seem to forget. The one death that revealed the writer’s greatest restraint was Gianna’s. I won’t spoil it here, but it was quite different and most importantly, it was believable in relation to her character.


Finally, Wick Chapter 2 took us to interesting places: the Roman Forum ruins and very futuristic locations in New York. They retained a hint of exoticism that James Bond used to have, with the ruins hosting a strange dubstep group that provided a fun backdrop for a fight. The museum in NYC that hosted the final showdown was beautiful and extremely well shot. It contained vibrant colors and countless mirrors. I have no idea how they choreographed the fighting and camera-work so kudos to Stahelski and his stunt coordinators.

Most importantly, Wick Chapter 2 does not take itself too seriously. There are added moments of humor and winks to the audience that it knows how ridiculous its premise is. I applaud Kolstad for striking this balance between humor and badass badassery.

Please, skip Fifty Shades Darker and talk your significant other into seeing this phenomenal movie. Yes, it is brutally violent, but it is vastly better made than that BDSM garbage.

Target Audience: Teens, adults, gamers, and anyone who enjoys action flicks.

For trailer, see below.

By Hagood Grantham

Kong: Skull Island (2017) – Teaser/IMAX Poster


Outlook: Skeptical

I’m not gonna lie. The images for this film are stunning. Google “Kong: Skull Island Posters” and you’ll find a trove of majestic photos that exude a distinctly retro/comic-book vibe. By the way, I’m a huge fan of Legendary Pictures, Brie Larson, Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman, and John C. Reilly and most of them are coming off successful projects: Larson (RoomTrainwreck), Hiddleston (The Night Manager), Goodman (10 Cloverfield Lane), and Reilly (The Lobster). On the surface, this film appears ready to knock critics’ socks off and rule the box-office.

However, the movie’s director, Jordan Vogt-Roberts, is largely untested. He has only one movie under his belt, the indie-coming-of-age comedy Kings of Summer. I have yet to see this movie, but the plot looked promising and it’s currently rocking a solid 76% on RottenTomatoes.com. Nevertheless, it’s an indie-film with a budget of probably no more than $15 million. Kong, on the other hand, enjoys a budget that RottenTomatoes estimates to be about $190 million. It also boasts a studded cast that I’m sure had big and possibly unwieldy personalities, not to mention monumental special effects that such a monster-blockbuster requires. That’s many balls to juggle for a rookie director.

Also, the plot looks horrendous. After watching this trailer, all I thought was so what? Ok, there is a giant gorilla named Kong and he’s pissed that American soldiers are attacking his “kingdom.” Beyond this simple plot, the trailer provides no hints that the movie will attempt to rise above it. That worries me. At least Peter Jackson’s King Kong (2005) maintained some mystery surrounding the King instead of flying straight into him as soon as the explorers enter Skull Island’s airspace.

I’m incredibly skeptical of this film. I assume that Warner Brothers, the studio distributing the film, signed on to Skull Island in hopes of capitalizing on the monster craze that it reawakened in 2014 with Gareth Edward’s blockbuster Godzilla, which Legendary Pictures also produced and Warner Bros. distributed. That movie was beautifully shot and filled with wondrous CGI, but the entire story dragged and by the end, I was bored with the omnipotent, nuclear beast. I worry that the same fate awaits me in Kong: Skull Island.


Split, directed by M. Night Shyamalan, is a thriller in which three teenage girls are kidnapped by  Kevin (James McAvoy), a man afflicted by a multiple personality disorder (D.I.D). The girls must try to escape their part in drawing out Kevin’s 24th personality, named ‘The Beast’.

Movie Score: 4 out of 5 (Excellent)

Through Split, Shyamalan delivers his best work since Unbreakable. Split mixes the claustrophobia of Alien with the eeriness of Silence of the Lambs’ Buffalo Bill and his hellish home.

The brooding and detailed style displayed in Shyamalan’s Unbreakable has returned, seasoned by more economical cinematography that conjures dread, frustration, and more through the camera and the movie’s set. For example, when the girls arrive in Kevin’s lair, the camera runs along a tight corridor. The space shrinks further, squeezed by bundles of pipes adorning either side. We share the girls’ fear and confinement from the movement of a camera.

The cast is small, comprising of five regular characters. The film focuses upon Kevin (James McAvoy), one of his victims Casey (Anya Taylor-Joy), and Kevin’s psychiatrist Karen (Betty Buckley).

Shyamalan exploits the confinements of Split‘s small budget to explore those characters through voyeuristic intimacy. The camera focuses upon the trio, imposing their faces onto the screen.We observe every slight emotion and cue, revealing how the three are linked through family and trauma.

Through the camera’s voyeurism, spliced with seamless flashbacks, Shyamalan excels in showing how alike Kevin and Casey are. Trauma has made them stronger, but along very different roads.

Shyamalan follows Hitchcock’s revelation and denial of information to enrapture the audience. He laces Split with glimmers of hidden details. These clues are not red herrings, but instead form questions about Kevin and the other characters, lending an excellent pace to the plot.

McAvoy is compelling as Kevin, flitting between a handful of 24 personas. Occasionally McAvoy’s voice acting falters, reverting to a dulcet Scottish. However, his best performance is given when depicting one identity masquerading as another. Often he infuses these identities with a dash of humour,  bringing levity to the more menacing characters. The darker personas even attract sympathy, as McAvoy depicts their internal struggles, suggesting who they represent to Kevin’s shattered ego.

Split is a showcase for McAvoy talents, and an advert for Anya Taylor-Joy as Casey, Kevin’s counterpoint. Taylor-Joy convincingly shows Casey turn her suffering into a will to survive. I have not seen an actress convey so convincingly such a range of emotion through her facial expressions alone. I am excited to see Taylor-Joy’s talent grow over the coming years.

The end does provide a satisfying arc to the story, completing the little questions aside the main mystery. However, the final act does buckle under its own momentum, especially when Split strays into elements of horror. The arrival of Kevin’s 24th personality is Split‘s best part, mirroring the theme of ‘becoming’ which pervades the Hannibal show and Hannibal films. The Beast initially appears in flickers, obscured by the shadows, running towards his prey. This is how The Beast should have remained, like a monster lurking in the dark until it strikes. Shyamalan reveals The Beast completely, weakening the character’s menace.

Target audience: Disillusioned Shyamalan fans, and anyone looking for a great thriller.

For the trailer, see below.

By Saul Shimmin

Super Bowl Trailers


Transformers: The Last Knight

The size of the paycheck Michael Bay sent to Hopkin’s agent in order to get him on Transformers: The Last Knight will be this film’s biggest reveal.

Potential sequel, if Hopkins stays on board, could be Silence of the Transformers: More Bayhem.

Pirates of the Caribbean 5: Dead Men Tell No Tales

Shiver me franchises, Disney is at it again (Pirates will be there 2nd of 5 sequels for 2017).

However, it does seem that this Pirates film may have a slightly darker tone.

With Orlando Bloom back, can Disney find Box Office treasure again?

Furious 7

Next sequel: Furious 8, Vin Diesel packs it in, gets a Prius, and dabbles in microbreweries along the East Coast.


Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

I eagerly anticipate the return of Marvel’s best franchise so far, but this trailer did need a little more Groot.


Biggie, slow-motion, and some pretty funny jokes at Zac Efron’s expense, we’ll hold out hope.


Logan could be the pinnacle of the X-Men series so far, striking overtones that are reminiscent of The Road,  but hopefully without the whiff of cannibalism.

The Founder

The Founder is a biopic that details how the Golden Arches, better known as the fast-food empire McDonald’s, rose to domination.

The movie begins with a struggling milkshake-mixer salesman named Ray Kroc (Michael Keaton). Ray has been traveling across the South giving a tired sales pitch to drive-in owners about why they need his four pronged mixer. Suddenly, he gets a call from California requesting six mixers. Disbelieving that any location would require six of his mixers, Ray makes the cross-country drive to San Bernardino, California where he meets the brothers Dick and Mac McDonald (John Carroll Lynch & Nick Offerman, respectively), the founders of a booming curbside restaurant called McDonald’s. With a line of customers a block long, Ray watches in shock as the line moves rapidly. In his and all of America’s experience, waiting for thirty to forty minutes for food at drive-ins was normal. Ray catches Mac McDonald, who merrily gives Ray a tour of their custom-made “Speedee-system” kitchen designed by Dick McDonald. Mac demonstrates how they can create a burger in less than thirty seconds and in that instant Ray knew this system was priceless. Within a week, he bought the franchise rights from the McDonalds brothers and birthed a fast-food craze, driving the brothers mad with his demands to increase efficiency and profits. After several years of infighting, Ray finally wrests control of McDonald’s from the brothers and turns the chain into a global powerhouse.

Movie Score: 3 out of 5 (Good)

I enjoyed this movie. My synopsis, though it seems detailed, only covers the beginning of the movie. The meat of this story, lies with the main lead, Michael Keaton. His performance is arresting. Ray Kroc is a ruthless, narcissistic, scum-bucket, and Keaton plays him perfectly. My favorite trait of Ray’s was this weird evil smile Keaton developed where you only see his top teeth. Something about that smile made my skin crawl, and it was just right for this money-mongerer, who I’m sure Donald Trump would praise for his cutthroat, self-centered business practices.

Ray’s downfall, from hard-working, supportive husband to ego-centric millionaire was the second best part about this movie. You can see Ray’s changes through his demeanor, from his increased drinking habits to his my-way-or-the-highway approach to life. His conviction in matters is scary, though maybe that’s what it takes to be a successful entrepreneur. If it is, I won’t be starting a profitable business. Ever.

The reason I docked this film two stars is because the plot is incredibly formulaic. It reminds me a lot of Christopher Nolan’s The Prestige (A fantastic movie that I am not criticizing). Ray Kroc is almost synonymous with Christian Bale’s character, Alfred Borden. Both men begin the movie humble yet hardworking. Then as the movie progresses their hunger for success consumes them, driving them to abandon their wives, disown their friends, and take on lovers if the mood hits them.  I called several plot turns in this movie long before they came to fruition, which caused the movie to become stale.

While The Founder was not dull due to Keaton’s performance, its basic plot did make it drag in sections. I would recommend this movie only if you’ve seen everything else at the multiplex and your other options are Resident Evil: The Final Chapter or The Space Between Us. Otherwise, if you haven’t seen SplitHidden FiguresPatriot’s Day, or Paterson, wait till this one comes on Netflix, iTunes, or Amazon.

Target audience: Mid to older aged audiences and adults looking to kill time on a rainy day.

As always, your comments and thoughts are welcome.

For trailer, see below.

By Hagood Grantham


Beauty and the Beast (2017) – Teaser

Outlook: Cautiously optimistic

“Tale as old as time,” Ariana Grande sings in Beauty and the Beast‘s final trailer. Yes, it is a tale as old as 1991. Beauty and the Beast has been around my whole life, so, to me, that famous lyric rings true as I’m sure it will for most of Beauty and the Beast‘s target audience.

With its series of live-action remakes that include Alice in Wonderland (2010)Maleficent (2014)Cinderella (2015), The Jungle Book (2016), and Pete’s Dragon (2016), some might think Disney has struck upon a golden formula. However, such people might be looking back upon these movies with rose-colored glasses thanks to the astounding success of The Jungle Book because it wasn’t until that movie that Disney got things right.

In 2010, Disney started strong at the box-office with its first two remakes Alice and Maleficent. They both grossed $320M and $190M, respectively. However, critics shunned the films, assigning them the mediocre scores of 52% and 50%. In Disney’s more recent live-action attempts, Cinderella and Pete’s Dragon, the studio finally won over critics, enjoying scores of 83% and 86% on RottenTomatoes.com, respectively, but neither came close to the $360+ million box office success of Jungle Book nor the lesser successes of Alice and Maleficent. Jungle remedied these imbalances by both winning over critics (95% on RottenTomatoes.com) and bringing in its largest box-office performance in the live-action remake sector, which set up the studio for a record breaking year.

Now all eyes are on this movie, Beauty and the Beast. Can it continue Disney’s hot streak and recreate Jungle‘s balancing-act of critical/box-office success? Can it lead Disney on to another record breaking year with a pipeline full of possible hits that include: Guardians of the Galaxy 2Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No TalesCars 3Thor: Ragnarok, Coco, and Star Wars: The Last Jedi.

Like The Jungle Book, this movie’s source material is incredibly well-known by audiences. Something I didn’t know till just now, Beauty was more than just a critical darling, it snagged an Oscar nomination for Best Picture in 1992. Laughably, Beauty‘s final trailer openly reveals the first half of the movie’s plot, in chronological order. Disney’s lack of effort to conceal the plot signals that it also realizes how familiar its target audience is with the original film. I believe this familiarity along with its star-studded cast (I’m eager to see Ewan McGregor as Lumiere) will generate large opening weekend number’s even if critics deride the movie.

However, I firmly believe that in today’s age of RottenTomatoes dominance, a movie cannot become a blockbuster without winning over critics. On this point, I’m a little nervous. Bill Condon is directing it and his biggest films up to this point have been Dreamgirls and Mr. Holmes. While I enjoyed the latter, it wasn’t a knock-your-socks-off type of good. It was just a good flick. Also, I must mention that in 2014 Condon  directed the Benedict Cumberbatch bomb, The Fifth Estate. While Condon is a veteran director, he lacks the pedigree and success of past live-action directors (e. g. Cinderella‘s Kenneth Branagh or The Jungle Book‘s Jon Favreau) and the fact that he directed that garbage, The Fifth Estate, makes me uneasy.

With all this on my mind, I rewatched this final trailer for the third time and hearing “Tale as old as time” still pulled at my heartstrings. Let’s hope this movie is more than just a waltz down memory lane to revisit Disney’s golden-era.

By Hagood Grantham