Since we rolled into the new millennium, there has been a consistent trend in the world of cinema. It's been used as a plot device, a character, as comic relief and more. While those elements are necessary in filmmaking, we are now living in a time where this trend is abused, not to the point where it's a cliché, but to the point where it's just flat-out annoying.

I'm talking about talking animals in family movies. No, not all talking animals are included. Animation doesn't count. I'm talking about the CGI animals of the modern family comedies, movies like "Zookeeper (2011)," "Underdog (2007)" and the Air Bud movies.

Since the summer break started, I have decided to begin diving into Redbox and watching movies new to DVD, movies I've never heard of or were never in theaters to begin with. My latest Redbox venture came in the form of two movies about talking animals: "Paddington (2014)" and Disney's "Russell Madness (2015)."

It's story time, folks!

In the past, I have heard quite a bit about the horrendous library that is direct-to-DVD Disney movies. I hadn't heard of Russell Madness until one of my favorite YouTubers, Mark “Markiplier" Fischbach, released a skit video he acted in with the animal stars of Russell Madness. The video was a musical number where he enlists the help of three other YouTubers to help him win a game of chess against a monkey. It was highly entertaining, but I've always enjoyed Markiplier's work.

When I saw Russell Madness in one of the four Redbox machines near my apartment, I figured I'd take a look. One hour and thirty minutes later, I quickly eject the movie from my DVD/VHS combo player, race downstairs, bullet out the door on my bike and pedaled at my quickest speed to the absolute closest Redbox machine. I pounded my finger against the screen to hit return and shoved the disc inside. "Never again!" I shouted. A Circle K employee stood nearby with his cigarette and looked at me. I shook my head and told him to never watch the horror that is Russell Madness. He nodded, but I don't think he took me seriously.

Russell Madness is about a lone dog who accidentally becomes a professional wrestler after he takes down some of the world's worst wrestlers. He is then hired by a family to be their wrestling star and a very mild-mannered battle ensues between the family and John Ratzenburger, who owns the story's equivalent company to our WWE, "cleverly" dubbed the WUF (Wrestlers United Federation).

Russell Madness is exactly what it says in the title: madness. The type of madness it gives off is the kind where the word "family" is tossed around like two playground bullies tossing a toy robot back and forth, the family members in the movie have no character or personalities whatsoever, and the dog—the dog—THE DOG! The dog sounds like a child ready to hit puberty at any second throughout the movie. The voice actor makes nails on a chalkboard sound like Bradley Cooper!

If that wasn't bad enough, the CGI used for the dog's facial expressions, speech and "wrestling moves" are just as horrendous. Seriously, "Scooby-Doo (2002)" had better CGI for Scoobs. Dare I mention the constant puns and jokes using the words “banana" and “monkey?" And to think this film was made by Disney, yes, the same exact Walt Disney Studios company that brought us "Big Hero 6," "The Santa Clause," and the "Let it Go" movie.

After being traumatized by that horrible pile of trash, I needed to find a better movie. Paddington received much praise after its release, and I was willing to watch almost anything at this point, even if the movie was directed towards kids.

Paddington tells the story of a marmalade-loving young bear (not a cub, just a bear who is still young, but older) whose forest is destroyed by a massive earthquake. He sets off to London to find a new family with high hopes that he might meet the man who discovered his intelligent aunt and uncle. While avoiding sandwich-hungry pigeons, an uptight bureaucratic organization and a crazed taxidermist, Paddington must adapt to his new life living in modern London with the Brown family.

Before watching Paddington, I was skeptical of the film. The TV spots made it look like the same-old animal living with a family and "ker-razy" antics ensue for ninety minutes with no real story.

I was wrong.

Paddington is an amazing movie! I loved every minute of it and the cinematography was incredible. The best shot in the movie is when Paddington is sitting in the train station, at night, by himself. Behind him, the lights for the Lost & Found office flicker, with “Lost" being the only lit part. The Brown family passes and when Mrs. Brown walks over to Paddington, we see “Found" flicker a bit and light up as Paddington begins talking to Mrs. Brown. Genius shot!

From there, all of the comedic bits are built around Paddington's confusion with human society and trying to fit in. One of the funniest bits is when Paddington gets lost from the Brown family. He comes across an escalator that has very precise rules as far as where to stand on the escalator and where to keep pets. Paddington takes this literally and ends up taking someone else's dog down the escalator (as pictured on the rules sign) and balances on his right foot when he reads “Stand on Right Side." Every bit with Paddington is humorous and adorable!

Now, to some people, it may seem like I may not be giving one movie enough credit or I might be complaining about small stuff for "Russell Madness," but there are reasons why I'm giving "Russell Madness" more flak than Paddington. While both movies have similar scenarios, regarding an animal moving in with a family and learning what it means to "be a family," the way both movies execute that type of plot are completely different.

In a family movie, the main plot device is, most of the time, going to be a family. The struggle with most family films is that they come off too sweet. Every character of the family tries to be nice and act like everything is hunky-dory, as if they've been brainwashed through viewing too many instructional videos from the 1950s. Our subjects provide two portrayals of a modern family.

Russell Madness has a family that comes off as more fake than tofu. Dad looks like he's trying to be interesting. Mom comes off as a freaky Amy Poehler with a smile similar to Jeff the Killer. Son seems to always know the answer to everything at the most convenient of times. Daughter is … well, she's just there. There's no personality, and when they try to have some, it ends up looking like a messy three-ring circus. The whole family is so well kept and controlled throughout the story that it only comes off as utterly fake.

Paddington, on the other hand, is not afraid to show the stress and flaws of a modern family. Dad is a worry wart. Mom is compassionate and tries to be nice to everyone. Son is a creative builder who almost resents his Dad. Daughter is moody and is embarrassed of her family. This is a more realistic portrayal of a modern family. I may be sounding like the producer of a "reality" show, but conflict is what makes a story interesting. Family is not always filled with smiles and rainbows, and Paddington reminds us that throughout the story.

The second issue I've found in most family movies is what I call the "cuteness crutch." Most of the time, the cuteness crutch is assigned to the animal or creature the film relies itself on. The character is then placed into various gags where the filmmakers can abuse that cuteness crutch and trick the viewer into thinking "funny" means "good movie." They'll give the character an adorable outward appearance, a dance move everyone knows or a sassy attitude. "Alvin & the Chipmunks (2007)" is a criminal suspect in relying on this too much. Alvin using the dishwasher for a shower is the best (or worst) example of this abuse.

The cuteness crutch in "Russell Madness" contains the kids, the monkey, and, of course, our worst offender, the dog. Stock audio of dog whimpers and noises are used to force an "awwwww" from the audience and make us feel sad for the little pup. The kids are always super-excited and their high-pitched voices can force a smile on viewers … well, some viewers. Then, we have the monkey with the wisecracks and banana-obsession, always having something smart to say. It's the same formula the majority of family films use; they give us a character to feel sorry for (the dog), a character that's always optimistic (the kids), and a character that provides the comic relief (the monkey). Ultimately, this only creates three incredibly flat and dull characters.

Paddington uses this same strategy, but manages to use only one character as the cuteness crutch, that being Paddington himself. Unlike our canine swine, Paddington is a character that's always optimistic towards others, but he is aware of his flaws and doubts. What makes him an entertaining character is that his over-optimistic approach to fit in creates confusion inside him and he doesn't know how to behave in human society. Overall, cramming those three traits (optimism, pity and humor) into one character allows our main character to be more interesting and entertaining to us.

Because of movies like "Russell Madness," the family movie genre has become a joke. Rarely, do we get a film like Paddington where some thought was put into the characters and storyline. But, these family films continue to abuse the same formula over and over again. It's gotten to a point where it treats the audience (mostly parents) like sheep, tricking them into buying their kids horrible titles that will easily be forgotten. And it was all because some filmmaker couldn't put effort.

So, to my Mom and Dad, sorry for making you guys sit through "Thomas and the Magic Railroad."