Two films with British origins are aiming for family audiences. One is a beloved character from children's literature, the other is from a well-known animation production.
The Tales of Peter Rabbit by Beatrix Potter is a childhood favorite of mine. I have fond memories of my mother reading me the story and watching the cartoon special narrated by Carol Burnett. A little rabbit disobeys his mother and heads into a garden, filled with delicious vegetables only to run in with the cranky gardener Mr. McGregor who has an appetite for rabbit pie. The film version goes the route Tim Burton did with Alice in Wonderland, not much a loose adaptation but a sequel to the original story. Peter (James Corden) is grown-up, and still sneaks into the garden of Mr. McGregor (Sam Neil) with the help of his cousin Benjamin (Colin Moody) and sisters Flopsy (Margot Robbie), Mopsy (Elizabeth Debicki) and Cottontail (Daisy Ridley). After Old McGregor dies from a heart attack (We are off to a good start!) his estate is given to his great-grand nephew Thomas (Domhnall Gleeson). A brash gentleman who hates animals but falls for his new neighbor Bea (Rose Byrne) an artist who looks after the rabbits. (Her name is short for Beatrix. Get it?) When war ensues between Young McGregor against old Peter, that makes me think yes this is Peter Rabbit. Not!
To say this movie butchered my childhood would be an understatement. What film hasn't. From the moment the trailer premiered I knew the direction it would take. Look at at the live-action Scooby-Doo, Garfield or Smurfs; a familiar property given the Shrek/ Minion treatment with pop-culture and low-brow humor galore. A butt joke involving a carrot? Comedy gold! Animals randomly singing a past or current pop song for no reason? Genius! The character being a complete jerk that you have a hard time believing this is the same character from the original story? Screen writing at its finest! Paddington and Stuart Little avoided this sin, but because simplicity doesn't guarantee profit, trade it all for trendy mediocrity that will bring in the audience and money.
The animation on the animals are admirable and Peter's family were ten time likable than Peter himself. Despite being over-the-top, I salute Domhnall Gleeson props for surviving this picture and giving a performance this film didn't deserve. The song played during the end credits along with the illustrations did a better job emoting Potter's work, making me wonder of what the movie could have been. If there is anything that terrible live-action adaptations have taught me is that no matter how awful the outcome it will never damper the original. If you wish to show kids a Peter Rabbit story, stick with any version but this.
Final Verdict: (C-)
If you have never heard of Aardman, someone's been living in the stone age. Specializing in stop-motion animation, specifically claymation, this British animation studio have given Pixar a run for its money from Chicken Run, Wallace & Gromit, and Shaun the Sheep. I can't think of a single Aardman film that was bad but Early Man seems to be their most average film to date. Set in Prehistoric times, Dug (Eddie Redmayne) and his caveman clan of rabbit hunters are in danger of losing their forest home to the Bronze Empire. As Bugs Bunny did with the Nerdlucks in Space Jam, their fate lands in an epic sports match. Dug's clan vs the Empire's best players in a game of soccer (or football as the Brits call it). With Lord Nooth (Tom Hiddleston doing a hilarious Inspector Clouseau impression) attempting to sabotage this Flintstone family, aid comes in the form of Goona (Maisie Williams), a Bronze local who dreams of playing the sacred sport.
On one hand I can't bring myself to give this film a thumbs down, as it still carries that Aardman dazzle. The characters are charming, the villains are menacing but downright funny, and tons of sight gags that requires a keen eye. Early Man has it. The problem lies in its predictable story. With Aardman's previous work the plot went from one unexpected route to another that you wonder how it's going to end. You knew the chickens were going to escape in Chicken Run but how they do it was off-the-wall. The usual silliness is dialed down in exchange for every sports movie cliche of the underdog going against the champ. There are moments of wacky British humor but not on par of say the creation of the Were-Rabbit, or Pirates hanging out with Charles Darwin.
The character designs look uninspiring resembling something out of Klasky Csupo's catalog (Rugrats, The Wild Thornberry's, Duckman). Choosing it's release date next to Peter Rabbit, wasn't the best idea as kids and families will find the former more appealing. Not to mention the common curse in children's British entertainment; if that doesn't have the name J.K. Rowling it will most likely bomb at the box office. If you are an Aardman admirer or soccer fan it still makes for a fine viewing. Not outstanding but I'm glad I saw it. I will gladly take this over the likes of Peter Rabbit.
Final Verdict: (B)
Thanks for sharing such a detailed post here. I was wondering what to show to my kids once they finish watching shows by Andrew Yeatman on Netflix. The weekend is around the corner and they love to watch movies and series on weekends. These two will be good options.
ReplyDelete