The Grinch (2018) review

When it comes to children’s literature, easily one of the most famous authors of all-time was Theodor Geisel, better known through his pen name, Dr. Seuss. From 1937 up until his passing in 1991, he wrote and illustrated more than 60 books that were hailed for their imaginative imagery and wonderful rhyme-based writing, thus paving the way for classics like The Cat in the Hat, Green Eggs and Ham, and Oh the Places You’ll Go. And easily one of his most famous creations was the Grinch, a furry, green creature who despised the holiday season. This character first made his debut in Seuss’ 1957 effort, How the Grinch Stole Christmas. Less than a decade later, Geisel teamed up with legendary animator Chuck Jones for a 26-minute television special that has continued to be one of the most beloved Christmas specials of all-time. The Grinch would then see new life on the big screen in 2000 thanks to a live-action adaptation that was directed by Ron Howard and starred Jim Carrey in the title role. This one, however, was a bit more controversial amongst critics and audiences. While it does still have its fans (namely those who were kids when it first came out… including me), it wasn’t as well-received as its animated counterpart. But now the ‘mean one’ known as ‘Mr. Grinch’ is back in a second feature film adaptation, this time as an animated feature courtesy of Illumination Entertainment, who had previously adapted Seuss’ 1971 story The Lorax in 2012. And although their last foray into the world of Dr. Seuss didn’t turn out so well, this new one works a lot better as a charming little family flick even if it’s still just the same story that we know and love at the end of the day.  

In the peaceful town of Whoville, one holiday is revered more than anything else, and that is Christmas. Every year, the Whos of Whoville go all out with their holiday celebrations, which become even more extravagant this year when the Mayor (voiced by Angela Lansbury) declares that they will have a Christmas that’s three times bigger than anything they’ve ever had before. But while everyone in Whoville likes Christmas a lot, the same cannot be said for the Grinch (voiced by Benedict Cumberbatch), a miserable loner who spends most of his time in his mountain lair looking down in disgust upon the town. For the past 53 years, the Grinch has hated the holiday season with a burning passion; a hatred that primarily spawned from all the time that he spent alone at the local orphanage when he was a kid. And when he learns about the Whos’ plan to make their Christmas celebration even bigger, he decides that the time has finally come to do something about it. His ‘wonderful, awful’ idea? Dress up as Santa Claus, find reindeer to lead the sleigh, sneak down into Whoville, and steal all their presents and decorations. Thus, with the aid of his loyal canine companion Max, the Grinch begins working on his plan to give the Whos the worst Christmas that they’ve ever had. Meanwhile, down in Whoville, a young, innocent Who named Cindy Lou (voiced by Cameron Seely) initiates a plan of her own to aid her overworked mother Donna (voiced by Rashida Jones) by finding the one and only St. Nick.

If there’s one thing that you can never fault Illumination films for, it’s for having bad animation. While I do love the live-action Grinch film with Jim Carrey, I will also admit that Dr. Seuss’ creations work a lot better in animation than they do in live-action, and the animation team at Illumination did a wonderful job in replicating Seuss’ style through the locales and character designs. As for the story, though, don’t expect anything new from this classic story. While it does do a different spin on the Grinch’s backstory and Cindy Lou Who’s role in the plot, it’s still the same premise and overall outcome through and through. But for what it’s worth, the film manages to work around this thanks to its laid-back tone and some decent bits of humor here and there. Ultimately, though, the best aspect of the film is Benedict Cumberbatch in the title role. Admittedly, when the first clips of him voicing the character were released, I was surprised to see that his Grinch wasn’t adopting the English accent that was originated by Boris Karloff in the 60’s special and then used, in part, by Jim Carrey in the live-action film. Instead, he goes for a more Americanized accent, but it’s still a solid take on the character and Cumberbatch works well with the film’s humor. Aside from him, there’s a notable supporting turn from SNL vet Kenan Thompson as the overly jolly Who Bricklebaum that the Grinch continually crosses paths with. And as for Cindy Lou Who, I appreciate that this film did the same thing that the live-action film did by giving her a more prominent role in the story. Instead of her struggling to understand the meaning of Christmas in an increasingly commercialized time, her arc in this film is a sweet one as it sees her just trying to find Santa so that he can do something nice for her overworked mother Donna (sadly, Rashida Jones doesn’t get much to work with here).  

Now I went into this film with far different expectations than most people. I think it’s safe to say that a lot of people went into this hoping that it’d be a better feature film adaptation of The Grinch compared to the previous one. But as I’ve noted before, I’m part of the crowd that grew up with the Ron Howard/Jim Carrey version, and I’m not afraid to admit that I still love it. Thus, when it comes to this new version, I was just curious to see what it’d be like compared to its predecessors. And while I do have my doubts about this film going on to maintain as much of a legacy as either of its two predecessors (yes, folks, the live-action Grinch does have somewhat of a positive legacy… even if it depends heavily on who you ask…), this version of The Grinch is still a cute little animated flick. This is, of course, primarily due to Benedict Cumberbatch clearly having a lot of fun in the title role and some gorgeous animation that does a nice job paying tribute to Seuss’ iconic visual style. At the same time, though, there isn’t that much different about this film in terms of its story compared to previous adaptations. And yet, even with that said, I was surprised by how this was a far more restrained affair compared to other Illumination projects. At the time that I’m writing this, I’ve only seen three Illumination films (this, Sing, and The Lorax) and have usually had the impression that they can often be a bit too wacky for their own good. But as for this film, aside from maybe one or two dips into modern-day references, it surprisingly may just be the most respectful adaptation of a Dr. Seuss story to date. And yes, considering some of the previous film adaptations of Seuss’ work (e.g. the infamous live-action adaptation of The Cat in the Hat starring Mike Myers), I know that this isn’t really saying a lot, but I will give this film credit for, at the very least, keeping it simple.

Rating: 3.5/5

Post-Christmas Short Review Triple Feature: 2016 Edition

Hey, folks, it’s time for the first Rhode Island Movie Corner post of 2017. Right now, I’m currently working on my annual ‘Top 12 Films of the Year’ posts detailing my favorite films from 2016. That four-part series will be published sometime in the next few days but until then, it’s time for something that I usually do during this time; a quick post detailing some of the recent films that I’ve seen during the final stretch of the year. Every year after Christmas, I go on a double feature run with my good friend Matthew Goudreau, a writer for The Young Folks and The Nerd Stash. We’ve been doing it since 2012 and every year, we always end up seeing two of that year’s biggest award contenders. The first year we did it, it was Les Miserables and Django Unchained. In 2013, it was The Wolf of Wall Street and American Hustle. In 2014, it was Into the Woods and The Imitation Game. And last year, it was The Hateful Eight and The Big Short. So, when it comes to doing reviews of these films, I always do a ‘short review double feature’ post instead of doing full reviews for both, mainly due to me not really having the time to do so because of the ‘Top 12 of the Year’ lists. But, it should be noted that in the case of our 2015 ‘double feature run’, it didn’t occur until New Year’s Day 2016 due to our busy schedules. Thus, I ended up seeing three films in two days. The third film was the annual film that I see on New Year’s Eve with my family (in this case, that film was Joy). Thus, that ‘double feature’ post ended up being a ‘triple feature’ post. And this year, it’s the same situation. I saw one film with my family on New Year’s Eve and then I did my ‘Double Feature’ run with Matt the following day; January 1^st, 2017. Another one of my pals, Alex Corey (who just started his own film review blog at alexcoreyfilm.blogspot.com and is also my co-host on our podcast Sabers, Phasers, and Lasers, Oh My!), even joined us this time around. Thus, it’s time for the second annual post-Christmas ‘Short Review Triple Feature’ post, in which I discuss the last three films that I’ve seen in theaters.

To kick things off, we have the film that I saw on New Year’s Eve. It was the last 2016 release that I saw in the year 2016.

SING

Sing is the latest film from Illumination Entertainment and their second of 2016 after their smash summer hit The Secret Life of Pets. It centers on a group of ‘misfit’ animals who enter a singing competition held by a koala named Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey), the owner of an old theater who hopes that it’ll give him the profit he needs to save his property. What follows is a charming animated film full of performances of new and classic songs, including ‘Don’t You Worry ‘bout a Thing’ by Stevie Wonder and ‘I’m Still Standing’ by Elton John. After all, this film is called Sing and the best part about it is the musical performances, all of which are performed very well by a solid voice cast that includes the likes of Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson, Seth MacFarlane, and Taron Egerton. For the most part, this does make up for the fact that the story is a straight-forward affair. This ‘save the theater’ storyline is quite predictable in both plot-points and in terms of its characterizations (e.g. an overworked mother, the son of a gang leader who looks to get out of the family business, a shy teenager looking to overcome stage fright, etc.). Still, despite this, I will give the film credit as there were some emotional moments that were quite effective, mainly in regards to Buster and his connection to the theater. Plus, most of, though not all, of the main characters are likable. In short, Sing is by no means a particularly groundbreaking entry in the animated film genre. Still, despite its standard plot, it does deliver when it comes to the one thing that it’s named for; singing performances. That at least makes it an enjoyable family flick.

Rating: 3.5/5

And now, onto the double-feature run that I did with Matt and Alex.

FENCES

Fences is the third directorial effort from A-list superstar Denzel Washington, following 2002’s Antwone Fisher and 2007’s The Great Debaters. The film is based off the award-winning (Pulitzer Prize-winning, to be specific) play of the same name by playwright August Wilson and is part of his series of Pittsburgh-based plays known as The Pittsburgh Cycle that encompasses all decades of the 20^th century. This one, set in the 50’s, shares a few similarities with another famous play, Death of a Salesman, in that it centers on an aging family man who struggles to provide for his family. Washington stars in the lead role of Troy Maxson, former Negro league baseball player turned garbage man, while Viola Davis stars as his long-suffering wife Rose. Both Washington and Davis starred in the 2010 Broadway production of the play and here they give terrific, emotionally-charged, and all-around Oscar-worthy performances in what is very much an actors’ showcase. And these strong performances do, for the most part, make up for some of the film’s flaws. Now, don’t get me wrong, the film is very well-directed by Denzel. But, at the same time, admittedly there are times where you do feel the length of the film’s hefty 139-minute runtime. Also, sometimes it does have a ‘stage’-like quality to it, namely because it all takes place within one primary location, the Maxson household, for most of the film. But, like I said before, it’s a solid emotional drama telling the tale of a dying American Dream. It may be hard to sit through (in fact, a lot of it is quite uncomfortable to watch) but it is worth it for the strong direction by Denzel Washington and the excellent performances from him and Viola Davis. And while I can’t go as far as to call this a ‘front-runner’ for Best Picture, it’s still a well-made film regardless.

Rating: 4/5

LA LA LAND

Finally, we have director Damien Chazelle’s highly anticipated follow-up to his critically acclaimed 2014 effort, Whiplash. La La Land, an original musical, is an affectionate love letter to old Hollywood and stars Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling as an aspiring actress and jazz musician, respectively, who meet and fall in love all while they both aspire to achieve their dreams in the City of Angels. What follows is an excellent and charming love story set against the great backdrop of Hollywood. Yes, folks, all the positive reviews that this film has gotten are accurate; this truly is one of the best films of the year. For one thing, it’s a technical marvel, thanks primarily to the constant use of long takes. The musical numbers are great from top to bottom and Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling are both excellent in their respective roles. This is the third film in which they’ve starred as a couple after 2011’s Crazy, Stupid, Love and 2013’s Gangster Squad and all three films showcase the strong chemistry between them. And finally, there’s the ending. Without giving anything away, it’s easily one of the best parts of the film. Simply put, it gives you a happy ending but then does something new with the idea that quite frankly ends up making the whole film. And because of all this, to reference the comments that were made by an older couple sitting behind me once it ended, I do believe that this film will become a classic down the road. It’s a charming original story that results in one of the best musical films to date while also showcasing the talents of everyone involved, particularly its director.

Rating: 5/5!