The Witches (2020) review (HBO Max)

 

When it comes to some of the most prominent authors in literary history, one whose work has consistently stood the test of time is Roald Dahl. From 1942 up until his death in 1990, Dahl was responsible for penning a whole bunch of classics such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, James and the Giant Peach, and Matilda. To date, his various novels and short stories have sold over 250 million copies worldwide and are widely touted for their creative imagery and their unabashed knack for dark humor to contrast with their primarily whimsical nature. Many of his works have been adapted to the big screen over the years although it is worth noting that, when he was alive, Dahl was usually quite critical about them for the various changes that were made to his stories. This included the last adaptation that was released before his death, 1990’s The Witches, which was directed by Nicolas Roeg and notably produced by none other than Jim Henson. Dahl, however, was not too pleased with this adaptation of his 1983 novel, namely due to its drastically different ending. Nevertheless, the film was well-received by critics and while it wasn’t exactly a box-office hit, it has since gone on to become a cult classic of its time. But now there’s a new adaptation of The Witches upon us, and just like the 1990 film, this one is star-studded on both sides of the camera. For starters, the cast is headlined by a pair of Oscar winners in Anne Hathaway and Octavia Spencer. And as for the behind-the-scenes crew, the film serves as the latest outing from director Robert Zemeckis, AKA the man who’s given us films like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Forrest Gump, and this reviewer’s favorite film of all-time, Back to the Future. However, Zemeckis isn’t the only big-name filmmaker attached to this project as it was originally proposed as a stop-motion film directed by Guillermo Del Toro, who instead serves as a producer alongside his good friend Alfonso Cuaron while also being one of the credited screenwriters alongside Zemeckis and Black-ish creator Kenya Barris. And while it may be far from being the best project that any of these men have ever worked on, it still manages to be a decently charming family flick that delivers a solid new take on Roald Dahl’s classic story.

In 1968, a young boy (Jahzir Kadeem Bruno) loses both of his parents in a car crash. He’s then sent to live with his grandmother (Octavia Spencer) in Alabama, and while it does take a while, she does help him start to overcome his grief. However, their idyllic lifestyle is soon threatened when the young boy has his first encounter with a witch. And since his grandmother is quite familiar with witches after seeing one when she was a child, she tells him everything that he needs to know about them; namely, that witches are really demonic creatures and are notorious for hating children and doing anything they can to get rid of them. Thus, to avoid any further witch-based encounters, the young boy and his grandmother promptly decide to take a vacation and stay at a prestigious hotel. Unfortunately, they end up arriving at the exact same time as a whole group of witches led by the most powerful witch in the world, the Grand High Witch (Anne Hathaway). The young boy ends up eavesdropping on their meeting, where the Grand High Witch reveals her newest scheme to get rid of all the children in the world by using a special potion to turn them into mice. And to make matters worse, the young boy is then discovered by the Grand High Witch, who immediately uses her potion to turn him into a mouse. Now stuck in mouse form, the young boy crosses paths with two other kids that were recently turned into mice, food-loving Bruno (Codie-Lei Eastick) and a girl named Mary (voiced by Kristin Chenoweth), who is revealed to be the mouse that the young boy had been keeping as a pet for the past few months. With both their help and his grandmother’s, the young boy now finds himself in a time-sensitive situation as he and his friends work to stop the Grand High Witch’s sinister plan before anyone else ends up suffering the same fate as them.

While it may be easy to simply call this film a ‘remake’ of its 1990 counterpart, this new version of The Witches does manage to avoid being a straight-forward retelling of its classic story, whether it’s by having African-American protagonists or revealing that the kid’s pet mouse was a transformed kid as well. Plus, if there’s one advantage that this film has over the previous film, it’s that its ending is a lot more faithful to the book since, as noted earlier, Dahl took significant issue with the 1990 film for having a more traditional ‘happy ending’. Granted, the changes that this film makes does mean that it takes a lot more liberties with its source material than even the 1990 film did, but at the very least, this isn’t a case like Artemis Fowl where the changes that were made significantly alter the story beyond recognition. At the end of the day, most of these changes are simply from a cosmetic standpoint, and for the most part, the film does an excellent job of maintaining Roald Dahl’s whimsical style that delivers a good-natured adventure where the kids are the heroes but is still allowed to have the delightfully twisted dark humor that Dahl was well-known for. And while I’m aware that the film has gotten some criticism for supposedly being ‘too scary for children’, I’d argue that it’s relatively tame compared to all the other family-friendly films over the years that have gained notoriety for their darker moments (and yes, this includes the 1990 adaptation of The Witches). All this makes up for the fact that the film ends up feeling like a routine affair for the filmmakers who are attached to it, especially Robert Zemeckis. It’s not that the film is ‘bad’ or anything since, if Zemeckis’ past work wasn’t enough of an indication, he’s not that kind of director. It’s just that, like what happened when Tim Burton made his remake of Planet of the Apes in 2001, this is one of those instances where, if you didn’t know that this was directed by the guy who made Back to the Future, you probably wouldn’t have figured that out until the credits because it could’ve been done by anybody.

For many people, one of the best aspects of the 1990 film was Angelica Huston’s standout turn as the Grand High Witch. But while that may have been an undeniably tough act to follow, Anne Hathaway proves that she’s more than capable of taking on that daunting task. With an over-exaggerated accent that’s matched by an equally over-the-top performance, Hathaway is clearly having a lot of fun as the main antagonist. And sure, it’s completely understandable if some may find her performance to be a bit too campy at times, but at the end of the day, she’s still one of the best parts of this film. This strong performance from Hathaway is then perfectly matched by Octavia Spencer’s equally terrific turn as the main protagonist’s grandmother. Spencer has always been well-known for playing characters like this who are very much good-natured protagonists but can still dish out some tough love when necessary, usually through some delightfully spunky snark. And while he’s not in the film too much, we also get the always-reliable Stanley Tucci as the manager of the hotel that all the main characters end up at who mostly spends his time trying to deal with the eccentric gestures of the Grand High Witch. Finally, to close out the main cast, we have newcomer Jahzir Kadeem Bruno as the main protagonist who, just like in the original novel (and not the 1990 film where he was named Luke), is unnamed. He is credited as ‘Hero Boy’, however, which is rather ironic because that makes him the second main character in a Robert Zemeckis film to be called that since that’s also what the main protagonist of The Polar Express was credited as. Nevertheless, while this may only be his first leading role in a film (that and his character is a mouse for half of it), Bruno instantly makes a strong first impression with some solid charisma for his age.

While it’s admittedly been a while since I’ve done so, I did read The Witches when I was younger. It was one of many Roald Dahl books that I read growing up alongside other classics such as Matilda and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. However, you may be surprised to learn that I never watched its 1990 film adaptation. Simply put, it was just one of those films that was never on my radar back then. As such, it goes without saying that I don’t have the kind of connection to it that many others from my generation have, which has clearly had a major influence on folks’ thoughts towards this new adaptation. I mean, if the usual reception towards Disney’s recent string of live-action remakes wasn’t enough of an indication, folks are always a lot stricter when it comes to remakes. And yet, from the perspective of someone who hasn’t seen the 1990 adaptation of The Witches, I’d argue that this new version of the story is a genuinely harmless affair. It avoids being a direct carbon copy of its predecessor and even manages to deliver a more faithful take on the novel’s ending… even if the changes that it makes everywhere else are more prominent than those from the 1990 film. Really, at the end of the day, the worst thing that I can say about this film is that it’s arguably the most by-the-numbers feature that Robert Zemeckis has ever directed. To be fair, his direction is solid as always, but at the same time, I will admit that I’m curious about how this film would’ve turned out had it been the Guillermo Del Toro-directed stop-motion film that it was originally planned to be. Ultimately, though, the film does manage to be a nice showcase of Roald Dahl’s brilliant storytelling and could very well serve as a gateway for younger generations to experience the rest of his work.

Rating: 3.5/5

The Walk (2015) review

In a way, this film sort of has a bit of a chip on its shoulder as it is a film released in the post-9/11 era that is based almost entirely around the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. But hopefully that doesn’t completely turn people away from this film because it actually focuses on a true story of the Twin Towers that was magnificent instead of tragic. When the towers were first built in 1973, the initial reaction towards them was generally negative amongst New Yorkers, many of whom referred to them as being ‘ugly’ and ‘oversized’. But on August 7^th, 1974, that all changed when French high-wire artist Philippe Petit ‘humanized’ the Towers by tightrope walking between them, situated at least 1,350 feet up in the air. This unique part of history had previously been explored in the 2008 documentary ‘Man on Wire’, which won the Oscar for Best Documentary that year. This year sees the release of a new adaptation of Petit’s story in the form of ‘The Walk’, directed by Robert Zemeckis, director of numerous film classics including ‘Forrest Gump’, ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit’, and my all-time favorite film trilogy, ‘Back to the Future’. With ‘The Walk’, Zemeckis achieves a pure cinematic achievement by giving us a film that is not only visually stunning but also one that is full of heart that will hopefully inspire others to follow their dreams, however impossible they may seem.

As he narrates throughout the film while stationed on the torch of the Statue of Liberty, we are introduced to Philippe Petit (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), who in 1973 was a juggler/wire-walker who performed daily in the streets of France having been inspired to become a performer after a trip to the circus when he was younger. One day, after a minor incident during a performance requires a trip to the dentist, he learns about the Twin Towers that are currently under construction in New York City from a magazine. Inspired to tight-rope across the towers before they are completed, Petit starts to train in the art of high-wire walking under former circus performer Papa Rudy (Ben Kingsley) and begins to plan his coup to walk across the Twin Towers with the help of his girlfriend Annie (Charlotte Le Bon) and a few other ‘accomplices’ as well, including photographer Jean-Louis (Clement Sibomy) and algebra teacher Jeff (César Domboy). Once in New York, Petit comes across additional help as well in Barry Greenhouse (Steve Valentine), a life-insurance agent who works at the Towers, French speaking local New Yorker Jean-Pierre (James Badge Dale), a second photographer named Albert (Ben Schwartz), and stoner David (Benedict Samuel), who all help Petit as he undertakes the illegal operation of rigging his wire from the observation decks of what were, at the time, the tallest buildings in the world.

Obviously the biggest selling point of the film is the 20-minute sequence at the end in which Petit performs his famous high-wire act between the towers. Zemeckis has stated that he wanted the audience to get an idea of what the view was like for Petit on the high-wire instead of just looking at it from the audience’s usual perspective down below and he definitely succeeds in that regard. This was a film that was made for IMAX 3D, effectively making you feel like you’re on the high-wire along with Petit. Though with that said, it has been reported that some audiences ended up getting sick during this part when the film first premiered in New York. So if you’re scared of heights, this definitely isn’t your kind of film. But hopefully that doesn’t completely discourage some of you from seeing this film because the high-wire walk really is one of the best film moments of the year and even though you know what’s going to happen, you’re still on the edge of your seat throughout this entire sequence. The buildup to it is really great as well. Again, while we may know how everything turns out, it’s actually really fun to watch Petit and his team undertake their obviously illegal operation. We see how Petit comes across his ‘accomplices’, how he and his team figure out how to rig the wire to the towers, and see them overcome certain obstacles and issues. It’s all done at a brisk pace that makes the film compelling throughout.

One of Robert Zemeckis’ greatest strengths as a director is that he really knows how to find the heart and characters within an unbelievable story. And one of the reasons why this film works as well as it does is because while it is definitely a visually beautiful film, it also has a great amount of heart to it as well. It’s an awe-inspiring tale of the strength of the human spirit and how one man was able to make a seemingly impossible dream of his possible, which in turn can hopefully inspire others to make their own dreams a reality. A lot of this is due to Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s phenomenal lead performance as Petit. Not only does Levitt get the French accent down very well but he also exudes a ton of charisma, which is obviously a key thing for anyone who is a performer. Levitt is backed up by a very nice supporting cast of characters headlined by Ben Kingsley as Petit’s wise mentor Papa Rudy and Charlotte Le Bon as his lovingly supportive girlfriend Annie. But then there are a few other members of Petit’s band of accomplices that also stand out as well, particularly James Badge Dale as the French speaking New York native Jean-Pierre and César Domboy as Jeff, an algebra instructor who has to overcome a fear of heights in order to help Petit achieve his dream. While some of the members of the team are introduced perhaps just a bit too late into the film to get any real chance to stand out amongst their peers, namely the secondary photographer and the stoner, most of the other members of the group do at least get their own moments to shine during a film that ultimately belongs to Joseph Gordon-Levitt.  

I legitimately have no idea why this film isn’t doing so well at the box-office despite getting great reviews. Is it because of the ‘post-9/11’ thing or the fact that some people got sick watching this film’s climax? Whatever the reason is, I sincerely hope that this doesn’t become this year’s next ‘Tomorrowland’, especially when considering that both films wear their hearts on their sleeves and honor the dreamers of the world. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; we need more films like this that promote positive messages of hope and perseverance that will hopefully inspire future generations to dream big. Obviously the biggest aspect of the film is the scene in which Petit walks across the towers, a visually stunning sequence that makes the film an absolute must-see in IMAX as well as the best 3D film that I’ve seen this year. Hopefully 9/11 isn’t one of the reasons why this film isn’t doing so well commercially because even with all that happened on that day in mind, this film is actually a very touching tribute to the Twin Towers in how it honors a joyous moment in the history of the Towers that were originally built as a symbol of hope. I’d also like to point out that this film ends on a particularly poignant note that doesn’t actually bring up 9/11 but does clearly allude to it, resulting in a pretty darn powerful conclusion to what is easily one of my favorite films of this year.

Rating: 5/5!

Back to the Future Trilogy (1985-1990) review (350th Post!!)

In order to commemorate Rhode Island Movie Corner’s 350^th official blog post, I decided to finally tackle a series that I’ve been longing to cover for a long time. That series in question is quite frankly my favorite film trilogy of all-time, which as you might have guessed spawned my #1 favorite film of all-time period. I’m of course talking about Robert Zemeckis’ ‘Back to the Future’ trilogy. I remember the first time I ever watched these films back in 2004. My parents had bought the trilogy on DVD and we watched the first two films one night and then the third and final film the following evening. Despite having never heard about the films before that moment, I was immediately hooked to them and around the time I started my senior year of high school, I realized that the first film truly was my favorite film of all-time. It’s hard to identify a single film as your all-time favorite but for me there was clearly no other choice. So today, I’m finally honoring these three classics of the sci-fi genre; the original masterpiece from 1985, its more effects-heavy and somewhat darker 1989 sequel, and the sometimes ignored 1990 finale. For the record, I won’t be covering the ‘Back to the Future’ animated series that ran from 1991 to 1992 due to time constraints but I may do another post specifically for that show in the future (no pun intended). But for now, it’s time to start up your DeLorean and go back in time with me as I delve into the ‘Back to the Future’ trilogy.

BACK TO THE FUTURE (1985)

So yeah… ‘Back to the Future’ is my favorite film of all time, no doubt about it. While I’ll admit that it wasn’t until a few years ago that I finally came to this conclusion, ultimately that’s beside the point because I absolutely adore this film. Why is it my favorite, you ask? Well having re-watched this film numerous times over the past decade, as I’m sure many of you have done as well, I think the main reason why this film is so great is because it’s more than just a ‘sci-fi’ film. Sure its premise of a teenager in 1985 accidentally going back in time to 1955 via a DeLorean time machine, where he ends up interfering with his parents falling in love which results in him nearly being erased from existence, is definitely rooted in the sci-fi genre. But this film goes beyond the standards of the genre by basically combining multiple genres into one. It’s got action, it’s got drama, it’s got romance, and it’s got humor. It’s one of those rare films that is legitimately a complete package, meaning that you don’t have to be a big sci-fi fan to enjoy this film. And of course, this is easily one of the most quotable films of all-time thanks to how well-written Zemeckis and Bob Gale’s script is and how well the cast work off each other. All of this I feel makes this film so timeless. Sure it was made over 30 years ago but it’s aged in just the right ways.

Robert Zemeckis’ direction is superb, effectively finding the right balance of serious drama and light-hearted humor. The film has one of the best soundtracks of all-time, highlighted by Alan Silvestri’s grand score and the two classic songs by Huey Lewis and the News, ‘The Power of Love’ and ‘Back in Time’. Casting is pitch-perfect all around, highlighted by the brilliant duo of Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd as Marty McFly and Doc Brown. Fox’s charisma and Lloyd’s straight-faced turn as the admittedly very eccentric Doc results in a great camaraderie between the two. But of course we can’t forget about the other members of this great cast; Lea Thompson as Marty’s mother Lorraine, who ends up getting ‘the hots for him’ when they cross paths in 1955 (which of course on paper sounds incredibly awkward but is handled perfectly here), Crispin Glover as Marty’s father George, who ‘becomes a man’ over the course of the film, and Tom Wilson as one of cinema’s greatest ‘bullies’, Biff Tannen. Seriously, I can go on and on about how this film is a cinematic masterpiece but let’s be honest, you all know that already. I’ve seen this film so many times that it’s practically engrained in my mind; I pretty much know it inside and out. And quite simply that is why this film is, and always will be, my favorite film of all-time.

Rating: 5/5! (Obviously)

“Roads? Where we’re going, we don’t need roads.”

BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II (1989)

‘Back to the Future Part II’ does exactly what any good sequel does; it continues the story and takes the series in a new direction while still managing to maintain just enough similarities to the first film without being a ‘carbon copy’ of it. And like another famous sequel, ‘The Empire Strikes Back’, this film even takes the series in a few darker directions. Like how about a plot in which Biff Tannen, in the year 2015, acquires a sports almanac, steals the DeLorean, goes back to 1955, and gives the almanac to his younger self so that he could become rich, resulting in a messed-up alternate reality 1985. As a result, Doc and Marty now find themselves having to go back to 1955 in order to steal the almanac from young Biff. I really liked how this film decided to go back to 1955 and revisit sequences from the first film but from different angles. This whole part of the film, and a sequence in the future in which Michael J. Fox portrays three separate characters at once; older Marty, young Marty Jr., and yes even his daughter Marlene, required the use of digital compositing and a new camera operating system, Vistaglide, which allowed actors to seamlessly play more than one part at once onscreen while the camera was able to move around. In fact, this film has quite a lot more visual effects in it compared to both the first and third films, which is understandable given that a good chunk of it takes place in the future.

I actually have to admit that ‘Back to the Future Part II’ is my least favorite installment of the series. Though at the end of the day, this is mostly due to personal preferences and the fact that this is arguably the one entry in the series that I’ve seen the least amount of times, due to my original DVD copy of the film getting a bit scratched up. Thankfully in recent years I’ve definitely warmed up to the film a lot more, though it’s still my least favorite of the trilogy. That’s not to hold anything against it, though, as it’s still just as enjoyable as the first film. The characters are still as great as they’ve ever been, the cast is once again terrific, and the production design is excellent through all of the different time periods visited in the film; 1955, the alternate screwed-up 1985, and the futuristic 2015. But wait a minute, some of you might say, aren’t we now in 2015? Yeah it’s become a bit of a running joke on the internet to discuss how accurate this film was in predicting what 2015 would be like and obviously not every piece of technology featured in this film is real (yet), like flying cars or self-drying jackets. Though with that said, there actually were some things that the film sort of got right, like hands-free gaming (Kinect) and video chat (Skype), which is quite impressive considering that this film was made around 25 years ago. Though with that said, I must ask… where are our damn hoverboards? Well, anyway, ‘Back to the Future Part II’ is a solid follow-up to one of the greatest films ever made. Is it as good as the original? No, but obviously that’s one hell of a tough act to follow. But ultimately it’s still a damn entertaining continuation of this great franchise.

Rating: 4.5/5

“Doc… what if we don’t succeed?” “We must succeed.”

BACK TO THE FUTURE PART III (1990)

While nowadays the practice of shooting films back-to-back is fairly common (e.g. ‘Lord of the Rings’, ‘Harry Potter’), it was a rarity at the time that the ‘Back to the Future’ franchise filmed Parts II and III back to back. Originally, the plot of Part III was meant to be combined with Part II for just one sequel, but this idea was scrapped due to the fact that it would’ve just been too much for one film. Heck, even after this decision was made, many still considered Part II to be overstuffed. But anyway, ‘Back to the Future Part III’ was released in May of 1990, just half a year after Part II was released in November 1989. From what I’ve seen online, Part III is apparently considered to be the ‘black sheep’ of the franchise. It seems like the biggest reason for this is due to the fact that the film takes place in the year 1885 in the Old West, which apparently some thought was a bit out of place for a ‘Back to the Future’ film. But as for me, this was actually my personal favorite of the series for quite a few years up until I came to the aforementioned ‘the first BTTF film is my favorite film of all-time’ conclusion. But while this may no longer be my favorite entry in the series, it’s definitely one of the prime examples of a film that isn’t as bad as everyone says it is. Contrary to popular opinion, I absolutely love that this film was set in the Old West, which results in some highly entertaining set pieces. This includes what may just be my favorite climax of the entire series in which Doc and Marty push the DeLorean up to 88 MPH, due to the fact that Marty accidentally end up tearing the fuel line when he first arrived in 1885, with a train.

Another major addition that may have had something to do with this film’s weaker reception is the character of Clara Clayton, who Doc falls in love with after saving her from falling into a ravine. But like how I’m totally fine with the film’s Western setting, I also didn’t mind Clara at all. I thought that it was actually rather cool to see, of all people, Doc fall in love and the romance between the two is really sweet. It’s also cool to see Doc and Marty basically switch roles as a result, with Doc becoming the young soul in love and Marty having to be the ‘straight man’ in the situation. There’s even one moment in which the two say each other’s lines, ‘Great Scott!’ and ‘This is heavy!’ Like the previous two films, the sequences involving Doc and Marty are the heart of the film. Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd’s camaraderie is as great as it’s ever been. And for the final film in this trilogy, it ends on such a terrific note. I cannot even begin to tell you how much satisfaction I got from seeing Doc return to 1985 in his new time-travelling train and flying away to travel through time in a shot reminiscent of the classic final shot from the first film. All in all, I guess you can say that ‘Back to the Future Part III’ is one of the most underrated films of all-time. I mean part of me legitimately doesn’t get what people don’t like about this film, aside from the aforementioned Wild West setting and the addition of Doc’s new love interest Clara. I think this film is just as great as the first two and a highly satisfying finale to one of the best film trilogies of all-time.  

Rating: 4.5/5

“Your future is whatever you make it. So make it a good one, both of you.”