Fantastic Mr. Fox
Starring: George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Jason Schwartzman.
Directed by: Wes Anderson.
Rating: PG for action, smoking and slang humor.
Running time: 1 hour, 27 minutes.
“Fantastic Mr. Fox?” Not so fantastic.
To say this movie is quirky is far beyond an understatement. It’s hard to expect anything else from director Wes Anderson, but maybe I was biased going in.
Not many people know about writer Roald Dahl’s work beyond the “Chocolate Factory,” so it doesn’t surprise me (but does sadden me) that most movie goers will see this film without reading or even knowing about the book.
And I guess in this day and age I should just accept the fact that few people read. But when a director takes what he touts as being one of his favorite books and totally changes it? That’s when I start getting annoyed. “Creative license” only takes you so far, Mr. Anderson.
My brother jokingly suggests that I should just stop reading — or at the very least stop watching adaptations. But with so few original movies nowadays, it’s almost impossible not to see an adaptation (especially when you write a weekly review column!).
Also, many people I’ve heard who enjoyed this film were Wes Anderson film fans from the start, and not Roald Dahl fans. Or they had simply not read the book and therefore had no idea how dramatically the plot and characters were altered.
Although “Fantastic Mr. Fox” didn’t irk me nearly as much as “Where the Wild Things Are,” it still makes me question directors’ motives and thought processes during writing and filming.
But, back to the film.
“Fantastic Mr. Fox” is about a fox (voiced by George Clooney, one of the few reasons to actually watch the movie) who steals from the properties of three local, and notoriously “evil,” farmers — Boggis, Bunce and Bean. Having been stolen from just a few too many times, the farmers decide to hunt and kill Mr. Fox, Mrs. Fox (Meryl Streep), son Ash (Jason Schwartzman) and nephew Kristofferson (Eric Chase Anderson).
The stop-motion filming used in “Fox” gives it a unique feel, but at times makes you wonder if you could have achieved the same result with the money you spent on the movie ticket.
An enormous hindrance to the movie is Mr. Fox himself. The leading character is selfish, arrogant and a plain brute to his son. Clooney’s voice can charm you only so much.
The only good change Anderson made to the book was the development of Mr. Fox’s son, whom the movie names “Ash.” Without Ash, this movie would have been a total disappointment. Granted, this development would have been unnecessary if you actually cared about Mr. Fox, but lacking any kind of emotional connection with the main character, Ash will have to do. You’ll find yourself wading through Mr. Fox’s scenes in the hopes that his son will soon make an appearance.
Another reason to dislike this movie? The pure random inclusion of Kristofferson. He adds nothing to the plot and is more of an unwilling rival to Ash than anything the audience should be interested in. And for a “deep” character, he’s awfully flat, hinging his entire being on yoga and naiveté.
In an effort to be edgy, Anderson also felt the need to taint a perfectly good children’s book with having the characters insert the word “cuss” as a not-so-subtle reference to a variety of swear words. I’m not always an angel when it comes to speaking, but this seemed like a desperate attempt to get a couple of chuckles from the adults or to give the teenagers a brand new catchphrase.
In short, if Twentieth Century Fox truly wanted a film version of “Fantastic Mr. Fox,” Wes Anderson should never have been let anywhere near it. If you haven’t read the book, you may be able to give the movie a decent chance. But for those who loved Dahl’s heroic fox, this is an adaptation you won’t want to see.
2.5 of 5 stars
No comments:
Post a Comment
Loved it? Hated it? Think I'm off my rocker? Let me know!