A Lighter DARK CRYSTAL

Article first published as THE DARK CRYSTAL AGE OF RESISTANCE Review on Seat42F.

Jim Henson’s The Dark Crystal film has quite a cult following. Many, many fans love the movie, and have watched it dozens of times a piece. Growing up, while I found it equal parts disturbing and boring, I certainly had more than my share of peers who told me I was wrong. And whether you like the story or not, there’s certainly plenty to appreciate in the sheer amount of work that goes into such a fully-realized puppet-driven world.

THE DARK CRYSTAL: AGE OF RESISTANCE is better than the movie. That is an opinion, of course, so agree or not, that is your choice. There are several things that stand out to me in forming this opinion.

One, the settings are so much richer and more beautiful. The original was post-apocalyptic, and that is a valid choice for the story being told. By setting AGE OF RESISTANCE as a prequel, the creators get to show us the beauty of Thra in its prime, and it is breath-taking. There are several distinct zones of habitat, each more impressive than the last. Setting plot aside, it has an Avatar-esque quality of something never seen before, and that’s worth watching.

Two, the voice cast is amazing. With no offense to the originals intended, as they did a fine job with their task, big talents lined up to be part of such a storied franchise. Returning and new characters alike boast big names along the lines of Jason Isaacs (Harry Potter), Sigourney Weaver (Alien), Eddie Izzard (Ocean’s Twelve), Helena Bonham Carter (Les Miserables), Caitriona Balfe (Outlander), Lena Headey (Game of Thrones), Natalie Dormer (um, Game of Thrones), Nathalie Emmanuel (yet another Game of Thrones), Toby Jones (Captain America), Theo James (Divergent), Taron Egerton (Rocketman), Gugu Mbatha-Raw (Belle), Awkwafina (Crazy Rich Asians), Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina), Simon Pegg (Shawn of the Dead), Benedict Wong (Doctor Strange), Keegan-Michael Key (Key & Peele), Andy Samberg (Brooklyn 99), Bill Hader (Barry), and Mark Hamill (Star Wars). And that’s not even a complete list.

Third, it feels like a fully realized story. It’s clear the writers have firm direction, partly because we already know the ending. But even if we didn’t, it’s clear this is well thought out, carefully crafted with rules that the series sticks to and a sense that it knows what it’s trying to do.

That is a bit of a downside, as well. After all, while would-be hero Gelflings strike out on quests to save their people from the ruling Skeksis, it’s well known that they will fail. The best these main characters that viewers are going to care about can hope for is noble martyrdom. The movie sets up only failure, and everything good in this place should be gone by the end of AGE OF RESISTANCE.IN ITThat isn’t an argument against watching DARK CRYSTAL: AGE OF RESISTANCE. After all, everyone knew the Titanic sank, and yet they flocked to the theatres to see the film of the same name. There’s a bit of a dread hanging over the story here, too, but it’s also hard to keep that in mind when it’s so easy to root for the Gelflings.

AGE OF RESISTANCE hasn’t won me over and made me a DARK CRYSTAL fan… yet. But by the time I finish it, it just might. It may take all ten installments to decide if the project was worth it, but it definitely expounds upon the universe in new and interesting ways. Had this come before the film, I’d probably have been more invested in the original follow-up. But the Star Wars prequels, this is not, and if you have even a slight bit of curiosity, I recommend checking it out.

THE DARK CRYSTAL: AGE OF RESISTANCE is streaming on Netflix now.

BURTON AND TAYLOR Memorable Disaster

Article first published as BURTON AND TAYLOR Memorable Disaster on TheTVKing.

This week, BBC America presented Burton and Taylor, a two-hour television movie about Elizabeth Taylor (Helena Bonham Carter, Les Miserables) and Richard Burton (Dominic West, The Hour). Specifically, it is about a period near the end of Burton's life in which the two worked on the play "Private Lives" together.

Make no mistake about it; Burton and Taylor is a two-person show. Like the performers that this TV movie is based on, these characters are gravity wells that draw everyone else to them, while at the same time, being concerned mainly with themselves. They aren't usually cruel to bystanders and those they work with; they're the opposite really. They are just almost completely focused on each other and the situation they are in. While no other actor manages to make an impression, not even Lenora Crichlow (Being Human), that's OK, because this is about them. Their names are in the title, after all.

Carter and West suck us in, as surely as Burton and Taylor must have back in the day (I assume; this happened before my time). It's an epic love story of a couple who are more addicted to one another than in love. As a pair, they are destructive, as much hate as adoration flowing between them, able to wound one another as no one can. Yet, their romance is fantastic, and they cannot break away.

Both of these are very large personalities, and the actors rise to the occasion. Carter captures subtleties of Taylor in a way I didn't expect her to, despite her large and accomplished body of work. West is fully believable as a great legend of stage and screen, carrying the swagger and gravitas with ease, while also making Burton human. Both gain the viewer's sympathy, even while also earning pity.

Burton and Taylor feels more like a play than a film. Or rather, like a movie made from a play. The sets are only background, with the two characters the point. The pacing is relaxed, luxuriating in the acting craft, and the tone is slightly melodramatic, an exaggerated effect we'd see in the theater. Only a single flashback, done with great effect near the end, really seems like it wouldn't work as well in the theater.

I love the ending, by the way. It really gets to the heart of the relationship, letting the characters discover the truth in one another and themselves. Neither is the bad guy here; both make mistakes, and both have their eyes opened. But this is definitely a unique dynamic, not the typical marriage, and Burton and Taylor does a terrific job illustrating that.

If I could have changed one thing it would be to make this a miniseries, with a greater period of time covered. The "Private Lives" period is played out pretty well, though it would be nice to see a bit more of the parallel between the play and their reality, something not obvious for those unfamiliar with the plot of "Private Lives." However, there is definitely a lot of history between them that one is expected to figure out or already know at the start. As this production is set in the year of my birth, I don't have that context to just jump in, and I'd like to see these two performers explore more of the characters in other eras, making for a more complete portrait, even though the climax explains what needs to be explained, and adding more may just be a retread.

For those who recall what it was like to live in the time of Burton and Taylor, this may be a nice walk down memory lane, though I doubt it brings a lot of new information to bear. However, it also effectively introduces the two to a new generation, giving us a glimpse of the tabloid culture before the days of cellphones and internet, and examining personalities worth examining, who should be remembered long after their time. To either group, it's enjoyable as a movie unto itself.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1

     What does the world, and this site, need more than another review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1? Am I right?  But each person has a different perspective, and as a long time fan of both the books and the movies, I'd like to toss my hat into the ring as well.

     We'll start at the beginning, and probably my biggest (and one of very few) disappointment with the film: The Dursley's departure. The family that (poorly) raised Harry (Daniel Radcliffe) has often been dropped or shortened in the film versions. I understand that with limited time and at an effort to keep strong pacing, this may have been necessary. However, we barely got glimpses of Vernon (Richard Griffiths) and Petunia (Fiona Shaw), and though he is listed on IMDB as being in the film, I don't think I even saw Dudley's (Harry Melling) face. Being that this is the last time these pivotal character appear, couldn't we have gotten sixty seconds with them? That touching goodbye between Harry and his cousin for the book? It would not have hurt the movie at all, and been a nice payoff for fans.

     However, the Dursley scenes were split with something awesome and unexpected. The extra moments not explicitly shown in the books with Hermione's (Emma Watson) parents were heartbreaking. It really informed the audience just what Hermione was losing, and colored her fabulous performance for the rest of the movie. What a brilliant addition. It was so good, it didn't occur to me that the Dursleys were so cheated until much later.

     The opening battle was stunning. Again, a few things I wish had been handled slightly differently. I would have liked to see Mad-Eye (Brendan Gleeson) go down, just because his death was unclear immediately to non-fans of the book series. I also remembered being terrified that Hagrid (Robbie Coltrane) was dead when reading, but although he was slumped over in the film, it didn't have that same sense of dread. That being said, it was still an intensely exciting scene, beautifully stage, and full of action and danger.

     From there we move onto the Burrow, which thankfully was rebuilt a bit different, paying homage to the fact that the Weasley house was firebombed in the sixth movie. The inclusion of Bill (Domhnall Gleeson - yes, Brendan's son) and Fleur (Clémence Poésy) was necessary, both to plant seeds of doubts about Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) into Harry's head, and to hurry the three leads on their journey. I don't fault the films for not including Bill and his bride before now, as it was an expendable subplot. I do wish, though, that scars on Bill's face were a bit more pronounced, and that the battle in which Bill received them at the end of the sixth film had not been axed. But that is one of my many complaints about The Half Blood Prince, that could fill up a whole different article.

     The Weasley plot I really, really wanted to see was Percy's (Chris Rankin). He did not appear in this movie at all. He had one of the best plots in the book series, but it became apparent long ago that it was not be make it off the pages. His break from his family was hinted at in The Goblet of Fire, and the sharp eye noticed him in Order of the Phoenix. I was hoping for a few words before the wedding about him, so that perhaps a hint of the story would make it in. Sadly, this was not to be, though Rankin is listed in the credits for The Deathly Hallows Part 2. I doubt he will be seen much, but at least he will be there.

     I read a couple of early reviews that said The Deathly Hallows grew boring after the wedding, as Harry, Ron (Rupert Grint), and Hermione searched high and low for the Horcruxes. In fact, although I adore the final book, it was more meandering in that format, as the Hallows began to take precedence. In this recent movie, the Hallows are introduced, but not until near the end, so they never become a front-and-center mission. Even Ron's absence seemed shorter, as the move rushed ahead and kept the twists coming. As such, I completely disagree with those early reviews, and found the two and half hour runtime flew by, and was over much too soon.

      Some criticism has also been heaped on that nude make-out session between Harry and Hermione in Ron's dark vision. I admit, it was a tad adult, however, none of their naughty bits were actually shown. I think the way it was done was artistic, a bit sexy, and a perfect representation for the doubts that had surely been plaguing Ron's mind during his separation from them. Plus, it allowed some justifiable rage that Ron needed to destroy the Horcrux.

     More essential was the awkward dance between the two that happened in reality. In the books, Ron and Hermione were always an inevitable couple. I am always baffled by my movie-only friends, who root for Harry and Hermione, even after the Harry - Ginny (Bonnie Wright) romance finally blossomed. The dance, as well as Hermione's obvious grief over Ron made it very clear where Hermione's heart stood, and was a nice payoff to those who had been sidetracked by the on-screen chemistry of Radcliffe and Watson. Nicely done.

     The Malfoy Manor scene provides the few other complaints that I have. Certainly not about the Malfoys themselves, as Jason Isaacs wonderfully portrayed the desperate cad Lucius, and Tom Felton's tortured Draco is superb. I really believed that he was not going to give the (too) slightly disfigured Harry away on purpose, although his awkward non-answer did it for him. Draco is a boy, and unlike Harry, has not looked death in the face. He doesn't possess the same heroic traits that Harry does, and I loved how Draco, who started as a series villain, was shown to be just a kid.

     No, my complaints stem for the two pivotal deaths. Well, one, since Wormtail (Timothy Spall) was never killed, and his name appears in the credits for Part 2. The film Dobby (Toby Jones) was annoying from the beginning; the Jar Jar Binks of the Harry Potter world. It is no surprise that all of his subplot had been removed from movies 3 through 6. However, this has made his death mean so much less, as movie goers have not invested in him. Instead, what I argue was the single most tragic loss in a book filled with loss came across as noble, but not all that important. The exchange between Dobby and Bellatrix (Helena Bonham Carter) only worsened it, as it felt out of place.

     However, the scene immediately following where Harry mourns Dobby was splendid, even if movie-only fans were probably confused at the level of emotion shown. The mourning of the main characters drove home that Dobby's death meant something, and was not just a bow to popular opinion.

     Over all, the movie lived up to expectations quite well. As expected, the cuts were less than in previous installments, since two films allow a more expansive story. While it did not exactly stand on its own, it certainly will have fans chomping at the bit for eight months for the capper. Eight months is far too long. I wish it would come sooner. If you are a fan of the series, both movie and / or books, it should satisfy fairly completely, even in wanting more.

     A number of new actors joined at this late time in the series, including the always flawless Bill Nighy as the new Minister of Magic, Peter Mullan as the evil henchman Yaxley, David Ryall as Elphias Doge, Andy Linden as Mundungus Fletcher, and Rhys Ifans as Luna's eccentric dad, Xenophilius Lovegood. Each delivered outstanding, but brief performances. As most characters in the movie series, I only wished the got more screen time. Similarly, familiar favorites such as John Hurt as Ollivander, Frances de la Tour as Madame Maxine, and especially Imelda Staunton as Dolores Umbridge were welcome returns, but barely got anything to do. This final film belongs to Ron, Hermione, and especially Harry, and while they own it, as they should, that does give less time for the deserving others.

     A note, for any parents considering taking children to see it. Please don't. If you've followed the last few films, it's obvious that Harry Potter may have started as a children's series, but was never intended to stay that way, hence it's huge range in popularity among many age groups. But these final two installments are much more adult than any before, featuring multiple deaths, as mentioned above. In fact, the second part should have more than double the kills than this first one. The PG-13 rating is well deserved.

     Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 is playing in theaters everywhere now. I suggest you see it as quickly as possible, and multiple showings is not out of the question.

For frequent mini-reviews and occasional tv news, follow Jerome on Twitter.


 Article first published as Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 on Blogcritics.