I remember acquainting myself with the children's book "Harold and the Purple Crayon" way back in the day. Like other childhood staples, it ignited my imagination in a way that would prove fruitful well into adulthood. I can see the possibility of a competent film adaptation, specifically for a short subject and/or an animated feature. As long as it kept the chill and easy going vibe in the veins of the "Winnie the Pooh" shorts or the "Peanuts" TV specials, a film adaptation of this story could work. But not like this. At least not the way director Carlos Saldanha and company tackled it here.
What we have here is another run-of-the-mill "fish out of water" narrative in the veins of "Enchanted" (2007), "Elf" (2003) and "Barbie" (2023). Our lead Harold (Zachary Levi) and his friends Moose and Porcupine (Lil Rel Howery, Tanya Reynolds) transport themselves from their magical animated world to the live-action world in search of a missing narrator. Their journey to find the person in question results in detours galore. The most notable of which is a work-driven mother (Zooey Deschanel) and her son (Benjamin Bottani).
Needless to say, the son takes a liking to Harold and friends right away. Enough of a liking in fact to help Harold in his seemingly hopeless crusade. Also captivated by Harold and friends is a librarian/aspiring author (Jemaine Clement) who's drawn by the power of the crayon and what it can accomplish. Two police detectives are also investigating the actions of our protagonists and seeing them as trouble. This is basically the plot of at least 50% of family films that have been released since the turn of the century.
It started off pleasantly enough with the first 2 to 3 minutes taking place in the animated world. It established the dynamic between Harold and his pals, and demonstrated the creativity and imagination that Harold and his crayon can exert. As soon as our characters enter the real world however, the film's recycled formula becomes apparent and any potential the film's narrative initially had was quickly ruined. This distinction is made even worse by the film's lacking and uninspired execution on multiple levels.
The characters within the narrative as told left much to be desired. For example, there was no point to having those two detectives at all considering the trivial screen time they occupy. The kid that comes to Harold's aid is completely boring. He's the typical stock kid who wants his parents to change to satisfy his needs, even if it means he keeps getting into trouble for it. The stock bullies that pick on him are just as unredeemably boring as he is, too. Talk about pot calling the kettle black.
Harold and his friends may be innocent enough, but there isn't much to the progression of their character arcs. Most of the characters feel one-note, with the sole exception being Clement. To be clear, his character is a fairly standard antagonist which this narrative really didn't need. Considering how his actions in the third act clash with the tone of the original story, this makes the hectic climax all the more awkward. To Clement's credit though, he does relish his screen time and you do understand why he's desperate enough to go down the path he does.
The worst performance from the cast by far has to be Zooey Deschanel. She's clearly disinterested in the material she's working with as evidenced by monotone line reading, unearned changes with her character, and her mostly being miserable on screen. Her character is already another variation on the one she played in "Elf", only done worse here with both her acting and the script sharing equal blame.
It's been brought to my attention that this film has had a troublesome production history and I'm not surprised. Why does a film about someone who can create anything with a magical crayon ironically feel constrained in every conceivable category? From the clichéd meltdown before the third act to a puzzling good vs. evil battle in the climax, there's no reason for a film based on a creative story to feel so bland and tired. This holds especially true when the original story had none of this uninspired nonsense to begin with.
The only reason I can come up with regarding this film's quality being what it is might have something to do with the box office success enjoyed by last year's "Barbie". Truth be told, I wasn't a fan of that film. It shared some of the same flaws present here with this film. I didn’t care for the kid and parent in "Barbie". To that film's credit however, it was at least trying something outside of the box with its source material. It challenged what its characters stood for in a way that made some real world sense.
With "Harold and the Purple Crayon" sadly, there's nothing here that hasn't already been accomplished beforehand in other family films prior. A film of this caliber may have enough here for audiences around 10 to 15 years ago. But in this day and age on the other hand, what's on offer with this film is no longer going to cut it. It's going to take more than a whole carton of crayons to draw or create a more compelling picture.
Final Verdict: 3.5/10
Opmerkingen