Disney's A Wrinkle in Time | 9th March, 2018 | Frozen's Jennifer Lee writing, Ava DuVernay directing. 45% on RT

[Aplandg]

When is the review embargo supposed to lift? This seems pretty late for a Disney property. 

[PNF2187]

6 minutes ago, Aplandg said:

When is the review embargo supposed to lift? This seems pretty late for a Disney property. 

Tomorrow (I think at noon). Recently, the latest that Disney's lifted an embargo this close to release (not including Star Wars) was with Cars 3 (68%) and Pirates 5 (30%), and those embargoes lifted on the Monday before their respective releases.

[Zakiyyah6]

Um saying that I HOPE that critics don't condescendingly pat a black woman on the head does not mean that I think that every okay review is not legitimate. I did not even question that 2.5/4 review that was posted. 

[AniNate]

https://www.twitter.com/slashfilm/status/971249855900372993

[Mojoguy]

What the hell is this shit? Jesus!

[AniNate]

https://twitter.com/jasondashbailey/status/971193365327941633

[Mojoguy]

Just let the movie's quality speak for itself.

[AniNate]

I'm fine with critics wanting to give it faint praise but being a "sincere blockbuster" is not what makes it risky. 

[kowhite]

Yeah I keep hearing...ehhhh...it’s messy.

 

Oh well.  OG Disney live action could use a hit.  Every time they go outside remakes, theyve fallen short in recent years.  And it burns!  I really wanted John Carter and Tomorrowland to be great.

Edited March 7, 2018 by kowhite

[Porthos]

23 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

 

 

This wouldn't be the first film ever made to get praised as a ambitious mess. In fact, film criticism is replete with just these sorts of reviews.

 

13 minutes ago, Mojoguy said:

Just let the movie's quality speak for itself.

"let the film's quality speak for itself"

 

What does that even mean? 

 

Part of being a film critic is to say why some things work and some don't, especially in context.  Taking ambition and scope out of the equation seems to be missing the forest for the trees in my not so humble opinion.

 

As I said above, noting that a film swung for the fences and missed isn't a new thing.  Saying that a film is ambitious and takes risks but might not hit them all is hardly outside the remit of the film critic. 

 

Just saying a film is good or bad without greater context is... Well I suppose some folks may want that, but I personally would like a little more meat on the bone.

 

Not really seeing what is wrong with either of those tweets, myself.

Edited March 7, 2018 by Porthos

[MovieMan89]

I feel the same way about Cloud Atlas as most of these critical reactions. It's possible to feel that way about a movie and art in general. 

[Porthos]

5 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

I'm fine with critics wanting to give it faint praise but being a "sincere blockbuster" is not what makes it risky. 

I think "sincere" could be another way of saying "not a cookie cutter paint-by-the-numbers cash grab".  Could also be a swipe at a presumed cynical attitude that some critics think some studio execs/directors have to some properties.

 

Sure, "sincere" can be a loaded word.  But it's a tweet, so it gets compact.

 

Or it could be something as simple as "sincere" just means "wears its heart on its sleeve". Or something along those lines.  Doesn't have to be read negatively.

[MovieMan89]

If anything, these reactions are starting to make me a lot more eager to see this. It sounds like it could be the boldest thing Disney has put out in quite some time, even if it doesn't all necessarily work. Now I'm hoping for the Cloud Atlas of family films, lol. 

[AniNate]

3 minutes ago, Porthos said:

I think "sincere" could be another way of saying "not a cookie cutter paint-by-the-numbers cash grab".  Could also be a swipe at a presumed cynical attitude that some critics think some studio execs/directors have to some properties.

 

Sure, "sincere" can be a loaded word.  But it's a tweet, so it gets compact.

 

Or it could be something as simple as "sincere" just means "wears its heart on its sleeve". Or something along those lines.  Doesn't have to be read negatively.

 

Most big blockbusters are in that "sincere, heart on sleeve" mold. It's not something that makes a movie inherently risky. If it's intended to be a compact way to say "strange, previously unadapted source material", it just feels lazy.

[Dementeleus]

4 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

 

Most big blockbusters are in that "sincere, heart on sleeve" mold.

 

I don't agree with this, actually. Generally speaking, I feel the opposite is true -- even if the filmmaker is clearly excited about the material (random example: Vogt-Roberts and KING KONG).

[AniNate]

 

Also one more reaction

 

 

[AniNate]

Just now, Telehilation said:

 

I don't agree with this, actually. Generally speaking, I feel the opposite is true -- even if the filmmaker is clearly excited about the material (random example: Vogt-Roberts and KING KONG).

Seriously? Star Wars is the epitome of sincerity, as are James Cameron films.

[Barnack]

4 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

Seriously? Star Wars is the epitome of sincerity, as are James Cameron films.

Those are 2 very specific example (and not so sure about Cameron, he could be a calculator of world audience want & need and star wars is 40 year's old).

 

If you look at the 500 last big budget movies you will find a lot of them that had marketing study, focus group, test screening result governing a lot of element, using proven how to build a movie rules about genre/3 - 5 act structure/needed pace, content, humor density/heroes journey guide going on.

Edited March 7, 2018 by Barnack

[Ryan Reynolds]

Ava the new Zac Snyder with ambitious failures ?

[AniNate]

2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Those are 2 very specific example (and not so sure about Cameron, he could be a calculator of world audience want & need and star wars is 40 year's old).

 

If you look at the 500 last big budget movies you will find a lot of them that had marketing study, focus group, test screening result governing a lot of element, using proven how to build a movie rules about genre/3 - 5 act structure/needed pace, content, humor density/heroes journey guide going on.

 

Well, it's hard for me to imagine A Wrinkle in Time not going through that machine too, especially with Disney behind it.

 

I think we have different ideas of what "sincerity" entails, though. I feel like it's a label you can apply to any film when you're trying to be nice to it.