Turning Red - Movie Review - Something new and different buried in familiarity

We all know Pixar, and I think it's safe to say we all love them. Despite this, their newest film, Turning Red, is not one I was particularly hopeful for. From the trailers, this film just looked annoying and very predictable to me. But, it's a Pixar film and it got some very positive reactions, so even though I was still cautious, I had some hope that this may turn out to be something up to their usual standard.

The plot involves a confident young girl named Mei in her teenage years who gets her whole life turned upside down as she obtains the strange tendency to turn into a giant red panda whenever she gets excited. After initially being resentful of this, it soon brings out a side in her that she and her friends start to like.

This film is extremely frustrating. Not just because of the fact that my concerns were completely accurate, but because I can also easily detect a better film within this. This is a coming-of-age story, and to me, the best coming-of-age stories are the ones that just depict life in a way that's completely down-to-earth and thus relatable for the audience. For example, films like Lady Bird or Booksmart, which are enjoyable because of, among other things, how we can easily understand the drama at hand because of how realistically it's depicted and how well defined the characters are. Turning Red has all the attributes of a film like this, as it has very well realised and relatable characters and plays with very human themes. But, what it also has on top of that is a thoroughly unique and beautiful aesthetic with its animation, thus feeling more in line with a slice-of-life Studio Ghibli film such as Only Yesterday or Whisper of the Heart. Based on this, it could have easily been Pixar's equivalent of one of those films, which I would've loved because not only is it the sort of film I find a nice enjoyment in, but it'd also be a nice change of pace for them as a studio. 

However, all this is completely let down by the execution. Turning Red goes about conveying its themes with the implementation of fantastical plot elements, namely having its protagonist transforming into a giant red panda. This is frustrating because it strips the film of the down-to-earth, almost indie style it could've easily had and gives it a far more accessible, mainstream, and childish sensibility. This is made so much worse by the fact that there are individual moments throughout where it behaves as this superior type of film, whether it be Mei just chilling with her friends and getting excited about seeing their favourite band, or her father sitting down and having a heart-to-heart conversation with her. I loved those moments but their integrity is spoiled by the way the film is elsewhere.

I kind of have similar issues with Pixar's other recent films, Soul and Luca. Those also feel like very neat slice-of-life films augmented by silly fantastical nonsense, however, they don't suffer as much as Turning Red does. I find enjoyment in the creativity behind the way Soul's story is made more otherworldly, and it also deals with bigger and more novel themes overall, which makes it more praiseworthy. As for Luca, the fantastical stuff in that film doesn't weigh it down so much, as the fact that the main characters are sea monsters, despite always being an underlying fact, becomes a lesser focus in certain chunks of the film's narrative, allowing those parts to feel nice and down-to-earth. Here, the magical stuff is highly prominent and it doesn't help that the narrative is as predictable as the trailers made it seem. 

You might be asking what's wrong with a film having fantastical elements and using them to tell a story, and to be honest, there's not an awful lot that is. But here I certainly feel it was the wrong choice. Sure, it makes the story more understandable and more enjoyable for kids, but this film makes it clear that it's going for a slightly older audience than five-year-olds who want to see big red pandas jumping about. At age thirteen (the age of the protagonist), you start to feel a little uncomfortable and immature watching animated films, as the stigma is that they are for youngsters. With that in mind, if you're trying to appeal to that audience, why treat them like they're super young and enforce that stigma? I'm sure your average thirteen-year-old would enjoy watching characters experiencing relatable situations more than watching these situations get dumbed-down and made more childish. It's easy for me to say that as an eighteen-year-old but even I think I would've been deterred from watching this movie as a young teenager, outside of my love for Pixar.

But that's not where all my issues end, as this film also has a frankly obnoxious nature. It's so hyperactive and energetic to the point where I just found it downright cringeworthy and exhausting. The main character herself is just plainly irritating as well, and what's perhaps most bizarre is that it doesn't feel like she explicitly grows much as a character over the course of the narrative; the way she is at the start is hardly distinguishable from the way she is at the end, making the growth experienced feel so ill-defined.

My oh my that's a lot of negativity, is there anything good about this film? Well, yes, there certainly is. As mentioned, there are individual moments of genuine, human character interaction that I loved, and they kept me engaged while the film failed to do so elsewhere. Also, aside from Mei, I loved lots of the characters. Her friends were all awesome, especially Priya, whose extremely deadpan reactions to almost everything that happens was just delightful, and Abby, who feels like a character straight out of a Ghibli movie with a wonderfully expressive design and the appropriate amount of unbridled, naïve energy. Mei's Dad was also really enjoyable as he just felt like such an accurate depiction of a Dad, and I can't really explain why, he just does, and I love that. Additionally, the animation is wonderful as usual. The setting of Toronto is very well presented and the characters all have a terrific design with such a unique and memorable style. 

So, Turning Red has a lot going for it, and when watching it, I can detect all the attributes of a great film. It could've been Pixar's Only Yesterday or Whisper of the Heart, but the factors that would make it so are buried in a load of on the nose and childish nonsense. I can't say I'm that disappointed as my expectations were about as low as you could get, but seeing just how close it came to being something special and different for Pixar standards does make me kind of feel that way. It's not their worst film, I doubt they'll ever make anything worse than Brave or Cars 2, but it's definitive proof that, as a studio, they will always be restrained by a need to appeal to young children and have an overall mainstream nature, and this is becoming increasingly detrimental to their recent works. 

I'm going to give Turning Red a 6.0/10

Anyway, looking to the future, I'd say I'm still somewhat optimistic for Pixar. Lightyear, their second film this year, looks like it may actually break away from these restraints in some ways. Tonally, it looks more in line with a Marvel or Star Wars movie than something by Pixar; not necessarily adult or anything but also not directly for children. Also, it's a Buzz Lightyear origin story starring Chris Evans, how can it not be a banger? Let's wait and see, and let's also hope that it gets released in cinemas and not dumped onto Disney+ like all thier recent films.

The Batman - Movie Review - Another Batman, but unlike any we've seen before

When it comes to Batman in film, I'm rather unfamiliar. I've only seen the Nolan Dark Knight films, all of which are excellent, and The Lego Batman Movie, which is also great but for completely different reasons. I've never seen the original from 1966, the Tim Burton films, the Schumacher films, or the recent DCEU ones with Ben Affleck. Despite this, I love Batman nonetheless; he's definitely one of my favourite fictional characters of all time, even if I'm not especially adversed in the many adaptations of him. So, of course I was keen to see the next iteration of the character with Robert Pattinson. 

Even though I was keen to see this film, I had some concerns. From what I saw in the trailers, I couldn't help but get the sense that this film was going to just retread familiar ground in terms of themes and tone when it comes to Batman. There have been so many versions of this character and I was struggling to think of how they could possibly keep any new version fresh. But, it still looked absolutely spectacular, so I was hopeful it'd at least be a great film.

I frankly couldn't have been more wrong. The Batman is a thoroughly distinct take on the character in almost every way. Tonally, it's what people tend to refer to as 'dark and gritty'. This is also a term that defines the Nolan Batman movies, but I think the use of it in reference to those is somewhat misjudged. To me, those films are simply Batman films that take place in the real world; they're very grounded in reality in many areas. Here, while this also feels as if it takes place in reality, it is the epitome of the phrase 'dark and gritty' - it has extremely violent and brutal elements, and is visually almost always bleak. As a result, from a tonal standpoint, it doesn't feel repetitive compared to previous Batman films. 

The same can be said for many other aspects of the film. The genre doesn't really feel like a superhero film or even an action film, it's a mystery thriller, in the same vein as something like Se7en or Zodiac. It's basically a detective movie that just happens to feature Batman and some of his iconic foes and associates. Aesthetically, as already mentioned, it's very dreary, with an abundance of rain and minimal lighting, creating an excellent atmosphere for this type of story. The direction from Matt Reeves is also very distinct and extremely graceful. So much of the imagery in the film is so memorable. I can't discuss some of the specifics of these without getting into spoilers, but there are many images that perfectly scream hopefulness as well as terror, and they were just beautiful. Additionally, there's a car chase in the middle of the film that's admittedly fairly commonplace for the most part but reaches a catharsis that had me transfixed. I can safely say I won't be forgetting it any time soon. Most blatantly, the music is unlike any Batman score we've heard in the past. It's chilling yet exciting and nerve-racking, and also utterly memorable. It's amazing that, despite Batman being associated with so many iconic themes by a variety of artists, this new one manages to feel as definitive as it does.

The only area where I did feel like the film wasn't going anywhere especially new was in its themes. A lot of the thematic elements of the film touch upon similar ideas to the Dark Knight trilogy in terms of fear, corruption, and hope. They were all very well explored and given enough variation, but I did notice the familiarity here more so than with any other parts of the film.

As you will probably expect, the performances are terrific. Robert Pattinson was brilliant in the lead; much like every other aspect of the film, his version of Bruce Wayne is very unique. He's not the charming, suave, likeable billionaire we've seen before, he's solemn and almost sociopathic based on his mannerisms and interactions with other characters, which was refreshing to see. His version of Batman wasn't anything especially new but did certainly strike me as more intimidating than any previous verison. The opening scenes of him alone cemented this. Jeffrey Wright gives a solid performance as James Gordon (he's always great), and Andy Serkis was wonderful as Alfred, surprisingly so, but he was very underused unfortunately, though there is only so much you can do with that character I suppose. As for the villains, Paul Dano is genuinely terrifying as the Riddler, continuing to prove what a talented performer he is, and Colin Farrell gives an energetic and completely unrecognisable performance as Penguin. 

There aren't many major issues with the film, but the runtime certainly was one of them. I definitely felt I was sat watching the film for three hours, unlike many others who have claimed the film went by swiftly. While it didn't necessarily drag, it did occur to me that the plot seemed to be going on and on and that it might have benefitted from being truncated in some places. I like the nature of the film as a slow burn, so I don't think a faster pace would've been better, I just think chunks of the story where it somewhat goes in circles could've been omitted to create a tighter, more succinct film. Additionally, parts of the film were unfortunately just plainly dull, but there was always enough going on that was interesting to keep me engaged and keen to see what'd happen next. Regardless of this, the film manages to come to a perfect conclusion that leaves you both satisfied with what you have while also being desperate for more, just like the Nolan movies were each able to, and that was awesome. 

All things considered, The Batman was pretty damn great. I don't think I like it as much as the Nolan movies but its existence is undoubtedly justified through the masterfully distinct ways it reinterprets the caped crusader. I have a suspicion it'll improve the more I watch it as it does offer a lot and I don't think the single viewing I've had has allowed me to sufficiently comprehend each and every aspect. Just time spent reflecting on the film after watching it and writing this review has already elevated it in my head, so further viewings will likely do the same. If there is one more thing left to be said, it's that modern DC have cracked the code on making great movies - putting 'the' in the title. They did it with The Suicide Squad, and now with The Batman. Here's to more definite articles in DC movie titles.

I'm going to give The Batman an 8.0/10