shapet99

This film is a feast for the eyes and represents, at least my untrained eye, a real leap forward what we can get, and what we should expect, from big budget cartoon action. Visually this film is sumptuous, detailed, interesting, and technically magnificent. If it sounds like I'm gushing, it's because I am, at least in this specific way about the specific aspect of the movie. It seems like forever we've been relegated when it comes to cartoons to very basic children's fare, incredibly ambitious children's fare that in many ways is wasted on the audience, or or paint by numbers animation, following one of say five or six studio templates. Even as stories became more emotionally complex, the animation felt safe. This genuinely represents a new day, and I felt the way I felt anytime I've seen the very first application of a new entertainment technology.

And of course what makes all of that work is that the underlying film is worthy of this advancement, which I don't think was guaranteed considering this is quite obviously the middle entry in an already announced trilogy. That said, I don't believe the underlying film is necessarily better than the first. In fact I think the first was a better film than every way but the animation and direction. I will freely admit this is because I judge movies, even ones that are in the middlefield and a trilogy, by how well they stand alone if you took away their showiest element, and I think that this film would lose enough without its showiest element, that it would fall short of the original story, characterization, and emotional impact. I also don't think the film was served by stopping short mid story, as if they simply made a longer movie and split it in half with a razor vs. A true standalone movie, but that was their choice and even though I am including it in my critique, I am still reading this movie high and talking about how brilliant it is, so everything is relative.

Finally I think this film might have benefited from the Coco Chanel rule which was taking away the last thing they added. It really was a little over stuffed which I think might be a little overstimulating for some, particularly since this film is designed to appeal to all ages. But again, minor quibble.

I really appreciate what this film was attempting to do and how much of that it succeeded in doing. And, to get the central question off the table, Styles is quite good and impressed me with his ability to play the character he plays. I'd actually thought, from early descriptions of the two lead characters, that he'd play the other one. Without giving anything away, the other character seemed more like something aligned with Styles, but I respected very much that he played a character who was actually something different from him. It was nice to see and it remains nice to see how is career is developing.

Emma Corrin brings the same delicate, highbrow, yet appropriately soapy chops to the role here that she did playing Princess Diana in "The Crown," but the character isn't given enough dimension to allow her to make me feel the way she made me feel about Diana.

I think if you like the genre, the story, or Harry Styles, you'll like this film. And if you're a fan of the book, I don't think you'll be disappointed.