A Wrinkle in Time (2018)

[starri]

Well, I'm still going to see it, I think, but my expectations are tempered somewhat.

[JessePinkman]

Oh no. This movie was not...good. Or bad. But it was definitely there.

I don't know how to describe it. I don't understand so many of the choices here. There was this huge story to tell but it also felt like absolutely nothing happened. But a LOT happened! They went to different worlds, Oprah was a giant floaty person, Reese Witherspoon turned into a flying cabbage, Mindy Kaling spoke in quotes (even quoted Hamilton (the musical, not the dude), which I loved)!

My biggest issue with the movie was the overuse of CGI. Every environment once we left earth was this CGI weightless place that I could not connect with on any level. I'm not sure why they filmed in New Zealand if it never felt like they were in a real place. Everything felt so disconnected because almost every single background was dreamt up in a computer program. I'm not sure why some of these sets couldn't have been practical. Or why the characters even went to some of the places they did, they went from set piece to set piece and nothing happened. They met exactly one interesting character on their journey with the Mrs and no one else. It was like if Dorothy only met Glinda.

The makeup for the Mrs looked incredibly cheap. I can't believe someone stuck these dollar store stick on crystals on Oprah and thought it was okay. And the costumes honestly looked like the contestants on Drag Race got two more hours to finish their creations.

I started the book a few months ago in an effort to compare the book to the movie but I couldn't get very far into it because Meg is a miserable character. She was still miserable in this but not the 13 year old malcontent she was in the book.

The performances were uniformly good. Storm Reid and Chris Pine were phenomenal in their reunion, just really great. I could hear sniffling in the audience. I wish we could have seen more of Gugu Mbatu-Raw because she too was amazing in her reunion with Chris Pine. Clearly Ava can bring out great performances from her actors but the writing, direction (it felt like 90% close-ups, it was hard to get a sense of place when the camera was so focused on the actors face) and pacing just wasn't there for me.

[Browncoat]

I was underwhelmed.  It is possible that I am too familiar with the book (and adore it!) to have really enjoyed the movie, but I just couldn't. 

Main things I really didn't like:

1. Calvin should have RED HAIR!  Much is made in the book of his red hair.  It was terribly disappointing that he had ordinary brown hair.  Also, his backstory in the book was completely different than in the movie, and I think more effective.

2. Charles Wallace is 5 and does not go to school.  Wandering around while Meg and the twins are at school is how he met Mrs. Whatsit in the first place.

3. Where are the twins?  The Murrys have four children, none of whom were adopted.  I suppose I can live without the twins, but they are so unrelentingly normal compared with Meg and Charles Wallace, they provided a nice comparison/counterpoint.

4. Storm Reid is too cute.  Don't get me wrong, she's great, and does a great job, but no one in their right mind would believe she's plain.  Even though the cue for "plain" or "ugly" girl is glasses.  A tired trope that should be retired.

5. Why did they change the location?  The Murrys live in wild, stormy, semi-rural New England, not urban, placid Southern California. 

6. Giant! Oprah! Winfrey!  I get that she didn't want to appear as the character appears in the book (pretty much a witch, to go along with her name of Mrs. Which), but good grief.  I think she went a leeetle overboard.

7. Mrs, Whatsit changed to a centaur, not a flying lettuce leaf, and took the kids specifically to see the darkness spreading over the universe.

8. The IT looked like Ego's brain in Guardians of the Galaxy.

9. No Aunt Beast!  No giving Meg the clue to saving Charles Wallace.  Oh, and CW gave in to IT far too quickly, and also got away too easily.

10.  Mrs. Murry was a Microbiologist!  Not a Physicist (or whatever they made her for the movie).

11.  Camazotz, in the end, was disappointing.  No idea what the random beach scene was all about.

 

There were things I liked, believe it or not.  Storm Reid was amazing.  I agree @JessePinkman, that the reunion scene with her and Chris Pine was wonderful.  I would say that that was probably the best scene in the whole movie.  I also appreciated that they didn't have Mrs. Murry cooking dinner over a Bunsen burner in the lab.  That bit has bothered me about the book for decades.  Even back in the day when safety standards weren't as high, we didn't eat or drink in the lab.

I was okay with the characterizations of the Mrs. Ws.  They did need updating from the book.  I also liked the room the IT and CW had them trapped in, and how Meg figured out how to get to her father.  Not enough was made of her skills with math (and lack of skills at pretty much everything else).  Man, even when I'm trying to compliment the movie, it comes out negative!  I didn't hate it, I promise!  And I could recommend it to someone who's never read the book, but for a fan, it wasn't the best ever.  Oh!  I did like the Happy Medium!  But I still missed Aunt Beast.

Maybe after thinking about it a bit, I can come up with some other things I liked, but that's about it for now.  Yep, definitely underwhelmed.

[Constant Viewer]

3 hours ago, Browncoat said:

And I could recommend it to someone who's never read the book, but for a fan, it wasn't the best ever.  Oh!  I did like the Happy Medium!  But I still missed Aunt Beast.

I was afraid it might turn out like this. The previews looked a little too flashy

I had a feeling they would cut out Aunt Beast. 

[wanderingstar]

Saw this tonight, and I really liked it. I read the book ages ago and remember it being very different (I mostly remember it being much darker). Basically, I had to treat this film as entirely different from the book. That let me enjoy this film adaptation.

• Visually, I found this stunning. I marveled at the costumes and effects (I'm so easy that way-lol)
• Loved Deric McCabe as Charles Wallace. I thought he stole the movie.
• Also really liked Storm Reid as Meg. In fact, I thought the whole cast was great

Overall, I loved this film.

[BoogieBurns]

Never read the book, or if I did, I do not remember. 

Loved the movie. There were a couple things that made me so happy, mostly because little girls and boys can benefit from the movie's message:

1) Mrs. Which first appears and Charles Wallace says "you're the wrong size!" and she asks how someone can be the wrong size. Mrs. Whatsit says "any size is perfect" (or something like that) Hashtag body positivity

2) Mrs. Who only speaking in quotes, one of them being Lin Manuel Miranda

3) The main message of the movie -- your faults are what make you special. They are your super powers. Being you isn't an accident. A million things happened for you to be right here right now. I cried happy tears a lot.

[Silver Raven]

I was underwhelmed.  It was pretty as heck, and the design people should get reward nominations, but it's underwhelming, story-wise, and everything wrapped up too patly.

Edited March 11, 2018 by Silver Raven

[Silver Raven]

1 hour ago, Gillian Rosh said:

Loved Deric McCabe as Charles Wallace. I thought he stole the movie.

Totally agree.

[Black Knight]

A friend and I saw it today. The only thing she remembered from the book, going in, was the definition of a tesseract, while I remember more the general sense of the book than specific details. I read it many times as a child, then re-read it a few years ago, and at that point it felt quite dated.

Probably not coincidentally, we both liked the movie. We didn't love it, because it felt more like a kid's movie, but we agreed that was okay. I definitely feel the movie was made for the children of today, with the assumption that they mostly won't have read the book. And that's fine. I don't think a faithful adaptation would work now. In that light, it was well-done and I'm thrilled for today's children who will grow up with this as a cultural touchstone for their generation, as the book was for my generation and others. There were a lot of enthusiastic children in our theater after the lights came up.

We both loved how the concept of the tesseract was explained visually, enabling them to avoid the info dump - a perfect example of showing rather than telling.

Seconding Gillian Rosh on the praise for Deric McCabe. The casting was strong across the board, but Charles Wallace is such a tricky character because it's so easy for him to be annoying, and he shouldn't be annoying until IT gets hold of him. Thanks to the casting of McCabe, and the choices made by Ava duVernay, the movie walks this line perfectly.

[phalange]

For some reason, I never read the book as a kid, but I did finally read it a couple months ago so it was fresh in my mind when I saw it tonight. I really enjoyed it, and the changes made, like having the Murrays live in California or not having the other two siblings, didn't bother me. The only thing that wasn't in the movie that I wish had been is Aunt Beast because I was curious what she would look like and I really enjoyed those scenes in the book.

Camazotz was appropriately creepy with the identical houses and the kids "playing" in the driveway. I assume the scene on the beach with the picnic was supposed to take the place of the scene in the book when the kids are offered a Thanksgiving dinner. I like how Meg used her excellent math skills to find her father, and their reunion was really well done by Storm Reid and Chris Pine. Mrs. Who, Mrs. Which, and Mrs. Whatsit were fun, and I'm always here for a good Hamilton reference. "Tomorrow there'll be more of us. Miranda, American."

At the end, our theater applauded, and the kids there (and there were a lot) seemed to enjoy it.

[angora]

I saw it this afternoon and am still trying to sort out my feelings.  It's definitely not all I wanted it to be, both as an enormous fan of the book (I may or may not have dressed up as Meg Murry for a Favorite Character Day in elementary school) and as someone who got progressively more intrigued the more I heard about the film (racially diverse Murrys!  Totally unexpected but fascinating Mrs. Ws casting!  Zach Galifinakis as the Happy Medium!)  I'm well aware that it would've been hard for any film to live up to my dreams for it, but it was still kind of rocky.  Despite being a much more faithful adaptation of the book than I would've expected, given the sci-fantasy action emphasis in the trailers, film felt somehow overwritten and underwritten at the same time.  Overwritten in the way it drilled in its messages - I lost count of how many times someone put their hands on Meg's shoulders and gave her an earnest heart-to-heart in close-up - and underwritten in the way it too often seemed that important things happened and I didn't feel much of anything about them.

Most of the specific changes I either like well enough or was indifferent to.  I liked the way they expanded on Meg using Mrs. Who's glasses to find Mr. Murry, I really liked the scene where Mrs. Which was showing them how IT affects the hearts of people on Earth (though I would've preferred to focus on Calvin's mom instead of his dad,) and I appreciate the flashbacks of Mr. Murry with both Meg and Mrs. Murry.  The brief scenes where the production team went, "Oh crap, there are no action scenes in this book!  Quick, let's make Meg and Calvin run from uprooting trees!" were goofy, but again, brief.  The different angle they took with Camazotz was kind of interesting, the way things continually shifted to try and keep the kids off-balance, but I liked its depiction in the book quite a bit better, and I thought the creepy kids bouncing balls in unison were more effective than anything the film invented for Camazotz.  That said, having the Man with the Red Eyes be less blatantly evil and more of an ingratiating tempter was interesting, and I liked the look of being inside IT for the final showdown instead of Meg just standing in front of a giant quivering brain on a table.

There was some great design work here.  I loved iconic shots like seeing Meg's attic bedroom, and that first shot of Mrs. Who in the Mrs. Ws' house took my breath away, everything looked so gorgeous.  The CGI was mostly just okay, but I adored the beautiful scene of Meg tessering at the end, how soft and beautiful it was compared to how frenzied and violent her earlier tessering experiences had been.

And regardless of whatever disappointments there are for me, I think it succeeds with the characters, who pretty much all feel very true to the book (although I would've liked more about how smart Calvin is, and they obviously weren't trying to make Mr. Jenkins anything like his book counterpart.)  That was my absolute deal-breaker with the film, and on that score, at least, I think it holds up.  My favorites:

• Storm Reid's Meg doesn't fly off the handle as much as book!Meg, but this character is captured wonderfully:  the intelligence, the pain, the stubbornness, the discomfort in her own skin, the anger, the love that drives her.  I needed Meg Murry so much when I was young, and I'm glad that girls will have this one to relate to on days when being them feels hard.
• I echo the love for Deric McCabe as Charles Wallace.  He (and the film) hit on Charles Wallace's key combination of traits.  Charles Wallace is brilliant and almost preposterously precocious, but he's also very much a little boy, and you have to balance all that within the character.  So impressed with McCabe for hitting just the right notes.
• Far and away, my favorite of the Mrs. Ws was Mindy Kaling as Mrs. Who.  I liked the mix of classic and new quotes for her, and I love how she augmented her words with evocative gestures and elaborate handshakes with Calvin (adorable!)  I just loved her from top to bottom.
• Mrs. Whatsit feels a little shortchanged here compared to the book, where she was definitely the most prominent of the Mrs. Ws (and I do miss seeing her disguised as a tramp,) but I think Reese Witherspoon captured her basic essence, bubbly and effervescent but also blunt and kind of casually rude.  I grinned at the stolen bedsheet-dress.
• Chris Pine was great as Mr. Murry.  I agree with posters who've said that his reunion scene with Meg is a highlight of the film.  Gugu Mbatha-Raw didn't have too much to do, but she did well enough to make me want more of her.
• I really liked Zach Galifinakis as the Happy Medium.  Though a different take than in the book (overall, not just in gender,) he makes for a nice balance of delightfully offbeat and very warm.

[Bill1978]

I think I will be disappointed when I see the movie cause it isn't The Phantom Tollbooth. Which for some reason, my memory always thinks A Wrinkle In Time is The Phantom Tollbooth. I think I tried to read A Wrinkle in Time but never got into it. Maybe this movie will be a way to appreciate the book. Kinda like how The Lord of the Rings movie helped me read the books.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

Storm Reid discusses A Wrinkle in Time:

[proserpina65]

Thanks everyone for posting your reviews.  I think I can safely say that my worst fears were confirmed, and I will not be spending my hard-earned money on the movie.

[Zoe]

On 3/10/2018 at 11:53 PM, angora said:

though I would've preferred to focus on Calvin's mom instead of his dad,

They neutered his role and took away his white trash background. I don't think they would have done anything remotely resembling Mrs O'Keefe.

[Browncoat]

On 3/11/2018 at 12:53 AM, angora said:

Far and away, my favorite of the Mrs. Ws was Mindy Kaling as Mrs. Who.  I liked the mix of classic and new quotes for her, and I love how she augmented her words with evocative gestures and elaborate handshakes with Calvin (adorable!)  I just loved her from top to bottom.

She definitely was one of the high points, until she started awkwardly running through the field in that dress.  It was a nice dress for standing around, not so much for running.

[ElectricBoogaloo]

3 hours ago, Browncoat said:

She definitely was one of the high points, until she started awkwardly running through the field in that dress.  It was a nice dress for standing around, not so much for running.

When I saw that scene in the trailer, I was already hearing a voiceover from Mindy along the lines of “Who the hell decided I should wear this dress to run through a field?”

[wanderingstar]

Storm Reid and Deric McCabe were so good as Meg and Charles Wallace. I loved the sibling bond they portrayed, and McCabe was especially good when CW was overtaken by The It.

[Zoe]

17 hours ago, doram said:

I do hope this movie does well enough for Disney to greenlit the entire franchise of books. 

That's unlikely to happen. They completely changed or outright excised characters essential to the sequels. The following books also lean harder and harder into the Christian themes which were stripped from this movie.

[BoogieBurns]

Many times during the film I thought Zendaya had time traveled and became Meg. They really favor each other a lot. Which makes it a little harder to believe this girl was ostracized at school. But, I played along. Being 13 (or however old) is awkward for everyone, even pretty girls.

[DrSpaceman73]

On ‎3‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 4:53 PM, BoogieBurns said:

Many times during the film I thought Zendaya had time traveled and became Meg. They really favor each other a lot. Which makes it a little harder to believe this girl was ostracized at school. But, I played along. Being 13 (or however old) is awkward for everyone, even pretty girls.

I didn't know who the lead was and kept wondering how Zendaya looks so young again.  But in general I was not as taken with Storm Reid's acting than most seem to have been.  Like most of the film, I found her Ok, not bad, but nothing I would describe as memorable. 

I saw the movie yesterday and found it all very underwhelming.  It wasn't a bad film, but for such a classic story I found myself surprisingly detached and uninvolved during the whole movie. 

It seemed to be like the writers were just trying WAY too hard to make the script all about diversity and female empowerment and every other hashtag social media concept they could throw in when in fact, they didn't have to try that hard if they just stayed true to the book in the first place. 

It came off as a bit cheesy and overdone to me. 

Honestly the most interested and excited I became during the movie was when John Wallace was captured and became evil.  Up to then I found the whole thing rather ho hum. 

[Christi]

Why make it if you are going to completely change the story?

What a farce?

[Bruinsfan]

It's been a while since I read the novel, but excising the part with Aunt Beast and the repeated injunctions to "be a warrior" were the only big missteps IMHO. And at least when it actually came time to show Meg fighting against the Darkness, they revealed that she was doing it by meeting hatred and hostility with love. I think that message could have been voiced a bit more explicitly before the big finish, though, at least by the Mrs.

I also wondered how Mr. Murray could be dumb enough to think that a wild-eyed rant about traveling across the universe by the power of one's mind alone wouldn't make him look like a lunatic in front of the assembled crowd. He had to deal with public speaking and other people's responses to his work to earn a doctorate in the first place, didn't he?

But overall, I thought all the performances were marvelous, and they hit the absolute jackpot in child actor casting. Despite Stormy Reid looking nothing like my longtime mental image of the character, she WAS Meg within moments of appearing onscreen. And I don't think it would have been possible to get a child actor better suited for Charles Wallace than Eric McCabe.

[satrunrose]

I was ok without Aunt Beast. I love the character, but even in the book, it derails the suspense a bit. That's not a huge deal in print, especially when it introduces a great character and deals with the relationship between Meg and her dad. In a movie, I think if it was going to happen at all, it probably should have been before they went to Camatoz. 

 

Anyway, I liked the movie. I missed Calvin's red hair more than I expected to, but my biggest meh was that some of the big moments (Charles Wallace being taken over by IT and Meg getting to her Dad's prison) just felt too easy. I mean, if I could make kids do what I want by reciting 4 bits of the times table, my life would be a lot easier. 

[tennisgurl]

I went into this with some lowered expectation after readings some mixed reviews...but I actually liked it more than I feared I would. I mean, its not as deep and out there as a the book, and there are tons of things that were changed that didn't really make sense, and some of the story beats seemed pretty rushed (but I remember thinking that about the book too, so what do I know?), but I still thought it had the heart of the book, and it understood WHY the book was a classic. 

There were things I wish had stuck around, like spending more time on the creepy step ford vibe in Camazotz, more of Calvin's backstory (and how he likes being around the Murreys because his actual family is so awful, which they just hint at), Charles Wallace's and Megs twin brothers, and, of course, Ixchel and Aunt Beast, who are some of the best characters in the book. I mean, I get why those things were cut or paired down, as a movie just cant fit as much stuff into it as a book, but it still sucked that we lost those on the big screen. I really wanted to see what they did with Aunt Beast, and I have always always loved the concept of these super scary aliens that are actually the nicest people ever. 

That being said, I did enjoy quite a few things, including some changes. I actually really liked Mrs. Who and her speaking all in quotes, much more than I thought I would. Its weird, but I thought it was weird in a way the book could be, and I also thought her little friendship with Calvin was super cute, and very in keeping with his character. Meg is the prickly oddball math genius, and Calvin is the charismatic, people loving humanities kid. I thought they did a decent job at that dynamic. Zach Galifinakis as the Happy Medium was super weird casting, but ended up being a highlight. I also liked Meg using the glasses to help find Mr. Murrey, and I thought that IT being a giant brain worked better for a movie than IT from the book. I mean, IT in the book is super scary and all, but on screen...its a big brain in a jar. Not super exciting, and could come off as a bit silly to a modern audience. I also liked getting some flashbacks to the family before Mr. Murrey disappeared, so we could see a bit more of the dynamics. 

The acting in general was great, Storm Reid and Deric McCabe, and I continue to adore Chris Pine lately. Also, just as I said when the trailers came out, Chris Pine is a serious DILF. Nice. 

[Notwisconsin]

The filmmakers have destroyed any chance of a sequel or the entire quintet.

Edited March 30, 2018 by Notwisconsin

[BetterButter]

[Apprentice79]

On ‎3‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 8:05 PM, Notwisconsin said:

The filmmakers have destroyed any chance of a sequel or the entire quintet.

 

What went wrong? was it Black Panther that blew it out of the water or was it just a bad movie?

[Notwisconsin]

34 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

What went wrong? was it Black Panther that blew it out of the water or was it just a bad movie?

The book series was about a family. Two kids were omitted from the film, the religious aspect was removed, and the two main characters were full siblings, not adopted. The fact that it was a family of six and not four, destroyed important plot points for the next four books.

[JessePinkman]

2 hours ago, Apprentice79 said:

What went wrong? was it Black Panther that blew it out of the water or was it just a bad movie?

It was very slow and kind of depressing for a kid's movie. Meg, the protagonist, was the most malcontent lead I've seen in a long time and her mood didn't change until the last 15 minutes of the movie.

Plus it was just plain weird. And the story sort of just sat there as it jumped from plot point to plot point. There was no real flow to the movie.

[Spartan Girl]

I watched it on Netflix. I read the book back when I was a kid and I was not a fan -- but this was okay. It was like a glitter bomb funhouse. Plus, the kids were cute and Oprah, Reese, and Mindy looked gorgeous.

[raven]

On 6/5/2018 at 4:36 PM, JessePinkman said:

And the story sort of just sat there as it jumped from plot point to plot point. There was no real flow to the movie.

I agree with this.  I love the book and after reading all of the reviews tried to watch the movie without comparing it to the book.  It did feel choppy.

Things I liked - the Murray house felt homey and lived in; all the kids were good, with Storm Reid being a stand out for me.  I thought Reese Witherspoon was miscast at first but she grew on me.  Mindy Kaling was my favorite of the the three and I really disliked the Oprah effects.  It was distracting to have her be so giant and the gems on her face looked like cheap tack ons.  Oprah can do grave and warm and wise but Mrs. Which is also supposed to be somewhat intimidating (oops, book comparison) and there wasn't really any of that. 

I disliked the makeup on Reese Witherspoon also and I didn't like the odd shaped costumes.  The movie was really kid friendly IMO; too much CGI, which is a peeve of mine anyway.    The trippy visuals didn't work for me.

I've read comments that the book is hard to adapt but IMO it's a fairly straightforward message about striving for your best, accepting yourself and choosing love over hate.  The movie did carry these themes, which I appreciated, though it sped by everything too quickly. 

Book Meg has a great line while trying to save Charles Wallace - IT says that everyone is alike, everyone is happy and Meg responds that "like and equal are not the same thing".  IT's great evil is trying to get everyone to think alike and viciously punishing anyone who doesn't conform; in the book one of the Camazotz children doesn't bounce in rhythm and Meg, CW and Calvin see the boy later, in some kind of conditioning containment, bouncing the ball and screaming.

I would have appreciated these themes being explored a bit more but like I said, the move seemed geared for a younger audience. 

[Enero]

On 9/30/2018 at 11:14 AM, Spartan Girl said:

I watched it on Netflix. I read the book back when I was a kid and I was not a fan -- but this was okay. It was like a glitter bomb funhouse. Plus, the kids were cute and Oprah, Reese, and Mindy looked gorgeous.

I never read the books. Didn’t even know books existed for this movie until it came out. 

I love a good fantasy kids movie. I enjoyed the look of it and all the characters. Storm Reid was pretty good. I completely understood why Meg was no Pollyanna. Her father literally disappeared into thin air and had been gone for four years. That had a profound affect on her and not in a good way. Deric McCabe was cute and believable as the younger brother and Calvin was very easy on the eyes. Levi Miller’s looks alone should take him far. LOL. He’s very pretty and he does mesmerized and  potentially in love very well. Lol  

Anyway, the costumes were beautiful, really liked all the Misses makeup and personalities. It was fun, up until the IT entered the picture. I know IT was a key part of the books but to me that’s where the movie went off the rails. I’m guessing they just didn’t do a good job translating the entity from the books to onscreen. I would’ve been fine with it being an adventure movie with the kids looking for Dr. Murray and while doing so running into some fantastical obstacles rather than this theme of darkness taking over the universe. I couldn’t have cared less about the last 30 minutes of the movie because it was all about the IT, which was disappointing after such a strong start.