Film Reviews

The Garfield Movie
Director: Mark Dindal 

Alcon Entertainment and DNEG Animation
In Theaters: 05. 24

As a kid growing up in the early ‘80s, there was little that got me giggling harder than a Garfield comic strip. While most of them don’t necessarily hold up very well as an adult, I still have a fondness for the orange tabby,  and it brings back a strong nostalgia for childhood. The Garfield Movie didn’t have to be a great film to win me over. It just had to live up to its title.

As the movie begins, we meet young Garfield as a cuddly kitten on a dark, rainy night. Garfield’s father, Vic (voiced by Samuel L Jackson, Pulp Fiction) leaves him at a shelter, promising to return. Cold, scared and hungry, Garfield waits and waits, until he sees a human, Jon Arbuckle (Nicholas Hoult, Mad Max: Fury Road, The Great) dining alone in an Italian restaurant. The two bond, and Jon adopts Garfield. Years later, Jon’s dog Odie, runs into Vic, who needs his son’s help to get him out of hot water with his vengeful ex-girlfriend, a cat named Jinx (Hannah Waddingham, Ted Lasso, The Fall Guy), who used to be in gang with Vic until a dairy heist went wrong and she was sent to the pound, while Vic escaped, leaving her behind. To settle his debt, Vic must complete the original mission: steal thousands of milk bottles from a dairy called Lactose Farms. Garfield, Vic, and Odie must infiltrate the heavily guarded location. Their only ally is Otto (Ving Rhames, Mission: Impossible), a bull who was on the face of Lactose Farms, along with the love of his life, a cow named Ethel, until they were separated. The menagerie of animals must work together, and father and son must learn to trust one another gain, if this high stakes mission is going to succeed.

It’s understandable that the makers of The Garfield Movie felt that they needed to have a plot that kept audiences engaged, and that making a good movie was more important to them than taking a purist approach to the material. The plot certainly didn’t need to be nearly this convoluted, however, and it’s shamelessly derivative of Chicken Run and is hard to escape, right down to the character design of Marge, an animal control officer voiced by Saturday Night Live’s Cecily Strong. In general, the design is all over the place, with Garfield, Jon, and Odie following the look established by Jim Davis, the original cartoonist, but many of the other characters look like they have just been pulled from various mismatched existing movies. If you’re going in as a fan, be prepared that for the most part, The Garfield Movie is so far from getting the basic attitude of the lead character or the simple dynamic that it feels like a peripheral connection to the source material at best. All of this would be more easily forgivable if it was a lot more entertaining, but sadly, it falls flat more often than not. There’s a certain amount of physical comedy that may appeal to kids, but the sly, cynical sarcasm of the title character has largely been neutered. The narcissistic edge is kept carefully in check, and is completely gone from his interactions with Jon and Odie, the heart of the original material. The feline villains and Vic’s past as a thief suggests that the screenwriters got Garfield and Heathcliff confused and didn’t bother to do enough research to correct the error, and very little of this plot thread works at all. The film really only succeeds on any tangible level when it’s milking the relationships between Garfield and his two dads, the absentee father Vic, and the adoptive father, Jon, for emotional warm fuzzies. The final action sequence aboard a train is fast moving and fun, if completely out of place. 

Much has been made out of the casting of Chris Pratt as Garfield, and while it’s not ideal casting, he does a capable enough job, and the shortcomings in the portrayal of the character can’t be blamed on him. Jackson is energetic as Vic, and the two try to inject some heart into the proceedings despite a lack of chemistry. Hoult is trying too hard to do a goofy cartoon voice as Jon, and while Rhames does have one of the most memorable voices in the movies, the character of Otto simply never clicked for me. The rest of the voice cast isn’t even worth mentioning, with the villain characters being so annoying and out of place that even the presence of talented voice actors couldn’t make me enjoy them.

The Garfield Movie gets some mileage out of moments of cuteness, and enough manic energy to keep kids watching, particularly in the second half. In terms of keeping parents – the ones who are more likely to be attached to Garfield as an intellectual property – engaged, this is a bit of a slog, and I’d recommend it only as a discount night family excursion, or something to wait and let the kids watch on video. –Patrick Gibbs

Read More Movie Reviews For The Kiddies:
IF
Kung Fu Panda 4 

3/5 stars

No Such Person is a rarity in Hong Kong cinema nowadays: a low-budget, purely commercial production with a no-name ensemble cast and minimal artistic flair whose producers nevertheless believe it can attract an audience with its attentive storytelling.

The film opens with a brief scene in which two people, purporting to be church officials, take over a vacant space in an old tenement building. It then jumps nine months ahead to follow young woman Amber (Kaylee Yu Hoi-ki) as she begins renting a furnished room in a property owned by Ray (Terry Zou Wenzheng), who claims to be a veterinary surgeon.

In the next scene, police are notifying the parents of a woman whose body has been found under a cliff along a hiking trail in a Hong Kong country park.

And then we’re back to learn more about those occupying the rooms next to Amber’s: Sisi (Winnie Chan Wing-nei), a live-streamer who produces sexually charged content for her audience; Ming (Himmy Wong Ting-him), a stock market speculator in deep financial trouble; and Ping (May Leong Cheok-mei), a creepy old lady who sells second-hand items on the streets.

From there, No Such Person gradually reveals the predicament of Amber, a former yoga teacher who appears to be in some emotional distress; the mystery surrounding Ray’s premises and the characters’ ulterior motives provide much of the intrigue.

Despite the film being set in a subdivided flat – a mainstay of Hong Kong social realist dramas – and having as its subject matter the prevalent social phenomenon of identity theft scams, Sun and his screenwriter Chen Hang have no ambitions beyond serving up a modest slice of B-movie entertainment.

Their film drip-feeds just enough information to keep the viewer engaged, before an escalation in the final act reveals the ungodly nature of the whole enterprise.

Even then, the visual depictions of sex and gore remain tame – which is probably more a reflection of the production’s limited scale than of a penchant for restraint on the part of Sun.

Its story is not as clever as the filmmakers intend it to be, and the sleazy nature of its revelations betrays Sun’s roots as a director and producer of erotic movies. Yet No Such Person is diverting enough for those who watch it with an open mind.

At the risk of damning it with faint praise, the film feels different from most Hong Kong productions we’re getting to see these days – and that does make No Such Person a welcome addition to the canon in spite of its many flaws.

Sight, 2024.

Directed by Andrew Hyatt.
Starring Terry Chen, Greg Kinnear, Fionnula Flanagan, Wai Ching Ho, Raymond Ma, Ben Wang, Jayden Zhang, Donald Heng, Jennifer Juniper Angeli, Natalie Skye, Danni Wang, Natasha Mumba, Mia SwamiNathan, Esabella Anna Karena Strickland, Sky Kao, Ken Godmere, Corey Turner, Jeffrey Pai, Sara Ye, Kenneth Liu, Ryan Cowie, Tara Burnett, Aidan Wang, Peter Anderson, Peter Chan, Kelvin Luo, and Garland Chang.

SYNOPSIS:

When a blind orphan arrives in his waiting room seeking a miracle, a world-renowned eye surgeon must confront his past and draw on the resilience he gained growing up in China during the Cultural Revolution to try to restore her sight.

Well-intentioned but clunkily structured and edited (the film doesn’t necessarily have an ending but rather an abrupt fade and transition into one of the usual Angel studio pay-it-forward advertisements), Sight tells a story about how the past and present inform one another, yet is so sprawling in its attempt to do so that nearly every section comes across as streamlined, forced, corny, and overly cloying. 

There’s too much ground to cover in 100 minutes, so every plot point, whether it be a look at the Cultural Revolution in 1970s China and survivor’s guilt of not fulfilling a promise, a breakthrough in curing blindness, the personal life of renowned eye surgeon Dr. Ming Wang (an expressive, affecting performance from Terry Chen) who found success in America, out of place comedic anecdotes involving his family, a puzzling disinterest in characterizing young orphaned Indian girl Kajal (Mia SwamiNathan) inspirational to his life who was blinded at the hands of her mother pouring sulfuric acid to make life more sympathetic as a street beggar (that’s a whole movie right there begging to be made), or some weak third act love interest material with a bartender, director Andrew Hyatt (co-writing the screenplay alongside John Duigan and Buzz McLaughlin, based on the autobiography of that trailblazing doctor) ends up with stale, unimpressionable Wikipedia style filmmaking that would somehow put similar fare to shame.

The more is more approach to storytelling prevents the film from ever settling into a moment or rhythm, meaning the intended emotional punches never hit. Admittedly, there are serviceable performances and the heartwarming true story factor. However, even that is undercut during the ending credits, which makes the usual biopic choice to insert some pictures and footage showcasing bits and pieces of the events that unfolded; it’s moving and suggests that the stronger route might have been through making a documentary.

Stylistic choices, such as having Dr. Ming Wang hallucinating haunting visions of his past as if egging him on to not give up on the children and to keep at it making headway on scientific breakthroughs, feel awkward in a grounded film such as this. The real story doesn’t need that kind of hokey, dramatic elevation; it would be compelling if the filmmakers figured out what to focus on. One portion is a mildly interesting look at scientific trial and error with Dr. Ming Wang experimenting alongside his trusted associate Dr. Misha Bartnovsky (a reliable Greg Kinnear, supportive and amusing); another is a baffling sitcom complete with a bumbling brother failing at entrepreneurship, and then there is a small slice of showing how the good doctor met his eventual wife (lovely, but hardly necessary here), all while flashbacks are rapidly unfolding without a chance to settle into a place and time.

Meanwhile, one wonders how Sight would have turned out if it actually played up the connection between the blind patient and the metaphorically blind doctor, uncertain of how to move forward in his future rather than moving it as something to spell out during the last 10 minutes. It’s reductive that the filmmakers only see Kajal as a source of inspiration, not a fully fleshed-out person, a trope that has plagued disability-centric stories for ages. Likewise, the exploration of Communist China is also surface level and deserving of stronger treatment. Essentially, Sight lacks cohesive vision.

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★

Robert Kojder is a member of the Chicago Film Critics Association and the Critics Choice Association. He is also the Flickering Myth Reviews Editor. Check here for new reviews, follow my Twitter or Letterboxd, or email me at MetalGearSolid719@gmail.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist