Skip to main content

Uncle loves Google.

Beautiful Creatures
(2013)

Another week, another failed Young Adult adaptation. This one floundered on its release about this time last year and it’s easy to see why. Possessed of the Southern flavour flaunted by True Blood, but without the libido, Beautiful Creatures is entirely mechanical in its construction of a supernatural world where teenagers both mortal and immortal (see Twilight) interact in a post-Whedon landscape of chosen ones and dark destinies. Richard La Gravenese, who made a splash early in his career with The Fisher King for Terry Gilliam, does his best on scripting and megaphone duties, but he’s unable to wring out anything very memorable.


The movie starts reasonably well though, and unlike many a YA picture, La Gravenese has managed to attract a supporting cast of colourful thesps who, when they’re occasionally granted a scene to themselves (as is more common during the first half) dispel the overpowering odour of the rather insipid love story. That’s not to diminish the leads. Both Aldren Ehrenreich (as mortal Ethan) and Alice Englert (as nearly-come-of-age caster – read witch – Lena) are much more skilled and vital than most of their corresponding YA protagonists.


The scenario is all-too familiar; boy wants to leave small town, meets strange and mysterious girl, they fall for each other but their love is forbidden and dangerous. As such, the mystery of the set up of is much more engaging before we’ve found out who is who and what is what. The intimations of possible past incarnations during the American Civil War is an intriguing one, but unfortunately is revealed to be (relatively) mundane. Indeed, the whole back-story of the Macons’ (Lean’s family) ownership of the town of Gatlin is under-explored. And, when the entire family are introduced, it’s something akin to The Addams Family meets Twilight. But not nearly as twisted as that sounds.


So thank heavens for Jeremy Irons, digging into a southern drawl as if there’s a serious ham shortage looming. As Lena’s Uncle Macon Ravenwood he gets all the best lines, dripping with sardonic superiority (“A voice of reason in a town of buttermilk minds” Macon says of Ethan’s mother). When he bewitches Ethan into reeling off a particularly depressing future life map, which ends with “And when I’m 64 I’ll hang myself”, Macon congratulates him; “You’ve got it all planned out. Good for you”. Indeed, early scenes such as this briefly fooled me into thinking Beautiful Creatures might be a genuinely sharp and witty tale throughout. Ehrenreich deftly shows off his comedic skills during a fractious dinner invitation to the Ravenwood residence; alas it descends into subpar CGI, but there’s a some vibrancy and fun there for a while. 


I had hopes for Emma Thompson’s dual duties as Bible-bashing Mavis and fearsome sister of Macon Sarafine (there’s a curse on the females in the family such that they turn to the dark side, you see), but La Gravenese doesn’t offer her nearly enough naughtiness (there was surely plenty of potential for Witches of Eastwick-esque antics with a pillar of the community possessed by infernal forces).


I should also single out Emmy Rossum, who not only looks delicious as Lena’s black-hearted cousin and former best chum Ridley but enters the scene with the energy and confidence that suggests she will steal the picture from the leads and her elder supporting co-stars. Unfortunately that’s not to be, as Ridley has to make room for Sarafine and is all but forgotten. I haven’t been watching the US version of Shameless, so I can’t speak for her performance there, but if nothing else Beautiful Creatures ought to be an effective calling card for bigger and better feature roles.


The Christianity versus the old religion subplot is so overused these days it’s not funny; I think we’re all aware by now how the ones purportedly teaching forgiveness are really the intolerant ones and those practicing the black arts are just misunderstood. That’s the chief problem here; co-authors (of the novel) Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl seem to have taken the teen fiction writers’ guide (mean kids at school, just the one who really understands the misfit, abundant obstacles to true love winning through), grafted on the South Carolina setting, and ensured every hoary old cliché of both is present and correct. 


There are tiresomely obvious speeches about how immortals admire humans for never giving up (this is the Spock/Gandalf school of bigging up the little people) and teenage admonishments of how everyone has to deal with shit; the special are nothing special in that regard. Viola Davis, possibly intended to take on the Giles role from Buffy, unfortunately ends up fulfilling just the latest in the dubious tradition of “Magical Negro” supporting characters. Such predictability doesn’t appear to have affected the series’ sales (four have been published so far), but it seems cinema audiences are less forgiving.


The biggest problem with Beautiful Creatures is that the middle section gets irretrievably bogged down in Lena’s search for a spell to break her curse. Which entails moping about a library (a nicely rendered library, but a library nonetheless) for what seems like an eternity. Once the momentum has gone from storytelling La Gravenese can’t reignite it, and even a rather decent twist I didn’t see coming can’t make-up for the descent into tedium the picture takes.


La Gravenese, aided by frequent Tim Burton cinematographer Philippe Rousselot, ensures the picture at least looks lush (the effects budget frequently can’t match the ambition, however), and the design is effective; the Ravenwood mansion evidently had a fair bit spent on it (nice stairs). As writer, he also sprinkles on an array of literary and pop culture references; not as fastidiously as Whedon is wont to, but I liked the addition of the “e” in Finale Destination 6.


Of course, everyone involved was hopefully this would be the next big thing so the picture ends with an eye towards the next instalment. I guess at one mighty argue that, however horrible Twilight mostly was, it did pull some genuine weirdness in its last episode(s). I doubt that anything unpredictable was in store for Beautiful Creatures. I keep wanting to call it Heavenly Creatures, which makes for highly unflattering comparisons. Full marks for imaginative casting then, but La Gravenese needed to throw half the novel out of the window if the was going to make it work on screen.


**1/2

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

I still think it’s a terrible play, but it makes a wonderful rehearsal.

Room Service (1938)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers step away from MGM for a solitary RKO outing, and a scarcely disguised adaption of a play to boot. Room Service lacks the requisite sense of anarchy and inventiveness of their better (earlier) pictures – even Groucho’s name, Gordon Miller, is disappointingly everyday – but it’s nevertheless an inoffensive time passer.

This better not be some 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea shit, man.

Underwater (2020)
(SPOILERS) There’s no shame in a quality B-movie, or in an Alien rip-off done well. But it’s nevertheless going to need that something extra to make it truly memorable in its own right. Underwater, despite being scuppered at the box office, is an entirely respectable entry in both those arenas from director William Eubank, but like the recent Life (which, in fairness, had an ending that very nearly elevated it to the truly memorable), it can’t quite go that extra mile, or summon that much needed sliver of inspiration to set it apart.

Time wounds all heels.

Go West (1940)
(SPOILERS) Comedy westerns were nothing new when the Marx Brothers succumbed – Buster Keaton had made one with the same title fifteen years earlier – but theirs served to underline how variable the results could be. For every Bob Hope (Son of Paleface) there’s a Seth McFarlane (A Million Ways to Die in the West). In theory, the brothers riding roughshod over such genre conventions ought to have been uproarious, but they’d rather run out of gas by this point, and the results are, for the most part, sadly pedestrian. Even Go West's big train-chase climax fails to elicit the once accustomed anarchy that was their stock in trade.

Shall we bind the deal with a kiss? Or, five dollars in cash? You lose either way.

The Big Store (1941)
(SPOILERS) Three go mad in a department store. The results are undoubtedly more diverting than low point Go West, but it feels as if there is even more flotsam to wade through to get to the good stuff in The Big Store, which is almost exclusively delivered by Groucho as private detective and bodyguard Wolf J Flywheel. Perhaps surprisingly, however, the climax is one of the better ones, an extended chase sequence through the store that is frequently quite inventive.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

Goodbye, Mr Chimps.

At the Circus (1939)
(SPOILERS) This is where the brothers sink into their stretch of middling MGM movies, now absent the presence of their major supporter Irving Thalberg; it’s probably for the best this wasn’t called A Day at the Circus, as it would instantly have drawn unflattering comparisons with the earlier MGM pair that gave them their biggest hits. Nevertheless, there’s enough decent material to keep At the Circus fairly sprightly (rather than “fairly ponderous”, as Pauline Kael put it).

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …