Skip to main content

Ice cream, Cherryade and chicken nuggets, liquidised.

The Kid Who Would Be King
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Joe Cornish generated such goodwill with Attack the Block – admittedly, I wasn’t its greatest fan – that I suspect no one really wanted to admit The Kid Who Would Be King, his belated follow up was a bit of a damp squib. This modern-day Arthurian retelling but with kids in the key protagonist roles may appear to have sufficient reconfigured cachet to appeal, but it’s mostly rather derivative, and that’s without even considering the patchy lead cast.

Because with a kids’ film – and perhaps the box-office kiss of death, this is definitely a kids’ film, rather than family fare – you’re stranded if you don’t have strong leads carrying you through rough patches of over-emoting and heroic junior challenges. Andy Serkis’ son Louis does his best, but he isn’t that lead (Alex), while at least two of his valiant knights (Dean Chaumoo as Bedders and Rhianna Doris as Kaye) also fail to bring much that’s memorable to the material.

On the plus side, Tom Taylor is a believably arrogant toff bully as Lance (with neat use of the legend’s rifts to turn him from aggressor to champion) and, MVP, Angus Imrie, Celia’s son, is an absolute standout as Merlin. He brings exactly the exuberance the whole movie needed – energetic, spirited, funny, slightly madcap – and when he’s onscreen, for the most part, Cornish’s slightly tired vision slots into place. That’s particularly true of the early passages, where Merlin announces himself as a pupil at Alex’s school (“And I am a perfectly normal British school boy”), casts spells on all and sundry, and offers appealingly archaic phrasings. Indeed, I could easily imagine Imrie being cast as Doctor Who in a few years. If there still is a Doctor Who in a few years.

Unfortunately, Cornish also decides to include what, on paper, probably seemed like a good move and financially a no-brainer: having an older Merlin (he ages backwards, nonsensically) turn up periodically. This is clearly designed as a dramatic anchor and showstopper, but entirely serves to undermine Imrie’s presence and the excellent work he is doing. And worse, lurch the proceedings into crashing dullness, because he’s played by no one’s idea of a sure wit, Patrick Stewart (if you need to recall, exactly, just look at who he was playing in John Boorman’s definitive cinematic telling Excalibur). It’s really quite rude to the young actor, in fact, particularly when the meaningful goodbye to Alex is reserved for Merlin the elder.

Cornish nurtured the germ of his idea for decades, which sometimes works out very well – Luc Besson and The Fifth Element – but in this case never seems like it had sufficiently striking ideas in the first place to justify its translation to screen. Excalibur’s found on a building site, Neolithic temples are transportation gateways, and the Lady of the Lake raises Excalibur in a bathtub (okay, the last one is pretty good). The visuals for the demon horsemen sent by Morgana (Rebecca Ferguson, not especially memorable) are decent design-wise, but the effects generally, including bat Morgana, aren’t supported by the budget.

Where Attack the Block managed to make a merit of its small scale, here Cornish’s reach exceeds his grasp, with the consequence that, more often than not, The Kid Who Would Be King feels rather twee, like a CBBC concept on a slightly more cinematic canvas. This reaches its most underwhelming realisation when the entire school are trained in battle manoeuvres ahead of the coming eclipse and the arrival of the demon hordes.

Cornish throws in various thematic arcs about honesty and trust (the “Chiv-alric Code”), but they take on no real meaning as his young leads can’t carry them. And while he his moments visually (he has Bill Pope on board as cinematographer, so he should), the picture lacks a sufficiently distinct stylistic tone to underpin the mythic present (he probably should have looked to The Fisher King, where ironically the mythic was only in the head of one of its protagonists).

One’s left with the feeling of a movie a parent makes for their kids – aside from a brief political swipe at the end, that “A land is only as good as its leaders and you will make excellent leaders” – rather than seriously considering how it’s going to work for a wider audience. Even if it does end with a small boy cutting a woman’s head off. I’m doubtful that, with a stronger lead, The Kid Who Would Be King would have landed, and it’s telling that the picture could more satisfyingly have ended at a point when there’s well over half an hour to go.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

This is very cruel, Oskar. You're giving them hope. You shouldn't do that.

Schindler’s List (1993)
(SPOILERS) Such is the status of Schindler’s List, it all but defies criticism; it’s the worthiest of all the many worthy Best Picture Oscar winners, a film noble of purpose and sensitive in the treatment and depiction of the Holocaust as the backdrop to one man’s redemption. There is much to admire in Steven Spielberg’s film. But it is still a Steven Spielberg film. From a director whose driving impulse is the manufacture of popcorn entertainments, not intellectual introspection. Which means it’s a film that, for all its commendable features, is made to manipulate its audience in the manner of any of his “lesser” genre offerings. One’s mileage doubtless varies on this, but for me there are times during this, his crowning achievement, where the berg gets in the way of telling the most respectful version of this story by simple dint of being the berg. But then, to a great or lesser extent, this is true of almost all, if not all, his prestige pictures.

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

We’re Americans. We read your emails.

Domino (2019)
(SPOILERS) Brian De Palma essentially appears to have disowned his unhappy latest motion picture experience (“I never experienced such a horrible movie set”). He opined that he came in on a script that wasn’t of his own devising (by Petter Skavlan of Kon-Tiki) and did his failing best to apply his unique vision to it. And you can see that vision, occasionally, but more than that you can see unaccustomed cheapness and lacklustre material that likely wouldn’t play no matter how much cash was thrown at it.

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.

Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.

Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they migh…

There’s nothing stock about a stock car.

Days of Thunder (1990)
(SPOILERS) The summer of 1990 was beset with box office underperformers. Sure-thing sequels – Another 48Hrs, Robocop 2, Gremlins 2: The New Batch, The Exorcist III, even Back to the Future Part III – either belly flopped or failed to hit the hoped for highs, while franchise hopefuls – Dick Tracy, Arachnophobia – most certainly did not ascend to the stratospheric levels of the previous year’s Batman. Even the big hitters, Total Recall and Die Hard 2: Die Harder, were somewhat offset by costing a fortune in the first place. Price-tag-wise, Days of Thunder, a thematic sequel to the phenomenon that was Top Gun, was in their category. Business-wise, it was definitely in the former. Tom Cruise didn’t quite suffer his first misfire since Legend – he’d made charmed choices ever since playing Maverick – but it was a close-run thing.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013)
(SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.