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

You are, by your own admission, a vagabond.

Doctor Who Season 10 - Worst to Best
Season 10 has the cachet of an anniversary year, one in which two of its stories actively trade on the past and another utilises significant elements. As such, it’s the first indication of the series’ capacity for slavishly indulging the two-edged sword that is nostalgia, rather than simply bringing back ratings winners (the Daleks). It also finds the show at its cosiest, a vibe that had set in during the previous season, which often seemed to be taking things a little too comfortably. Season 10 is rather more cohesive, even as it signals the end of an era (with Jo’s departure). As a collection of stories, you perhaps wouldn’t call it a classic year, but as a whole, an example of the Pertwee UNIT era operating at its most confident, it more than qualifies.

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 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.

In a few moments, you will have an experience that will seem completely real. It will be the result of your subconscious fears transformed into your conscious awareness.

Brainstorm (1983)
(SPOILERS) Might Brainstorm have been the next big thing – a ground-breaking, game-changing cinematic spectacle that had as far reaching consequences as Star Wars (special effects) or Avatar (3D) – if only Douglas Trumbull had been allowed to persevere with his patented “Showscan” process (70mm film photographed and projected at 60 frames per second)? I suspect not; one only has to look at the not-so-far-removed experiment of Ang Lee with Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk, and how that went down like a bag of cold sick, to doubt that any innovation will necessarily catch on (although Trumbull at least had a narrative hinge on which to turn his “more real than real” imagery, whereas Lee’s pretty much boiled down to “because it was there”). Brainstorm’s story is, though, like its title, possibly too cerebral, too much concerned with the consciousness and touting too little of the cloyingly affirmative that Bruce Rubin inevitably brings to his screenplays. That doesn’t mea…

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016)
(SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ (or Zootopia as our American cousins refer to it; the European title change being nothing to do with U2, but down to a Danish zoo, it seems, which still doesn’t explain the German title, though) creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). It’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

So credit’s due to co-directors Byron Howard (Bolt, Tangled) and Rich Moore (of The Simpsons, Futurama, and latterly, the great until it kind of rests on its laurels Wreck-It-Ralph) and Jared Bush (presumably one of the th…

You can’t keep the whole world in the dark about what’s going on. Once they know that a five-mile hunk of rock is going to hit the world at 30,000 miles per hour, the people will want to know what the hell we intend to do about it.

Meteor (1979)
(SPOILERS) In which we find Sean Connery – or his agent, whom he got rid of subsequent to this and Cuba – showing how completely out of touch he was by the late 1970s. Hence hitching his cart to the moribund disaster movie genre just as movie entertainment was being rewritten and stolen from under him. He wasn’t alone, of course – pal Michael Caine would appear in both The Swarm and Beyond the Poseidon Adventure during this period – but Meteor’s lack of commercial appeal was only accentuated by how functional and charmless its star is in it. Some have cited Meteor as the worst movie of his career (Christopher Bray in his book on the actor), but its sin is not one of being outright terrible, rather of being terminally dull.

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 …

You keep a horse in the basement?

The ‘Burbs (1989)
(SPOILERS) The ‘Burbs is Joe Dante’s masterpiece. Or at least, his masterpiece that isn’t his bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you masterpiece Gremlins 2: The New Batch, or his high profile masterpiece Gremlins. Unlike those two, the latter of which bolted out of the gate and took audiences by surprise with it’s black wit subverting the expected Spielberg melange, and the first which was roundly shunned by viewers and critics for being absolutely nothing like the first and waving that fact gleefully under their noses, The ‘Burbs took a while to gain its foothold in the Dante pantheon. 

It came out at a time when there had been a good few movies (not least Dante’s) taking a poke at small town Americana, and it was a Tom Hanks movie when Hanks was still a broad strokes comedy guy (Big had just made him big, Turner and Hooch was a few months away; you know you’ve really made it when you co-star with a pooch). It’s true to say that some, as with say The Big Lebowski, “got it” on fi…

Well, if we destroy Kansas the world may not hear about it for years.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.