Skip to main content

Ah, it’s good to breathe in your glorious dragon stench again.

Raya and the Last Dragon
(2021)

(SPOILERS) It may have been entirely germane to the writers’ room process, spitballing hither and thither, but it’s very noticeable that Raya and the Last Dragon runs with Avengers: Endgame’s – and Steven Moffat’s, for that matter – principle that nothing stays dead for long, so divesting young, impressionable minds of one of the basic unassailables of life. Who knows why such false narratives have attained such currency currently. Could it be a means to dilute the sting of mass devastation by creating a mythic salvation, one where the world one has known may still become tangible once more, if only in virtual, escapist sense? On the other hand, it might just be symptomatic of creative doldrums, where the greatest inspiration one can hope for is being inspired to copy someone else.

Raya and the Last Dragon has some decent ideas going on, despite habitually falling back on formulaic characters and devices. The realisation of the Druun is genuinely effectively creepy; yes, it’s presenting the prerequisite apocalyptic predictive programming of a world ruined thanks to “people being people” – the general disparagement of us, the masses, as opposed to those who promulgate the dyspeptic paradigm - and “a plague born from human discord” (hmm, what does that sound like, all the more so for being a metaphoricplague). Emphasising the point, the Druun are identified as “mindless parasites”.

If that side represents your standard-issue “we’re to blame for our environment so get what we deserve” scenario, the execution is fairly strong stuff for a Disney movie. Turning victims to stone is the material of myth (Medusa) but the visualisation, of crackling energy forms, not so far from Venom, roaming the countryside (or what was once countryside) lends the proceedings a pervadingly unsettling atmosphere. So much so, you can tell it was consciously reined in rather than run with.

What we’re to make of the idea that 500 years ago (movie time), humans lived alongside dragons is anyone’s guess, as the dragon (reptilian) is only variably depicted as a bountiful force. These ones are positively fluffy and cuddly, not at all personifications of the cruel bringers of control and oppression (and fiery demise). Make of that what you will. Disney loves to rehabilitate the antagonists just now, but to be fair, there’s precedent in children’s literature’s for such a take on dragon lore. This one is much closer to The NeverEnding Story’s Falkor. For the Mouse House, besides Pete’s Dragon, Eddie Murphy played one in the (relatively) fun version of Mulan, and this particular fun dragon is voiced by Awkwafina, failing to carry off the improv laugh riot clearly being angled for, and infinitely preferable in dragon form than Awkwafina facsimile human version (somewhat amusingly, resembling nothing so much as a bag lady Awkwafina).

Most of the story elements – strong, attitudinous heroine (Raya) and opposing number (Namaari) as mortal frenemies; priceless artefact that must be reconstituted through the heroine’s quest in order to re-empower the land (the dragon’s gem, shattered by divided humans); comedy sidekicks (kid chef Boun, farting con-baby Noi); endearing pet (Tuk Tuk, armadillo/bug whom Raya rides around the countryside, like something out of a reject concept design for Mortal Engines) – are serviceable, but none of them are remotely inspired.

One can see a similar energy at work in co-director Don Hall’s earlier Big Hero 6, but also that movie’s slightly facile quality. Aside from the environment, there’s very little that is striking here, and indeed, everyone involved ultimately means well, villains and heroes simply overstepping the marks and eventually all living amenably. Well, except for those Druun (evil spirits, per Wiki), who perhaps aren’t even real at all…

There are reliable vocal turns from Benedict Wong (warrior Tong) and Alan Tudyk (Tuk Tuk). As for Kelly Marie Tran, who replaced Casssie Steel because she had the requisite “lightness and buoyancy, but also badassery” the role needed… Uh-huh. Raya is determinedly earnest and dull, as you’d expect from what we’ve seen of Tran so far, if you’re disposed to generalise. Tran apparently interpreted the relationship between Raya and the slightly butch Namaari as romantic, Well, of course, she did.

Disney, quite rightly, or wrongly, can do nothing right, since that’s inevitable when you trip over yourself attempting to win brownie points for best diversity casting evah. So, instead of Raya and the Last Dragon winning them all the kudos, it’s been noted in repudiatory terms that they managed to plumb for a predominately East Asian cast in a movie set in Southeast Asia. Obviously, that was neither here nor there with regard to its box office – simply the Twitterati and Tinseltowners tying themselves in knots – although, the movie did have a feeble reception, such is the eroded theatrical landscape. Who knows what the uptake was on Disney+. It’s taken me this long to see it.

The climax hinges on the realisation that “It’s not about magic. It’s about trust”. You know, just before a reset brings everyone back to life. No, it is about magic. Which is fine, but don’t be so apologetic. Don’t wear your metaphors on your chin so much, and you might attract more viewers who know they’re going to have fun, rather than expecting to be preached at. Raya and the Last Dragon’s an okay, undemanding flick, of the sort that gets quickly forgotten and so resurfaces on underrated lists a few years later. But it’s not going to turn it into anything more than okay, really, between now and then.


Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

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.

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.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.