A Wrinkle in Time Characters a Wrinkle in Time Father Clip Art

SWEET DREAMS ARE "Not"

Made OF THIS

---

Since the visitor'southward inception, Walt Disney Studios has produced a plethora of feature films, with some animated cartoons while others live-activity movement pictures. In amongst those 2 categories, the studio has told some original stories in the cinematic storytelling, just has besides derivate many either classic fairy tale source material (i.e. Snow White & the Seven Dwarfs, Piffling Mermaid, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, etc.) or adjusted from literary novels. Of the latter, Disney has crafted films to entertain its audience viewers by bringing these book stories to life (from page-to-screen). Such perfect examples of this notion are movies like 1954'due south 20,000 Nether the Sea (based on Julies Verne's archetype) or 1964's Mary Poppins (loosely based on the novels past P.50. Travers). Disney has connected this "book-to-film" adaptations for many years, including recent endeavors similar in 2005'southward The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe (based on the beloved children'due south book by C.S. Lewis) and 2016's The BFG (based on the book by Roald Dahl). At present, in the latest installment in adapting popular books into movement pictures, Walt Disney Studios and director Ava DuVernay present the film A Contraction in Time, which is based on the Newberry honour-winning book by the author Madeleine 50'Engle. Does this movie shine bright and achieve for the stars or does it become lost within its cosmic understanding of light and dark?

THE STORY

---

Immature boyish Meg Murry (Storm Reid), lives a happy life with her mother Dr. Kate Murry (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and male parent Dr. Alex Murry (Chris Pino) and younger adopted blood brother Charles Wallace Deric McCabe). However, One thousand thousand's father, shortly after he discussed the possibility of using astrophysics to traverse the galaxy in seconds by "wrinkling" the fabric of the infinite / time continuum, suddenly disappears without a trace. Iv years after his disappearance, Meg is misunderstood and bullied at school, causing trouble by fighting dorsum against her swain classmate Veronica (Rowan Blanchard) and beingness disapproved by her school principal Jenkins (Andre Holland) and her female parent. Unbeknownst to her, Meg's life begins takes an unexpected change, with the arrival of 3 otherworldly celestial travels Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspoon), Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), and Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), who accept come to help Million observe her begetter. Along with Meg's classmate, the sensitive jock Calvin O'Keefe (Levi Miller), Million and Charles Wallace set up off with the iii Mrs. Westward's to track their father's footsteps beyond the universe. Eventually, the Mrs. W's reveal Dr. Murry's discovery to the children, explain the usage of "tessering" (or "wrinkling" to fold infinite in order travel slap-up distance instantly and that kids must follow their father'due south journey until they meet a great evil simply known as "Information technology". With the help of the Happy Medium (Zach Galifanakis), Meg, Calvin, and Charles Wallace are able to locate Dr. Murry on the world of Camazotz, which has been engulfed in an evil darkness. As they journey to Camazotz, the three youths confront great challenges of illusions and temptations that "It" prepares for them, while Meg'southward personal baggage of issues of identity and self-doubtfulness weigh heavy on her middle, casting an uncertain calorie-free on whether or not the grouping will exist successful in saving Dr. Murry and make information technology domicile safely.

THE GOOD / THE BAD

---

It'southward not uncommon for studios to select a book (exist it acknowledged, or beloved literary classic) to be adapted for the big screen equally a total-length feature movie. Why? Mostly because it's the novel's story has proven to work to the masses and is ripe for the picking to be brought into a new entertainment medium (i.eastward. to exist made into a motion picture). Disney Studios is not stranger to doing this and (by and large) succeeds in a lot more than than it fails in these endeavors. 1964'south Ally Poppins stands as a attestation to that endeavor, standing as not just as a classic within Disney'due south catalogue of feature films, but as a love classic in motion-picture show. As I stated in a higher place, Disney continued that trend in adapting and reimagining with such whimsical young readers books similar The Chronicles of Narnia: The Panthera leo, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (a movie that I extremely love and cherish) likewise equally 2007's imagined and heartfelt Bridge to Terabithia (based on the book by Katherine Paterson). Although sometimes they practise falter, such is the example with 2016'southward The BFG, a film that was critical praised to due its source textile and for its visual furnishings, but failed connect to its modernistic audience of moviegoers as the picture barely made its money back was the lowest grossing Disney movie property in 2016. Still, Disney presses onward with bringing books-to-film installment, hoping to capture a cinematic medium with its storytelling motion pictures.

This brings me back around to the present with my review for A Wrinkle in Time, Disney's latest endeavor of bringing beloved literary novels to life through a cinematic lens. I do have to say that this. Yeah, I've read the L'Engle'southward book. Withal, to be honest, I read it but before I saw the moving-picture show and (to be true) I should've read a long time ago every bit I really did relish it. It's definitely a classic (i that many school systems use for class reading or summer reading) and does experience similar a good wholesome book for immature readers out in that location, peculiarly since L'Engle published the volume back in 1962 and carried a lot of thematic messages and meanings within its story.

I also have to mention that this isn't the offset attempt that Disney has made into adapting A Wrinkle in Fourth dimension, with their first attempt beingness a TV movie back in 2003, which starred Katie Stuart, Gregory Smith, Kate Nelligan, Alison Elliott, and Alfre Woodward. I really did see this movie (immediately following the 2018 version of A Contraction in Time) and I idea information technology was adequately good. The visual effects were, of class, mediocre and dated, but the acting was good and L'Engle's story was still there. Anyways, back to the 2018 version, I was immediately taken when the film'due south bandage was appear (Witherspoon, Kaling, Winfrey, Pine, Galifanakis, etc.) as well equally seeing the film's trailers, which gave me goosebumps every time I watched them, peculiarly when hearing the remake of Eurythmics's "Sweet Dreams" performed by Mark Hadley feat. Dresage. With a lot of excitement in the air about this film and being heavily promoted through various marketing campaigns, including being mentioned during the 90^thursday Academy Awards, I personally was excited to see this and gave me that extra "push" to actually read the book. Heck, I even placed A Contraction in Fourth dimension on my Meridian fifteen Nearly Anticipated Films of 2018 (I placed it on as #10 on the list). And so, what did I think of information technology? Was it worth the hype? Sadly (and unfortunately), it does not…in a large fashion. Despites its source material pedigree, a famed managing director, recognizable big-ticketed actors and actresses, and a large upkeep, A Contraction in Time fails to deliver, meandering through messy journeying from first to cease that lacks substance, clever / sharp dialogue, and meaningful cinematic amusement value. Suffice to say, the movie'southward ambition exceeds its own and never quite lives upwards to its inherit hype and potential.

A Wrinkle in Time is direct by Ava DuVernay, who's previous directorial works includes the academy-award winning motion-picture show Selma as well as For Justice and xiii^th . Given how Selma was well-received by viewers and critics (a feature picture show based on the 1965 Selma to Montgomery voting rights marches), DuVernay was i of the virtually sought after African-American directors in Hollywood. They're were even rumors that she was eyed Marvel Studios for Black Panther (Ryan Coogler won that seat) and Lucasfilm for directing one of the recent Star Wars films, though she didn't end up directing neither of them. Still, DuVernay gaze look towards Disney and soon fell upon bringing Madeleine L'Engle'due south love A Wrinkle in Time to life. DuVernay takes several poignant stances when approach the source material and ultimately crafting a characteristic picture. The well-nigh obvious one, which is the nigh noticeable, is the diversity within the cast that represent the characters in the pic. Rather being casted and played past Caucasian (aka "white") actors and actresses, DuVernay makes the determination to make the Wrinkle in Fourth dimension characters a mixture of different races. This is clearly defined in the Murry family, which is portrayed as a mixed-race family (i.e. Meg and her mother Kate are African-American, while her male parent Alex and Charles Wallace are white). This is even further extended to the three Mrs. Ws, who are played by white actress, an African-American actress, and an Indian extra. It's bold motility to exercise, but information technology's a motion that really does work well and speaks volumes, especially in this twenty-four hours and historic period where mixed families and relationships are more than commonplace likewise as Hollywood'south controversial "whitewashing" some of its minority / ethnic characters in the movies. Additionally, DuVernay, beingness a skilled manager, brings to the forefront of the characteristic a lot of ideas and concepts that may have been challenging to a less experience managing director. In that regard, she succeeds, especially in bringing the universal themes and messages similar self-identity, the power of love (cheesy equally it sounds), and the importance of family. Also, the themes of good and evil (aka lite vs. darkness) is too presented in the flick (as somewhat classic notion in child movies) as DuVernay handles that notion well.

On a visual and technical level, A Wrinkle in Fourth dimension is a feast for the eyes and is definitely 1 of the most positives things most the motion-picture show. Information technology goes without saying that the visual effects team (and art department) who worked on this moving-picture show should be commended for their work. The diverse conflicting-world scenes and vistas (near notably on the beautiful and colorful planet Uriel) vibrant and distinct with a lot inventiveness put into them. I literally fell in love with the whole Uriel sequences as well as lot of the effects that showed the group "wrinkling" infinite / time through tessering. Additionally, the costume designs by Paco Delgado and the entire pilus and make-up team should also exist praise for their work on A Contraction in Time, especially in the diverse outfits and facial make-upward for the three Mrs. Ws. Lastly, the film's musical score, which was composed by Ramin Djawadi, is exceptionally good, with a lot of melodic flourishes and sweeping orchestral music to invoke a sense of kid-like wonderment and awe-inspiring moments. All in all, A Wrinkle in Fourth dimension is beautifully rendered, which makes it even harder to now talk almost all its disappointments.

As I said, I was really looking frontwards to seeing A Wrinkle in Time, just the picture's finished product was far less desirable than what I was hoping (and expecting). Perhaps the biggest problematic complaint would accept to be the awful screenplay. The film's script, which was penned by Jennifer Lee and Jeff Stockwell, lacks a sharpness in its dialogue and transforms L'Engle'south story into a mish-mash narrative that doesn't really work quite also. What practice I hateful? For starters, the movie jumps right into the master consequence by introducing the Mrs. Ws, but its done in such a brisk and fast-paced fashion that it very jarring and perplexing. Naturally, those who have read L'Engle's book volition be able to follow this, only, to the uninitiated in A Wrinkle in Time's story, it might be a little bit too comprehend, specially since this is supposed to the introduction to the narrative's principal plot every bit this could make a non-reader of the book loose interest in the moving-picture show altogether. Congruent with that idea, the movie moves at such a brisk pace and never takes to end and the smell roses (I had to put that in there). What I hateful is that the DuVernay keeps the movie on a straight and narrow path and doesn't permit either the picture nor its characters to stop at a item moment and reflect on events or even graphic symbol-building moments. This, of course, hurts the motion picture itself and even hurts the character building, which makes a lot of them generally flat (but more than on that beneath). Thus, the motion-picture show goes from one plot point to the next and doesn't stop. To be honest, the picture itself seems extremely choppy as if huge chunks of the flick were taken out in order for it to clock under the two-hour runtime (A Contraction in Time every bit a runtime of one hour and forty-ix minutes long).

Another problem is in the film'due south world building. Taking from its source material, A Wrinkle in Fourth dimension blends whimsical fantasy and high-concept science fiction together, though the end issue is far from being cohesively entertaining. In truth, the idea of three Mrs. Ws, the rescue mission of Dr. Murry, and the Meg (and company) journey to fight against an evil darkness is a lot to take in and does crave a lot of world-building, especially since the narrative explores different worlds beyond the universe. Unfortunately, DuVernay fails to capture that notion and does so by breaking a cardinal rule in moviemaking, which is to "tell" its viewers what'southward going on rather than "showing" its viewers. This, of form, means that A Wrinkle in Time has a lot of expositional scenes of characters talking well-nigh things and more affair and even more things, with not a lot of action or even drama. This also farther leads into the pic's 3rd act, which is where a lot of poignant and meaningful moments happen during the movie's climax. Unfortunately, what's suppose to exist a defining moment for Meg (and for the moving picture itself) falls flat on its face. The climatic ending is extremely rushed and literally undermines the showdown between Meg and IT. I was and so disappointed past it and was like "That's information technology. That'southward climatic last battle". Fifty-fifty the film's ending, which sorts wraps everything up, feels underwhelming and doesn't experience earned as if Fifty'Engle's story and us (the viewers) are cheated by the film'southward mishmash resolution. Given the complexity of the story and its earth-building ideas and concepts, DuVernay could've easily added an boosted x or 15 minutes to brand the motion picture "breathe" and farther aggrandize on certain moments to make the feature (be it plot points or characters). Unfortunately, this did non happen. It's as if DuVernay (as well as Lee and Stockwell) are so busy in trying establish the flick (and its colorful imagery) that they neglect to make a natural flowing and cohesiveness of a feature film. Information technology's equally if the movie is and then in love with L'Engle's central plot that it disregards a lot of common filmmaking tactics.

Then at that place's also the film'southward dialogue, which is incredible dull, clumsy, and clunky. Yeah, I do know that A Contraction in Time is derivate from a young readers book and that the picture show is made (and geared towards) young tween viewers, but the pic's dialogue is and so incredible bad and clunky. Naturally, some of its is masked by some performance (mostly the seasoned actors and actresses), simply it's hard to deny that terrible dialogue written that will most certainly roll your optics or even laugh at information technology (I certainly did). And so there's extreme close-up photographic camera angles. While I do praise Tobias A. Schilessler for his cinematography on the motion picture, DuVernay'south determination to button widely in on characters face for extreme close-ups is overutilized in the movie. Information technology's expert for a couple of moments, just for most every single grapheme scene…. and so it becomes quite annoying and distracting. I literally cringe every time that picture did that with the grapheme of One thousand thousand as you would see Storm Reid'due south nostril wiggle up and downwardly from breathing. Likewise, while I exercise praise DuVernay for tackling strong theme and sincere messages, she does so in mode that quite heavy-handed and also much "on the nose", which takes abroad from A Wrinkle in Fourth dimension's allure. Heck, she fifty-fifty takes out 50'Engle's Christianity overtones in the narrative. However, she still keeps the idea of "conformity" in the central plot. Lastly, before I forget, the moving-picture show likewise ultized several pop songs in the characteristic, but information technology ultimately backfires and takes away from the more than whimsical fantasy journey that Meg and company are on. In fact, it more felt like TV picture show when those songs were being played, which farther drives the blast in A Contraction in Time's coffin.

Much like what I said in a few paragraphs above, A Wrinkle in Time's bandage is diverse and does makes a statement with each individual being their respective characters. Naturally, the moving-picture show'due south "large-ticketed" stars are mostly delegated to supporting roles, while the three kids (Million Murry, Calvin O'Keefe and Charles Wallace are given the spotlight every bit narrative's iii main protagonist characters. At the head of the group is young extra Storm Reid who plays the truthful primary hero of A Wrinkle in Time One thousand thousand Murry. Known for her roles in 12 Years a Slave, Sleight, and Lea to the Rescue, Reid is given the near compelling and well-rounded grapheme arc in the entire moving-picture show, cultivating Meg as the "chosen one" architype to defeat the darkness and notice her father. However, I didn't feel that Reid was detail right for Meg as her acting ability was quite that great, especially in a film'south lead office. She has the poise and stance of previous child stars (in the classic "hero" role), just she just seems to lack weighty theatrical talents to fully embody Meg Murry, peculiarly when the grapheme is called upon to give dramatic moments. To be honest, a lot of her characters moments is just her reacting to things and speaking dialogue of her reacting to those particular events. In the film'southward catastrophe, which is where Reid's One thousand thousand is supposed to smoothen the most, feels lackluster in her performance. And then, in a nutshell, the character of Meg has well-developed (albeit) character arc in the movie, but is weighed down past Reid's inexperience of make her character come alive and making information technology her own, which is extremely disappointing.

The two others that tagalong with Meg on her take a chance are the characters of Calvin's O'Keefe, a nice-guy jock in Meg'south school, and Charles Wallace, Meg's intellectual gifted adopted younger blood brother, who are played by thespian Levi Miller and young actor Deric McCabe. Miller, known for his roles in Pan, Better Watch Out, and Jasper Jones, acts every bit a companion to Meg by supporting her and believing in her. Miller's overall operation is fine, but there's really no depth to him. He'southward basically just a nice boy-next-door type architype that lacks weight across his surface level. There'due south an important part of his home life that's revealed in the movie, but there's no much resolution that point or fifty-fifty to his character past the time the movie ends. He'due south basically but forth for the ride….and that's information technology. There's a semi-romantic subplot between Meg and Calvin, but it but seems one-half-baked and only partially works due to charm / dynamic of Reid and Miller. However, perchance the weakest (of the iii) has to be McCabe's Charles Wallace. Known for his roles in XXIII Boss (curt film), Stephanie, and Hold On, McCabe becomes increasingly annoying throughout the picture show and is literally a "cog in the motorcar" to drive the narrative'south story exposition and a somewhat instigator of plot progression. His character is given more to practise within the terminal human action of the feature, just it merely comes off as as well comically campy and odd due to both McCabe'south acting ability and through the fourth dimension constraint on the third human activity. Basically, he's only important in the kickoff act (the first ten minutes) and the catastrophe, becoming completely forgotten during the film's 2d human activity.

With the movie primarily focusing Million, Calvin, and Charles, the supporting players in A Contraction in Fourth dimension aren't even quite enough screen-fourth dimension to project their characters (as a whole) to us (the viewers), which makes them flat and underdeveloped. However, virtually of these performance (if not all) are represented well plenty just do the screen presence of the role player / actress that portrays them. This is notion is conspicuously defined within the 3 Mrs. Ws (Mrs. Whatsit, Mrs. Who, and Mrs. Which), who play as the mentoring / guiding astral beings that guide the 3 children on their journeying. Of the iii, actress Reese Witherspoon (Legally Blonde and Wild) is given the most screen-time and is also granted the virtually personality as the bubbly / fast-talking Mrs. Whatsit. Information technology's also articulate that Witherspoon seems to be having the about fun in the office than whatever cast fellow member, which makes her presence (both her as an extra and her character) memorable in the movie. Behind is actress Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project and Within Out), who is given not much to exercise with her grapheme of Mrs. Who than to spout random quotable line for most of the film, which makes her the about underused of the 3 Mrs. Ws. Her acting is fine in the flick, merely her character volition mostly exist remembered only on by the lavish / fashionable clothing she wears every bit Mrs. Who. Unfortunately, famed celebrity icon / quondam talk-evidence host Orpah Winfrey (The Princess & the Frog and Lee Daniel's The Butler) is pretty much a one-not stock mentor character office as Mrs. Which, for both the three children and to the two other Mrs. Ws. She definitely has the strongest presence of anyone in the film and does so whenever she'south on-screen, merely she has little to in the film beyond existence the "obi-wan" classic past offering encouragement and wise words. Again, her acting is fine, but Winfrey'due south operation will be simply exist remembered in A Wrinkle in Time merely do her starring in the film and not by her character of Mrs. Which.

Rounding out the cast are several notable that either serve to frame the story'south edges or have pocket-sized roles within one or two sequences. This includes Million's two parents, with extra Gugu Mbatha-Raw (Concussion and The Cloverfield Paradox) every bit Dr. Kate Murry and histrion Chris Pine (Star Trek and Wonder Woman) equally Dr. Alex Murry being more developed side characters than three Mrs. Ws. Both Mbatha-Raw and Pino requite great performances for their relatively pocket-size roles in the film and offering a minor compelling anchor for this movie's story, which is mainly focused on Meg, Calvin, and Charles Wallace hazard out in the cosmos. Other notable actors in the pic include comedian actor Zach Galifanakis (The Hangover and Baskets) equally the eccentric spiritual existence known as "The Happy Medium", actor Michael Pena (Ant-Man and The Martian) every bit the cherry-eyed telepathic agent of It who is simply chosen "Red", actress Rowan Blanchard (A Globe Away and Daughter Meets Earth) as Meg'due south next-door neighbor / young man classmate mean daughter Veronica Kiley, and actor Andre Holland (American Horror Story and Castle Stone) as 1000000'south principal Jenkins.

FINAL THOUGHTS

---

One thousand thousand Murray, Charles Wallace, and Calvin O'Keefe embark upon an adventure through space and fourth dimension (guided by the celestial Mrs. Ws) to find One thousand thousand's male parent in the film A Contraction in Time. Director Ava DuVernay newest film takes Madeleine Fifty'Engle beloved honor-winning book and brings information technology to the big screen, offer upwardly a visual banquet for the eyes inside its scope as well equally bringing a endearing strength of female empowerment equally well as diversity within actors and actresses chosen for the moving-picture show'due south characters. Unfortunately, while film'due south visual and technical presentation is huge positive selling point and the story has a strong universally messages, the movie tin can't overcome its extremely clunky dialogue, it's uneven catamenia, underdeveloped characters (both major and minor), inexperienced acting, perplexing narrative stances, confusing plot holes, and rushed (and lackluster) catastrophe human action. To me, I was disappointed with this picture. It definitely has all the correct pieces, simply how the movie was handled (through all its negative points) left such an unsatisfying aftertaste. I really accept little to no desire to sentry this film again, which is actually disappointing to me, particularly since I was actually looking forward to this flick. Every bit many early on reviews for this movie have stayed, A Wrinkle in Time is more often than not geared towards kids, so young viewers will probably get more mileage out this motion-picture show than teens or adults. However, in that location are far better features films out there that acquit the necessary weight of translating books to moving picture and take a more as balance of narrative structure and cinematic presence than this movie did. Thus, my recommendation for this motion picture is a definite "Skip it". Sadly, DuVernay's A Wrinkle in Time, despite its inherit hype and its pre-release anticipation, will get down as disappointing endeavor than a successful one. Some movies achieve for the stars and achieve cinematic greatness, but A Wrinkle in Time fails to exercise so, providing a cute but messy and underwhelming kid's fantasy adventure.

2.three Out of v (Skip It)

Released On: March ninth, 2018

Reviewed On: March 11th, 2018

A Wrinkle in Time  is 109 minutes long and is rated PG for thematic elements and some peril

Share this post