hopscotchee: tilda swinton score: 65 rating: pg (though should be pg-13) time: 143 minutes
sooooooo. a proper apology should first be stated for the *semi-intermission* in-between this batch. however, we truly felt like we need to talk about kevin was definitely not something we needed to talk about. therefore, after a short figure-out-able detour to reconstruct the hopscotch, we landed on a childhood classic, narnia: the lion, the witch, and the wardrobe. (we will be referring to this as narnia #1 for short.)
it's a true understatement to say that narnia #1 was our favorite movie as kids. despite our very short attention span for baby-shiz like dora the explorer and barney, this two and a half hour movie would kill our antsy toddle bottoms. so call us selfish, but it was because of these vivid-adoring, childhood memories that had us loop it into our hopscotch reconstruction. that said, the re-watch was far different from what we thought we recalled...............................................................
let's start with the obvious. we need to address mr. tumnus (aka mr. hummus)!! 😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱😱
this is like home-alone-kevin-scream-worthy. the menacing still that you see to your left is seriously one from the film. he really does look that evil. looks aside, his dialogue was problematic. what we are confused with the most was how FOUR people worked on the screenplay and none of them caught any of the red flags. he (spoiler) basically grooms lucy and roofies her via malicious tea and flute music. if that's not suss enough, he has mega creepy lines like, (spoiler), "you make me feel warmer than i've felt in 100 years". you may believe that we are reading way too implicitly into his lines, but tumnus the hummus reads pedo vibes 100%!! ultimately, poor james mcavoy doesn't hold up in the light of day and probably wishes his character wasn't as cringey as he is. like, that scarf....oof. to be fair, speaking sophisticatedly, his whole concept, clearly relevant to the book and story, was just not handled well for the film's adaptation - ESPECIALLY for the chosen genre being 'kids and family'. you don't just drop (spoiler) "i'm kidnapping you" with the swell of villainous music in family friendly films. you just don't!! some common sense in the matter would've made things less concerning.
now that that's outta the way, we can transition into other aspects of the film that weren't so horrifying. one of these being the set. obviously, obviously, we like stress that we don't judge oldie graphics, but we all like it if they weren't so noticeable polar express-y. when it came to the ol' narnia #1 there were a few of those moments, but surprisingly narnia held up for the most part!! this really goes to show you why having a great set design team and using your resources wisely (in this case not skimping on set in the budget) can allow your movie to stand the test of time longer. some directors and producers want the big names/actors and will spend half the budget on them instead of putting the money in departments that could really use it. it might've been easy for them to go ahead a green screen the entirety of narnia from the wintery forest to tumnus the hummus' abode to the beavers' home to aslan's tented campsite, but by going out of the way to create PHYSICAL sets allows them to capture the magic longer. for example, this film came out in 2005 and it holds up more than a re-watch of batch one's avenger's: infinity war from 2018. hashtag 5sos - just saying.
yet even in 2005, the pacing could've been better. YES, this was the year that long movies must've been a fad, seemingly in the company of batman begins, king kong (which is apparently 3 gd hours!!), and harry potter and the goblet of fire (though that one is an example of a long movie with a good pace), but narnia #1 left us with a speedy exposition but then a saggy, draggy back half. it hasn't been scientifically proven for this set-up to cause yawns, but it's practically guaranteed. as a result, the viewers are just waiting for this grand battle half way through the film without any interest throughout the journey. this doesn't necessarily make the overall story bad, but it does seem to lack some richness ~ most likely happening during the book-to-screen adaptation process. equally responsible for this was the directing. there was a laundry list of shots that had to be filmed in the front half of the film, which made the movie very dynamic for viewers and therefore very alluring to the eye. you were always seeing things with several different angles that it led your attention to be captivated to the screen. however, as the film progressed, the shots leaned on the basic and repetitive side of things. in particular, the close ups on peter were enormously overused to the point where you felt like that was the only shot they could get of him. who knows, the actor might've gotten a injury that they were trying to cover up??
overall, after watching narnia #1, we were completely shocked that we stayed awake throughout it over and over again as young children, and, on top of that, we are completely stunned at how everyone is SO oblivious to the whole tumnus the hummus situation. that is just a yikes!! but, other than that, the movie held up enough for enjoyment and nostalgia.
-- thanks, tilda xo
ps. is it just us or does our fav, edmund, look like charlie spring from heartstopper (aka joe locke) and maybe a tiny bit of ethan (matthew knight) from the underrated show, my babysitter's a vampire. the charlie spring resemblance is almost uncanny, but you may have to watch narnia #1 to find the ethan double takes. maybe that one's more in emo-edmund's mannerisms?? either way, we hope you like our suave gallery grid for a reference point.
also, don't let your kids watch this movie when they're young. seriously, we don't understand why this was only rated pg and promoted as a kids and family watch?? it's creepyAF for sure. like the white witch's henchmen-creatures....bruh, that's not kid-friendly. that's not friendly in general. strong caution is advised on our end.