What The Reviews Are Saying About 'The BFG'
Adaptations of Roald Dahl's classic children's books to the big screen have a pretty good record, from the original Gene Wilder-starring Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory to Wes Anderson's animated Fantastic Mr. Fox. Now, Steven Spielberg joins the fray with his adaptation of The BFG (that's "Big Friendly Giant") — here's what the critics think.
Mark Rylance Is Truly Excellent As The BFG
Rylance's tender and deeply invested performance should convince any remaining doubters that motion-capture technology is now advanced enough to have created a new category of on-screen incarnation: the performance of an actor or actress who may be wearing a digital full-body mask but who is nonetheless truly and powerfully acting. The bottomless emotional reserve of Rylance… makes the sometimes galumphing BFG more than a mere pleasant afternoon of family viewing. Rylance's debut in the strange new world of motion-capture performance is jumbly, it's delumptious, it's positively squiffling.
[Slate]
Rylance brings a gentle goodness but also a world-weary gravitas to the BFG.
I was so tickled and moved by Rylance's interpretation, highly emotional in surprising ways, the problems didn't matter much to me. For once, underneath all the motion capture folderol, the key performance really does feel like a full, real, vital performance.
And The Movie Is Pretty Darn Nice To Look At
It's a funny thing. You can see a thousand movies and think that you've become immune to dazzling visuals — until you see them done right.
Working under the Disney label for the first time in his career, Spielberg offers a gallery of unforgettable images to illuminate a surprisingly straightforward story about the friendship between the Big Friendly Giant of the title and Sophie, a spunky 10-year-old orphan.
The new film, made with a mixture of live-action performance and digital techniques, is, at its heart, a story about dreams, beautifully captured in magical jewel-toned light.
But It's A Bit… Boring?
The film is so sluggishly paced that even its pleasures—those bright countrysides, and a warm-hearted performance by Rylance—are overtaken by the boredom creeping in from all corners. The movie just plods along, with Sophie and the BFG becoming friends and then … well, then they stay friends. Their relationship is supposed to be the heart of the film, but there's no real progression to it
[T]he film suffers from the one thing that Spielberg films almost never suffer from — stasis. He's made, essentially, a "hangout" movie, one in which we're supposed to luxuriate among the characters, but Spielberg isn't a director who thrives in that kind of environment. You can sense his restlessness, too… [W]hen it comes to actual interactions between girl and giant, the energy dissipates.
And It Loses Track Of Dahl's Essential Darkness
Spielberg and Dahl aren't a perfect fit, honestly. The latter had a droll, sometimes macabre sense of humor, appealing to the darker fascinations of kids; he made his young readers feel like they were getting away with something. Spielberg, conversely, can be a hopeless sap
[AV Club]
Unwittingly, Spielberg has toned down the darkness that makes Dahl unique. Throughout the writer's work, from "Charlie and Chocolate Factory" to "Matilda," there is an acknowledgement of life's shadows that makes his embrace of the fanciful all the more potent. The lows that must be overcome by the children in his stories makes their victories sweeter.
TL;DR
Overall, The BFG is a really good film that suffers mostly because of circumstance. Steven Spielberg, Disney and Dahl are such powerful names that you expect E.T., Snow White and Willy Wonka rolled up into one. It's not that. It's simple, sweet and silly. There's nothing hugely wrong with it. The visuals are beautiful, the John Williams score is entrancing but it never becomes something more.
[io9]
Watch The Trailer
