When I first read about this I was excited and thought it had some potential. Seeing the trailer on Saturday cooled my excitement some. I’m still going to see it.
Not excited, but I’ll be taking a kiddie to see it Friday probably- it at least looks different from most typical childrens films, and Dustin Hoffman is always good. Is Natalie Portman supposed to be a twelve year old boy in it, because that’s what she looks like from the commercials?
It looks like a complete mess, a F/X-fest in search of a story.
Well I liked it. Not as much as I had hoped, but I liked it.
It reminded me of a children’s movie in the tradition of Mary Poppins and Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. No fart humor, no bodily humor of any kind, little or no slapstick. A lot of silliness.
Natalie Portman was adorable, despite her boyish haircut. She has a killer smile.
I say take the kiddies.
Is it me or does Dustin Hoffman in that role creep anyone else out? I only saw the trailer, but it did not make me want to go see the film. Glad you had a nice time. Not for me, though.
The only thing I’ve seen about this movie is the poster, so I can’t really comment on the film at all. But damn, that is one sucky poster, because looking at it makes me angry that this film even exists.
Which I suspect is not the reaction they wanted to elicit.
The title seems like a film one might remember Troy Mclure from. Or maybe Filliam H. Muffman.
Yes! It sounds like a Simpsons throwaway gag as to McClure’s poor choice of past projects, such as The Contrabulous Fabtraption of Professor Horatio Hufnagel, and it looks like a cross between the awful Robin Williams movie Toys and the equally awful in their own ways (IMO) Charlie/Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory movies.
However, I am looking forward to Terry Gilliam’s next movie with a similarly horrible title, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, featuring Tom Waits.
The commercials said it was by the same people who brought us Bridge to Terabithia. I turned to my wife and said “So I guess that means ten minutes of CGI wonderment and an hour and a half of Natalie Portman dying from leukemia or something.”
We saw it last night, and it was… bland. The best you can say about the movie is that all of the actors turned in competent performances. It felt hollow, shallow, vapid, and vacuous, and didn’t weave the various character arcs into anything resembling a coherent whole.
I wanted to like it more, but I couldn’t.
Haven’t seen it, and hope not to (although the boys just might drag me to it). Looked cloying and insipid in the ad.
Not for me. From the shorts it looks like something that would require 80 units of insulin.
I saw it tonight. I really enjoyed it and it wasn’t too cloying. Hoffman was a little over the top. It was fun; my 7-year-old son really enjoyed it. My 10-year-old daughter enjoyed it; my wife thought it was good.
Call me a softy I guess, but I did not find it too cloying.
Natalie Portman’s hair did annoy me, but that is minor.
The major child actor Zach Mills as Eric Applebaum, the Hat Collector was very good. He was believable and never annoying like lets say Dakota Fanning or Macaulay Culkin.
The special effects worked pretty well. The story was a tad slow, but the sense of wonder was excellently done.
Jim
That’s exactly what I was thinking too. What makes it even funnier is that it’s released by 20th Century Fox*, who showed interest in McClure’s project. Just as Larry Borgia was, I was also reminded of Stephen Colbert’s pet project The Splendiferious Zeppelin Escapades of Filliam H. Muffman (which I’m sure is a lot more entertaining than Hiphopketball: A Jazzebration).
[sub]*A subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company[/sub]
Dustin Hoffman and Jon Voight must be in a competition to see who can destroy their own legacy the most.
Y’know, I really miss G-rated movies that are “a tad slow”, fun and enjoyable. Seriously, I’m not being snarky. It really makes me wish the littlest sprog was old enough for a theatrical experience. But I guess she’ll have to wait for her birthday and enjoy the DVD.
I was blowing through CNN’s homepage the other day and I saw a link in their “Popular Culture” section that was presumably to their review of this movie.
The text of the link was “Review: ‘Mr. Magorium’ is really, really bad”
Not that I’m all up on CNN’s jock or anything but seeing a title like that on a major news outlet’s website makes me want to stay away from the movie altogether. I didn’t even read the review, as I felt the title must have summed it up nicely.
Why all the hate for Natalie Portman’s pixie cut? She gets hotter the shorter her hair is.
A “magorium” sounds vaguely menacing. “Throw the prisoners in THE MAGORIUM and see how they like it!!!” the evil genius said.