Runtime: 1 hour, 53 minutes
Rating: PG-13
Directors: Bryan Singer
Quick Impressions:
A few days ago, I saw a string of articles online in quick succession about how Jack the Giant Slayer was expected to have a soft opening and lose a lot of money and be a big disappointment and ruin the lives (or at least the day) of everyone involved. This sob story worked on me. We had originally planned to take our kids to a cave this weekend, but instead we ended up taking them to see Jack the Giant Slayer on opening night.
Forget expensive ad campaigns. Instead, studios should bribe entertainment bloggers to write articles playing up how doomed the movie they’re about to release is sure to be. (I mean they should do it more often.) That kind of direct appeal always gets me. I’m sure it would work on others, too. When you see something like that, you really feel like you’re helping out with something important by buying tickets to the movie. I think instead of stills from the film, studios should pay for ad space that shows pictures of creative team behind a new movie losing their jobs, homes, and families. The caption should read, “This will happen if you don’t go see Fill in the Title.” I’d see all of them. I’m such a sucker. (Seriously, I am; the same kind of pleading tactics lured me into watching John Carter last year.)
Anyway, both our children—ages ten and four—found Jack the Giant Slayer thoroughly enjoyable and enchanting. When the beanstalk started growing, my daughter leaned over and whispered to me, “I don’t know where they got that crazy name. I’m starting to think this is really just ‘Jack and the Beanstalk.’” And basically, it is “Jack and the Beanstalk” retold with beefed up action and a plot complex enough to carry a nearly two-hour movie.
The PG-13 rating must be mainly for violence. Nothing too salacious ever happens, and I don’t remember much objectionable language. There’s genuine menace from the villains, but my daughter only became scared enough to climb into her father’s lap once. All four of us enjoyed the movie from start to finish (though I can’t comment on the 3D because my daughter won’t wear the glasses).
The Good:
Anybody who feels captivated enough by “Jack and the Beanstalk” to make it the basis for a feature length film has to realize that the real star of the story is the beanstalk. I remember watching the animated Puss and Boots in 2011 and feeling like they had discovered a new (green) star, one with huge cinematic potential. Easily ninety percent of movies are about a poor young person of unappreciated quality who wants to make something of himself (or in rare cases herself). The beanstalk shooting up and falling down is really what makes the Jack story stand apart.
And this incarnation of the Jack legend uses its beanstalk pretty well. Whether its twirling up or toppling down, the beanstalk is absolutely impossible to ignore. It’s a lovely centerpiece, a dynamic piece of set dressing, a catalyst driving the plot, and a pretty gigantic symbol of an obscure young man’s insanely rapid upward mobility.
Probably the best thing Jack the Giant Slayer does is add more beanstalks for our further viewing pleasure. (That choice makes sense because in a movie, there can’t just be one plot thread. A film must be more complex. It can’t just show one ambitious young man’s upward climb. There’s got to be a whole bunch of other stuff going on around him, too (and for all kinds of reasons), so in this movie, we get one beanstalk per bean. That makes sense to me because beanstalk number 1 only gets us a little over halfway through the runtime.
The use of every last bean (and particularly that last bean) is what strikes me as especially clever, frugal, and innovative about this incarnation of the Jack story. In fact, in this respect, it actually far exceeded my expectations. I have to give it credit for knowing the most effective way to use its beanstalks.
The film is also well cast. Nicholas Hoult (otherwise known as Beast in X-Men First Class and R the Zombie in Warm Bodies) makes a compelling young lead and seems perfect for the part. I don’t think Eleanor Tomlinson quite matches his charisma, but she is a beauty and makes a perfectly lovely and likable Princess Isabelle.
Stanley Tucci is wonderful, as always, in the role of the dastardly Roderick, and Ewen Bremner is also fantastic as his obnoxious hanger-on Wicke. (I kept trying to place Bremner and know realize I remember him as Justin in Death at a Funeral, though he’s certainly in tons of other stuff, too.)
Ian McShane and Ewan McGregor could be used a little better, in my opinion. I don’t think either of them has very great lines, and McGregor’s character in particular could use more development. He’s a wonderful presence, but there’s something just a little vague about his entire persona. Anyone who is on screen that much (doing things of such importance) needs a little more help from the script and the director. The character of Elmont just doesn’t seem fleshed out. Still, I was glad to see McGregor who impressed me recently in The Impossible.
We also get brief but memorable performances by Eddie Marsan and the unmistakable Warwick Davis. And Bill Nighy recognizably voices most of the Giant General Fallon.
Best Scene:
Others may disagree, but my favorite part of the movie was the fight in the giant stone head between Elmont and Roderick. Their interaction is quite captivating, and from this point, the pace of the movie picks up as the focus narrows and events proceed toward a unifying conclusion.
Best Scene Visually:
That beanstalk may be exciting as it comes up, but it looks truly amazing when it’s tumbling down again. I loved watching Jack and Isabelle’s (eventually quite hurried) descent down the beanstalk. Hoult and Tomlinson are quite believable and captivating as virtuous young adventurers in love.
Another real visual strength of the movie is what happens to the stolen crown once it falls from the head of the thief. If you’re going to have giants in your movie, use their enormous size in clever ways. The movie does a good job of that here.
I also liked a bit at the end for personal reasons since it allowed me to retrace the first steps (on foot) of my honeymoon.
Funniest Scene:
Stanley Tucci and Ewen Bremner ham up the role of the nefarious villain and his goofy sidekick like they’re in an animated Disney movie (and I actually mean that entirely as a compliment). I think the two have great chemistry and play all of their scenes really well. What they’re doing definitely works. Not only is Tucci chewing scenery as one-half of a villainous comic duo, but he’s also turning in an excellent performance as one of the few characters who seems three-dimensional and interesting because Tucci brings so much to the role. Jack and Isabelle are both beautiful and make a lovely couple, but apart from their fresh-faced romance, the easy-to-watch rapport of Tucci and Bremner makes their characters the most interesting in the film by far. They really disappear much too soon.
The king’s line about the bells really amused me, too, and a lot of people around me seemed really charmed by the bit with the bees.
Best Action Sequence:
Everything that happens after the beanstalk in Jack’s house topples happens fast and runs together right into the film’s exciting conclusion. Basically, the last half hour is all action, and though I wasn’t always charmed by the giants (they were gross, violent, and not the film’s most shining example of CGI), I did like the way the pace picked up and just kept increasing. The (increasingly hurried) flight back to the castle is very well done.
The best part, of course, is how Jack reacts when General Fallon puts the squeeze on him. I thought Jack’s response was really inspired and genuinely clever (not lazy like so many movies of this kind are in such moments). And when we got home and I asked my four-year-old her favorite part of the movie, she called out this scene as well.
The Negatives:
There’s really nothing wrong with this movie, but it’s of pretty modest scope. It’s just a retelling of “Jack and the Beanstalk” with more action and a movie-length plot. Honestly, though it consistently entertained me, it didn’t really make any kind of lasting impression (except maybe that moment when Jack was about to be eaten by Fallon. I’ll probably remember that for a while). If the theater had experienced technical difficulties forcing us to take a rain check half way through the movie, I would have shrugged mildly and said, “Oh well.” It’s a decent fairy tale fantasy, but then you walk out of the theater and go on with your life, sighing, “Fee-fi-ho-hum.”
I can’t bring myself to delete that lazy joke, but I’m sure I won’t be unique to this review. I haven’t read any other reviews yet, but that line is so obvious, it will probably come up in every single one. In one sense, a lazy joke is unfair since the movie honestly isn’t lazy. When it counts, the film is quite inventive. But sadly, it’s just not all that memorable. You’re interested in what’s happening while it’s happening, but it’s hard to connect with the story (or most of the characters) enough to care for long.
Part of the problem with the movie is that there’s no follow-through with most characters. Jack the Giant Slayer introduces the most fascinating characters and potential plot lines, only to drop them quickly over and over again. As far as intrigue goes, the monks have amazing potential. I think they should be a more active presence in the entire story. And Roderick! Besides Jack, he’s like the best character in the movie. He’s out of the picture way too soon (though not as soon as we lose the wonderfully nasty Wicke).
I understand that dropping characters quickly and unexpectedly keeps the plot from stagnating. Like the beanstalk, the plot keeps growing—often in surprising directions. But still, I think Roderick is dropped too quickly, and I don’t understand why he behaves the way he does on the way up the beanstalk. It’s his execution of his plan I don’t really get. I’m not saying that it doesn’t make sense, but I would like to have him around to let us know if all our assumptions about him are correct.
Also—and, admittedly this is a bit picky of me—the way Ewan McGregor’s character arrives somewhere just when he’s needed seems ridiculously contrived. (I mean somewhere specific. I’m trying to avoid spoilers.) Part of the problem is probably inadequate CGI. If his trip looked more real, maybe it wouldn’t seem so conspicuous. In general, McGregor’s character Elmont is criminally underdeveloped. He’s likable, but that’s not enough. (And sometimes, McGregor’s performance seems way too evocative of his work in Star Wars and other popular films—especially the way he stands there staring, yelling, “No!” I feel like I’ve seen him do that in at least fifteen movies already.) He probably needs better lines. He can’t deliver them if they’re not there.
For an action-driven film, Jack is very well developed, and Isabelle has a decent amount of development, too. At the very least, the movie makes a point of showing us that she’s far more than just another pretty face (though, make no mistake, her face is very pretty). But all the other characters need either more work or more time (or both).
The character who makes almost no sense to me is General Entin (played by Ralph Brown). I’m not saying that Brown does a bad job, but what exactly is the point of that character? He seems highly superfluous to me (though he’s got a memorably unique sense of style).
Jack the Giant Slayer is a charming retelling of a classic folk tale, but I think it’s going to have the most lasting impact on children in the audience. I’m not saying that only children will enjoy it, but I’m guessing that the movie will probably mean more to children than to adults. Despite its PG-13 rating, it’s a great film for elementary aged kids—if they aren’t upset by a nasty bit of (mostly fantasy) violence. The giants, in particular, seem aimed at a young audience since when they’re not caught up in the three most common cinematic giant pastimes (i.e. eating humans, brawling, and falling from the tops of beanstalks to their deaths) they always seem to be passing gas, picking their noses, and passing gas some more.
Overall:
My family thoroughly enjoyed watching Jack the Giant Slayer (including our ten-year-old boy and four-year-old girl). It’s fast paced, entertaining, and just clever enough to avoid making us feel like we’ve been tricked into watching a bunch of lazy, recycled garbage. Perfectly capable of anchoring a movie, Nicholas Hoult makes a charismatic and sympathetic Jack. Because of his numerous virtues, we’re more than happy to watch his love for the equally likable Isabelle blossom before our eyes. There’s lots of action and a great (though unfortunately underutilized) supporting cast. If you like your beanstalks plentiful and your giants relentless, then this is the movie for you. It’s a frugal film in which no bean goes to waste, and it’s also a lot of fun for the entire family.