This needs less cliches and more colors.
“Harold and the Purple Crayon” is a celebrated children’s book, published in 1955 by Crockett Johnson. I haven’t read the book, but I understand the concept of a little boy named Harold, who wears blue pajamas and a has a magic purple crayon. Anything he draws with it comes to life. The adventures he draws are filled with improvisation, as young Harold manages to get himself out of situations without harm to himself or his animal friends Moose and Porcupine.
The new movie version of it starts off as animation and allows the animated characters to come into the live-action world (like “Enchanted,” “The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle,” or “Fat Albert,” etc.). So instead of using a child actor or crappy CGI animals (like how “Dolittle” learned the hard way), why not have Zachary Levi play the adult Harold (at least we think he’s an adult), and why not have Moose and Porcupine in the forms of Lil Rel Howery and Tanya Reynolds?
And I have some more questions. Is this movie really necessary? Is it trying to channel on the success of the first “Shazam” by having Levi play a kid in an adult body (which is what we’re going to have to assume)? Is it funny when the human Porcupine has to sniff around and act like an animal who snarls at her human enemies? Is a villain necessary for the small book to be extended into a feature length film? And why do we always get a subplot regarding a cynical parent and an imaginative child?
My answers……
1.) Not really.
2.) Your guess is as good as mine.
3.) No, she just looks and acts weird and that’s degrading.
4.) No, but, in retrospect, Alec Baldwin was worse in “The Cat in the Hat.”
5.) My guess is it’s an obligatory cliche, but Patrick Dempsey handled it quite well in “Enchanted.”
The reason why Harold, Moose, and Porcupine are in the real world (Providence, Rhode Island to be exact) is because their narrator (Alfred Molina) hasn’t told them their stories of the day, and he could be Harold’s dad. And the characters they come across consist of Zooey Deschanel as a single mom and would-be musician named Terri, her imaginative son Mel (Benjamin Bottani), and a nerdy and would be Narnia-esque author named Gary (Jemaine Clement).
She wants nothing to do with their exuberance, her son has an imaginary friend who is a dragon splice and has a dog whistle to call him, and the author covets Harold’s crayon for ultimate power. And P.S. the reason why he can’t get his book published is because nobody-not even me-can pronounce his character’s name. So don’t ask me.
“Harold and the Purple Crayon” is the live-action debut of Carlos Saldanha, who was an animator at what once was Blue Sky Studios. He made the “Ice Age” movies, “Robots,” the “Rio” movies, and “Ferdinand.” He can make fun animated movies, but he doesn’t apply the same magic in the real world.
Howery is funny from time to time as Moose when he starts off crawling in the real world and ends up sleep standing up on a mattress against a wall, because that’s how moose sleep. He’s an actor who can display his acting range from goofy to serious (remember I loved last April’s “We Grown Now”), and that’s what I like about him. Just as long as he’s given the right material.
And Levi seems to be enjoying himself as Harold, but doesn’t give him the same charms as demonstrated in “Tangled” or “Shazam.”The direction for him makes you wince more than making a smolder.
This movie can be fun for kids and I liked the animated opening sequence, but if you’re an adult forced to see this with them or if you’re a film critic trying to find the joy and suitability inside, you’re better off looking at your watches. Or at least hoping to borrow Harold’s crayon so you can draw your own exit door. I know I would have.
