by Emma Smith, Reporter
The novel A Wrinkle in Time, upon which this movie is based, is beloved for its imaginative world building and complex emotional narrative. The movie attempts to capture the same magic but never quite gets there.
The movie opens with the the protagonist Meg Murray’s tortured middle school experience. Four years ago, her NASA scientist father disappeared while researching the possibility of using the mind to travel through space. Now with the assistance of her precocious younger brother, a new friend, and three mystical beings, Meg must try to save him, and ultimately herself.
A Wrinkle in Time was first published in 1962. It is unsurprising a big screen adaptation took 56 years as the book is full of planets and plot points requiring imagination from a reader and special effects from a director. Unfortunately, the CGI used in this move is wildly uneven. Portions of the planet Uriel, the first stop on the children’s journey, are almost cartoon like. The effects improve in the second half of the film and the visualization of ultimate evil of IT is quite clever. Unfortunately, it’s not enough to recover from the issues that plague the CGI, especially since it lingers on every effect regardless of quality.
Equally as uneven is the acting. Storm Reid as Meg Murray does well in some of her more emotional scenes, but she’s not seasoned enough to carry the movie as her part requires. She lacks chemistry with Deric McCabe, who plays her younger brother. This is particularly damaging because their relationship forms the core of the story. Her chemistry with Levi Miller as Calvin is also very hit or miss. Similarly, the three Mrs also never gel as a group. Individually, Reese Witherspoon (Mrs. Whatsit), Mindy Kaling (Mrs. Who), and Oprah (Mrs. Which) turn in competent performances, but they never feel like the team they are supposed to be. Between their flat interactions and the heavy use of CGI, it often feels as though the three women didn’t film at the same time and were just composited into scenes together in post-production. The best performances in the movie are turned in by Chris Pine as Mr. Murray and Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Mrs. Murray, though the nature of the story means they have minimal screen time.
The story itself is mostly true to the spirit of its original material and most of the modifications made to turn it into a movie make sense. Still even here there are missteps, such as the odd choice to never explain why tesseracts can or can’t be done in certain circumstances. Ultimately, the biggest sin of the film is the Disneyfication of the story’s themes. While a some commentary regarding this movie has complained about the “liberalization” of the source material, the messages are in the movie are simplified versions of those in the source material. But the book allowed readers to get to the core ideas in their own time, something the movie doesn’t show the patience or the subtlety for.
Any movie based on source material as beloved as this will always face a daunting comparison. And credit where it is due, the creative team headed by director Ava DuVernay reached for the stars with this movie. They just didn’t quite make it there. Though the movie never creates the magic of the novel, I hope it at least inspires a new generation to go read it.
