So the reviews of Book Of Henry, the latest film from Episode 9 director Colin Trevorrow, delivered what can only be called a mauling by the mainstream press. Here is a sample:
“It does not suffice to call The Book of Henry bad; it’s nonfunctional, so poorly conceived from the ground up as to slip out of the grasp of the usual standards one applies to narrative film” – Vulture
“A weepie, a thriller, a tragedy, a sub-Spielbergian pastiche, The Book of Henry is mostly a tedious mess.” – The New York Times
At the time of writing it had received a score of 22% on Rotten Tomatoes, but strangely 67% from the viewing public. I decided to investigate by doing what we should all do, consume the movie and judge it for ourselves. Could it really be so bad, and why the difference in the opinions between cinema goers and the media…
Henry, an 11-year-old boy genius is being raised by their single mother, Susan, a waitress and wannabe children’s author. Henry uses his genius to build substantial financial resources for the family on the stock market but also to build amazing Rube Goldberg machines to carry out everyday tasks. This creates an instant charm to the character that pulls the audience in.
Henry is an observant child and realises that his neighbour Christina is being abused by her stepfather – but nobody believes him. He thus designs a complicated scheme to ‘save’ Christina and writes it in his notebook. However, the plot takes a sudden twist when Henry dies from a brain tumour.
Susan decides to carry out Henry’s plan from his notebook and accompanying audio tape. The plan involves the murder of Christina’s abuser.
Susan almost carries out the act, but realises that she must not act on the ideas of a child but rather tackle the problem as an adult and confront the abuser. As the investigation into the abuser starts, he takes his own life rather than face reality.
Christina ends up being adopted by Susan, and Susan finishes her book just like Henry had urged her.
The film is a real mix of themes and events that make it at times uncomfortable viewing. You have an adorable child genius with wacky gadgets, but also child abuse, child illness and death, homicide, and suicide. This isn’t a paint by numbers feature where the plot is horizontal and predictable.
This is an uncomfortable film layered with horrors, and tragedy. But does that make it bad? The clear answer to me is no. This may have themes that people don’t want to consume, or to accept occur in life. They may want to revert back to safe places, and comfortable story telling with predictable outcomes. Some will even argue that these themes should not form part of an entertainment piece. I would argue that some of the greatest films ever made derive from parts of the most horrid elements of mankind. We shouldn’t be afraid to address these topics, but equally we also have a choice to avoid and not consume them. The reviews seem to forget that we have that choice.
Trevorrow doesn’t subject us to a predictable journey. He layers the characters and allows the actors to explore the depths of their characters beautifully. We start with a rather wonderful 30 minute tale of Henry the precocious kid genius, allowing the child actor Jaeden Lieberher to capture the hearts of the audience. But just as you get comfortable with the adorable story, you are hit with the first jolt, life for all children is not love and happiness.
Just next door Christina suffers a life of horrible abuse. It is a hard and shocking pill to swallow and as you start to take command of that issue, Trevorrow boldly layers the emotions by killing the lead, Henry. You can argue here that Trevorrow is pushing the emotion buttons of the audience rather than earning their emotions but the sudden shock works in upsetting and unsettling the viewer. The sudden and swift switch in tone will not suit everyone, arguably it creates a film the viewer never expected from the rather sweet tones of the family friendly opening. But does that make it bad? No, it makes it challenging and engaging to the viewer. But only IF the viewer is prepared to be challenged.
Perhaps this is where the media reviews fail. They criticize the change in tone, and what they term ‘genre.’ But if you watch any of the trailers and promotion of the movie it is very clear on what the storyline is and where this movie is going. It would appear that they simply classified it in the wrong genre before they started to consume it. It is clear it is not a children’s movie. So many of the media reviews see to fail to grasp this, they write their reviews as if they were expecting a light-hearted family movie. Trevorrow never once promises this. He delivers on the dark tale he promises. Is that simple issue the reason the viewing public knew and appreciated the movie they were going to see, but the media just didn’t grasp it?
The perhaps one universal criticism that media and fans alike unite over is the final act, the proposed murder plot. Whilst there is an attempt to use Henry’s genius to deliver the plot device, it just doesn’t work for me. It begins to stretch belief. Here I can accept the criticism delivered, and it delivers a weaker final act to the movie. You do have to couple that with the fact that Susan also chooses to ignore Henry’s plan, so there is an acceptance within the plot of the movie that the plan is not all that.
So how does this movie impact of Episode 9…?
THAT is the real question. Well as in all director appointments there are good and bad elements to every pick. Book Of Henry was a passion project of Trevorrow for some twenty years. You thus have to question why the last act didn’t quite work. On the same hand, you also have to praise the guts it takes to tackle such a tough host of topics in one movie. It’s bold. Bold is good, and Star Wars at this time needs bold as too much of the content has been safe. Trevorrow can deliver on that, as he is aiding in the story of Episode 9. However as a self correction of the weak final act he has the comfort of support of a very talented story group, Derek Connolly whom he wrote Safety Not Guaranteed and Jurassic World with – which lets face it is the two films that earnt him this job, as well as recently addition writer Jack Thorne. Well known in the UK for his writing abilities, and whom wrote the This Is England TV series, and much like Book Of Henry the very uncomfortable but gripping child abuse story, National Treasure. Thus more than an interesting pick.
In terms of actor performances in Book Of Henry there is not one bad performance. Every performance is sublime. To get such a performance of depth as seen from Jaeden Lieberher as Henry, as well as Naomi Watts and Dean Norris shows the skills of a director. He has guided them to deliver amazing performances, and allowed them the freedom to develop and bring forth the characters in the script.
Elsewhere in the movie, the art direction is full of fun. Henry’s treehouse and equipment allowing the art directors wonderful creative freedom. The cinematography is strong, with particular haunting effects added to the abuse of his neighbour. Cunning use of light and dark, as well as focus. The fingerprints of Trevorrow are across the whole movie, and exhibit signs of a director being in full control of his team.
I thus have been left with nothing but optimism for Episode 9. There is an undercurrent in fandom to bury Trevorrow due to topics and tomes he has chosen for his films. A desire to see him removed from the film in fact. I can respect the disagreement among fans as to whom Lucasfilm choose to lead a film, what I find bizarre and distasteful is very personal campaigns against individuals that truly we don’t really know. We only know their body of work, not the individual behind that work.
When it becomes personal, I have to question the motives. Isn’t it more appropriate to support a production, until such time as it lets down and disappoints? Yes question the choices, debate the issues around those choices – but why carry on a vitriolic campaign against them. What purpose does it serve, and whom does it serve but themselves. Instead of reacting to reviews, why not consume his body of work yourself and base opinions on that…
Towards the end of the film, the character of Henry delivers an interesting voiceover. “Good stories remind us of who we want to be,” – but perhaps this is also a self inflicting criticism of the film. What character in this film do you want to be. By the end there are few characters that walk out with their head held high. But is that the point of this movie. Life isn’t a story, life can be hard and painful…
When Star Wars gets dark, it tends to excel. A painful and hard end to Episode 9 may just be what the franchise needs to kick it into the next forty years. Lets wait and see what Colin Trevorrow gives us…
