James Berardinelli review - ** out of ****
https://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/harold-and-the-purple-crayon
Let me start out by saying that my four-year-old daughter liked the film considerably more than I did, which probably says all that needs to be said about Harold and the Purple Crayon. Like the book from which it gets its name and inspiration, the movie is designed for young kids far more than for their older siblings or parents. The screenplay credited to David Guion & Michael Handelman pays lip service to the twin powers of animation and friendship by relaying them in a clunky and obvious fashion. The charm of the book is mostly lost in translation although, as I noted, that might not bother younger, less discriminating viewers.share
One of the film’s biggest problems relates to the titles it either consciously or subconsciously references, starting with the likes of Big and moving on to Jumanji, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, A Bridge to Terabithia, and so on. All those earlier films are better (some considerably more so) and bringing them to mind does Harold and the Purple Crayon a disservice. A Bridge to Terabithia is especially noteworthy for two reasons: it’s arguably the best of the bunch and it features Zooey Deschanel, who is also in Harold.
The movie begins with a delightful animated sequences that recaps the events of the book, introducing Harold and his two friends, Moose and Porcupine. Narration is provided by Alfred Molina as the omniscient entity Harold calls “Old Man” (presumably writer Crockett Johnson). When Old Man’s voice falls silent, Harold decides that he must visit the “real world” to discover what has happened. He does this via his magical purple crayon and, faster than you can say “Shazam!”, Harold (Zachary Levi) is stumbling around in a park terrorizing an old man. He is eventually joined by a humanized version of Moose (Lil Rey Howery) and, later, Porcupine (Tanya Reynolds). A literal run-in with a woman, Terry (Deschanel), and her son, Mel (Benjamin Bottani), provides the homeless, clueless Harold with a place to stay for the night. He repays Terry’s kindness by painting her house purple. Mel sees the crayon at work and becomes a believer. Terry, despite the evidence of her eyes (which includes an enormous number of pies in her kitchen), refuses to accept that magic is involved.
Gary the Librarian (Jermaine Clement), a creepy failed author carrying a torch for Terry, connects Harold with the book and decides to get the crayon away from the cartoon-turned-man. Once he has it, he believes he can transform his environs into a facsimile of his fantasy realm and remake himself as his book’s hero, Gagaroh. All it takes is a soul-crushing event – one that Gary is more than happy to be a part of.
The movie tries, without much success, to fit Harold into the mold of a child in a man’s body, not unlike the premise of Big (or, to name another Deschanel movie, Elf), but Zachary Levi is no Tom Hanks and, instead of being endearing, he comes across as vaguely clueless and sometimes even a little creepy. As Moose, Lil Rey Howery seems to be channeling Eddie Murphy’s Donkey (from Shrek), but with limited success. Jermaine Clement’s Gary is missing only a mustache to twirl. And Deschanel seems strangely distracted. This will not go down as one of her finest performances.
The titles I listed above, all of which classify as “family fare,” indicate it’s possible to fashion a story about the power of imagination that will engage and entertain viewers of all ages. For whatever reason, director Carlos Saldanha and his writers are unable to give Harold and the Purple Crayon the same degree of respect accorded to many of the other fine motion picture translations of beloved children’s literature. The movie mistakes lazy slapstick humor, a somewhat dreary storyline, and unnecessarily busy special effects as key ingredients.
Anyone who spends a few minutes perusing (the book) Harold and the Purple Crayon will recognize that it isn’t the best choice for a movie adaptation. Perhaps in the hands of a visionary genius in touch with their inner child, it might have been possible to achieve something better than an overlong throwaway distraction for a preschooler. In the hands of these filmmakers, however, it feels like a soulless cash-grab – an attempt to tap into the family-friendly frenzy that has emerged this summer. It’s a crass approach to a title that deserves better.