Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day

This is topic Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=002092

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 12-12-2014, 03:53 PM:

Alexander and the Very, Very, Very, Very Long Title is based on a 32 page picture book by Judith Viorst about a young boy who feels trampled by the world and feels that his personal misfortunes are neither recognised nor understood by his family. In a moment of sly retribution, he wishes the worst possible day on his parents and siblings in a desperate attempt to have them understand his plight.

I've not read the the book (other than a few sample pages courtesy of Amazon.com) but I imagine, as was the case with Where the Wild Things Are, that the book is a much more economic and elegant tale than the resulting feature film. The film appears to be riding the coat tails of the recent Diary of a Wimpy Kid films (which do a very good job of translating it's literary source to the silver screen) but where the Wimpy Kid films riff neatly on the familiar misfortunes and fears of our youth, the hijinks presented in the Alexander film are so outlandish as to be highly unlikely. These tremendously contrived events no doubt sat fine within the confines of a picture book but in the context of a hammy live action feature film they feel phony and forced. As a result, much of the proceedings are excruciating to watch as one unbelievable misfortune is piled upon the next.

Naturally, the film redeems itself with it's central theme that as long as you have your family, things can't be too bad, but there's no escaping the feeling throughout the movie that Diary of a Wimpy Kid is so much better than this.

6 out of 10.

Posted by Carol May (Member # 4068) on 12-16-2014, 08:20 PM:

I love the book, and there's no way, if it must be made into a movie, that it should be any longer than 15 minutes. The same with Polar Exoress. I've read the book over and over, but the magic is in the words and in the imagination. Not every book needs to be made into a movie.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-16-2014, 08:41 PM:

I agree that Polar Express was too long. This movie didn't feel stretched to me, but then I haven't read the book either.

I wonder where it is written that movies have to be as long as they are? The Polar Express could have been a great 50-minute movie and there could have been way more shows per day. They could have given it a reduced ticket price, or paired it with some other shorter film as a double feature.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 12-17-2014, 04:57 AM:

It's an interesting point you make. But it's all about playing it safe obviously.

You could, for example, make a really great movie in an hour, but people will somehow expect to get at least one hour and a half of entertainment.

I do like the good old concept of the double features or putting one or two short films or cartoons in front of the main feature, but those concepts are unfortunately difficult to market. I'm afraid that even if you give them two short films and a double feature mounting up to an hour and a half to two hours in total, they will still feel somehow cheated...

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 12-28-2014, 05:55 PM:

^ But that's only because people are stupid.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-01-2015, 10:13 AM:

putting nearly ALL the jokes in the two and half minute trailer though was a dumb idea.