Wonderstruck

source: Wonderstruck

I'm a great fan of Todd Haynes' work and I'm so happy for him. Third time at Cannes with such a beautifful, bizzare and unic movie. How to come to terms with the world when there is so much pain? How to find a meaning in death of your parents? or in their absence? How to see your injured memory as a museum of wonders? Millicent Simmonds is amazing and such a beautiful and sad cameo of Michelle Williams.

One of those coming-of-age movies where you're supposed to be short of breath and gasping at the Big Reveals. I was gasping from the urge not to vomit. Ben, a precocious youngster (they're all precocious youngsters, ain't they?) embarks on a journey by himself to find his father because his mother won't tell him who his father is. Why? Who knows? There's absolutely no reason presented as to why the identity of the father must remain this big dark secret. Indeed, the father turns out to be quite a good guy. What the hell, Mom? Can't ask her because, you see, she died, carrying her incomprehensible and downright cruel reasons to the grave. So Ben has to move in with his aunt, who lives in a house right next door to his house, both on the same plot of land, apparently, and his house is bigger than the aunt's so why didn't they all just switch over? Got me. I guess it wouldn't advance the proposition that Ben is Cruelly Treated by his Aunt and cousin, necessitating the whole running-away-to-find-my-father shtick. As if that wasn't bad enough, superimposed over all this is a black-and-white sub-story involving Rose, a deaf girl who runs away to...well, we're not really sure. Visit the museum where her brother works, I guess. See, Rose is also cruelly treated because her Dad doesn't think 12-year-old deaf girls should run around New York City alone. And, get this, he wants her to learn sign language (why doesn't she already know sign language?)! Yeah, cruel bastard, he. Oh, yes, Ben loses his hearing during a lightening strike, so I guess that connects the two stories even though there's no reason why these two stories even relate...well, there is, but you don't know that until waaaay later, long after you've lost interest. Oh yeah, the 1977 New York City blackout's involved, too. What a godawful YA mess this movie is. I'd kick out my screen before watching it again

Carol was one of the best films I saw in 2015, as a matter of fact its probably the best film of that year. Everything about that film was so right. I really like Todd Haynes. Safe is also a fantastic film. I did like Far From Heaven and I'm Not There, though I'm not as crazy about those two. I saw the trailer for Wonderstruck and thought it looked interesting and could possibly be an experience like Carol or Safe. Wonderstruck is definitely a good film but its one of Todd Haynes' weaker efforts. That's really no knock on the film or the filmmaker, its just that Haynes' has set his own bar high. The film portrays events in the lives of two children, one in the late 1927, the other in 1977. Both kids are deaf and have common elements in their life. Rose (1927) is running away from her dad to New York to find her idol, an actress in New York. Ben (1977) is recently orphaned and runs away to New York on a quest to find his estranged father. Both stories are intertwined and interwoven despite the already visible similarities from each tale. Its an interesting concept and Haynes utilizes unique filming styles to convey the tale, however the film doesn't always have high points and is a bit predictable. The 1927 portion of the film emulates silent films of the era and is a tribute to movies of the time. The film is score heavy in this decade which makes the picture seem authentic. The score for this film is rather excellent and could be up for award contention at year's end. The 1977 portion has that gritty and colored frame that perfectly represents the cinematography of films of that era. I applaud Haynes for his presentation in style. The child actors do quite well. I actually didn't even realize Michelle Williams was in the film. Its a warm and fuzzy film that lacks any real conflict which I think was needed to perfect the film. Its a very saccharine effort which will appease younger viewers and Haynes definitely intended for it to be that way. I have to go back to the score because its really riveting. Adds to the magic and wonder of the film and the experiences of the two leads. I love seeing New York in film throughout different decades so visually this film offers a definite viewing experience. Wonderstruck is not Haynes' best effort but like most of his other films its an ambitious effort and technically outstanding. 7/10

Wonderstruck is a shining gem in the cinematic "cabinet of wonders." The film is adapted from the book Wonderstruck by Brian Selznick, the same author who wrote Hugo Cabret. Directed by Todd Haynes and written by Brian Selznick, the film envelopes you in its beautifully detailed vision of old New York. The movie stars Oakes Fegley, Julianne Moore and Michele Williams. I love this film because it combines the artistic style of old black and white silent films with the more modern color palette of today's films. Wonderstruck tells two similar stories that have a connection. One story concerns a twelve-year-old boy, Ben, in the 1970s, who, after losing his Mom, decides to run away and look for his father in the big city. Recently losing his hearing from a lightning strike, he must deal with his disability without knowing sign language. Luckily, when he arrives in NYC he makes a friend, Jamie, who takes him to the American Museum of Natural History. The other story follows a young girl, Rose, in the late 1920s. It is portrayed as a silent black and white film, as befits the time period. Rose is born deaf and never learned sign language or how to properly talk, but she is talented at creating artworks with paper. She is depicted as a very shy, quiet type, but loves visiting her brother who works at the Museum of Natural History. This film reminds me of Hugo and The Night at the Museum because of the attention to historical detail and the wonder inherent in the natural world. I also enjoyed how it keeps changing from a silent, black and white film to a talky, color film. It gives you the best of both worlds - old style filmmaking and more modern. Each time the film shifts time periods, the music changes as well. The film revels in many different textures, such as the gritty reality of NYC in the 1970s, all the old curiosities in the Museum of Natural History and even the paper cityscapes that Rose creates. The crux of the film is the director's fascination with the old "cabinet of wonders" and how it is the precursor to the modern museum. This film itself is a "cabinet of wonders," revealing many treasures in its depths. My favorite scene is when Ben and Jamie explore the secret rooms in the Museum of Natural History. Before Wonderstruck, I was not familiar with the director, Todd Haynes. Until now he has created mostly sophisticated, art house, independent films. This film can be considered a fascinating, art house, family film. I give Wonderstruck 4 out of 5 stars for its creative way it combines two different artistic styles. I recommend it for ages 12 to 18. Reviewed by Clayton P., KIDS FIRST! Film Critic.

Wonderstruck is a beautifully told story that surprises you because there is little dialogue. The story ties together two deaf children, a girl in 1927, and a boy in 1977, both of whom go to New York searching for family but discover more than expected at the Natural History Museum. The 1927 scenes are shot in black and white and take on that slightly frantic pace old silent films have, where everyone seems to walk just a little too briskly. The 1977 scenes are the exact opposite, with vivid, colourful clothing, filmed in a slow, languid, hot summer style. When words are spoken, they are sometimes shown from the perspective of the children, without subtitles, but these aren't necessary as the stories unfold into each other, with some surprising results. The art direction is especially worthy of praise. I couldn't tell if all the scenes from 1977 New York were recreated for the film or if they were old footage spliced in. The finale of the film, where all is revealed, is cleverly told through dioramas! The film has many of the magical qualities of Brian Selznick's previous film Hugo.

Terrible waste of time and money. Boring, flat and uninteresting plot. Go stare at a bowl of Rice Krispies for 2 hours and THAT will be a better mind expanding experience. In short, I was not Wonderstruck.

This was almost exactly what I expected based on the average reviews. Definitely a significant downgrade from Carol. I appreciated its ambition and some of its visuals, cinematography, and music is really good. But that screenplay is kind of a huge mess, and such a big missed opportunity. I don't see why this film would get much dislike, but I also don't see why it would get much love either. It's almost the complete opposite of mother!, which is probably the worst spot to be in. As soon as it was over I had forgotten it and felt so much apathy towards it. Not terrible or even bad, but not all that good either.

This film tells the stories of two deaf children, in different eras in New York. It is unfortunate that the film is just painfully slow to the point that I can skip thirty seconds at a time and still miss nothing. I don't really need to see scenes of characters walking the streets for a whole minute, walking up the stairs for thirty seconds or just sitting for a minute. Most of the film has no dialogue, which is not a problem in itself, but there is just no message to fill the screen. The museum scenes in the two different eras may be trying to make viewers compare and contrast the treatment of deaf children in different eras, but it just does not work at all. It is just tedious and boring. Even Julianne Moore cannot save this film from being a tremendous bore.

I absolutely love this movie. David Ehrlich wrote:"This is a soul-stirring and fiercely uncynical film that suggests the entire world is a living museum for the people we've lost, and that we should all hope to leave some of ourselves behind in its infinite cabinet of wonders". I couldn't have said it better myself. Of course it is a bit slow and maybe too complicated for a kid (it's definitely not for everyone). But A LOT of people actually love The Greatest Showman or another rubbish...I am 25 years old - I watched it with my mother who is 60 years old and we enjoed it. The ending is quite outstanding in my opinion. Everyone involved did such a beautiful job.