Ohjaus:
Tim BurtonKäsikirjoitus:
Ehren KrugerKuvaus:
Ben DavisSävellys:
Danny ElfmanNäyttelijät:
Colin Farrell, Michael Keaton, Danny DeVito, Eva Green, Alan Arkin, Nico Parker, Finley Hobbins, Roshan Seth, Deobia Oparei, Joseph Gatt, Sharon Rooney (lisää)Suoratoistopalvelut (5)
Juonikuvaukset(1)
Elokuva laajentaa rakastetun klassikon tarinaa, joka juhlii erilaisuutta, vaalii perhettä ja joka siivittää unelmat lentoon. Sirkuksen omistaja Max Medici (Danny DeVito) antaa entiselle tähdelle Holt Ferrierille (Colin Farrel) ja hänen lapsilleen Millylle (Nico Parker) ja Joelle (Finley Hobbins) tehtäväksi huolehtia vastasyntyneestä elefantista, jonka valtavat korvat tekevät siitä pilkan kohteen jo valmiiksi taloushuolien kanssa kamppailevassa sirkuksessa. Mutta kun käy ilmi että Dumbo osaa lentää, tekee sirkus häikäisevän paluun. Bisnesmies V.A. Vendevere (Michael Keaton) palkkaa paksunahan uusimpaan, elämää suurempaan show’hunsa nimeltä Dreamland. Dumbo nousee uusiin korkeuksiin yhdessä viehättävän ja säihkyvän ilma-akrobaatin, Colette Merchantin (Eva Green), kanssa kunnes Holt saa tietää että Dreamlandin kimaltelevan pinnan alla piilee synkkiä salaisuuksia. (Walt Disney Nordic Fin.)
(lisää)Arvostelut (7)
The main protagonist of the animated Dumbo was an elephant. In Tim Burton’s live-action version, the baby elephant is primarily an attraction in a clichéd story of several nondescript characters who are paradoxically bothered by the fact that someone uses animals as attractions. Otherwise, it is a completely routinely directed film without spark and (surprisingly) also without memorable visual ideas and (almost) without humour. The original Disney film is an hour shorter, much more enchanting and touching, and contains a scene with pink elephants (to which Burton only briefly refers), apparently written under the influence of absinthe. In other words, it would just be better if you put on Dumbo from 1941 for yourself and your children. 50% ()
Dumbo, the giant-eared elephant, was born in a failing circus. At first he is thought to be a monster, but when it turns out that he can fly thanks, everything changes. When Dumbo and the circus are bought by a cynical businessman, everyone thinks they are in for a golden time. But the opposite is true. Tim Burton's new live-action Disney film is a surprisingly disjointed film that I'm not sure who it was intended for. The humour is lacking, Dumbo himself is cute, but unfortunately much of the plot revolves around the human characters, whose stories are not very funny or interesting, and are also quite serious for a fairy tale. The elephant hero is fine, but overall this remake is awfully mediocre, with no ideas and no energy. And I'm afraid it will bore both children and adults. ()
Tim Burton made me very happy with this tale. The acting is very good (Colin Farrell and Eva Green are charming and Michael Keaton as the villain is solid). All the circus acts are impressive and once Dumbo wiggles his ears, the goosebumps and tears are on point. Towards the end the film is also unexpectedly quite suspenseful, nicely paced and a little scary for the kids in places. I enjoyed it. 80%. ()
The original cartoon is absolute perfection. It was originally a tiny film that wasn't even meant to be a feature film, and yet it has regularly moved generations and is simply wonderful. It’s understandable to young and old alike. Unfortunately, the live-action version is not like that at all. While Burton has surrounded himself with interesting people, the story is perfectly paced to fill almost twice the runtime of the original. But it doesn't work. The acted Dumbo film is neither touching, playful, nor fairy-tale enough, and there is not even a trace of the proverbial "Burton-touch." I’m sorry to say that even Eva Green or Michael Keaton in great costumes can't work miracles. ()
Many had already written off the director of the excellent Big Fish and many other cult classics with Alice, claiming that the quality of subsequent films was still decreasing. The definitive confirmation comes now with the big-eared elephant, whose problems begin, among other things, with the fact that it doesn't respect its source material (it doesn't speak). For the direction of Dumbo, it would have perfectly suited me if Disney had given the opportunity to a newcomer, whom they carefully guarded, and not to a veteran who theoretically has nothing left to prove, yet the old Tim Burton is unrecognizable even from a fast train, and the film is absolutely a generic, nicely looking, another edge adaptation from the extensive Disney money factory, which I never want to see again (which applies to about 60% of related films). Even someone like Michael Keaton is trying again, and even though the creators had a fairly large lineup of favorite actors at hand, they can hardly sell it at all. And this time not even financially, since it has once again been confirmed that Colin Farrell is box office poison - the king. Absolute average...50% ()
The original Dumbo is a pretty daunting piece among Disney movies, so I thought that teaming up with Tim Burton would make for a good remake. As far as the visuals go, it is a beautiful and well-crafted, although the look of some of the animals was a bit jarring to my eyes (especially the rabid monkey). Danny Elfman's score is typically magical and reminded me a lot of the earlier Burton films in places. The cast was mostly well chosen. The director reached for both old friends (Danny DeVito and Michael Keaton) and brand new faces (the child roles). However, sadly this is not another similarly amazing spectacle of Big Fish proportions, which Dumbo is close to through the circus setting. I did feel the old Burton in some places, particularly in the flying elephant scenes, the bubbles and the ending, yet the film felt a little flat. It may be a family film, but even those can delve deep and still appeal to both young and adult audiences. ()
Burton goes full Zemeckis. The storyline about an elephant who, after stuffing its trunk with feathers, discovers it can fly naturally has higher potential in the Czech environment, but this pun also fades away after a while. Even when trying to be as objective as possible and truly push aside how disgustingly artificial the whole thing is, it's still impossible to ignore the fact that the screenplay was fiercely fought over. Obviously, there were conditions in place dictating which motives, characters, and scenes to keep from the source material, all while having to deal with directives from above on how to update things according to current trends. As a result, there are quite a few blind motives here, especially in terms of characters. A prime example of this is the little girl who embodies the cliché of a smart Hermione-like character who rebels against predefined roles, yet that character is completely lifeless, just standing there and uttering some truth with the same expression. Most of the time in that scene, she does nothing, her hands hanging by her body as she looks ahead. If they had added something to her and her brother in post-production, it would have made sense. I'm only giving the second star for Alan Arkin, who seemed to be saying whatever he pleased in each of his scenes because he knew it ultimately didn't matter. ()
Mainos