Intro: Back from my holidays in Argentina, I'm pushing myself to get back to writing some new reviews, or I'll fall even further behind schedule after my two-week break... Vámonos!
Film 2513: "The End of Oak Street" (2026), directed by David Robert Mitchell
Watched: At the movies
Language: English
Watched with: Niamh, Debbi
Thoughts: I was quite excited about this one, to be honest, as I love both Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor, and a movie about dinosaurs is always welcome when well made. Judging by the reviews and the trailer(s), it looked like "The End of Oak Street" could be a new hit for the genre.
But it wasn't. At least not for me.
I'll start by saying that it's not the actors' fault, as they deliver great performances. The issue for me is the story. It doesn't really matter that the screenplay doesn't explain what's happening in a way that makes sense, or that the explanation is relegated to just a brief moment of dialogue towards the end. To me, the real issue is that... I didn't really get who this movie was made for.
The (CGI) dinosaurs only come out around the middle of the story, and all the hype leading up to the first encounter is counterbalanced by a lack of interaction between the creatures and the protagonists. I'm not saying that there isn't any interaction -- cause there is -- but considering this was heavily marketed as the new (if not better -- ahahahahahah!) "Jurassic Park", then I'm expecting dinosaurs galore. Like, I expect to see a new dinosaur appear every minute or two. They have to rain from the sky, emerge from the abyss, climb down from trees, and chase humans like there's no tomorrow.
Here, instead, we get very slow interactions and mainly walking dinosaurs. I mean, they do eat people and chase our protagonists, but I was expecting way more.
Additionally, there's another element that confused me: the time-jump combo. We're in the 80s, then the dinos appear. That's absolutely fine with me, but... why? Going back to what I was saying earlier, it felt to me that the "explanation" the story gives is extremely technical, comes too late, and doesn't necessarily answer the question: why should this movie exist? Because, let me tell you, it doesn't add anything to the dinosaur genre, nor to the time-travelling one.
Overall, I can't say I hated it, but "The End of Oak Street" definitely left me disappointed (though, I was happy to see Mrs. Kim from "Gilmore Girls" once again!).
Cast: Anne Hathaway, Ewan McGregor, Maisy Stella, Christian Convery, P. J. Byrne, Emily Kuroda.
Box Office: $122 million
Worth a watch?: Please don't believe the reviews that claim this film is better than "Jurassic Park" because, I'm sorry, it isn't. It's an OK movie with an intriguing premise that fails to deliver. It's not bad by any means, but it lacks a sense of purpose that goes beyond the starting idea: what would happen if a whole neighborhood were transported from the 80s to the age of the dinosaurs?
Awards: /
Key word: Light.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi
Watched: At the movies
Language: English
Watched with: Niamh, Debbi
Thoughts: I was quite excited about this one, to be honest, as I love both Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor, and a movie about dinosaurs is always welcome when well made. Judging by the reviews and the trailer(s), it looked like "The End of Oak Street" could be a new hit for the genre.
But it wasn't. At least not for me.
I'll start by saying that it's not the actors' fault, as they deliver great performances. The issue for me is the story. It doesn't really matter that the screenplay doesn't explain what's happening in a way that makes sense, or that the explanation is relegated to just a brief moment of dialogue towards the end. To me, the real issue is that... I didn't really get who this movie was made for.
The (CGI) dinosaurs only come out around the middle of the story, and all the hype leading up to the first encounter is counterbalanced by a lack of interaction between the creatures and the protagonists. I'm not saying that there isn't any interaction -- cause there is -- but considering this was heavily marketed as the new (if not better -- ahahahahahah!) "Jurassic Park", then I'm expecting dinosaurs galore. Like, I expect to see a new dinosaur appear every minute or two. They have to rain from the sky, emerge from the abyss, climb down from trees, and chase humans like there's no tomorrow.
Here, instead, we get very slow interactions and mainly walking dinosaurs. I mean, they do eat people and chase our protagonists, but I was expecting way more.
Additionally, there's another element that confused me: the time-jump combo. We're in the 80s, then the dinos appear. That's absolutely fine with me, but... why? Going back to what I was saying earlier, it felt to me that the "explanation" the story gives is extremely technical, comes too late, and doesn't necessarily answer the question: why should this movie exist? Because, let me tell you, it doesn't add anything to the dinosaur genre, nor to the time-travelling one.
Overall, I can't say I hated it, but "The End of Oak Street" definitely left me disappointed (though, I was happy to see Mrs. Kim from "Gilmore Girls" once again!).
Cast: Anne Hathaway, Ewan McGregor, Maisy Stella, Christian Convery, P. J. Byrne, Emily Kuroda.
Box Office: $122 million
Worth a watch?: Please don't believe the reviews that claim this film is better than "Jurassic Park" because, I'm sorry, it isn't. It's an OK movie with an intriguing premise that fails to deliver. It's not bad by any means, but it lacks a sense of purpose that goes beyond the starting idea: what would happen if a whole neighborhood were transported from the 80s to the age of the dinosaurs?
Awards: /
Key word: Light.
Trailer
#HollywoodCiak
Bengi
#HollywoodCiak 2513 #TheEndofOakStreet #OakStreet #AnneHathaway #EwanMcGregor #MaisyStella #ChristianConvery #PJByrne #EmilyKuroda #dinosaurs #timetravel #timejump #family #death #violence #neighborhood #survival #JJAbrams #80s #wormhole #grief #loss #flop #followme
RispondiElimina