THE STORY – Inside of his book, adventurous Harold can make anything come to life simply by drawing it. After he grows up and draws himself off the book’s pages and into the physical world, Harold finds he has a lot to learn about real life – and that his trusty purple crayon may set off more hilarious hijinks than he thought possible. When the power of unlimited imagination falls into the wrong hands, it will take all of Harold and his friends’ creativity to save both the real world and his own.
THE CAST – Zachary Levi, Lil Rel Howery, Jemaine Clement, Tanya Reynolds, Alfred Molina & Zooey Deschanel
THE TEAM – Carlos Saldanha (Director), David Guion & Michael Handelman (Writers)
THE RUNNING TIME – 90 Minutes
Based on the 64-page 1955 children’s book of the same title by Crockett Johnson, “Harold And The Purple Crayon” is a live-action family film (with some animated elements) aimed directly at children. It’s a film that could have been a unique and empowering experience for young audiences, inspiring their creativity and imagination at an early age by stressing how anything is possible. However, the casting of 43-year-old Zachary Levi (“Shazam!“) as the titular character, who is supposed to be four years old in the beloved children’s book, is a debilitating error that detracts from the film’s desire to be empowering for younger audiences. Instead, it settles for corporatized shlock and cookie-cutter storytelling that should be considered an embarrassment for everyone involved.
Harold (Levi), along with his cartoon animated friends Moose (Lil Rel Howery) and Porcupine (Tanya Reynolds), live inside a children’s book where, with his purple crayon, he can draw anything his imagination conjures up, opening his world up to an infinite number of possibilities. One day, he draws a gateway into “the real world” and suddenly finds himself there with Moose and Porcupine (now taking human physical form instead of CGI creatures). Harold discovers there is so much to learn about the real world, which he experiences through meeting a young boy, Mel (Benjamin Bottani), and his widowed mother, Terri (Zooey Deschanel). Harold must find the book’s creator (Alfred Molina as The Narrator, aka. Crockett Johnson) and the world from where he is from so he can return home, but he does not know the man’s name or what he looks like other than knowing he is an “old man.” With the help of his friends, new and old, the childish Harold begins his search. However, the purple crayon’s unlimited power attracts Gary Naswich (Jemaine Clement), a failed fantasy writer and librarian who wishes to use it to bring his own dark fantasies and worlds to horrifying life.
With uninspired visual effects and lifeless cinematography, “Harold And The Purple Crayon” is pretty dull for a movie where the lead character can create anything his heart desires. There is a lack of imagination in all aspects of filmmaking, failing to capture the fancy and creativity inherent in its source material. It’s further brought down by the childish, immature, and poorly scripted performances from everyone involved. Had Harold been portrayed by an actual kid instead of an adult man, this movie could’ve been a new classic for families, giving children a hero worth aspiring to be. While the film’s message of fostering creativity instead of stifling it is well-intentioned, it loses its impact when delivered through Levi’s discomfiting performance. Over-acted, with no shred of nuance or more profound meaning to be found, his work as a wide-eyed man-child is grating and betrays the spirit of Johnson’s original book, all because he was likely deemed bankable enough to get the film greenlit after years of trying to get this project off the ground.
Lil Rey Howery and Tanya Reynolds don’t fare too much better. Still, there is an inconsistency in their portrayals of animated animals who have now taken human form, with Reyolds leaning more into the physicality of a porcupine’s behavior. At the same time, Howery consistently complains or comments on the differences between being a human and being a moose. Zooey Deschanel looks utterly exhausted throughout. Part of this is the character who is having to contend with the loss of her husband, working at a job she hates, and raising an eight-year-old boy who has an imaginary pet animal that is part dragon, and part of this almost comes across as feeling like she wants to get through the shoot and on to something more substantial with some shred of dignity. When the manner in which she meets Harold and Moose by hitting both of them with her car in the middle of the street, she barely expresses any concern over their well-being and instead treats the accident like it’s nothing; it just goes to show there’s a lack of care, specificity, and subtlety to the storytelling with significant gaps in logic, human behavior and anything resembling any form of consequence.
By the time the film reaches its third-act showdown between Harold and Gary over who gets to control the purple crayon’s magical powers (lazily dramatized in the form of a Western standoff), there is a deflating sense of missed opportunities both on a visual level and a storytelling level. The film fails to fully explore the potential of the purple crayon and its rules (there seemingly are none?), making this premise fully unsatisfying. Medieval weapons and fantasy action play a big part in the climactic fight as Gary’s vision of himself as some mythical warrior manifests itself instead of the pitiful fantasy writer who lusts after Mel’s mother he is. The portrayal of Gary as an insecure fantasy writer with sinister motives feels not only clichéd but also inadvertently mocks the innovative efforts of wonderfully talented fantasy writers all over the world, one such example of boundless stretches of imagination in this world the film purports to celebrate, but through this character simultaneously mocks and vilifies.
“Harold and the Purple Crayon” falls short on every front, coming across as cringeworthy, tedious, and hypocritical in its messaging. It lacks the heart and creativity of Crockett Johnson’s original work, offering a lackluster interpretation filled with poor performances, humorless writing, and pedestrian direction. Despite including elements like a CGI spider-fly (which is legitimately terrifying, as Harold accurately points out to Mel), purple vehicles, objects, and adults behaving like children, the movie will likely fail to engage even the most impressionable young viewers. It’s unfortunate for anyone who adores the charm of the original source material, as this mortifying endeavor never lives up to its full potential.
