Review – Tomorrowland

With George Clooney, Britt Robertson, Hugh Laurie,
Raffey Cassidy, Keegan-Michael Key. Written by Damon Lindelof and Brad Bird. Directed by Brad Bird. Rated PG for sequences of sci-fi action violence and peril, thematic elements, and language. 130 minutes.

To say that TOMORROWLAND is a disappointment isn’t really fair. If this reviewer was eight years old, it would seem like one of the best movies ever. It’s the difference between someone able to appreciate all the “gee whiz” elements and someone able to ask all sorts of inconvenient questions about the plot. So take the kids and check your cynicism at the door.

The film begins with Frank Walker (George Clooney) seeming to address us. Off screen is Casey (Britt Robertson), whom we’ll meet after a while. They’re arguing about how to best tell their story, and right away it’s clear that maybe writer/director Brad Bird and co-writer Damon Lindelof might have solved that problem before they started making the film.

As a young boy, Frank (Thomas Robinson) goes to the 1964 World’s Fair to show off his invention. There he meets Athena (Raffey Cassidy) who gives him a special badge, which allows him to go to a futuristic city where Athena and Nix (Hugh Laurie) actually live. Meanwhile, in our present, teenage Casey has been breaking into a NASA facility to prevent them from taking down equipment. (That she does it with relative ease is one of the film’s many narrative problems.) When she gets caught, she finds that one of those special badges seems to have turned up in her belongings, and she, too, gets to visit the future city.

Things get strange when two shopkeepers (Keegan-Michael Key, Kathryn Hahn) turn violent and demand to know about the “girl” who gave her the badge. She knows nothing about any girl, which is when Athena–looking the same as she did in 1964–shows up to rescue her. Athena gets her together with the adult Frank, who isn’t interested in Casey or her story… until robot men show up and start attacking.

For a long while, “Tomorrowland” is wacky and inventive, but when the robot men start vaporizing police officers who get in their way you begin to wonder if this is really a family film. By the time the main characters are all together in the future city–which apparently is in another dimension–the shagginess of the story is all too obvious.

Clooney is not known for this sort of film, but he plays the gruff but ultimately warm-hearted adult well, playing off his younger co-stars without overpowering them (or being upstaged by them either). Robertson is the film’s feisty heroine, quickly adapting to the increasingly strange occurrences. As for Cassidy, she offers a suitably serious presence for a character presumably much older than her actual age of 12, with her pleasant British accent adding the necessary gravitas. Laurie, alas, is sorely under-utilized and gets saddled with the big “exposition speech” to boot.

Given Brad Bird’s track record (including “The Iron Giant,” “The Incredibles” and “Mission: Impossible: Ghost Protocol”), it’s not surprising that expectations would be high for “Tomorrowland.” If it falls short, it’s because he’s done so much more.•••

North Shore Movies has given this film a score of 2.5 out of 5.Daniel M. Kimmel is a veteran movie critic and author of a host of film-related books. His most recent book is “Shh! It’s a Secret: a novel about Aliens, Hollywood and the Bartender’s Guide.” He lives in Somerville, Massachusetts.

3 thoughts on “Review – Tomorrowland

  1. To say that Daniel Kimmel’s review is a disappointment isn’t really (world’s) fair. After all, he did go against the crowd by giving Bridesmaids the panning it deserved and no one is p-p-per-perfect every time out.

    The film is not “little girls save the world”. Tomorrowland is about the constant feedback of war news, theocratic end-time and eschaton in teen or YP novels that are translated into manipulated stupid big box office movies like “Twilight” filled with implications of opiate addiction hiding behind vampire whiteface (both on and off the set) not to mention deliberately dumb dialogue and on-purpose B movie acting. Hunger Games is post WWIII mixed with Orwellian and fake Darwinian survival of the fittest themes.

    Along comes another far distant future franchise called Detergent where clothes never get dirty. Tomorrowland really is divergent and says we are all being programmed about what to expect in the real world. Sarah Palin’s rapture endtime in out lifetime. Along comes Clooney and company to say different and enough already.

    The cops blown away by Secret Service robotic BOM’s was kinda Clooney and wild but what the heck that was Hugo Gurnsback’s store that was blown up. And who was he? The guy whose artwork about the future really was in every Sunday paper back in the day of the 64 World’s Fair. More importantly were the things coming out of his movie robot characters mouth. Was the Gurnsback rant just a bunch of Hollywood science fiction gibberish or reality based? Check out the short story “The Gurnsback Continuum” by William Gibson and leave out the dumb ending. Like Tomorrowland it is not just a story.

    What was it robot woman said in the store? Something about ultra-plus humans? Or Double-Plus Ungood Big Brother types dragging the world down by “feeding the wrong wolf”.

    1. Actually the book I had in mind was a collaboration science fiction short story called “The Belonging Kind” co-written by William Gibson. The Gurnaback Continuum was part of the same collection.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.