Review: 'A Wrinkle In Time' Delivers Weird, Fun, And Heartfelt Family Entertainment

Current estimates put A Wrinkle In Time in the $30+ million range for domestic opening weekend. Should that prove true, it would need a strong final multiplier of at least 3x or more (depending on whether it comes in at the higher end or lower end of estimates) in order to finish its run with a North American cume of $100+ million. A domestic/foreign split of the 33%/66% variety, then, would result in a $300+ million worldwide total in this scenario.

Should this be another case of tracking and other predictive data under-representing interest and likely attendance from demographics who overindex on mobile devices and social media marketing, as often/usually happens with people of color in tracking and certain polling, then A Wrinkle In Time might enjoy a domestic opening closer to $40-45 million, a final domestic cume in the $100-120 million range, and a global tally north of $350+ million.

It seems that even a high-end result that defies even more optimistic expectations would see the film finishing in $50 million territory in North America this weekend, so the true fate of A Wrinkle In Time will depend a lot on its legs and on international interest. Families will drive the box office narrative for this one, as will people of color. Expect a high percentage of women in the audience, and particularly women of color.

If turnout pushes the domestic opening toward $50 million, and if the Cinemascore is A- or better, then a 3x multiplier or higher could be very possible. That, in turn, would translate into a $150+ million domestic run and — based on performance for typical branded fantasy fare with good word of mouth — perhaps another $300+ million in foreign markets, for $450-500 million in global earnings.

With about $200 million in production and marketing costs, the film needs to finish in the vicinity of $400+ million worldwide to turn a profit from theatrical receipts alone. Obviously the Disney merchandising machine will generate good revenue streams elsewhere, including the eventual home entertainment release that will bring in tens of millions in rentals and sales around the world. So even if the theatrical returns are more modest, it won’t hurt too much in the long run.

But the hope has to be for a franchise launch, of course, so Disney is surely hoping to perform above expectations, not to mention positive word of mouth from viewers and subsequent strong box office legs. A worst-case scenario might be a $30 million opening, a soft B or B+ audience grade, and a resulting muted $65+ million domestic cume alongside roughly $150 million in international receipts, for a grand total of only about $215+/- million worldwide. Still, that scenario leaves room for merchandising revenue to at least make up the difference and break even or turn a small profit.

Best case, the film opens far ahead of expectations, riding a wave of brand interest, popularity of some of its stars, and good will for diverse filmmaking, to achieve a $50+ million opening that translates into a $150-175 million domestic and a worldwide cume of $500+ million. This isn’t even a far-fetched or significantly high-end set of hopes and factors, and there’s a chance that even a weak domestic bow is eclipsed by enough foreign interest in the brand, stars, and genre trappings to give it a lopsided domestic-foreign split that still allows it to pass the $400 million mark.

Reviews so far, though, have been decidedly mixed-to-negative, and the marketing has been fine but a bit conservative compared to other branded genre-franchise entertainment from a major studio. The latter point means audience awareness might be lower than necessary to achieve a true breakout opening, so it will rely far more on good word of mouth and legs. Which, in turn, means reviews need to be overshadowed by the word of mouth from audiences, enough to overcome the combination of bad reviews and lower visibility in marketing.

I’m frankly surprised we didn’t see a more aggressive marketing push, including leaning heavily into the fact this is an iconic, beloved book series and proudly promoting the fact A Wrinkle In Time is another example of Disney’s family of studios releasing a big-budget genre picture from a filmmaker of color and staring a diverse cast. On the heels of Black Panther, there was a lot of potential in embracing such talking points even more than Disney already has — and I don’t mean to imply this wasn’t part of the film’s PR, just that I expected it to be an even more prominent aspect.

Heck, I’d even argue that perhaps Disney should’ve included a sneak preview of A Wrinkle In Time at the start of screenings for Black Panther last weekend and all through this week, in major markets. A five minute preview ending in an extended trailer-like series of clips, for example, plus an opening weekend giveaway of posters, t-shirts, and a coupon for an early download of Black Panther on digital release probably would pay decent dividends this weekend for A Wrinkle In Time. Some double feature ticket sales likewise would give it a nice boost, too.

I realize that second-guessing the House of Mouse, and offering marketing suggestions to the studio that has turned PR into a martial art, is probably a fool’s errand. After all, I’m among those who regularly cites the 3-Ds mantra “Don’t Doubt Disney.” Still, I have to call it as I see it, and in this case I can’t help thinking there is some missed opportunity to give A Wrinkle In Time every possible chance to succeed above expectations. Indeed, I’ll freely admit I want it to outperform expectations and succeed in launching a franchise.

My own “moderate” prediction for opening weekend is $35-40 million, based on my belief — which I really hope is correct — that existing numbers don’t adequately consider or represent key demographics that are constantly under-represented in tracking and other predictive box office data. Likewise, I expect another case of overall critical reception proving to be at odds with mainstream audience reception, resulting in positive word of mouth from viewers (especially among crucial demographics) and decent legs. The result, then, would be a final domestic tally in the $90-120 million range in North America.

I expect a domestic/foreign split of about 40%/60%, meaning an international total of $135-180 million. This means a final worldwide cume of $225 million to $300 million, as my “moderate” estimate. My lower-end estimate for the final global results would be in the $200-225 million range, while my higher-end estimate would be in the admittedly wide $300-400 million range. If it either has even better legs than expected or enjoys far stronger foreign reception, or both, then it could climb toward perhaps $450 million.

Why am I rooting for DuVernay’s film, and why do I think audiences will give it a better reception than most critics? Read on for my full review…

We’re at a point in time when genre entertainment, even family entertainment geared toward younger audiences, is expected to put the wants and preferences of adult fans first. This tends to go beyond mere expectations of quality storytelling and into specific demands that films appeal to both the misty-eyed nostalgia of grownups as well as their insistence that stories from their childhood mature with them. This often deprives younger fans of a chance to enjoy the same entry-level admittance to genre storytelling that we as adult fans were offered, and results in adults unable or unwilling to consider relevant context and perspective in stories geared specifically toward the experiences, tastes, and maturity of youthful audiences.

This does not mean some sort of lower standards of quality for children and their entertainment, it’s merely a recognition that of course storytelling that treats younger fans as the primary target demographic will sometimes fail to meet the demands and expectations of adult genre fans with a preference for entertainment that puts those fans at the center of all considerations. There’s a difference between simply bad storytelling and low quality productions, and storytelling with rhythms, pacing, and structure offering children the opportunity to participate in anticipating a turn of events and following the connections between subplots and character arcs.

Because yes, kids tend to be smarter than we give them credit for being; but yes, kids also still need stories that introduce them to increasingly complex structure and that teach them to draw conclusions and connect the dots. And it’s important to understand that stories about 13 and 14 year olds are not primarily geared toward that age group in the audience, but rather toward kids a few years younger. It tends to be true that, for younger fans, the most influential and resonant stories will feature characters a few years older than the young fans, allowing them to look up to the characters and aspire to be like them.

So this isn’t a call for adults to just accept lower standards for child entertainment, although that’s frequently the reductive mischaracterization a lot of people jump to when points like these come up. This is a call for adult fans to simply be less selfish, and to be more open to genre content that lets other people stand front and center.

A Wrinkle In Time is a family film, and its main intended audience are kids 12 and under. Parents of those kids are the secondary audience. Teens are next, I’d guess, being slightly ahead of adult fans of the original book series. And in all of this, there is intersection of race and sex and gender as well, since this is a story about a young girl of color and a collection of many supporting characters of color as well, especially women of color. If this conversation makes you uncomfortable or outright upset and frustrated, if you’re “sick” of hearing discussion of entertainment that actually cares about social issues and the fact a huge portion of audiences rarely ever get to see stories more reflective of their lives, then you’re frankly part of the larger problem.

DuVernay delivered a coming of age story about a young girl from a fractured home, who feels lost and alone and scared, who is an underachiever waiting for life to offer her a good reason to care again, who has so much potential for greatness that nobody else can see but which leads her to a great destiny and a journey across the stars.

It is a story full of humor, of tragedy, of fun and joy, of painful truths and responsibility. It offers life lessons that aren’t always easy to hear, it suggests sometimes our idealized expectations of other people might leave us disappointed. It tells us to not just accept but rather to overcome that disappointment and love each other, not only despite our flaws but in fact because of those flaws. Our flaws, our mistakes, and our disappointments are really none of those things if we learn to use them as sources of strength to improve ourselves and accept who we are. Without flaws, there is no growth; without growth, there is no insight; without insight, there is no transcendence of ourselves and the limitations of this world. Loss leads to discovery, and A Wrinkle In Time is all about that important, foundational fact of how we live our lives.

The journey in A Wrinkle In Time begins with a missing parent, an emotional scar and a hole in a family’s life. That starting point, and how it relates to the end point, is a story that can be told and understood entirely apart from the sci-fi and fantasy elements.

Parents make mistakes, and sometimes a single momentary lapse can cause life-altering problems for an entire family. Children bear these burdens without the experience to put it into perspective, feeling guilt and shame for things that weren’t their doing, feeling fear of their own emotions when they love a parent so much but also resent and hate that parent for decisions the child cannot fully understand. It hurts to feel betrayed by someone you love, and it hurts to hate yourself for feeling responsible for someone’s departure, to hate yourself for still loving them and to hate yourself for the fact you blame yourself for the parent’s mistakes.

These emotions are dreadfully confusing, and people at the crossroads between childhood and young adulthood face tremendous internal and external pressures already, without the added issue of abandonment and self-loathing and love-hate turmoil. This is all wrapped up in the notion of learning enough self-awareness, self-acceptance, and control over emotions to travel through life and transcend a given moment or particular experience so we can put them into greater perspective and learn a whole new perspective about our place in the world. And sometimes, perhaps even usually, we meet people — good and ill — who influence our choices and help or hinder our ability to achieve self-awareness and emotional control, who impede or improve the ways in which we travel down our path in life. Who we invite along the way, and what we are able to learn from them, is itself a major lesson inevitably shaping our fate.

None of that requires warping of space-time, galactic travel, interplanetary threats, or psychic phenomena. A Wrinkle In Time uses sci-fi and fantasy as the backdrop for exploring these and other themes, the way most sci-fi and fantasy are ultimately about real life issues and themes presented in unique, imaginative ways that sometimes make it easier to enjoy and digest the lessons. The heart and soul of the tale are entirely human and familiar, and most every single scene speaks to these issues and themes with care and intelligence.

With beautiful visuals that sometimes intentionally appear not just surreal but even outright unreal, the film presents many moments of fantastical escape precisely in conflict with the realism elsewhere in the film. Imagination and the mind’s eye are central concepts here, and so DuVernay allows the imagery to dance between varying forms of representation more literal or more illusionary, depending on how precisely escapist the moments might be. When children soar through a new world atop a magnificent earthy beast, for example, the scene embraces its own oddity and fantasy by presenting an almost glowing color palate unconcerned with grounded realistic presentation. This is childlike imagination, a freeing moment, and that tone manifests in the visual effects.

Is it weird and trippy? Yes, indeed. Are there moments existing purely for fun and silliness? You bet. Do we travel from one locale to another with varying degrees of necessity, alternating between “just for fun” and “advancing a plot point?” No doubt. But here’s the thing: this is all true of most every single other sci-fi and fantasy movie, even those purely for adult genre fans. Wearing its oddness on its sleeve, letting moments of levity and fun indulgence be precisely what they are, and committing to allowing the humanity and emotion of the story tie it all together without fearing irreverence is all a very good thing that works in the film’s favor, as it so often does for other sci-fi/fantasy entertainment.

Why, then, are so many reviewers — especially white male genre fan reviewers — being so negative about the film?

If A Wrinkle In Time were directed by George Miller and starred a young white male lead, a lot of the critics (not all, but a lot) would probably be praising the same elements in the film they’re instead complaining about. Consider how often white male geek-genre reviewers and outlets rush to embrace and applaud the weird, inexplicable world-building chock full of “let’s stop to explain complicated backstory” moments in so many other sci-fi and fantasy releases.

Many of these same reviewers were frustrated by negative reviews of white male genre films and TV shows with complicated, messy narratives, and runtimes that tested the patience of mainstream audiences. Such willingness to look deeper and see past flaws into the heart and soul of proudly strange, crazy, fun sci-fi/fantasy entertainment is great, except when it becomes a glaring road map of obvious, constant double standards within entertainment press.

This is a common problem within a certain segment of white male genre fans who applaud diversity when it’s an occasional exception. Too much diversity in a row, though (especially when intersectionality of race and gender come into play), strains their tolerance. There are limits to their ability to relate to stories that aren’t about ordinary white dudes who secretly have a grand adventurous destiny.

Some will of course rant against my claim here, insisting I’m dismissing any and all criticisms of the picture. They’ll say it’s unfair to suggest racism or sexism are factors in their reviews. They’re wrong. Recognizing white male privilege and biases as relevant and influential factors tainting some reviews and having an impact on overall critical reception of A Wrinkle In Time is not equivalent to claiming all complaints are invalid.

Of the 33 “rotten” reviews of the film at the time of this writing, 91% were from white film critics, 83% of which were specifically white men. Meanwhile, more than half of the positive reviews were from women critics, and about 20% were from persons on color of both genders. You can look at these numbers and pretend it doesn’t matter, pretend there’s no message or lesson to be gleaned from it, but frankly such reactions are simply further demonstration of a lack of self-awareness of — or, more often, an overt refusal to listen and/or admit to — white privilege and male privilege institutionalized even within journalism, including corners of journalism that like to fool themselves into believing their opinions are magically free of such problems that run rampant throughout the rest of society and workplaces.

[Note: As I write this, more reviews came in, and a quick look through them confirms that these demographic trends among critics continue apace.]

If you have trouble internalizing these numbers and believing there is any actual social, cultural, or political meaning behind them, try this: imagine those are the numbers for a political election instead, and then ask yourself how quickly you’d dismiss the relevance of such data in that context. I strongly suspect few people would seriously entertain the notion that such significant racial, sex, and gender divisions between acceptance and rejection are entirely free of underlying biases and inequalities in society.

So don’t waste your breath telling me an overwhelmingly white male rejection of a film by a woman of color, about women of color, is not driven by some underlying biases in at least some of the reviews. Especially when so many of those same white men rejoice and praise films by white men, about white men, that include the same elements these reviewers reject in A Wrinkle In Time. Again, what they are currently declaring flaws within the context of this particular film, they often outright champion when it’s in a typical “ordinary white man saves the day and proves how special his ordinariness really is” production.

Does it matter? Is all of this relevant in reviewing a film? Of course it is. This is art, and anyone who argues that they only want art free of political and social considerations or discourse should probably stop viewing art, or start getting a better attitude about it. We live in the 21st Century, but Ava DuVernay is the first woman of color to direct a studio film with a budget of $100+ million. It is both a wonderful moment, and also a sad commentary on how pathetically slow and resistant to change our supposedly free and equal society really is. That during such a moment of change, there are still people who reject these conversations and who resent having the inequality pointed out, speaks to just how far we still have to go to turn moments of change into foundational, transformative moments that don’t fade away.

Just as Black Panther matters, is important, and is a wonderful piece of art and entertainment worthy of praise, so too is A Wrinkle In Time. Any critics who think they punched the clock on diversity by giving Black Panther a good review, and thus are free to revert back to stereotypical “white guys who can’t relate to stories that aren’t about white guys” mode, are mistaken. There’s no room to pretend that a few weeks are enough to erase the need to speak loudly and openly, even painfully if necessary, about the racism and sexism still rampant in society and in our entertainment, and how often otherwise good and progressive-minded people fall prey to their own biases and perpetuate inequalities because they’re unable or unwilling to consider, perceive, and admit that such biases might reside within themselves.

It pains me to see a film this lovingly constructed, with so much attention to character and emotion, with so much sheer fun and joy, being rejected and in danger of missing out on the audience it deserves — an audience I’m sure will appreciate it and want to see it again.

Storm Reid gives a wonderfully nuanced emotional performance, which is what the film absolutely needed in order to work. The constant conflict and contradiction of her feelings and reactions ties the matching conflicting and contradicting locales together, and I loved how much the settings reflected her own shifting inner storm (no pun intended). There is a necessary element of physical humor and action to the role, too, and Reid delivered on all fronts. The supporting cast are all excellent. In particular, Deric McCabe’s precociousness is a constant source of humor and sweetness.

So much of this film relies on putting the characters into interesting situations, sometimes nonsensical ones, and letting us enjoy the way they play off one another’s reactions. Sure to be an audience favorite is a trip to visit the Happy Medium, played by Zach Galifianakis, in an off-kilter setting that — as I discussed earlier — represents the lack of balance and assuredness felt by Reid’s main character. That scene sums up so much of why I like A Wrinkle In Time, and the differences between how a story like this presents itself to a young audience and the often myopic, self-centered demands of so many reviewers when it comes to genre entertainment.

A Wrinkle In Time had to be strange, irreverent, and ultimately a family-pleasing heartfelt fantasy tale. There’s nothing else like it in theaters, and yet it also delivers so much of what we like and want from such entertainment.

Box office figures and tallies based on data via Box Office Mojo , Rentrak, and TheNumbers.

Follow me on Twitter, on Google+, and on Quora.  Read my blog.

“>

This weekend, all U.S. citizens except those in Arizona, Hawai’i, and overseas territories will leap forward in time by an hour. So what better weekend, then, for Disney to release A Wrinkle In Time, adapting Madeleine L’Engle’s famous sci-fi/fantasy novel about a family traveling across time and space? Oscar nominated filmmaker Ava DuVernay’s latest picture hopes to challenge current box office king Black Panther for the weekend’s top spot and deliver a solid launch for a new franchise, but it looks to be a close contest.

Current estimates put A Wrinkle In Time in the $30+ million range for domestic opening weekend. Should that prove true, it would need a strong final multiplier of at least 3x or more (depending on whether it comes in at the higher end or lower end of estimates) in order to finish its run with a North American cume of $100+ million. A domestic/foreign split of the 33%/66% variety, then, would result in a $300+ million worldwide total in this scenario.

Should this be another case of tracking and other predictive data under-representing interest and likely attendance from demographics who overindex on mobile devices and social media marketing, as often/usually happens with people of color in tracking and certain polling, then A Wrinkle In Time might enjoy a domestic opening closer to $40-45 million, a final domestic cume in the $100-120 million range, and a global tally north of $350+ million.

It seems that even a high-end result that defies even more optimistic expectations would see the film finishing in $50 million territory in North America this weekend, so the true fate of A Wrinkle In Time will depend a lot on its legs and on international interest. Families will drive the box office narrative for this one, as will people of color. Expect a high percentage of women in the audience, and particularly women of color.

If turnout pushes the domestic opening toward $50 million, and if the Cinemascore is A- or better, then a 3x multiplier or higher could be very possible. That, in turn, would translate into a $150+ million domestic run and — based on performance for typical branded fantasy fare with good word of mouth — perhaps another $300+ million in foreign markets, for $450-500 million in global earnings.

With about $200 million in production and marketing costs, the film needs to finish in the vicinity of $400+ million worldwide to turn a profit from theatrical receipts alone. Obviously the Disney merchandising machine will generate good revenue streams elsewhere, including the eventual home entertainment release that will bring in tens of millions in rentals and sales around the world. So even if the theatrical returns are more modest, it won’t hurt too much in the long run.

But the hope has to be for a franchise launch, of course, so Disney is surely hoping to perform above expectations, not to mention positive word of mouth from viewers and subsequent strong box office legs. A worst-case scenario might be a $30 million opening, a soft B or B+ audience grade, and a resulting muted $65+ million domestic cume alongside roughly $150 million in international receipts, for a grand total of only about $215+/- million worldwide. Still, that scenario leaves room for merchandising revenue to at least make up the difference and break even or turn a small profit.

Best case, the film opens far ahead of expectations, riding a wave of brand interest, popularity of some of its stars, and good will for diverse filmmaking, to achieve a $50+ million opening that translates into a $150-175 million domestic and a worldwide cume of $500+ million. This isn’t even a far-fetched or significantly high-end set of hopes and factors, and there’s a chance that even a weak domestic bow is eclipsed by enough foreign interest in the brand, stars, and genre trappings to give it a lopsided domestic-foreign split that still allows it to pass the $400 million mark.

Reviews so far, though, have been decidedly mixed-to-negative, and the marketing has been fine but a bit conservative compared to other branded genre-franchise entertainment from a major studio. The latter point means audience awareness might be lower than necessary to achieve a true breakout opening, so it will rely far more on good word of mouth and legs. Which, in turn, means reviews need to be overshadowed by the word of mouth from audiences, enough to overcome the combination of bad reviews and lower visibility in marketing.

I’m frankly surprised we didn’t see a more aggressive marketing push, including leaning heavily into the fact this is an iconic, beloved book series and proudly promoting the fact A Wrinkle In Time is another example of Disney’s family of studios releasing a big-budget genre picture from a filmmaker of color and staring a diverse cast. On the heels of Black Panther, there was a lot of potential in embracing such talking points even more than Disney already has — and I don’t mean to imply this wasn’t part of the film’s PR, just that I expected it to be an even more prominent aspect.

Heck, I’d even argue that perhaps Disney should’ve included a sneak preview of A Wrinkle In Time at the start of screenings for Black Panther last weekend and all through this week, in major markets. A five minute preview ending in an extended trailer-like series of clips, for example, plus an opening weekend giveaway of posters, t-shirts, and a coupon for an early download of Black Panther on digital release probably would pay decent dividends this weekend for A Wrinkle In Time. Some double feature ticket sales likewise would give it a nice boost, too.

I realize that second-guessing the House of Mouse, and offering marketing suggestions to the studio that has turned PR into a martial art, is probably a fool’s errand. After all, I’m among those who regularly cites the 3-Ds mantra “Don’t Doubt Disney.” Still, I have to call it as I see it, and in this case I can’t help thinking there is some missed opportunity to give A Wrinkle In Time every possible chance to succeed above expectations. Indeed, I’ll freely admit I want it to outperform expectations and succeed in launching a franchise.

My own “moderate” prediction for opening weekend is $35-40 million, based on my belief — which I really hope is correct — that existing numbers don’t adequately consider or represent key demographics that are constantly under-represented in tracking and other predictive box office data. Likewise, I expect another case of overall critical reception proving to be at odds with mainstream audience reception, resulting in positive word of mouth from viewers (especially among crucial demographics) and decent legs. The result, then, would be a final domestic tally in the $90-120 million range in North America.

I expect a domestic/foreign split of about 40%/60%, meaning an international total of $135-180 million. This means a final worldwide cume of $225 million to $300 million, as my “moderate” estimate. My lower-end estimate for the final global results would be in the $200-225 million range, while my higher-end estimate would be in the admittedly wide $300-400 million range. If it either has even better legs than expected or enjoys far stronger foreign reception, or both, then it could climb toward perhaps $450 million.

Why am I rooting for DuVernay’s film, and why do I think audiences will give it a better reception than most critics? Read on for my full review…

We’re at a point in time when genre entertainment, even family entertainment geared toward younger audiences, is expected to put the wants and preferences of adult fans first. This tends to go beyond mere expectations of quality storytelling and into specific demands that films appeal to both the misty-eyed nostalgia of grownups as well as their insistence that stories from their childhood mature with them. This often deprives younger fans of a chance to enjoy the same entry-level admittance to genre storytelling that we as adult fans were offered, and results in adults unable or unwilling to consider relevant context and perspective in stories geared specifically toward the experiences, tastes, and maturity of youthful audiences.

This does not mean some sort of lower standards of quality for children and their entertainment, it’s merely a recognition that of course storytelling that treats younger fans as the primary target demographic will sometimes fail to meet the demands and expectations of adult genre fans with a preference for entertainment that puts those fans at the center of all considerations. There’s a difference between simply bad storytelling and low quality productions, and storytelling with rhythms, pacing, and structure offering children the opportunity to participate in anticipating a turn of events and following the connections between subplots and character arcs.

Because yes, kids tend to be smarter than we give them credit for being; but yes, kids also still need stories that introduce them to increasingly complex structure and that teach them to draw conclusions and connect the dots. And it’s important to understand that stories about 13 and 14 year olds are not primarily geared toward that age group in the audience, but rather toward kids a few years younger. It tends to be true that, for younger fans, the most influential and resonant stories will feature characters a few years older than the young fans, allowing them to look up to the characters and aspire to be like them.

So this isn’t a call for adults to just accept lower standards for child entertainment, although that’s frequently the reductive mischaracterization a lot of people jump to when points like these come up. This is a call for adult fans to simply be less selfish, and to be more open to genre content that lets other people stand front and center.

A Wrinkle In Time is a family film, and its main intended audience are kids 12 and under. Parents of those kids are the secondary audience. Teens are next, I’d guess, being slightly ahead of adult fans of the original book series. And in all of this, there is intersection of race and sex and gender as well, since this is a story about a young girl of color and a collection of many supporting characters of color as well, especially women of color. If this conversation makes you uncomfortable or outright upset and frustrated, if you’re “sick” of hearing discussion of entertainment that actually cares about social issues and the fact a huge portion of audiences rarely ever get to see stories more reflective of their lives, then you’re frankly part of the larger problem.

DuVernay delivered a coming of age story about a young girl from a fractured home, who feels lost and alone and scared, who is an underachiever waiting for life to offer her a good reason to care again, who has so much potential for greatness that nobody else can see but which leads her to a great destiny and a journey across the stars.

It is a story full of humor, of tragedy, of fun and joy, of painful truths and responsibility. It offers life lessons that aren’t always easy to hear, it suggests sometimes our idealized expectations of other people might leave us disappointed. It tells us to not just accept but rather to overcome that disappointment and love each other, not only despite our flaws but in fact because of those flaws. Our flaws, our mistakes, and our disappointments are really none of those things if we learn to use them as sources of strength to improve ourselves and accept who we are. Without flaws, there is no growth; without growth, there is no insight; without insight, there is no transcendence of ourselves and the limitations of this world. Loss leads to discovery, and A Wrinkle In Time is all about that important, foundational fact of how we live our lives.

The journey in A Wrinkle In Time begins with a missing parent, an emotional scar and a hole in a family’s life. That starting point, and how it relates to the end point, is a story that can be told and understood entirely apart from the sci-fi and fantasy elements.

Parents make mistakes, and sometimes a single momentary lapse can cause life-altering problems for an entire family. Children bear these burdens without the experience to put it into perspective, feeling guilt and shame for things that weren’t their doing, feeling fear of their own emotions when they love a parent so much but also resent and hate that parent for decisions the child cannot fully understand. It hurts to feel betrayed by someone you love, and it hurts to hate yourself for feeling responsible for someone’s departure, to hate yourself for still loving them and to hate yourself for the fact you blame yourself for the parent’s mistakes.

These emotions are dreadfully confusing, and people at the crossroads between childhood and young adulthood face tremendous internal and external pressures already, without the added issue of abandonment and self-loathing and love-hate turmoil. This is all wrapped up in the notion of learning enough self-awareness, self-acceptance, and control over emotions to travel through life and transcend a given moment or particular experience so we can put them into greater perspective and learn a whole new perspective about our place in the world. And sometimes, perhaps even usually, we meet people — good and ill — who influence our choices and help or hinder our ability to achieve self-awareness and emotional control, who impede or improve the ways in which we travel down our path in life. Who we invite along the way, and what we are able to learn from them, is itself a major lesson inevitably shaping our fate.

None of that requires warping of space-time, galactic travel, interplanetary threats, or psychic phenomena. A Wrinkle In Time uses sci-fi and fantasy as the backdrop for exploring these and other themes, the way most sci-fi and fantasy are ultimately about real life issues and themes presented in unique, imaginative ways that sometimes make it easier to enjoy and digest the lessons. The heart and soul of the tale are entirely human and familiar, and most every single scene speaks to these issues and themes with care and intelligence.

With beautiful visuals that sometimes intentionally appear not just surreal but even outright unreal, the film presents many moments of fantastical escape precisely in conflict with the realism elsewhere in the film. Imagination and the mind’s eye are central concepts here, and so DuVernay allows the imagery to dance between varying forms of representation more literal or more illusionary, depending on how precisely escapist the moments might be. When children soar through a new world atop a magnificent earthy beast, for example, the scene embraces its own oddity and fantasy by presenting an almost glowing color palate unconcerned with grounded realistic presentation. This is childlike imagination, a freeing moment, and that tone manifests in the visual effects.

Is it weird and trippy? Yes, indeed. Are there moments existing purely for fun and silliness? You bet. Do we travel from one locale to another with varying degrees of necessity, alternating between “just for fun” and “advancing a plot point?” No doubt. But here’s the thing: this is all true of most every single other sci-fi and fantasy movie, even those purely for adult genre fans. Wearing its oddness on its sleeve, letting moments of levity and fun indulgence be precisely what they are, and committing to allowing the humanity and emotion of the story tie it all together without fearing irreverence is all a very good thing that works in the film’s favor, as it so often does for other sci-fi/fantasy entertainment.

Why, then, are so many reviewers — especially white male genre fan reviewers — being so negative about the film?

If A Wrinkle In Time were directed by George Miller and starred a young white male lead, a lot of the critics (not all, but a lot) would probably be praising the same elements in the film they’re instead complaining about. Consider how often white male geek-genre reviewers and outlets rush to embrace and applaud the weird, inexplicable world-building chock full of “let’s stop to explain complicated backstory” moments in so many other sci-fi and fantasy releases.

Many of these same reviewers were frustrated by negative reviews of white male genre films and TV shows with complicated, messy narratives, and runtimes that tested the patience of mainstream audiences. Such willingness to look deeper and see past flaws into the heart and soul of proudly strange, crazy, fun sci-fi/fantasy entertainment is great, except when it becomes a glaring road map of obvious, constant double standards within entertainment press.

This is a common problem within a certain segment of white male genre fans who applaud diversity when it’s an occasional exception. Too much diversity in a row, though (especially when intersectionality of race and gender come into play), strains their tolerance. There are limits to their ability to relate to stories that aren’t about ordinary white dudes who secretly have a grand adventurous destiny.

Some will of course rant against my claim here, insisting I’m dismissing any and all criticisms of the picture. They’ll say it’s unfair to suggest racism or sexism are factors in their reviews. They’re wrong. Recognizing white male privilege and biases as relevant and influential factors tainting some reviews and having an impact on overall critical reception of A Wrinkle In Time is not equivalent to claiming all complaints are invalid.

Of the 33 “rotten” reviews of the film at the time of this writing, 91% were from white film critics, 83% of which were specifically white men. Meanwhile, more than half of the positive reviews were from women critics, and about 20% were from persons on color of both genders. You can look at these numbers and pretend it doesn’t matter, pretend there’s no message or lesson to be gleaned from it, but frankly such reactions are simply further demonstration of a lack of self-awareness of — or, more often, an overt refusal to listen and/or admit to — white privilege and male privilege institutionalized even within journalism, including corners of journalism that like to fool themselves into believing their opinions are magically free of such problems that run rampant throughout the rest of society and workplaces.

[Note: As I write this, more reviews came in, and a quick look through them confirms that these demographic trends among critics continue apace.]

If you have trouble internalizing these numbers and believing there is any actual social, cultural, or political meaning behind them, try this: imagine those are the numbers for a political election instead, and then ask yourself how quickly you’d dismiss the relevance of such data in that context. I strongly suspect few people would seriously entertain the notion that such significant racial, sex, and gender divisions between acceptance and rejection are entirely free of underlying biases and inequalities in society.

So don’t waste your breath telling me an overwhelmingly white male rejection of a film by a woman of color, about women of color, is not driven by some underlying biases in at least some of the reviews. Especially when so many of those same white men rejoice and praise films by white men, about white men, that include the same elements these reviewers reject in A Wrinkle In Time. Again, what they are currently declaring flaws within the context of this particular film, they often outright champion when it’s in a typical “ordinary white man saves the day and proves how special his ordinariness really is” production.

Does it matter? Is all of this relevant in reviewing a film? Of course it is. This is art, and anyone who argues that they only want art free of political and social considerations or discourse should probably stop viewing art, or start getting a better attitude about it. We live in the 21st Century, but Ava DuVernay is the first woman of color to direct a studio film with a budget of $100+ million. It is both a wonderful moment, and also a sad commentary on how pathetically slow and resistant to change our supposedly free and equal society really is. That during such a moment of change, there are still people who reject these conversations and who resent having the inequality pointed out, speaks to just how far we still have to go to turn moments of change into foundational, transformative moments that don’t fade away.

Just as Black Panther matters, is important, and is a wonderful piece of art and entertainment worthy of praise, so too is A Wrinkle In Time. Any critics who think they punched the clock on diversity by giving Black Panther a good review, and thus are free to revert back to stereotypical “white guys who can’t relate to stories that aren’t about white guys” mode, are mistaken. There’s no room to pretend that a few weeks are enough to erase the need to speak loudly and openly, even painfully if necessary, about the racism and sexism still rampant in society and in our entertainment, and how often otherwise good and progressive-minded people fall prey to their own biases and perpetuate inequalities because they’re unable or unwilling to consider, perceive, and admit that such biases might reside within themselves.

It pains me to see a film this lovingly constructed, with so much attention to character and emotion, with so much sheer fun and joy, being rejected and in danger of missing out on the audience it deserves — an audience I’m sure will appreciate it and want to see it again.

Storm Reid gives a wonderfully nuanced emotional performance, which is what the film absolutely needed in order to work. The constant conflict and contradiction of her feelings and reactions ties the matching conflicting and contradicting locales together, and I loved how much the settings reflected her own shifting inner storm (no pun intended). There is a necessary element of physical humor and action to the role, too, and Reid delivered on all fronts. The supporting cast are all excellent. In particular, Deric McCabe’s precociousness is a constant source of humor and sweetness.

So much of this film relies on putting the characters into interesting situations, sometimes nonsensical ones, and letting us enjoy the way they play off one another’s reactions. Sure to be an audience favorite is a trip to visit the Happy Medium, played by Zach Galifianakis, in an off-kilter setting that — as I discussed earlier — represents the lack of balance and assuredness felt by Reid’s main character. That scene sums up so much of why I like A Wrinkle In Time, and the differences between how a story like this presents itself to a young audience and the often myopic, self-centered demands of so many reviewers when it comes to genre entertainment.

A Wrinkle In Time had to be strange, irreverent, and ultimately a family-pleasing heartfelt fantasy tale. There’s nothing else like it in theaters, and yet it also delivers so much of what we like and want from such entertainment.

Box office figures and tallies based on data via Box Office Mojo , Rentrak, and TheNumbers.

Follow me on Twitter, on Google+, and on Quora. Read my blog.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)