Review of Inkheart (2008) by Gareth R — 10 May 2010

In Inkheart, certain people (called "silvertongues") possess the ability to bring fictional characters out of literature, and into reality. That's a dazzling premise, so why does the movie make such little use of it? I haven't read Cornelia Funke's novel yet, so I'll charitably assume she did a lot more with it than the film does. Here, when our heroic silvertongue needs to rescue his friends, it doesn't seem to occur to him to just pick up a book and get reading. How come?

Oh, right: because bringing a character out of fiction will send a real person into it. Probably. It's very unclear how the checks and balances work, or whether this is even always the case. The fantasy logic of Inkheart doesn't get much by way of explanation, and that's fine for a while, but the questions do seem to pile up by the end. The goodies don't seem to know how to send characters back into fiction, for instance, but they kind of pick it up for some reason. That was lucky.

Anyway, let's get synopsising: Mo (Brendan Fraser) is a silvertongue. His daughter Meggie (Eliza Hope Bennet) travels with him as he tries to find a copy of Inkheart, the novel which now contains his wife, her mother. Now almost a teenager, Meggie finally decides to ask where Mom went. (It took her this long?) One thing leads to another, and soon they're on the run from Capricorn (Andy Serkis), an escaped bad guy from Inkheart who is living in a castle somewhere, apparently completely undisturbed. He wants Mo, presumably to cause general mischief. He actually already has a silvertongue, but this one's got a stutter, and is consequently not great at bringing forth fictional characters: some have writing on them, others look or sound wrong. I wonder if they corrected his stutter, would he be better at it? Anywho, there's much locking up and escaping only to be recaptured, and the characters come and go until the finale. It's lacking in plot, which is odd for a story all about the irrepressible power of storytelling, and much of the dialogue is bad. (Also, the whole reading people out of books idea raises tons of questions, never answered.).

Sadly, it's also lacking in character. Mo is a rather flat lead - Funke has said that Brendan Fraser inspired the character he here plays, so it's a strange irony that he's so scowly and lifeless - and Meggie serves no purpose at all, apart from ultimately becoming useful to Capricorn. (One assumes that in the book, she's the reader's eyes and ears, but of course, we don't need those in a movie.) All the characters from the fictional Inkheart are rather monotonous creatures, and in the strange tradition of books-within-books, the imaginary novel itself sounds like quite a boring read. Characters do occasionally bring forth things from the book world, such as the flying monkeys from The Wizard Of Oz or the Minotaur, but seriously, there could have been so much more, put to far better use. I should advise you in advance not to imagine how the inevitable battle at the end will look, because it's bound to look less exciting than what you come up with. Speaking of looks, much time is spent shooting Italian locations, but there's not enough variety, and looks-wise, it ultimately becomes dreary.

Now then, the good news. Inkheart is one of many book-to-film adaptations where the book is the first part of a series, and they're always problematic, but this one at least tells something resembling a single, coherent story. Some things don't make sense, but at least it's contained. There are a few bright sparks, character-wise, such as Jim Broadbent as the guy who wrote Inkheart, and Rafi Garad as the heroic Farid, who prefers reality to his Arabian Nights. Helen Mirren's eccentric aunt character may seem about as realistic as the flying monkeys, but she's frequently entertaining, and the special effects are generally faultless. It's a pleasant, at least vaguely inteligable tale, and although this isn't much of a defence if it's not done properly, it must be said: it's a very nice premise.

But oh, what a waste. This should feel like a story where anything can happen, but there's no such creativity on display. The actual plot isn't interesting, the fantasy novel the whole thing pivots around is barely-described and kind of dull, and the characters we're stuck with donâ??t bear scrutiny. (What about Capricorn? On the one hand, he's completely unconvincing as a big baddie. On the other hand, he isn't meant to be one anyway - he's a minor character from Inkheart whoâ??s gone megalomaniac in the real world - but his humble henchman beginnings are never capitalised upon, even though there's loads of potential there for a different sort of villain.) At least the film leaves an impression that all this worked better in the book, but, well, of course it did.

Inkheart is a disappointment, but not a disaster. Overall, you'd think a story about bringing words to life would be a perfect fit for a cinematic adaptation, but apparently director Iain Softley ain't no silvertongue.