As someone with a posture that remains (something) divorced from the world of video games (with Mario Bros. As a maximum idol of this ethereal fanaticism), I have always maintained with caution expectations regarding each cinematographic proposal of this new and overwhelming wave of films. Promoted by the incessant ambition of their thirst for studies, they saturate the world billboards with adaptations that drink directly from the Ambrose nectar of the most emblematic video games of popular culture. These digital recreational works find fertile terrain in the effervescence and devotion that the fandom pours on these dreamlike audiovisual experiences to reinforce its (already solid) bases and transfer its pixelated borders towards a more ambitious industry: that of Hollywood. And of course, A Minecraft movie It fits all this.
In that context, they will already understand that Minecraft It does not fit in my generational cohort (generation z), much less its categorization as a form of entertainment is inclined towards my definition of hobby. Now, I would have to live in a cavern so as not to know the mastodontic impact that this video game has had on popular culture. This is how with the immediacy and omnipresence of the complicit internet and a few cousins something (to whom I lie, extremely) obsessed with the game, I have managed to throw myself without parachute to the sui generis Overworlda surreal dimension in which the concept of creativity is challenged too much, and where the only limit is the subjectivity of ingenuity, in its most scathing version.
So, A Minecraft movie has landed its artillery more Heavy Square in all cinemas in the world, to expand borders of their reach beyond consoles and computers, while strengthening their faithful followers and kneads a new generation of fans like me.
Is A Minecraft movie a worthy adaptation of the original video game?
Being a rookie about the lore of Minecraftand starting from the basic premise of the game where the player must build a world from his own perspective, I can intuit (and in fact the same film makes it clear) that creativity is the pillar on which the rules of this unusual world are governed. In that sense, and finding the last pinch of logic in this wisdom drought, this film adaptation should adopt these ideals as a backbone of its proposal. However, and for misfortune on the most exquisite side of the Fandom, it does not, despite excavating incessantly throughout the film trying to find that parallelism with its video game counterpart.
In this way, this film adaptation could be perceived in merciless with respect to its original material, because being rigorous, although we dive into the most absurd of its crazy proposal, it does so insubstantially superficial and focusing its objective towards another horizon. This treatment is leaving us with honey on the lips, especially the potential that the narrative could have embraced with the concept of free creative will. And, if they recover the occasions in which something is built in the film, of these only there are vague vestiges, and this element is used more as a decorative allegory in a script that is undermined by a comedy that (sometimes) dangerously crosses the border between a slight district and CRINGE.
Jack Black Eclipsa a powerful character assembly
This feature film begins its epilogue with the presentation of our main characters, opening its eccentric fan with the main character and flagship leader of the franchise, Steve. This is embodied by the ironically acidic Jack Blackin his second courtship attempt with this film subgenre (remember that he previously lent his voice to Bowser in Super Mario Bros.: The film). Jason Momoa is added (Aquaman) Danielle Brooks (The Pacifier), Emma Myers (Wednesday) and Sebastian Eugene Hansen as Garret, Down, Natalie and Henry, respectively.
In this way, it is Jack Black who rides on a comedy of pure blood (in the worst of the senses), whose blatantly acidic tone enters territories that dangerously limit with what CRINGE. And, from a subjective point of view, we have the vague certainty that the problematic pillar of the film lies in his selfish character approach, and how he focuses his attention on the narrative arch of Steve (and Garret). This can be obvious since he is the protagonist of the original video game, and in n theory it is, only that in this case the divergence between both products is that the film adds the ingredient of the dialogue. And although it provides a more intimate background of characters, it is not very harvested narratively speaking, serving more as an excuse to impose a feast of comedy to which the absurdity ends up devouring, and whose most sinful consequence results in the sacrifice of the development of secondary characters, which makes the foundations of its solid a character assembly staggered. In this way, the shadow of Jack Black’s grandiloquence not only obnubilaizes the narrative neatness of the film, but also eclipses the search for an authentic personality of Steve, who ends up falling into the classic character mold that Black has turned into a personal brand.
Judging by the insubstantial treatment of its secondary characters and supporting the irrational approach on their development, we must highlight what virtues of the characters make us miss a more thorough development. I will start with an actress that since I saw in The Pacifier He demonstrated a born charism, Danielle Brooks. In this proposal, this overflow of buffería is limited by quite mediocre dialogues and scenes that denote a daring indifference towards that comic vein of the actress. As for Jason Momoa, he offers a realization of a razzie, which rounds the side more CRINGE of the film, executing with Jack Black a kind of ridiculization towards the already narrative archetype cliché Bromancewhich ends up dragging with him the only pinch of authenticity of the movie towards a scoundrel abyss. Finally, and not less important, also highlight the parental duet of the film, played by Emma Myers and Sebastian Eugene Hansen, who take the most unequal portion (narratively speaking) of this banquet that, of a voracious bite of Fan Service, anesthesia the critical judgment of a mass to which the ecstasy of fanatism clouds completely. This is how a subarc that drinks from the development narrative of these two characters, and that serves as a moral for the little ones, is relegated and is only touched with the fingertips by the director of Nacho Libre. We are referring to the refusal stigmatization of creativity in infants, a phenomenon that contemporaneity translates as the figure of the misunderstood genius.
Technical sections that survive mediocrity
If we must rescue in the meantime narrative debris, it is the technical section. It is something that A Minecraft movie You can proudly hold. And, challenging any previous pattern, this film nourishes its vague concept of creativity endowing next to VFX that immerses you in the Overworld In a more than ideal way, taking into account that almost 100% of this world was built digitally. This leads to even more assessing the interpretive work of the protagonist quintet, for which it is an even greater challenge when interacting with an intangible scenario for them and whose materialization does not concrete until postproduction. As for the original soundtrack, he drowns in his own mediocrity by maintaining skeptics to innovation. Thus, this technical section becomes generic and lacking substance, distracking the potential of each scene, specifically in which the action takes prominence.
Conclusions
A Minecraft movie it’s a Game Over to which your only extra life He gives him the opportunity to honor that creative essence of his video games. And although he ends up achieving his mission, some Bugs In their journey they hinder their narrative, which although enriched by a powerful group of characters, but extremely narcissistic, does not finish curdling thanks to a humor that becomes corrosive and reckless. Thus, this film builds its foundations on nostalgia, a resource that, tied to the subjectivity of the viewer, sees its mediocre proposal, merely fed by an obnubilated emotional evocation.
