The Changeover (2017) Reviews

• I wish they hadn't "twilighted" this beautiful story.

  alinda-thelostgirl2018-11-09

  As someone who read the book over 20 years ago, I knew coming in I wasn't the target audience for this film. But I re-read the book recently, and despite it being a YA novel, I found it just as compelling now as it was when I was 13. Casting-wise, I found some of the choices quite brilliant. Timothy Spall as Carmody (does he even have a name in the film?) was everything I pictured when reading the book and more, down to the smile that felt like the face shrunk around it. Brilliantly terrifying. I would comment on the other characters too, such as Myriam and Winter Carlisle, but truth is, their presence in this film is so minor and marginal, I can barely remember if they were there at all. The little boy playing Jacko was an adorable little boy, just like the character he was playing, so no issues there. This leaves the main character, her love interest and her mother. In the book, Laura is a compelling character you immediately sympathize and root for. She feels things, even more strongly than others, and reacts to things. She speaks her mind, sometimes faster than it is wise. She is feisty and brave. Why the writers in the film decided to write her as the exact opposite in this adaptation, I will never know. Perhaps they saw the success of the Twilight franchise and decided to try and make their protagonist remind people more of the heroine of those books/films. What a shame, trading in all the liveliest qualities of Laura for this lifeless adaptation. The actress they cast did match with the physical description, but what came out of her mouth were dull, cliched lines that didn't even seem like they were meant to be part of a dialogue, just written for some dramatic effect. And not satisfied, the writers decided to turn Sorry into some sort of Edward-like character, broodingly stalking our protagonist and too busy pouting to bother having a personality. In the book, Sorry has so many layers, you cannot wait to see more of him. Here, the character was stripped off of any quality but his physical appearance, making all of his screen-time feel longer and more boring than it probably was. But the one who got the worse treatment was Kate, Laura's mother. I guess the production decided that the viewers had no interest in the struggles of a single mother of two, so they stripped her role to the bare minimum, removed any of her motivations and only left what comes across as an incompetent mother who is completely oblivious at first and aggressively unfair later on. Apparently all we need to know about the protagonist's mother is that she doesn't understand her daughter and she nags, because isn't that what mothers do? When I started watching, I really wanted to like the film. I loved that it was an actual NZ production, that the cast pretty much looked their part (well, not Kate, to be fair) and I was willing to accept the differences: Laura's dad dying instead of the divorce, the more modern approach on how kids her age spend their time together and such, but the more the film went on, the more it felt that too much time (and money) had been spent on making these minor, in both importance and effect, than in creating a solid story that could keep the viewer interested throughout the film's run-time. And the final showdown happened so quickly and when I had already lost any interest in the plot development that it took me a while to notice "Ah, this is it, she won." Finally, either someone in the editing room messed up, or the script writers didn't feel the necessity to maintain any coherence in their dialogues. Sorry telling Laura that he knew she could make it, apart from being what any viewer would expect him to say, has absolutely no foundation as nowhere in the film did he ever express such certainty and the only time in which the changeover is verbally addressed, we only see him object to it. Now, in the book he does the same, but then again, Margaret Mahy doesn't forget that, and how he acts before and after the changeover is in perfect accordance to his personality. To anyone who has watched this or would like to see it, I recommend you read the book it's based upon and hope someone else, some day, will have another crack at it. Perhaps Timothy Spall can be persuaded to reprise the role, because he's just perfect for it.

• Had Potential BUT...

  ariestarzga2018-07-27

  I really went in to watching this film with high hopes. Teenager discovers she has hidden powers and tries to rescue her younger brother. Story starts off well and had my interest for about 30 minutes in and THEN it fell flat. The actors are actually perfect but the movie tried to form chemistry between the main actor and actress in a way that did not fit with the movie. There was a lack of build up for the audience, I kept waiting to be amazed while the main actress discovers herself but truth is she remained boring until the very end. This movie could have been great, may be lack of funding but something was wrong so therefore i could only give it a 3/10.

• The Changeover: Kiwi teen sci-fi type stuff

  Platypuschow2019-04-21

  Young adult book adaptations into sickly movies have been a thing for a while now, from Twilight to the Host to Divergent to Hunger Games and beyond. Here we see New Zealand have a go at it, and it's the same as the US tends to deliver. Telling the story of a girl who must face an evil force in order to save her little brother this is a witchy themed thing, and the above description of sickly most definitely applies. Starring Timothy Spall and Lucy Lawless I'm being a tad generous here, it's a really quite bad film. You see it's your usual teen angst vs less than normal love interest vs nonsensical convoluted plot hole ridden concept. To make matters worse the two leads are awful! Nicholas Galitzine is your stoic dull mysterious brooding "Hunk" and Erana James is the Kiwi Kristen Stewart and has the acting ability of a brick. The two of them pick one facial expression at the start and continue it for the full duration of the movie. If you like your schmaltzy teen angst nonsense then you might enjoy this, otherwise steer clear. The Good: Spall is oddly on form Decent soundtrack The Bad: So much teen angst! The two leads have the emotional range of a fart

• Useful review for those that have read the book.

  tudzie2018-09-11

  I so want to give this movie a 10/10 but it was awful. Spall was believable and understood the character Carmody, Sorensen's character not so much, there was so much behind Sorensen that we didn't get to see. Winter & Miryam worked well though, again more padding could have been put around these two. As someone who has read the book and actually cherishes the original copy, it could have been so much more. The basic plot line is there, with a few twists that are not in the book, yet that is to be expected when transforming book to film. It just didn't knit together, there were so much empty space that begged to be filled. Perhaps finances were an issue. As a book, it's one I hope to continue to re-read and lose myself in in my dotage. The film, not so much. Although I've just purchased the film (to go with the book), I would still like to say Thank you for 'having a bash' at it. (fingers crossed someone will come along and have another go) Could do better all round.

• The Changeover pissed me off

  bizzybodyz2018-04-21

  A cardinal rule I believe a film should have if to make an engaging experience for the audience. I am convinced after watching this film that whoever made it weren't interested in the engagement of the audience. Rather it was like a group of professionals doing their jobs as efficiently as possible at the sacrifice of soul and heart. The result being a film that looks gorgeous but feels vapid. The main character is a brick with the tonal range of angry to slightly more angry. The thing is I got the impression that this wasn't the result of poor acting, rather narrow acting. This is pretty much the same for all the characters whose names I couldn't commit to memory because it didn't seem important. It didn't seem necessary to remember their names because they're not humans, but robots. The story was, in the most literal sense of the word, stupid. Not the concept, I'm sure the book was better considering that it won awards, this movie however was badly plotted like a script that never had the fine-tooth comb inspection for inconsistencies and as a result it had characters who would do things that made no sense. Why did she hop in the car but only until they arrived at her place did she threaten to call the cops? If she had to be on an IV drip while experiencing hallucinations, how could she summon the power to bolt from her room under the supervision of three nurses? Why were they frantically running and in the next shot slow to a walk? She kills the old man making her a murderer! Who in the name of the holy Buddha would let two kids see a dead body in a poorly lit, unhygienic, unsupervised room? And perhaps one of the most stupids lines I've heard "You know where I live. I saw you, walking across the street." "Wasn't me. Unless your seeing things?" (I mean come on!) These types of questions arise only when the filmmakers are doing chess piece storytelling. Character goes here, character goes there, with little consideration to the weight of the assembly of the scenes. Shower scenes are a good symbol of showing the intimacy and vulnerability of a character both physically and psychologically, making an audience wonder just whats on their mind. I never wondered what was on her mind because shes a moron. Shes a brick. She loses track of her brother, finds that hes been with the old man of whom she is suspicious of for (at this point in the film), no reason. She hastily rushes him out but when he tells her shes her own person of something (which is a lie because she is not a person. Is a brick!) she immediately stays to loiter. Another thing that bugged me was just looking at the characters lifeless deadpan expressions throughout the film. It was like watching paint dry. It made the movie feel longer then it actually was. I get the points of conveying a serious, socially awkward person who wont react with the classic 80s movies one-liner, but moments, especially at the beginning never seemed motivated. The main character is just a rude dick was the impression I got from it. It's just one-dimensional characters. This results in narrow acting on behalf of the actor but its not their fault. The script is putting them in a cage and not letting them expression the wonderful chaos which is humanity. You, whoever might be reading this, may feel like that these are the reasons that pissed me off and though these did little to help this feeling it was not the major contributor to these feelings of anger. I just hate the fact that there are problems like these in the first place. These are rudimentary errors that vanish under the level of scrutiny of an impassioned filmmaker. It never felt like they celebrated each scene and its narrative weight. I could skip scenes in the movie and feel like I hadn't missed anything important. I couldn't get invested because scenes felt long but said little. That is the reason The Changeover pissed me off. It didn't care if anyone watched it. It just seemed like an opportunity for talented film creators to do their job. The result is a polished turd. I don't care how nice the lighting is, I'm still staring at crap!