Theodosia Throckmorton, 'Turning Red,' and the Failure of Modern Film Criticism: A Rant

As Well as Things I Can't Believe I'm Having to Say in 2022

I decided to write this post — more of a rant, really — due to a couple things that happened this week in the sphere of film criticism, both professional and amateur, regarding two newly released properties on HBO Max and Disney+ respectively. The first is probably not one you've heard of, but the second has been widely publicized in the news, and I'd like to talk about them both and how they relate to each other, as well as how they relate to the culture at large regarding how we approach criticizing films and television, especially titles created with younger audiences in mind.

The two programs in question are the HBO Max Original Theodosia, based on the series of books of the same name by R. L. LaFevers about the daughter of two Egyptologists who lives in their museum and accidentally winds up learning ancient Egyptian magic, and the new Disney-Pixar film Turning Red, about a girl who turns into a giant red panda whenever she's stressed. I have not yet seen Turning Red, but it is on my watchlist. Both are comedies geared towards a similar age group (the tween to young teenage audience) and both have had, shall we say, interesting reviews of late. But first, some background.

I had initially heard of the Theodosia series ahead of its release while researching another blog post (11 Reasons Why 'The Falcon and the Winter Soldier' Season 2 Should Include X-23). If you've already read that article, you may recall that while I was pitching a Disney+ show based on Tom Taylor's All-New Wolverine series starring Dafne Keen as the title character, I also fan-cast Keen's double from His Dark Materials as Laura Kinney's younger sister Gabby: Eloise Little, who had, at the time, only recently been announced as the star of the then-upcoming Theodosia series on HBO Max. So, I made a note to myself to check out the series once it premiered, so I could see if it proved my inclination that Eloise Little would be a good choice to play Marvel's Honey Badger.

In short, it does. Eloise Little as Theodosia Throckmorton demonstrates exactly the kind of acting skills necessary to play Gabby Kinney/Honey Badger, showing an ability to be intense and passionate, but more importantly for the character, an ability to be irreverent and silly.

And beyond my fan-casting interests for this show, I was also intrigued by the premise. Ancient Egypt stuff is always interesting, especially when it involves a mystery story and magic. After watching it, I found it to be quite enjoyable, funny, and entertaining. It's also easy to watch, and has the vibe of an easy-reading chapter book with charming characters and whimsical settings.

Which was why I was so disappointed to see a number of very negative reviews on IMDb. However, looking further, the reasons for these negative reviews became clear, and this is what I want to talk about.

When I had first looked at the reviews, there was at least one one-star review (out of ten possible stars on IMDb), and I don't think any that were over five out of ten stars, with at least forty-four ratings that were not accompanied by a review. This gave Theodosia an overall score of around 5.6 out of ten stars. I happened to look again last night and this had already changed, with a new review giving the show eight out of ten stars, and highlighting the issues with the other, low-star rating reviews that came before it, in some cases directly calling them out.

The types of things that these other reviewers were complaining about were that Theodosia was "childish," "not what I was expecting," "on the wrong platform," or "better suited to Disney+." Particularly common was the thought that this show apparently had no place on HBO Max because it was "a kids' show."

There are several problems with reviewing a show like this, the most important being that these reviewers are criticizing a show based on what they thought it would be, rather than what it actually is; and furthermore, judging an entire show based on expectations that are unreasonable in the first place. Insisting that Theodosia has no place on HBO Max because "it's a kids' show" indicates a lack of remembering that Sesame Street runs on HBO.

This seems to be a really common theme right now in film criticism. Reviewers don't seem to be capable of putting themselves in the shoes of a show's target audience (a concept otherwise known as empathy) and judge shows not made for the audience they fit into based on the shows they enjoy in their personal lives. The reviews on Theodosia seemed to be assuming that because it was on HBO Max, that it was going to be at least as intense as His Dark Materials, with major themes of right and wrong and life and death and free will and blah blah blah blah blah.

Spoiler alert: Theodosia is not His Dark Materials. Comparing them is a pointless exercise in irrelevance.

It's troubling how much the process of reviewing a film or television show has been so mangled. Theodosia not being what someone expected or being a "kids' show" is somehow enough to earn it a one star review. If I'm reading a review of a show, I'm wholly uninterested in someone's assessment of its genre. Theodosia is made for kids. How very observant of you. Do you mind now telling me how successful you think it is as a kids' show? Or do you have such a complete lack of empathy that you are incapable of knowing? Or do you judge that the very notion of a "kids' show" is so far beneath you that it must be worth only one star? Just because Theodosia Throckmorton doesn't lop off the bad guy's head and curse every five seconds in an historically inaccurate fashion, that means Theodosia is worthless as a series and doesn't belong on HBO Max? It's Young Sherlock Holmes meets Magic Tree House meets Best Friends Whenever crossed with Enola Holmes. What exactly were you expecting from this show?

Taking to the extreme, this lazy, unimaginative style of film criticism can end up being both hurtful and extremely damaging, and this is exactly what happened with Disney-Pixar's Turning Red. You may have already heard this story, in which CinemaBlend writer Sean O'Connell wrote a review of the film, and concluded that not only was the film not enjoyable because he was "not its target audience," but also that "Pixar has turned its reigns over to fresh voices, and given them the freedom to share deeply personal – though less universal – stories."

Excuse me?

EXCUSE ME???

This review has been rightly meant with intense criticisms over its thinly veiled sexism and racism. O'Connell basically states that because Turning Red's humor was not targeted towards a middle-aged white man (who, it should be stated, isn't Pixar's target audience by default), that it isn' "worthy" as a movie, and that it was "exhausting" to watch.

Give.

ME.

A BREAK.

Many people online have pointed out how ridiculous it is to call this film un-relatable, drawing comparisons to films like Ratatouille, Cars, A Bug's Life, or really — oh, I don't know - EVERY PIXAR MOVIE EVER — which all have ridiculously absurd premises that nobody could possibly relate to, and yet we relate to the characters anyway. None of us are being controlled by a rat in our hat, and yet we relate to Linguini. None of us are a talking race car, yet we relate to Lightning McQueen. None of us are a Scottish princess who have turned their mother into a bear (at least, I hope not...), and yet we connect with Merida. What do these characters who in Sean O'Connell's eyes are more relatable and less "exhausting" have in common?

They're all white.

Well, not technically. Lightning McQueen is candy apple red, and is — you know, a car — but he's voiced by Owen Wilson: a white man.

So, methinks Sean O'Connell is a tad full of shit. Apparently so does CinemaBlend, because they have retracted the review — though one has to wonder why they let the article go to print in the first place. And while it's easy to roast Sean O'Connell and make jokes about how we couldn't relate to Inside Out because we're not a part-elephant-part-dolphin-with-a-cotton-candy-body-who-cries-caramel, I think we need to acknowledge how problematic it is that this is how we approach reviewing films and television shows, especially those made for children; and we need to insist on better from film critics. At its most tame, it's the dense approach behind giving Theodosia a bad review because it didn't live up to your half-baked expectations; at its worst, it's the malevolence with which white film critics like Sean O'Connell and worse can drag a movie like Turning Red just because they missed the point. As many other writers have pointed out, marginalized groups have spent decades not being the target audience.

Writers like Sean O'Connell need to step outside themselves and see that films like Turning Red, Encanto, and Coco give young kids of those cultures empowering representation that they may never have seen before — something I as a white man have never experienced and will never experience. This is what white privilege is, and Sean O'Connell's is showing.

I have not yet seen Turning Red, which is why I wasn't able to go into as much detail with it as Theodosia — that, and I am a religious spoiler-dodger. I have, however, been very eager to see it after seeing the trailers, and I feel like I'm more eager now. Pixar has such a good track record that I'm almost certain I'm going to like it.

Anyway, thank you for coming with me on this rant. I'll be back later this week with my essay about Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, and probably with a new Your House, My House or two in the next couple days. Until then, toodles!

—C