Review: ‘Detective Pikachu’ works for both kids and adults |

Review: ‘Detective Pikachu’ works for both kids and adults

It may be surprising, to put it mildly, to read a review of “Pokémon: Detective Pikachu” that also mentions “Blade Runner.” (More on this later.) But in a world where goldfish turn into dragons and baby dinosaurs walk the streets with tails aflame, stranger things have been known to happen.

For the uninitiated, Pokémon are mythical creatures of varying types that each have special abilities. (Ask your local 10-year-old to list a few of the many species and their powers.) Working with human trainers, they battle one another for supremacy by using their powers to attack opponents.

The phenomenon started in the 1990s with video games, evolving into a cartoon series, a card game and eventually the ever-present cultural juggernaut it is today. “Pokémon: Detective Pikachu,” the first live-action/animated entry into the canon, is only the latest fuel to keep the fire burning — and the money flowing.

Cuddly creatures

“Detective Pikachu” takes the mostly cuddly creatures out of the ring and puts them on the streets of a place called Ryme City, where Pokémon and people live together in relative harmony. The story starts outside the city limits, with Tim Goodman (Justice Smith), a 22-year-old insurance adjuster who has given up his dream of becoming a champion Pokémon trainer.

After the death of his father in a mysterious accident, Tim heads to Ryme City to set his dad’s affairs in order, only to discover an amnesiac Pokémon lurking in his father’s office: It’s the yellow, rodent-like critter known as Pikachu.

Though Pokémon can normally only articulate variations of their own names — e.g., “pika pika,” delivered here by the original voice of the cartoon Pikachu, Ikue Otani — this particular specimen (voiced by Ryan Reynolds) can talk. He convinces Tim to try to get to the bottom of his father’s death.

Here’s where “Blade Runner” comes in.

Dizzy and dazzling

Just as Ridley Scott created a film-noir vision of the future — all neon lights and crowded streets — director Rob Letterman (“Monsters vs. Aliens”) has rendered a dizzyingly complex and visually dazzling Ryme City. “Detective Pikachu” embraces other noir tropes as well, down to the film’s snappy dialogue and trench coat-clad femme (not quite) fatale: a BuzzFeed-style journalist (Kathryn Newton) who compiles Pokémon listicles, yet aspires to bigger things.

It’s a clever kind of world-building. The film’s Pokémon — all of whom are CGI — look so real you’ll want to reach out and cuddle them, especially Pikachu. That verisimilitude makes “Detective Pikachu” feel like more than a kids’ movie, extending its appeal to nostalgic adults who may remember the Pokémon-card-filled binders of their own childhoods.

The screenplay, however, isn’t terribly innovative — you’ll see some twists coming — but Smith makes for a compelling straight man to Reynolds’s caffeine-obsessed Pikachu, who’s thrilled to find a human who can understand him.

Better than it should be

Reynolds, known for the “Deadpool” movies, jettisons that character’s foul mouth in this PG-rated outing, yet he brings a similar, blunt-spoken charm to this sweet-at-the-center role.

If you’re a stranger to the world of Pokémon, you’ll probably miss dozens of Easter eggs. It’s handy to have a 10-year-old at your side, whispering such insights as: “Psyduck can see into the future” and “That’s the original battle music.”

Is “Detective Pikachu” a movie for everyone? Hardly. But it’s way better than it should be.

It seems that when you take a little yellow creature with a heart of gold and turn him into a soft-boiled detective, something special is in the cards.

Warner Bros. Pictures
Justice Smith with Pikachu (voice of Ryan Reynolds) in “Pokemon: Detective Pikachu.”
Warner Bros. Pictures
(From left) Kathryn Newton, Pikachu (voice of Ryan Reynolds) and Justice Smith in “Pokemon: Detective Pikachu.”
Categories: AandE | Movies TV
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.