There’s a long cinematic tradition of children who escape horrible lives through the power of imagination. “The Wizard of Oz” is about a girl stuck in the lifeless Dust Bowl. “The Spirit of the Beehive” is about a girl isolated in fascist, Francoist Spain. “In Your Dreams” is about a girl with a loving family who might have to move for her mother’s work, even though her dad really likes their current house. One of these problems is, admittedly, less like the others. Even the kid with the snooty piano teacher in “The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T” had it worse than Stevie in “In Your Dreams.”
“In Your Dreams” is the latest Netflix animated feature, hailing from director Alex Woo and co-director Erik Benson. It’s not going to be the next “KPop Demon Hunters” but that’s a ridiculously high bar, and there are worse animated films on the streaming service. And also better ones. Typically, there are two kinds of Netflix animated movies: the ones that couldn’t get released anywhere else because they’re too cool, and the ones that couldn’t be released anywhere else because they’re not. Now there’s also “In Your Dreams,” which splits the cool/not cool options right down the middle.
It’s a well-intentioned but somewhat banal animated fantasy, with brief, infrequent bursts of energy and amusement. It also has an interesting moral about the dangers of avoiding reality, which might explain why it’s not more fun. If “In Your Dreams” was too entertaining it would contradict its own message about the perils of escapism. But it also might not be entertaining enough to make audiences stay until the message comes through. Call it a design flaw.
“In Your Dreams” tells the story of Stevie (Jolie Hoang-Rappaport) and her little brother Elliot (Elias Janssen), who find a book about the Sandman (Omid Djalili), a mythical deity who will grant your wish if you find him in your dreams. So, to save their family from the horrors of moving to Duluth, Minn. — and not, pointedly, to end world hunger or cure cancer — Stevie and Elliot embark on a late night journey through all their worst nightmares, accompanied by Elliot’s favorite stuffed animal, Baloney Tony (Craig Robinson).
“In Your Dreams,” like all movies that take place in your dreams, is a showcase for the filmmakers’ imagination. Sometimes their imagination is derivative, and lifts imagery wholesale from “Little Nemo: Adventures in Slumberland,” “Spirited Away” and “Labyrinth.” Sometimes their imagination is generic, with a town full of anthropomorphic breakfast foods. Sometimes it’s upsetting in deeply uncomfortable ways, like the creepy muffin who stalks children in alleyways while wearing Stevie’s retainer on its head and horrifically rasps that it’s “a perfect princess.” I don’t know why that’s there. I don’t want to know that’s there. That’s some Freddy Krueger stuff is all I’m saying.
The film peaks halfway through, with an extended montage of Stevie and Elliot’s nightmares, all of which are striking and ridiculous. It’s so vivid and inspired it makes you wonder why the rest of the movie doesn’t match that energy. “In Your Dreams” had carte blanche to do literally anything. That’s the promise of the premise. Most of the time it pulls those punches, to the film’s detriment and to the audience’s.
When Stevie and Elliot do find the Sandman — earlier than you might expect — the film takes an unusual shift, turning a familiar fantasy into a cautionary tale about the concept of fantasy. Maybe escaping your problems through fictional worlds of wonder isn’t practical, or even cathartic. Maybe nostalgia is a deadly trap. Maybe the only good dream is a nightmare? I’m not sure about that one. But it’s a premise “In Your Dreams” argues, so kudos for making an unusual and challenging point in what seemed, at least, like an otherwise typical narrative.
“In Your Dreams” takes a few stabs at originality but the blade is dull, so it never sinks in. That makes sense. More than anything else the adjectives “In Your Dreams” evokes is just “harmless.” It’s got highlights, but they’re never too high. It’s got lowlights, but they’re never too low. It’s got an interesting point about the dangers of fantasy but all the characters’ problems are resolved by engaging in fantasy, so it’s unlikely to change anybody’s perspective. To put it simply, the movie could have been better. (But, perhaps, only in your dreams.)
