Hello, friends!
From time to time some of us probably think it would be great if we could wish all of our mundane problems away and instead go to a magical world where we are fighting against dark powers with a group of loyal friends. Since that's not possible, a good substitute is immersion through stories, so today I'm reviewing a film that transports the viewer to the world of the goblins, the world of the movie Labyrinth.
A note about spoilers: This majority of this review is spoiler-free as I will not talk about the ending of the movie. I'll be talking about the characters and their dynamics but not what happens to them so feel free to read without fear of the secrets being spoiled. NOTE: As I get into the general thoughts section I'll talk about some events that are further along than I usually talk about (normally I don't go further than the inciting incident) but will still refrain from talking about the ending itself.
Labyrinth (1986)
Premise: Sarah is full of daydreams, but her dad and stepmom leave her to babysit her half-brother, Toby, when he just takes her things. She finds it absolutely unfair and when he won't stop crying she wishes that the king of the goblins would just take Toby away so she didn't have to worry about him. Turns out, her wish comes true as Jareth, the very king of the goblins himself, appears and does just that. Now Sarah has to find her way to his castle before time is up to get her baby brother back and come home, or else he'll belong to Jareth forever. The only problem is, to do that, she has the face the labyrinth where the rules are always changing and Jareth isn't above cheating to get what he wants.
 |
| If only there was a worm to guide her... |
Genre(s): Adventure, Family, Fantasy.
Length: approx. 101 minutes.
Age Range: This is rated PG. There's a bit of peril that might be too much for really little kids, but nothing gory ever happens so kids over 8 would probably be okay. The goblins can be a bit alarming but they're more bumbling than (think of Maleficent's minions in Sleeping Beauty (1959)) scary. Jareth is probably the eeriest thing in this world.
Crew: Directed by: Jim Henson. Produced by: Eric Rattray. Written by: Terry Jones, Dennis Lee, and Jim Henson. Music by: Trevor Jones and performed by David Bowie.
Starring: David Bowie and Jennifer Connelly, and a whole slew of voice actors and puppeteers!
 |
| Personally, I'll always choose the blue option. |
General thoughts:
Coming after Henson's earlier work The Dark Crystal (1982) (which I am now curious about to see if it's in the same world), this film is in the classic "girl goes to another world to learn about herself" canon, up there with The Wizard of Oz and Alice in Wonderland, and Jim Henson himself didn't mind the comparison. However, this story didn't stop at garnering inspiration, but was substantial in influencing future stories in this niche micro-genre. Some other films that come to mind with a similar premise are:
- Spirited Away (2001): spirits instead of goblins fill this world, but our main character still has a spiky-haired antagonist to face.
- The Adventures of Elmo in Grouchland (1999): this may not count because it's a play on Alice in Wonderland already, but what it has in common with Labyrinth is puppets, so I think it's still of note. It also features something that is lost and claimed by the antagonist (in this case, it's a blanket instead of a baby).
- Pan's Labyrinth (2006): I have yet to see the film itself, but have seen a couple presentations about it so I have a pretty good idea about the plot. My basis of comparison isn't just the title, but also the dynamic between a girl and her brother.
As far as I know none of those films have credited Labyrinth as an inspiration, they just stood out to me so this is my own un-researched hypothesis. What is known is that this film has a cult following and there have been discussions of a sequel since 2016. While there haven't been any updates since 2024, it was still thought to be sincere.
 |
| And besides, Mr. David Bowie is no longer with us and who else could play Jareth? |
Though, it would be hard to follow this up because this film is so distinctively 80s, so something made 40 years later would invariably feel out of place and not even in the same world. It's hard to pinpoint a tone for this story as the stakes are high--Sarah's brother's life is in the balance!--yet then there are puppets, the occasional crass joke thrown in, and musical numbers.
Quick tangent: These songs are low-key insane. I get it, they couldn't bring in someone as famous in the music world as David Bowie and NOT have him sing, but at the same time it's not a musical? And David Bowie is the only one who is singing?? The muppets sing along sometiems, too, but Sarah never has a song which is what keeps this from feeling like a musical and more of a pop experiment. It just plays into Jareth being dramatic that he breaks out in song from time to time, usually just to sing things he could've just as easily said with a few words. I somehow have them stuck in my head even though I don't know what the words are.
 |
| Is that a magic 8 ball? |
With that out of the way, back to defining the tone. As strange as it is for me now--and strange doesn't mean I don't like it!--it's not too far out there for the time frame, as it is believably in league with other 80s fantasy films, such as The NeverEnding Story (1984). I'd classify this as funky fantasy. That's not an official genre, but it's as close as I can get to describe it, as opposed to things like high fantasy or dark fantasy or...romantasy.
And that's what leads me to what I really want to talk about: I think this film inspired a generation of fans who also love romantasy (romance + fantasy), and explains so much about people being obsessed with the "romantasy" genre even if the film itself isn't part of it.
For those of you who are not around the current book spheres, romantasy often involves characters from opposing sides (enemies-to-lovers) as the main couple, frequently including a brooding character who has for much of the story been seen as the villain/antagonist/or just plain dangerous. You'll notice that Romance isn't in the genres listed for this film, yet there's a scene where Jareth is up to his usual manipulation and is trying to make Sarah forget why she's there until time runs out, so he traps her in a time-loop and the common reading from the cult following is that this is romantic.
I'm here to argue that it isn't and that the movie isn't trying to show that it is.
Sarah has been longing for an escape this whole time, and that's all Jareth is offering her, to be stuck in a time-loop forever. In this hazy escape world Sarah is clinging to things that have a sense of familiarity, not attraction. There are other options for escape given later and they are just as attractive options to Sarah as this scene, and so that's no indication of feelings on either side. The goblin king is never in love with Sarah, only ever trying to trick her. And she's never in love with him, just under the spell.
 |
| I think that's more to do with the dress, if we're being honest. |
Romantasy as a genre is fine on its own--let people read what they like!--but I think it's problematic if it's read into things that are not there. Remember: he's the villain and she's 16 years old. I think the film itself does not support that as we are constantly reminded of the true motivations (only a villain would nearly drop a baby so many times).
And who knows, maybe people don't see it this way; that's just the impression I had of this movie for years now before watching it and was impressed that it actually had such a hard line of just being manipulation and nothing more, and it's up to the characters to break free.
And while we're here, let's talk about the characters.
 |
| Preciousssssss |
I really liked Sarah as our progatonist. At first she is somewhat petulant, whiney, and has her own idea of what is and isn't fair in life (the "I wonder what your basis for comparison" line is ICONIC), but like all great stories, her worldview changes and she becomes strong and kind. Her arc is about growing up, grief, and coming to appreciate those you have, not those you lost.
To continue the comparison to The Wizard of Oz, Hoggle, Ludo, and Sir Didymus remind me of The Scarecrow, The Tinwoodsman, and The Cowardly Lion. There is not an exact counterpart for each member of the trio, but instead all have parts of intelligence, compassion, and bravery.
-screenshot-472902663.jpg) |
| I would also hold Ludo's hand. |
Those characters are bold in their personalities but also in their appearance, thanks to the work done to bring them to life and I so appreciate the effort of all of those puppets. I mean, it's Jim Henson, so that's kind of his forte. To our modern eyes, some of the transitions aren't perfect, but that's part of the charm.
In addition to the puppets, I was constantly blown away by the set and the utter commitment of dusting everything in gold. I mean it, there's glitter on everything. I could not find a great picture to demonstrate this, so you just have to watch it to see how in-depth they go. This alone makes me think of it as not being as "dark fantasy" as it is often portrayed. Yes, there are dark moments, but there's also enough humor to keep things light. There's a light at the end of the tunnel, or at least, at the end of the Labyrinth.
 |
| Look at the sparkly walls! |
For the blogathon:
This is my entry to the "Eddie's Year" Blogathon hosted by Sally Silverscreen at 18 Cinema Lane. This blogathon is celebrating the character Eddie Munson from Stranger Things and through that the year 1986, the year he would've graduated. I haven't watched Stranger Things, but Sally also opened this blogathon up to movies made in 1986 and when I saw Labyrinth back in February I sprung at the chance to talk about it. Last year around this time I reviewed The Breakfast Club (1985) for a blogathon celebrating movies from 1985, so this felt like the next logical step.
From what I understand about Eddie and the world of Stranger Things, Dungeons and Dragons is a part of it. This film feels very much like it could be in that world with the twists and turns and changing rules. If this were a Dungeons and Dragons set-up then Jareth feels like the Dungeon Master--one that nobody likes--as he changes the scenarios from minute to minute. I've never played D&D but would love to give it a go, so my character that I'll claim is either Hoggle or Sir Didymus. Pretty simple when anything comes up: Hoggle runs away from danger and Sir Didymus runs towards it. But as I talked about above, they have development of their own, too, so the story is never dull.
This review of mine is last minute, at the thirteenth hour, but thanks to Sally for hosting this! Readers, if you liked this article and want to revisit more of 1986, check out the other entries in the blogathon HERE.
 |
| 13 is prime time. |
Thank you for reading! Have you seen this movie? Do you think this fits into the romantasy genre? I'd love to discuss it with you in the comments! Who do you think of Hoggle, Ludo, and Sir Didymus is the best fit for each Wizard of Oz character I listed? What are other 80s fantasy films you enjoy? What should I know about Stranger Things?
Until next time,
Chloe the MovieCritic
