Why I Saw It: There's simply too much buzz about this movie to wait for it to come out on DVD or Netflix.
Cast: I should probably start with Ellar Coltrane since it's all about him. He is solid, not spectacular. By the very nature of the movie, we see him grow as an actor and his change from beginning to end is remarkable. This is the best thing I've seen Patricia Arquette in ever (granted, I've hardly followed her career closely). It's nice to see frequent Linklater (the writer/director) collaborator Ethan Hawke in this. He's the most immediately comfortable person in the movie. The only other regular character is Linklater's own daughter, Lorelei. She's ok. It's hard to rate either of the kids because they literally group up before your eyes.
Plot: This is nearly a three hour movie that covers Mason's (Coltrane's) entire childhood, from 1st to 12th grade, so the story is understandably all over the place. It's almost better to think of the movie as different acts or a series of mini-movies, covering different phases in Mason's life: moving, new family, rebelling, etc. Everything is undeniably part of an intricate story, but I can't say it's one with a particular through-line. There's a scene with Mason and his mother (Arquette) at the end that's the closest thing there is to a "what it's all about" moment. It's not a plot-driven movie though. It's about tracking the growth of the characters, and few movies have ever tracked the growth as well as this one.
Elephant in the Room: What about the 12 years? I've been talking around this so far, but it is the most important part of the movie. The movie was filmed over a period of 12 years, with the same actors. That's insane! Linklater is happy to invest time in characters (The Before Series, specifically), but this is a different level. He had to get a twleve year commitment from all the actor's (hence using his daughter and good friend, Hawke) and hope that the 6 year old boy that the entire movie hinges on can carry it through his awkward adolescence. The movie handles the time jumps incredibly well too. The soundtrack does most of the work to set the time, and Mason goes through numerous haircuts that clue the audience in on jumps too. Knowing that there's no way to fabricate the filming makes certain moments like Mason and his dad (Hawke) in 2006ish discussing if they'll ever make another Star Wars movie even cooler. It's just so fascinating to see the incremental growth and aging of characters in this way, instead of trying to synthesize it with makeup or computer effects.
To Sum Things Up:
It is impossible to rate this against other movies because the filming is so completely different from anything else. I've heard people compare it to a TV show instead of other movies and that's fair since both are filled over time and the stories change over time*. There's no way that the movie ends the way Linklater originally thought (if he planned that far at all). I feel comfortable saying that this movie is an experience more than any other movie you will see this year. The one thing I will say about it that isn't necessarily positive is this. I like the experiment more than the movie. The first thing I'll ever say about it is "it took 12 years to make". Anything else about it gets a pass. Storylines that went nowhere or questionable acting choices are forgiven by the idea that no one entirely knew where this was going. In that way, it is review-proof. It is a special movie though and one that I will be mulling over for a long time after this.
*There's also a number of documentaries that have done this as well. Hoop Dreams and the Up series come to mind immediately.
Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend
No comments:
Post a Comment