140 Character Movie Review – #140RVW
The premise is noteworthy & truly an impressive achievement, but in no way should this be part of the discussion for Best Picture. #SoLong
Spoiler-free Movie Review of Boyhood:
For me, saying that Boyhood exceeded my expectations is something of a backhanded compliment. It didn’t look particularly interesting to me and I’m no fan of Linklater, Hawke or Arquettes (any of them). I thought it was an interesting premise, though. Upon viewing I found my diagnosis fairly accurate, but still thought the film was full of good moments. Unfortunately they are spread far too thin.
In short the movie is exactly what it looks like: an impressive and novel idea for making a film relating the childhood of one boy. Except longer. Unacceptably longer. Inexcusably longer. It felt like the longest movie I’ve ever seen…
I’ve stated before the belief that comedies venture past the 90-minute point entirely at their own risk – they’re in over their head at that point and will be judged accordingly. The analogue to this for drama is that two hours should be sufficient for most tales – I start getting fidgety shortly after that without a compelling reason to keep the story going. But 2 1/2 hours? That really requires something else. At 150 minutes there had better be at least one massive battle scene. And there really is no reason to go to three hours for non-war pictures.
On the positive side of the ledger, it’s a gorgeously shot film showcasing amazingly realistic human emotion. The concept of following a child through myriad changes in life is excellent and this picture succeeds at this as well as any film I can think of. The concept of sticking with one cast that you keep revisiting every few years is masterful.
But that’s the problem; it’s all concept. The whole film is like a class project or a proof-of-concept. It’s really just an exercise in technique – and the technique is good – but it’s ultimately just kind of there as a film, a piece of cinema. There’s no plot, no ending and no message beyond some sort of hesher, hippie worldview. I’m not spoiling anything by revealing that the denouement is essentially a piece of trite stoner insight delivered by a character introduced five minutes beforehand.
Another compliment: I noted while watching that it’s downright bizarre that we’re spending 12 years with this kid and it seems to be so little about sex and romantic relationships. But then I realized what I think they were going for and it’s very clever; Linklater makes a kind of a cool decision to sort of skip over the big moments – showing them only in transition. For example not filming wedding scenes but showing people coming back from a honeymoon; picking up right after graduation instead of using the typical shots of the ceremony. It avoids some cliches and I appreciate that. Also the filmmaker gives the audience credit for being able to keep up – there are no clunky transitions or titles indicating time passed.
There’s some really interesting stuff going on here and some well-written dialogue. It’s just all too damn long. Much like I’m criticizing the film for not really being about anything, I’m aware that I’m leaving myself open to criticism by making my review so much about the length of the movie, but I really can’t stop coming back to it. I just haven’t the slightest idea why this it is so unbelievably long. It’s stubbornly slow and repetitive and for no good reason. There are two separate instances of the mother marrying a man who turns into a drunken husband who clashes with the kids. Is there any reason that this had to happen twice? It’s essentially the exact same character and arc.
Since there’s no discernible plot, Boyhood is something of a rorshach test (not my insight – I’ve seen it in other reviews) – you take from it what you bring into it. Different viewers latch onto different parts of the story or different characters. I guess that’s good – if you’re into film theory or sociology.
In case my review hasn’t been negative enough, here’s a few quick bites from my notes:
- Personally, I don’t see how can you justify nominating 2 supporting actors but not a Best Actor for Ellar Coltrane. Not that any would get my vote.
- I don’t know if the problem was that I had run out of patience or the marked increase in navel-gazing teen talk, but I was climbing the walls for the last 60 minutes of the film.
- The use of overly familiar pop music is a bad call. I understand the thinking – they’re trying to use audio cues to identify the timeline of the story and establish setting. Due to the aforementioned skill of the filmmaker, it’s unnecessary and distracts, pulling you out of the picture by making you mentally synchronize your personal timeline. They did the same thing in Watchmen and Forrest Gump and it didn’t work then either.
- Boyhood exposes the audience to Ethan Hawke’s singing on 5 separate occasions – I counted. Charlie Sexton by comparison: 1.
- If this wins Best Film Editing I may stop writing reviews…
After nearly three hours of watching Boyhood I finally realized what it was – it’s The Truman Show – the whole thing is like just like unscripted reality tv – it isn’t uninteresting, but I don’t get the impetus behind making movies that accurately reflect the mundanity of life.
Poster:
Trailer:
Bechdel Test:
Pass
The Representation Test Score: C (5 pts)
(http://therepresentationproject.org/grading-hollywood-the-representation-test/)
| Main Cast | Ellar Coltrane Mason, Patricia Arquette Mom, Ethan Hawke Dad, Elijah Smith Tommy |
| Rating | R |
| Release Date | Fri 15 Aug 2014 UTC |
| Director | Richard Linklater |
| Genres | Drama |
| Plot | The life of a young man, Mason, from age 5 to age 18. |
| Poster |  |
| Runtime | 165 |
| Tagline | 12 years in the making |
| Writers | Richard Linklater (written by) |
| Year | 2014 |
