Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Age Out (2018)
9/10
Polanski's Oliver Twist meets Andrea Arnold's American Honey
22 June 2018
Edward's Friday's Child is Polanski's Oliver Twist meets Andrea Arnold's 2016 road drama American Honey.

Edwards, editor for Terrence Malick on his 2012 drama To the Wonder, brings the brutal decision 25,000 orphans face annually in the US to the cinema in this hauntingly real drama: whether to pursue a higher education and take on immense debt, or forego education early to fight for their place in the world.

At its core, the film has a harsh honesty that will leave the audience helpless in its wake. Edwards doesn't shy away from confronting the audience and employs a full range of cinematic techniques to create as visceral and personal experience. The end result is drama that will leave the viewer shaken, gasping, and somewhere deep down, confused by the guilt and anguish they feel by the pounding resolution of Edward's cinematic masterpiece.

Right off the bat, you'll notice Edwards chooses to shoot his entire film on the same wide lens (when I mean wide, I mean very wide: probably around in the 12-18mm range). It distorts space, makes it bulbous and deep, and draws attention to the environment very consciously. Inspired by American and German photographers from the 70s and 80s, Edwards explains that when we look at the world, we're not switching constantly between different lenses, rather in reality, our eyes see through one set of lenses. It is a very confrontational choice, that forces the viewer into the rest of the world in Friday's Child. You don't get to live the drama of the film without the harsh reality it is placed in.

Tye Sheridan, Imogen Poots, and Caleb Landry Jones have standout performances. They feel real and present; the only ounce of melodrama that leaks in is at the very end of the film. Aside from that, they move about the film with the listless pace you'd expect from people trying to piece their lives together. It isn't acted - scenes are startlingly authentic, starting from minute details like the awkward gait Tye Sheridan at Richie's first high class evening party, or the reckless stride of Caleb Landry Jones's character Swim as he struts around a hotel he has no business living in. Edwards often brings the camera right up to the actor, close enough to hear their shallow breathing and notice the clenching of their jaws. The intensity of the performance lives through its subtlety, a testament to Sheridan, Poots, and Jones.

The tone of the film, largely controlled by the rich kodachrome color palette and the pressuring soundtrack from rock artist Colin Stetson (he worked on Arrival and more recently, Hereditary), is heavy and oppressive. The 3:4 aspect ratio, in combination with the unrelenting drone of the soundtrack, can leave the audience feeling just as trapped as Richie himself. It isn't without catharsis, however: in the middle of the film, Richie elopes with his new girlfriend to the midwest, and the sound track recedes to reveal the gentle ambience of the country, the colors calm down to a comfortable temperament, and the sky opens as the frame expands in wondrous 2.4:1 aspect ratio. You can almost hear the theater breathe a collective sigh of relief.

Ultimately, the film revolves around freedom. In the opening minutes of the film, Richie's school counselors tell him, "You know what we call aging out? Emancipation." Edwards presents us with an authentic story rooted in the real problems of orphans all over the United States, while pressing us to live out their struggles with realizing what freedom really means in the "Land of the Free". While we can never completely understand the stories of these orphans from this side of the camera, Edwards offers us something remarkably close that, if not moving us into action, forces us to truly celebrate and fight for Emancipation some of us have the luxury of possessing.
21 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Strong control of environment and camera, but muddled in its delivery
20 June 2018
At its core, the film is a haunting look into the mind of a despairing artist. As the artist is scorned by his audience and his colleagues alike, he returns to his childhood home, only to find his mother dying of some respiratory disease, and his presence replaced by a man adopted from a mental institution. Slowly he succumbs to his neurosis, ailed by paranoia and scrabbling for control of his life. Ultimately, he must make the choice whether or not to force his way back into his childhood home, or leave quietly and face the outside world.

Director Subbotko has an auteur's keen eye when it comes to mise-en-scene, making sure to control every aspect of the visuals very carefully. The movement of the camera is masterful, and subtly draws the audience inwards towards the world. The colors and tone are painterly, and Subbotko isn't afraid to let the awkwardness of real life leak into the film.

The music, in particular, is a look both into the main character's and Subbotko's mind. A simple orchestral riff from Polish Composer Szymanowski, repeated numerous times throughout the film, marks the limits between reality and the main character's paranoia. Though hauntingly beautiful, its appearance changes the tone of the scene entirely with every appearance. By the end of the film, it seems to be a harbinger of ruin. It is an elegant use of music, simple in execution, but impactful in delivery.

However strong the thematic and cinematic delivery of the film is, it ultimately falls a bit short on the delivery of the film's central story. The issue is not the film chooses to be ambiguous in its exposition, or that the ending raises more questions than it answers, but rather from the beginning of the film to its very end, there seems to be a lacking driving force behind the main character. There is no push behind him - he seems to do things absolutely on a whim, decisions made without logic in mind. In the end, the viewer might be left thinking, "I may have just experienced something incredibly profound. I'm not exactly sure what about it is profound, or if I really have anything to say about it, other than wanting to ask the main character: Why!?"

However, the fact that the film is as headless as it is tailless, may not be that much of an issue. A film that can leave an audience muttering about it quietly long into the credits is the mark of a film that has left an impact on its audience, and ultimately, that's more than a lot of films can say nowadays.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed