Animal Kingdom (C or 2/4 stars)
Oh, Australia ... regardless of how I feel about this particular film, no one can accuse you of making conventional movies. 'Animal Kingdom' (written & directed by David Michod) tells the story of 17 yr. old "J" (James Frecheville) as he tries to survive amongst a combustible criminal family and the detective who believes he can save him. Action kicks-off when Julia (J's heroin-addicted mother) dies right in front of him. Not knowing what to do, he calls up his estranged maternal grandma, Janine "Smurf" Cody (Jacki Weaver), the family matriarch, for a place to live. Smurf dominates her family with an odd, somewhat incestuous love for her 3 troublesome sons: the diabolical-looking "Pope" (Ben Mendelsohn), the live-wired Craig (Sullivan Stapleton), and her youngest son, Darren (Luke Ford).
Pope & his best pal, Barry "Baz" Brown (Joel Edgerton), are armed robbers, with Darren being their apprentice, so to speak. Also along for the ride is Craig; who happens to be a drug dealer, as well. Melbourne Australia's Armed Robbery Squad is specifically after Pope, who is hiding out somewhere. And when tensions btwn. the Cody clan & the Armed Robbery Squad escalates, a war brews. Some major players (in the story) are murdered, and "J" gets caught in the middle. So because of all the recent deaths, an investigation gets underway; and Homicide Det. Nathan Leckie (Guy Pearce) knows that the Cody Clan is definitively involved. As Leckie tries to get "J" to confess (that he knows what's going on with his nefarious uncles), "J" must try to figure out if it's better to trust the detective, or his own untrustworthy family. Can justice be attained in this grim situation? And what does grand mama Smurf have to say about it all?
I guess I just missed the boat on this film. It has an enormous 83 rating on Metacritic (a site used to rate films from all of America's top critics). And I don't think I'd give it much more than a 50, 55. How could I not see what they all saw? Some of their quotes, followed by mine in parentheses: "a remarkable film" (yes, my remark is 'boring'). "Gut-churning" (there was zero tension in the narrative). "A distinctive, ominous, & hypnotic work" (how about, ordinary, tedious, & sleep-inducing). "A contemplative crime drama with a high startlement quotient" (startlement? I was trying to stay awake). "Suffused with atmosphere & style (it was drab). I may be overreacting, but I'm trying to prove a point. I would swear that some of these critics are being paid to say amazing things about certain films. I simply can't understand how I - an average movie-watcher with some degree of taste - can be so far off from popular opinion on this particular film.
Some critics praise it for its metaphors/themes: greed & betrayal; how we all have a wild streak; life is 'survival of the fittest'; we must have an eat or be eaten mentality, at times. Those themes are obvious. I just don't think the movie was big enough to fill-out those ideas. 'Animal Kingdom' could have been a slick, strange little thriller with ripe dialogue, interesting plot developments, & provided a real 'wow' ending. This could have been an epic tragedy (though, the film is far from epic - more like claustrophobic). No, instead, we're left to watch 105 min. unfold at a glacial pace, with little plot incident, & insignificant dialogue; even when I could understand what was coming out of the actors' hushed, accented mouths. Subtitles should have been provided for most of this movie; and it's in English.
I just don't know the criteria that was used by the critics for this movie. What got them stimulated? It couldn't have been the filmmaking or story (lack of). I can only figure: the acting. Best in show is definitely Jacki Weaver. She's what I would call a quiet force to be reckoned with. Why quiet? Because she's so unassuming. She has an irritatingly sweet voice. She tends to end her sentences with "sweetheart" or "love". Nothing gets to her. She kisses her sons as if to recall younger days when they were little boys. She cooks for them, cleans for them. Her sons die. She looks upset. She moves on. But all the while, she has ruthless, demonic ideas in her head. She'll do whatever she can to keep her cherished pups alive; even if it means disposing some of her others. Wicked. Then again, was it her performance that was so great? Or did she just luck out by getting a wonderful role?
I just feel like 'Animal Kingdom' is a banal and deficient movie in all facets aside from some stellar performances. And I have no doubt that half the people (or more) who see this film will be left scratching their heads - as I am - as to why it's been so critically lauded.
Pope & his best pal, Barry "Baz" Brown (Joel Edgerton), are armed robbers, with Darren being their apprentice, so to speak. Also along for the ride is Craig; who happens to be a drug dealer, as well. Melbourne Australia's Armed Robbery Squad is specifically after Pope, who is hiding out somewhere. And when tensions btwn. the Cody clan & the Armed Robbery Squad escalates, a war brews. Some major players (in the story) are murdered, and "J" gets caught in the middle. So because of all the recent deaths, an investigation gets underway; and Homicide Det. Nathan Leckie (Guy Pearce) knows that the Cody Clan is definitively involved. As Leckie tries to get "J" to confess (that he knows what's going on with his nefarious uncles), "J" must try to figure out if it's better to trust the detective, or his own untrustworthy family. Can justice be attained in this grim situation? And what does grand mama Smurf have to say about it all?
I guess I just missed the boat on this film. It has an enormous 83 rating on Metacritic (a site used to rate films from all of America's top critics). And I don't think I'd give it much more than a 50, 55. How could I not see what they all saw? Some of their quotes, followed by mine in parentheses: "a remarkable film" (yes, my remark is 'boring'). "Gut-churning" (there was zero tension in the narrative). "A distinctive, ominous, & hypnotic work" (how about, ordinary, tedious, & sleep-inducing). "A contemplative crime drama with a high startlement quotient" (startlement? I was trying to stay awake). "Suffused with atmosphere & style (it was drab). I may be overreacting, but I'm trying to prove a point. I would swear that some of these critics are being paid to say amazing things about certain films. I simply can't understand how I - an average movie-watcher with some degree of taste - can be so far off from popular opinion on this particular film.
Some critics praise it for its metaphors/themes: greed & betrayal; how we all have a wild streak; life is 'survival of the fittest'; we must have an eat or be eaten mentality, at times. Those themes are obvious. I just don't think the movie was big enough to fill-out those ideas. 'Animal Kingdom' could have been a slick, strange little thriller with ripe dialogue, interesting plot developments, & provided a real 'wow' ending. This could have been an epic tragedy (though, the film is far from epic - more like claustrophobic). No, instead, we're left to watch 105 min. unfold at a glacial pace, with little plot incident, & insignificant dialogue; even when I could understand what was coming out of the actors' hushed, accented mouths. Subtitles should have been provided for most of this movie; and it's in English.
I just don't know the criteria that was used by the critics for this movie. What got them stimulated? It couldn't have been the filmmaking or story (lack of). I can only figure: the acting. Best in show is definitely Jacki Weaver. She's what I would call a quiet force to be reckoned with. Why quiet? Because she's so unassuming. She has an irritatingly sweet voice. She tends to end her sentences with "sweetheart" or "love". Nothing gets to her. She kisses her sons as if to recall younger days when they were little boys. She cooks for them, cleans for them. Her sons die. She looks upset. She moves on. But all the while, she has ruthless, demonic ideas in her head. She'll do whatever she can to keep her cherished pups alive; even if it means disposing some of her others. Wicked. Then again, was it her performance that was so great? Or did she just luck out by getting a wonderful role?
I just feel like 'Animal Kingdom' is a banal and deficient movie in all facets aside from some stellar performances. And I have no doubt that half the people (or more) who see this film will be left scratching their heads - as I am - as to why it's been so critically lauded.