ChrisKnipp

  • ChrisKnipp
  • Website: www.chrisknipp.com
  • Personal note: Knipp is a painter and printmaker who ha also been a soldier, Arabist, teacher, and long-distance runner. He divides his time primarily between California and NYC and now focuses a lot on watching new movies and writing reviews of them.
More reviews »

THE ROAD (John Hillcoat 2009)

The Road , Tuesday 05. January 2010, 23:48

Hollywood likes the world to end with a bang. In the Australian director John Hillcoat's The Road, adapted quite faithfully from Cormac McCarthy's 2006 novel, it's ending with a whimper. This is an authentically post-apocalyptic situation, an Endgame worthy of Beckett, but tinged less with irony than with sadness and constant gnawing fear. Somewhere on the eastern seaboard, the Man (Viggo Mortensen) and his son, the Boy (Kodi Smith-McPhee), are struggling to make their way south to the sea, years after universal cataclysm has wiped the slate clean, killed every living plant. Everything is gray, covered with sludge. The trees stand black, shorn, and dead, and are starting to crumble and crash down, large and small. The Boy has never seen a bug, or drunk soda pop. On their journey these things happen, and are great novelties. What people there are remaining along the way must be deemed dangerous. Everyone is desperate and starving.

The Man has flashbacks to before, when he lived with a Woman (Charlize Theron). He sensed the disaster coming before she did. Apparently she had her baby after it happened, to her chagrin. Things were so hopeless she chose to wander off by herself. Some have committed suicide rather than starve to death or die at the hands of marauders. Cannibalism is being practiced by survivors. The Man promises the Boy they won't do that, that they're good guys and will always remain good guys, and carry the fire within them. (That promise is sorely tested.) Out there where the Man and the Boy are now, you have to assume anybody who turns up is a bad guy. And the problem is, the Man and the Boy have just one pistol with two remaining bullets, and they're meant for the two of them, in case.

Cormac McCarthy's books are sort of stylized, apocalyptic westerns a lot of the time, and this could be some austere Clint Eastwood invention with a sci-fi twist. Hillcoat's previous film The Proposition is an Aussie historical western about a desperate contract. The hard thing is to make The Road seem like nothing else, when post-apocalyptic imagery is so familiar to moviegoers. Hillcoat does a good job.

The Man's nostalgia for his past could be part of a Beckett play, but in a way this world is stripped even more bare than Beckett's, bare of discernible history or culture. It's never really clear why they're heading south, except that the Woman, when she was around, warned the Man he'd never survive another winter where they were.

The book's power comes from the way it takes you into this world of desperate day to day survival. The Man and his son come across an unspeakable horror in a southern mansion. When the discover an underground store of preserved food it's heaven for them, and they're also able to wash up and trim their hair. This is the interval of happiness. But it's unsafe to remain anywhere. The story and film give the boy and the adult equal importance. There's a moment of epiphany when the man says he is the one who has to worry about them, and the boy says no, he is. The man is the stronger and more experienced and tougher, but the boy is an angel. When they meet an old codger (Robert Duvall, superb) he says he thought the boy was really an angel. The boy speaks for kindness and love. He still has some hope. The man has lost it and is just soldiering on. His cough gets worse; he's not going to make it.

This is a book that's sufficiently powerful that what you want from a movie based on it is to bring it back to you, and Hillcoat does this. Mortensen and Smith-McPhee are wonderful, as is everyone, including Guy Pearce in a strong final cameo. The man and his son are all each other has, and the relationship is as heartrendingly pure. The difference is in the way the book, with its much greater number of words, speaks itself into your soul. However the movie can do that too if you give yourself to it; it's impossible to say what it feels like to see it without having read the book, if you have. Hillcoat gets the look of the world of The Road very well, though a distraction not experienced with the book is to be wondering sometimes where he found such a lot of wrecked, desolate houses, buildings, cars, roads, and trees, so much gray landscape and so much rain. Somehow all this was simulated on locations in Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Louisiana. One objection is that sometimes there is a sepia tint to the scene that's too pretty; and sometimes there would have been flashes of light or color that the art directors did not allow. But this is a very worthy adaptation of a powerful book -- not McCarthy's greatest novel, but a more important and characteristic one for this very great contemporary American writer than his 2005 No Country for Old Men.

McCarthy's oeuvre is full of apocalyptic journeys. But none other is so stripped to the bone and so melancholy as this one. Yes, it ends with hope. But that's just to say it's open-ended. "Do not despair, one of the thieves was saved; do not presume, one of the thieves was damned." The Road is like that.

_________________
©Chris Knipp 2010

Share on Facebook

Chris, we never really agreed on many movies but here it's worse than ever. You say great acting and directing, I say the film was ruined by bad acting or director's inability to get the most out of his actors. Only Theron was convincing to me.

During the screening I often had a feeling of total indifference. I did not care what was going to happen! There were a few thrilling scenes where I did care for a while, there were a few some good dialogues but in general I did not believe the story and found it hard to be touched by the poor father and the even poorer child.

I agree with you on the Duvall part - I also found it a good performance.

But even though the story felt dull and not challenging, we bought the book - I'm gonna read it in some time and will let know if it's a bad adaptation or a faithful one of a bad book ;>
I suspect the former, knowing about the acclaim McCarthy got.

So, here you have the opinion from the point of view of someone who hasn't read it.

THE ROAD has not received rave reviews in the US. It's Metacrit score is 64, which means "generally favorable." However it is on some significant best lists, I believe (I can't site names off the top of my head, but from some good critics). I see Metacritic has a "Books" section too in which McCarthy's novel rated a 90 -- extraordinarly high.My three greatest reading experiencs of the past 15 years have been: Proust's REMEMBRANCE OF THINGS PAST, David Foster Wallace's INFINITE JEST, and all the novels of Cormac McCarthy. THE ROAD is not a "bad book" by any stretch of the imagination. Both it and the film are desply sad and deeply compelling works. I can't understand your dismissal of the film. I can only conclude you watched it looking for a different kind of film, more an actioner, perhaps.

It shouldn't be necessary to have read a book to appreciate a film adaptation of that book, but it's always better to know the book, and almost a requirement when it's by an important writer. McCarthy is an important writer. I'd say he's one of our (America's) most important ones of recent decades (as is the younger, but sadly now dead by suicide, DFWallace). Here's an assessment of the style and some of the novels by one of our best mainstream critics, James Wood: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/07/25/050725crbo_books. It's about NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, so doesn't deal with the later THE ROAD.

Chris, I was expecting more or less exactly what I got. It was just badly delivered. I didn't like lots of things about The Road. I should probably write a longer reviews to list those, but among them were:
- strange mixing of large-scale scenes that were meant to show us this post-apocalyptic world from bird's view, with the cameral scenes between the main heroes (not sure what was wrong here but it seemed not cut properly - I didn't know why they are showing this or that landscape at that particular time, a bit like in 2012)
- bad acting - I really didn't like the acting of the boy and Viggo Morgensen did not impress me either. For a movie where these two characters are on the screen for 90% of the time, it's quite a serious drawback
- I was not convinced to care about the characters, the relationship between them and the viewer was not built properly, so I struggled for the whole screening trying to feel something and failed
- I hated the self-narration comments of "The Man" - I did not need all those things explained, the pictures could have shown this all much better
Minor problems, after all, but summed up they made the movie that had great potential turn out only mediocre.

I recommend Haneke's Time of the Wolf which is missing all the special effects but has a very similar grey / post-apocalyptic climax, much better acting and a more convincing / touching (although also very cold) story.

great

E-mail notifications and better filtering of Planet Filmaster

We spent the last month implementing a couple of major features, that may not look that major but are so ...

Half a million film ratings at Filmaster.com!

We’ll be celebrating 1st birthday of Filmaster (at least the Polish version) soon, but we already have great news. We’ve ...

Lots of minor features and bug fixes

Over the last few weeks we’ve been constantly updating Filmaster with new features and bug fixes. This post is a ...

The Planet

The Planet shorts

The Planet reviews

The Planet comments