Finally got around to seeing this one tonight. Would have seen it sooner (since I've been waiting for over a year for it!) but I decided to wait for a friend of mine who also wanted to see it.
In response to Zabladowski's review, let me say first of all that he is absolutely right about two things: it has absolutely nothing to do with Stand by Me and the acting (by everyone involved, not just Ryan Kelley and Rory Culkin) is simply amazing.
Aside from that, I pretty much disagree with everything he said. And, yes, that means I liked it quite a bit. In fact, I'm debating whether I should give it a 9 or a 10.
First, about Rory's screen time. That he gets first billing is irrelevant. I don't think it was deliberately misleading, as he's not famous enough to attract many people to the theatre. The names of the actors who play all six major characters appear at the beginning of the film in alphabetical order. Rory goes first, Scott what's-his-face goes third. (Same order as on IMDb.) All six of them get roughly the same amount of screen time. Most of the movie takes place in one day, when these six characters are alone in the woods together.
Scott, who is indeed 23 years old, didn't seem that much older than his two friends, at least not to the point of distracting me from the film. He could probably pass for 20. Trevor Morgan's character looks like he's about 18 or 19. I don't remember them saying anything about being "classmates" so there's no reason why an 18 year old shouldn't hang out with someone who's a year or two older. Even if they were classmates, it wouldn't be impossible. Ryan does look much younger than both of them, but again - some kids do look younger than others at that age.
As for the filmmakers giving us more insight into Scott's character's life than any other, I'm not sure I agree here either. We meet his older brother and his brother's friend, because these two will play a role in the events that unfold. We find out eventually (through dialogue) what happened to his father, and his mother is mentionned once or twice but we never actually see her.
The same is true for all the characters. We know very little about their family lives. And, frankly, this was one of the things I liked about the film. The characters are developped through other means, mostly the actors' subtle performances and the interaction between the characters. We find out bits and pieces about some of the characters' backgrounds through dialogue, but nothing is ever expanded apart. It's all very subtle and the screenwriter/director very carefully stays clear of clichés.
For example, we find out at some point that Ryan Kelley's character lives with his two "fathers" - his dad is gay and lives with another man. The other characters sometimes tease him about it, but it never really becomes a big deal. There's a wonderful scene where the bully character is playing around with his video camera, improvising a rap song while filming himself and others. He points the camera to the other kids in the boat, joking: "Rocky's a pimp, Clyde is a f*g." Everyone is laughing at his goofing around, but you have to see the subtle change in Ryan's facial expression when the other calls him a f*g. His smile just kind of falls off his face and he stares at the video camera as if to say: "where did that come from?" It's a split second, but it reveals volumes about his character.
I haven't seen Deliverance, but Bully and River's Edge are two excellent comparisons for this film. However, Mean Creek is far superior to either of those two in my opinion. Bully was an incredibly awkward mess by Larry Clark (a rather crappity smacked up director with some good ideas, but whose films I find are usually less than satisfactory), and River's Edge, while slightly better, suffered from overacting by Crispin Glover and the usual dull underacting by Keanu Reeves. Mean Creek's strength, on the other hand, is undeniably in the amazing performances turned in by the entire ensemble cast, although a lot has to be said for the fine cliché-free writing (not a superfluous word) and the skillful direction.
One of the characters I found the most appealing, suprisingly, was the only girl in the film, Millie, played brilliantly by Carly Shroeder. Her performance may actually have been my favourite in the film, although it's hard to pick one because they were all so impressive.
In conclusion, I suppose that some of you may also be disappointed by the film if Rory Culkin is the main attraction. He was for me at first, too, but as soon as I started watching I was drawn completely in and enjoyed the movie for everything that it was, not just Rory's presence. If any of you have been paying attention to my reviews and ratings, you will know that I have very specific tastes that don't necessarily reflect the opinions of the majority. I don't expect everybody to like it as much as I have, but to me this was a clear winner - one of my favourite films of the year, so far.
|