Skip to main content

There are things you can get away with in this world and then there are things you can’t.


Mud
(2012)

(MINOR SPOILERS) Matthew McConaughey’s screen rebirth continues apace in this engaging, consummately scripted slow-burn thriller from Jeff Nichols (Take Shelter). Mud finds two young protagonists in a scenario that invokes The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. But Nichols isn’t interested in merely making a straightforward boys’ adventure yarn; his is a rites of passage tale, one where the first stirrings of young love must vie with the harsh realisation that mutual affection may not endure. It’s a theme that reverberates through his characters, both young and old.


Nichols allows his narrative to unfold at a languorous pace, and the Southern backdrop sometimes recalls the work of John Dahl or Carl Franklin. But he is aiming for something less defined and more poetic than in their noirish visions, both visually and in his characters’ lyrical language. In particular, McConaughey’s Mud has a frazzled, almost biblical grandeur to his speech, superstitions, and wisdom. Nichols encourages this mythic quality. The two boys live fractured, dysfunctional lives; since there is no domestic bliss to return to Mud represents an escape, an adventure.


At the same time, Ellis’ (a very fine performance from Tye Sheridan, who made his debut in Tree of Life) experiences and travails compare and contrast to Mud’s own paradigm. We aren’t sure at various points if Mud is delusional, a benign fantasist, or harbours dangerous secrets. But it is Ellis rather than his friend Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), who feels the tug to aid Mud; even more so when he discovers that Mud is a fugitive from justice, for a reason he can relate to; idealised love (it’s amusing to see the less insightful Neckbone offer his services in exchange for an impressionable teen’s prize; a real gun). Ellis’ parents are in the process of separating, while Ellis himself is experiencing his own feelings for a girl a few years older than him (whom he believes reciprocates).


Mud has arrived in his spot of bother due to a yen for Juniper (Reece Witherspoon), a girl whom he has lived for since he was younger than Ellis. Much of Mud’s subtext relates to the contrast between the various shades of jadedness, bitterness or disinterest shown by adults towards love, be it Ellis’ dad Senior (Ray Mckinnon), hermit neighbour Tom (Sam Shephard) or Neckbone’s uncle Galen (Michael Shannon). Mud may be delusional, but there is purity to his vision, a quality that captures Ellis’ imagination and swelling heart. It may not be realistic, but along side the dark manifestations of Mud’s infatuation there is an untainted spirit (one that has not yet been crushed beneath the weight of adulthood; Nichols seems to be saying that there is a place for heady dreams; it is best not to die inside).


However, Nichols offers parallels between Ellis and Mud that are occasionally a little on the nose. At times the symbolism is overt; the foreshadowing of Mud’s warnings concerning snakes culminates in his inevitable redemptive act. You can see what Nichols is doing; Ellis might be poised to repeat the fringe existence of Mud, disaffected and out-of-touch, unhealthily fixated on the object of his affection and mistaking acts of violence as declarations of love. But, in the final frame, he is enabled to move on, at a pace 30 years faster than the man he idolises. Because Nichols doesn’t take expected route he keeps the movie surprising and, because we are expecting Mud, whom we quickly grow to like, to meet a sticky end at the hands of the family of the man he murdered, there is an underlying tension even during the most beatific scenes. Ultimately, it is a surprise and a reward that the picture ends on an upbeat note.


The climax caught me off guard, I admit. Although Nichols is careful to set up certain characters, such as Tom, with a view to what transpires, there is nevertheless a standard-issue quality to the set piece staging and fireworks that feels like it has come from another, less aching and measured, movie. I wouldn’t say it disappointed me, as I can see thematically that Nichols has themes to explore concerning the importance of moving on, young or old, once has awoken to reality. But the tone had led me to expect a downbeat, reflective final note.


McConaughey isn’t a transformative actor (whatever his physical fluctuations may be, such as in the forthcoming Dallas Buyers Club); he leads with natural charisma, and any part marbles itself around that. The problem can be, and has been in the past, that this manifests as an off-putting cockiness; the kind of self-regard that has been prevalent in Tom Cruise’s career. More recently he has begun channelling his energies into really strong roles, with the result that his talent rather than his preening has started to shine through. He’s perfectly cast here (in a role Nichols earmarked for him when he conceived the story during the ‘90s), lending Mud a folksy charm that is as well intentioned as his bounty hunter in Killer Joe is poisonous.


Sam Shephard, no stranger to finely crafted material as both a screenwriter and a playwright, is legendary as the gruff but concerned Tom, while Nichols regulars McKinnon and Shannon (in a role so un-crazed it takes a moment to adjust) also make a strong impression. There are also sightings of Joe Don Baker and Boardwalk Empire’s Paul Sparks.


The problem with a movie with a male gaze is that it can look as if the director/writer is giving the female characters short shrift; the female roles are by intention refracted. Nichols is more interested in exploring the mistaken assumptions of men about women than fully fleshing out his female characters; Mud and Ellis have unrealistic expectations of Juniper and May Pearl (Bonnie Sturvidant) respectively, which need correcting (or dashing). Our sympathies initially lie with Senior when the loss of Ellis’ river life is broached, but it becomes clear that Ellis’ mother Mary Lee (Sarah Paulson) needs to break from her husband’s destructive intransigence. All three actresses are strong; Witherspoon has a couple of good moments, but her presence is more about the audience seeing a “star” in the role (the way Mud sees her) than bringing substance to Juniper.


Cinematographer Adam Stone complements the already striking landscape of Arkansas (notably the island Mud inhabits) with imagery that evokes childhood’s wondering gaze, from the first sight of the boat perched in a nest of branches (a vessel that offers Mud the prospect of salvation) to Galen’s idiosyncratic submarine excursions.


Perhaps the most enjoyable aspect of Mud is that realisation of a clear and distinctive voice, where a director/writer’s vision is completely realised on the screen. The film will no doubt bring to mind other coming of age dramas, just as the Southern setting, on the edge of the wilderness, has a strong familiarity. But Nichols’ story is fully formed and (aside from his intentional nod to Mark Twain) fresh. For all its rumination on unrequited love, this is a deeply romantic movie; but the romance is for place and time and mood rather than people.

**** 

Popular posts from this blog

You were this amazing occidental samurai.

Ricochet (1991) (SPOILERS) You have to wonder at Denzel Washington’s agent at this point in the actor’s career. He’d recently won his first Oscar for Glory , yet followed it with less-than-glorious heart-transplant ghost comedy Heart Condition (Bob Hoskins’ racist cop receives Washington’s dead lawyer’s ticker; a recipe for hijinks!) Not long after, he dipped his tentative toe in the action arena with this Joel Silver production; Denzel has made his share of action fare since, of course, most of it serviceable if unremarkable, but none of it comes near to delivering the schlocky excesses of Ricochet , a movie at once ingenious and risible in its plot permutations, performances and production profligacy.

Well, something’s broke on your daddy’s spaceship.

Apollo 13 (1995) (SPOILERS) The NASA propaganda movie to end all NASA propaganda movies. Their original conception of the perilous Apollo 13 mission deserves due credit in itself; what better way to bolster waning interest in slightly naff perambulations around a TV studio than to manufacture a crisis event, one emphasising the absurd fragility of the alleged non-terrestrial excursions and the indomitable force that is “science” in achieving them? Apollo 13 the lunar mission was tailor made for Apollo 13 the movie version – make believe the make-believe – and who could have been better to lead this fantasy ride than Guantanamo Hanks at his all-American popularity peak?

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

He’ll regret it to his dying day, if ever he lives that long.

The Quiet Man (1952) (SPOILERS) The John Wayne & John Ford film for those who don’t like John Wayne & John Ford films? The Quiet Man takes its cues from Ford’s earlier How Green Was My Valley in terms of, well less Anglophile and Hibernophile and Cambrophile nostalgia respectively for past times, climes and heritage, as Wayne’s pugilist returns to his family seat and stirs up a hot bed of emotions, not least with Maureen O’Hara’s red-headed hothead. The result is a very likeable movie, for all its inculcated Oirishness and studied eccentricity.

The Krishna died of a broken finger? I mean, is that a homicide?

Miami Blues (1990) (SPOILERS) If the ‘90s crime movie formally set out its stall in 1992 with Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs , another movie very quietly got in there first at the beginning of the decade. Miami Blues picked up admiring reviews but went otherwise unnoticed on release, and even now remains under-recognised. The tale of “blithe psychopath” Federick J. Frenger, Jr., the girl whose heart he breaks and the detetive sergeant on his trail, director George Armitage’s adaptation of Charles Willeford’s novel wears a pitch black sense of humour and manages the difficult juggling act of being genuinely touching with it. It’s a little gem of a movie, perfectly formed and concisely told, one that more than deserves to rub shoulders with the better-known entries in its genre. One of the defining characteristics of Willeford’s work, it has been suggested , is that it doesn’t really fit into the crime genre; he comes from an angle of character rather than plot or h

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

You think a monkey knows he’s sitting on top of a rocket that might explode?

The Right Stuff (1983) (SPOILERS) While it certainly more than fulfils the function of a NASA-propaganda picture – as in, it affirms the legitimacy of their activities – The Right Stuff escapes the designation of rote testament reserved for Ron Howard’s later Apollo 13 . Partly because it has such a distinctive personality and attitude. Partly too because of the way it has found its through line, which isn’t so much the “wow” of the Space Race and those picked to be a part of it as it is the personification of that titular quality in someone who wasn’t even in the Mercury programme: Chuck Yaeger (Sam Shephard). I was captivated by The Right Stuff when I first saw it, and even now, with the benefit of knowing-NASA-better – not that the movie is exactly extolling its virtues from the rooftops anyway – I consider it something of a masterpiece, an interrogation of legends that both builds them and tears them down. The latter aspect doubtless not NASA approved.

You tampered with the universe, my friend.

The Music of Chance (1993) (SPOILERS) You won’t find many adaptations of Paul Auster’s novels. Original screenplays, yes, a couple of which he has directed himself. Terry Gilliam has occasionally mentioned Mr. Vertigo as in development. It was in development in 1995 too, when Philip Haas and Auster intended to bring it to the screen. Which means Auster presumably approved of Haas’ work on The Music of Chance (he also cameos). That would be understandable, as it makes for a fine, ambiguous movie, pregnant with meaning yet offering no unequivocal answers, and one that makes several key departures from the book yet crucially maintains a mesmerising, slow-burn lure.

Drank the red. Good for you.

Morbius (2022) (SPOILERS) Generic isn’t necessarily a slur. Not if, by implication, it’s suggestive of the kind of movie made twenty years ago, when the alternative is the kind of super-woke content Disney currently prioritises. Unfortunately, after a reasonable first hour, Morbius descends so resignedly into such unmoderated formula that you’re left with a too-clear image of Sony’s Spider-Verse when it lacks a larger-than-life performer (Tom Hardy, for example) at the centre of any given vehicle.

People still talk about Pandapocalypse 2002.

Turning Red (2022) (SPOILERS) Those wags at Pixar, eh? Yes, the most – actually, the only – impressive thing about Turning Red is the four-tiered wordplay of its title. Thirteen-year-old Mei (Rosalie Chiang) finds herself turning into a large red panda at emotive moments. She is also, simultaneously, riding the crimson wave for the first time. Further, as a teenager, she characteristically suffers from acute embarrassment (mostly due to the actions of her domineering mother Ming Lee, voiced by Sandra Oh). And finally, of course, Turning Red can be seen diligently spreading communist doctrine left, right and centre. To any political sensibility tuning in to Disney+, basically (so ones with either considerable or zero resistance to woke). Take a guess which of these isn’t getting press in reference to the movie? And by a process of elimination is probably what it it’s really about (you know in the same way most Pixars, as far back as Toy Story and Monsters, Inc . can be given an insi