Skip to main content

The middle of nowhere is underrated.

The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared
(2013)

I gave up on Jonas Jonasson’s novel before the halfway mark. While the premise held potential (an elderly Swedish fellow getting into scrapes, interspersed with flashbacks illustrating his – relatively – Forrest Gump/Zelig charmed life in which he just happens to show up at important historical events), the prose in translation (or maybe Jonasson’s prose is accurately rotten) did not. The film version is pretty much an approximation of the book, as far as I got to anyway. Its central conceit carries The 100- Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared along  in blackly comic fashion, and it is affably eccentric albeit in a very studied way, but someone ought to have taken the novel as a jumping off point rather than diligently translating it. There’s precious little that’s fresh or original here.


Director Felix Herngren co-wrote the screenplay, so there merely adequate results are his by design. At times the comic rhythms click, as narrative punchlines are set up and pay off, but this is more thanks to Matti Bye’s quirky score than any zest imbued by Herngren and his editor. The plot wastes not time, but the director has little verve, as Allan Karlsson (Robert Gustafsson) escapes his old people’s home by the titular route and hops on the first bus out of town. It doesn’t take him very far because he doesn’t have very much money. That he knows about, anyway; asked to watch a suitcase by a particularly unpleasant skinhead who needs to relieve himself, Allan feels he has no choice but to board the bus with it. We later discover it contains 50 million krona, which of course means that the skinhead, and the gang he works for, want it back.


On his unplanned journey Allan meets various accomplices; Julius (Iwar Wiklander), a roguish type who lives in a disused station building; Benny (David Wiberg), who has begun numerous courses of study over the previous 18 years and has nearly become qualified in a great many areas (including zoologist, dietician, vet, pharmacologist and neuropsychologist) but finds it impossible to decide on anything definite); and Gunilla, who owns a circus elephant.


This is a tale of lucky coincidence, in which a web of synchronicities lead our heroes to fortunate fates; even the negative turns of events have silver linings, and the villains are hoisted by the own petards (and basic stupidity). Allan walks through unscathed, perhaps because he was scathed as a youth when a “racial biologist” sterilised him. Allan contrasts with Forrest Gump in that he is not wholly the innocent; there is a canniness in there too (although he seems a tad more gumpish as a young man).


It’s been suggested that Allan is a metaphor for Sweden itself; an apparently neutral (neutered) individual who nevertheless has a capacity for supporting wrongfulness through profound passivity.  Allan has a penchant for explosives, and is blithely indifferent to those on the receiving end of a blast. His mother’s advice that “Thinking will get you nowhere” means that he does not pause to contemplate or regret; he merely accepts.  Allan shows up at, and gets involved in, various conflicts (the Spanish Civil War, followed by making pals with Franco, proving a key factor in the success of the Manhattan Project, spilling his beans to Stalin, and then becoming a double agent for the Americans), but he has allegiance to no one but himself.


In the context of the picture, this untouchable status is a positive; Allan endures where others do not. Those with a passion, or a cause (whatever their motives may be), fall by the wayside, while Allan (“You have changed the world for the better” Truman tells him following the atom bomb test) carries on untainted. Depending on the requirements of the sequence, Allan is unaware and guileless (his lack of self-effacement with dignitaries) or dubiously adept (acting as spymaster). He also shows no remorse for his actions, which means he is probably some sort of benign sociopath.


The flashbacks are marginal, and too perfunctory in duration and execution to hold much in the way of satirical intent or comic momentum (Einstein’s idiot brother; really?) Whether one likes the film or not, Forrest Gump had a lot going on under the lid (much of it contradictory, but at least that makes it interesting). 100 Year-Old-Man is never much more than a tall tale told tolerably.  


The juxtaposition of our hapless quartet with a gang of pea-brained thugs yields fitfully amusing consequences. Allan Ford breaks out his cockney gangster act (see Snatch) to reliable effect, and there’s a mild-mannered police detective (Ralph Carlsson) whose most agitated moment comes refusing to mention a radio show’s sponsor; “And I have a policeman here” segues a DJ who has just played Message in a Bottle.


The 100- Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared is consistently so-so. It stands as the most successful Swedish film ever at $50m worldwide (don’t bother to Box Office Mojo it, though), but artistically it could have done with some with flair, someone to indulge the exaggeration (Sweden’s answer to Jean Pierre Jeunet?) and make it as heightened and off-the-wall as possible. And to really embrace the absurdity of the tour through history. Gustafsson is reasonable as the resolutely inscrutable lead, but he’s sunk under a ton of shockingly bad make-up. If you’re basing your film on a special effect it better be a good one. Gustafsson spends half the picture wandering around resembling Billy Crystal’s Miracle Max from The Princess Bride.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

If this is not a place for a priest, Miles, then this is exactly where the Lord wants me.

Bad Times at the El Royale (2018)
(SPOILERS) Sometimes a movie comes along where you instantly know you’re safe in the hands of a master of the craft, someone who knows exactly the story they want to tell and precisely how to achieve it. All you have to do is sit back and exult in the joyful dexterity on display. Bad Times at the El Royale is such a movie, and Drew Goddard has outdone himself. From the first scene, set ten years prior to the main action, he has constructed a dizzyingly deft piece of work, stuffed with indelible characters portrayed by perfectly chosen performers, delirious twists and game-changing flashbacks, the package sealed by an accompanying frequently diegetic soundtrack, playing in as it does to the essential plot beats of the whole. If there's a better movie this year, it will be a pretty damn good one.

I am so sick of Scotland!

Outlaw/King (2018)
(SPOILERS) Proof that it isn't enough just to want to make a historical epic, you have to have some level of vision for it as well. Say what you like about Mel's Braveheart – and it isn't a very good film – it's got sensibility in spades. He knew what he was setting out to achieve, and the audience duly responded. What does David Mackenzie want from Outlaw/King (it's shown with a forward slash on the titles, so I'm going with it)? Ostensibly, and unsurprisingly, to restore the stature of Robert the Bruce after it was rather tarnished by Braveheart, but he has singularly failed to do so. More than that, it isn’t an "idea", something you can recognise or get behind even if you don’t care about the guy. You’ll never forget Mel's Wallace, for better or worse, but the most singular aspect of Chris Pine's Bruce hasn’t been his rousing speeches or heroic valour. No, it's been his kingly winky.

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

It is the greatest movie never released, you know.

They'll Love Me When I'm Dead (2018)
(SPOILERS) They'll Love Me When I'm Dead, Morgan Neville's documentary on the making of Orson Welles' long-gestating The Other Side of the Wind, is much more interesting than the finally finished article itself, but to be fair to Welles, he foresaw as much as a possibility. Welles' semi-improvised faux-doc approach may not seem nearly as innovative nearly fifty years on – indeed, in the intervening period there's a slew of baggage of boundary-blurring works, mockumentaries and the whole found footage genre – but he was striving for something different, even if that "different" was a reaction to the hole he'd dug himself in terms of bankability. On the evidence of the completed film, he never quite found the necessary rhythm or mode, but the struggle to achieve it, as told here, is fascinating.

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

Have you ever looked into a goat's eyes?

Hacksaw Ridge (2016)
(SPOILERS) There was probably an insightful, sensitive movie to be made about the World War II experiences of conscientious objector Desmond Doss, but Mel Gibson’s Hacksaw Ridge isn’t it. It’s unsurprising that a number of reviewers have independently indulged the wordplay Hackneyed Ridge, an effective summation of the ridiculously over-the-top, emotionally shameless theatrics Mel indulges, turning a story that already fell into the “You wouldn’t believe it if it wasn’t true” camp into “You won’t believe it anyway, because it’s been turned up to 11” (and that’s with Gibson omitting incidents he perceived to be “too much”, such as Doss being shot by a sniper after he was wounded, having given up his stretcher to another wounded man; certainly, as wrung through Mel’s tonal wringer, that would have been the case).

Perhaps Mel should stick to making subtitled features, the language barrier diluting the excruciating lack of nuance or subtlety in his treatment of subject m…

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

What if I tell you to un-punch someone, what you do then?

Incredibles 2 (2018)
(SPOILERS) Incredibles 2 may not be as fresh as the first outing – indeed, certain elements of its plotting border on the retread – but it's equally, if not more, inventive as a piece of animation, and proof that, whatever his shortcomings may be philosophically, Brad Bird is a consummately talented director. This is a movie that is consistently very funny, and which is as thrilling as your average MCU affair, but like Finding Dory, you may understandably end up wondering if it shouldn't have revolved around something a little more substantial to justify that fifteen-year gap in reaching the screen.