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 was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice.

Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
I’ve seen comments suggesting that John Sturges’ thriller hasn’t aged well, which I find rather mystifying. Sure, some of the characterisations border on the cardboard, but the director imbues the story with a taut, economical backbone. 

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 system when Burton did it (even…

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…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

How do you like that – Cuddles knew all the time!

The Pleasure Garden (1925)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s first credit as director, and his account of the production difficulties, as related to Francois Truffaut, is by and large more pleasurable than The Pleasure Garden itself. The Italian location shoot in involved the confiscation of undeclared film stock, having to recast a key role and borrowing money from the star when Hitch ran out of the stuff.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

To defeat the darkness out there, you must defeat the darkness inside yourself.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)
Easily the best of the Narnia films, which is maybe damning it with faint praise. 

Michael Apted does a competent job directing (certainly compared to his Bond film - maybe he talked to his second unit this time), Dante Spinotti's cinematography is stunning and the CGI mostly well-integrated with the action. 

Performance-wise, Will Poulter is a stand-out as a tremendously obnoxious little toff, so charismatic you're almost rooting for him. Simon Pegg replaces Eddie Izzard as the voice of Reepicheep and delivers a touching performance.
***

The President is dead. You got that? Somebody’s had him for dinner.

Escape from New York (1981)
(SPOILERS) There’s a refreshingly simplicity to John Carpenter’s nightmare vision of 1997. Society and government don’t represent a global pyramid; they’re messy and erratic, and can go deeply, deeply wrong without connivance, subterfuge, engineered rebellions or recourse to reset. There’s also a sense of playfulness here, of self-conscious cynicism regarding the survival prospects for the US, as voiced by Kurt Russell’s riff on Clint Eastwood anti-heroics in the decidedly not dead form of Snake Plissken. But in contrast to Carpenter’s later Big Trouble in Little China (where Russell is merciless to the legend of John Wayne), Escape from New York is underpinned by a relentlessly grim, grounded aesthetic, one that lends texture and substance; it remains one of the most convincing and memorable of dystopian visions.

The present will look after itself. But it’s our duty to realise the future with our imagination.

Until the End of the World (1991)
(SPOILERS) With the current order devolving into what looks inevitably like a passively endorsed dystopia, a brave new chipped and tracked vision variously in line with cinema’s warnings (or its predictive programming, depending on where your cynicism lands), I’ve been revisiting a few of these futuristic visions. That I picked the very Euro-pudding Until the End of the World is perhaps entirely antagonistic to such reasoning, seeing as how it is, at heart, a warm and fuzzy, upbeat, humanist musing on where we are all going.