Skip to main content

It’s not a prison. It’s a test.

The Maze Runner
(2014)

(SPOILERS) The first hour of The Maze Runner provides a set-up as arresting and intriguing as that of any mainstream movie unhindered by the label “Young Adult”. It is less overtly constricted by pandering to a niche (teen) audience, while clearly influenced by the likes of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies and Vincenzo Natali’s Cube. Unfortunately it is also afflicted by the curse of the J J Abrams, or more precisely Damon Lindelof. What makes it so involving cannot possible pay off.


Nevertheless, there’s good reason many greeted this as a surprising breath of fresh air in the glutted Young Adult marketplace. There were few expectations, and debut director Wes Ball does a determined job of making the movie pacey and involving on a restricted budget. Perhaps crucially, its issues are the precise opposite of 2014’s other YA franchise-starter, Divergent. There, anyone could see the set-up didn’t make a blind bit of sense from reading a brief synopsis but was quite entertaining if you could move past it. In contrast, The Maze Runner is all about the mystery. So, by the time you realise it’s very nearly as silly as that picture, it’s almost over and pushing for its sequel (it surely no coincidence that of the three credited writers, T S Nowlin, Grant Pierce Myers and Noah Oppenheim, one of them, Oppenheim, is working on one of the second Divergent sequel).


Thomas (Dylan O’Brien) wakes up in an elevator with no memory, en route for a grassy clearing in maze complex where other boys are imprisoned.  Led by the longest resident Alby (Aml Ameen) and Newt (Thomas Brodie-Sangster) they have formed into a regimented micro-society with individually delegated set tasks. Thomas is most intrigued by the role of the maze runners, who leave the area in the morning when the entrance to the maze opens and return in the evening just before it closes.


Thomas’ arrival appears to set off ructions within the delicately maintained order of the Glade (the grassy clearing), personified by the aggression of Galley (Will Poulter), but further demonstrated when Thomas takes it upon himself to enter the maze to help Minho (Ki Hong Lee) and a wounded Alby. Just as they return (no one has ever survived a night in the maze, thanks to vicious bioelectronics guardians known as Grievers), a girl arrives by the elevator (Teresa, played by Kaya Scodelario), further upsetting the applecart.


The Maze Runner is designed as a puzzle, not just geographically but also in terms of the whys and wherefores of the place and its subjects. Thomas dreams of experiments undertaken on him, and he and Teresa remember each other’s names. The danger of this sort of deal is the one that faced Lost, just in more truncated form. The possibilities go unsatisfied by the reveal. So it is that by the time the credits roll, The Maze Runner has crossed from potentially the best YA to a merely so-so appetiser for a take-it-or-leave-it movie series. Although, since it made a lot more than Divergent for a fraction of the cost, its continuation is a no-brainer.


Newt goes to the trouble of laying out a series of rules and place markers (no one has ever gone beyond the walls, no one has ever survived a night etc.) that effectively identify Thomas as an ever popular chosen one when he surmounts them. There are also cryptic elements (“It’s called the changing” “WICKED is Good”) that are much less evocative once explained, and it’s understandable questions don’t go away.


Like, why no one can scale the walls when there are clearly vines going right the way up at least some of them (this is surely the most repeated complaint about the obvious plot holes).  Coming in a close second is that, for a movie with this title, there is very little in the way of exploring the mazes. There was a surely lot of potential for constantly changing structures and losing one’s way in the labyrinth, but it doesn’t happen. It’s all a bit linear, alas.


Mainly, though, The Maze Runner has been lacerated for affronting viewer intelligence. The reveal concerning what this is all about makes no sense. The kids are immune to a virus that decimated humanity (turning them into zombies of the 28 Days Later variety) after a solar flare devastated the Earth. They were corralled into the maze as a test, to map out their brains’ responses to the challenges within, and what makes them different. And so provide hope of a cure. Okay…


It’s all a bit tenuous, isn’t it? The classic problem of a viable concept with little means to thrash it into something satisfying and useable. The subjects are both vital and wholly expendable (project leader Ava, Patricia Clarkson, expresses surprise that so many survived). However you cut it, such as making excuses based on other tests being conducted prior to entering the maze, this precise scenario is entirely batty. The criteria and objectives won’t be clarified because nothing would satisfyingly explain them. Presumably this is also a very broad-spectrum test as, aside from the three or four runners, the lads do sweet FA aside from a spot of gardening.


There are a few decent reveals; that Thomas and Teresa were actually testers (Gally was right to be suspicious; it’s notable that his approach of safety first, not bucking the system and rule and order, is the closest the movie comes to reaching for a critical subtext beyond its mystery box), the fake-out of the terrorist attack on the facility. Others – Galley miraculously appearing having traversed the maze solo – bear as little scrutiny as the project goal. For a YA movie this is also impressively un-sentimental in killing off sympathetic characters or in unpleasant ways. The Grievers are familiar and generic, but Ball handles the maze sequences with energy and flair; it’s a shame there aren’t more tight scrapes as the close shaves are gripping when they come.


The young cast also give a good showing. The Maze Runner’s failings are purely material-based. The trio of writers should probably have forsaken more of James Dashner’s novel than they did. Dashner still seems to be banging the series out (his fifth is due next year), so perhaps he’ll digest some of the criticisms and come up with something coherent in time for finale. At least with this number of novels, provided audiences don’t get bored and the series is curtailed, there should be no need for Fox to follow the route of every other YA and split the last entry in to two. Although, the same could have also been said of Harry Potter.



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.

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

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.

I can’t be the worst. What about that hotdog one?

Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022) (SPOILERS) It would have been a merciful release, had the title card “ The End ”, flashing on screen a little before the ninety-minute mark, not been a false dawn. True, I would still have been unable to swab the bloody dildoes fight from my mind, but at least Everything Everywhere All at Once would have been short. Indeed, by the actual end I was put in mind of a line spoken by co-star James Wong in one of his most indelible roles: “ Now this really pisses me off to no end ”. Or to put it another way, Everything Everywhere All at Once rubbed me up the wrong which way quite a lot of most of the time.

We’ve got the best ball and chain in the world. Your ass.

Wedlock (1991) (SPOILERS) The futuristic prison movie seemed possessed of a particular cachet around this time, quite possibly sparked by the grisly possibilities of hi-tech disincentives to escape. On that front, HBO TV movie Wedlock more than delivers its FX money shot. Elsewhere, it’s less sure of itself, rather fumbling when it exchanges prison tropes for fugitives-on-the-run ones.

We could be mauled to death by an interstellar monster!

Star Trek Beyond (2016) (SPOILERS) The odd/even Star Trek failure/success rule seemed to have been cancelled out with the first reboot movie, and then trodden into ground with Into Darkness (which, yes, I quite enjoyed, for all its scandalous deficiencies). Star Trek Beyond gets us back onto more familiar ground, as it’s very identifiably a “lesser” Trek , irrespective of the big bucks and directorial nous thrown at it. This is a Star Trek movie that can happily stand shoulder to shoulder with The Search for Spock and Insurrection , content in the knowledge they make it look good.

He's not in my pyjamas, is he?

Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice (1969) (SPOILERS) By rights, Paul Mazursky’s swinging, post-flower-power-gen partner-swap movie ought to have aged terribly. So much of the era’s scene-specific fare has, particularly so when attempting to reflect its reverberations with any degree of serious intent. Perhaps it’s because Mazursky and co-writer Larry Tucker (also of The Monkees , Alex in Wonderland and I Love You, Alice B. Toklas! ) maintain a wry distance from their characters’ endeavours, much more on the wavelength of Elliott Gould’s Ted than Robert Culp’s Bob; we know any pretensions towards uninhibited expression can’t end well, but we also know Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice have to learn the hard way.

I think World War II was my favourite war.

Small Soldiers (1998) An off-peak Joe Dante movie is still one chock-a-block full of satirical nuggets and comic inspiration, far beyond the facility of most filmmakers. Small Soldiers finds him back after a six-year big screen absence, taking delirious swipes at the veneration of the military, war movies, the toy industry, conglomerates and privatised defence forces. Dante’s take is so gleefully skewed, he even has big business win! The only problem with the picture (aside from an indistinct lead, surprising from a director with a strong track record for casting juveniles) is that this is all very familiar. Dante acknowledged Small Soldiers was basically a riff on Gremlins , and it is. Something innocuous and playful turns mad, bad and dangerous. On one level it has something in common with Gremlins 2: The New Batch , in that the asides carry the picture. But Gremlins 2 was all about the asides, happy to wander off in any direction that suited it oblivious to whet

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.

So, you’re telling me that NASA is going to kill the President of the United States with an earthquake?

Conspiracy Theory (1997) (SPOILERS) Mel Gibson’s official rehabilitation occurred with the announcement of 2016’s Oscar nominations, when Hacksaw Ridge garnered six nods, including Mel as director. Obviously, many refuse to be persuaded that there’s any legitimate atonement for the things someone says. They probably weren’t even convinced by Mel’s appearance in Daddy’s Home 2 , an act of abject obeisance if ever there was one. In other circles, though, Gibbo, or Mad Mel, is venerated as a saviour unsullied by the depraved Hollywood machine, one of the brave few who would not allow them to take his freedom. Or at least, his values. Of course, that’s frequently based on alleged comments he made, ones it’s highly likely he didn’t. But doesn’t that rather appeal to the premise of his 23-year-old star vehicle Conspiracy Theory , in which “ A good conspiracy theory is an unproveable one ”?