This is one of those rare occasions where the trailer is a bit boring, yet somehow it looks like the movie is actually really good. Of course, I do love pretty much any movie Sam Rockwell is in, so maybe that's why.
Anyone else feel similarly?
FYI, I didn't read the book and had never heard of it in any form of media until I saw the trailer, so I really couldn't say whether the story is good or not.
The trailer sets up a protagonist, the environment and atmosphere, the event that propels him into conflict, and two villains of different type. It doesn't ruin the ending and leaves details out of it, so it's for you to discover. Accompanied by gray, timid and modest cinematography, the film's scope and setting is correctly perceived by the filmmakers. The performance of the actors pulls you in. It reminds me of Mud with more stressed out characters and a location in the North. Not sure if it is as poetic, maybe it's not and that's its downfall - maybe that's why the trailer is not bad but falls a bit flat in terms of depth and mystery. Mud was an achievement in low-budget American dramas and proved that in a film like this you need poetry and smart characters abiding with the conflict. I'll check this out if reviews are 'ok' to 'good'.
shareI saw A Single Shot at Tribeca this year. It moves at a very slow, deliberate pace, but your comparison to Mud is pretty astute. Sam Rockwell is, as always, awesome, but if weighing the two against each other, I think I'd say I preferred Mud. A Single Shot has less meat to it, and feels stretched out at times to a point where my mind began to wander. It's a very atmospheric and gritty movie, and not exactly a breeze to watch. I gave it a 7/10, but I might lean closer to a 6.5.
share