MovieChat Forums > Young Ones (2014) Discussion > I thought this movie had a great deal of...

I thought this movie had a great deal of promise, but... (Spoilers)

posted 9 years ago by joshinaus
7 replies | jump to latest

I normally never take the time to comment on movies here, but man... This flick really stuck in my craw for some reason. It seems like several folks on here have commented on the waste of the actors and that's definitely true.

But, overall it just seems like this movie has a waaaaaay overly inflated sense of itself. I mean, not only were the actors wasted. But it seems to me like the whole setting / backdrop was wasted as well.

I mean, why the hell did the screenwriter and / or director decide to set it in the near future. Some hint of global warming? Well, they never describe it as that. They just call it "The Drought." Plus, it seems like folks are getting water at least in other areas. I mean, if you're going to use climate change as a plot point, then use it. And, "The Dad decides to stay because he knows the land is still good." Okay, but that just seems like another weak device to set the story in motion.

Plus, the robots and what not? Completely wasted. This film could have easily been set in the old west and the exact same story could have been told. Just replace Nicholas Hoult's character with a rival rancher's kid or a Native American and it really wouldn't have played out the slightest bit differently.

It just seems to me that this film had a really kind of cliched story that's been told about a bazillion times. But they thought, "Oh, we'll add robots and climate change to the mix and it'll be so fresh and exciting!"

This film really could have been so much more, but it just seem pretty hackneyed to me.

That being said, the cinematography was absolutely top notch. It was beautifully shot.

[–] Trebaby 9 years ago

I had no expectations going into this movie. But I was scratching my head throughout. Did I miss something deep and meaningful? I wondered. Looking at the high rating and positive reviews on this site, maybe I did miss something! I think this is just a poorly thought-out, poorly made film. It's not necessarily the worst film I've ever seen but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone either. Maybe the filmmakers will get better next time.

[–] bruce-129 9 years ago

Yeah, I agree with you. I think some famous playwright said, if you see a gun on the wall in the opening scene, then you should expect that someone is going to get shot later on in the plat. So, why all the pretense in this movie that is unneeded.

I liked the movie, I watched the whole think and did not hate it. To me that deserves about a 3/5 stars. 2/5 means I could barely watch it, 1/5 means unwatchable. This was watchable, you get curious as to what is going on ... but not much happens.

They had this thing about the husband and the wife and her condition was somehow because of him - but they never went into that and why have it in the movie if they don't use it. Then they have the son calling his Dad by his first name, and they didn't explain that.

They claim to be dirt poor, but they buy what must have been an extremely expensive robot.

They have this odd thing with the women, but they never really make use of that, they just make it part of the scenery. Sorry, but a movie cannot be all scenery.

[–] DeanSledgehammer 9 years ago

Sorry, but a movie cannot be all scenery.

This is well said about this movie.

I don't completely agree with OP, because I thought the setting was really well done and what the movie got right was the day-to-day survival in grim near-future setting.
There's draught and civilization seems to be heading down, but technology is still there, just in smaller quantities. The cities are still doing relatively well etc.
So, yeah I thought the setting was nice, even if the story could've been set in other time/place. Most stories can be.

In my mind this tried to go for the classic western-feel with cinematography and actors.
Everyone's stoic and downhearted, dialog is short, images are grand, colors are neutral, etc.

With better script this could've been amazing, but as it is, it feels kinda boring.
The script needed more to happen at times and more elaboration at others.
E.g. the mother, she had no purpose other than character backstory. She could've been dead from the accident and nothing really would've changed, and the production would've saved money on those shots...
Or the ear-through-hair-girl, she had kinda half-assedly written role. Or many other things that were referenced, but never really elaborated or used that well.

Michael Shannon has perfect charisma for this kind of slow burning movie and the other actors were good as well, but I too would've liked for the director to pull stronger performances from them.

[–] kinsayder 9 years ago

Yeah, it was essentially a western, but I don't see a problem with that. A lot of sci-fi, including Star Wars, has western roots. Only one plot point seemed to hang on the futuristic element, which was when the kid watches the playback of the robot's memory and sees what really happened between Flem and Ernest. But it would have been easy enough to get around that in a traditional western by adding another character who witnessed the events.

I liked the movie. There was a strong (if simple) story, good acting, an intelligent script that didn't spoon feed you, great cinematography, and the sci-fi aspect was restrained and neatly done. No spaceships, no aliens or monsters, no ray guns. Just utilitarian robots and medical technology.

It reminded me a bit of Once Upon a Time in the West, in which it's the corrupt railroad men rather than the thugs at the water camp who decide whether a community flourishes or dies. There are also references to Jean de Florette / Manon des Sources (a couple of classic French western style dramas) as well as other western-inspired sci-fi such as Mad Max.

[–] Egobot 9 years ago

I disagree that you could replace the setting. Watching Flem kill Ernest was the emotional peak of the film.

[–] denise1234 8 years ago

kinsayder^

Nicely written!

I enjoyed this movie ~

"Much communication in a motion, without conversation or a notion"

[–] Quest_Shield 9 years ago

A friend of mine raved about this film but watching it I cared more for the mule robot than I did for thev human characters, and the film seemed to drag on ad infinitum. Seriously, this is 100 minutes long? I looked at the clock numerous times during the film thinking I had misread it and it was in fact a 200 minute film.
However it looked nice and parched, excellent cinematography and nice fx for the robot.
6/10