Mud debuted at Cannes 2012, but only received a wide American release in the last few weeks. Mud has been praised widely, like Nichols previous effort Take Shelter. Take Shelter showed the new director's promise, despite a flawed third act and conclusion that ultimately muddled the message Nichols tried to convey.
Mud immediately has several things going for it. Nichols's strongest attribute appears to be building an immersive environment, and Mud is no exception. We explore the deep south through the eyes of two young boys, in a modern environment, but not tied to one moment in time. In this aspect, it resembles a Mark Twain story. Nichols's fingerprints can be seen in every frame of the film, but it is still completely relatable.
Matthew McConaughey is as good as the often derided actor has ever been. He creates the love-sick exile warmly, building his character slowly, but leaving much open for interpretation and a deeper reading. The young Tye Sheridan excels as the impressionable, confused Ellis, susceptible to facing a similarly grim future as Mud, who runs from gangsters and the police after killing a "connected" man for beating Mud's love, Juniper (Reese Witherspoon).
However, as the film progresses, it weakens substantially. the biggest issue lies with the central romance, between Mud and Juniper, which is vastly uninteresting and says nothing of note about love, family, or romantic disinterest, themes that come from the other two relationships depicted in the film- the faltering marriage of Ellis's parents, and Ellis's courtship of a high school girl several years older than him. Both relationships are much more dynamic and interesting than Mud and Juniper, which falls flat quickly, doesn't progress and ultimately passes on as an afterthought, and kills much of the film's story, especially the second act.
The chief antagonists of the film are similarly bland: a squad of generic gangsters led by the brother and the father of the man Mud killed. However, the gangsters seem like another afterthought to Nichols, as they are simply a mechanical creation used to move the plot, and say absolutely nothing about any of the themes or messages of the film. When the storyline comes to a close, it doesn't satisfy in the slightest, since there is no real fear from the gangsters, or even interest in the father and son trying to get their revenge. The film seems to want to say something on violence, but can barely gasp out a word or two on the subject before it is immersed by the ineffective stories around it.
Even the much more interesting dynamic between Ellis's parents resolves sloppily. Nichols's seems completely unsure what the real story he wants to tell is, and what it even all means, so tries to throw several stories on top of one another, hoping one sticks. Actually, Ellis's relationship with high school girl, who the audience immediately knows is uninterested in him romantically, works, but is underutilized and forgotten.
Adam Stone's photography is completely unremarkable, despite several interesting shots of the wilderness. Stone and Nichols compositions are generally shallow and bland. The 35mm print looks digital, in the worst way a film can look so. the focus is constantly shallow, and the blurred, out of focus patterns that often live behind the characters are simply boring.
All in all, Nichols's third film cannot be anything more than a promise of things to come of the young filmmaker. Despite what many proclaim, Jeff Nichols is nowhere near maturity for a filmmaker, although several individual aspects of Mud show potential, but no guarantee of development or future success. Mud certainly represents a step back from Nichols previous efforts.
Bottom line: Despite a stunning environment and several brillant performances, Mud fails to come together and ultimately falls flat due cliches and poor story telling.
No comments:
Post a Comment