"Harrowing," "Morally Thorny," etc.

email this story
read comments (38)
post a comment

Filing from Telluride, Cinematical's Eugene Novikov says that Peter Weir's The Way Back "enters the canon of survival films as perhaps the most sadistically intent on making you feel as much of its subjects' physical agony as possible. Despite its impeccable awards pedigree and prestige pic status, it may be too straight-up harrowing to get much traction, either with the Academy voters or at the box office. [But] for those with the fortitude to take the plunge, it offers an intense, morally thorny exploration of the limits of human endurance."

HE reader Terry Woods calls it "a hugely harrowing experience. The first half is better than the second half, which covers more of the journey the escaped prisoners make, but the film is never less than totally absorbing. I'll go so far as to say the first half is the best work that Weir has ever done in my opinion, and the second half is still better than most Hollywood product churned out today.

"Jim Sturgess is excellent here. I haven't been a huge fan before but there's a scene near the beginning where Sturgess doesn't utter a word but says everything with his eyes -- it took my breath away. And the cinematography is award-worthy. Really try and catch this one, Jeff. A big-scale movie for adults, although commercial prospects may be dicey due to the overall darkness in tone and unflinching portrayal of the subject matter. It needs to be released in December to gather some awards momentum."

But apparently that's not in the cards. I'm reading from Deadline's Pete Hammond that Newmarket, the film's distributor, isn't going to open The Way Back in December...right?

Clooney Will Beat Trejo<< previous | next >>Speech vs. Swan

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on September 4, 2010 at 3:51 PM

comment #1

MikeSchaeferSF says ...

Isn't there an equally "harrowing" movie about "the limits of human endurance" jockeying for Oscar position? Directed by a recent Best Director winner? I would think Newmarket wouldn't want to compete with Boyle's cut-off-your-arm saga.

Posted by MikeSchaeferSF at September 4, 2010 4:50 PM

comment #2

moviechick44 says ...

The Way Back will get a LA/NY release in 2010 just so it qualifies for Oscar consideration. They'd be freaking crazy not to. And look... you have Oscar nomianted talent all over this film. They aren't stupid. Even if they release it only one theater in America in December, they will because this is a big boy in the race of the best films of 2010.
After reading the book and seeing that it was Peter Weir directing it, I thought how could they go wrong if they just adapt the book as is, because it's one intense story.

Posted by moviechick44 at September 4, 2010 5:19 PM

comment #3

Eloi Wrath says ...

I've always hated Sturgess up to this point, so hopefully this'll turn my opinion around.

Posted by Eloi Wrath at September 4, 2010 5:56 PM

comment #4

The Winchester says ...

Yeah, Sturgess has been on my shitlist for the 1-2 awfulness punches of Across The Universe and 21.

If I ever meet him in person, I'm demanding my money back.

Having said that, on paper this movie sounds fan-freakin tastic.

Posted by The Winchester at September 4, 2010 6:07 PM

comment #5

moviechick44 says ...

Still time to pick up the book at your local library just to get an idea of what the film might be like.

Posted by moviechick44 at September 4, 2010 6:20 PM

comment #6

Mr Hooper says ...

"If I ever meet him in person, I'm demanding my money back."

I love when people make bullshit make-believe threats like that.

Posted by Mr Hooper at September 4, 2010 7:11 PM

comment #7

theboywho says ...

been excited about this one for a while and its been hugely under the radar. Peter Weir's films are like great novels of character depth and suspense that transport you to someplace new. except green card. and fearless was "meh"

Posted by theboywho at September 4, 2010 7:27 PM

comment #8

hiviper says ...

how much of this is thing is fiction anyway?

http://outsideonline.com/outside/features/200301/200301_adventure_canon_9.html

Are there Abominable Snowmonsters in the film too?

Posted by hiviper at September 4, 2010 7:31 PM

comment #9

moviechick44 says ...

That's bee argued. But why call the guy a liar ? We have no proof of his telling. Though it is in history books people did escape the Gulag and make impossible treks and survive, so...

Posted by moviechick44 at September 4, 2010 7:40 PM

comment #10

hiviper says ...

never mind - should've read Jeff's link first

Posted by hiviper at September 4, 2010 7:41 PM

comment #11

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

MikeS - your not exactly a newbie, so how are missing the fact that THE WAY BACK has a Jewish interest angle and therefore has the leg up. Unless Aron Ralston is actually a Rabbi, Boyle just won for a film many didn't feel was that worthy but benefited from decent competition that year.

Posted by Deathtongue_Groupie at September 4, 2010 7:43 PM

comment #12

Eloi Wrath says ...

21 was one of the worst films I've ever seen. Sturgess wore a shit-eating grin all over his nondescript face the entire time in such a way that I wanted to set my telly alight just to destroy the image on screen. Utterly bastarding rubbish film.

Posted by Eloi Wrath at September 4, 2010 8:06 PM

comment #13

scooterzz says ...

"I love when people make bullshit make-believe threats like that. "

i love when people say they 'love' things that they don't really 'love' at all in order to show how much they don't 'love' the thing that they said they 'love'.... THAT'S what i love.....

Posted by scooterzz at September 4, 2010 8:26 PM

comment #14

Bob Violence says ...

why would you assume he doesn't really love that, internet threats and hyperbole are one of things that make life worth living

Posted by Bob Violence at September 4, 2010 8:28 PM

comment #15

Bob Violence says ...

(^ not hyperbole)

Posted by Bob Violence at September 4, 2010 8:28 PM

comment #16

moviechick44 says ...

In the end, you just ask yourself, was it a good film ? Was it good filmmaking and well acted ? I have no doubts that this isn't a good film as I thought the book was a page turner. Oh.. and I also don't care if it's " too dark ". God, I get sick of that tag on movies. " It's too dark " Boo-hoo !
Didn't No Country and There Will Be Blood get the " too dark " tag ?

Posted by moviechick44 at September 4, 2010 8:36 PM

comment #17

Homie Cat says ...

Impossible I know, but for a minute there, I thought the guy in the upper left hand corner was Richard Widmark.

Posted by Homie Cat at September 4, 2010 11:12 PM

comment #18

lastwave says ...

as much as I hate him in Across The Universe and 21,I love him in Heartless and Dead Man Walking.I think Jim Sturgess can be very good.

Posted by lastwave at September 5, 2010 12:11 AM

comment #19

gazer says ...

moviechick44 -

While I can't comment on either the book or the film I find you are right-on with regard to the observation of how dark films is thought problematic. It's as if a great part of the critical community can't watch a film without a persistent and lingering reference to it's thought reception by the Academy voters or its box office potential, and it leads me to think one and the other has become too entangled; I can see and understand the interest in a films reception, but in the end a film has to be seen on its own merits, and I often believe there is not enough of the kind of reaction to a film based on the particular reviewers very personal take without the meandering assessments on its potential as a moneymaker or being a prize darling. Just see the damn film, give in to it, or let us hear about that. The cool take on a film is one thing, and as a reviewer perhaps necessitated for him/her to write a review, but a detached attitude can never be a quality as such if it leads to not giving in to the material at hand. In a way it feels as if the public awareness is quite affected, more than you might first believe, by the critical reception, and in turn the critical adherence to the importance of revenues and accolade becomes an obstacle assimilated by the public, when in fact we're here to first give in to the material, the film itself, and then let our reaction talk its talk. Perhaps it's not so much about the critical community being the "bad guy," and this is more about a zeit geist, if you will, but there is more or less a dehabilitation at hand on the indivudual take which is then substituted by the need to revel at and serve the conglomerate, or "higher" oppinion - which seems to be nothing more than a calculated end, namely money.

Posted by gazer at September 5, 2010 2:20 AM

comment #20

Markj74 says ...

@Homie Cat: It's better than that, it's Ed Harris.

Posted by Markj74 at September 5, 2010 6:32 AM

comment #21

Homie Cat says ...

My god, it is! What happened to him, he looks eighty.

Posted by Homie Cat at September 5, 2010 9:46 AM

comment #22

The Winchester says ...

"I love when people make bullshit make-believe threats like that. "

Yeah, you're right. I'm just an anonymous pussy on the internet who likes making outrageous claims to satisfy my ego.

Posted by The Winchester at September 5, 2010 10:13 AM

comment #23

brad says ...

well, against the grain, i thought Sturgess had an effective innocence in 21, easily the most likable person in the film

Posted by brad at September 5, 2010 1:13 PM

comment #24

merilynch says ...

I am so looking forward to this film. Personally, I love Sturgess' acting ability. He has an exceptional talent in portraying emotion in oh so many ways. Yes, he is nice to look at, but his acting talent goes WAY beyond that. Unfortunately, he prefers to commit to indie movies, which don't often show worldwide.

Posted by merilynch at September 6, 2010 4:20 PM

comment #25