The Grey (Joe Carnahan)

[Watashi]

IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1601913/)

http://0.tqn.com/d/horror/1/0/I/4/1/-/The-Grey-poster-2.jpg

[Skitch]

Dammit, did I fuck up the rating thread thingy idea already? Well if I did, my bad.

Any way, I quite enjoyed this. Exceeded my expectations and then some.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Dammit, did I fuck up the rating thread thingy idea already? Well if I did, my bad.

Any way, I quite enjoyed this. Exceeded my expectations and then some.

Nope. Just vote and rate the thread here. Discussion can still take place in the other thread as well.

[Raiders]

Actually the intent is to have this be the only discussion thread for the film. The Upcoming threads are to be closed once the film is released and a thread created here and if desired, we can link to the Upcoming thread in the first post.

I will move Skitch's post to this thread.

Also, not to be too demanding, but please keep the title of the poll as the name of the film and the votes to a simple yay and nay. This has to do with the database and how I run queries if and when we create a master tally thread.

[Ezee E]

So... spoilers can be posted here without tags then? Whereas in the upcoming thread they should still be there. Right?

Gonna see this for sure.

[Winston*]

I think there should be spoiler tags here too.

[soitgoes...]

Yeah, I think there should always be spoiler tags.

[Skitch]

Actually the intent is to have this be the only discussion thread for the film. The Upcoming threads are to be closed once the film is released and a thread created here and if desired, we can link to the Upcoming thread in the first post.


Good. I really like this system. No need to move my post, sir.

[MadMan]

The Gray strikes me as a potential Raiders movie for some reason. Some of the good buzz this movie is getting makes me consider it as a strong rental. Plus of course Liam Neeson punching wolves.

[TGM]

So whoever said this movie was stunningly good, they weren't lying. Even with my increased expectations, this movie still surpassed them. Really, really legitimately good movie.

[Henry Gale]

Yup, really intense, emotionally gripping and overall just very well made. But I also liked Smokin' Aces and The A-Team just fine, so maybe I'm not as shocked as others that Carnahan's work here is as enjoyable as it is.

I was aware of the movie being promoted for a long time, but I went in only having seen a single TV spot and a short clip from a talk show. I'm so glad I avoided anything else (although mostly accidentally), because I was pretty shocked when my friends told me after the movie what the trailers showed.

[Fezzik]

This was pretty freaking great. Neeson is the badass of badasses, but the violence was brutal and the psychology and philosophical questions were pretty interesting.

It was much more than I expected it to be from the trailers.

That is a very good thing.

[Watashi]

Yeah, the trailer shows the final scene of the movie. It tempered the emotions of that scene a bit.

The film's only real flaw is that keeps flip-flopping between a standard horror film and a psychological drama. I could have dealt with less of the former. Though beyond that, it's pretty great. It definitely makes up for the horrendous Smokin' Aces.

[Adam]

I was a bit drunk when I saw this so I don't 100 percent trust my opinion, but I was also consistently impressed by how assured it felt throughout. Why is it a flaw to flip-flop between psychological and physical horror? How are those mutually exclusive? Anyway it worked best for me as a showcase for Liam Neeson. Even in the goofiest movies, that guy has such a presence to him. More of these types of films should star big hulking Irishmen constantly looking off into the distance giving wry, knowing half-smiles

[transmogrifier]

Mixed, slightly more to the negative side, because it's all just a little too blunt and ragged on the surface, but pure factory-product underneath.

A more miserablist Final Destination, basically.

[Dukefrukem]

Yeah, the trailer shows the final scene of the movie. It tempered the emotions of that scene a bit.

The film's only real flaw is that keeps flip-flopping between a standard horror film and a psychological drama. I could have dealt with less of the former. Though beyond that, it's pretty great. It definitely makes up for the horrendous Smokin' Aces.

I agree with this and I'm glad I didnt see that particular scene in the trailer the first time around. I enjoyed this a lot, and I don't think it was particularly the Neeson factor. I loved the environment, especially plots that revolve around a snowy environment . They're rare and when they're done right can come off more realistic than usual; something about a cold environment allows for me to relate more to what is happening on screen.

Beautiful touch
with the wolves howling in the night and we only see their breath from the cold.

[Boner M]

I didn't see the trailer and knew nothing except for that Neeson punches a wolf in the film, so it was nice to only have that (and knowing of the good reviews) to go on, which combined for one of the most pleasant surprises I've had at the movies in a while. My tweet:


Hey nearly every Oscar hopeful, a January release is better than you, how does that feel. Cant remember the last studio film with such a convincing (if blunt) existential bent. Gotta admit, it actually betters MEEK'S CUTOFF in the most crucial dept

[Melville]

Cant remember the last studio film with such a convincing (if blunt) existential bent.
Yes. It's like a bleaker version of Camus' Myth of Sisyphus: a raw depiction of life reduced to its brute elements, where death is assured, you are invariably heading in the wrong direction, and your actions have no impact, but still the things you hold dear have meaning, even as they too are stripped from the world bit by bit, and you must struggle on, holding those dear things tight, loosing your grip on them only when it comes time to strap broken bottles to your fist and punch a wolf in the face!
I'm awaiting a Raiders review of this.

[Dukefrukem]

Did anyone know there's a final 2 second post-credits scene?

sequel :P

[TGM]

Did anyone know there's a final 2 second post-credits scene?

sequel :P

Yeah, the guy at the ticket booth was informing people to stick around after the credits. Never had them do that for any other movie, and this isn't one where I would have thought to expect anything afterwards.

[EyesWideOpen]

I'm glad I went and saw this before it left theaters it was fantastic.

[soitgoes...]

Did anyone know there's a final 2 second post-credits scene?

sequel :PI'm not sure why you'd think that. Well actually, I suppose this is a Hollywood film, so that might be the case, but I'm not sure how the post-credits scene led you to think a sequel. For all we know Neeson could be lying there dying as well with the rest of the pack circling in closer.

[Dukefrukem]

I'm not sure why you'd think that. Well actually, I suppose this is a Hollywood film, so that might be the case, but I'm not sure how the post-credits scene led you to think a sequel. For all we know Neeson could be lying there dying as well with the rest of the pack circling in closer.

Well I thought it was pretty obvious they were suggesting he survived, but you’re right they didn’t specifically show anything. I just assume they were alluding to one of the first scenes of the movie after Neeson shot a wolf and sat by the wolf until it died. But there is also nothing to suggest Neeson wasn't dying too.

[Irish]

This was solid. Neeson carries it & the rest of the cast is fine, if disposable.

There's a lot of stuff here that's shallow and on the nose, but just as much that works with some depth. Thought the ending was a pretty ballsy move.

I'm curious why the studio dumped this in January, and what might have caused them to lose faith. This isn't any kind of blockbuster action picture, but as a horror/drama kind of thing it easily holds its own with any of the releases from last year.

Maybe it didn't test well?

[Morris Schæffer]

Beautiful touch
with the wolves howling in the night and we only see their breath from the cold.

The really funny thing, there's a scene in the airplane right when the stewardess closes the curtains and the camera pans back across all the seats and there was this smoke emanating from all the passengers and I thought "what the hell kinda airline is this?!" But it was their breath.

Very strong movie. I liked it. When it aims for texture, pathos and philosophy it isn't always hit, but definitely more hit than miss. I guess Joe Carnahan is back! And so awesome to have one of the dudes just, well, give up really. Man sits down, he's had enough. And none of the others somehow manage to get him on his feet again. Good perf from Frank Grillo.

[Morris Schæffer]

Did anyone know there's a final 2 second post-credits scene?

sequel :P

Motherfucker I forgot that!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! :sad:

Oh well caught it on Youtube. So my reaction was overcooked.

[Ezee E]

Oh wow. I absolutely loved this.

[Ezee E]

I wish I could turn up the brightness on this, but this might be the scariest shot I've seen in years:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y288/bialasishaha/screen-capture-2.png

[Rowland]

Nice to see Carnahan pull something like this off so effectively and affectingly after his intermittently clever but otherwise obnoxious A-Team remake. The fucker made me shed man tears.

[Pop Trash]

Almost all of this was absolutely great. It also annoys me that the Academy won't ever acknowledge movies like this simply because they fall into a particular genre. The studios know this, thus The Grey getting dumped into January (although it could also be Carnahan's track record, but this is the first of his films I've seen). Neeson is award worthy here and the rest of the film has an old school 70s style craftsmanship that reminded me a bit of Jaws. It also might have the best "screaming at God" scene since the original Bad Lieutenant.

The one nitpicky thing is that in a film this existential, and dealing with the here-and-now in a very visceral way, I kinda wish this didn't have any flashbacks or surreal visions (such as the daughter after that guy fell down the tree). The film is so good at pure filmmaking form, that I didn't think it needed any editing/chronology tricks to punch up the drama.

[Morris Schæffer]

@ Pop Trash:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52986

;)

[Pop Trash]

Nice, although it would take a lot to get Neeson nominated. I don't even think a lot of critics will go to the mat for this, since quite a few of them were ambivalent towards it judging from metacritic. Not to mention, I think critics often have the same sorts of genre prejudices that the Academy has.

[Pop Trash]

There's also a rather retarded pro-wolf contingency that seems to hate this film (because OBVIOUSLY the wolves couldn't possibly be exaggerated for metaphorical effect in a fictional film, and are meant to be taken as literal, realistic wolves in the wild). They might come roaring back to life if this is pushed too hard for awards, thus giving a political reason for the Academy to ignore it.

[Skitch]

Your critique of the Academy and critics is dead on, and it makes me so mad I can't even talk about it.

*leaves*

[Pop Trash]

One last thing: there is an interesting subtext to this film and Neeson's own life. He was married to Natasha Richardson who died in a skiing accident. The character here lost his wife (presumably) and is also battling the elements, wolves, trees, or anything else that might snuff him out. He is quite literally staring death/God/fate in the face and throwing down the gauntlet. I wonder if making this film (and maybe his intense focus on action genres in general lately) was a form of therapy for Neeson? Just a thought.

[Watashi]

I really want to see this film again. So far it's the best film of 2012.

[Ezee E]

I really want to see this film again. So far it's the best film of 2012.
Yeah it is.

[EyesWideOpen]

Moonrise Kingdom is my favorite but The Grey was surprisingly really good.

[Pop Trash]

Moonrise Kingdom is my favorite but The Grey was surprisingly really good.

My top two so far.

[B-side]

Damn, this was intense. I don't think I can even bring to mind a film as avowedly atheist as this. Usually when a character gets angry at God, some sort of divine intervention occurs or something to re-affirm the character's faith, but nothing of the sort here. It's all about the very real human will to survive. "Show me something real!" indeed. That ending was fucking brutal. This really became downright existential near the end. And Morris alluded to it a while ago, but I'd like to point out for special recognition that terrific little tracking shot near the beginning on the plane that follows the stewardess to the front, then swings to the right to show the malfunctioning monitor, then tracks back on the same path to reveal the presence of cold breath with each passing row. It's little things like that that really make a survival horror film horrifying.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Oh, I get it. The wolf is supposed to represent his struggle with faith.

Yeah, this was way too corny for me. Cool atmosphere wasted by dull characters and Philosophy 101 conversations.

[Winston*]

Oh, I get it. The wolf is supposed to represent his struggle with faith.
It is?

[transmogrifier]

Oh, I get it. The wolf is supposed to represent his struggle with faith.

Yeah, this was way too corny for me. Cool atmosphere wasted by dull characters and Philosophy 101 conversations.

Yeah, I can't believe the extent to which it has been embraced here. It is a bog standard survival yarn, no better no worse than a million other similar films.

[Winston*]

Yeah, I can't believe the extent to which it has been embraced here. It is a bog standard survival yarn, no better no worse than a million other similar films.
It's an extremely well made and acted survival yarn.

[Watashi]

Oh, I get it. The wolf is supposed to represent his struggle with faith.

Uh no it's not.

[Irish]

Yeah, I can't believe the extent to which it has been embraced here. It is a bog standard survival yarn, no better no worse than a million other similar films.

A million other films don't feature Liam Neeson turning his hands into knives using complimentary airplane booze bottles and some duct tape.

I don't disagree with you overall, but two things stood out for me with this film: (1) the main character is suicidal, which is rare in mainstream stuff from a name actor and (2) the movie makes something of an attempt to end ambiguously.

Those are creatively interesting choices, and I think the guy who made them had some stones, to get that by everyone.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Just a joke guys. Apparently not a very good one.

[Boner M]

Philosophy 101 conversations.
You think more sophisticated conversation would've aided these characters?

[Kurosawa Fan]

You think more sophisticated conversation would've aided these characters?

The opposite. Every time they stopped to have a quiet moment, they broke out the eye-rolling philosophies. They're being tracked by the most vindictive pack of wolves on Earth, yet they have time for moment after moment of embarrassing existential discourse (well, in between winning moments like "Who elected you leader!" or "I'm not scared. I don't live in fear of this world!"). My favorite was when they're walking along the river, knowing the wolves are behind them, yet they stop walking to discuss where Neeson was going when he left the bar the night before their flight. Calmest, most rational hunted men on the planet.

[transmogrifier]

It's an extremely well made and acted survival yarn.

Agree to disagree.

[Pop Trash]

Calmest, most rational hunted men on the planet.

I think this is the point KF. There is a distinct arc where the men gradually get slower, calmer as their inevitable fate slowly sinks into them. The adrenaline wears off replaced by recognitions of death. That single long take shot of the 'asshole' character (whose personality has been drained of any attitude at that point) watching immense beauty right before we know he is going to be killed by exposure or wolves is one of the most haunting shots I've seen recently.

[Morris Schæffer]

I think you got it right Pop Trash. In a more ordinary movie, one of the characters, Neeson here, would have given a rousing speech, prompting everyone to get off their asses, slaughter the wolfpack and be found by a reconnaisance airplane. Now, if K-Fan found most of the dialogue corny and boring, that's his good right, but the final stretch of passivity was brilliant. The Frank Grillo character just giving up blew me away.

[Melville]

I agree about the corniness, but it fit well enough with the movie's overall style. And I've never seen another survival yarn so potently existential and grimly inspiring.

Too bad about the post-credits scene. I didn't know it existed until sometime after I saw the movie. Sounds like it kind of ruins the ending.

[B-side]

I agree about the corniness, but it fit well enough with the movie's overall style. And I've never seen another survival yarn so potently existential and grimly inspiring.

Too bad about the post-credits scene. I didn't know it existed until sometime after I saw the movie. Sounds like it kind of ruins the ending.

I don't think it does. It's decidedly ambiguous. There's a desperate abruptness to the initial ending that's kinda beautiful, but the post-credits scene is hardly definitive of anything.

[Melville]

I don't think it does. It's decidedly ambiguous. There's a desperate abruptness to the initial ending that's kinda beautiful, but the post-credits scene is hardly definitive of anything.
The ambiguity lessens the impact of the ending for me. 'Strapping broken bottles to your fist in the face of certain death' becomes 'strapping broken bottles to your fist in the face of possible victory'. It just doesn't have the same ring to it. I don't see any purpose in subverting the bleakness of the rest of the movie. I also find post-credits scenes pretty hokey.

[Boner M]

I think it's impossible to make an entirely un-corny film about macho/sentimental American dudes facing certain death.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I think this is the point KF. There is a distinct arc where the men gradually get slower, calmer as their inevitable fate slowly sinks into them. The adrenaline wears off replaced by recognitions of death. That single long take shot of the 'asshole' character (whose personality has been drained of any attitude at that point) watching immense beauty right before we know he is going to be killed by exposure or wolves is one of the most haunting shots I've seen recently.

That single shot was nice, but the rest just doesn't work for me. Also, if he was so intent on not being eaten by those wolves, why not just wade into the middle of the river and die beyond their reach? Not a big complaint, but it seemed that thought would have struck one of them.

Beyond the poor dialogue and the dull characters, the inconsistencies in their surroundings were too much and too many to swallow. When they're trying to make the tree line, the trees are shown far off in the distance as darkness approaches, and one of the men says, "The trees don't seem like they're getting any closer!" or something along those lines. A beat later two wolves come sprinting toward them from both sides. The men start to run, even though it was hard enough for them to walk due to the wind and the deep snow. Somehow they are able to out run the wolves to a tree line that is suddenly pretty damn close to their position.

Okay, it happens once, no big deal. I brushed it off and continued on. Then there's that scene at the sheer rock wall. Nothing there made a lick of sense. That initial shot was so daunting, as was any shot of them looking down from the edge of the cliff. Yet the shot from the side, with all four men standing on the edge looking at the trees on the other side of the gap, looked completely different. In that first shot, no way in hell was someone jumping from the cliff edge to the trees on the other side, but it becomes more feasible when the movie deems it necessary. Again, let it go and move on.

They're being tracked from behind by a pack of wolves the entire movie (or at least, after they leave the wreckage). Every attack comes from behind them. They approach this giant cliff that seems to extend forever. It's a sheer wall with no visible ledges. Yet, the wolves are waiting at the bottom as soon as one of them hits the ground. I know the wolves would be incredibly familiar with the surroundings, but my guess is it would take them awhile to get down from the top of that cliff. The wolves don't try to attack at any point while the men are cornered at the edge, instead they go to the bottom and wait for the men to come down? In all other respects they are vicious and cunning, even invading the camp to pick the men off. Here, they decide to trot down to the bottom to make way for an exciting set piece. Also, when the group was down to three men, why would the wolves wait to attack? Are they pleasure-delayer wolves? Pretty sure that massive pack could have taken all seven no problems, but then there's no movie, so I get the delay, but at some point their numbers had dwindled to the point that picking them off one by one just didn't make sense.

I know some of this is nitpicking, but the further along the movie went, the less I was immersed in that world, and the more apparent these flaws became. The film was obviously very concerned with verisimilitude (made most obvious by one of the group dying because his body couldn't handle the high altitude), yet it bends reality to suit set pieces, and it pulled me out of the experience every time. Too many flaws to ignore.

[Irish]

Pretty sure that post is longer than the movie, KF.

;)

[Melville]

The film was obviously very concerned with verisimilitude (made most obvious by one of the group dying because his body couldn't handle the high altitude), yet it bends reality to suit set pieces, and it pulled me out of the experience every time. Too many flaws to ignore.
Details such as the death-by-altitude enhanced the physicality of the story and the direness of the circumstances, and they were an easy way to show Neeson's character being knowledgeable. But I didn't think it was going for verisimilitude at all. It was going for rough and ragged allegory. The wolves didn't really look like wolves or act like wolves. I thought the cliff scene you mention was both morbidly funny in its ridiculousness and perfectly fitting in its bleakness: there's the tensest moments in the movie, with the characters trying to make this impossible, desperate escape—and it doesn't matter. Wherever they go, the wolves are already there, waiting.

I think this movie is best described as a Raiders movie. It's a bit corny and has little concern for realism. It's a movie of men and death.

[B-side]

The ambiguity lessens the impact of the ending for me. 'Strapping broken bottles to your fist in the face of certain death' becomes 'strapping broken bottles to your fist in the face of possible victory'. It just doesn't have the same ring to it. I don't see any purpose in subverting the bleakness of the rest of the movie. I also find post-credits scenes pretty hokey.

Point taken.

Supposed straying from realism concerns me very little. This is a work of visceral fiction. The wolves aren't wolves so much as they are oversized hellhounds. Having concern for altitude sickness being, like Melville here said, a device to relay Neeson's character's knowledge of the region. That doesn't make this a documentary; it makes it a film concerned with both corporeal and spiritual fragility. Sure, it's on the nose and a bit silly, even, but it works so well on such a basic level of intensity that it seems beside the point to cry foul about its lack of dedication to realism. You can feel the bitter cold and the strength it took to make every step in that deep snow and the torrential blizzards. Plus, there's that brilliant little tracking shot I mentioned. So good.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Pretty sure that post is longer than the movie, KF.

;)

Hey now. You of all people should understand long posts defending a position. :P


Details such as the death-by-altitude enhanced the physicality of the story and the direness of the circumstances, and they were an easy way to show Neeson's character being knowledgeable. But I didn't think it was going for verisimilitude at all. It was going for rough and ragged allegory. The wolves didn't really look like wolves or act like wolves. I thought the cliff scene you mention was both morbidly funny in its ridiculousness and perfectly fitting in its bleakness: there's the tensest moments in the movie, with the characters trying to make this impossible, desperate escape—and it doesn't matter. Wherever they go, the wolves are already there, waiting.

I think this movie is best described as a Raiders movie. It's a bit corny and has little concern for realism. It's a movie of men and death.

That's a good point about the tone, but how does the inconsistency of their surroundings serve that purpose? Showing the impossibility of making it to the woods, only to have the woods appear much closer; showing the impossibility of reaching the tree line on the other side of the cliff only to make it much more feasible in a later shot; wouldn't the allegory have worked just as well had they been within reach of both tree lines in those moments? Both scenes took me out of the experience, and neither helps to strengthen your interpretation.

EDIT: Oh, and I watched the post-credit scene. It's literally about five seconds long, and implies that they destroyed each other. It's sort of pointless.

[Irish]

Hey now. You of all people should understand long posts defending a position. :P

Who, me? I'm concise to the point of being taciturn. :P

[Melville]

That's a good point about the tone, but how does the inconsistency of their surroundings serve that purpose? Showing the impossibility of making it to the woods, only to have the woods appear much closer; showing the impossibility of reaching the tree line on the other side of the cliff only to make it much more feasible in a later shot; wouldn't the allegory have worked just as well had they been within reach of both tree lines in those moments? Both scenes took me out of the experience, and neither helps to strengthen your interpretation.
Yeah, I don't think they strengthen my interpretation. I tend not to care about things like that, and I found them somewhat amusing in their kind of pulpy crudeness, but I can understand your issues with them. Really, it was only in the last few scenes that for me the movie went from surprisingly good and forgivably hokey to outright awesome.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Hm. I guess I'll have to see this then. It looked really run-of-the-mill when I saw the posters and trailers, though.

[D_Davis]

Too bad about the post-credits scene. I didn't know it existed until sometime after I saw the movie. Sounds like it kind of ruins the ending.

Filmmakers need to do away with post-credit scenes. As a rule, now, I turn the movie off as soon as the credits start, just to spite them. If their stupid movie relies on some kind of post-credit stinger, they can fuck off and DIAF.