Room (Larry Abrahamson)

[Ezee E]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f0/Room_Poster.jpg

IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3170832/?ref_=nv_sr_3)

[Henry Gale]

Very mixed on this. The two lead performances are essential to the success it does manage, particularly with Larson being as magnetic as ever but also devastating and vulnerable in ways I've never quite seen her before. The way the film treats Jacob Tremblay and his role is hit-and-miss for me, because it frames the film mostly from his perspective (my friends who had read the book told me after that its entirely done from his perspective, which sounds much more appealing to me but I also realize how that's a very tough thing to do in a film that portrays inherent evidence of visuals instead of just childish conjecture) but then it also pushes itself into these more adult tangents where he begins to feel more like an outsider with a more conventional cutesy-kid performance with big, sad, yell-y bits. The quieter and more inquisitive he's allowed to be on screen, that's when he absolutely shines. There's a small, simple scene between him and Tom McCamus' step-grandfather character of the two of them learning to communicate with one another, is basically silent on Tremblay's end, and that might actually be one of the most effective moments of the whole film for me.

But then there's the often annoyingly overbearing score (the final scene is particularly damning of this, as I feel it could've been perfect completely music-less, and if I hadn't seen it in a theatre I would've wondered if something nearby had a sweeping travel commercial accidentally auto-playing in a buried browser tab since it felt so emotionally dissonant to me), the way it both under-sensationalizes its more harrowing aspects but then dramatically overplays smaller moments that don't play as realistically as a result, and ultimately its a film of two obvious halves, and I simply found the first of them significantly more interesting in its storytelling design, characterizations, and general resonance. I appreciate its other section, but it did not work for me nearly as well, despite many of the strong threads (especially Larson and Tremblay's work) carrying over smoothly into it.

Also, very minor anecdotal thing, but lol to it taking place in Ohio with multiple shots of the Toronto skyline and other noticeable landmarks. Our audience giggled at least a couple of times they contradicted each other, being in the heart of the real thing. Obviously not a detrimental thing, as it did win the TIFF People's Choice prize.

**½ / 5.9

[Pop Trash]

But then there's the often annoyingly overbearing score (the final scene is particularly damning of this, as I feel it could've been perfect completely music-less, and if I hadn't seen it in a theatre I would've wondered if something nearby had a sweeping travel commercial accidentally auto-playing in a buried browser tab since it felt so emotionally dissonant to me)


Couldn't agree with you more about the music in that last scene. What was up with that? A lot of people in my theater were sniffling through tears, but it was just too generically manipulative for me. This and other things make me wonder about Abrahamson's choices as a filmmaker. I think a stronger director would have trashed that music or gone back to the board with the composer.

That said, I do ultimately think this is a good film. Larson is very good of course, even if she is equally (perhaps even a bit better) as good in Short Term 12. The bits with William H. Macy choked me up, but I think that is mostly to do with the continual awesomeness of Macy as an actor. Tom McCamus is also always a welcome presense, but I couldn't help wonder if his casting was due to an Atom Egoyan/Sweet Hereafter influence on the film. The Sweet Hereafter is one of my all time favorite films and does post-tragedy so well, that I couldn't help but think Room seemed a bit slight in comparison.

[number8]

Macy was amazing because he created a completely whole and conflicted character through his performance with, what, two minutes of screen time?


The way the film treats Jacob Tremblay and his role is hit-and-miss for me, because it frames the film mostly from his perspective (my friends who had read the book told me after that its entirely done from his perspective, which sounds much more appealing to me but I also realize how that's a very tough thing to do in a film that portrays inherent evidence of visuals instead of just childish conjecture)

I actually do not remember any scene without him in it, which I was impressed by because it's one of the few instances in which a story skips over the rape victim's perspective that doesn't feel exploitative. Or are you talking about in terms of his understanding of what the adults are talking about in front of him?

[Henry Gale]

I actually do not remember any scene without him in it, which I was impressed by because it's one of the few instances in which a story skips over the rape victim's perspective that doesn't feel exploitative. Or are you talking about in terms of his understanding of what the adults are talking about in front of him?

Yeah, more the latter in terms of how we obviously understand the weight of the various circumstances and references to everything that's happened (even before he was born), but I remember feeling like the film tried to have it both ways with his narration and protagonist role to skip over delving more into the nuances of everyone else we still get surface details of, most by abruptly cutting away from said moments or having them stop talking because they realize he's around the corner listening, rather than using that lack of comprehension to inform his character's emotional strength through everything (more than just from his innocence and naivety) and that disconnect for him or between any of the adult characters.

Either way, I felt like the film was considerably more cinematically compelling prior to their return to the outside world, and the ways it chose to mine drama from that second stretch of the film never quite worked for me. The sit-down interview with Wendy Crewson's sensational reporter character and the various family blow-ups come to mind especially.

I also don't know if it says anything particularly flattering that it's become difficult for me to remember these sort of specifics just over a month after seeing it. It simply didn't leave much of an impression.

[Spinal]

Boy, I really didn't like this one. Artistically, I think it's bullshit. Just effort after effort to try to wring tears out of the audience. The voice over is unforgivable in its attempts to mine for poetry in the words of a five-year-old, a character carefully crafted to manipulate emotions. The duo's attempt to escape is ridiculously reckless, considering they apparently have hours each day to keep trying door codes. Lots of shouting. Lots of underlining the inner wisdom of a child. Not a lot of craft. Coarse, blunt-edged filmmaking.

[number8]

The duo's attempt to escape is ridiculously reckless, considering they apparently have hours each day to keep trying door codes.

This is the weirdest thing. Why did they go for keycode as the obstacle? It doesn't take years to try all 10,000 possible combinations of a 4 digit code.

[Ezee E]

This is the weirdest thing. Why did they go for keycode as the obstacle? It doesn't take years to try all 10,000 possible combinations of a 4 digit code.

I forget. I swore there was a reason they didn't attempt this?

[Peng]

I assume it will lock up once you entered too many wrong code (because if not, why use a keycode machine at all?). As for the escape, I forgot if it was made clear in the film (I'm kinda sure it was, but that may be my knowledge about the story bleeding in), but in the book the guy just lost a job, and Ma realized that once the money ran out, their well-beings will be very much in suspect. That's why she started giving him info about and preparing him for the outsides world, leading into the escape.

Reading the book kinda dilutes my viewing experience of this, and made the Director Oscar norm bewildering because for me it's a rather shoddy directorial effort. The book's psychological complexity feels so much grossed over.

Sidenote: I know it will be impossible to promote otherwise, but I wish they haven't revealed so much about the second half of the film. The book's synopsis just focused on the beginning scenario, and I didn't know about the story's structure, which made the escape scene a truly stressful, blood-pressure-spiking sequence to read. I was so sure it would fail because I thought all of the book would be about their lives in that room, and the thought of what the man would do after getting the kid back rendered the whole scene almost unbearably nerve-wracking.

[Lazlo]

I assume it will lock up once you entered too many wrong code (because if not, why use a keycode machine at all?).

Pretty sure I remember Larson saying this at some point.

[Spinal]

It's possible she did and I missed it.

[number8]

Maybe that's how those locks typically work and we're supposed to assume that's the standard explanation even if it's not stated? I didn't because I've seen The Flash get out of a jam by brute forcing codes too many times.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Huh. I liked it. Agreed that the craft is just... it's not inspired, just tons of handheld closeups. I can't stand that technique where you get a closeup of a sweaty face and the camera can't even hold the entire head in frame, it's gotta track between the lower chin and then the eyes and forehead, because that's just how frenetic the situation is. And I was really confused when the escape attempt borrowed the Moneyball soundtrack. 60-70% of the film's goodness is with Tremblay. Thought that kid displayed some real talent and stayed on the right side of precocious.

[TGM]

Outside of the random and distractingly out of place Moneyball music, I otherwise didn't have an issue with any of the musical choices here. The jump from the first half to the second is a bit jarring, though in hindsight, I suppose that's appropriate enough honestly. And really, those are my only gripes with this thing. Otherwise, quite liked it, and as much as Brie Larson is (deservedly so) getting awards recognition for her performance, I think Jacob Tremblay deserves quite probably even more so. That kid was absolutely terrific.

[number8]

Amazing.

704170970198585344

[Dukefrukem]

HA!

[Peng]

The only studio I follow on twitter. They're so great.

[DavidSeven]

Instinctively, it feels like it might be manipulative as all get out, but damn if this thing doesn't sneak up on you. Ultimately, I think there is quite a bit of skill on display. Not so much in the craft, but the film admirably strikes a nice balance between mawkishness and poetic detachment. The result is a pretty full experience, one that I found thematically rich and dramatically affecting. Admittedly, there are a lot of parts where I started muttering, "okay, this is getting too deliberate." Yet, it never lost me. Ultimately, there is space for movies like this, and it's sort of refreshing to see one done with such deftness.

[Grouchy]

Eh... I don't know. It's kind of fitting that this is coming from the director of Frank because I got more or less the same from both films - brilliant concept brought down by the direction.

Now, I hadn't even heard of the book so I bought into the notion that the entire movie would take place inside the room and I agree, that made the suspense of the escape scene increase ten fold despite the ridiculousness of Mom's plan. Nothing after that worked for me. Brie Larson is very good, the kid is a revelation and when even your tiny roles are filled by the likes of William H. Macy you know you're in good hands acting-wise. But the drama... it seemed forced and cheap. I get that it's a difficult subject to tackle, specially when you're doing it from a little kid's perspective (which, as Henry notes, was randomly abandoned when the scene would be too hard to do) but still, this stooped way too low too often with the swelling music and the screaming matches. If it was a short movie about Mom and her son escaping an Austrian Monster type it would have been gold.

I don't know if this happened to anyone else but I spent a large bulk of the film convinced that the little boy was a girl and that the Mom just named her "Jack" to prevent the kidnapper from getting any ideas about her. I realize it's hard to tell sometimes with children that age but I was fully convinced about this and found it very confusing that they still called her Jack on the outside.

[TGM]

I don't know if this happened to anyone else but I spent a large bulk of the film convinced that the little boy was a girl and that the Mom just named her "Jack" to prevent the kidnapper from getting any ideas about her. I realize it's hard to tell sometimes with children that age but I was fully convinced about this and found it very confusing that they still called her Jack on the outside.

Yeah, I actually thought the same thing at first, and was also confused for just a little bit there. :p