Midnight Special (Jeff Nichols)

[TGM]

MIDNIGHT SPECIAL

Director: Jeff Nichols

imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2649554/?ref_=nv_sr_1)

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/midnightspecial/images/background-twitter.jpg

[TGM]

Spoilering because I almost feel like even talking about this movie is a bit spoilerish, and it definitely benefits from going in cold. The trailer consists pretty much of just the first 5 minutes and tells you nothing, and that's by design. But having now seen it, I almost feel like, in some ways, this feels like a more competent Tomorrowland. Pretty good flick.

[Stay Puft]

Pretty good. Loved that opening. Loved the soundtrack. It sags in the middle, and the ratio of exposition to the unexplained feels a little off and unsatisfying, but there's an emotional undercurrent that comes bubbling swiftly to the surface in the final third and took me by surprise. I was genuinely moved by a couple moments there at the end.

And speaking of that ending...

Reallllly not sure what to think of that final revelation. It's a big scale moment, and I think it fits, but it also feels weirdly flat. It was a clearly divisive ending even amongst those at my screening: Some people were snickering, and then a couple people actually stood up and applauded when the credits rolled - something I'm only used to seeing at film festivals. I watched an interview afterwards with Nichols, who explained the reasoning behind the ending, and while I appreciate why he wanted to show something, I did find what he showed a little lacking (this movie needed a better art director or visual effects house, perhaps).

But again, those emotional beats surprised me, so overall I'd say the film worked. It's a bit wobbly but nevertheless an effective piece of genre filmmaking.


Spoilering because I almost feel like even talking about this movie is a bit spoilerish, and it definitely benefits from going in cold. The trailer consists pretty much of just the first 5 minutes and tells you nothing, and that's by design

True, though as I was watching it I realized I had in fact seen a trailer for this some time before, and based on that memory was able to predict pretty much every major beat for the first two acts. So there's at least one trailer that has been floating around for a while that shows way more than just the first five minutes. In fact, even knowing the basic plot can kinda spoil the experience, since it begins in media res and spends a long time filling in some of the blanks. Go in as cold as possible, absolutely.

[Peng]

This is right in my aesthetic spectacle wheelhouse that it's a shame the film reaches greatness only a few times. The sparse, casual approach to visual wonder works great in inspiring real awe, but it crosses over into underdeveloped when it comes to story, characters, and their relationships. The performances from Shannon and Dunst are so strong that their characters' love and worry for the kid are very keenly felt (especially in tandem with the sci-fi story's parenthood allegory), but the three people are not developed enough for the film's third act to pack a full emotional wallop that it's aiming for (the heartrending glances from them near the end and the "I like worrying about you" convo get me a bit though). Still, it must be said again how well the film's set-pieces work for me, both visually and emotionally, especially for its budget. They are more than glancing, but never dwelling or flashy, and always in service of the story.

[Henry Gale]

Went in almost entirely cold, and I liked it, but I spent so much of it wanting to love it that it ultimately ends up feeling more disappointing than it should because it's clearly much better than the average movie, it just might not be the best movie of the bigger sentimental-sci-fi pantheon it aspires to.

As you've pretty much already said, it manages some really stellar moments, the performances are unflinchingly compelling (especially in their consistent, deliberate quiet), it's formally directed very intelligently and unobjectionably, the film has that usual Nichols-y feel I love, except somehow here with actually dealing with actual supernatural stuff makes his touch feel almost less ethereal than even something like Mud, which found wonder in the mundane and childhood exploration. Take Shelter's dreaminess goes without saying, but it's a more tragic, conflicting point-of-view to see as outright fantastical as it goes.

I agree with TGM about it really reminding me of a certain high-profile movie: Tomorrowland. And Midnight Special was originally set to be released in the same calender year, which might've made the dialogue between the two even more interesting. But whereas that movie had a lot more to say about the state of the world and culture we live in, this one is admirably content with simply serving themes to the universe it creates, which might also be an issue in and of itself since we are given little context for it, emotional or otherwise, and are plunged into the situation in ways no character on screen really is. Driver's character comes closest to being the audience surrogate, but he ends up walking in and out of the movie knowing even less than us.

Either way, this is still very much worth watching, especially if it leads to further discussion. It just didn't quite hit me in that sweet spot (being, "oh god why am I crying this doesn't even make any sense but *sniffle* it's beautiful" emotional irrationality) movies like this usually tend to.

[dreamdead]

Mild yay. This film starts off in media res to such a degree that there's a sense of absurd expectation and significance regarding each of the early scenes. Nichols stages some crafty moments, largely through his use of darkness and night-time filming, but the first act takes so long to gain access to the most basic exposition. There's ways in which this is far more cinematic and adult in its approach, but there's also sequences that are so close to going to eleven in mystic import that it loses itself in places.

Nichols works better once Dunst is introduced, as the keepaway scenes have a more straightforward momentum and expectation. And the mystery of bullets trained to stun rather than kill is shocking despite itself.

If anything, this is the sort of film that finds itself in the second act but can't quite stick the landing. The reveal in the finale is marvelous visually but it lacks any way spiritual weight, especially after so much in that direction has been teased. Ultimately, it's about finding one's community, but that theme ends up being so generalized that its mysticsm and attempt to find itself as a contemporary Close Encounters just peters out without revelation.

Well performed throughout--just not as valuable to me as his earlier Take Shelter.

[Ezee E]

Well damn. After a really great first twenty minutes, this gets quite boring, and ends the same. This kind of pisses me off, because it started off so well.

[Skitch]

I'm thirty minutes in, and this...is...awesome.

Now skimming comments, I guess I should reel it in a bit. I've gone in totally cold.

[Grouchy]

Well damn. After a really great first twenty minutes, this gets quite boring, and ends the same. This kind of pisses me off, because it started off so well.
This. I kept getting frustrated with the film because the opening scenes were great, tense and made me anticipate a cross between sophisticated science fiction and the directing style of John Carpenter. But the film kept introducing intriguing concepts (the church, the parish member who seemingly wanted to use the kid's powers for his own benefit, even the weird double parenting arrangement) and then wasting them completely by turning everything into a dumb chase actioner.

I also had a problem I realize now I've had with all of Nichol's pictures which is that his character writing just sucks. Take the cop/friend character. Here's a guy who gets a house call by a childhood friend he hasn't seen in years and he goes on this incredible adventure leaving everything that was his life behind. What's a guy like that like? Well, apparently he's a non-descript stock hero character. And so are all of Nichol's characters. He's a competent, even impressive director but a very lazy writer.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Yeah, agree with many here that the film might be a little too obscurantist for its own good, and that the final revelations don't quite have the impact they should have. I think it's because Nichols is such a careful and restrained filmmaker that his moments of high spectacle don't hit quite as hard as they could. That's when you miss that orgiastic energy of Spielberg/Williams.