CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The Way Back - Post Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Way Back - Post Release

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 

Peter Weir's new film just opened here. 

 

 

Halfway through the film I was getting worried that this might be the worst misstep Weir, a personal favourite director of mine, had made. At the end of the film despite a few misgivings I'd rank this up there with the best of his work. It's definitely better than FEARLESS at least.

 

The problem is that the first half is just twitchy and rushed feeling. Despite the plot being relatively simple and being the sort of thing that would favour lots of character development the film feels populated by ciphers. Essentially the film is about a bunch of political (and non-political) prisoners escaping from a Gulag in Siberia in 1939 and walking to India. However the film only really comes alive and makes you feel for these characters after we've spent at least two thirds of the film with them. The problem is that the editing murders the film at times, scenes just going on a second too long and not really connecting with what went before or what goes after. Essentially the first hour of the film feels like it has no connective tissue and as such the ardous trek through Russia feels airless and weightless. You don't get a sense of time or place and whilst Weir films the vistas of Siberia with great aplomb the panoramas ultimately outweigh the cast. 

 

The cast is injected with life by the late arrival of Saoirse Ronan who breathes life into the film and wakes Ed Harris from the hypnotic stupor he's in for the first hour. Ronan gives a sense of warmth and community to the group and it's through her that we start to actually, y'know, like the people we're following. Which is good because the second half is almost completely reliant on you rooting for these guys as they go through hell after hell to finish their journey. 

 

Ronan's reinvogaration of the cast really helps the film storm from a limp to a sprint. 

 

Now for some spoilery discussion,

 

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

At first I found the kind of pat way that Mark Strong and Colin Farrell exited the film to be kind of hilarious. Strong is one of the few characters who has presence and personality in the first half of the film so it's kind of amazing that he just disappears with a hushed discussion in the middle of a blizzard explaining what happened to him. I also kind of love Colin Farrell just sort of walking away from the group and never coming back. It's a genuine surprise because it's so un-cinematic and in doing it so it kind of makes the second half of the film far more dangerous. If Farrell's character can just sort of shrug and wander off then any character can die. I also love the bit with the Mongol horsemen, where you have an entire sequence devoted to them and then they're like 'Oh, whatever' and ride off into the sunset never to be referenced again. 

post #2 of 6

I found the opening act far too Edward Zwicky. Once winter ends in Siberia, The Way Back transforms into a much different, less conventional, and far better movie.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I liked how Farrell's early departure underlined how ambiguous the escape really was for these guys, especially for the Poles. I kept wondering what they planned to do once they  finally crossed the Himalayas. Find another home country? Camp out in India and smoke lots of opium until the end of the cold war? The refugees face more immediate dilemmas, but the overarching "what happens next" question colors the movie in a dark and oppressive way after they escape the gulag, since all but the American were homeless in the most extreme sense of the word.

 

 

The Gobi crossing felt like a devastating but beautiful ten hours. I'm sure most reviewers will tell you how thirsty this sequence made them. I think it's Weir's most straightforward and unambiguous movie, but it's great at transferring the palpable sense of being lost in a post-WWII nightmare.

post #3 of 6

I liked much of the cinematography and epic feel of the journey, but beyond Harris, Ronan, Strong, and Ferrell, the rest of the cast is essentially undistinguishable. And that's a big problem when you're trying to invest emotionally in whether a character makes it or not, because there's not much to hang onto intellectually.

 

Enough worked that I can say that it's worth seeing, but I think it's definitely towards the bottom of Weir's filmography.

post #4 of 6

As soon as they get to the business of walking (and that, once they get outside of Russia), this becomes something bordering on grand. It's beautiful to look at, lush cinematography makes even the Gobi fucking desert seem incredible. But the set up and introduction feels so badly mishandled, too hurried. I could not distinguish between the characters much of the time (save for the 'names') and the first part of the journey felt like a day hike in the woods that went horribly, horribly wrong. Picks up steam near the end, and Ronan's death was touching and wonderfully handled, but it all felt like too little, too late at that point.

post #5 of 6

I became engaged to the film once the girl enters the frame, and the gobbi sequence was majestic.  I felt like the ending paid off, but most of the actual movie was a bit boring.  Narratively its subdued which I guess is cool, but I couldn't really get into any of the characters, other than somewhat with the main dude, Harris' character, and of course the girl.  I hope the girl is actually part of the true story, otherwise, it would be a weird break from fidelity to reality considering they missed a lot of narrative opportunities.

 

This movie reminds me of Never Let Me Go, in its slow burner subdued take on an interesting premise.  Although, that film(NLMG) was far more succesfull with what it was trying to do, I believe.  

post #6 of 6

Just watched this and while I agree it's not top Weir, I disagree with the reasons presented above.

 

The first half of the film establishes all the characters, gets them out of the Gulag in a realistic (that is, not necessarily exciting manner in terms of cinema, but realistic), and gets them out of Siberia. I think the fact that we don't know these people until the second half is intentional. They don't know each other, why should we? In fact the only information about anyone except Janusz we get is from their own words, or from Irena. We start to know the backstories only because Irena worms it out them, and that's also the point where they become less desperate escapees to nowhere and more human beings sharing a journey.

 

I also feel the pacing of the film is intended to make us feel the long journey, not just process it intellectually. I'd say it succeeds in that, but at the cost of being perceived as "boring" by some.

 

Things I didn't like: the cliched dialogue at times made me think I was watching an Ed Zwick movie. "Tastes just like chicken" Har har. The minute they realized they were being followed I knew by who (generally) and what function that character would play. Weir is better than that.

 

Also, I really wish Weir had ended the film with the remaining travelers in India. That coda was way too sentimental and on the nose for this film. I'd rather we leave the travelers still walking, maybe not sure where they'll end up, but with hope that they'll wind up somewhere better. The ending as is shows me that Weir has stopped trusting his audience, unless the Studio and/or producers mandated it.

 

I was really impressed with the talent on display here. I'd say Ed Harris, Colin Farrel and Saorise Ronan (the chick) share the MVP honors, but everyone does well. Definetly worth a look.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › The Way Back - Post Release