THE STORY: In Alaska, an oil drilling team struggle to survive after a plane crash strands them in the wild. Hunting the humans are a pack of wolves who see them as intruders. (via IMDb)
THE WORD: Usual patrons of movie theaters use their time at the cineplex as an escape, hence why “popcorn” films have always done so well. Let’s face it, in general there’s not a whole lot that’s more relaxing than sitting down to a good movie with snack and soda in hand. However, sometimes people are misguided and misinformed by film’s trailers to expect certain things that just aren’t in the film. An example would be the recent cases of people returning their money after realizing that there isn’t any talking in The Artist (srsly, y wuld ppl wnt 2 c a moovee w/o talkeen?! wtf). The Grey is played off as your typical disregarded January fluff. Apparently not good enough for awards season and not marketable enough for the summer, The Grey has been poured into the same release chamber as Joyful Noise, The Devil Inside, and Underworld: Awakening. Notice a trend there?
I never expected to hear anything about The Grey in terms of grandeur or artistic praise. So when loads of positive reviews began pouring in I was shocked. Neeson seems to have been playing the same “wrong man scenario” or bad ass dad character since 2007, and Carnahan hasn’t released a film worth watching since 2003. Thus making The Grey, a rare case of sorts. Marketed as a “survival tale” I’d label the premise itself as a MacGuffin. You see, the point of the film - as would be in any real life situation - is to survive, whether it be from the vicious weather, natural hazards or blood thirsty wolves. These elements distract the viewer enough to take their mind off the central element: death. While people go in expecting a “final stand” tale of man versus animal, instead is a surprisingly philosophical portrait of death. Although the motifs are at times shoved down the viewer’s throat - a character, Diaz, shouting at the wolves, “You aren’t the animals! We are!”, a pretty clear observation made after the group decides to devour a wolf and laugh over it - the subtle artistic precision by Carnahan is enough to balance the melodrama, mild philosophy, and poor comedy well enough to make the film work as a whole.
What I didn’t appreciate, is the lack of faith in the viewer. The Grey is a bold work, it truly is. But as Neeson’s Ottway screams to the sky, “Fuck faith! Earn it!”. And what credibility do cinema goers have these days? None. Mostly everything has to be spelled out for the viewer or else it goes completely over their head (I mean hell, Inception had a near hour long exposition and people still think it’s about the spinning top). There are a few cheap shots at the viewer such as the previously mentioned motif slugging, and some characters are never really developed but rather included as mere bait for death. A very cheap ploy to garner an emotional reaction that shouldn’t be substantial, because of the lack of character in the first place. Coined as a “mainstream” film, I expected many shots to cut well before they did. Carnahan gives the focus where it’s due. When the men leave a friend behind, it doesn’t cut once the men walk away, but rather a slow zoom captures the man left behind’s final moments. Overall, some of the film works and some of it really seems out of place. Many people have complained about the lack of conclusion. The film abruptly ends at what appears to be a climax, but the focus was never meant for the wolves nor the action. The conclusion satisfies all the film’s thoughts and beliefs perfectly, because Neeson’s character reaches a complacency with death. An understanding that points to the central theme so hard that it could fucking blind it. The Grey is the black sheep in a pack of white, it’s the first stand out film of the year and hopefully marks for more mainstream voiding films such as itself to come.
THE VERDICT: 76/100
INFO: Joe Carnahan | USA | 2012 | 2.35:1 | 117min
