The Impossible reviews

Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Okri »

Can you articulate the differences between this film and what you perceive a "Hollywood" film to be, Oscarguy?
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by The Original BJ »

I basically agree with everything Uri says about this movie, and will add that it's pretty unsettling how such a tragic occurrence as this is presented as almost a horror show fun house, full of "gotcha" moments meant to goose the audience as one grueling thing after another happens to Naomi Watts's character.

I had a debate with a (well-off, white, conservative) relative over Christmas about this movie, which basically crystallizes my feelings about it. She couldn't understand why I didn't like it, and I told her that I was really troubled by the fact that, of all the stories one could tell about a tsunami that destroyed the lives of so many poor East Asians, it's a little obtuse to focus on the rich white tourists. She countered that she liked the fact that the rich white people were portrayed as heroes, because so often wealthy whites are vilified in popular culture (?!?!?!?!?!), and would I have wanted the movie to do that? I said, of course not, but there's not even ONE major character who is non-white in the movie! She stated that when people go to the movies, they like to see characters they can relate to, so it wouldn't make economic sense for the filmmakers to have other types of characters (i.e. non-white) as protagonists. Then I said I was troubled by even the minor, mystical other Asians depicted in the movie, and appalled by what was presented to me as a happy ending: the insurance guy from Switzerland shows up to fly the protagonists off to safety, while so many left behind are suffering so much more. She said most people like happy endings in movies, and didn't think it was the movie's place to dwell on the tragedies that didn't turn out as well as the heroes' story did.

This conversation, to me, reflects the mentality to which I feel this movie was designed to serve.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by OscarGuy »

Have you seen it? Because it doesn't feel like a Hollywood production to me. That may be your impression, but it's one I unreservedly disagree with.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by dws1982 »

It may not be Hollywood in terms of where the production money came from, but it certainly appears to be "Hollywood" in terms of the mentality behind it.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by OscarGuy »

Wow. I was not aware that any of these production companies were part of Hollywood.

Apaches Entertainment
Telecinco Cinema
Mediaset España
Canal+ España
Generalitat Valenciana
Institut Valencia de Cinematografia (IVAC)
Instituto de la Cinematografía y de las Artes Audiovisuales (ICAA)

The film was constructed, produced and filmed in Spain and stars British actors. You cannot blame Hollywood for this.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Okri »

The trailer made all of Uri's complaints seem obvious, but it's still disheartening that the film actually follows through. I'm more disappointed that of all the stories that could've been told about the tsunami and the people, this is the one Hollywood chose to tell.
criddic3
Tenured
Posts: 2874
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:08 pm
Location: New York, USA
Contact:

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by criddic3 »

Uri wrote:It’s the natives who are selfless and caring, not the mother and the son, who are beneficiated by these actions. That’s my point – these 5 members of this family glide through, seemingly accepting these acts of kindness by strangers, who are just happy to be there for them, as some kind of divine right. So there’s a man who’s just happy to allow the father to use his cell phone although the battery is low. That same person joins the father only to be dumped by him once the father achieves his goal. The father leaves his small boys with a perfect stranger, accepting her to devote herself to them regardless of whatever she needs to do. The mother does take care of a stranger, but it is an angelic blond boy who’s a substitute for her little sons at a point when she believes she lost them. And once she and her son are rescued by the locals, the little boy is unceremoniously, without a second thought, left behind. These people are totally self-centered and totally oblivious of it.

And I don’t think this film was meant to be read as social criticism. It was really intended to be a life affirming piece.
Maybe it's just me, but I wasn't thinking one bit about the social status of the characters during this movie. Are we supposed to be that conscious of status? A family gets caught in a Tsunami, barely survives physically, gets help through the kindness of strangers (and help others, too, you forget -- the boy reuniting family members) and are separated for a long period of time while not knowing if the other half of their unit is even alive. Does any of that have anything to do with social status or race? Maybe it does. Maybe I'm too naive. But I didn't think of that angle at all, though I did think it disturbing that the man left the little boys with strangers (is it something the real, Spanish father did?)

A couple of points: The man who helps the father is the second person with a phone. The first person refuses to help him. Another is that the man says "there's no point to staying now" or something like that when McGregor is reunited with the boys. He doesn't exactly abandon the guy, but it's true that he doesn't turn back and acknowledge him either (but he is not unreasonably wrapped up in the moment of hugging his children).
"Because here’s the thing about life: There’s no accounting for what fate will deal you. Some days when you need a hand. There are other days when we’re called to lend a hand." -- President Joe Biden, 01/20/2021
Uri
Adjunct
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Uri »

It’s the natives who are selfless and caring, not the mother and the son, who are beneficiated by these actions. That’s my point – these 5 members of this family glide through, seemingly accepting these acts of kindness by strangers, who are just happy to be there for them, as some kind of divine right. So there’s a man who’s just happy to allow the father to use his cell phone although the battery is low. That same person joins the father only to be dumped by him once the father achieves his goal. The father leaves his small boys with a perfect stranger, accepting her to devote herself to them regardless of whatever she needs to do. The mother does take care of a stranger, but it is an angelic blond boy who’s a substitute for her little sons at a point when she believes she lost them. And once she and her son are rescued by the locals, the little boy is unceremoniously, without a second thought, left behind. These people are totally self-centered and totally oblivious of it.

And I don’t think this film was meant to be read as social criticism. It was really intended to be a life affirming piece.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by OscarGuy »

Uri. I honestly think you are trying WAY too hard to hate the movie. While the end partially supports your thesis, there are many moments in the film where money doesn't buy happiness or success. Such as when the natives take in the wife and son. They don't care if they are white or black or non-native. They share of themselves in the face of need. I find that far more compelling than what you suggest. You see the details you want to see and ignore the ones don't fit into your thesis. I don't entirely disagree with your commentary, I just think it's misapplied.

Let's also remember that director Juan Antonio Bayona is Spanish and that his first film was a Spanish-language horror film starring Spanish actors. As I recall, it was his decision to change the skin color of his protagonists from white to brown. I do not know his specific reason, whether it was to try to sell the story to multiple markets or if there was some other artistic statement he was hoping to make. If he WAS attempting to comment about society the way Uri suggests, then perhaps it was a conscious decision to go white and that the film is actually SUPPORTING Uri's thesis intentionally, which would give it a different viewpoint altogether. Perhaps, Uri, you should submit your thesis to the director and see what he has to say about it?
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Uri
Adjunct
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:37 pm
Location: Israel

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Uri »

No wonder Witherspoon and Jolie are fans. This film is a prime product of a certain Darwinist, capitalistic state of mind since it’s all about celebrating the motion that the privileges of being white, rich, English speaking and having the best travelers insurance money can buy are enough to ensure one would be able to safely separate oneself from the horrors the Plebeians are submitted to. This very blond onscreen family (the original family members are far darker looking) manages to survive these hardships by coalescing into a tight cocoon which separates them from the outside world. Their ability to be totally committed to sticking together at all cost, relegating anything and anyone else into mere tools which are there to promote this target is seen as some kind of heroism. And the metaphorical cocoon actually becomes an actual one by the finale, when the reunited family is on board of the private jet, courtesy of the insurance company, all alone with plenty of vacant space, flying away blissfully, leaving behind all those less fortunate people, many of them could have been rescued by being allowed on this plane. Then again, let’s face it, solidarity is vastly overrated.

It’s a reassuring tale for those who, like these people, belong to a very protected, pampered minority. And this reassurance is served, narrative wise, by avoiding any real conflict. It’s a very straight forward string of events without any trace of moral, spiritual or social dilemma one might except in a situation like this. So the performances here are by definition, regardless of whatever the actors are capable of, extremely limited, almost mechanical. Endorsing this kind of performance as a manifestation of some kind of acting greatness is, for me, an indication of a total lack of understanding of what acting should be about. But what do I know, compared with the two grand thespians mentioned here.
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6377
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by anonymous1980 »

I'm starting to suspect Naomi Watts might be a stronger contender for the win than previously thought and The Impossible might Blind Side its way to a Best Picture nomination. Oscar pundits all think it's Jessica Chastain vs. Jennifer Lawrence. But they're forgetting that Naomi Watts is more of a "veteran" than either of those two and might be seen as more "due". Her role is also much more traditionally Oscar-baity than either Jessica's or Jennifer's. Plus she's still a hot babe. Reese Witherspoon and Angelina Jolie are openly campaigning for her as well. I think we're underestimating her.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Big Magilla »

Reza wrote:Naomi Watts is the frontrunner according to Ebert.
He's says a front-runner the front-runner.
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10031
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Reza »

Naomi Watts is the frontrunner according to Ebert.


Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

The Impossible
A natural disaster, a sea of emotion

Release Date: 2012

Ebert Rating: ****

By Roger Ebert Dec 19, 2012

The tsunami that devastated the Pacific Basin in the winter of 2004
remains one of the worst natural disasters in history. Although I
assumed its climax, as shown in Clint Eastwood's film "Hereafter"
(2010), would never be surpassed, that was before I had seen "The
Impossible." Here is a searing film of human tragedy.

We were London in 2004 when the disaster struck, and later we sat
mesmerized in Biarritz, watching the news on television. Again and
again, the towering wall of water rose from the sea, tossing trucks,
buses and its helpless victims aside. Surely this was a blow from hell.

The victims in Eastwood's film beheld it afar on home video. In
director Juan Antonio Bayona's "The Impossible," they seem lost in
it, engulfed by it, damned by it.

As "The Impossible" begins, all is quiet at a peaceful resort beach
in Thailand. Seconds later, victims are swept up like matchsticks.
The film is dominated by human figures: a young British couple, Maria
and Henry Bennett (Naomi Watts and Ewan McGregor), and their three
young sons, Lucas, Simon and Thomas (Tom Holland, Oaklee Pendergast
and Samuel Joslin). All five fear they will never see their loved ones again.

In the earlier Eastwood film, they seem the victims of cruel destiny
singling out a fate, perhaps foretold. In the Bayona film, have they
been doomed by destiny? Seated in a dark theater, I reached out my
hand for that of my wife's. She and I had visited the same beach and
discussed visiting it with our children and grandchildren. An icy
finger ran slowly down our spines.

Such a connection can be terrifying. What does it mean? We are the
playthings of the gods. As the film's heroine, Naomi Watts powerfully
becomes a front-runner for an Academy Award. Its eldest young hero,
Lucas (Holland), separated from all, seeks tirelessly for fellow
family members. How did anyone possibly survive? It takes a lot of
courage for the little boy to bravely try to help others.

Spoilers follow, although the trailer and TV commercials reveal many
of them. I'm happy I was blindsided by the story. We meet the
Bennetts aboard a flight beginning their family holiday in Khao Lak,
Thailand. We almost feel, rather than hear, a deeply alarming shift
in the atmosphere. Something is fundamentally wrong. We see the
tsunami from the tourists' point of view. There is a shift in the
universe, leaving behind a dazed group whose world is a jumble of
destruction. They wander through the wreckage.

Maria is terrifyingly knocked through a glass wall and realizes she
can see her son Lucas' tiny head and body struggling to stay afloat
in the surging flood waters. With indomitable strength and courage,
she clings to debris, and they find themselves in a makeshift
hospital that seems to have been somehow cobbled together. We realize
she is the most seriously injured and begins to drift into and out of
consciousness. She is a medical doctor and applies emergency first
aid to herself.

Henry, tough and plucky, screams out the names of his two younger
sons and loads them onto a truck bound for higher ground. The
geographical layout miraculously seems halfway familiar to us after
dozens of hours of cable news. All of those YouTube videos uploaded
by strangers have been populated by characters we think of as people we know.

The film's most dramatic sequences focus on Lucas, assigning himself
the role of his mother's lifeguard and protector. Now again, at
another holiday season, this film becomes a powerful story of a
family's cohesive strength.

Director Juan Antonio Bayona and writer Sergio G. Sanchez combine
visual effects in this film that are doubly effective because they
strive to do their job without calling undue attention. It is a mark
of great acting in a film when it succeeds in accomplishing what it
must precisely when it is required. "The Impossible" is one of the
best films of the year.

Cast & Credits

Henry Ewan McGregor
Maria Naomi Watts
Lucas Tom Holland
SimonOaklee Pendergast
Old woman Geraldine Chaplin
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 6163
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by flipp525 »

I saw The Impossible tonight. The opening sequence of the film is incredibly realistic and emotionally jarring. It was a traumatic viewing experience, similar to what I felt during the first 20 minutes of Flight earlier this year. It really captures the utter devastation of the 2004 Tsunami in Southeast Asia in the shock of its first hit and beyond. Very well done.

Naomi Watts is very effective as the struggling-to-survive-mother and she does have several harrowing moments in which to do some real physical work. But she disappears for a chunk in the middle and is bed-ridden for much of the film. She is very good in the role, but I didn't feel like I was seeing anything completely revelatory. I've heard talk that she could possibly be the frontrunner and I can only view that as "impossible". I'd think her spot would be more vulnerable this year than it's shaping up to be.

The real star of the film (and best in show) is Tom Holland who plays Watts' and Ewan McGregor's oldest son, Lucas. He carries a significant portion of the film and provides the most organic emotional resonance up until the end. It's an excellent juvenile performance. He's a revelation.

Quite random (but good) Geraldine Chaplin cameo.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: The Impossible reviews

Post by Big Magilla »

'The Impossible'
Review
Grade: D+

Published: Monday, September 10th 2012 at 2:30 PM

After 20 minutes, the emotional leash on The Impossible is at its limit. After 40 minutes we've heard enough screaming and pained exasperations to last a lifetime. The final hour is sopping with melodrama so contrived I'd love to see someone try and convince me I was watching a story that's supposedly true.

We're told this is the story of a family separated during the 2004 tsunami that hit the coast of Thailand on December 26, 2004. As the text fades away, two solitary words remain emblazoned on screen... "true story". I saw this and believed the emphasis remained not only for added dramatic effect, but because I was about to see the most honest account of the story director Juan Antonio Bayona (The Orphanage) could provide. Yeah right!

The film begins by introducing us to Maria (Naomi Watts), Henry (Ewan McGregor), Lucas (Tom Holland), Simon (Oaklee Pendergast) and Thomas (Samuel Joslin). They settle in to their resort bungalow, let loose some Chinese lanterns on Christmas Eve, open presents and capture family movies on Christmas Day and settle in poolside a day later. Henry is playing with the boys in the pool while Maria reads a book in the sun when a massive wave rises from the sea, sweeping away everything in its path.

Maria and Lucas are separated from Henry, Simon and Thomas as the massive current takes them deeper inland. The effects during the scene are astonishing. Palm trees bend and give way under the pressure of the water, cars are floating by and Maria and Lucas are pummeled by floating debris, sustaining injuries that will make the journey to safety much more difficult.

It's a harrowing and effective sequence. A mother's desire to protect her son and a son unable to see his mother in pain works to great dramatic effect. With the destroyed landscape surrounding them and their injuries taken into account, they have a long and arduous road ahead of them and they are only half of the story. Henry and the boys have their own journey to make and you better believe tough times are ahead.

All things considered, one problem the movie faces is the fact there isn't enough story to tell. Dramatic license was clearly taken as the story progresses and once the tsunami has passed not enough is left to sustain any kind of feature running time, even at only 98 minutes long. The only way it can attempt to keep you invested is through the characters' constant pain and suffering as they try to reunite with one another. If it isn't physical pain, it's emotional loss or the recounting the story to loved ones over the phone.

It's easy to feel compassion for their plight and the screenplay goes to great, melodramatic lengths to make sure the human spirit is just as much the highlight of the film as is a family's love for one another. But it is presented in such a heavy-handed, obvious manner with one of the worst narrative devices used late in the film to bring tension to the picture that you end up losing interest altogether.

The most surprising thing is that it was written by Sergio G. Sanchez who wrote The Orphanage for Bayona, a film so subtle and delicate in narrative it practically hums its dramatic beats while The Impossible screams at the top of its lungs. The story consistently beats you over the head to the point you're numb to the characters' struggle and resorts to terribly dismissive dialogue in the latter moments that all you can do is begin to chuckle at the contrivances.

It's really too bad it all had to end so poorly because the first 20 minutes are quite strong with Watts working her ass off in what looked like a tough role to begin with and Holland is also quite strong as much of the heavy lifting is placed on the young actor's (who looks a lot like Jamie Bell) shoulders.

Overall, it's a film that hits hard in its opening and hopes it has softened you up enough along the way to tug at your heartstrings in the end. I'm sure it will end up working for some, but for me I got to the point where I'd just had enough.

GRADE: D+
Post Reply

Return to “2012”