Directed By Oliver Hermanus

Starring – Bill Nighy, Aimee Lou Wood, Alex Sharp

The Plot – In 1950s London, a humorless civil servant (Nighy) decides to take time off work to experience life after receiving a grim diagnosis.

Rated PG-13 for some suggestive material and smoking

LIVING | Official Trailer (2022) – YouTube

POSITIVES

“Living” didn’t have to be set in the 1950’s, but I’m glad it was because doing so allowed Hermanus his single best direction to date, with an artistic merit that can only be described as transformative. From the very opening imagery inside of a 1.48:1 aspect ratio that remains consistent throughout, the film establishes immersive essence inside of London, complete with grainy newsreel footage, side-scrolling editing schemes, intricacies in set designs and wardrobe choices, boldly lettered opening credits, and a weathered color pallet in presentation that not only offers a refreshing homage to 50’s cinema, but also matches the thematic ambition of a profoundly layered screenplay originated by the late great Akira Kurosawa. As expected, the film’s creative storytelling does lend itself to the dark and devastating circumstances of impending death, with the news materializing in the opening ten minutes of the movie, but it’s the inspirational trek the film and its character study takes that frees it from ever being a wet blanket of an engagement, in turn exploring some fascinating angles of fearlessness from the diagnosis that really affords us the vantage point of witnessing our protagonist living for the first time ever, when responsibilities and priorities take a backseat to urgency. The themes and lessons in everything pertaining to love and lasting legacies never feels cheesy or obvious in the context of its garnering, and considering we the audience immediately know the inevitable outcome of where the film is headed, it’s shocking that it never feels plagued by the predictability that could’ve easily gotten the better of it, but didn’t in the eyes of such a compelling protagonist who we experience everything through. This is where Nighy takes over, completely justifying every bit of his Academy Award nomination with a stoicism that never relents despite so much of his performance burdened by the palpable fear that hangs overhead. Nighy never requires volume or vitriol to sell his intent, instead relying on the sternly subliminal of the character’s determination factor that makes him such a driving force for good in a world with obstructed priorities. But while Nighy will bask in the glow of Oscar limelight, another artist was severely robbed of it, and that’s composer Emilie Levienaise-Farrouch, who easily summons one of my favorite scores of the year. This is my first experience with Emilie’s work, but it’s clear that she taps into a consciousness into the film that not only rubs off faithfully to the context of the aforementioned timely element of the film’s appeal, but also as complexly versatile pieces of music on their own merit, which unfortunately didn’t receive the deserved awards consideration, but did attain in me a fan for a lifetime who can’t wait to see what she composes next.

NEGATIVES

There’s very little to get cynically frayed about with respects to the movie’s inferior qualities, but if I was ever truly tested, it’s within the third act pay-off of the film, which I felt wasn’t paced precisely enough to resolve matters with the most impactful momentum. To be clear, the entertainment factor of the pacing isn’t the problem, but rather the unraveling of events, with the big moment in question happening a bit too early, with 35 minutes of the film still left to explore. Part of my problem is certainly that I could’ve used more of Nighy in the vulnerable stages of his diagnosis, but the bigger issue is in what remains without him: a group of supporting characters whom we’ve spent little to no time getting to know throughout the duration of the 97 minute run time. If they were fleshed out a little better in feeling like anything other than the one-dimensional types they are, then the film probably could’ve capably omitted the immense shadow left behind by Nighy, but as it stands it’s noticeably weaker when he’s not present, leading to a climax that can’t quite measure up to the superior first two acts. Beyond this, my only other problem with the film is an absence of dramatic heft that underwhelms the established conflict and requires Nighy to do more of the heavy lifting throughout a mostly dry encompassing. I get the point that Hermanus is constructing a film that’s inspired to depict the beauty of life, rather than the perils of prognosis, but every dynamic or secret unaddressed keeps it from fully grasping the extent of its dramatic potential, in turn omitting the film of the defining moment worthy of permanent stay in the memories of its audience.

OVERALL
As a remake, “Living” proves its themes and messages of cherished urgency timeless with a thorough exploration through the eyes of a man with nothing left to lose, but as a transformative expressionist piece, it’s the coming out party for Hermanus, who constructs what is easily his most ambitiously complete production to date in vividly rendering the essence of 1952 London, England. Though the film occasionally blunders during a meandering third act with underwhelming supporting characters, it’s Nighy’s career best turn that holds it all together, immortalizing the film as so much more than another Oscar contender.

My Grade: 8/10 or B+