NEVER LET ME GO (2009 - DRAMA / ROMANCE) **** out of *****
(the Happy Police have their work cut out for them here...)
CAST: Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, Andrew Garfield, Sally Hawkins, Charlotte Rampling, Ella Purnell, Charlie Rowe.
DIRECTOR: Mark Romanek
WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some thoroughly depressing plot developments straight ahead.
IT'S LIKE THIS: Hello, folks... Today, I have a riddle for you. How is it possible to for you to like a film that stars one of your favorite actors, is well-written and well-acted, tackles a profound and relevant subject matter that makes you think, has a terrific supporting cast, has a beautiful musical score, is based on highly-praised novel, and is a film that you like very much - but still you avoid watching it as much as possible? How can that be?
Our next review is NEVER LET ME GO, an adaptation of Kazuo Ishiguro's widely-acclaimed novel of the same title. It stars Andrew Garfield, one of my TOP 3 favorite actors. It is very well-written and well-acted (obviously, with Garfield in the lead). It tackles a profound and relevant subject matter that makes you think. Has a terrific supporting cast in the forms of Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, Sally Hawkins, and Charlotte Rampling. It has a hauntingly moving musical score composed by Rachel Portman. And it is a film that I like very much. So why then do I come up with a dozen and one excuses to avoid watching it?
The answer is simple: the movie is depressing as hell. Trust me - if you ever needed a film to bring you down - hard - from a Sappy Romantic Comedy-induced sugar high, NEVER LET ME GO is it. This is not a movie that screams "Fun! Fun! Fun!" More like: "Hara-Kiri! Hara-Kiri! Hara-Kiri!" You see, this flick is about an alternate future in which human cloning is as commonplace as Facebook accounts and I-Phones. It seems the primary use of human cloning is to have "back-up bodies" to harvest organs from when the original human gets sick. In other words, the clones are basically a collection of "spare parts" to be used when needed. Which means the clones don't really have much of a life. They are sequestered from the rest of society in "homes" deep in the countryside. And with all the inevitable organ harvesting, they also don't live long. All in all, it sucks to be a clone.
Naturally, our heroes in NEVER LET ME GO are clones. They are: (1) Tommy (Andrew Garfield), doe-eyed hottie who is friends with (2) Ruth (Keira Knightley), slutty tramp who is friends with (3) Cathy (Carey Mulligan), shy gal who secretly loves Tommy. Tommy, Cathy, and Ruth have grown up in Hailsham, which is one of those "homes" I talked about before. Picture an orphanage - but much, much, much more fucked-up. Basically, the kids at Hailsham don't have adoption to look forward to. More like losing their organs, one by one, until they "complete." Which is basically a new-fangled way to say "dying." I told you it was a depressing movie.
Anyhow, Cathy eventually becomes a "carer": someone who helps fellow donors through the process and makes things easier for them. But if you think that taking this special duty exempts Cathy from donating herself, you are sorely mistaken, my friend. Basically, it just buys her a little time - until she starts donating herself. See? This movie is beyond fucked-up. The fact that these terrible things are happening to hotties who look exactly like Andrew Garfield, Carey Mulligan, and Keira Knightley makes it even more wrong. Why, God, why!?!?! These asses are too fine to be killed off.
As if things weren't complicated enough, a love triangle develops between our heroes. Cathy has always loved Tommy, but hides it like it's the Lost Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Plus, Ruth really likes Tommy, so Cathy does what any decent friend would do: graciously stand aside to let Ruth and Tommy be together - and resign herself to masturbating while imagining what Tommy looks like buck naked. Okay, okay, Cathy doesn't actually do that last part. But, come on, if she can't fuck him, what else is she supposed to do? Ahem?
At any rate, while Ruth and Tommy are shagging the shit out of each other, Cathy busies herself with her "carer" duties. And let me just tell you that it is not a pretty walk on a Sunday afternoon. Apparently, a "carer" is like a cross between a psychologist, a nurse, and a stalker. I mean, damn, if I had to give up my organs one-by-one, will someone following me around and asking me if I'm alright over and over again, make any real goddamned difference? Don't think so.
Soon, however, Ruth begins to feel guilty for having stood in the way of Tommy and Cathy - and tries to make amends. Of course, the fact that the bitch has donated, like, three organs already and is on the verge of "completing" - AKA croaking like a fish in the desert - might have something to do with her sudden contriteness. Ruth encourages Tommy and Cathy to try to find out about that "special clause" that allows donors to live as man and wife together for a few years - before the inevitable donations begin. Ruth knows that Tommy and Cathy love each other and thinks they should plead their case.
But is there really such a clause? Or is it just another legend invented to keep the donors in line? And what about the three donations that Tommy has already made? Is it too late for him to finally have a relationship with Cathy? And what about Cathy? How long can she continue to be a "carer" before she must begin her own donations? Can Tommy and Cathy possibly have a happy ending this late in the game?
Now do you see why I hate watching this movie?
BUT, SERIOUSLY: In the opening, we talked about how some movies can be well-made, well-acted, and well-written, but still be less than pleasant experiences - due to the simple fact that they are heartbreaking. An example for me would BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, which is a bold, powerful love story about the forbidden love between two men - but is a movie that I have only watched twice because of how sad it is. While I like BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN and agree it is a very good movie, it is not one of my favorites. NEVER LET ME GO is another such film: everything about is top-notch, but I don't look forward to watching it. I have seen more NEVER LET ME GO than I have BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, and find it more bearable, but it is due mainly to the unique screen presence of Andrew Garfield, as well as Carey Mulligan's ethereal charisma.
Contrast NEVER LET ME GO with BOY A, my # 1 favorite movie of all time, which also stars Andrew Garfield in a similarly heartbreaking performance. BOY A also has the same bleak tone and downbeat ending that NEVER LET ME GO. However, the reason BOY A has the distinction of being my # 1 favorite film, while NEVER LET ME GO - despite being a quality film - doesn't even place in my TOP 20, is because BOY A has a hopeful tone and moments of joy. These moments are so visceral and vivid, courtesy of the endlessly-talented Garfield's empathic ability to make you feel what he is feeling, that you feel you are walking in Jack Burridge's (Garfield's character in BOY A) shoes. Even when things turn very dark in the end, these moments of joy and hope linger and redeem the film.
NEVER LET ME GO, on the other hand, is continually somber and brooding, with very little moments of light to punctuate the unrelenting gloom. Eventually, the film reaches its heartbreaking ending, and it feels like a heavy weight has been dropped on your shoulders - rather than taken off it. BOY A had a similarly dark and devastating ending, but due to Garfield's powerhouse performance (he won the British Oscar Award for it) and the aforementioned threads of hope in the film, it was a more haunting experience. Bottom line: I have no problem watching BOY A over and over again, even if it is sometimes a painful experience. NEVER LET ME GO, on the other hand, is another story. It is just not an experience I want to go through another time.
That's not to say it is bad film. Far from it. NEVER LET ME GO is based on Kazuo Ishiguro's celebrated novel of the same name. I have not read it, but I am told that it has a surreal, lyrical feel. You can see elements of this in the film here and there, and it works well for the film. In the end, though, the film's relentlessly sad and bleak tone kind of weighs it down. Of course, another likely reason that the film is so hard to watch is also because we care about the characters so much. Garfield, Mulligan, and Keira Knightley do excellent jobs of fleshing out their roles - which are basically innocents who are not long to this world.
Garfield, as always, acts with his eloquent brown eyes and lean physique - reminding us that playing a character is not just about dialogue. It is just as much about was is left unsaid - or said through expression, movement, and gesture. Garfield makes Tommy's gentle nature endearing - and later when his hopes are dashed in a crucial scene towards the end, Garfield also shows the volcanic emotions that have been buried for so long. While he doesn't have the same powerhouse showcase that BOY A gave him (mainly because he has to share center stage with two other leads) this is still a very strong performance that deserves a high place in his body of work.
Ever since her attention-getting role in AN EDUCATION, Mulligan has always registered as someone who is poised and mature beyond her years. Her deep, rich voice has a way of contradicting her fresh-faced features, making her an interesting paradox. This dichotomy is what makes her perfect for the role of Cathy - a young person who has been forced to grow up and take responsibility for those around her. Time after time, Cathy takes the gracious route, from nobly stepping aside to let Ruth get together with Tommy (even though Cathy loves Tommy herself), to taking on the duties of a "carer" to make her life easier for her fellow donors. And when Tommy and Cathy finally manage to get together at long last for a brief period of time at the end of the film, it is a small ray of light through all the darkness. Cathy is my second favorite character in the film, and Mulligan plays her with understated grace.
Knightley has more atypical role - for her, anyway. We have gotten used to seeing Knightley playing the sweet but feisty lead in films like BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM and PRIDE AND PREJUDICE that it comes as somewhat of a surprise to see her play someone as unpleasant as Ruth. Knightley shows her range by playing not only Ruth's selfishness, but also her guilt and contrite desire to make things right for Tommy and Cathy at the end for having stood in their way for so long. Kudos must be given to Knightley for stepping out of her comfort zone by taking on this part that require more from her than to smile and be likable - and doing it well.
Charlotte Rampling and Sally Hawkins are just as accomplished as the three leads. Rampling's icily aloof beauty has not dimmed as she has aged, and she is perfect for the role of the Miss Emily, headmistress of Hailsham, who seems a bit of a mysterious wild card. Is she sympathetic to the donors? Or could she care less if they are all destined to die young? Rampling never allows her character to be read accurately by anyone around her, allowing only small glimpses of softness here and there, which makes her so fascinating. Hawkins, on the other hand, is completely transparent and winning as Miss Lucy, a teacher deeply sympathetic to the plight of her students, but know there is nothing she can do about it. She ably expresses Miss Lucy's conflicted emotions about her wards and their fate - and the film's second best scene (the first best scene is Tommy's emotional meltdown at the end) is when Miss Lucy slowly realizes that the staff of Hailsham have been lying to the students about their purpose in life and withholding the truth from them. Miss Lucy does the painful right thing by telling them everything in a scene that Hawkins plays with exquisite grace and barely-contained emotion. Miss Lucy's role is small but she is my favorite character in the film - and Sally Hawkins makes her mark with it.
Someone said to me that a good film entertains - while a very good film makes you think. We have rated NEVER LET ME GO with **** (very good), and it is because it does make you think. It makes you appreciate that you can choose how to live your life, what to do with it, and who to love. And that is a gift. One that the boys and girls of Hailsham will never have. And while NEVER LET ME GO may not be an easy film to watch over and over again, it is most definitely a very good movie that makes you think.
