Life Itself

Greetings again from the darkness. The theory is that heavy dramas find it challenging to attract an audience during times when real life and newscasts are filled with daily downers. One need only tune in to the local news to see that we are in just such a "downer" period right now, and it would be difficult to argue that this latest from writer/director Dan Fogelman ("This is Us") is anything but the weightiest of heavy dramas - with an emphasis on the preciousness of time and life.

It's highly likely that this film will fall into the love it or hate it category. It's a sure bet that many critics will bash it as pretentious and overly melodramatic. It will be labeled a manipulative tear-jerker with outlandish coincidences. I won't debate the merits of that criticism, and instead will remind all that creative fictional storytelling can often seem fantastical and improbable, but that doesn't mean it can't also be entertaining, thought-provoking, and carry a worthwhile message.

Because of the overlapping and intertwining stories, characters and timelines, filmmaker Fogelman breaks the film into 5 chapters. This should allow most viewers to keep track. Chapter 1 is entitled "The Hero" and features Samuel L Jackson as the unreliable narrator - a recurring theme throughout. It's also in this chapter that we meet Will and Abby. Will (Oscar Isaac) is an emotionally unstable man who has been in a mental institute for the 6 months since his wife Abby (Olivia Wilde) left him. He is despondent and attending required sessions with a therapist played by Annette Bening, and we get cutesy flashbacks to the Will and Abby courtship. See, Abby and Will are the kind of couple who see themselves as Tarantino characters, argue about the merits of Bob Dylan (poet or Chewbacca noises?), and come up with the worst dog name in cinematic history.

Chapter 2 is where we meet Dylan Dempster, daughter of Will and Abby, and granddaughter of Mandy Patinkin and Jean Smart. She is named after the poet songwriter, not the Star Wars character. There is a cool effect that evolves Dylan's face from a child surrounded by death and tragedy to a just-turned-21 year old played by Olivia Cooke (THOROUGHBREDS), who also happens to front an atrocious punk rock band and flashes quite the temper. Chapter 3 shifts from New York City to Carmona, Spain where we are introduced to "The Gonzalez Family" of Javier (an outstanding Sergio Peris-Mencheta), his wife Isabel (another excellent performance from Laia Costa, VICTORIA), and Javier's boss Saccione (Antonio Banderas). Javier works Saccione's olive orchard, as he and Isabel start a family. Chapter 4 focuses on their son Rodrigo (Alex Monner) as he grows into a talented young man while his beloved mother suffers with a debilitating disease. Finally, in Chapter 5 we meet Elena Dempsey-Gonzalez (Lorenza Izzo) and the story comes full circle ... or all the dots are connected. Even the identity of the narrator who took Samuel L Jackson's place after Chapter 1 is revealed.

Filmmaker Fogelman seems to be better suited as a writer (CRAZY STUPID LOVE) than as a director (DANNY COLLINS), and his script here is extraordinary in its ambition. While there may be some developments that seem contrived, there are also some terrific moments throughout. We see a cross-continent ripple effect that makes this the CRASH of family dramas (the 2004 movie, not the one from 1996). Who is a hero and who is a villain is one of the key elements here, but Fogelman seems intent on making the point that traumatic events and tragedy shape who we are as people. The message is that our ability to bounce back - to "stand up" after being knocked down, is really what defines the human experience. For those who keep an open mind, the emotional jolts provided here will likely resonate.

Unpredictable, emotional, well- written dialogue, heart felt performances. When I read the bad reviews I was in shock. How can anybody not love this movie ? It touches on the essence of relationships, from the happy moments to the tragic moments. Please ignore the bad reviews and give this movie a chance. It deserves it.

At the time when I watched this, the rating was 6.6. I hope it gets higher after people discover more of Dan Fogelman thanks to This Is Us, because this rating is just not fair.

I do not agree with the reviews that say this movie is "This Is Us in 2 hours." Though I do love the show, this movie is something else in itself, and it deserves to be recognized for it.

What it tackles is 'life itself' with all its ups and downs, and believe me, I'm no mushy romance lover. It's far from being sappy, it's so on point, subtle and down-to-earth that I have difficulty defining it as just another romantic movie or a typical drama. There were parts that I literally cried out in awe, covered my eyes in fear, or sat on the edge of my seat like it's one of those almost-frustrating thriller movies that slap you in the face at every turn. Of course it has its bittersweet moments, but I think this movie deserves a chance--and a higher rating--even from the harshest critics and cynics.

I was hesitant to invest the time in this film after reading critic reviews but I can absolutely say they were truly too harsh with Life Itself. No surprise but it's very reminiscent of 'This Is Us' and instead of an episodic narrative it's condensed to a two hour multi-chaptered film. While it did feel closer to three hours at points, there's a clear disconnect between the current reviews and the actual film performance. It was very emotional and most of the movie I had a lump in my throat. The way it's structured it's almost like three movies in one but the way it all comes together was so fascinating to watch as an audience member. My vote is you give it a shot, it's a really creative story.

So, what does that tell us? That the only truly reliable narrator is life itself. But life itself is also a completely unreliable narrator because it is constantly misdirecting and misleading us and taking us on this journey where it is literally impossible to predict where it's gonna go next.

Occasionally I come across such a film that knows how to surprise me. At first, I wondered what it was all about. Usually, I take a wait-and-see approach and see where it's going. If there's no improvement in terms of story and it remains quite uninteresting, I'll give up. Fortunately, this rarely happens. And certainly not in the case of "Life itself". As the film progressed, it became (at least for me) more fascinating. Before I knew it, I was looking at the credits with astonishment and I thought to myself: "Wow, what the hell was this". A film that succeeds in making me quiet and paralyzed. That's quite an achievement.

In retrospect, I was somewhat surprised at the negative comments regarding this film. I do understand there are people who are allergic to tragedy, drama, and sadness in films. But the bursts of tirades being fired at this movie, are rather exaggerated in my opinion. Or is it my anarchist nature that is rebelling? Calling "Life itself" the "Worst movie of the year", is a bit shortsighted and slightly simplistic. I suppose those who did, only watched the crème de la crème of films that year. I dare to admit that I've seen much worse last year. Again it looks like a snowball effect after the appearing of some reviews of prominent film critics. And expressions such as "semi-intellectual", "philosophical ramblings" and "overly melodramatic" are copied excessively so that it resembles a we-against-them situation. Or is it an acute case of navel-gazing? Or are they all male critics who, just like Dan Fogelman said in an interview, hate films with emotions? Maybe a defense mechanism so nobody would say that their tough torso contains too many female hormones. Oh well. If you focus on the correctness of timelines and the correct layout of the different time sections only, you may lose sight of the larger picture.

I am convinced that among those notorious critics, there are some who unknowingly believe in certain things that would fit perfectly into the context of this film. Isn't it so that people speak of a soul mate who exists somewhere on this planet? That there's this one special person somewhere who's a good fit for you? And isn't the term karma used all the time? Does coincidence exist? Or coincidentally not? And then the pinnacle of mysterious power that millions believe in. The divine power that watches over us and directs our lives. I bet some of those opinion writers have used these terms before? Or that they want to save their soul every week by solemnly entering a church somewhere? Well, not me. Am I too realistic? Too suspicious? Could be. But I believe that a combination of circumstances and destiny can form the basis of a story such as "Life itself".

Without a doubt, the first chapter is the one with the most impact. A chapter full of confusion, psychological distress, and trauma. But also a chapter about eternal love. Finding that one specific person who fits you unconditionally. Will (Oscar Isaac) and Abby (Olivia Wilde) are such a couple. The living proof of the well-known saying about the pot and the lid. Until one day Abby leaves Will, and Will's life immediately becomes a mess. A ruin that needs to be restored with the help of a psychologist. It's a chapter in which the storyline wraps itself ingeniously around Will's past and present. With and without Abby. With and without the will to live. A chapter full of flashbacks. A chapter introduced by Samuel L. Jackson who represents the "unreliable storyteller". The subject of Abby's thesis. But at the same time, he plays a character from a script that Abby and Will wanted to write together. "A husband and wife Tarantino". That's why Samuel L. Jackson uses his "Pulp Fiction" intonation. And then there are some who claim that his contribution adds little to the story. well, you just have to want to see it, I guess.

The chapter ends shockingly. A blow of a sledgehammer, as it were. And from then on the story begins to spread intercontinental. From the rebellious Dylan (Olivia "Me and Earl and the Dying Girl" Cooke), the end result of the wonderful love between Abby and Will, whose life is dominated by death. To Spain, where the rich olive oil manufacturer Mr. Saccione (Antonio Banderas) tells his life story to one of his workers, Javier Gonzalez (Sergio Peris-Mencheta). And although these two different family trees initially have nothing in common with each other, the two storylines melt together in a bewildering manner. But you have to discover for yourself how it all gets connected.

The only flaw I could think of is the predictability at a certain moment. At first, you don't have a clue what's going on. Once you've passed that point, you can already see where it's going. If I were a nitpicker, I would use this to criticize "Life itself" harshly. But the inventive story and the sometimes excellent acting of a group of well-known actors make this a side issue. Perhaps it all seems doom and gloom. As if real life only produces sorrow and misery. Where you experience one setback after the other. Everyone has bad periods in their lives and emotionally difficult experiences. But perhaps the message is also that there is always light at the end of the tunnel. I don't believe in coincidence or destiny. I don't believe in a heavenly power that determines our lives and sets out the route in our lives. But admit it. The way the story developed here could actually also occur in real life. Unfortunately, sometimes life is indeed an unreliable narrator.