As one film-fan friend and I made a very worthwhile drive all the way to State College for The Life of Chuck, our rambling conversation lamented the ongoing onslaught of sequels, remakes and franchise spin-offs. With so many dreary and derivative offerings, it sometimes seems like Hollywood no longer wants to take chances.
But lo and behold: As closing credits rolled on this fine new film — which is based on a lesser-known Stephen King work — I turned to my pal and quietly affirmed: “I think we finally saw an original movie.”
Indeed, it’s not like any other picture I can think of. And I’m struggling with how to interest readers without giving away its offbeat plot.
Perhaps I can begin by saying I was attracted to a King-inspired story that wasn’t horror; there sure is a solid track record on those. (See, for instance, Stand by Me, The Green Mile and, of course, Shawshank.)
I was also drawn by its strong cast, with the ever-reliable Tom Hiddleston in the title role — plus Chiwetel Ejiofor, Mia Sara and Jacob Tremblay. And there’s Mark Hamill with something truly rare in recent years: a role he can really sink his teeth into.
They are all excellent, with Sara a real standout. (Here she’s a grandmother — for those who recall her so young in Ferris Bueller!) Matthew Lillard (Scream, Scooby Doo) has one keenly memorable scene; plus there’s a virtual cameo for Heather Langenkamp, from the Elm Street franchise.
And tapping Nick Offerman for narration was a stroke of genius.
By including several fright-film actors — along with a glimpse of the ’58 Plymouth from King’s Christine — director Mike Flanagan (best known for King-ly horror like Doctor Sleep and Hill House on Netflix) pays homage to his genre while stepping outside it for something very different.
Indeed, the well-reviewed Chuck has been hailed as inspiring and uplifting in the manner of It’s a Wonderful Life. And that is the movie’s great strength.
In keeping with King’s often-brutal worldview — punctuated by unaccountable suffering, loss and death — the film pulls no punches when it comes to grief and pain. Yet somehow it manages to affirm all the joy and beauty of life while tracking with its ordinary but ever-hopeful protagonist.
You won’t get much sense of this at first, however.
Instead, The Life of Chuck starts out as an apocalyptic film, showing us much about humanity as it reacts to a disintegrating world straight out of Revelation. But then it shifts smoothly into other genres: song-and-dance, family drama, metaphysics, ghost story, tragedy — there’s even some mystery, as later scenes (which are actually earlier) fill in the gaps from earlier puzzles (which are actually later).
Do I have your interest now?
If so, I should admit that Chuck is not perfect, as it doesn’t always fulfill the promise of its admittedly lofty ambitions. But it is unique — and that’s danged refreshing at the movies these days.
