This movie explores the theme of planet sustainability - if all humans are suddenly required by law to stop their life at 50, and stop using all electronics, then Earth can restore its resources and future generations can live without hunger, war, etc. The two main characters in the movie are the witnesses who go to people aged 50 at designated times to witness this agreement being fulfilled. I'll talk about the drawbacks of this movie first, and then mention a couple things I thought it did well.
The idea is interesting, and it starts off with some light world-building. It eases you into the concept gently. Bit by bit you learn what happens. I was really curious to see where it goes and what other themes in this concept it explores.
Unfortunately, it very quickly fell flat for me. Despite introducing a great idea, and the roles of the two people, it didn't dive deep into anything within it at all. It barely covered the basic things an average viewer would wonder when being introduced to such an idea. The concept stayed surface-level the whole time. There were no complications or intricacies with what this would mean, no drawbacks (aside from maybe one), just the immediate idea itself, and everything felt scripted and inorganic.
What's more, there was more 'telling' than 'showing'. The concept was reiterated verbally throughout the movie, and it got a bit tedious to constantly listen to the reasoning: 'it's for our planet!'. After a while, it felt more like a movie for hippies, rather than for the general public who could benefit from being encouraged to reflect on the state of our planet. I would have loved to get visual examples of how certain things could have gone wrong, or what they were alluding to when they kept saying 'it's for the planet'. It just wasn't clear. When I finished the movie, it didn't leave me with anything to really ponder, and neither did I feel like I learned anything.
The acting, unfortunately, wasn't good. I felt like I was watching a high school drama recital. And this is where the director should have been stricter on the directing part - sure, it's likely frustrating to work with someone who insists on 17 takes per shot, but the end result is usually so seamless, that people forget they're watching a movie. Here, I was constantly reminded that I'm watching some actors reciting the lines that they've recently rehearsed. The only person who really pulled through and looked and sounded natural was Sandra Oh, and she's a seasoned actress. Hopefully, the director feels more comfortable in her directing role in the future and really works with the actor for each scene until they manage to bring their lines to life.
The visuals were stunning! I'm not sure they fit the theme, because they felt a bit misplaced at times, but it was a unique touch that gave the movie some character.
The sounds was beautiful. There were a few breathtaking scenes with, ironically, the stillness of sound. It was suddenly so silent, that the whole cinema held their breath and just watched as everything stood still. Then once the sound returned, everyone went back to breathing normally. It was great.
All in all, the movie pulls a 6 because of its beautiful sound design, use of light with hopeful tones, and fairly new concept that I haven't seen often in movies. Though it would have been higher if the other points I mentioned can be improved, I was happy to have watched it.
