The Life of Chuck (EUA, 2024)
Original title: The Life of Chuck
Director: Mike Flanagan
Writer/Screenplay: Mike Flanagan, inspired by a novel written by Stephen King
Main cast: Karen Gillan, Mark Hamill, Tom Hiddleston, Kate Siegel, Lauren LaVera, Molly C. Quinn, Matthew Lillard and Jacob Tremblay
Runtime: 110 minutes (1°50’)
“Charles Krantz. 39 great years! Thanks, Chuck!”. This is the message that appears in the three acts of the feature film directed by Mike Flanagan, best known for his experiences in horror such as The Haunting of Hill House (2018) and Doctor Sleep (2019). Thus, inspired by the versatility of horror master Stephen King, Flanagan wants to demonstrate his multiple skills in a genre that mixes science fiction, drama and comedy to bring us an inspiring message about life.
Once again, we’re faced with a film in which it would be preferable to arrive at the session knowing as little as possible about the plot, something quite difficult in times of revealing trailers and spoilers on the internet. We have some moments of the life of an especially ordinary man being put on screen so that we understand how each personal story is particularly interesting and contains a universe of unique possibilities that lead to an inevitable ending. With this unrevealing way of explaining the plot, it’s already possible to realize that we aren’t dealing with a film that will bring strong cosmic horror, but rather a reflection on our existence.
Even though there are no ghostly presences, the film seems to orbit in a universe very similar to Flanagan’s Netflix series, where several elements need to come together to create a final result that’s as predictable as it’s unexpected, giving a wink to the most attentive viewer. In this sense, the movie works very well, giving all the necessary clues to reach its conclusion without necessarily spoiling the experience of those watching it for the first time.
We are introduced to a three-act story, starting with the final act, in which a professor and his ex-wife are trying to understand, in the midst of a world that’s collapsing, who is the Chuck mentioned on posters around the city with the fateful phrase “Charles Krantz. 39 great years! Thanks, Chuck!”. Then, we move on to a charming second act in which a specific event is narrated in which a man and a woman perform a beautiful spontaneous dance performance led by a drummer playing for tips. And finally, we have the third act, which tells the story of a boy raised by his grandparents, with his grandfather being terrorized by something in his attic. It’s only in the last act that all the elements presented make sense, but unfortunately when all the elements are aligned, the effect is disappointing.
This happens because the first two acts are so much more interesting when understood as a mystery, that solving everything through a key to understanding ends up actually removing layers of meaning that the work took care to create previously. The path that leads to the climax is more interesting than the climax itself, which is a problem for viewers. After resolving the feeling that the film’s mystery has been solved, there’s little room to reflect on it after leaving the theater.
Even so, it’s necessary to remember that the feature film makes visual jokes with cinematographic genres at all times and ends up being almost an eulogy to audiovisual. All of its technique is refined, with equally good performances that create a fun to watch feature film and which works well with the audience. But unfortunately, its impact is limited to its duration.
