Beasts of the Southern Wild Review

Alright, I'm probably gonna get a lot of flack for this review, but, as always, I don't care. This is all my opinion, and you don't have to listen to me if you don't want to. That being said, if you liked this movie...I would suggest leaving now. I would hate to offend you. Just kidding, I aim to offend.

Beasts of the Southern Wild tells the story of Hushpuppy (played by Quvenzhane Wallis) and her father Wink (played by Dwight Henry) and paints a picture of what their lives are like in the "Bathtub." This takes place in a future where the polar icecaps are melting and the poor have, essentially, been left outside of the levies to drown.

Now, don't get me wrong, Beasts was a fairly well-acted and directed film (both of which I will cover later.) But what really killed me was the script and the pacing. I thought the entire concept had so much promise, being a semi-sci-fi/fantasy film, but being rooted in reality. Almost like Never Let Me Go. But this film just failed to capture my interest at any point. It really just seemed like the entire script was black people screaming about really mundane shit. All I really took away from this film is: in the future, apparently all black people are poor and homeless. Oh, and irrationally angry. And apparently they solve this by getting drunk. Ummm...right....?

Where the movie really shined, to me, was in the direction. This was Benh Zeitlin's first feature film, and I was really impressed with what he did with it. Several of the scenes only held my interest because they were just so beautiful to look at. It reminded me a lot of watching Tree of Life, where nothing interesting was happening, but every shot was so well framed and the editing was so spot on, that I couldn't look away. Now that I've seen this movie, I can honestly say I'm glad that Zeitlin got the Oscar nom for Best Director, but he definitely didn't deserve it over Affleck, Bigelow or Tarantino. People keep saying that he "stole" their spot, but I think that he earned his spot more than Haneke (and possibly David O. Russell.) I know he won't win, but I'm really glad to see such a strong first performance from an up and coming director. I just hope he didn't peak too early...

Another strength in the film was the acting. Wallis and Henry were amazing together. It's really stunning when you see a nine year-old girl deliver such a moving performance. In a movie that is, essentially, two people walking (or boating) around for 90 minutes, its really on the actors' shoulders to keep the viewer interested (and the director, to an extent.) And with such a shitty script, it took even more than usual from these actors. Both of them showed such emotion and developed their characters so well that it was hard not to enjoy the performances. I think all of my rage about this movie really came from the script, so I can't say anything bad about the acting. Wallis was great (especially for her age) and it took a lot for Henry to keep up, but he definitely did. I'm surprised I haven't heard more about him this award season. I guess he is just being overshadowed by Wallis.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overall, I didn't hate this movie. I didn't really love it, either. I will, most likely, never see this movie again. Even though it was short, if felt like an eternity when there is no real plot development. A movie really can't be carried by two actors and some pretty direction. It can't. Not with an abysmal script. I imagine two retarded monkeys could have written something better. No joke. I think Zeitlin should stick to directing and leave the writing to more talented folks.

Writing: 2/10

Directing: 8/10

Acting: 8.5/10

Pacing: 3/10

Rewatchability: 2/10

Score: 4.7/10