Gerry

Two friends (both called Gerry) take a drive out into the New Mexico wilderness to go and see the thing. Following the trail they assume will lead them right there they eventually decide they are not going to find it and decide to head back to their car. However they have been blindly hiking for hours and before long they realise that they are lost. Sleeping rough that night, they continue their trek across the desert in search of a way out, putting their friendship under stress with every passing hour.

Perhaps this is one of those like it or hate it type movies but I do dislike the way that those that love it feel the need to lash out at those that don't, claiming that they are perhaps stupid or hollow people for not getting the beauty of this movie. Personally I do slightly suspect that the viewers who fall over themselves to love this film have never really seen many films that compare and perhaps mistake being different and non-multiplex as being the same as having depth. That the film is minimalistic and different is not in question but there is no substance to this film other than what the viewer forces into their own experience of it.

Having said that the film is still hauntingly beautiful to watch. The desert landscapes are impressive and really well captured – what a shame that you do not go to the cinema just to stare at landscapes. The cast of two have nothing to do but, as they are also responsible for the concept then they have nobody else to really blame. Affleck and Damon stumble around the place vaguely improvising but they have nothing about them; most of the time I found them an intrusion in front of the landscapes that were of much more interest.

Overall then a beautiful but empty film. The landscapes are haunting but I could not find any of this beauty in the material (such as it was). Those desperately seeking something deep will find it, but that is different from the film actually having depth.

This is not a good film.

But it's not a bad film either.

Consider the blank canvas hung in the museum. Questions arise: What is this? Why is this here? Who did this? Why did they do this? And most importantly, do I care about this?

These are the type of questions you will be left with after seeing `Gerry.'

The film is painfully slow to watch, the dialogue unrewarding, the landscape more interesting than the cinematography, the characters undefined, and the plot full of holes.

And yet, the film sticks with you and makes you think... just as the blank canvas does.

After leaving the theater, you truly contemplate the strange trip you just took through the middle of nowhere while you draw parallels to your own adventures.

And for these reasons the journey is worthwhile... the film, worth seeing.

Like many who have commented on this film, right after I saw it on DVD last night, I really didn't like it. However, this morning, I really came to the conclusion that like any piece of art, once it leaves the artist, it is up for interpretation, so here is my two cents: Gerry (whether he is two persons, or one person and the alter ego, as some have suggested) is really a product of world popular culture. We wonder if he has ever read a book, or had an original thought. We expect this to be a story that give us a rich backstory (who are these guys, where did they come from, where are they going, etc) and instead we get vapid dialog about Wheel of Fortune, or perhaps a rehashing of Dungeons and Dragons? These guys HAVE no backstory.. .they watch tv, play video games, and are completely out of touch with nature and the world at large. It is only at the very end of the movie, when death looks them in the face, that the thought process is engaged - probably for the first time in thier (his) life. They reach down deep inside and finally notice which direction the sun sets in, which way is north, and think about direction. . .is this what they were looking for in the first place - why they came to the wilderness? Is this a metaphore for life? I don't want to trash the younger generation (I am 45) because one could look back to Rebel Without a Cause in the 1950's to see the emptyness of suburban American life even then.

The slow pace of the film is the antithesis of MTV quick cuts, so I doubt if the intended audience, those under 30, will be able to sit through this - and isn't that the point!

I really enjoyed this movie, largely because its style goes against so much we have become used to as modern viewers. I admit, the pace was slowwwww..... but in this age of fast-cuts, it was nice to see a director trying to do something different -- trying to create a state, rather than just tell a story. The plot is simple, two guys through lack of attention get lost in the desert. Thats it. In the next few days we follow the characters through a range of emotions--anger, worry, fear, doubt, determination, love. Central is the relationship between the two characters and the journey it takes in all its ups and downs. Here, I thought Damon and Affleck did a great job, giving their characters nuances that indicated they were friends that knew each other well. Throughout the cinematography is superb and certainly innovative. Though some scenes may be trying for some viewers (think of the scene in Lawrence of Arabia where Omar Sharif approaches from afar riding a camel), the shots are full of intensity and are visually creative. For me, the movie was a brave and largely successful attempt to give insight into a life-changing experience. I thought about it for days after.

Gus Van Sant's `Gerry' is a bit like `The Blair Witch Project' minus the sensationalistic, supernatural elements. In this two-character film, Matt Damon and Casey Affleck (both of whom co-wrote the film with Van Sant) are buddies who decide to go hiking in the desert. When Damon offhandedly suggests leaving the trail, the decision turns out to be a fateful one for the both of them. The young men are both named Gerry, an appellation which turns out to have allegorical significance, since `gerry,' we are informed, is slang for `mistake.' And these guys sure come up with a beaut.

Like `Blair Witch,' `Gerry' taps into the almost primordial fear humans have of being lost in unfamiliar, hostile territory bereft of even the most rudimentary supplies necessary for survival. It also shows how even the most seemingly insignificant decision a person makes can wind up having fatal ramifications in the end. Despite the fact that the film runs a little over 100 minutes, the three screenwriters have opted to have the characters speak as little as possible, both before and after the fateful decision. Although this does prevent us from really getting to know the men in any great depth, the purpose of the filmmakers seems to be not so much to craft a narrative-driven drama but to create a kind of lyrical tone-poem about fate and the ways in which people face the inevitability of impending death. As director, Van Sant lingers long on both his images and his scenes, probably too long for many in the audience, who may well become restless and impatient long before the closing shot has faded from the screen. Personally, I found the rhythm and the pacing of the film to be both hypnotic and entrancing. There's an immense sadness that hangs over the film, enhanced by the starkness and bleakness of the setting and the grimness of the subject matter. Damon and Affleck turn in subtle, taciturn performances, relying on body language and facial expressions rather than words to convey their thoughts and fears. Arvo Parte has also provided a brooding, melancholic score that enhances the atmosphere of the film.

`Gerry,' is occasionally self-conscious, frequently padded and often maddeningly superficial in the way it fails to develop its two characters. Nevertheless, the film has an amazing ability to draw you into its world and to haunt you long after you've seen it.