Night Moves

I was actually surprised after watching this movie, having firstly noticed the given low ratings.

Starting with the characters, the difference in the way each one of them feels about the environmental problems is clear and straightforward. While Harmon, being an ex-con, performs his role in a more detached way, Dena, and mainly Josh, possess deep feelings about them. Dena learnt about them and made up her mind supported in what she claims to be scientific facts. Josh appears to have a more romantic and purist approach, despite his paranoid outbreaks and trust problems. This actually helps the viewer to start building an idea about how each one of these characters will react to the approaching outcome.

OK, it is a slow paced movie, which I don't see as something necessarily bad. Actually, I think it contrasts beautifully with the sentiment of urgency that the problem demands and which they want people to acknowledge. Also, about the kind of numbness in Josh expressions during almost all the scenes, I simply cannot see them as emotionless or empty. I rather think (and felt) that he was the most engagingly involved and disturbed about environmental unbalances, almost in a traumatized way, which I think is reinforced by some plan shots, silent and numbing, taking a few more seconds than we are used to.

Ultimately, it is a movie about the human condition, about good people, with good reasons, doing wrong things.

To appreciate this film, you have to be prepared for the work of Kelly Reichart, whose films tend to be slow-moving and thought-provoking. You have to be in the mood for that type of experience. For this particular film you also have to be prepared for an emotional reaction to the story of several people who take political action, violent action, and suffer its human costs.

Anyone who was young during the 1960's and 1970's will remember what it was like to debate those political issues. We all had to decide whether we were willing to take action in which someone might get hurt. Or in the jargon of Star Trek, does the life of one outweigh the life of many? It's a question we still grapple with today.

If you are willing to confront those questions, and your own answers, this film will interest you. If you don't like to think about such things, skip this film and watch something more superficial.

"You said no one would get hurt!" -Dena

I was not particularly excited going in to see this one but I was certainly interested, Night Moves is another of those movies that premiered a year ago at the Toronto Film Festival that are only now getting released in my country though this one has also taken a while to get it's release in the U.S. It was a year ago then that two films premiered at "TIFF" that stared Jesse Eisenberg, one of them was The Double and the other one was this one, both received good reviews, The Double continued to get it's share of talk while this one kind of was forgotten, still though I remembered the good early buzz that had continued throughout it's promotion so I still went ahead and saw it.

Night Moves is Directed by Kelly Reichardt and it stars Dakota Fanning, Jesse Eisenberg, Alia Shawkat, Peter Sarsgaard, Katherine Waterston, James LeGros and Griffin Newman. " Three radical environmentalists coming together to execute the most intense protest of their lives: the explosion of a hydroelectric dam-the very source and symbol of the energy-sucking, resource-devouring industrial culture they despise."

Night Moves is not a picture that I loved, I didn't it's no doubt flawed and I can see many getting way of this one but I got to say that this is a good little film that's being underseen. I am not familiar with director of the movie, I had heard about some of her pictures but she seems to be someone who divides audiences and I guess this is another picture that will divide audiences. It will not break audiences because it's weird or too complicated but because it's too simple and many will probably find it uninteresting and boring.

Though the movie certainly has a slow pace I would disagree with those who say it is boring though I got to say that I would understand those people too because I feel there's a lack of character development. I'm not saying they should have gone with some cheap clichéd sh*t and put up a background on the characters but they could have made a bit more effort. We are never truly able to understand these guys, their motivations seem awfully weak, they are basically people who want to protect the environment and all that jazz but the fact is that the movie's tone is much bleaker, these characters are completely alienated, especially Jesse's and we never get the sense of why. They basically are acting like terrorists doing some "Mickey Mouse" job that doesn't really have a great deal of importance in the big scheme of things but they take it like they are revolutionizing the world and I think that made it kind of confusing for the audience.

It was also confusing what happens afterwards, I mean was it really that surprising that someone got injured or killed, I mean that blew up a f*cking dam like tough guys but then they couldn't handle the consequences of their job that was ultimately successful. I mean this collapsing of the characters in the afterwards of the job is certainly an interesting character study on guilt, on fear and on redemption and I think it's handled quite beautifully but I still I couldn't help but to feel confused. It's kind of a paradox because that made me feel confused but it also helped me relate with the characters because they are no big timers they are just normal people, with good intentions and a heart and it's very interesting to their reacting to the consequences or their actions, their reactions aren't from a gangster where he doesn't feel anything, this the way probably a normal person would react.

The film takes it very slowly but then again it's never boring even though the movie is never really exciting or thrilling it's always at least engaging and an interesting watch and certainly quite tense to. It's a very intense film with doubt and I got to applaud the director for creating such a mood where you feel trapped, claustrophobic, very gloomy and heavy. It's a very simple story with few twists in it, very straight forward and there are not a great many deal of surprises but again I say the movie is always very tense and there's quite an emotional complexity to it all.

The performances certainly helped. Peter Sarsgaard is such a great actor, very underrated, good in everything he's been and unfortunately he's face doesn't bring audiences and because of that he usually is not given big roles, here he does have a good little role that he plays well, not a great deal of showy scenes where he lets loose his talent but still worth mentioning. Dakota Fanning is still seen as a child by many, such as myself, but the fact is that she's already taking big roles such as this one with a performance that I'm not going to lie, impressed me. She's great in this though she's not the star of the movie. The star of the film is Academy Award Nominee, Jesse Eisenberg, who gives he's best performance since The Social Network. What a good performance, very contained performance, as a seemingly shy, quiet, lonely, alienated young fella. He almost reminded me of Travis, this guy is really quite sick, very paranoid, it seems like he's always cooking up something and I mean those last 25 minutes just showcase Eisenberg's talent, he here proves that The Social Network wasn't just luck.

Night Moves is a simple yet beautifully made picture, with a slow pace but gut wrecking intensity at times and performances that alone are worth your while, it also raises up some interesting questions like "when do legitimate convictions truly demand illegal violent behavior?" and a good meditation on consequences when it comes to political extremist acts. See it!

Rating:B-

Kelly Reichardt's Night Moves, if nothing else, proves that the radical environmentalists of our time can be just as irritating as those who hold up signs blasting the alleged lies of global warming at crowded, echo-chamber rallies. The film concerns a group of three young, arrogant eco-terrorists, so concerned about the environment and so appalled by the blatant corporatism of America that they decide to set an example and wake-up the sheep of the country but staging an explosion of a hydroelectric dam in Oregon. Think about that last sentence and find the flaw in their young minds.

The three radical environmentalists are John (Jesse Eisenberg), Dena (Dakota Fanning), and Harmon (Peter Sarsgaard). John and Dena have come up with an elaborate plan to stage the bombing, but it's up to Harmon to actually construct the bomb, using ammonium nitrate among other things, to help carry out the attack. Co-writer/director Reichardt follows these characters in a way that's quiet, low-key, and not very menacing, given the subject matter, ripe for commentary and subjectivity. She chooses to shoot everything through a lens of softness, making good use of natural sound, light, and other devices to help the story move forward. Reichardt, nor the film's trio of environmentalists, are in any particular hurry whatsoever. The film is ten minutes shy of two hours and makes diligent use of its time.

A great deal of the last hour shows the mental effect the actual bombing has on its characters. We only hear the ammonium nitrate activating and exploding and do not see the actual explosion occurring, nor do we need to, for this isn't that kind of film. In true indie- film fashion, we are focused on what the bombing's long- term effects are on the film's characters, who feel guilt when they learn the rush of the dam currents drowned a man camping near the explosion. They never intended to injure or kill the sheep of the country, but rather, just inform them of what their actions are doing to the ecosystem. However, they now have a mess on their hands and must deal with it in their own manner. They split up and cut connections with each other, but grow weary of one another possibly ratting out the entire group when the rush of guilt becomes too difficult to bear.

The three eco-terrorists of the film are not very likable people. They are arrogant and self-absorbed, not willing to share their knowledge, but beat you over the head with it until your covered in metaphorical blood and shame for your alleged lack of interest or concern about Mother Nature. They are no better in their propagating of their idea of "the truth" then their greatest enemies, climate change deniers or the uniformed, are at iterating their own "truth."

However, that's not to say our three characters (I don't see them as protagonists, antagonists, anti-heroes, or any literary classification whatsoever) don't make substantial points in their arguments. One of the best moments of the film comes when the idea of the rich vs. the poor is elaborated in such a philosophical way it begs a mention in this review. The characters talk about how the poor live and work in the moment, operating on a day-by-day basis, using what available resources and cash they have in the moment. The rich, on the other hand, operate in the future, buying many things with credit, investing in long-term business plans, and so forth. To them, this is why the environment is such in a disastrous position because we've chosen to allow our greed to thrive in the moment and left our tab - environmental dangers, debt, and income inequality - for later, or worse, for somebody else.

Night Moves is a nice showcase for low-key filmmaking in the sense that we can still have a point, or even several points, be inferred or illustrated without obnoxious overtones and frustratingly overwritten dialog. To some degree, the film is underwritten because its characters lack evident personality, but it all comes back to the ideas I discussed in my reviews of 17 Girls and The Bling Ring in that the characters explored in these films have no personality other than their immediate gratifications through violence, theft, pregnancy, or what-have-you. To give them illustrated personalities would be giving them too much credit. The emptiness of the characters in this particular film are crafted nicely by Eisenberg, Fanning, and Sarsgaard, particularly Eisenberg who, in The Social Network, managed to play the same sort of role. Quiet, unassuming, but uncompromising in his brilliance and his approach to the world. For some, this may be one of the best films you've never heard of, and for me, it's one of the most surprising independent efforts of its year.

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Dakota Fanning, and Peter Sarsgaard. Directed by: Kelly Reichardt.

Josh (Jesse Eisenberg) and Dena (Dakota Fanning) are radical environmentalists. They buy a boat called "Night Moves". They along with troubled ex-Marine Harmon (Peter Sarsgaard) plan to bomb a dam. They buy a large quantity of fertilizer, make their bomb and deliver it on the boat.

This is a slow, methodical movie. There are so many empty spaces. It's a two hour movie that could easily be squeezed in half. It's just so very slow. Everybody is doing mainly quiet acting. Some could see in it as deep emotional acting. They can read so much into their quietness. I can only read it as a lack of dialog. There are some emotional content in the second half but it's not enough.