Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: The Bleeding Cool Review - Promised Land

  1. #1
    Robot for Front Page Blog Posts
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,313

    Default The Bleeding Cool Review - Promised Land

    Linda Ge writes for Bleeding Cool.

    This is an anti-fracking movie.

    To Promised Land's detriment and perhaps even the detriment of their cause, there's no subtlety in the way Matt Damon and John Krasinski present their very pointed views on this politically charged environmental topic.

    Damon and Krasinski co-wrote the film, which is clearly a passion project, and also bring their star power to the impressive onscreen ensemble cast, but more focus on their storytelling abilities and a bit less lecture-style posturing about fracking itself could have gone a long way to make their case more convincing.

    Damon plays Steve Butler, a cog in the machine at Global Crosspower Solutions sent out to dying small towns in the midwest to convince poor farmers and landowners of the (mostly monetary) advantage of letting the company come in to drill their grounds for natural gas. He's not a greedy corporate fat cat and he does have a point, having personally experienced the death of a small town personally, but his reluctance - and thus, the audience's - is felt almost immediately as he sets out on one last job before a major promotion.

    And it's all downhill from there as director Gus Van Sant trots out America's Cutest Old Man,Hal Holbrook, as a local science teacher to list all the dangers of fracking at a town hall meeting. Butler is frustrated but can't refute any of the points made, because, we suspect, neither can the filmmakers.

    Butler mostly finds wide-eyed, naive and eager landowners more than willing to sign away their property for the prospect of getting rich fast. Having signed up they promptly begin to spend the money they don't yet have on such frivolities as sports cars, further hammering home that you are being taken advantage of if you support fracking - and frankly, kinda dumb.

    The film does get a nice jolt of excitement with the arrival of Krasinski as Dustin, a friendly, confident anti-fracking environmentalist and a showdown between him and the diametrically opposed Butler quickly escalates as the latter grows increasingly frustrated with how easily the former is able to relay his message.

    The movie's greatest asset is its talented and engaging cast, in particular Krasinski, who has had trouble finding success on the big screen but proves here that he has a real leading man's charisma. Damon's everyman quality serves his character's purposes well as he plays the straight man opposite Krasinski's more magnetic figure. Rosemarie DeWitt effortlessly flirts with both men as the dream girl who symbolizes the one upsmanship between them, while Frances McDormandis solid as Damon's sales partner - though underused - while trying to evoke a working mom who just wants to do the job and go home to her family. The ubiquitous and chameleon-like Scoot McNairy also pops up deep into the movie as a cantankerous farmer who makes Butler's job difficult.

    Still, the cast is done a disservice by the heavy-handed fashion they are asked to relay their message, leaving little room for the actors to breathe life into their characters. They become little more than mouthpieces who, ultimately, all drive the same message home.

    And then, a third-act twist comes out of nowhere. It's meant to put the nail in the coffin of the fracking argument, but sadly, only leaves the audience feeling as duped and boxed-in as the characters onscreen.

  2. #2
    Dean of Cool University Captain Comet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Hardcore Station
    Posts
    1,918

    Default

    Do they like, Frack a Balrog out of the Earth or something?

  3. #3
    Way Cool
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    54

    Default

    I'm really interested to see this one. National Geographic just had a big article about fracking and how it's cut down US co2 emissions by switching from coal, etc. etc. but you just can't get past the one image they had of a lady from Pennsylvania SETTING HER WATER ON FIRE as it came out of her kitchen tap, due to there being so much methane in it.

    But that's what you expect from Nat Geo. They give you the facts - good and bad - and let you make up your own mind. I wouldn't expect a narrative about the subject to be so wishy washy and I expect I'd like this film, but probably because I'm already onside with the film's message.
    Read Max Overacts - a 2011 Eisner loser!

  4. #4
    Zen Master of Cool
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sugar Land, TX
    Posts
    838

    Default

    This review pretty much sums up my thoughts I had when I saw the preview.
    Oh come on! You're going to kill me because I had fake sex on graph paper with a girl who barely spoke to you in real life?!?
    - Dr. Venture, Past Tense, The Venture Brothers

  5. #5
    VP in Charge of Cool
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Toronto
    Posts
    1,597

    Default

    I've been sliding toward the anti-fracking side of things since I saw GASLAND and even more since the earthquakes in Texas around fracking sites, but even with that predisposition I don't think I could stomach the earnestness coming off the trailer again let alone sit through a movie about it.

    I understand there are better, safer, but more expensive and slower to turn into production methods of getting to the gas, but the industry isn't interested.

    ~R

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •