I just rented this and I only did so rather than buy the film because it seemed like a lot of people were trashing it, but now I wish that I had bought it because it was friggin good. The way people were bitching I got The 5th Wave kind of bad vibe, but instead I watched a film with an excellent cast and a story that was not childish or cliche. It's very Starman like and entertaining. Did some of you need the typical spoonfed story explaining everything that had happened and everything that was happening to enjoy it? Does everything need to be simplistic crap that answers every question? It's a well done film. What a shame that a movie this well done goes so unnoticed because it failed to be simplistic big budget science fiction eye candy.
I was looking forward to The 5th Wave and it was HUGE letdown. Midnight Special on the other hand I've never heard of and was a pleasant surprise - really good and gripping movie!
I'm all for a little ambiguity in a story, but couldn't the writer at least tried to answer how this normal American couple birthed an alien? Are we supposed to just think it's a sci-fi film and anything can happen? I can understand not explaining who the alien race was or the nature of his abilities, but totally ignoring how he got here is just bad writing. There was also how, for half the movie, the kid had to avoid sunlight and then... POOF!... not a problem. Turns out he didn't need to avoid sunlight at all, they were just being overprotective? 😴
I also didn't think the characters actions were believable. My biggest complaint regarded Lucas. He said he was a childhood friend of Roy who hadn't seen him since Roy's family moved to the ranch. Now middle aged men and on a moment's notice, he is willing to drop everything and go on a chase (even committing crimes!) with some guy he hasn't seen since childhood? Who just randomly showed up at his door 3 days ago?! Even in a sci-fi universe where a kid can shoot beams of light out his eyes that is not believable. People don't just place full trust and run off with someone they haven't seen in decades, even if they were "real close" as kids.
I'm all for a little ambiguity in a story, but couldn't the writer at least tried to answer how this normal American couple birthed an alien?
We don't get all the answers because the characters in the movie don't have them either.
but totally ignoring how he got here is just bad writing.
It's not a mistake, it was deliberately omitted.
There was also how, for half the movie, the kid had to avoid sunlight and then... POOF!... not a problem.
They kept him out of sunlight because of the reaction that he had to it - which was significant. So I wouldn't describe the resulting event with the phrase "not a problem". It was a fairly large discharge of energy.
My biggest complaint regarded Lucas...Now middle aged men and on a moment's notice, he is willing to drop everything and go on a chase (even committing crimes!) with some guy he hasn't seen since childhood?
Lucas stated that he was doing what he was doing "for Alton" and not for Roy after expressing deep regret over the death of the state trooper. He then relayed to Sarah that Alton had "done that thing with his eyes" to him and that was why he was helping.
I also greatly enjoyed Midnight Special. Another one of those exceptionally crafted sci-fi films that's grossly underrated IMO. Let's start with the direction. Jeff Nichols' style of storyteling (as always) is filled with restraint. He intentionally leaves information out so the viewer can make their own conclusions to what is happening. The reveals never happen quickly, which forces the audience to patiently wait for their answers. I imagine this deliberate pace can be frustrating for some, but for me I found this style worked surprisingly well for a sci-fi thriller. Yet, many times the answers provided are not fully explained. Jeff Nichols loves ambiguous endings, but the true beauty comes after you invest some time to to discover these endings weren't all that ambiguous at all. I do enjoy hearing about the various theories - especially regarding the final shots of his films.
What comes with this heavy restraint (along with the lack of answers) is a subscription to the "less is more" approach. This low-key style of storytelling is more like M. Night Shyamalan - a total opposite to the likes of Michael Bay or Roland Emerich (yawn). I also read complaints about the CGI... or how there wasn't enough special effects. Jeez... are we so spoiled to expect every sci-fi movie to have a $200-$300 million dollar budget to showcase Hollywood's computing technology? I don't know about you guys, but I'm so tired of the bloated CGI blockbusters, that I welcome these quality Indie films any day. In order for these types of films to compete, it typically requires the writing, acting, and direction to be very solid and compelling. Midnight Special has all of these qualities in spades. As for the CGI, when it was used here it appeared very natural and realistic - something I can ironically NOT say about some of the bigger budget films.
Kudos for Michael Shannon, Joel Edgerton, and the young actor who played the gifted son! All three gave very convincing performances that made me completely "sold" in their predicament and I was instantly hooked for the ride. In fair criticism, I thought that Kirsten Dunst was a bit wasted as the boy's mother. Her role (or how she played it) felt expendable. She was probably the weakest part of the film. Adam Driver's FBI agent was entertaining and brought enough humor without overpowering the heavier themes in the storyline. Sam Shepard was spot-on as the religious cult leader. Even the small scene with the congregation's followers responding in unison raised a level of creepiness to the story.
** SPOILERS AHEAD ***
Speaking of endings, I scratch my head to why some people jump to the conclusion how the "flash of light" in the father's eyes indicates he must also be alien (or even half-breed). It's as if the point of the story was completely missed. The movie starts off with the focus around the survival of a gifted child, but the story later CHANGES its focus to the grieving loss of a parent! Martin Scorcese's Hugo is another example with this shift in storytelling. Initially it was centered around Hugo Cabret (the boy), but the story later passes its protagonistic torch to George Mellies (the old shopkeeper). I felt the effect of this transition was equally brilliant in both films - although it's more sneaky & subtle here in Midnight Special.
So underneath the sci-fi "veneer" is the suffering and loss that only a parent could feel. The sacrifices. The struggles. The pain of making difficult heart-breaking choices. The importance of doing what it takes to protect your children from harm. All of these themes are aptly delivered in full force here. I'm not discounting the science fiction aspect. I was completely fascinated and glued to my seat! Yet as a father myself, I sympathized with the parents as the storyline changed and I imagined what both parents were going to face by continuing down their path. In order to save their son, it also meant they were going to lose him forever (very much like a death - another theme that was brought up in the film), and therefore this painful loss would be suffered for the rest of their lives. Even Joel Edgerton's character commented on what a shame it was to see such a close-knit family torn apart... further supported by the mother & father holding hands in the living room, or the family embracing toward the end.
Once you reach this emotional aspect of the story, the reflective glow in his eyes shown in the final shot clearly indicates he is human. The ambiguity is not whether or not he's an alien. It's whether he is receiving a message from his son, or if he is simply longing for the loss of his child - symbolized by the sun's reflection like "glow" in the father's eyes. Perhaps it's both. I will let you be the judge on that debate :-)
That said, it was a big risk for the writer/director to not show or explain how the gifted child came to be. I imagine many audience members (myself included) felt robbed by this choice. But thinking back, I personally find the experience to be more fascinating by intentionally avoided these answers. There is a bit of symbolism (coupled with the religious cult) that showcases a supernaturally gifted child born from common everyday parents. How can it be possible for a human child to become so exceptional? Doesn't this notion sound remarkably similar to another very well known historic figure that is talked about to this day? Even when there are no scientific explanations or definitive answers? This is why I think even going down that road... to explain how & why the alien child came into existence would be a disservice to the film. Some things are better left unsaid and left to the audience's imagination & interpretation.
*** END SPOILERS ***
I'm not trying to suggest the "nay-sayers" of this movie are a dumbed-down audience, but I do think it's likely much of the negative reactions are from people who have become accustomed to a formula of what is good vs. what isn't. I'm also guilty of this, but try to keep an open mind when viewing movies that don't follow a conventional pattern. So while I can highly recommend this movie, I suggest for those who first experience Midnight Special to sit back and enjoy the ride... and try to judge the movie for what it is over what it isn't. If you can let your preconceptions go, you are in for a wonderful treat!
To the above poster that complained about Lucas's actions... there are obviously some interactions (unseen on the screen) that happened for him to be willing to jump on board with Alton and his father. For instance, we see a brief scene of Alton "vision-melding" with Elden. One can assume Lucas had a similar experience. There was also specific dialogue from Lucas confiding about the visions he saw with Alton and the comforting feeling he felt. These moments are not lazily put in there by accident... it's very carefully constructed.
No surprise we think alike! Pink Floyd is the best :-)!!! Amused to Death is my favorite Roger Waters album though, but Pros & Cons had a great narrative (lol). Cheers!
What comes with this heavy restraint (along with the lack of answers) is a subscription to the "less is more" approach. This low-key style of storytelling is more like M. Night Shyamalan - a total opposite to the likes of Michael Bay or Roland Emerich (yawn).
It's clear to me that a big motivation of people like you liking this film is due to your need to feel like you're better than people, using that tired-ass everyone else just likes Transformers movies remark. If the story/characters are interesting enough, I wouldn't mind some answers being withheld. I quit watching around the time the sun just magically stopped being a threat to the irritating little special boy to spare myself the frustration.
Not at all my motivation. I really liked Take Shelter and Mud, so I was eagerly anticipating Midnight Special (and was not disappointed). I'm also looking forward to Loving - but will wait for rental to see it.
My liking of these "less is more" type of films doesn't mean I don't enjoy the fun action films. I was VERY pleased with Rogue One! That final 30 minute 3rd act was insane... and non-stop riveting action... in a similar way as Mad Max: Fury Road was (another movie I greatly liked).
But I can see why it's easy for some to mock others when they see quality in things others can't.
Watched this with my Daughter. We were both spellbound and we loved it. I appreciate your post and agree with most of it; especially with your reference to Mr. Nichol's style using restraint. That restraint gave the film a pace that worked for me. I like how much thought you put in to your message. I'll probably re-read it when I'm not so tired.
**Spoiler, sort of**
I didn't get "alien" from the "people who have been watching us for a long time." I got that the people were the future; that time isn't linear and the boy's ability to be a seer was because he was visiting our time zone, so to speak.
At any rate, it gave me lots of food for thought. I'm still digesting.
It's very possible it could be an evolved futuristic human society (kind of like "they"... the bulk-beings of Interstellar). Interesting take on it, and it might explain why they are here on earth... co-existing with the past via a different "frequency" that we can't see (but they can).
Some theorized it could be a version of heaven. That stairway in the end leads to that kind of thought, and the parents did experience what was essentially a "death" of their son.
I'm all for the action extravaganza. I *highly* enjoyed Rogue One. But these deliberately paced 'thinky' films (movies that refuse to endorse hand-holding) are a welcome contrast to most of what Hollywood pumps out these days. For me, even though the pace was slow I was glued to my seat as the story unfolded. I found the overall vibe of the movie unsettling and a little creepy, yet it was the acting of Joel, Michael, and the boy that totally sold me on the story.
Since you liked Midnight Special, I definitely recommend you check out Take Shelter (and if you like that check out Mud).
Thanks, EyeinSky ... for another thoughtful post. Yes, perhaps an "evolved futuristic human society" residing on a different frequency is one scenario.
I also enjoy fast paced action films ~ sometimes. I'm getting old so I tend to fast forward through the chase and gunfight scenes. Still, I enjoy them. Love seeing the good guys win!
I haven't yet seen Mud. Take Shelter was my first Michael Shannon film; it was great; very creepy with a pace that works for me. Whenever I see Kirsten Dunst or Michael Shannon listed as actors, I count on the film being a hardcore drama. When I saw that both of them were in Midnight Special, I knew it wasn't going to be a comedy. 😉 Dunst has a very dark persona as an actress ... it works. She was incredible in All Good Things & Marie Antoinette.
All Good Things came out in 2010 and I think it was pretty good. It has some issues but Gosling gives an interesting performance and its worth a watch.
Why is it our job to save everyone? Haven't we done enough?
I liked it so much that I bought it to own. I like to try and make up for not seeing a good film during its theatrical run by buying it. I wish I had gone to see it in the theater because a film like this deserved support.
Did some of you need the typical spoonfed story explaining everything that had happened and everything that was happening to enjoy it? Does everything need to be simplistic crap that answers every question?
The answer is that we need something, SOMETHING good and compelling, not slow and stupid.