25% Off Dinner
new york, NY 10028
Happily sampling nasty beats and riffs from the Scorsese catalog, the new Aussie crime saga Animal Kingdom begins with a hushed but breath-holding set piece: A gawky lad watches TV on the couch next to his dozing mum . . . until the already-summoned EMTs arrive and the boy calmly tells them she's OD'd on smack. They try to revive her, and the boy blankly waits beside them. As it becomes clear that she's dead, his eyes continually, habitually veer back to the stupid game show on TV. First-time writer/director David Michôd limns a dank and lost family history in just these few barely conscious gestures, and the toxic fumes of inherited misery fill your head.
Inheritance is the movie's fueling idea. Contrary to the title's suggestion of a sweeping, societal portrait of venality run amok, the action is restricted to a single Melbourne family of rampaging crooks—and the cops who want to kill them. The alienated teen is Joshua Cody (James Frecheville), who, with nowhere else to go, calls his garrulous grandmother somehow nicknamed Smurf (Jacki Weaver), and is accepted into her roiling nest of pathology. This chintzy suburban house is where up to half of the movie plays out, dominated by Smurf's three sons: Darren (Luke Ford), a surly post-teen visibly uneasy with following the family line; Craig (Sullivan Stapleton), a tattooed coke brute with azure eyes to die for; and Pope (Ben Mendelsohn), the oldest, a bank robber off his meds and hiding out from the fuzz.
A heist buddy looking to straighten up (Joel Edgerton) tops off the testosterone, which heats up a bit in the face of Joshua's uncertain presence. With Joshua's narration, the template is GoodFellas but without the crescendos. We're experiencing the Cody clan essentially post-felony—they're all already hunkered down and waiting the law out. The first crime we see is a parking-lot assassination perpetrated not by a Cody but by a band of rogue narcs.
No speeding bullet, Michôd's film is kind of languorous, luxuriating in its own exaggerated sense of tragedy, observing the family as it self-destructs under pressure. Joshua becomes a pawn between his cousins and the police (fronted by Guy Pearce as the only reasonable voice in earshot), forced even to escape protective custody because the cops can be bought, too. The movie maintains a low boil, marbled up with a portentous liturgical score, but meanwhile, eggs do get cooked: Michôd's portrait of Melbourne's low-rent outlands is convincing, Mendelsohn's flabby jerk emerges as a fresh kind of sociopathic menace (not the kind that announces his madness with bulk physicality or glaring eyes), and Weaver's bubble-headed mom morphs into a back-stabbing Ma Barker. When the SWAT team does finally descend, it's silently, suddenly glimpsed crossing a hallway in the background behind Joshua's back.
That opening moment, though, when Joshua glances from his dead mom to the TV—there's nothing else like it. Michôd's strenuous efforts to accumulate tension are often only just that. His movie pales beside the uneasy charge delivered by another recent-ish Australian film about three criminal bros: Rowan Woods's The Boys (1999), a nightmarish, neo-Cassavetes bolero also set largely in the mother's house, with David Wenham's wrecking-crew nutcase ex-con inciting a nerve-wracking degree of dread. Woods wasn't focused on much besides the purgatorial space between people, whereas Michôd wants a Greek epic but doesn't have the material. Animal Kingdom is a work of obvious ambition, and seeing a debut filmmaker swing for the fences like this is its own kind of moviehead satisfaction. Maybe he could redo it down the road, pull a Mean Streets on this Who's That Knocking at My Door.
I'd say it is just the flimsiest production ever made. Rarely can we find such poorly-sketched characters acting so badly and such an unengaging plot in one movie. What are you supposed to say about a movie which gives you as much thrill as your cheese sandwich you ate last Tuesday? When you don't care what will happen to the characters, who will die and who will survive and you don't know what the fuss is all about, it can only mean there must be something that went terribly wrong. And what went wrong, I'm afraid, was the very idea of shooting the movie in the first place. If they did want to waste some tape, they should have made a serial instead. A total bummer.
Why would you spoil the opening scene in a review? Sets the tone for the test of the review that's for sure...
Didn't care for the movie, but thought the same about this critic's errors. I got the impression that he had the movie on in the background while doing something else.
I agree with this review. I also plan to give the film another chance down the road. But the story just didn't deliver like I thought it would. Even Jackie Weaver's character/performance wasn't as powerful as I expected it to be. It was an ambitious film with a good story. But it could have been great with a different kid, better editing and a little more punch.
Funny how just about every other critic has raved about this movie and the Voice seems to print the only disparaging review. Obviously we saw a different film because I can't think of anything better this year. It's an astonishing accomplishment. A phenomenal debut. Absolutely riveting. Just trust all the other critics. No doubt this will make best of year lists.
Funny how just about every other critic has raved about this movie and the Voice seems to print the only disparaging review. Obviously we saw a different film because I can't think of anything better this year. It's an astonishing accomplishment. A phenomenal debut. Absolutely riveting. Just trust all the other critics. No doubt this will make best of year lists.
It's as though you were given a diamond and all you could see is a piece of glass. You have to be completely thick not to recognize the brilliance of this film. Do yourself a favor and see it again when your blinders fall off...
Interesting review. I find it hard to take the opinion seriously when there are so many factual errors in what is written - this throws into doubt whether the reviewer even watched the film from beginning to end, let alone engaged himself enough to form a real opinion besides denigration by comparison. Shame.
Normally I'm a fan of your reviews, but I think you're dead wrong about this movie. Just because you can reference every scene to other movie scenes doesn't mean Animal Kingdom is a dud. I think you should give it another look, and then another review.
Well done for outlining what happens in the opening scene, thus ruining the surprise for viewers.
Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...
Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...
More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience
Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info
Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips
Log in or Sign up
Social Connect:Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.
Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:
Sign Up or Log in
Social Connect:Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.
Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:
