Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: All Is Lost (2013)

This is topic All Is Lost (2013) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001994

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 11-07-2013, 05:21 PM:

A man sailing the Indian Ocean must use all his strength to survive after the hull of his yacht is breached.

*****

All Is Lost is every bit as harrowing as the thematically similar Gravity, but in its own way it's a much better movie, and with no dubious science to argue over. Robert Redford is the only person in the picture, and he gives a terrific performance as the hapless sailor who must fight his way through storm and high sea after his boat is badly damaged. I appreciated the fact that there is almost no dialog for the film's entire length, rather than Bullock's near-hysteria and Clooney's doofus act, Redford quietly goes about the business of survival with strength and dignity. Whether or not all is actually lost is not revealed until the final few seconds of the movie and will be subject to a couple of different interpretations and no little debate, but whatever way you see it the ending is handled with thie same restraint as the rest of the film. Highly recommended.

Posted by Gerard S. Cohen (Member # 994) on 11-11-2013, 04:20 PM:

I watched it as though it were "This Old House" or a cooking show.
While it was interesting to follow the character's fix-it attempts to survive, I felt no real empathy for the Redford character. Who was he? Where was he headed? Why was he alone 1700 miles from land?

"The Life of Pi" was much more dramatic in that the boy had a history, spiritual searching, losses of family, moving underwater shipwreck scenes, plus the anxiety and suffering on the raft with the tiger. I felt real empathy and excitement in this survival-at-sea story but none at "All is Lost".

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-12-2014, 11:00 PM:

Golden Globe win:

Best Original Score - Motion Picture

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 03-22-2014, 07:18 PM:

From J.C. Chandor, writer and director of the excellent GFC-inspired Margin Call, comes All Is Lost, a sea survival film with a cast of one: Robert Redford.

At age 77, Redford remains a dependable star, carrying the film easily despite an almost complete absence of dialogue. Incredibly calm under pressure, "our man" coolly placates the ever-elevating toils which mount against him; repressing his despair to breaking point. The role requires a subtle internalised performance and Redford delivers this with ease.

Chandor nicely contrasts and allegorises the plight of our man with his environment. The sea is portrayed as a realm brimming with life, an elegant counterpoint to the life which appears to ebbing away for our man, but also great savagery as is the grisly end awaiting our hero.

Like Gravity before it, All is Lost provides great spectacle despite some glaring lapses in logic. Here, the most obvious flaw is our man's refusal to carry an EPIRB. Like the physicists with Gravity, however, no doubt seafarers will spot multiple failings with this film and will find it unwatchable. For the rest of us non-experts, though, ignorance is largely bliss.

7.5 out of 10

Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 03-22-2014, 07:45 PM:

quote: Gerard S. Cohen
While it was interesting to follow the character's fix-it attempts to survive, I felt no real empathy for the Redford character. Who was he? Where was he headed? Why was he alone 1700 miles from land?

Felt the same way, didn't really care much for him.

quote: Mark Ogden
Whether or not all is actually lost is not revealed until the final few seconds of the movie and will be subject to a couple of different interpretations and no little debate, but whatever way you see it the ending is handled with thie same restraint as the rest of the film.

And there in lies the problem of All Is Lost, the whole interpretation type ending is way over done, about an hour into the movie I said to myself "Redford is going to see a boat near the end and we really won't know if he survives".

Judging by the fact that All Is Lost made such little money at the box office, I think it had something to do with the interpretation style ending.

quote: Mark Ogden
Highly recommended.

I don't recommend it simply because of the ending, all it needed to have was a nice straightforward ending and it would of probably done a lot better.

quote:
I appreciated the fact that there is almost no dialog for the film's entire length,

I agree, for a movie almost no dialog, it was pretty good. The sound mix was also outstanding.

I was stunned at home much green screen was in the movie.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 03-22-2014, 08:15 PM:

I watched it a couple weeks ago, and found it to be quite engaging. And Redford really brought the role to life. The movie was every bit as compelling as Gravity - which I liked for much different reasons.

In many ways the lack of dialog matched the way things are for me when I'm alone. If I don't make a conscious effort to get out of the house on my days off, I can go a day or two without talking aside from the occasional expletive. I definitely don't have an ongoing verbal dialog with myself (although I understand why this is done for cinematic reasons in movies like Gravity or Cast Away).

Unlike others, I didn't think the ending was open to interpretation. Or I took it as being straight forward because of the lack of any particular clues to make me think it might be subjective.

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 03-23-2014, 04:34 AM:

Yeah I took the straight forward ending too. But I can see how there could be a meta-physical spiritual interpretation if you wanted to analyse a little deeper. The idea that he had to sacrifice absolutely everything before being saved is steeped in Christian ethos.

Btw, I think we learnt enough about his character from the opening narration (which was clearly the message he wrote for the bottle).

Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 03-23-2014, 05:22 PM:

quote: Stu Jamieson
Yeah I took the straight forward ending too.

quote: Justin Hamaker
Or I took it as being straight forward because of the lack of any particular clues to make me think it might be subjective.

So to you guys, did Redford die or did he live?

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 03-23-2014, 06:30 PM:

While some may be bothered by the film's ambiguous ending, that's its beauty. Rather than having a pointed cop-out last scene that someone could call bullshit on, you can leave the theatre having it your own way. Sometimes, movies are better if you have to bring something to them, interpretation-wise. 2001: A Space Odyssey has possibly the single greatest WTF ending in cinema history, and it rightly considered a classic.

That having been said, I personally go with the "heaven" ending. He was under water a really long time, longer than anybody could reasonably expect to hold their breath. Plus, of course, there's the title of the picture to think about.

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 03-23-2014, 06:39 PM:

@Terry: Redford lives.

I don't think there's too much "WTF" in the 2001 ending. I think it's pretty straightforward actually. What is WTF about 2001 is it's deliberately obfuscated implementation.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 03-23-2014, 08:15 PM:

I don't want to get into spoilers, but I'm with Stu.

Posted by Terry Lynn-Stevens (Member # 7349) on 03-25-2014, 11:28 AM:

web page

Here is an interview with the director and Redford, ending is open to how the audience member feels about it. Translation to me = been done, cop-out ending, the movie will make very little money, I will not recommend it, ending should of been more straightforward

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 04-06-2014, 09:39 AM:

I had another look at the end of this the other day and there's nothing ambiguous about it as far as I can see. The image is clearly of a man in a boat shining a torch into the water.