Drive (2011) Blu-Ray review
Posted by Michael Weyer on 02.04.2012
And the Award for the most overrated movie of 2011 goes to...
Drive
Sony Pictures Entertainment
100 Minutes
Every year at this time, the Oscars dominate talk in Hollywood. Besides discussing the nominees, the big conversation is on who was passed over. It’s a rather sizeable list this year with Tilda Swinton truly robbed for her magnificent performance in We Need to Talk About Kevin to Michael Fassbender for Shame. One of the most common omissions mentioned is Albert Brooks for Drive which also got pushes for Best Picture and actor Ryan Gosling. Rolling Stone’s Peter Travers leads that charge, having named the movie his best for 2011 and other critics felt it deserved a shot too.
Which makes it rather baffling that the movie, now on DVD, is shown to be a good film but not really what one would call Oscar material. The story is light, the acting lighter and for all the talk about it being a high-throttle thrill ride, it’s actually pretty slow in a lot of places. Most of all, it’s one of those movies that tries too hard to be daring and “auteur,” and you can’t shake that feeling, that’s it trying too hard to get your attention and stand out. Despite good acting and some nice turns, it’s a pretty standard tale elevated by a few good directional choices and a fine soundtrack but not exactly the level of brilliance so many critics have made it out as.
The Film
Based on a novel by James Sallis, Ryan Gosling stars as the main character, known only as Driver. His name is his job as by day he works as a Hollywood stuntman for car crashes and such in movies. He also does work as a mechanic at a garage for Shannon (Bryan Cranston), who gives him the side job of a wheelman for petty crooks. Driver makes it clear that he wants to know nothing of their crimes or what they want, just to drive them and get paid. Shannon has a dream of using Driver to get fame and borrows money from mobster Bernie Rose (Albert Brooks) to buy a stock car for racing. Driver gets close to neighbor Irene (Carey Mulligan), a single mom whose kid likes Driver. Just before things get serious, however, her husband Standard (Oscar Issac) is released from prison. When Driver finds him beaten on a street, Standard reveals that he’s in debt to gangster Nino (Ron Pearlman), a Jewish associate of Rose. Knowing that Standard getting hurt would also hurt Irene, Driver agrees to help Standard and aide Blanche (Christina Hendricks) pull a job to clear the debt. But things quickly go south, forcing Driver to make some brutal moves to keep Irene safe as enemies close in.
Maybe it’s me. Maybe I just didn’t get it. I enjoy a good crime noir tale with a stylish edge as much as many people. But after all the hype and expectations, the movie just came off rather hum-drum. The opening is good with Driver leading some robbers on a job, losing the cops in a short chase, all while listening to the final seconds of a basketball game on the radio. As he pulls into a parking garage, we realize he’s been timing the game so he can ditch the car and escape through the crowd leaving. It’s a good opening but the rest of the film never quite achieves such creative heights. It’s clear, however, that it thinks it does. Director Nicolas Winding Refn goes out of his way to give the film a shine with slo-mo crashes, keeping the camera inside cars for chases instead of showing winding roads and lots of mood lighting. But such artistic touches come up short when compared to the raw elegance of, say, Michael Mann. The movie isn’t bad, far from it. It just doesn’t achieve the level of greatness the filmmakers obviously think it does. Just presenting something as being cool isn’t enough, you really have to sell it and the film doesn’t quite do that.
It also doesn’t help that the film seems to not know what it wants to be. It starts off a slow-burning piece about a conflicted man falling for a normal girl. It then goes into a heist film with a few touches but transforms at the mid-point into a typical revenge flick. It’s pretty damn gory too with heads blown off, some torture and lots of blood. Which is odd as the actual car chase scenes you’d expect are muted down, hardly the thrill ride promised. It looks to me that a lot of critics (especially the Hollywood-bashing Travers) fell into the trap of thinking that its art house style automatically meant it was great but stylish as a movie can be, it won’t make up for a lack of real story and characters to get behind. Nothing is more off-putting than basically being told “this is so cool” and that throws any appreciation of the film right off.
That pertains to Gosling’s performance. He’s supposed to be a Steve McQueen type, all stoic and serious but that makes it hard to connect to him. Yes, he has a great white scorpion jacket but you need more than that to get to like a character. At times, he shows some stuff like coolly telling a guy at a diner to sit down or get a beating. But that ultra-silent demeanor keeps you from connecting to Driver as a real character, more the guy the events of the film happen around. Gosling can be good in the right material (The Ides of March) but looking downright bored at some of the action you’re around doesn’t sell your hero well. Like the movie, Gosling gives the smug impression that this is so great and audiences should enjoy that. Mulligan is much the same, Irene too much the innocent overwhelmed by events, a talented actress not given a real chance to show her stuff. Cranston has a good tired air as Shannon, aided by a limp in his performance and Pearlman is a hoot as the mobster angered at his family treating him like a kid. One thing I will agree with others with is Brooks’ fantastic performance. It’s not just the shock of seeing a man long-used to comedic roles showing his stuff as a bad guy. Brooks gives Rose a tired air of a man who’s been in the business too long and cursing at underlings. But he still comes off a genial guy which makes his shocking acts of violence more stunning. Brooks completely imbues this character (When Driver puts off a handshake as his hands are dirty, Bernie smiles. “Mine too”) and elevates every scene he’s in.
Again, this is not a bad movie by any means. The style does give it some flair and good touches like when the lights dim in an elevator for Driver and Irene to kiss just before he attacks a thug. Taken on its own, it would be a pretty good film but it suffers from the high expectations given it by critics who seem to believe that an artsy style makes up for a lackluster story. If you want a decent crime drama, it’s a good film but expecting some grand cinematic experience is a bit much. A shame as the movie can offer a fun ride if you’re willing to take it on its own terms.
Rating: 7.5 out of 10.0
Video
2.40 1080p transfer, excellent quality if a bit deep in its level of contrast. The video goes with the film’s unique style, the night scenes quite lovely and the fact the stunts are done realistically helps you appreciate every detail.
Rating: 9.0 out of 10.0
Audio
Dolby DTS-HD 5.1 Master Audio, a good mix although sometimes the bass is a bit much. Subtitles are in English and Spanish to help with the crisp dialogue, able to handle both the action scenes and rock soundtrack in sharp detail to carry the experience.
Rating: 9.0 out of 10.0
Bonus Features
The extras are a letdown in many ways, no audio commentary and the short entries almost scream for a “special edition” set coming soon.
I Drive (5:26) looks like one of those “cable channel” featurettes as they discuss the “biblical simplicity” of the story and how that appealed to so many. The most notable line is the “cosmic irony” of both the director and writer not driving.
Under the Hood (11:49) is the big “making of” for the film, relating how they decided to use a subplot from the novel to focus on. It covers the casting, Cranston wanting to base Shannon on Mickey from Rocky and Mulligan creating the backstory for Irene in her head. Brooks is the most interesting to listen to as he saw Rose as not being a villain but a good guy pushed to extremes.
Driver and Irene: The Relationship (6:13) examines the main romance, described as a “dark fairy tale,” giving more weight to talking about it than we actually saw in the movie.
Cut To the Chase (4:35) is a too-short look at the stunts of the movie. Unit director Darrin Prescott talks about it and how Gosling insisted on doing his own driving as much as he could. A big challenge was having the cameras inside the cars so much that complicated the stunt work.
Drive Without a Driver (25:40) is a sit-down interview with Refn which goes into very nice detail over the movie’s journey from being a Universal Studios action piece with Hugh Jackman to a more intimate tale, developing it over a long car ride with the writer. He discusses changes like how Irene was originally Latino but Mulligan just blew him away in her audition and how he loved the idea of creating a Jewish gangster for Pearlman. He discusses a lot of the movie’s style and wanting it to stand out and his pride of opening it at Cannes. There’s a bit of overlap between this and the other featurettes but it’s still a nice talk.
Rating: 7.0 out of 10.0
The 411: Drive is not a bad movie, it has some good moments and tells a gritty crime story. The violence can be intense but fitting and not too raunchy and its unique style does give it a different air. However, it just doesn't deserve the massive accolades it's recieved as some fantastic piece of cinema. It comes off as trying too hard to be "artsy" and that only serves to let down what it gets right. The extras are light as well, nothing really insightful to the movie although its presentation is top-notch. If you want a movie with a decent ride, it's enjoyable but don't expect a real thrilling experience.
Posted By: water bottle jones (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 12:15 AM
this movie will be a classic. it is a true gem.
I dont know what you saw.
10/10 perfect
Posted By: Wow (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 03:14 AM
Bit unprofessional to base a review on other critics expectations! And to keep going on about it! Just review the movie on its on merits
Posted By: Michael (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 05:16 AM
yeah i dont agree with you a bit... Best film of 2011 for me ..
Posted By: ReallyAverage (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 05:27 AM
YOUR A FUCKING IDIOT IF YOU THOUGHT THIS WAS GONNA BE FAST AND FURIOUS NUMBNUTS!
Posted By: Guest#7298 (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 07:09 AM
love how they fucked his jacket up on the Blu-ray cover.
Posted By: Guest#5655 (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 07:51 AM
no its not just him, i saw this film in theaters. thought the opening scene was very well done and intense then the next 45 minutes were boring as all hell and then it picked up for the end. not as good as people keep making it out to be
Posted By: Guest#2453 (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 09:13 AM
It fits in an older genre of action movies, feeling like it was made in 1982. But in a good way.
It sounds like you were expecting the Hugh Jackman version, which isnt necessarily a bad thing.
A movie called Drive, released in 2011, with an opening like that, makes you expect something different.
Instead we got a timeless art picture. I loved it, but it isn't for everyone.
Posted By: d (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 09:15 AM
definitely just you. Go back to your spoon fed plot twists and scene chewing, and ignore acting, style, mood, direction, cinematography and just plain great subtle and nuanced film making, and go for the simple and predictable.
Posted By: Guest#1472 (Guest) on February 04, 2012 at 09:51 AM
Nope, not 'just you'...
After hearing so much about how great this movie was, I watched it with my wife. Both of us were like 'ok...'.
Pretty good movie, it was not (in any way) a BAD movie, but to say it was one of the best movies of 2011, that’s pure hyperbole. (Personally I’d say the ‘Devils Double’ was a far better, more gripping movie, just to name one)
Frankly, the plot was pretty pedestrian (typical 'guy pushed too far' movie) and the whole sub plot about the 'racing car' and him grabbing the 'prosthetic mask' (while going after Pearlman's character) just was fluff that had NOTHING to do with the movie.
Good scenes, well acted, GREAT music, but to say it was some kind of pinnacle of film making is right up there with the unjust praise for 'no country for old men'.
This was a 'quite good' movie, nothing more.
My 2 cents...
Posted By: Brian in Vancouver (Guest) on February 06, 2012 at 05:30 PM
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.