Everest Review

There is a moment fairly early on in Everest that, looking back, is indicative of the entire film. The men and women who are braving the elements to climb to the top of Mount Everest are gathered in a tent at their base camp. At this point, they are still in the process of training their bodies to make the climb to the summit. One of these climbers is a journalist. He asks the rest of the crew why they're doing what they're doing; it seems like every aspect of the trip is torturous with little payoff. They struggle to give him a straight answer. They joke around a bit before spouting some obviously evasive platitude about just doing it to inspire others.

The journalist doesn't buy it, and neither do we. There has to be some darker visceral reason for attempting the climb. There has to be something deep inside driving each and every one of them. Much like the climbers themselves, the film neglects to explore these potentially fascinating themes. Instead, it's a pretty generic and predictable disaster movie with some admittedly beautiful visuals and strong performances. I can't shake the feeling that it could have been much more, though.

Everest follows the true story of the 1996 Mount Everest disaster, which resulted in the deaths of several climbers. This is really all you need to know about the film before going to see it. Everything else that happens would be considered a spoiler. I can't say I knew too much about the movie's subject before my viewing, but I can now see the appeal of putting this story on the big screen. If anything, it's just a reason to make a movie that takes place on Mount Everest. I also think the story of the climbers who lost their lives is worth telling on a cinematic level.

The film boasts quite an impressive cast. Jason Clarke, Josh Brolin, and Jake Gyllenhaal headline the A-list cast, which also includes the likes of Keira Knightley, Robin Wright, Michael Kelly, Sam Worthington, and Emily Watson. All of the actors and actresses mentioned turn in rock-solid performances, particularly Clarke, who is able to shake off the sour memory of his appearance in Terminator: Genisys earlier this year and show us that he is a legitimately talented actor, something he already proved in last year's Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Gyllenhaal, who I have praised at length on this site, is in typically strong form, even if the script underutilizes him.

The first thing that will probably be mentioned in most reviews of Everest is its visuals. It is true, the film possesses tremendous physical beauty, and some of the cinematography involving the titular mountain is simply breathtaking. I'm sure that some CGI was used, but it is very hard to tell. Director Baltasar Kormákur has crafted a visually gorgeous film. That is the film's greatest strength along with the performances.

What ultimately makes this movie rather ordinary is the script. It is, for the most part, uninspired and rather flat, failing to create three-dimensional or believable characters. This is a huge flaw when it comes to the third act when everyone is in danger; we don't feel very much for them because they simply aren't very interesting. There isn't much about the narrative to get invested in. And that is something that really disappointed me about Everest.

Like I mentioned earlier, it could have been a thought-provoking exploration of these characters and their fight for survival atop Mount Everest. If the film wasn't afraid to evoke some of the darker themes that were latent throughout the movie, it could have been much more than just another disaster thriller that we've seen before.

I can't say I fully recommend seeing Everest, but it wasn't a bad movie by any means. Just a lazy one. The visuals are astounding and the performances from a great cast are really quite good. If you crave something to latch onto emotionally or intellectually, then you'll be disappointed. Its narrative ultimately felt a little hollow. This prevents the film from having the emotional impact it could have delivered had it done more to flesh out its characters. If you do go to see it, be sure to check it out in IMAX. I did, and the climbing sequences were suitably intense.

C+

Comments

  1. Interesting, I'd have to say that I'm on the opposite end of all your negatives. I just got out from seeing this, and yes the visuals and IMAX was an incredible experience, and maybe that helped enhance the film for me, but I actually found the characters real and was sad for them when things went bad. I think what this film does really well is how subtle the awful experience is. Yes everyone went up the mountain to climb it, but I didn't feel like I needed to go into their "demons" to understand them. Compared to other films based off a true story this one actually felt real to me than me sitting in a theater.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, this is just my definition, but I don't see this as a disaster movie, mostly because the phrase "disaster movie" sort of makes you think of a popcorn movie that has no plot or heart, which I find that Everest does have.

      Delete
    2. I just couldn't get fully invested in it with such a superficial portrayal of the characters. Just my personal thoughts. As for it being a disaster movie, I call it that because it uses a disaster (in this case a storm) as a central plot device. To me, that's the definition of the genre.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts