lederman-michael I just watched this movie (yes a bit late to the game) and was amazed at the, well everything. It was a minimalist movie for the genre but did so much with what they had it seemed like a big budget film. The story is compelling and you actually come to feel emotions for the characters. The direction was outstanding with shots that brought you into the action while at the same time made you feel alone in the desert. Lastly the actors how this movie escaped the Academy is beyond me. Each one brought an element unique to their part of the story from Michael Shannon who was outstanding as the farmer who struggled to keep thing as sane as possible for his children and who hoped for better days with such devotion as to be palpable. To Nicholas Hoult who showed more range than any young actor has a right to. But the rest of the cast each added an element that together make this film amazing.

derbo73 I didn't check the budget of this movie but it feels like a low budget production in many ways.First of all the characters are roughly cut and stereotypes, you don't find real inner conflicts in them, Flem could have had good intentions to a degree, but he was just selfish - that is to simple for a drama.Second the long chapters don't make much sense, it's just confusing. Finishing a chapter with the death of it's subject is not smart. No flashbacks, no learnings in the later chapters about Ernest or the past for example.The setup was perfect for a Rashomon style drama, by simply NOT letting the audience know every detail all the time. Wasted chance.The whole movie was to long for the story. The slow pacing and the lack of anything happening over long periods (nothing of substance at least) makes it tiresome.The automatic mule robot (Big Dog or LS3 Pack Mule) did not add much to the sci fi feeling - it was developed around 2009 or even earlier. If this movie is supposed to take place in the near future (like some 20-50 years) such a machine would be long gone and replaced by better systems. Some primitive drones and stuff do not convince me, too. A little bit more attention to the details would have been nice. Even poor settlers would use something better than an 80s style transistor radio.The border situation was awkward. I wonder how the patrols walking on stilts would defend against the mob pushing them over... the available fences and guard's walkways would allow much better control. Just silly.I watched the German translation and the dub voices were terrible. They sounded like some people from the street had been asked to dub the movie during their lunch brake.All in all the story was too simple, too often seen and the rest of the movie didn't save the day.I don't consider it a waste of time but would expect something more imaginative or original these days. It would make a solid first movie for a director starting his career right after film school.

Tom Dooley This is set in the future when after prolonged droughts water has become the most precious commodity on the planet. The story is told in three chapters from the perspectives of the three main players. Ernst Holm comes first; he has stuck it out on his dehydrated farmstead. He has alcohol issues, a wife in hospital and two young children, his daughter Mary and son Jerome.He ekes an existence by servicing the local water mine and life is hard. His daughter has a beau in the shape of Flem Lever (Nicholas Hoult) who has designs on both her and her daddies land. He soon decides to put his designs into action with repercussions for all.Now this is an indie effort and the CGI is excellent despite that. The story is a slow burner but it is one that is very much worth staying with. Michael Shannon an Ernst is particularly effective as the guilt ridden, hard bitten man who is clinging on to hope. The sci- fi parts in terms of machines are also done quite well, there is some action, but this is a character piece with violence as a driver for the story and not the raison d'être. I like dystopian futuristic films and this is one that goes for that in most parts whilst still clinging to some of the more regular societal norms and I felt they got the mix really well. If you like to have to think about a film, but not too much, then there may well be something of merit for you here.

estebangonzalez10 "Pray for rain."Gwyneth Paltrow's younger brother, Jake, introduces us to a dystopian future where water is scarce in Young Ones, his sophomore feature film. The film has style and it is also gorgeous to look at the empty vast dry land (filmed in South Africa, but taking place in an undisclosed American town), but unfortunately the characters did lack some development. This could well be classified as a sci-fi western centering on a family that is struggling to survive under the harsh dry conditions. The always fascinating Michael Shannon plays Ernest Holm, the father of two adolescents who has decided to stay in his dry land hoping he can find water to cultivate his once fertile land. His younger son, Jerome (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is always alongside him as they struggle to find a means for survival. With the help of a robotic donkey carrier, he sends supplies to the workers who extract water from deep wells. His relationship with his daughter, Mary (Elle Fanning), isn't going too well. She has secretly been dating Flem (Nicholas Hoult), who isn't someone his father trusts. Flem has plans of his own for Ernest's land and he will stop at nothing in order to get his way. Aimee Mullins has a supporting role as Ernest's paralytic wife who lives in the hospital where she can use special equipment to move. The film is divided into three chapters centering on each one of the three male characters. The first centering on Ernest, is by far the best thanks in large part to Michael Shannon's incredible performance. It also sets the rules for this futuristic world and it manages to engage us. But the promising start of the film quickly dies down in the next two chapters with predictable character arcs and familiar story lines. It is a shame because the film did promise an inventive post apocalyptic setting, but other than the fascinating visuals it doesn't deliver anything fresh. Despite not having much character development I did enjoy the performances from the talented young cast. Nicholas Hoult is solid as the villain, while Kodi Smit- McPhee once again finds himself playing a character in a desolated future (The Road). He delivers one of the stronger roles and did a decent job holding up his own in the scenes he shared with Shannon. Fanning is an actress I have always admired, but her character is the least developed this time and she doesn't get to do much here. It is a shame Shannon doesn't get more screen time because the film loses much of its appeal after that first chapter. He always brings an incredible fresh quality to each one of his characters and in a way Ernest was the reason why this dystopian world seemed so fascinating.Young Ones is the third consecutive Western I've seen and each one has been very different. Once Upon A Time in the West is a masterpiece and a classic spaghetti western, while A Girl Walks Home Alone At Night was an Iranian vampire western that was more atmospheric than anything else. This futuristic western is also gorgeous to look at and introduces a rather interesting premise but it loses its appeal after the first part of the film and heads towards generic and familiar territory. I'd still recommend this film because there are some interesting qualities to it and there is also Michael Shannon of course who always delivers. I loved the landscape as well, but the pacing of the story does get tedious and predictable at times. http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/