Wakefield (2016) Reviews

• Cranston is excellent, but the film itself was something of a missed opportunity

  jimbo-53-1865112018-03-14

  Successful and wealthy litigator Howard Wakefield (Bryan Cranston) suffers a nervous breakdown and decides to hide out in the family attic for several months. During these months, Howard observes his family continuing their lives without him and as time passes by his behaviour becomes increasingly erratic and he often wonders whether he can return back to his old life (or indeed if he wants to)... Wakefield bravely tries to tackle a rather complex issue - one of a man suffering a nervous breakdown which I suppose could be classed as a mental health issue. Howard, for me, was a rather complex character with a torrent of varying emotions - Cranston does an excellent job in trying to give some depth to his character. The issue I had is that I didn't find that the narrative had any real depth; the focus is on Howard spying on his family, but I found that the cause of his nervous breakdown was glossed over meaning that I could never identify with or really understand Howard's motivations. The film also doesn't show anything from his wife's perspective - Howard's narration gives us an idea of what she may be thinking, but more input or insight from her as a character might have made the film a tad more involving. Other more notable flaws/issues with this film lay with believability; I found it hard to believe that Howard could manage to hide out in his attic for months on end without being spotted by his family or any of his neighbours at any point - considering how often he is roaming around outside. Also I find it hard to believe that no-one would think to look in the attic at any point to see if he was hiding out in there? He steals food and drink from his own home, but his wife doesn't notice at any point. The idea of him also surviving for so long by eating thrown away leftovers is also something of a stretch in credibility. The main selling point with this film is Cranston; he gives the best performance by a mile and his multi-layered performance does make this film more tolerable than it otherwise would have been. Garner is OK, but she's given too little to work with to make an impression on the picture and the same can be said of the supporting cast. Wakefield for me was a disappointment and something of a missed opportunity - the script lacked the complexity and insight necessary to make this a good character study. I do like the idea of a man looking into his own life from the outside and seeing what life is like for his family without him being around (there are actually shades of It's a Wonderful Life in this film), but with so little depth to the script I basically found myself watching Cranston spying on Garner which after a while became rather one-note and tiresome.

• Could have been more interesting

  barbagvido2017-11-06

  Wakefield is a film starring Bryan Cranston as the man who hides in a garage for months looking at the events in his house and everyone thinking he's missing. Basically, he's looking at his life without him. It's an interesting premise on it's own, but the movie never really does anything about that and the plot barely goes anywhere through the entire movie. And yeah, don't expect much of a resolution at the end. This is something that works on paper, but doesn't translate to the screen very well. One of the biggest problems is also a lack of interesting and creative direction. If a director made it stranger and more unique, it would have been a lot more interesting. This way, it just doesn't stick out. But still, it's filled with powerful performances, especially from Bryan Cranston, who never fails to impress and pretty much carries the entire movie with his performance and he might be one of the few reasons it wasn't completely uninteresting. The premise itself, a few interesting but not memorable enough moments and the premise are what saves this movie from being bad. But it's not particularly good either. While the run-time isn't long the movie is longer than it should be and by the last third the end can't come soon enough. Only watch if you're a big fan of Cranston. Other than that, you won't find much here.

• Lost time

  NicolaTesla2017-12-10

  This move got me intrigued for a while and I specifically waiting and avoided to read or see any reviews because I wanted to experience this movie from a blank slate. when we got the end credits of this movie I was left with a feeling of '2-hours lost i'm never getting back' What a waste of time and talent. I can sit for hours and watch Bryan Cranston act but this whole execution of an attempt to make a movie was a total miss by it's creators. Cranston is amazing to see and hear and to see him pull this sloppy story and script off with the class he brings is a a miracle. The makeup was terrible and inconsistent. The music score didn't know what it wanted to be (minimalistic, adventurous, Clint-Eastwoodesk Piano style, Jazz, Noir..) it's all over the place. The Down Syndrome actors where a disgrace to watch at, the director or editor or casting agent should be ashamed for the way these characters are brought to the screen and the way the are portrait as story filler / forced-endearing tool. There's more then smiling, pointing and repeating names and words! And the most disappointing thing of it all. The ending! I understand you want to play off the whole 'open end' feeling, but this is just bad bad writing and cinematic execution. We do not need any more discomfort at the end, it's been enough of that sitting through it all.

• An enjoyable movie, with a disappointing ending

  jonyrowe2017-11-29

  While Bryan Cranstons casting and an intriguing hide in the garage plot is largely enjoyable, the climax is disappointing. We watch as Cranston fails to return home, hides in the garage and watches his family as a missing person. When he does finally walk back through the Door, the film ends. Very disappointing, how did he explain himself, was he accepted back into the arms of his wife and children? Who knows.. Is this just a ruse for a sequel, I think not, but it left me deflated and wanting to know what happened next.. Avoid.

• Premise is interesting, as are some parts, but, the whole - not so much

  srdjan_veljkovic2017-09-07

  Even in the movie, the obvious is stated: who hasn't had a thought about leaving their life and watching how people from that life react to them being gone missing? This movie explores that scenario. It's somewhat original, so, it's interesting. The exploration has some interesting parts. Jenifer Garner is well cast as the wife whom the main character "kind of loves", but is also "sick and tired of her". Also, the whole projection that the protagonist has on his wife as "his main problem", which she clearly isn't, is interesting. Sure, she's far from perfect, but, so is he and it's obvious that he actually "did good, wife-wise" (in the sense that he could have done _much_ worse). Also, the notion that he just goes on with his exile without having any good reason to, other than inertia, is interesting. But, otherwise, it's not well put together, very little is deeply explored, there's not much fun or dread of all of this - while there can/should be. The main problem is probably the ending. Sure, the "let the viewer think/imagine what might happen" ending can work. But, it needs to be done differently, especially with a movie as-is. Basically, the ending doesn't fit the movie at all. If we had more deep explorations, sure, this could work. But, as-is, movie is too shallow for such an ending.