Mike Flanagan and Stephen King’s latest collaboration may lack thrills and chills, but is still a bittersweet concoction that’s hard not to like.
PLOT: An apocalyptic event and the life of a mild-mannered accountant named Chuck (Tom Hiddleston) have an odd correlation.
REVIEW: Two kinds of folks will be checking out this review of The Life of Chuck—those who have read the short story and those who haven’t. To be transparent, I’m one of those who have not. I was tempted to read it before making the trip to TIFF to see Mike Flanagan’s big-screen adaptation, but in the end, I didn’t because I wanted to experience the film as its own thing without any preconceived notions.
Pretty much right off the bat, I was intrigued by Flanagan’s first feature since his last Stephen King adaptation, Doctor Sleep. The film begins in one of King’s sleepy small towns, where a schoolteacher (played by Chiwetel Ejiofor) tries to keep his students engaged even though they seem to be living through an apocalyptic event. California and many other major cities are no more, the internet is down (including – most cruelly of all – PornHub), and even their town seems to be falling apart. The lovelorn teacher and his ex-wife (Karen Gillan) begin to reconnect as the world falls to pieces around them (with it all explained in one of Flanagan’s trademark monologues by Matthew Lillard in a small role). But, in the meantime, everywhere they look, there are billboards thanking Chuck for thirty-nine years of great service.
Who the heck is Chuck?
Flanagan’s film is divided into three acts, and the second two acts (or rather the first two as the movie takes place in reverse chronological order) answer those questions. Chuck, as played by Tom Hiddleston, is a kindly, mild-mannered accountant with an inoperable brain tumor who starts to find the poetry in life and reflects on how he ended up where he is now. It’s an affecting tale that will cut close to the bone to those of us who’ve realized that our time on earth is finite and that the end, often, is closer than you might think.
It all sounds quite dark, but like in adaptations of many of King’s other stories, such as The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Stand By Me, and even Hearts of Atlantis, the story has a lot of sweetness. Indeed, Hiddleston has rarely been as likable as he is here, with him expertly portraying a man wrestling with his own sense that the clock is running out while finding joy in unexpected moments. The big show-stopper is a set piece where Hiddleston and a young woman (Annalise Basso) have an impromptu dance in front of a busker just because the urge hits them in the right way.
Given that it’s King and Flanagan together, you might wonder where the horror aspect comes in. It needs to be said – this isn’t that film. Life of Chuck’s is not at all scary, even if it touches on the supernatural, the apocalypse, and other classic King themes. But it’s optimistic, sporting a cast of Mike Flanagan regulars. They include Mark Hamil in a meaty role as Chuck’s loving grandfather, the long-absent Mia Sara in a lovely role as his wife, Rahul Kohli, Kate Siegel, Samantha Sloyan, Carl Lumbly, and even A Nightmare on Elm Street’s Heather Langenkamp in an unexpected (and effective) cameo. So yeah, it’s not really horror, but it has a lot of people in it that horror fans love.
Ultimately, Life of Chuck is different for Flanagan because he can fully explore the rich characterizations that define his work without hitting those genre beats. While that might limit his audiences, his fans (of which I am one) will undoubtedly appreciate this detour and find The Life of Chuck a bittersweet tearjerker. More than anything, it’s a warning that our time on earth is limited and that it’s best to find joy wherever we can, even in the most fleeting moments.
