Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Truth and consequence.
Hey look, Tom Hardy! That was basically my reaction when I saw a poster for a new movie, called Locke. I didn’t look up what the movie was essentially about, but I did know it had a lot of driving in it, and that it is apparently a thriller. That doesn’t even begin to describe what this movie really is…so instead, I’ll give you a better idea – it’s a very relatable and believable story that doesn’t try to be anything else. So it’s definitely not what we’re used to in film, but the outcome is actually pretty interesting.
Locke introduces us to Ivan Locke (Tom Hardy) – who is on his way to the birth of a child. His child, born from his mistress that he was with on one strange night months ago. Throughout his ninety-minute car trip to the hospital, Locke tries to get a list of things done through his car phone – things like confess to his wife and finish plans for his building at work. The whole movie, mind you, is real time. It’s just a guy driving down a road the entire time, talking on the phone.
The concept on its own is quite unique and surprisingly ordinary. This is something that I’m sure a lot of people have experienced first hand. It’s very relatable, because all it is…is a guy on a trip going the speed limit. That’s it. No funny business, no tricks up the sleeves…just a guy in a car. At the same time, there is a lot of opportunities to be disappointed in the film’s direction. Primarily speaking, you think the movie has a secret that it has been withholding from the audience…but in reality…it really doesn’t. It’s just a guy in a car going the speed limit for an hour and a half.
Now, the thing that’s done well in the movie is it’s boldness to go unique. It’s also the use of camerawork, the entire production process, and of course, the acting. Movies are a work of art and the phrase “Movies aren’t real life” is often spoken to remind ourselves how fake the world of film is. However, if movies were exactly like real life, you might actually have something like Locke…and I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. As for the camerawork, you have to admit that an hour and a half on…essentially…the same place (a basic highway), that the setting would get old fast…but it doesn’t. The use of the camera is very effective in changing things up and making it look pretty nice and fresh the entire time.
The production process is actually interesting, because they only had to film a few things…the whole movie was pretty much filmed in a single take…that just means that there was a lot of professionalism from everyone. Tom Hardy was actually talking to people on the phone, because they were calling him on location. He was also actually taking that trip to the hospital…the realism of this film is staggering. Seriously. The acting by Hardy was ultimately impressive, but I wasn’t a fan of his voice…which didn’t seem to fit his expressions. Other than that…production-wise, this film is kind of a goldmine…but entertainment-wise…this film is kind of a bore. So much, in fact, that I’m not sure who would really actually like it, to be honest.
Everything behind the camera was bold, unique, and done unlike anything you’ve actually really ever seen before. If you are a film buff, it’s hard not to give this movie credit, because it definitely deserves it.
Movies really aren’t meant to imitate real life. It’s cool to see in theory once in a while, but this isn’t what we want from film. Instead, we naturally have all of these expectations of how the movie is supposed to be, and are disappointed in the fact that it’s realistic. The concept is fine, but the story and execution is just boring.