Everest
Every few years disaster strikes on Mount Everest and
multiple debates about climbing the tallest mountain in the world begin. The
most basic question that is always at the heart of Everest is, “Why?” The film,
Everest, directly posits this
question as well, and the characters, in unison, shout George Mallory’s famous
line: “Because it’s there!” The characters give serious answers afterward, but
that line gets to the root of most reasons why people climb and also why the
film exists. Everest is there, and such an imposing example of nature will
always fascinate climbers and viewers alike.
There is no shortage of disaster stories from Everest’s
deadly history, but the 1996 climbing season was possibly the most documented
making it the obvious choice for source material. Jon Krakauer’s Into Thin Air is the most famous account
of the climb, but Everest went with a
more broad scope in an attempt to present more viewpoints of the event. This
makes Everest more accessible, but
the lack of focus also leads to some characters receiving short shrift. That
said, enough character building is done to make the human drama a very
effective counterbalance to the visual spectacle of the film.
The draw of Everest
is definitely the spectacle, though. Any film about Everest needs to be about
the beauty of the deadly mountain and the general experience of climbing it. In
that regard, Everest is extremely
successful. The shots of the mountain are stunning, but, more importantly, the
actors seem to be truly struggling as they make their way higher and higher. The
film shows how brutal the climb truly is, even when climbers are paying to be
shepherded up the mountain. The climbers are basically dying the last few
thousand feet since humans aren’t meant to survive at such altitudes. Director
Baltasar Kormákur said in an interview that he’s “fine” with putting actors
through “a little bit of pain” and it definitely shows.
It’s important for the film to hammer home the difficulty of
the climb to make the major question of the film more pertinent. Why put
yourself through this? Why risk your life? This question is doubly relevant
when you add in the weather conditions that led to the 1996 disaster. Is it
worth losing your life for the glory of reaching the top? Everest does not presume to answer this question, but the
characters obviously think that it is very much worth it. It’s important that
the film ultimately leaves the answer up to the viewer since it is a real world
question that is still relevant, especially since Everest’s deadliest day
occurred this past April. The bigger question then becomes about commercial
climbing. In other words, should less-experienced climbers be allowed to pay
professional guides to get them to the top? Multiple times in the film, money
is mentioned, and the guides clearly want to get people to the top so they can
stay in business. Would the disaster of 1996 have happened if the guides didn’t
feel that pressure to get more people to the top, especially with a journalist
in two who was going to write about it? The film’s screenwriters (William
Nicholson and Simon Beaufoy) wisely stop short of blatantly demonizing the
practice of guided climbing, leaving it ultimately up to the viewer.
The question of Everest
then becomes, “Why recreate these terrible events?” That is difficult to
answer. Much like any film based on real, tragic events, there is a tricky line
that is toed between reverence and exploitation. “Everest” does not come across
as exploitative, but there are moments near the end (which did actually happen)
that felt too personal to be recreated, much less witnessed by millions of
viewers. (This is a slight SPOILER so skip to the next paragraph if you don’t
know the true story and don’t want any part of the film spoiled.) Near the end
of the film, one of the main characters, Rob Hall (Jason Clarke), has a
conversation with his pregnant wife via a walkie-talkie/satellite phone hook-up
as he is dying. It felt too personal to read about it in Into Thin Air, and it felt even more personal watching it
recreated. The film seems aware of this, however, as there are multiple
reaction shots of characters listening in on the interaction. Everyone is
crying, and most people watching the film will be crying as well. This moment
is so important because this is where the film might lose the audience. It
feels a bit too manipulative, but it actually did happen this way. It’s hard to
fault a movie for being melodramatic when it’s based on a real moment. The
scene proved to be a double-edged sword for me. It made the film much more
emotional and powerful than I expected it to be, but it also convinced me that
I never wanted to watch it again.
Any emotion created in a scene is also the product of the
actors involved. Clarke is great throughout, but he is truly heartbreaking at
the end of the film. Keira Knightley, as Hall’s wife, gives an effective
performance as well, especially considering that her scenes were just her
talking on the phone. The rest of the cast of Everest is equally impressive: Jake Gyllenhaal, Robin Wright, Josh
Brolin, John Hawkes, Michael Kelly, Sam Worthington, and Emily Watson. Brolin
is given the meatiest role as Beck Weathers, a man whose experiences could have
been a movie on its own. The rest have their moments, but the only weak point
of the film is that some of the cast is underutilized, specifically Gyllenhaal.
Gyllenhaal portrays Scott Fischer, who was known as kind of a rock star
mountain climber. This reputation leads to a slightly strange performance as
Fischer seems to be constantly drunk and/or angry, but it’s never explained
completely. It seems that once Gyllenhaal was cast, the screenwriters wanted to
beef up the role, but couldn’t devote enough time to create a fully fleshed out
character. That said, Gyllenhaal brings enough charisma to the role to justify
his appearance; you’re just left wanting more.
If anything, the main issue with Everest is that you’re left wanting more. It’s a true story with so
many characters it’s impossible to feel like the full story has been told in
two hours. Thankfully, there are multiple books and articles that delve deeply
into the individual experiences. So Everest
is more of a snapshot of Everest and all the human drama that comes with it. It
is a very effective film that makes you appreciate (and question) the struggle
people go through to achieve their dreams. As a short glimpse into the world of
commercial climbing and the tragedy it can bring, Everest works on every important level. It won’t (and can’t) answer
the question of why people climb Everest, but it does present a fascinating
example of people who took up the challenge and paid the ultimate price.
Everest receives a:
No comments:
Post a Comment