Life (2015)

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

I never thought much of Dean's acting ability or his story until I saw this. It is multi-layered and engrossing. If you think Pattinson is a light-weight just see this film. He is the most interesting character, complex and tortured. He is the antipathy of the real James Dean and far more like the characters Dean played. "Life" confirms a very misunderstood canard about art reflecting life. It most often reflects what artists and directors want people to think. Hollywood was teaching kids to rebel and breakaway from traditional values. Giant, Rebel and many others created discontent with values. They did not actually mirror real life but the most obscure, irrelevant, and antagonistic situations that writers of this ilk believe in. These films began and created the tearing of the fabric of society that began in the 1950's. It is exactly what Hollywood is doing now even though so much damage has been done. The real James Dean was very close to his family, loved his home town and enjoyed all the people there. He loved fast cars and hot girls too. Fame was the ticket to get more wild experiences. He was not at all the tortured youth of his films.

This movie moved too slowly for its content, and the casting of James Dean ruined it for me. The actor had NONE of the qualities I remember about Dean (we had similar Porsches, and I lived near where he crashed), looks, personality, voice, etc., and they could have done so much better finding someone who at least conveyed the spirit of him. That face is critical. I don't care how good that actor is in general, it was lousy casting. The poetry quotes, etc., seemed out of context and beyond the mental capabilities of the real actor, who was really not that complicated. I would have liked to see more snippets of his actual movies/acting and a fuller display of the final Life photos rather than those few at the end. The interesting part of the movie was not Dean, but the photographer's life.

This was a stunningly boring movie. Pattinson turned in his usual sleeper performance - what's the old saying - "he could have mailed it in". DeHaan's James Dean character seemed obtuse and forced. Maybe Dean was this self-absorbed; I'd like to think otherwise. A real stinker of a flick. Definitely one not to waste your time on.The only scenes that offered any refreshing warmth and (perhaps)an authentic glimpse of Dean, were those shot on the farm back in Indiana. The Dean character seemed to become child-like and at ease with life; whereas back in L.A., Jack Warner was a constant thorn in Dean's non-conformist side.The rural settings of Indiana were a respite from the tedium of Pattinson's stare and DeHaan's seemingly unsure interpretation of the Dean character made this a very long movie.

A movie about James Dean stands or falls by the portrayal of the man. Everything else is secondary to capturing that unique mesmerizing person.I am a straight male, yet I remember the first time I googled that name and started browsing his photos. There was something there completely out of the ordinary. Strength with fragility, sadness with mischievousness, rebellion resting in the moment. Its like watching young Marlon Brando or Ryan Gosling in a movie like Drive, there is something extraordinary there your brain cant define but can understand.Dane DeHaan, who I don't know outside of this movie, could probably portray Justin Bieber just fine, but playing James Dean requires a different beast of an actor all together.