The Life of Chuck
Though I have deep love for “The Shining” and the “It” movies, I think my favorite Stephen King adaptation- the older I get- is Rob Reiner’s “Stand By Me.” Adapted from the author’s novella, The Body, it’s a film I grew up watching (despite its R rating), and it reflects the way I think back at my own childhood, to an extent, growing up in Ohio. Mike Flanagan’s “The Life of Chuck,” which adapts another King novella, is cut from a similar cloth, though not as grounded in reality. I am nine years older than Chuck Krantz when he passes away of a brain tumor in the film, but his life feels familiar to me. I don’t think my passing would bring forth the end of existence- Hell, the way things are going, the world is doing a great job of that on its own- but every life leaves a void, and I think that’s what this story is getting at. I really kind of loved it.
Flanagan’s film works its way back in time, first as it shows us the world before we’re introduced to Chuck, then it gradually brings Chuck into the story. The main characters we follow are a teacher (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and his ex-wife (Karen Gillan) as the world around them seems to collapse. No internet. Freak events, cars stopping suddenly, lights going out, and then, the stars in the sky disappearing. Throughout this section, we see commercials about Chuck, thanking him for 39 great years, but no one really seems to know who he is, and what he does. People are disappearing, and every interaction feels a bit more meaningful, whether it’s with a next door neighbor (Matthew Lillard), an old man on a bench (Carl Lumbly), or a little girl in his ex-wife’s neighborhood. Framing this part of the story are the immortal words of Carl Sagan, who looked at the lifespan of the universe in the context of a calendar year, where our existence only makes up a minute portion of the year. That perspective of human existence is more frightening than anything King could come up with.
Next, we move further back a bit more, and we see a young drummer (played by The Pocket Queen) set up on a corner. She puts a couple of dollars in a hat, but no one really contributes. We then get our first look- in person- at Chuck (Tom Hiddleston). The narration by Nick Offerman tells us all about Chuck- he’s a loyal husband, an ordinary person, and that he has nine months to live. When he starts to get closer to the drummer, she changes the beat, and he starts to dance. People start to crowd around, and he picks a partner out of the crowd. The money rolls in. It’s interesting how one life can have an unexpected impact on another.
We then see Chuck’s early life. We learn about his parent’s deaths when he’s seven, and his life with his grandparents (Mia Sera and Mark Hamill), and where his love of dance comes from. The film as a collective whole is beautiful, but this third act is where it hit me the hardest in my feels. The sense of loss when Sera’s character dies, the joy of his dancing, and the dynamics between Chuck and his grandfather. This is another wonderful late-era performance by Hamill, who has apparently flourished under Flanagan’s direction. (I’ll admit to being behind on his Netflix shows.) Honestly, there’s not a false note in the movie from a performance standpoint, and while the score by The Newton Brothers points to deep rivers of sentiment (which really come through in the third act), it doesn’t get maudlin. It touches all the right notes. At least, for me it did.
