Tribeca Review: Driving Lessons
Filed under: Comedy, Drama, Tribeca, Theatrical Reviews, Harry Potter
Aside from its dialects and locations being distinctively English and Scottish, Driving Lessons feels very American. The coming-of-age film, which stars a stone-faced Rupert Grint (Ron Weasley from the Harry Potter films), has a story that seems straight off the assembly line of our own indie scene. Some of the conventions used in the script include the out-of-his-league crush, the casual virginity-loss, the overbearing and/or religious parent, the life-changing road-trip, and the cross-generational relationship that begins as student-mentor and ends as everlasting friendship. Such tried-and-true elements are not specific to the States, but with so many novice filmmakers here relying on generic adolescence as their easy starting point, the conventions have become staples of American cinema.
Grint plays Ben, a boy so far on the verge of manhood that he states his age as precisely 17½. He's not very ready for the world, though, thanks to his strict, protective mother (Laura Linney) and his weak father (Nicholas Farrell). When urged to get a summer job, Ben finds employment as an assistant for an aging actress named Dame Evie Walton (Julie Walters, who plays Grint's mom in the Harry Potter films), who not only helps him to grow up, but also helps him to have fun with the transition into adulthood, as well.
At first Ben's duties consist of simple care-taking, escorting and cleaning, but eventually Evie cons him into playing chauffeur, too. This becomes a little problem since Ben doesn't actually have his license, and then it becomes a bigger problem when he's forced to drive up to Edinburgh for a poetry reading, as Ben's mother has already forbid him to be gone overnight.
Walters, who earned an Oscar nomination for her brilliant mentor role in Billy Elliot, is the only person truly alive in Driving Lessons, but she overdoes her performance by about 1000 percent. She plays the eccentric theater vet as a loud, cursing, fast-talking old lady, and we've seen it all before, only more subdued. Perhaps she only appears as vibrant as she does because Grint is her expressionless opposite, but most of the time when she should be funny she comes off annoying.
The interesting thing about the most common, cliché narratives is they are often the most personal to their filmmakers. Jeremy Brock, known best as the screenwriter of Mrs. Brown and as co-creator of the British hospital soap-opera Casualty, makes his directorial debut with Driving Lessons, which he loosely based on his summer working for the Oscar-winning actress Peggy Ashcroft. No real-life is as cookie-cutter cute as the film, though, and it is a wonder if a more genuine approach might have made for a more honest, intriguing story, or a more quietly dull one. They say that truth is stranger than fiction, but as we see in most autobiographical coming-of-age films, adolescent truth is just as boring as adolescent fiction.
_thumbnail.jpg)
Fan Made: Steampunk 'Return of the Jedi' Figures_thumbnail.jpg)
Exclusive: 'A Christmas Tale' Poster Premiere_thumbnail.jpg)
Cinematical's Fourth Annual Halloween Costume Contest is Coming!
Netflix Unleashes Another Batch of "Forgotten" Flicks
Geek Daily: Wolverine, 'Batman 3', 'Punisher' and 'Kick-Ass'
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg){kind=spacer}
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
5-02-2006 @ 7:05PM
Finished.Law.School said...
It's Ron from Harry Potter!!!!!!!!!!
He'll always be Ron from Harry Potter no matter what film he is in. Maybe he could try being the killer in a horror movie or a dork in a dork film but anything else and he will always be Ron.
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 8:53PM
Steph said...
I saw the film and thought it was wondeful. Rupert was supposed to be closed off in the beginning- he was not "stone-faced." He played someone who was an observer in his own life and he did so brilliantly. He was not supposed to appear vibrant and a live- that is the entire point of the film.
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 9:03PM
Christopher Campbell said...
I am aware of the intent in his lack of expression, but I still thought he could have seemed a little more alive. I mostly blame Brock, who clearly was directing him to stare off blankly and look as sullen as possible for the first half of the film. It resulted in an extremely bland performance regardless.
Anyway, stone-faced shouldn't necessarily be taken as bad. Buster Keaton was stone-faced throughout his films, and he was a genius.
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 9:42PM
sweeney said...
"stone faced ". Well, I didn't really have high expectations of Rupert. His Ron in the HP movies is awkwardly comical and he has difficulty with emotional scenes. Still, this is a great venture outside of the HP backyard.
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 9:44PM
Melissa said...
I saw the movie too, I think this review is spot on, Rupert didn't show too much emotions, some of his lines were too force, I think for now he should stay in HP!
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 10:25PM
Steph said...
I understand your opinion, but I still disagree. I thought that Rupert's "blandness" at the start actually worked very well, especially in contrast to the charcter's funny and emotional moments later on. Rupert's character, Ben, was bland at the start and I don't think it was the performance, but the character. Those moments, such as when Ben incredoulously screams "You swallowed the f---ing key" would not have been nearly as hilarious if it had not been one of the first imes we saw genuine emotion from the character. I think that the character was sleep-walking through life until he met Evie and learned how to express himself. The scene in the bath tub said it all- he was drowning.
I agree that there were certainly moments that seemed a bit obvious- the loss of virginity, etc., but they worked for the film. There needed to be certain rites of passage to show the character developing from a living death to a teenager trying to figure out his direction in life. By definition, rites of passage are well-known events, and therefore, can be misconstrued as cliched or formulaic. I thought the film was truly well written and well acted. Grint played a distinct character and showed that he can handle roles outside of Ron Weasley. He was genuinely funny in more of a straight-man way, and did not fall back on the obvious comedy we are used to seeing from him in the Harry Potter films. He is just a natural actor and I believe that his performace was layered, not bland, and that was clear by the end of the film. Of course, we may have to agree to disagree.
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 10:27PM
d said...
well, personally, i didn't c this movie, but i saw Rupert Grint in HP movies, & i know that he is NOT :
"awkwardly comical and he has difficulty with emotional scenes".
He's a great comic, & the few emotional scenes he had , he carried them well.
most HP critics & directors say that he's the most naturally talanted of the trio, & that's what i can c very obviously, even his co-stars colleagues say that about him. Personally, if it wasn't for his comic scenes & the special effects in the 4th HP movie(GoF), i would have considered that movie a total waste in the HP movie series.
Reply
5-02-2006 @ 10:53PM
garada said...
to sweeney : well i did not see this movie (DL), but i saw Rupert Grint in the HP movies, and he is NOT :
"awkwardly comical and he has difficulty with emotional scenes".
He is a very brilliant comic young actor, his comic acting is so natural & a lot of fun to watch, & the few "emotional scenes" he had as Ron, he carried them well.
A lot of HP critics & directors say that he is the most naturally talented of the HP kids, & that is what i can see very obviously. Even his co-stars & colleagues say that about him.
Personally, if it wasnt for his comic scenes & the special effects in the 4th HP movie (GoF), i would have considered this movie a total waste in the HP movie series.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 2:31AM
sophie said...
Its funny that you should say the film is typical of the American indie scene, because from what I have seen it strikes me as interchangable with most British cinema. And when I say British cinema, I mean the usual "worthy" Julie Walters-featuring stodge, such as Calender girls, Billy Elliot, and too many other identikit films to name. They really do irk me.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 2:36AM
Liz said...
I'm aware that Mr. Campbell's intent here was to evaluate the artistic merit of this film and he's done so with grace (though I'm the sort who'll have to see it myself to form my own opinion).
Yet it's hard to believe that artistic merit alone will affect the ultimate success or failure of this film. All of the leading cast have their own ready fan bases, not the least of which belongs to Mr Grint. It's been announced that a second theater has been scheduled at Tribeca for the "Driving Lessons" May 6 showing in order to house all of those who could not be admitted to the other sold-out showings. Surely this will catch the attention of many a studio exec much faster than any given performance. The studios care not if the paying patron is a cinema connessieur or a sixteen-year-old spending her babysitting earnings. There are a lot of female under-30's out there with a pocketful of cash who are ready, willing, and anxious to watch Rupert Grint in this film.
If nothing else,we know that one thing is most assuredly more important to the studios than bringing great cinema to the world.
Cha-ching.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 3:34AM
April said...
i've seen it!! Julie is wonderful and Rupert is awesome!! Laura's character is not very likable but she did a wonderful job as always. definitely 1 of the best films this year. a lovely feel good movie.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 3:53AM
Selma* said...
I totatlly agree with the above person and i would like to say, RON ROX IN THE HP MOVIES AND HE IS SOOOOOOO CUTE!
Glad thats of my chest.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 7:55AM
Chingala said...
Has this guy even read the Harry Potter books? Well of course Rupert is awkwardly comical! He's not even supposed to be all that comical to begin with! I think he's a tad bit too critical. If Rupert's acting is bad, then Emma Watson is abysmal. Actually, it already is abysmal, so whatever. Eitherway, Rupert in my opinion is really good, and I cannot wait to watch this movie.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 8:56AM
Kate said...
I watched the movie and I really liked it and I really thought it was brilliant and moving. I'm sure it will be one of my favourites, if not my favourite for the year. I don't think that everyone will get it. I found how they portrayed Rupert at the beginning a very apt way to show his progress and character growth as the film progresses and he had some really wonderful scenes. As for Julie, she is supposed to be over the top as that is what the character calls for. So therefore, while it's good reading your opinion, I have to really strongly disagree. I think maybe you just didn't get what they were aiming for and not everyone will get it as I said before.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 10:55AM
Layla said...
Well, I have not seen the movie yet, but I do know that Rupert is a wonderful actor for his age, and he is only ripening. In the Harry Potter movies, it's easy to lose sight of his performance in the glow of Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson's, as they always have much more screen time, but if you watch closely (and have read the books and have a knowledge and feel for who Ron Weasley is)he is doing a fantastic job. Really brilliant. And I can't wait to see him in this and all other future projects, because I have all the faith in the world that he will be great. :)
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 11:08AM
Christopher Campbell said...
8. Sophie: I would have expected that sort of feel-good British film as well, but it just wasn't the same. I think the American music separated it from that style mostly.
12. Chingala: I don't know if you're talking about me, but I have read the Harry Potter books and seen the films and think Grint is wonderful in them. That is why I have decided to blame the director for his insisting on a boring portrayal of Ben.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 11:12AM
carla said...
well, think of it this way...how would you be if you grew up in a strictly christian way. i'd have "an extremely bland performance" too. that's the way the charactor is suppose to be, and from what i've seen of the movie rupert does very good, + his "sullen" and "blankly" look is very cute.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 12:09PM
Connie said...
Garada: the directors and writers of the HP movies think he is the most natural COMICAL actor, no the most natural actor overall, they think he is great in comedy but after seeing this movie "Driving Lessons" I have to say that he should stick with comedy, Rupert has a goofy face that do wonders for comedy!
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 12:16PM
Camile said...
Great Review!!
I saw this movie, and for me the only one that was worth mentioning was Julie Walters, I know sometimes she made her characters to cartoonist (not real), way too overdone, but even with the overdone characterization she was great, Rupert on the other hand had so many moments that were empty and, YES, stone-faced, he didn’t show too much of emotions, even when he was screaming at his mother, it didn’t show any passion, it wasn’t that believable.
I think the film was ok, but I didn’t feel for any other characters, I guess only fans of this kid Rupert will feel something, but someone outside the fan-girl word, will see it differently.
Reply
5-03-2006 @ 12:21PM
Katia said...
I will grade the actors 1-10, 1(bad) 10 (best)
Julie Walters: 9 (she was great)
Laura Linney: 9 (annoyingly perfect)
Rupert Grint: 5 (please don’t do Drama)
I think Julie really save this movie from been a really bad movie, I guess Jeremy should also continue writing and not directing.
Reply