•
Rating: After the radical narrative choices of Boyhood, Linklater returns to a more traditional cinema, which however does not abandon some strong prerogatives that reached their extreme consequences with the previous film. A naturalistic cinema that attempts to eliminate any possible barrier between artistic form and life. Obviously, in this case, the diegetic structure is not as disorienting and radical as that of Boyhood; there are trend lines and a selection in the narrative material. But not too much: Linklater manages to tell a story, a specific matter, but immerses it in a river where everything flows naturally, dragging with the current so much material, not always essential. And that is a great value for a film like this, where the narrative is not constrained by overly tight, almost suffocating plot necessities. There is a choral scenario narrated with rare mastery, without overly artificial and superficial cuts and stitches; nonetheless, it reaches a construct, a meaningful focus, a specific reflection.
The superficial theme is that of the transition phase between high school and college, but more deeply, it finds a nice reasoning on identity and about going more or less with the flow. Maturing necessarily involves swimming a little in the opposite direction; this can be more or less traumatic. The group can be fierce, can corner the individual (Bufalo), but it is not a fixed rule and those who take different paths from the more predictable ones are not necessarily ostracized (Jake). Linklater’s reading thus does not fall into easy schematism; it is a rich fresco that does not go in one single direction, does not want to postulate a thesis. One observes a phase of life common to everyone, or at least to many, with its harshness and its joys, its happiness and its contradictions, and a reading key is suggested, a litmus test to deepen reflection on what has been seen.
The additional quality of the film is given by the fact that this reflection almost never affects the film's fabric, focused on elements of pure entertainment, highly enjoyable, with almost no stop at the rhythmic level. Under a facade that might thus seem frivolous, Linklater's implicit analyses develop. But the whole is highly enjoyable even in its most prurient and easy exteriority. Everybody Wants Some!! also works as a film on the collage of pure entertainment, because it enjoys felicitous writing, highly adherent to reality, and really presents many interesting cues in itself: from the music to the endless gags and jokes, to the various games among the students, the characters portrayed masterfully, their quirks, the temporal structure set on a countdown (the last 72 hours before classes). In short, a real narrative feast.
A few words must be spent to praise the character-building ability. Even towards the end of the film, only a few names are remembered, but each student is perfectly characterized, with those two or three elements per head that are sufficient to give vividness to the group of friends. In this sense, script management is really surgical: there is a bit of space for everyone, sooner or later. The introduction of the various guys is not all polarized at the beginning of the film, but well spread out at different moments, so as to guarantee perfect assimilation by the viewer. In this way, after the short two hours of the film, it almost feels like truly knowing the various rascals that form the baseball team at the center of the story. Certainly, a commendable casting also contributes: the nice protagonist, the sly sex-obsessed but loyal friend, the crazy overly competitive one, the tough but ultimately good one, the stoner pretending to be young, and so on. The human types are perfectly embodied by the various actors, many of whom are not yet particularly known. Zoey Deutch might be on the rise.
The music, in addition to being an almost uninterrupted background, is used interestingly to identify the various environments that the protagonists alternately frequent, always on the hunt for ladies. There is the disco club, the country one, or even the punk one. In this sense, the choice of the year 1980 proves decisive in identifying a historical moment of transition, a historical-musical-cultural turning point, which is then a reference to the moment experienced by the boys. As the musical genres, the environments, and the lifestyles of the society fray, so the initial unity of the group will soon diverge into perhaps even antithetical paths. From the historical reconstruction point of view, the work on the costumes is splendid and decisive.
Also, on a chronological level, the staging of the story within a limited time frame of the three days before the start of classes (a nod to Dazed and Confused, which took place in 24 hours) works well; the events take on a more intense connotation because they represent a sort of swan song before the start of academic efforts and, metaphorically, adulthood. In this limited time frame, many preliminary issues are played out, which perhaps will then crystallize. We are on the threshold of adulthood, the choices made could take on special importance. But even here, Linklater is not certain: the descriptive vocation prevails over the prescriptive one. Everyone does a bit of what they want; there is the one who settles down and the one who, on the contrary, might succumb to temptations.
7.5/10
Loading comments slowly
