Cast: Tom Hiddleston, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Karen Gillen, Mark Hamill, Mia Sara, Jacob Tremblay, Matthew Lillard, Benjamin Pajak, Cody Flanagan, Carl Lumbly, David Dastmalchian, Harvey Guillen, Michael Trucco, Q’Oorianka Kilcher, Violet McGraw, Kate Segal, Heather Langenkamp, Nick Offerman

Written and Directed By: Mike Flanagan (based on the story by Stephen King)

Original Score By: The Newton Brothers

Release Year: 2025

Studio: Neon

Runtime: 111 minutes

Audio Description Produced By: Point 360

Written By:

Narrated By: Tansy Alexander

What Is it?: Told in reverse chronological order, the film tackles a seemingly average human, and breaks their life up into three parts. We start with the end, which is not just the end of Chuck’s life, but likely the end of the world. The middle chapter is Chuck as an adult, having a compulsion to dance. the final chapter is chuck as a kid, growing up with his grandparents (Hamill, Sara).

What Works: I’ve seen this called life affirming, and it was the Toronto Film Festival’s Audience Award Winner, but this didn’t do much for me. I love Flanagan, especially his limited series on Netflix, but also most of his films. He has an eye for dramatizing horror in such a way that makes him stand out. his films can still be scary, and gory, but he knows how to write characters with emotional depth. in a film that isn’t scary or gory, he’s surprisingly at a disadvantage, as he’s not sure how to keep the audience on edge, or if he even should.

The film works through a series of sparks of perfection. His cast is strong, but often denied just the little bit they need to transcend into the best performances of the year. Mark Hamill is a standout, because he has a few good scenes, but honestly a similar role in Brigsby Bear showcased him more. Even Flanagan’s own Fall Of The House Of usher gave Hamill a richer character. Hamill is only in a third of the film, and even in his own act, he’s a supporting player. However, his character has so much potential, which is never actualized. Mia Sara, who plays his wife, is the same thing. Lovely moments, not enough of them.

In the first part, Chiwetel Ejiofor does fine playing a guy trying to live his life while the world collapses, but his character is denied any true emotional resonance as he seems to be searching for his ex-wife (Gillan), and just as he finds her, Flanagan flips on his weird switch and chooses to instead focus on all of the “Thanks Chuck” signage that propagates the first act. And the middle is just Tom Hiddleston dancing, albeit gloriously, but out of context of anything.

Sure, the film has an ending, which attempts to tie everything together, but instead of feeling like a pretty professionally wrapped gift, it looks like something hastily wrapped moments ago. Flanagan clearly wanted to do something a little different, without fully leaving his genre, so he dips his toes in where he can, but he really needed to abandon it altogether. While Music Of the Heart is not a groundbreaking work by any means, it is kind of amazing when you realize Wes Craven directed it. Flanagan needed to do that here, but do it better. If Craven can direct Meryl Streep to an Oscar nomination, there’s no reason Flanagan couldn’t have gotten one out of someone in this talented ensemble.

What Doesn’t Work: While most of what I just said is also leaning negative, i just didn’t feel the connection to this. I wasn’t moved by Chuck, his life, or anything Flanagan seems to want me to connect with. there are brief moments of brilliance that keep this film barely afloat, but I was underwhelmed, perhaps because this was oversold. Had this not been the winner at TIFF, or ever in the Oscar conversation, perhaps it would feel more like we were allowed to just watch a mike Flanagan deviation without any preconceived ideas of excellence. Instead, it was marketed as a diamond in the rough, but I got a really pretty cubic zirconia. It might work in a pinch, and fool people as needed, but it is not a diamond.

The Audio Description: Lovely work from Point 360. Tansy is always a welcome narrator, but whoever wrote this did some lovely work in the dance sequence, as well as all of the mentions of the signage in the first act. Even when Gillan is walking around the empty hospital, and the machines are running, that was handled well. One of the better tracks for a drama film this year.

Why You Might Like it: I’m in the minority here, but a lot of people adore this, and I expect it to appear in at least some top 10 lists. A lot of film is subjective, and some people will connect with this more. If you love Mike Flanagan or Stephen King, that would be another reason to watch. I’d also say check it out for Mark Hamill.

Why you Might Not Like It: I think Flanagan just simply has reached greater emotional depths before with some of his horror oriented work. Even his direction of Carla Gugino in Gerald’s Game is richer than this.

Final thoughts: this is so close to being in the middle, but it came down to me rooting for a handful of things, including being an overall fan of Flanagan, and still holding out hope that Hamill could pull a magic trick and finally be an Oscar nominee. the Life of Chuck doesn’t have the dramatic weight it does to push its life affirming narrative, and suggests perhaps that Flanagan is afraid to move too far away from his comfort zone. However, a talented cast does their best to keep you engaged, with what they are given.

Fresh: 6.1/10