There are some aspects of films that we tend not to notice unless they're specifically strong or specifically weak. Pacing goes unnoticed unless it's too swift or too slow; tone goes unnoticed unless it's too charged or too soft; and so on. Though I recognize that it is regarded well, I regret to say that I find 'Key of life' to be a title that struggles with both pacing and tone, as they are notably dull. It's a bit of a wry dark comedy, yes, so such sensibilities may theoretically work in its favor, yet even at that the situational humor requires timing and energy, and this picture has neither. I see the wit in Uchida Kenji's screenplay and the vitality that's waiting to be drawn out from the performances. With rare exception that vitality is kept endlessly waiting, however, without a chance to flourish, and all the brimming potential of the screenplay is like air being blown into a balloon that will not inflate without the right technique - or in this case, the precise necessary spark in the direction.
So for all the skill I recognize in stars Sakai Masato, Kagawa Teruyuki, and Hirosue Ryoko, neither they nor their co-stars especially get a chance to demonstrate it. The clever plot and scene writing, and keen dialogue and characterizations, are not given the wings that they need to be able to fly. Those operating behind the scenes turned in fine work, and Uchida's direction is capable in the most fundamental terms of orchestrating shots and scenes. But even with some livelier or smarter moments scattered throughout, and certainly more so in the back end as events come to a head, as it presents the feature has been robbed of far, far too much of its strength. Did I laugh once throughout these two hours? Did this ever earn more than a warm smile? Well, yes - once, more than 80 minutes in.
I don't dislike 'Key of life.' Yet if I say that I like it, that feels a step too far. Under these circumstances it feels overlong well before it's over. How could a movie so neatly primed for success, with some sequences that are particularly ingenious, fail so hard to make a mark? It all comes down to pacing and tone. Bereft of the zest that would allow the narrative or its comedy to land, the viewing experience is flat, unimpressive, and almost altogether tedious. I see what it could have been, and it's not bad. Such verbiage, however, is not what recommendations are made of.
