Master Gardener

The concept of Master Gardener wasn't new at all, "a man with a troubled past tries to restart his life and so on". I still wanted to give it a try, since the cast and the director ensured some potential.

After the credits hit there was only one question left, what was it all about? There wasn't even that much dramatic stuff happening in the film, to be hoest, and since the characters are barely transofrmed by the situations they find themselves in - there was no noticeable arcs or transformations. In the end everything stayed almost exaclty the same, including the characters.

It felt like just a recollection of a couple of weeks from these peoples lives, including long, stretched scenes of driving around, eating, narrating diaries and so on. Almost like a basic pointless re-enacted documentary.

Scenes just dragged and dragged, slowing it down as much as possible. So when it felt like the movie is going to end, I wasn't sure what story is left to wrap up, since nothing really happened. The main character changed slightly in terms of coping with his past, but didn't really change that much.

Besides some basic people-flower metaphors, there was nothing of interest in this film, so in the end, indeed, this was a waste of my time.

Thank god for intelligent film making. This story of second chances and redemption is not without its problems but overall is time well spent if you actually want to watch a story unfold. The basic plot of bad man atoning for a past life through enabling others is a well worn furrow which usually ends in an orgy of violence or a tragic sacrifice but not so here. In Edgertons measured and nuanced performance we have a far better and more realistic journey as he demonstrates once again how underrated he is as an actor. Sigourney Weaver demonstrates just how damm good she is and relative newcomer Swindell holds her own. If I were to critise it would be the continuity and editing, at times I was left thinking that a scene was missing and some of the linkage plain didn't work, thankfully the overall arc of the story and the performances kept me interested enough to let the flaws slide. Give it a watch.

I have to say, I haven't seen any of the other two movies part of this thematic trilogy, but as far as I know they're independent stories.

To start with, the story is nothing original. It's been done many times before, and better.

The story of a guy with a dark past and set of skills, retired from that life, trying to live a quiet life in a small job, but trouble comes up and the guy goes back to old habits.

I know, that's not all there is here, but the rest, honestly, didn't blow my mind neither. I just didn't connect with the characters or what they do. And it's actually weird, because I do like gardening and nature in general, but it just didn't click for me.

Also, I felt the visual aspect wasn't great. I get the pale colour palette, but still, the shots didn't catch my eye or made an impression, except for the monotony and bland character of it. I know many won't be so exigent with this aspect, but I consider it an important aspect and with so many great cinematographers in the industry, if a movie doesn't have this aspect covered, I feel frustrated and disappointed. After all, movies are a visual form of entertainment, which include other many aspects, but it's a visual thing first!

Besides all that technical criticism, I found the ending quite weird, awkward, a bit cheesy and even slightly nonsensical at some degree, considering the character Norma (S. Weaver).

On the performances side, everyone give solid acts, that's the strongest point of the movie for sure.

Quite a disappointment, I was expecting this to be a solid movie, but it ended up being a mediocre piece, for me.

I didn't expect much and sat for a typical plot for a typical genre. The movie started slow but went to a climax quicker than I though. The core of the film impressed me the most when you realised the garden is a symbol of life and your choice in life will nourish what comes of it. It's not too late for anythingand there's always achance to have a garden full of colours and energy.

I guess we all had to make choices in life and there and that's why there is something for everyone in this movie.

You're in it for a treat. Good writing and a better cast is something that you don't see these days.

Sometimes, it seems, a gardener is not a simple man who just takes care flowers and herbs. Sometimes he takes form of Joel Edgerton and with an enigmatic and stoic look he riddles his audience a riddle regarding his true identity.

Narvel Roth is a well talented gardener, who works for a snob, rich and unpleasant land owner. It is not known what secret identity he has, but over the surface their relationship doesn't tell what else is there except very rich woman and her beloved employee, which prepares her garden for a flowers auction sale.

Once her grandniece enters their lives things rapidly change and the outer coating of Narvel starts to dry out and masks start to crack and fall down.

It is a classic enigmatic tale from Paul Schrader's line of creations. Though the movie is almost two hours of well-crafted tale and script, the movie maintains its relationship with the viewer and connects easily to the main characters.

It is sometimes weary but almost at all times this slow burner manages to compensate its audience and keep them involved with plot changing, while revealing small details, that will keep the tension and the viewer intriguing, regarding the following steps of the movie.

It is a movie for small festivals audiences, but it is well written, directed, shot and well performed by the main characters and another interesting creation from Schrader.