Mike Flanagan is no stranger to adapting Stephen King’s work, but like King himself, he’s tended to stick to horror. THE LIFE OF CHUCK represents a foray into King’s more literary work and, with its formally experimental structure and its genuinely life-affirming joyfulness, also represents a renewed confidence for Flanagan in his own writing.
The world is falling apart. Marty Anderson (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a small-town high school teacher, stumbles along with his life even as the USA’s infrastructure collapses, the internet goes off (even Pornhub, we’re told), and California dissolves into the sea like an aspirin in water. As the world ends and he tries to reconnect with his ex-wife, Felicia (Karen Gillan), they both suddenly start seeing billboards and ads thanking someone called Charles Krantz (Tom Hiddleston) for 39 great years. The Charles Krantz billboards are on every street corner and every bus stop: “Our last meme”, as Marty tells an elderly undertaker (Carl Lumbly), also journeying through the ruins of American civilisation.
“The confidence to experiment formally with narrative structure and to lose some of the more gimmicky aspects of his Netflix horror series speaks to [Mike Flanagan’s] new confidence in his writing.”
The film then moves backwards from this intriguing opening – labelled as ‘Act Three’ – into the preceding two acts of the narrative, exploring the identity of the mysterious Charles Krantz. While this reverse chronology threatens to unmoor the film as it loses focus on the earlier players in its large cast, Flanagan wisely inserts an overarching voiceover narration from Nick Offerman, which not only ties the film’s disparate parts together but provides a welcome narrative throughline in a way that also inserts King’s unique authorial voice.
THE LIFE OF CHUCK doesn’t stray too far from Flanagan’s directorial staples: like his previous projects – including series The Haunting of Hill House, Midnight Mass, and his previous King film adaptations, DOCTOR SLEEP and GERALD’S GAME – Flanagan brings some of his frequent cast members and the lengthy monologues that bedevil his scripts. But these recognisable elements work alongside a new direction for Flanagan. The confidence to experiment formally with narrative structure and to lose some of the more gimmicky aspects of his Netflix horror series speaks to a new confidence in his writing. That conviction leads what could have been an irritatingly idiosyncratic film in the direction of something special.
“There’s a certain tinge of Charlie Kaufman-esque postmodernity, but it’s deployed in a far more joyful and life-affirming way than Kaufman and ultimately seems more akin to Frank Capra.”
The end result is a beautiful and intriguing little puzzle of a film that works best the less you know about it. There’s a certain tinge of Charlie Kaufman-esque postmodernity, but it’s deployed in a far more joyful and life-affirming way than Kaufman and ultimately seems more akin to Frank Capra. Though some may find THE LIFE OF CHUCK a little saccharine, for others it will be the rare kind of film that makes them want to get out of their seat and dance out of the cinema.
The title character proves to be more than a MacGuffin or J.J. Abrams mystery box; he takes his place as the beating emotional heart at the centre of the film. Chuck contains multitudes and, as he expresses the joy of movement, of dancing, and of life, we’re reminded that we all contain universes of people and memories. THE LIFE OF CHUCK is a daring and confident work for Mike Flanagan, and it will move you if you let it.