FILM REVIEW: “LOCKE”
I am not sure if the film is a stylistic trick, or a damn clever film.
Locke stars Tom Hardy ( I guess “Thomas” is too formal and someone in Hollywood was concerned he would be mistaken for a dead British author–it happens, you know.)
The film starts with Hardy’s character (“Locke”) driving to a hospital in London (or “to hospital” as they say across the pond), and saying while on the phone to the woman he is to meet, “I should be there in about 90 minutes” (or words to that effect).
And over the next 90 minutes we watch Locke make and receive numerous calls as he tries his best to keep his world from exploding.
The drama is not played out in images but in sound. We see no one but Locke and except for exterior shots of the road, the camera never leaves Locke, shot in side view and frontal close ups. (One disconcerting aspect of the film is that many shots are done through the windshield and not in the car–I don’t know if the director was trying to create a distance between the viewer and Locke or he had trouble squeezing the camera into the car.)
In any case, oddly, a series of believable and effective dramas (the Locke guy is NOT having a good 90-minute ride, believe me), are carried out on screen, realized by nothing more than Locke’s face and his voice and the voice of others, all via his car phone.
“Locke” is effective as a drama and one hopes it does not inspire a series of knockoffs (Tom Cruise texting his next performance in “Mission Impossible” part whatever).
