The current, somewhat glib joke about George Clooney as a filmmaker is that he makes movies that “don’t exist,” i.e., are not made for the current cinematic zeitgeist and are often out of step with what the culture is watching and consuming. And there’s an argument to be made, no matter how shallow and maybe that ageist the joke is, that there’s something to it, perhaps going as far back as 2008’s throwback comedy “Leatherheads,” which really wasn’t for audiences at the time either. Often a very classicist, old-school Hollywood filmmaker in his taste, the last movie of Clooney’s that felt relevant was 2011’s “Ides Of March,” and films like “The Monuments Men,” “Suburbicon” and “The Midnight Sky” have come and gone almost immediately (at least in cultural conversation). And the filmmaker’s been working at a fast clip of late too, having released three films since 2020. This leads us to his latest, 2023’s “The Boys In The Boat,” an old-fashioned, vintage sports drama about underdogs that feels like it could have been made in 1985 next to “Chariots Of Fire.”
READ MORE: The 21 Best Films Of 2023
If you’re cynically looking at Clooney as old and out of step with what modern-day audiences want, “The Boys In The Boat” won’t change your mind and will provide plenty of ammo for your argument. However, taken on its own merits and for what it is, “The Boys In The Boat,” as familiar and conventional as it can be, is still handsomely well-crafted, features a strong cast of relative newcomers, and can rouse the spirit like any quintessential Hollywood feel-good movie can.
It is very gentlemanly and elegant, though, and a little safe, so mileage will vary, but despite how out of touch the film may be—and it’s hard to argue that most audiences are clamoring for this film—it’s Clooney making what he wants, doing so on his terms and doing it well. Still, describing its story probably won’t win over many pessimists who have already made up their minds about it either.
Based on the New York Times bestselling non-fiction novel written by Daniel James Brown and adapted by Mark L. Smith (“The Revenant”), ‘Boys’ is set in 1936 and centers on the University of Washington rowing team that competed for gold at the Summer Olympics in Berlin. Also established during the height of the Great Depression, the story centers on Joe Rantz (Callum Turner, looking like an archetypal All-American Boy), a kid down on his luck with a vagabond father who vanished and can barely pay for his university tuition. Having led a hard-scrabble life, having to had to fend for himself since he was a kid, when those semester fees come a-knockin’, and Rantz needs more time to scrounge up change, he quickly starts looking for any side hustle that’ll pay his way. And he quickly discovers that being selected for the school’s elite rowing team is a generously paying gig. Believing it to be easy money, he’s quickly disabused of the notion and discovers the crew only picks a few select members, and the competition is stiff.
Despite a bit of a chip on his shoulder about his circumstances, Turner eventually earns his way onto the team and is joined by a raggedy motley crew of other boys, most of them much more affluent than him. The plot from there is rather straightforward and garden-variety. The hard-nosed coach, Al Ulbrickson (Joel Edgerton, workman-like, but super effective in the role), demands much from his team and sees a lot of talent in his boys. But he has to shape raw talent, grind them down, and work them hard to function as a successful collective unit. But eventually, after many hard-fought, skin-of-their-teeth, come-from-behind victories, they make the grade and ultimately make it to the summer Olympics. Money does become an issue, though, and they have to pinch and scrounge from their communities to collect a fee; otherwise, they forfeit their spot to a privileged Ivy League college, none of whom are as good but face no financial burdens.
Admittedly, “Boys In The Boat” is pretty standard stuff in design, the always-bouncing back underdogs tale, but its cast and its direction really elevate the material. You’ve seen the story before, but it does inspire regardless. Chiseled and lean, Turner is an absolute bonafide star for sure, and Edgerton is pitch-perfect in the role. The cast and rowing crew are full of fresh new performers, and many of them—Jack Mulhern, Sam Strike, Alec Newman, Peter Guinness, and Luke Slattery—feel like faces we’ll see more of in the future. The shining Hadley Robinson, in particular, as Turner’s love interest, really leaps off the screen with winning magnetism, a really charming presence in what is a sea of mostly men.
But arguably, the film’s true ace in the hole is two-time Oscar-winning composer Alexandre Desplat (“The Grand Budapest Hotel” and “The Shape of Water”), whose soaring score really lifts and gives every moment wings, but especially the rousing sports sequences that are incredibly well shot by cinematographer Martin Ruhe (not to mention artfully well-paced, edited and constructed for maximum slowly-escalating drama). Desplat makes magic, frankly, and there arguably no one in the business who can assemble that crescendo of stirring, anthemic encouragement, and twinkling faint sense of hope as he so elegantly can.
“The Boys In The Boat” does not reinvent the wheel, and it does tend to run out of steam in the final act, having already hit all the sentimental, classical, upbeat, and optimistic notes that are left to play, but by and large, it’s quite good at what it is, and there’s something to be said for that instead of facile dismissal right out of hand.
In a challenging movie climate like this, you certainly may ask yourself why Clooney is seemingly making time travel movies or time capsule films taken from the mid-1980s. Who are these movies for—aside from the exact kind of audience that doesn’t seem to pay to see movies in theaters anymore? The reality may be these films are for parents, older generations, and or Oscar voters; but clearly, someone is still financing them and trusts his well-honed vision. The truth is, at 62, Clooney might be out of step with what’s currently popular and or just Film Twitter and Film critics, who don’t represent everyone as much as they’d like to think they do. But at his current rate and pace (almost a film a year), there appears to be an appetite for what he makes, even if it feels the opposite of anything au courant or buzzing with timeliness. His out-of-current-fashion movies can feel quaint in some ways, but more power to the filmmaker who can make whatever the hell they want and do it well and do so on their own terms. [C+/B-]