Tammuz has crafted a solid work here. He focuses heavily on character, and his actors give the performances to match it. True, the vast majority of the humour comes from differences between characters from either side of the atlantic... but there is enough material there to bring the occasional belly laugh. Moments here and there are inspired (the railroad stands out), some are very moving, and all in all this is well worth a look.
7 Reviews
Well, I liked it
thesnowleopard28 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I couldn't figure out at first how a film that got so trashed by some critics could win so many awards. Now that I've seen it, it's fairly obvious--this flick has been mis- marketed like you would not believe. First of all, this ain't no comedy, not even a black comedy; it's a family drama. Sure, it has some laugh-out-loud moments, but the general storyline is dead serious--literally. By the time I got to Ian Tracey's monologue toward the end, I wasn't laughing at all, and the film was still good. Second, Sam West as Rupert may be top-billed and the story may be called "Rupert's Land", but the protagonist is actually his brother, Dale (Tracey's character). The movie begins with him and ends with him. It shows his life and his attempts to change it, not Rupert's. Most importantly, he's the only character who really changes and it's his half-baked idea of dragging his brother off on a road trip to their unlamented father's funeral that kicks the plot into motion. Dale doesn't have a clue what he's looking for. He just knows it doesn't involve turning into his father.
I could wish that Sam West had played Rupert with a bit more depth. One critic claimed that he was the only normal character in the movie. Hardly. Rupert is supposed to be the bastard son of a Canadian fisherman and a working-class Englishwoman, but West plays him as a stereotypical upper-class twit. If Rupert really were a self-made man, it would show sometimes; the mask would slip. It never does. This is disappointing. Toward the end, I was as sick of his whinging as the quietly competent Dale was and I wanted to slap him just as hard.
Compared to West's assay at "Carry On Up Canada", Tracey's ultra-low-key style works much better. He doesn't play Dale; he inhabits his life. Some very funny moments involving Dale just can't be described. It's not what he says; it's the way he says it, and the evil little smile he gets. Gabrielle Miller does an equally fine turn in a lesser role as Dale's pregnant girlfriend, Shelley. Like Dale, Shelley starts out looking like a familiar, and obnoxious, stereotype, but quickly develops into someone sympathetic and real. George Wendt as Bloat, the father's best bud, comes across as a caricature until a creepy part near the end where he changes from affable to abusive then back to affable again in just a few seconds without even seeming to notice. You immediately get a sense of what Dale has been fighting against his whole life, and why he would think Rupert was the lucky brother. Rupert is the one that got away.
Man, is this tough to get. It had a limited video release when it first came out but it was sheer coincidence I stumbled across a copy. I'm glad I did. No, it's not perfect. So, what? It's an independent film. They're experimental by definition, which always makes them a bit rough. This one is still fine, though. Tracey, in particular, thoroughly deserved his Leo and his performance makes the film worth watching just for that alone.
I could wish that Sam West had played Rupert with a bit more depth. One critic claimed that he was the only normal character in the movie. Hardly. Rupert is supposed to be the bastard son of a Canadian fisherman and a working-class Englishwoman, but West plays him as a stereotypical upper-class twit. If Rupert really were a self-made man, it would show sometimes; the mask would slip. It never does. This is disappointing. Toward the end, I was as sick of his whinging as the quietly competent Dale was and I wanted to slap him just as hard.
Compared to West's assay at "Carry On Up Canada", Tracey's ultra-low-key style works much better. He doesn't play Dale; he inhabits his life. Some very funny moments involving Dale just can't be described. It's not what he says; it's the way he says it, and the evil little smile he gets. Gabrielle Miller does an equally fine turn in a lesser role as Dale's pregnant girlfriend, Shelley. Like Dale, Shelley starts out looking like a familiar, and obnoxious, stereotype, but quickly develops into someone sympathetic and real. George Wendt as Bloat, the father's best bud, comes across as a caricature until a creepy part near the end where he changes from affable to abusive then back to affable again in just a few seconds without even seeming to notice. You immediately get a sense of what Dale has been fighting against his whole life, and why he would think Rupert was the lucky brother. Rupert is the one that got away.
Man, is this tough to get. It had a limited video release when it first came out but it was sheer coincidence I stumbled across a copy. I'm glad I did. No, it's not perfect. So, what? It's an independent film. They're experimental by definition, which always makes them a bit rough. This one is still fine, though. Tracey, in particular, thoroughly deserved his Leo and his performance makes the film worth watching just for that alone.
A Pointless Waste of Time
kdmode18 May 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This movie makes Canadians and Brits out to be asinine, moronic idiots. The men get stoned/drunk, and then they yell/beat each other up in almost every scene. The women are superfluous to the story I do not understand what they are there for they spend every scene causing a ruckus, or worse, milling around like mesmerized cattle. Apparently, Canadian women are either quarrelsome vulgar tramps or hulking hippie chicks. It's the standard knocked-up girlfriend, her loser boyfriend and his wicked mother ludicrousness that we have seen in countless movies before.
Every character here is a carping, infantile stereotype. Not to mention that they all looked like they need a shower! And the idea of any kind of scene implying sex with George Wendt shudder is enough to make anyone gag! I watched the movie because Samuel West was in it but I cannot understand why he would have accepted a role like this. Maybe he needed the money. Ian Tracey is a superb actor - the only one with a vague redeeming moment, but his talent is wasted here.
As for the rest of the plot the three imbeciles trying to get their dope back yawn - or Karl who is dead, but who is actually a character very much alive in the minds of those left behind (almost like Rebecca in Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece although I am ashamed to even have thought to compare these two films), why even bother? Karl is so galling that you find the circumstances of his death gratifying.
By the end of this wretched movie, I thought they would all have been better off going down with him on that boat!
Every character here is a carping, infantile stereotype. Not to mention that they all looked like they need a shower! And the idea of any kind of scene implying sex with George Wendt shudder is enough to make anyone gag! I watched the movie because Samuel West was in it but I cannot understand why he would have accepted a role like this. Maybe he needed the money. Ian Tracey is a superb actor - the only one with a vague redeeming moment, but his talent is wasted here.
As for the rest of the plot the three imbeciles trying to get their dope back yawn - or Karl who is dead, but who is actually a character very much alive in the minds of those left behind (almost like Rebecca in Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece although I am ashamed to even have thought to compare these two films), why even bother? Karl is so galling that you find the circumstances of his death gratifying.
By the end of this wretched movie, I thought they would all have been better off going down with him on that boat!
Witty and Charming Canadian Road Movie
fairestcat-110 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Rupert's Land is a delightful and very Canadian road movie. Set on the Sunshine Coast of northern British Columbia, Rupert's Land is the story of two brothers with almost nothing in common reunited after 20 years for their father's funeral. It's a story of clashing cultures and of mixed-up, messed-up family dynamics and also a sharp and loving portrayal of a place and a community like no other.
The acting is strong, with fabulous performances from Samuel West and Ian Tracey as the brothers and George Wendt as a friend of their father, and the scenery is stunning. Northern BC, Rupert's Land as it was once called, is a unique and beautiful place and this movie captures the feel and spirit of it beautifully.
The acting is strong, with fabulous performances from Samuel West and Ian Tracey as the brothers and George Wendt as a friend of their father, and the scenery is stunning. Northern BC, Rupert's Land as it was once called, is a unique and beautiful place and this movie captures the feel and spirit of it beautifully.
Worst Canadian Film Ever.
aardvarkdv21 April 2004
Not only was this the most expensive Canadian film ever shot in BC, but easily the worst, never seeing the light of day. The director is not even Canadian, but British, and boy does it show. We are all made out to be a bunch of over-sexed dope fiends and morons. The spirit of what it means to be Canadian is absent, and this is supposed to be the reason we fund this bunk. Of course the British character is normal. The rest are a crop of sitcom stereotype - can you say "Norm!!"? The cinematography ranges from pretty postcard images to murky indoor silhouettes. The actors always seem to be fidgetting. Are they as bored as the viewer, or is this the directors idea of cinema? Avoid this mess and check out some of Bruce Mcdonalds films. A true Canadian boy with something original to say cinematically. You won't be compelled to walk out on HIS films after 10 minutes.
A Wonderful Road Trip Movie
fiddleheads28 October 2005
My family loved this film. Not only because it was filmed in our home province of British Columbia and made references to so many of our local jokes and stories, but because it is a feel-good movie that leaves you smiling and laughing! The great acting and believable characters made me swear I got to know these people in real life. The fun (and sometimes unfortunate)plot developments made me feel like I was along for the ride on an epic road trip where everything seems to go wrong, but for all the right reasons, and in the end I'm thankful for everything that happened. Highly recommended by myself and my siblings, it's a film brothers should watch together. Only too bad I can't see it again since it's impossible to get a copy of.
A waste of time for a director that can do better
Kitty_Lester25 June 2003
Anyone that has see Tammuz's Child Eaters knows that this is a director that can do better. Let's hope it was not a case of too many hands in the pot (Telefilm anyone?)and that is was a case of second feature jitters. The characters are one dimensional and over used. The scenery is terrific however and showcases the Pacific Northwest beautifully.
The cinematography is great. Shot almost entirely outside, the images are crisp and beautiful. You can almost smell the wind blowing through the leaves.
Technically this movie is as sound as they come - it just lacks a heart.
The cinematography is great. Shot almost entirely outside, the images are crisp and beautiful. You can almost smell the wind blowing through the leaves.
Technically this movie is as sound as they come - it just lacks a heart.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
