In "Hick" the main question to be made is if we're really aiming at the right direction due to the fact this film strange proposition. I don't know if it's a case of being a bad thing, a bad project or the director's idea is to make us interested in the people we're not supposed to and ignore the characters and situations we should cheer for. I believe that this was the main cause for this getting such low ratings in here, viewers got confused with what was settled here. I liked it because I could notice brilliant things in this distorted aspect. However, there's plenty of things to be bothered about "Hick".
Coming from a strange family, almost an broken home, the 13 year-old Luli McMullen (Chloë Grace Moretz) decides to leave her home in Nebraska and hitchhike all the way to Las Vegas just to see what's going on in the apparently happy place, the complete opposite of her current state. On the way, she meets with a wannabe cowboy named Eddie (Eddie Redmayne, the best thing in the movie), they'll keep meeting each other throughout the film; Glenda (Blake Lively) of whom they'll share some load of problems and develop a certain bond between them; and some other characters (played by Alec Baldwin, Rory Culkin and others) that we think they'll have some deep importance in the story but they're just mere cameos or of very small influence in the plot.
"Hick" could be a good story about the process of growing up, the difficulties faced by a child while going through the adolescence, and in this case under extreme and harsh circumstances. I don't see "Hick" in that way and some even thinks this is a young re-telling of "True Romance". I see it as an quite hollowed narrative that loses its purpose halfway through with no much to give. So, Luli keeps feeding us with thoughts about her dead brother she never met, creating some fantasy seen through lots of happy drawings and what's the point of all that? There's so much more in her life during the journey and she never makes comments on those moments, and we should be close to her, that's what voice-overs are for. Instead of making us close to her the story makes us hate the character for a while not only because she's obnoxious and irritating but because the actress playing her isn't helping at all. Moretz doesn't make a good show in here.
This is part of the confusion I was telling about. Are we supposed to like more of the "bad" guy than for the lead character? My case was that I cared more for Eddie (both actor and character with the same name) than her. He starts off as being a quite polite, friendly guy, and little by little we discover how violent and twisted he can get, and he has this strange fascination for Lily, all going towards to the edge of a tragedy. Here's a young actor showing how skillful he can be, convincingly playing an Southern character (remember, he's British) and giving a side of him we didn't know, acting tough and all (the scene in the bar is very scary). Together, he and the girl have some wonderful moments that saves the film from the obscurity.
Far from being so bad as many claim this is yet also far from being so great and inspiring as some also tend to say, "Hick" is worthy of a somewhat careless view just to kill the curiosity and because despite the many problems the story's pacing is quite good. 6/10
Coming from a strange family, almost an broken home, the 13 year-old Luli McMullen (Chloë Grace Moretz) decides to leave her home in Nebraska and hitchhike all the way to Las Vegas just to see what's going on in the apparently happy place, the complete opposite of her current state. On the way, she meets with a wannabe cowboy named Eddie (Eddie Redmayne, the best thing in the movie), they'll keep meeting each other throughout the film; Glenda (Blake Lively) of whom they'll share some load of problems and develop a certain bond between them; and some other characters (played by Alec Baldwin, Rory Culkin and others) that we think they'll have some deep importance in the story but they're just mere cameos or of very small influence in the plot.
"Hick" could be a good story about the process of growing up, the difficulties faced by a child while going through the adolescence, and in this case under extreme and harsh circumstances. I don't see "Hick" in that way and some even thinks this is a young re-telling of "True Romance". I see it as an quite hollowed narrative that loses its purpose halfway through with no much to give. So, Luli keeps feeding us with thoughts about her dead brother she never met, creating some fantasy seen through lots of happy drawings and what's the point of all that? There's so much more in her life during the journey and she never makes comments on those moments, and we should be close to her, that's what voice-overs are for. Instead of making us close to her the story makes us hate the character for a while not only because she's obnoxious and irritating but because the actress playing her isn't helping at all. Moretz doesn't make a good show in here.
This is part of the confusion I was telling about. Are we supposed to like more of the "bad" guy than for the lead character? My case was that I cared more for Eddie (both actor and character with the same name) than her. He starts off as being a quite polite, friendly guy, and little by little we discover how violent and twisted he can get, and he has this strange fascination for Lily, all going towards to the edge of a tragedy. Here's a young actor showing how skillful he can be, convincingly playing an Southern character (remember, he's British) and giving a side of him we didn't know, acting tough and all (the scene in the bar is very scary). Together, he and the girl have some wonderful moments that saves the film from the obscurity.
Far from being so bad as many claim this is yet also far from being so great and inspiring as some also tend to say, "Hick" is worthy of a somewhat careless view just to kill the curiosity and because despite the many problems the story's pacing is quite good. 6/10