16 Years of Alcohol (2003)

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

To say this movie is about only alcoholism is losing the point. It's about growing up in a world of alcoholism. The best example is when the young boy is sitting in the room with his parents and they are clutching their alcoholic drinks and are covered with cobwebs. His parents aren't there. Sure they are there physically but the are lost in their own drunken worlds. And here is a young confused boy who needs guidance and knowledge of the world. Meanwhile his parents are off drinking and neglecting him in plain sight. So the rest of his years he struggles to define what it is to be normal, what is it to be in love, why people lie and act fake. His argument with the acting professor is not only about acting but it's a young boy as man trying to figure out why people are always acting and faking things.He struggles to express himself and his emotions. And he models the behavior of his parents and turns to alcohol himself. He has no model of love from a philandering alcoholic father so he struggles with love too.In short this is about being a child of alcohol and becoming one yourself, because the only thing you can remember from childhood is your parents covered in cobwebs clutching their own drinks.I can see why this movie isn't rated as high as it should be. The accents are thick for your average American and you may need closed captioning to make out some of the dialog.

I really loved this, even though I guess I have to admit on some level it had quite a few flaws. It was very much in the tradition of British "Angry Young Man" films, but at the same time clearly infused with a lot of influence from Wong Kar-Wai and Terrence Malick. Considering how I love each of those styles very much, it was really no surprise that I dug this quite a bit. Sure, the overtly "poetic" voice-over narration wasn't pulled off quite as well as when Malick does it (but then again, who else does?) and considering this film was shot on digital video it couldn't hope to capture Wong Kar-Wai's lush visuals (although, that said, it is easily one of the best looking digital productions I have ever seen, looking almost completely film-like most of the time, and in 2.35 aspect ratio at that), but it really overall held up amazingly well. I would be lying if I said the film wasn't at times blatantly indulgent in the way that only debut films can be, but the indulgence never seemed too contrived, but rather oddly enduring. The director obviously put his heart and soul, every idea he had, into this film, and it shows in a good way, even if the results are sometimes slightly clunky. In another context, some parts would theoretically have played very badly, but here I more just find myself admiring the director's sheer obvious ambition and passion for what is clearly an extremely personal work (it is based on the director's own autobiographical novel-length tone-poem, apparently), so much that he is almost entitled to any indulgence he feels like including. Apart from the cinematography (which really is of the level that any digital film should hope to aspire), I also really thought the soundtrack was very well-done. Clearly it was one of these situations where the director carefully chose each song and incorporated them into the scenes, in a way that makes them integral to the film. Not only is the music good, but the way it is used adds to the overall feeling that you are watching one person's meticulous creation, that the film is something extremely personal, and not only that, but that the director knows exactly what he wants to achieve. That alone is more than I can say for a lot of films, so despite it's occasional hackneyed indulgence, I overwhelmingly respect this film and it's director for, if not avoiding all the pitfalls of an extremely personal passion project, than at least indulging himself exactly the way he wants to and doing it well.

I found this movie to be remarkable. I was captivated by the depth of each character from the beginning. The casting was superb. The dualistic forces evident in us all; the undertow of past conditioning and trauma and the propelling urge to transform, are pivotal in Frankie's story. Through the gifted performance of Kevin McKidd, I felt as if I was experiencing this developmental tension from the inside of him. Contrary to the title, alcoholism was rather a subtle subplot. There were no visits to a detox and in the one scene where we are led to a brief glimpse of an AA meeting, Frankie does not identify himself as an alcoholic. None the less, alcoholism provided a powerful back drop to the more obvious themes of rage, repression and the redeeming power of love and intention. Alcohol is portrayed as the catalyst to fuel the violence, betrayal and poor choices, the gage to measure the protagonist's progress and most important a means to pathologically cope with emotional pain and unresolved memories which thematically appear throughout the film. The richness and natural beauty of the women in the movie and the lighthearted romantic moments provided a welcomed balance to the intensity. The artful direction of incorporating stills with action as well as the thoughtful use of sound light and closeups further made this film worthy of high merit.

If I gave out Oscars, this film would collect them all !If I was nitpicking, I would say the dialogue was the best part ( but only by a little)I wonder if it will be as good on the second viewing ? Maybe I won't watch it again, cos it was so perfect !!Ian.p.s. whats this crap about minimum 10 lines ????Should I pad it out with nonsense ?? Should I go on about the beautiful soundtrack ? Shouls I go on about the wonderful camera work ? what a hassle to post a comment !!!!