Room (2015)

[Empress1]

I'd been looking forward to seeing this because it was pretty universally praised, and I liked the book. It stayed very true to the book, even using Jack's narration as a way to be sure that we were seeing things from Jack's perspective. I liked that they showed Jack starting to understand the difference between real and not real when he was watching TV. Jacob Tremblay is both cute and a good actor. (I saw an interview with him where he said his favorite scene was when he got a haircut because he didn't have to wear the long hair wig anymore.) One of the most effective things about the movie was the camera work - you really got a sense of just how small Room was, particularly when they showed the clothesline. Brie Larson is terrific. She does so much - she's affectionate with Jack, she's desperate, she's depressed, and you can see her rebuilding.

 

One thing that didn't quite make sense to me, even when I read the book, is why Old Nick would just give up and take off when Jack jumps out of the truck and sees the guy walking the dog. He could have taken Jack back into the truck, he could have left Jack outside and gone back and killed Ma, but instead, he just kind of shrugs like "Oh well, the jig is up." Emma Donoghue said that she deliberately chose NOT to focus on Old Nick and rather on the bond between Ma and Jack, but that fell a little flat to me. It did in the book too, but seeing it made it fall even flatter.

[King of Birds]

why Old Nick would just give up and take off when Jack jumps out of the truck and sees the guy walking the dog. He could have taken Jack back into the truck, he could have left Jack outside and gone back and killed Ma, but instead, he just kind of shrugs like "Oh well, the jig is up."

Just saw Room today, and as to your point above, my guess is that it was getting to be "too big a public scene" - when he blew up at the dogwalker, he did it in such a way that he'd be remembered. "Stay out of my business" or however he put it.  He bailed on Jack right then because that guy would say something. Just mention "white guy, beard, the red truck" and if someone saw him in that area, to be questioned about why he's with Jack or any child was way more than he wanted. I actually was more surprised he didn't gun the truck instead of getting out and apprehending the boy.

 

I thought the movie was terrific, such great performances. The William Macy/ father stuff was very vague- I didn't read the book, not sure if that was explained more. I caught the drinking issue and obviously he couldn't bear to acknowledge the child.

 

Kudos to the casting crew, who found Jacob Tremblay. I thought the whole ensemble  - Brie, Joan Allen, the guy who plays Leo, even the police officers - were all well played.

 

As much as they showed a bit of the media intrusion, and that interview that led to Joy's overdose, I was wondering if there was more to the public/TV angle in the book, if there was more to that.

[Empress1]

The William Macy/ father stuff was very vague- I didn't read the book, not sure if that was explained more. I caught the drinking issue and obviously he couldn't bear to acknowledge the child.

 

...

 

As much as they showed a bit of the media intrusion, and that interview that led to Joy's overdose, I was wondering if there was more to the public/TV angle in the book, if there was more to that.

Not really re: William H. Macy. He just can't deal with the fact that Jack is the product of Old Nick raping Joy, can't see past it. Also if I recall correctly, in the book it's revealed that he lives in Australia (the movie they just say "far away").

 

There's not really more to the public interest in the book. The interview takes a different disastrous turn and there are a few "Hey, it's that kid!" encounters that there aren't in the movie - Ma and Jack wear sunglasses in public for a while - but eventually the media stops being mentioned.

 

They stayed pretty true to the book, just omitted stuff for time. In the book they spend quite a bit of time in the hospital; Jack has a harder time acclimating to being outside (e.g. he can't gauge distance so he bumps into stuff, it takes him weeks to be able to go up and down stairs, his communication skills are an issue, they spend a little time outside each day) and they both need medical care. Joy also has an older brother who has a partner and daughter and we meet them. It also delves a bit into her learning how to be a 26-year-old woman (in the book she's 19 when she's abducted, not 17) and how to balance that with needing to parent Jack, and Jack needing to be so physically close to her all the time. They move into assisted living when Ma recovers from her overdose.

 

I loved the actor who played Leo. I thought he was so sweet with Jack.

[Chas411]

She mentioned a brother in the movie though didn't she? I was confused about that because I thought she mentioned him and then everyone forgot about him.

[SeanC]

I saw this on Wednesday night, just under the wire before Oscar nominations, making this the first year in a while where I had managed to see all of the Picture nominees before the announcements.  I was quite impressed (I'd probably rank it third among the eight, behind Mad Max and Spotlight).  I liked seeing Abrahamson get a nomination too, as this is the sort of film where direction can be overlooked; getting such performances from the cast, particularly from a child actor, and knowing how to make such a long stretch in a single location feel cinematic takes real talent.

 

Tremblay probably carries the film even more than Larson, due to the film's largely adhering to his POV, particularly in the second half where she's absent for a stretch.  I rewatched Short Term 12 a few days before seeing this movie (the "Brie Larson: Teenage Rape Victim" double-bill), and was reminded again how Larson is one of the more compelling twentysomething actresses of the day.  I also really liked Joan Allen.  And William H. Macy (who used to be really ubiquitous on film but I don't recall seeing him in anything for a while) was very good in a small part that is nevertheless tough, given that the father's position is understandable but hard to truly sympathize with.

 

I hope that beat cop got promoted to detective afterward, because her skills are clearly being underused in her current job.  That was some Holmes-level deduction there.

Edited January 17, 2016 by SeanC

[Traveller519]

Saw this without reading the book and liked a lot. Though the Grandpa storyline felt unresolved, maybe that's just the way it is sometimes.

 

The stuff with the stairs was fantastic. Something I wouldn't have thought about but certainly a good angle. It sounds like the other items in the book that dealt with acclimation would have been interesting but definitely would have thrown off the pacing of the movie. I should definitely look into reading this one.

 

Very well acted and well shot. It's amazing how big they managed to make Grandma's House feel after Room. And you really feel how big the World felt to Jack when he got out there. I felt the struggles of both characters too. Their motivations vs their desires. Jack wants to be there for his Mom but craves the safety he felt in Room. Joy wants the freedom and the return to a normal life, but can't help her need to protect Jack.

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

I love how in-universe there were members of the public that thought Joy should've given Jack to Old Nick to place in custody when he was a baby and actually judged her for not doing so. Like sure, I'm going to trust my kidnapper/rapist to safely place the infant he forced me to give unassisted birth to in a dirty shed instead of just killing him once he's out of earshot. Good plan. Yet I can see people having the same reaction IRL.

[purplemouth]

I do not get claustrophobic, but during the scene where they were exercising and Jack was running from one wall to another, I got a little panicky! They did a great job of conveying how small their living space was.

I read the book years ago, but when he was trying to wriggle out of that rug in the back of the truck I was on the edge of my seat. And when he got free it really hit me - that was the first time he ever felt fresh air. And what it felt like to ride in a car. These are things we just take for granted.

Great movie.

[SeanC]

I saw this a second time recently.  The ladies I was seeing it with hadn't seen any of the ads, etc., and one of them remarked to me afterward that during the escape sequence she was convinced the cops were going to find Joy murdered when they went back to the house.

 

The rewatch just heightens my appreciation for the film.  The nuances of the acting are remarkable (referring back to the above comment, Joy didn't seem like she was expecting that she'd survive this attempt).

[methodwriter85]

 

Joy didn't seem like she was expecting that she'd survive this attempt

 

No, she definitely didn't.

 

I loved that the film left a lot of things to imagination, and didn't feel the need to bash us over the head with what they went through.

[MartinKSmith]

I hadn't read the book and hadn't really watched any of the trailers before going to see this. I went in knowing it had been nominated for best picture, that a couple of my friends had already seen it (and really liked it) and a bit about the basic concept/story. 

From the start, I was pretty convinced that Jack was really a girl and 'Ma' was hiding the fact from Old Nick, so he didn't turn his 'affections' toward Jack by shutting him away (though there were other more obvious reasons for this) when Nick was in Room and never letting Nick near to or touch Jack. In my head, this was so Nick could never have enough time to properly see Jack and see how feminine "he" looked. 

When the cops asked Old Nick about his little girl, when Jack escaped, I thought that was that. 

I felt pretty bad when the film was over and I'd taken it to a darker level than the writer had. hah. 

Really enjoyed the film though.

[methodwriter85]

My impression is that Ma couldn't cut Jack's hair because of course Old Nick wouldn't let her have scissors or anything sharper than a butter knife, so it just became a normal thing.

[ResedaDiva]

I read the book and saw the movie, and in my opinion there weren't any huge omissions from the book, nothing that impacted the movie. 

 

Jacob T. was amazing, incredible, moving, heartbreaking, and beautiful. What a performance. 

 

The only criticism I had was Old Nick in the book is, as Ma says, "Twice as old as I am" making him mid 40's. The movie Old Nick was young and kind of dweeby. Also he's the same age as Ma in the movie, and in all the true-life kidnap stories I've ever read, the kidnapper is definitely older than the victim. So the casting choice for Old Nick wasn't working for me. 

 

But the rest of the movie--I bawled through 90% of it! Two very enthusiastic thumbs up. 

[SeanC]

The only criticism I had was Old Nick in the book is, as Ma says, "Twice as old as I am" making him mid 40's. The movie Old Nick was young and kind of dweeby. Also he's the same age as Ma in the movie, and in all the true-life kidnap stories I've ever read, the kidnapper is definitely older than the victim. So the casting choice for Old Nick wasn't working for me. 

Where are you getting that?  The actor who plays Old Nick was born in 1968, and I don't see anything in the movie suggesting they're close in age; he's got a house and a shed all to himself, after all.

[Empress1]

Where are you getting that?  The actor who plays Old Nick was born in 1968, and I don't see anything in the movie suggesting they're close in age; he's got a house and a shed all to himself, after all.

 

Yeah, I didn't see anything that indicated that he was a 20something like Ma. The actor looks his age, to me, and he didn't make any references that indicated he was a 20something. As ResedaDiva says, a 17-year-old kidnapping another 17-year-old doesn't really make sense, but I didn't see or hear anything in the movie that indicated that that was the case.

Edited February 11, 2016 by Empress1

[methodwriter85]

Where are you getting that?  The actor who plays Old Nick was born in 1968, and I don't see anything in the movie suggesting they're close in age; he's got a house and a shed all to himself, after all.

 

Also, remember that Joy is mentally stuck at 17, so a guy in his mid late 30's (when he kidnapped her) would seem really, really old to her.

Edited February 11, 2016 by methodwriter85

[JBC344]

Just saw this and absolutely loved it.  Brie and Jacob were as amazing as I heard they were.  One question that was bothering me was they indicated that Joy was doing the primetime interview to help pay for her legal bills.  What legal bills were there?

 

I'm assuming Joy was going after Old Nick's "assets" as some sort of compensation?  The DA would of gone after Old Nick criminally so I was confused as to what legal bills she has?

[Milburn Stone]

Just saw this and absolutely loved it.  Brie and Jacob were as amazing as I heard they were.  One question that was bothering me was they indicated that Joy was doing the primetime interview to help pay for her legal bills.  What legal bills were there?

 

Yes, that's the one part that hung me up also. The "social media advisor" said there were going to be "costs going forward," or something like that. (I didn't hear "legal bills" per se.) I thought, "What the hell 'costs going forward' could there possibly be?" (And why the hell did they need a social media advisor?) I get that the movie had to justify the TV interview, so there could be an overdose, so there could be a catharsis, but that was some pretty non-credible justification on which to construct all that.

 

One thing the movie did really well, I thought, was to make the audience feel the same feeling of "un-safety" after the escape that Joy and Jack must have felt. The whole time they're in the hospital, I'm thinking, "Oh no, Old Nick is going to get them," and the same thing the whole time they're in Grandma's House. No doubt I felt that way in large part because that's exactly where a million movies would have gone with the story.  No doubt I also felt that way because Sean Bridgers' performance was so excellent. But partly I felt that way because the movie succeeded in making me feel the fragility, the sense of not being able to trust in anything good, that Joy and Jack must have felt.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Milburn Stone

[Chas411]

What was the justification of the tv interview in the book?

[Silje]

The guy is Joy's lawyer and in the book he mentions bills for rehab, therapy, housing and education for Joy and Jack. The TV interview is for Jack's college fund and I think it was to tell/sell their story before someone else did. 

[SeanC]

I chortled when the Oscars used a traditionally buoyant version of "Big Rock Candy Mountain" as Brie Larson's walk-on music.  Now that's tonal whiplash.

[Milburn Stone]

The guy is Joy's lawyer and in the book he mentions bills for rehab, therapy, housing and education for Joy and Jack. The TV interview is for Jack's college fund and I think it was to tell/sell their story before someone else did. 

 

Thanks, Silje. I guess one reason it didn't make sense to me in the movie was that I assumed all those services would be provided pro bono to a mother and child in Joy and Jack's situation. It's hard for me to imagine the hospital saying, "We must care for you after your unimaginably hellish seven-year ordeal. You owe us $95,000."

[Bruinsfan]

You lucky dog, never to have been in the hospital or had a family member in one!

[Milburn Stone]

You lucky dog, never to have been in the hospital or had a family member in one!

 

Who said that?

 

I'd still expect that in this special case, the services would be pro bono.

[Bruinsfan]

I've been dealing with hospitals for parents and grandparents since I was a kid. I'm surprised they don't charge $25/pint for tap water and have a per-flush fee on the room toilet.

[Milburn Stone]

No, I get that. But with a case this high-profile, with this much sympathy for the victims, it doesn't seem to me a hospital would want the enormous bad will that would be generated by the victim taking the story of her astronomical hospital bill to the media.

[SeanC]

A24, the distributor, has amusingly noted that, for the first time since 1997, the Best Actor and Best Actress winners are in the same film.

[JBC344]

No, I get that. But with a case this high-profile, with this much sympathy for the victims, it doesn't seem to me a hospital would want the enormous bad will that would be generated by the victim taking the story of her astronomical hospital bill to the media.

Exactly, even if the hospital themselves wasn't writing off the bill.  The donations that would of poured in to help take care of those expenses would of been more than enough.  Between the people in Joy's neighborhood, her old high school, the town they live in, I can't imagine they had to worry about any immediate expenses.  Not to mention the organizations that would of donated once Joy was found.  Or the professionals who would of volunteered free services just to get advertising. 

[scarynikki12]

Putting aside the question of finances, I think the main reason to have a lawyer would be to get Jack established.  He would need a Social Security Card and birth certificate and that can take a while.  There are all sorts of reasons to have legal representation beyond that but that's what came to mind for me when the question was asked. 

[methodwriter85]

 

A24, the distributor, has amusingly noted that, for the first time since 1997, the Best Actor and Best Actress winners are in the same film.

 

I kind of wondered about that poster- if Joy was born roughly around 1991 (I think she's supposed to be about 24), she would've have been a little young for the Leo mania of 1997-1998, but it's possible that he was a childhood crush of Brie Larson and they just went with it. (Titanic DID have some major longevity, and Brie would have been about 8 when Titanic came out.) I did notice a few other touches, like a White Stripes poster and Brie Larson's guitar from her wannabe pop star days. (I think it's this green/yellow guitar you see there.) Joy's room in general did look like something out of the mid-2000's.

 

 

 

Putting aside the question of finances, I think the main reason to have a lawyer would be to get Jack established.  He would need a Social Security Card and birth certificate and that can take a while.  There are all sorts of reasons to have legal representation beyond that but that's what came to mind for me when the question was asked.

 

They also need to have "Old Nick" relinquish any parental rights he might have to Jack. It's sick, but if he wanted to, he could force Joy to have Jack visit him in prison.

Edited March 1, 2016 by methodwriter85

[Bruinsfan]

It seems to me he'd have had an extremely difficult time finding a lawyer to try and sue her for not allowing visitation.

[SeanC]

If a case like that actually arose, you would have lawyers falling all over themselves to offer Joy their services pro bono.

[JBC344]

That would never happen.  Nick's parental rights would of been automatically terminated on the basis that he was their captor.  Now if Nick was just some old sleazy convict ex-boyfriend then yes he could probably mount a case, but not in a situation like Room. 

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

In 31 states a rapist who impregnates his victim can sue for custody and visitation rights. Unlikely to be successful in Room's case since it's so high profile, but it is a tragic flaw in the justice system nonetheless.

[JBC344]

I understand, my point is that the fact that he was her and Jack's captor, which adds a different layer.  The captivity would be considered abuse which is what you need to terminate parental rights. 

[Milburn Stone]

If a case like that actually arose, you would have lawyers falling all over themselves to offer Joy their services pro bono.

 

And not just pro bono in the event of a suit by Old Nick. The very lawyer we saw, who was advising Joy (and perhaps doing the necessary legwork to get Jack a social security card, etc.) would also--in any real world situation--being offering his services pro bono. And if he wasn't, other lawyers would be lined up around the block to do so. So there would have been no "costs going forward" to necessitate the TV interview. Without which, I realize, there's no third act of the movie--but premising the third act on something so non-credible is a serious problem.

[SeanC]

I don't think it's a real concern.  The family would have expenses going forward, even with charitable support, so I don't have a problem believing they'd need money.

Edited March 2, 2016 by SeanC

[VCRTracking]

From last Saturday's Film Independent Spirit Awards, a sketch parody of Room featuring the show's hosts Kate McKinnon(Saturday Night Live) and Kumail Nanjiani(Silicon Valley):
 

[Empress1]

I don't think it's a real concern. The family would have expenses going forward, even with charitable support, so I don't have a problem believing they'd need money.

Yeah, Joy would be years away from being able to support herself and Jack. Even if the copious psychological treatment she needs is paid for (and that's a big if), she was kidnapped at 17. She needs some kind of education or training in order to get a job, and that costs money.

[Ronin Jackson]

I thought the film was good and especially Larson and Tremblay's acting. The one question/nitpick I had was whether the television interviewer would really be that horrible. And I have no problem believing of course that members of the media can be unscrupulous and tone-deaf, but in a case like this, the public sympathies would be behind Joy almost 100% (there are always exceptions of course but it'd be a tiny minority) and the media covering it would play up the hero/survivor angle and would likely be lofting soft balls at her the entire interview. Of course we were presented with the interview as shot and not as edited, and likely they'd cut those questions out of the final edit, but if an interview with a rape/abduction survivor had been aired and those questions made it to air, the interviewer would be justifiably crucified.

Edited March 4, 2016 by Ronin Jackson

[SeanC]

I thought the film was good and especially Larson and Tremblay's acting. The one question/nitpick I had was whether the television interviewer would really be that horrible. And I have no problem believing of course that members of the media can be unscrupulous and tone-deaf, but in a case like this, the public sympathies would be behind Joy almost 100% (there are always exceptions of course but it'd be a tiny minority) and the media covering it would play up the hero/survivor angle and would likely be lofting soft balls at her the entire interview. Of course we were presented with the interview as shot and not as edited, and likely they'd cut those questions out of the final edit, but if an interview with a rape/abduction survivor had been aired and those questions made it to air, the interviewer would be justifiably crucified.

Yeah, that I did think was contrived, even if it's not something that I think detracts much from the film.  No way would the TV interviewer be given the third degree like that -- maybe the first question about whether she ever contemplated it, but the second one, which is basically her passive-aggressively asserting that Joy is a bad mother, would never happen.  And yeah, had that aired (and particularly, if Joy's suicide attempt came shortly after), that interviewer would have been immediately fired.

Edited March 4, 2016 by SeanC

[Ronin Jackson]

Yeah, that I did think was contrived, even if it's not something that I think detracts much from the film.  No way would the TV interviewer be given the third degree like that -- maybe the first question about whether she ever contemplated it, but the second one, which is basically her passive-aggressively asserting that Joy is a bad mother, would never happen.  And yeah, had that aired (and particularly, if Joy's suicide attempt came shortly after), that interviewer would have been immediately fired.

 

It didn't detract much for me either. I do understand the narrative purpose of where it led the characters. It simultaneously addressed the inevitable media attention that would result from such an event as well as presenting Joy with an emotional breaking point, which also separated Joy and Jack for a period which was vital part of his journey in the film. I guess everything else in the film hit very authentic and resonant emotional notes, and that was the one that didn't-- at least from the authenticity perspective-- from an emotional one I ended up disliking the television interviewer almost as much as I disliked Old Nick, which is admittedly rather warped.  

[SeanC]

In a bit of an awards season postscript, Room swept the Canadian Screen Awards on Sunday (the renamed Genie Awards), winning basically everything it could conceivably have been nominated for:  Picture, Director, Actor (Jacob Tremblay), Actress (Brie Larson), Supporting Actress (Joan Allen), Adapted Screenplay, Production Design, Editing, and Makeup.

[Milburn Stone]

winning basically everything it could conceivably have been nominated for:  Picture, Director, Actor (Jacob Tremblay), Actress (Brie Larson), Supporting Actress (Joan Allen), Adapted Screenplay, Production Design, Editing, and Makeup.

 

So apparently Sean Bridgers as Old Nick didn't get a nomination for Supporting Actor. Which means the movie didn't get all the nominations it should have! Because his performance was awesome.

[raezen]

Just saw this film last night and I thought it was fantastic. I actually started to get claustrophobic when Jack was being rolled up in the carpet.

Definitely a film that stays with you.

[Wiendish Fitch]

Room was fantastic; like Gone Girl, it's practically a how-to guide on how to adapt a beloved book into a film. Brie Larson's Oscar is not wasted, she is utterly fearless and heartbreaking as Joy. I know in the book "Ma"'s name is never revealed to us, but I loved how they gave her a name in the movie, because it gives her more of an identity, and it makes it just as much her story as Jack's. 

 

Speaking of, Jacob Tremblay did really well as Jack, and I appreciated that they didn't make him an only-in-Hollywood angel. Jack can be cute, lovable, and (damn, I hate this word) precocious, but he can also be difficult, temperamental, stubborn, bratty (I'm not judging; even the sweetest kids have their bratty moments), and his innocence can be just as frustrating as it can be charming (it must have made Joy physically ill to see Jack enjoy the remote control car Old Nick gave him). Maybe it's wrong, but I didn't mind that they eliminated the almost madcap incidents Jack had from the book adjusting to the outside world (accidentally stealing the book from the bookstore, constantly being mistaken for a girl, etc).

 

I also have to voice how they portrayed Joy's mom. In the book, she's so pompous and ineffectual that I kept thinking, I refuse to believe that someone this lame could have raised a daughter as resilient and resourceful as Joy. Joan Allen (who can do no wrong in my eyes) played her with grace and dignity, and the scenes with her bonding with Jack were genuinely touching (in the book, I could never see them ever learning to get along). The argument between her and Joy was gut wrenching because no one was right or wrong; what makes these stories so devastating is that everyone suffers, things will never truly be the same, and Joy will never be who she might have become, because Old Nick took that away from her.

 

The ending felt a shade more optimistic than the book, without feeling too "Hollywood". Overall, one of 2015's best.

Edited April 3, 2016 by Wiendish Fitch

[methodwriter85]

I also have to voice how they portrayed Joy's mom. In the book, she's so pompous and ineffectual that I kept thinking, I refuse to believe that someone this lame could produce a daughter as resilient and resourceful as Joy. Joan Allen (who can do no wrong in my eyes) played her with grace and dignity, and the scenes with her bonding with Jack were genuinely touching (in the book, I could never see them ever learning to get along). The argument between her and Joy was gut wrenching because no one was right or wrong; what makes these stories so devastating is that everyone suffers, things will never truly be the same, and Joy will never be who she might have become, because Old Nick took that away from her.

 

The ending felt a shade more optimistic than the book, without feeling too "Hollywood". Overall, one of 2015's best.

 

I didn't read the book, but I was really happy to see Joan Allen with a good role in what seemed like forever. I'm glad that it sounds like they made Nancy a better role than what it was in the book. I loved the little moments she got, like when Jack is telling her a seemingly innocuous story when they're baking cupcakes, and the very split second reaction she had at the horror of what Jack was actually saying before composing herself, and the scene where Jack tells her he loves her. You could just see everything there at that moment- the conflict of wanting to love Jack but also knowing that he's only here because of a deranged man who kidnapped and tortured her daughter for 7 years.

 

I also liked how the movie knew where to hold back. It would have been super-easy for Joy to have some kind of scene where she runs into former classmates and we can see where Joy's anger and resentment about she lost (prom, high school graduation, college, her early 20's), but they kept it to Joy looking at a picture of her former life as a high school track star and the curt comment about what happened to her former friends. (Nothing, according to her.)

 

I also thought Brie did a good job of playing Joy as being emotionally arrested at 17, but not in a super-obvious way. She kind of reminded me of how teen mothers seem more like a pal to their children than a mother, but in this case, Joy really didn't get to mature with her peers, at all. She looked all for the world like a little girl in her mother's clothes and make-up at that interview, and it was well-done.

 

I like to think that Joy went on to get her GED and go to college and make up, at least a little bit, for what she lost. I mean, of course, she can never get to be the 18-year old wide-eyed college freshmen getting her first taste of freedom in her new dorm and at frat parties during opening weekend, but there's still a wonderful amount of things she can get to experience. Which they seem to hint at during the end.

[jah1986]

I finally saw this and was really impressed.  I thought Jacob Tremblay was the real stand-out, such a good child actor.  I got excited when Joan Allen showed up on screen because she's just such a good actress.  I felt sorry for Joy's parents and their break-up, probably over her disappearance and then the dad not being able to look at Jack, so sad.

Of course Brie Larson was just fantastic. Such a great performance.  My heart was pounding in my chest when she was planning Jack's escape and then the execution of the escape I think I was watching through my fingers.

Someone else mentioned that uniformed cop getting a promotion etc., I'll second that was some great police skills right there figuring that all out and being right. I was expecting Joy to be dead so I was relieved when they found her alive.

It was a good movie but I don't think I want to see it again as it tends to stay with you after viewing, if that makes sense. But I would recommend it to others.

[SherriAnt]

9 hours ago, jah1986 said:

It was a good movie but I don't think I want to see it again as it tends to stay with you after viewing, if that makes sense. But I would recommend it to others.

This is the reason I haven't reread the book, either. Too much crying.

[SlovakPrincess]

Honestly, something about this movie just irked me.   It tries to delve into dark issues ... then scurries away to the comforts of the 5-year-old's innocent perspective and precocious narration - the kid who was protected by Joy from the horrible reality of their situation.  (Though I am glad they didn't have actual rape scenes and didn't sensationalize that grossness).

The scenes where Joy gets to voice her anger and resentment of classmates who got to live normal lives are very well done, but I wanted a little more.  I was far more interested in how/if Joy was going to be able to move forward - as her own person, not just a victim or someone's "Ma" - and we didn't get even a hint of that.   Joy was the one who actually suffered the most trauma, but she isn't the focal point once they get out into the world.  In fact, she totally disappears for a while and, I guess, has all of her therapy sessions offscreen.  But yay, Jack gets a dog!  [rolls eyes].  

It's not that I didn't find Jack's issues interesting -- I just would have liked more attention paid to Joy.

And the ending:

Spoiler

I kind of wish she'd said to him "no, Jack, we are not going back to Room.  It's a crime scene and I don't want to, and I'm the parent."  I am skeptical that she would get any kind of closure out of going back to look at the shed ... maybe if she were allowed to burn it to the ground, but instead she just kind of looked at it sadly and left.   Meh.

Edited April 2, 2017 by SlovakPrincess