Yesterday Jan & I went out for a movie and dinner. The movie we picked was the New Zealand film Hunt for the Wilderpeople.
Rotten Tomatoes describes the plot for Hunt for the Wilderpeople. “Raised on hip-hop and foster care, defiant city kid Ricky gets a fresh start in the New Zealand countryside. He quickly finds himself at home with his new foster family: the loving Aunt Bella, the cantankerous Uncle Hec, and dog Tupac. When a tragedy strikes that threatens to ship Ricky to another home, both he and Hec go on the run in the bush. As a national manhunt ensues, the newly branded outlaws must face their options: go out in a blaze of glory or overcome their differences and survive as a family.”
If the plot sounds a bit hackneyed, I would agree. And I was just a bit anxious about it. Of course, some Shakespeare fits that harsh summarizing, as well. And, while it isn’t Shakespeare, it is just plain wonderful soup to nuts. The value of the movie like all art is in the execution. The film is directed by Taika Waititi, who also did the screenplay adapting the wildly popular New Zealand author Barry Crump’s Wild Pork and Watercress. Mr Waititi also co-produced the film.
The cast is pitch perfect, from young Julian Dennison as Ricky and Sam Neill as Uncle Hec, with solid support starting with Rima Te Wiata as Aunt Bella and Rachel House as the villainous social worker. Among the lesser characters who capture the screen are Rhys Darby’s Psycho Sam and Taika Waititi himself, who throws in a comic turn as the Minister.
With ninety-four reviewers surveyed Rotten Tomatoes gives the movie a startling one hundred percent positive score. Reviewer Angie Han writes how the film is a “sort of live-action Up with dashes of Roald Dahl, Wes Anderson, and Thelma & Louise, all filtered through (Taika) Waititi’s own warm, offbeat sense of humor, Wilderpeople looks destined to become a new childhood classic.” Sounds about right. Although, not just for kids, as an end phase sexagenarian, I found it worked just fine for me, as well. Actually, I don’t believe there was a kid in the audience that gave the film an ovation when it ended.
Apparently wanting to dislike the film but unable to Rolling Stone’s David Fear concludes his observations on the films’ veering toward sentimental twaddle, but failing. “For all the stock elements thrown into this indie-cutie gumbo, it’s still flavorful enough to stand out – an oddball and oddly affecting take on two misfits finding their metaphorical partner-in-crime match.” Actually, a good description, but the end product wasn’t “flavorful enough,” it was outright delightful.
I loved it. And if you want a perfectly entertaining one hundred and one minutes, you would be hard pressed to find something better.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In