Mike Flanagan is best known for his horror films and television shows. He’s shown a lot of acumen when it comes to not only getting scares turned up, but by grappling with the idea of ghosts, and what their purpose in our lives and in story telling could be. While the novella ‘The Life of Chuck’ feels like it could be the dead center of what we would expect his wheel house to be, it is after all a Stephen King work, it’s a refreshing take from a writer/director that’s show a lot of talent over the years inside the genre works he’s crafted.

‘Life of Chuck’ works backwards, it’s opening card labels itself as Act III, and we meet Marty Anderson (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a middle school teacher trying to teach his class about Walt Whitman when the world starts falling apart. California falls into the ocean, and things just get worse and worse every day. During these horrible tragedies happening all over the world Marty sees a peculiar sign Tom Hiddleston smiling coyly holding a mug of coffee and writing on a pad, “Charles Krantz 39 Great Years! Thanks Chuck!” The celebration of someone apparently retiring is a light in the dark that Andy’s world has become. 

There’s a radio ad as well, that Andy’s nurse ex wife (Karen Gillan) here’s as the news report is talking about flooding throughout the world. They have a phone conversation about their world crashing down, and in between saying how the world ending “sucks” they take a beat and laugh about how one man is being celebrated when everything is dying. It’s the only light they have.

‘Life of Chuck’ works best during the small moments. In that regard it most similarly feels like Flanagan’s ‘Midnight Mass’ which was largely people having beautifully written long winded conversations about existential dread. There’s a conversation that Andy has with one of his neighbors (Matthew Lillard) about going through the five stages of grief. It’s a perfectly written talk where two people are trying to combat their dread with a little bit of levity and some crass jokes. Trauma is displayed in a multitude of ways in ‘Chuck’.

The mystery at the heart of “Who is this Chuck guy?” reminded me of a very dissimilar work. At the beginning of Ayn Rand’s objectivist fever dream “Atlas Shrugged” the world is falling apart and the phrase “Who is John Galt?” Is littered throughout the world. The reveal of this is John Galt is any kind of “doer” (CEO/owner/capitalist) that has left the world behind because they don’t like taxes and can’t create enough corporate profit to find purpose. The reveal of who is Chuck is not opposite exactly, but feels in conversation with that idea. Chuck is a man that is being celebrated because he is coming up to an end. He’s not being celebrated for his achievements. He’s being celebrated because he’s a person in the world that had an effect, and was affected by, those around him. Those people will carry him, and remember him, and he will take them with himself in some form. It’s the antithesis of celebrating those that “do” it’s celebrating those that “are”. Because we all leave little marks on one another, and we all deserve to be remembered.

Act II largely revolves around a previous moment in Chuck’s life that points to the heart of this. A small but beautiful moment he had while on a work trip. He’s walking down the street and stop to listen to a busking drum player. She starts playing along and Chuck bursts into dance, inviting a girl from the crowd to dance with him. Seeing Hiddleston dance flawlessly is an absolute cinematic delight and this moment is the beating heart of the film. It’s such a joyous moment, and Hiddleston’s moves could rival Mads Mikkelsen’s at the end of ‘Another Round’.

The third act goes further back into Chuck’s life and shows him growing up and the people he knew as a kid. It’s the most familiar section of the movie, and can occasionally feel rote. But put in context of everything that came before is more of those small moments that we were enjoying earlier in the film. It’s such a soft sweet movie, there are not scares per se, Flanagan is evolving, and with that evolution comes the need to try things that he has a hand for, and leave things that he doesn’t need behind.

I don’t want to get too spoilers about how this is all connected. It’s a charming work and the little conversations that are peppered throughout are what make it soar. I’ve long since been waiting for Director Flanagan to leave the world of streaming television behind and start making movies, and if this is his first at bat upon return? I expect to be delighted by each and every swing.

4.5/5