The Life of Chuck Review

Mike Flanagan adapts a Stephen King story for the third time with The Life of Chuck. He steps out of his horror comfort zone.

The Life of Chuck is a film split into three acts. “Thanks, Chuck” shows an ex-married couple, Marty Anderson (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Felicia Gordon (Karen Gillan), just as the world suffers from an apocalyptic event. “Buskers Forever” follows Charles “Chuck” Krantz (Tom Hiddleston), who ends up getting the urge to dance when taking a break from an accounting conference. “I Contain Multitudes” shows Chuck’s (Benjamin Pajak) childhood after being taken in by his paternal grandparents (Mark Hamill and Mia Sara) due the death of his parents.

There has been a lot of buzz around The Life of Chuck. It won the People’s Choice Award at the 2024 Toronto International Film Festival, and prestige distributor Neon brought the North American distribution rights. The marketing highlighted it was made by an acclaimed director, had an ensemble cast, and was from the author of Stand By Me, The Shawshank Redemption, and The Green Mile, instead of his horror work.

The Life of Chuck was an eclectic film. It started off as a M. Night Shyamalan-style mystery where the world was suffering from a slow collapse. “Buckers Forever” was a simple modern fairy where Chuck decides to dance and develops a magical connection with his dance partner and the drummer. The longest act, “I Contain Multitudes,” was a Spielbergian coming-of-age drama about Chuck’s childhood. This mix of approaches may seem like a strange mix, and it did start in a state of despair, before growing into an optimistic film. The Life of Chuck was a wonderfully constructed piece of work.

The Life of Chuck was a film built on slow reveals. In “Thanks, Chuck,” the title character was a mystery figure that the people didn’t know; he just appeared on a billboard on the bank and appeared on TV amidst the Emergency Broadcast. “Buskers Forever” revealed a bit about Chuck, but Taylor (Taylor Gordon) and Janice (Annalise Basso) were given equal prominence. “I Contain Multitudes” was the part that showed Chuck’s childhood and what drove him.

The Life of Chuck was a film that was about the importance of the past and how it influences a person. There were small details early in the film that became important later, like clips from classic musicals. There was a lot of philosophising with conversations about Carl Sagan’s cosmic calendar, and his Zayde telling Chuck about the importance of mathematics. It was a film on the significance of Chuck’s grandparents in his upbringing. Mark Hamill gave one of his best performances as Chuck’s grandfather. The film had a simple message: live life to the fullest. Even during the darkest chapter, some characters still believed in that philosophy since they didn’t have time to waste.

Flanagan shows how talented a filmmaker is. He was versatile since he was able to make a compelling apocalyptic film, to an entertaining story about a child growing up. “Thanks, Chuck” was only a brief part of the film; I wanted to see more of this quiet apocalypse. I accept this was not the point of the film. The heart of the film was about Chuck’s childhood. He had a strong bond with his grandparents and took up dancing, which led him to get close to Cat (Trinity Bliss), a pretty older girl. It was about the life lesson Chuck got from the adults in life and fulfilling milestones.

The Life of Chuck was a lovely film that shows Mike Flanagan and Stephen King can be more than hopeless darkness. It showed the resilience of humanity during the worst of times.