Hell or High Water (2016)

This is a stream of consciousness review I wrote after watching Hell or High Water during the spring semester of my sophomore year at college. More specifically, it details the path I traveled when deciding upon this film's star rating. In preparation for that year's 89th Academy Awards, I saw all 9 Best Picture nominees: Hell or High Water was the fifth nominee watched. My overall rating for the film was 3.5 stars out of a possible 4. On my scale, 3.5 stars qualifies as "very good."

This is hands down one of my all-time favorites. I was hooked from the very beginning and it held me for the whole ride. There is not a single thing that I can say against this film... so why is it only 3.5 stars? The answer is shitty, but it’s the truth: it just is. The deciding factor behind this rating was comparing it to other difficult films to rate. A couple reviews ago, when I was struggling with a rating for Moonlight (2016), I mentioned the cases of The French Connection (1971) and Bunny Lake Is Missing (1965). Those two films have the distinction of not feeling like top tier 4-star pictures until after the credits have settled and the mind is able to contemplate and comprehend what the eyes watched and the soul took in. Now, I have thought long and hard about this, and Hell or High Water is not better than either of those, nor is it better than Moonlight. So next, I traveled to the bridge between 3.5-star films and 4-star films. Ever since I watched The Godfather Part II (1974) in high school, I have felt that it is the worst great film, and I have similarly proclaimed since middle school that The Manchurian Candidate (1962) is the greatest non-great film of all-time. I presented Hell or High Water before both films, and after close examination, I can say with certainty that it is not better than either film and squarely deserves to be on the 3.5-star side of the bridge with The Manchurian Candidate. However, I would dare to say that it is the second greatest 3.5 star film of all-time. Regardless of the pain I've endured assigning a star rating to Hell or High Water, I love this film so much and will make a point of watching it so many times over the course of my lifetime, possibly even once a year like I do with Die Hard (1988) and Casablanca (1942). The interesting thing with these annually watched films is that while Casablanca is not only 4 stars, but also the greatest film of all-time, Die Hard is not a 4-star film at all, it is only 3.5. Yet, I do not feel bad about giving Die Hard, my all-time favorite movie, that rating, because it has two flaws, and their names are Ellis and Thornburg. But I feel gut-wrenching agony by slamming Hell or High Water with a measly 3.5 stars. It does not have a flaw. It just does not execute everything well enough to qualify for 4-star material. The acting from every notable character is great, especially Jeff Bridges (in an Oscar-nominated supporting role that I would love to see him win for, but Mahershala Ali absolutely deserves it for his nominated performance in Moonlight) and Chris Pine (it is so strange hearing Captain Kirk’s voice saying "fuck" regularly rather than "Starfleet"). The screenplay is one of the best I have ever heard, and the soundtrack from Nick Cave and Warren Ellis (the two primary composers) is absolutely fantastic. The cinematography is great as is the film editing, and I hope, although I still have some films to go, that Jake Roberts will win the prize for Best Film Editing. The film is so damn clever and it knows it, which usually dooms a film, but not here. It’s just off by enough that it does not get to strut around with a 4-star label. So, Hell or High Water, I am sorry that you will forever be tarnished with a rating of 3.5 stars, but hopefully the number of times that I watch you in the future will help make up for this. While I will never be able to forgive myself for giving you this rating, maybe you can.