Young@Heart

The final film of this year's Doc Soup* season was a surefire crowd-pleaser. Young@Heart has all the elements: adorable seniors doing improbable things (performing songs by the Ramones and Coldplay, among others), lots of pop music (see above), and a natural story arc (rehearsing new songs for a performance that serves as the film’s climax). The film was made for Britain’s Channel 4, but had its North American premiere at Sundance and was picked up by Fox Searchlight – a sure sign of blockbuster expectations. But is it any good as a film?

It starts off beautifully, with a punk-rock perfomance of the Clash's "Should I Stay Or Should I Go" by a 93-year-old English fireplug named Eileen. But it soon becomes clear that the seniors and their choir director, Bob Cilman, aren't the only characters in the movie. The film's director, Stephen Walker, inserts himself into the film with long-winded and intrusive first-person narration. We learn not just about the subjects, but that making the film has given him "24 grandparents."

Really, Stephen, who cares? We want to know about the singers, not about you. The intrusive first-person narration gives the film a TV feel - the last thing you want when watching a movie on a big screen. And Walker continues to inject himself into the film throughout. Almost never are we allowed to hear the seniors speak without first hearing his (usually awkward) off-camera question. One in situ interview with one of the singers, who is gravely ill, ends with Walker's off-camera voice wishing him a speedy recovery. As a result, a film that has all the potential to be a great cinematic experience quickly starts to feel like a cheesy British TV show, with an over-enthusiastic "presenter" always hovering just barely off-camera.

To be fair, the film has a lot of virtues. Walker never condescends to the subjects, and he mostly manages to show rather than tell. Most importantly he never asks the subjects to explain why they do what they do, but instead allows the answers to become clear in the course of the action. He recognizes what a goldmine he has - the subjects are characters in the true sense of the word: funny, self-aware, and always honest. And for the most part he knows enough to let them carry the film.

There is one stylistic exception: the indifferently-shot vérité is sometimes interrupted by slick music videos. This happens four times in the course of the 110-minute film, and it only works half the time. The first time, a sequence in an old-folks home suddenly morphs into the group performing the Ramones' "I Wanna Be Sedated" as nursing-home residents. It's completely bizarre and delightful. And towards the end, their performance of "Stayin' Alive," complete with geriatric strut, is too hilarious to quibble with. But the other video segments are just plopped in the middle of the film, seemingly without any rhyme or reason. It feels like they should have been DVD extras.

So, on the whole, does the film work? I would say that the director comes this close to ruining it, but somehow the characters hoist the film on their backs and pull it out of the fire. And I should also say that my better half, Mme Holiday, and our friend D.A. disagreed with me completely. They loved the characters, and loved the film because of them. Mme Holiday said she was bothered by the intrusive narration at the beginning but soon stopped paying attention to the director's voice and just enjoyed the film. So who am I to pour cold water on that? I just think the film is a missed opportunity. It could have been so much better.

------
* The Hot Docs film festival’s year-round monthly screening series