It's likely many people recall being told as children that understanding life’s complexities would come with age—a promise often stored away for later consideration. However, how many of us truly found that promised clarity upon reaching adulthood? It seems a common experience to wait for such insights, only to discover the assurance never quite materialized, and I suspect this disappointment happened more often than not. This second film from director Clint Bentley revisits that scenario as its constantly bewildered main character searches for meaning. But given how frequently we encounter this in everyday life, one has to question whether it’s necessary to see a movie depicting such a familiar experience—one many have already lived through. The film, lauded by critics, portrays the story of Robert Grainier (Joel Edgerton), a logger working in the forests of the Pacific Northwest during the early 20th Century. Having lost his parents at a young age and never knowing them, he’s consistently sought explanations for life's mysteries, but they have largely remained out of reach even as an adult. During a time when the world was undergoing rapid change, he desired answers that didn't come, leaving him perpetually questioning his existence, particularly when confronted with unexplained injustices, tragedies and personal hardships. While it’s easy to sympathize with his situation, one can’t help but wonder, “Haven’t we all been there?” (It isn’t exactly uncharted territory.) The film essentially centers on the desire of a lost soul continually striving for some grand revelation that never arrives, attempting to present this as something entirely new. To bolster this point, the filmmakers have added what are presented as profound voice-over observations, but they don't really contribute much that is meaningful or even engaging. The director also tries to compensate for these weaknesses with beautiful cinematography and a solid performance from Edgerton—though it’s hard to praise him too highly considering the role isn’t particularly demanding. A strong (and perhaps underappreciated) aspect of the film is its cast of supporting characters, especially William H. Macy and Kerry Condon, though their appearances are regrettably brief. Considering the considerable praise this film has received, I'm let down that it doesn’t live up to expectations, both in terms of its technical aspects and, more importantly, the depth of its story. Perhaps I will understand it better as I age. But given there isn't much to grasp initially, I seriously doubt it.

Source on TMDB