At what point are we allowed to be offended by the continued content-ification of blockbuster movies? When even the most competently made of childish action entertainment, like the new YA adaptation, The Maze Runner, leaves audiences groaning at the admission that the preceding 110 minutes have been little more than a vehicle for three or five more films, can we bemoan the state of things? It’s not that The Maze Runner represents anything like “the death of cinema,” but it crosses the Rubicon into utter exhaustion. All the more depressing that the film itself is mostly very good.
In a jab of sorts, intentional or not, at The Hunger Games, the film begins with a character trapped in an elevator flying up to the surface. No endless exposition-fest and costume party for an hour. No waiting for the sense of action and mystery to start. The film plops Thomas, its lead, played by Dylan O’Brien, right into the middle of an unknown place. He has no memory, except for his name, and neither do any of the other boys already there, who have formed a functioning Lord of the Flies-esque society in this odd expanse bordered by giant concrete walls. Much of the opening is spent learning how this society works, eventually leading to the greater mystery: what’s behind the wall?
A giant maze, as it turns out. A maze that opens in the morning and closes at night. Every day, the layout changes. And of course there are monsters inside, hilariously called “grievers.” It all feels like pretty typical YA stuff, right down to the group of boys who must run the maze each day attempting to map it, and the fact that Thomas, a mysteriously “special” boy, is constantly drawn to the maze, hoping to join the runners and attempt an escape. Complications arise when Thomas does finally go into the maze, leading to one last kid being sent up the elevator. Only this time it’s a girl kid! And she knows Thomas! What fun.
And it is fun, truly. Action abounds. The characters are enjoyable archetypes. There’s a refreshing diversity to the cast, bringing to mind kids’ movies like Spielberg’s Hook and Richard Donner’s The Goonies. But none of those elements are core to the film’s concerns. Mystery is the name of the game for The Maze Runner. For all that its array of young male characters are charming, or interesting, or offer a complex take on social dynamics, the film isn’t really that interested in those things. O’Brien is an affable enough lead, but his natural state is one of questioning, his perpetually confused Adam Brody-ish face mirroring the audience’s state. The story is driven entirely by questions. “Why are we here?” “What’s beyond those walls?” “What’s in the maze?” “Who built all this?” “What are these flashback dreams I’m having?” “What happens if we escape the maze?”
The mysteries pile on faster than a season of Lost, and, amazingly, with even less resolution by the end. In fact, the film pulls an interesting trick, seemingly offering a whole host of answers, only to question those, widening the mystery further. It would be intriguing if not for a character coming on screen at the end, speaking literally of a “Phase 2” about to begin. Whatever it is that happens in this film has no purpose within the film itself. All the character work, the action, and the slow building of information, adds up to nothing self-contained.
It’s a mode of filmmaking (and novel writing) that’s become increasingly tired. When the Harry Potter films were made, each installment—even the split sections of the seventh book—had some internal satisfaction. The Lord of the Rings films were explicitly telling one story over three films, and still, each one was structured to feel like a semi-satisfying whole, buttoned by a tease toward more. The Maze Runner feels no such inclination toward satisfying its audience, taking its cues instead from serialized television. It’s boldfaced and crass. Explicitly all introduction and nothing more, with an implicit understanding that “you WILL be back for more, popcorn in hand.” At least the studio had the decency not to force a premium-priced 3D ticket on everyone.
One thought on ““The Maze Runner” Review”
While I agree with your middle-aged angst about the ending, I will be back for more. So it didn’t really bother me, although I may have rolled my eyes a bit. It was a good flick, and I can forgive the last 10 seconds.