Let's get this out of the way up front: I'm about as anti-fracking as they come. You've heard of tree huggers? Well, I'm a bedrock hugger. So you'd think to me this movie would be 100% environmental porn. Surprisingly, on that level my reaction was somewhat meh. We'll get to that in the 4th paragraph, but let's talk about the movie on a strictly artistic/entertainment level first.
Excellent. Great acting, good thoughtful pace without becoming boring (in fact it's amazing how interesting they made a subject which puts most people to sleep), nice artistic cinematography, and a truly original story. The story is about a good guy "Steve" (Matt Damon) who works for the natural gas company intent on convincing small rural townsfolk to lease their land to them so they can drill. Steve believes he & his company are doing the right thing by bringing money to the depressed rural economy, a no brainer. But things get complicated when he encounters resistance from some townsfolk and a mysterious environmentalist who isn't exactly fighting fair.
If you caught the clever spin, you see that the film flips the character stereotypes on us. The big corporation is the honest protagonist while the anti-fracking whistleblower is the shady character. I really liked that novel approach. But here's how it sort of falls short regarding the social message it seeks to deliver....
The movie barely gets into the actual debate over fracking (which, in a nutshell, is the practice of "drilling" by shooting water & chemicals deep into the ground so it knocks stuff loose and brings it to the surface. Sorta like fishing by dumping Ajax into a pond so the fish jump up into your boat). While the movie does mention this in 1 scene, that scene was played a bit over the top, with the mystery environmentalist lighting a desk on fire and threatening to incinerate a turtle to make his point. In other words you might miss what he's saying as you are marveling at how absurd he looks. The rest of the movie handles the debate in a similarly oblique way, focusing more on the cat-and-mouse drama between Steve and the environmentalist rather than the actual talking points. In that respect, this film didn't necessarily have to be about fracking; it could've been about a poker game, or a beauty contest, or anything where the goal is to be more convincing than your opponent.
Ultimately, the showdown comes to a clever climax and resolution where a speech wraps things up for us, and if this were an 80s teencom it would certainly deserve a slow clap, but at the same time it may leave you wondering "so wait... uh why is fracking bad?"
If you already know, or if you don't really care, then no problem. Without a doubt the movie is entertaining and worth your time. But if you were expecting a compelling exposé of why fracking is bad, aside from its rather unfortunate name, then you may end up disappointed and/or running to Google to get an education.
Contrasting this movie against classics like "The China Syndrome" (nuclear power) or "The Towering Inferno" (unethical building practices) where we are shown exactly what can go wrong, "Promised Land" doesn't take us there. It just tells us, through innuendo, that we should be afraid of fracking. That was an incredible missed opportunity for an otherwise powerful film.
7 out of 10 found this helpful