The Thing with Feathers
Critic Alec Toombs won't be revisiting "The Thing with Feathers" anytime soon, but it left him with feelings he won't soon shake.
Film Yap is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work please consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Sometimes segments of a movie are a slog, but the same flick can hit high enough heights that it’s almost impossible not to recommend the overall product despite drawbacks. “The Thing with Feathers” (in select theaters beginning Friday, Nov. 28) is one such film and its strengths and weaknesses grow glaringly more apparent as it’s divided into chapters.
“The Thing with Feathers” is the feature directorial debut of British rock documentarian Dylan Southern (“Meet Me in the Bathroom,” “Shut Up and Play the Hits”), who also adapted Max Porter’s novel “Grief Is the Thing with Feathers.” It concerns a father (Benedict Cumberbatch) and his sons (Henry and Richard Boxall) who are grieving the loss of their wife/mother (Claire Cartwright).
Dad is a graphic novelist who’s working on a project about a crow (paging James O’Barr). His creation manifests itself as the anthropomorphized Crow (memorably designed by Conor O’Sullivan, embodied by Eric Lampaert and voiced by aces character actor David Thewlis). It’s arguable whether Crow is real or representative of their collective familial grief, but his presence appears to be necessary in order for them to heal.
“The Thing with Feathers” is broken into chapters “Dad,” “Crow,” “Boys” and “The Demon.” The first two didn’t do much for me despite Cumberbatch’s towering performance while the second two were hugely emotional, captured childlike wonderment and got fascinatingly fantastical. “Boys” is the picture’s high point thanks to the wonderfully naturalistic performances of the Boxall twins and Southern and his fellow collaborators’ commitment to capturing the youthful experience. During this segment I was often positively reminded of Spike Jonze’s deeply sensitive adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s “Where the Wild Things Are.”
I don’t think I’ll be revisiting “The Thing with Feathers” anytime soon as it was an extremely emotional experience, but these are feelings I won’t soon shake.
Great read! It’s fascinating to see how the magic realism landed differently for you. I found Benedict Cumberbatch absolutely incredible (the physical exhaustion performance was top-tier), but for me, the 'Crow' metaphor ended up crowding out the human drama a bit too much. I felt like the film was explaining grief to me rather than letting me sit with it. I expanded on that disconnect in my review here: https://amnesicreviews.substack.com/p/the-thing-with-feathers-drowning