Looking back to 2007, I was just starting my journey into the world of critiquing film. As much as I would love to say that I was good at it, it was always a learning curve. My first selection of reviews helped literally nobody understand if the movie was good or bad, as without really noticing it, I would simply say that it was good or bad, and I would make no real effort to expand on why. I’ve come a long way, but one of the films that actually prompted me to look deeper into the importance of all the different stages of production was ‘The Bucket List’, a film that I remember loving and slightly getting emotional while watching, yet it was undoubtedly issue-ridden.

‘The Bucket List’ stars Morgan Freeman as Carter, opposite of Jack Nicholson’s Edward – two elderly patients waiting for death to come knocking on their door, as they are both facing irreversible terminal cancer. They have, at most, a year to live, but it’s more than likely mere months. So, together, they decide instead of being grim and waiting for death, to create a bucket list and check off every item before they ‘kick the bucket’, so to speak.

“The strengths of the film primarily lie in its execution of certain themes and messages.”

One of the main reasons I chose to revisit this film, and one of the reasons its on my mind recently, is because it’s actually part of the incredibly long (and growing) list of mysterious Mandela Effects. Which one? Oh, just the one that suggests the term “bucket list” never even existed until this film came out. This movie coined it. *Mind blown*. Now, I know this was a smaller film and not everybody saw it, yet everyone knows what a bucket list is. You’re telling me before the movie, nobody called it that? Bullhonky, I say.

Moving on, I guess I should lay out why this film in particular motivated me to look deeper into the role that each aspect of production plays. That’s because this film dances to the beat of its own drum a little bit. It does things that are honestly laughable if they were in any other film, yet endearing in this. Things such as the visuals. This is a relatively small film with a very big idea at the end of the day – and those kinds of things clash. You don’t even need me to break down which parts need help, as they’re all pretty obvious, but I’ll do it anyway – green screen and super-imposing are both significant issues and clearly fake. Most would point to the super-imposing problems during the skydiving scene that look fake. This is probably because they couldn’t even recreate it practically in front of a green screen because…well, our two leads are older and can’t do a lot of physical activity, which limited them getting their faces plastered on actual sky divers. Yes, that was the Scorpion King moment of the film in terms of visuals, but pretty much any time they are in another country, something about it feels like green screen city. They actually filmed in these locations, though, which leads me to believe, once again, the actual actors are superimposed into various elements of footage.

Yet, as I said before, none of that seems to matter all that much when you’re in the midst of watching the flick. Instead, I would argue it is the spirit of the film that forgives any lack of quality in the technical department. Morgan and Jack have a lot of chemistry together, which builds throughout the film, there’s a message in there about living life to the fullest, facing your fears, owning up to your past mistakes, having fun, and most importantly, how friendship and love alone can heal long-forgotten wounds and in a matter of speaking, save someone’s life.

The film is undoubtedly sappy, but sometimes sappy is exactly what you need, and you wouldn’t have it any other way. It’s not the most cinematic film in the world, and sometimes the acting is incredible while other times it leaves me a little unimpressed, but at the end of the day, you can tell our two leads were having a blast making the film, which is good to know, given it was Nicholson’s second-to-last film he ever made, and has since disappeared for the last 14 years.

Overall, I’ll leave it at this – I can say without a doubt in my mind that my first impressions of the film were better than my most recent. After 17 years of critiquing different elements of a film objectively, I can understand where this film falters when initially, I guess I either couldn’t or it didn’t matter. It’s unfortunate, because just a little bit of a higher budget could have easily and quickly fixed those issues. If it were made today, I don’t even think there would be those same issues. The strengths of the film primarily lie in its execution of certain themes and messages.

– RATING –

C