‘Promised Land’ Review

Published 2 years ago by , Updated November 18th, 2014 at 3:51 am,

promised land matt damon Promised Land Review

It’s high-minded material, but makes for a flaccid viewing experience.

Promised Land is the third collaboration between the Good Will Hunting duo – writer/star Matt Damon and director Gus Van Sant – who last united ten years ago on the divisive lyrical experiment Gerry. Damon plays Steve Butler, a rural town native-turned successful natural gas corporate salesman. He’s the antithesis of a Frank Capra protagonist, whose naivety and innocence makes them susceptible to cynicism in the face of corporate interests (see: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington). That Steve starts disillusioned is one of the film’s problems, for reasons that will be explained later.

Steve’s on the verge of a promotion when he and partner Sue Thomason (Frances McDormand) head to rural Pennsylvania, anticipating an easy job convincing locals to sell their properties for drilling rights. However, that’s before encountering such unexpected obstacles as a distinguished high school teacher (Hal Holbrook), whose respectability and industry knowledge complicate a city-wide vote on the matter; not to mention, the arrival of mysterious environmental activist Dustin Noble (John Krasinski, who co-wrote the script with Damon) whose presence jeopardizes their entire operation and messes up Steve’s budding romance with local elementary teacher Alice (Rosemarie DeWitt).

Promised Land aims to be a meditation on economic hardships and disappearing community values – as explored through a Capra-esque socially-conscious parable – but works better as an allegory for the Hollywood types who made it attempting to reconnect with the ‘common people’ (a group they once belonged to). The film never transcends the feeling that it was made by people concerned about an issue, as opposed to those whom are directly impacted. As much as the screenplay from Damon and Kransinski – and story co-conceived by David Eggers (Where the Wild Things AreAway We Go) – is coming from a sincere place, there’s an obstacle it fails to overcome: it’s from the perspective of privileged outsiders looking in.

promised land john krasinski Promised Land Review

Matt Damon versus John Krasinski in ‘Promised Land’

Unfortunately, Damon’s performance contributes to that flaw; his self-detestment and incompetence often feels forced, while the scenes where Steve gets back to his roots are (and yes, this sounds mean) like watching a politician rolling up their sleeves, pretending to be a blue-collar worker. The script ends up incorporating some credibility-straining developments (including, a climactic revelation) in order to properly complete Steve’s arc, since he begins from a darker place. It’s those plot elements that are bound to generate complaints that Promised Land amounts to propaganda and fails to shock because of Krasinski’s character – who, it seems, is meant to be perceived as pushy yet sincere, but overdoes it and just comes off mostly twee and obnoxious (that might’ve been partly intentional but, again, it’s too much).

Meanwhile, the characters played by McDormand, Holbrook and DeWitt – who are all more interesting and feel like legitimate salt-of-the-earth folk – end up getting short-shifted, with so much screen time devoted to Steve and Dustin. That’s all the more frustrating because those actors also give the best performances in the film. To tie back to a previously-raised point: Promised Land is (theoretically) shining a light on the tribulations of these ordinary people and giving them a voice but by pushing them aside in favor of Steve’s redemption, it fails to accomplish that task.

promised land rosemarie dewitt Promised Land Review

Rosemarie DeWitt and Matt Damon in ‘Promised Land’

Damon and Krasinski are more successful here as screenwriters than actors. Their script isn’t exactly a trailblazer, in part because it borrows the Capra formula (right down to a character’s moment-of-truth monologue in the third act); nonetheless, its simple storytelling and political restraint is admirable. Similarly, Promised Land avoids proposing any pat solution when it comes to the dilemma of fracking and its environmental consequences. The film’s unwillingness to commit politically and demand for accountability are its strengths - which makes those aforementioned thematic (and philosophical) shortcomings all the more frustrating by comparison.

On a pure technical level, Van Sant and his cinematographer Linus Sandgren create some picturesque visuals that include recurring bird’s-eye shots of the untarnished countryside; however, the use of prolonged takes and/or extemporaneous camera movement distracts as often as it manages to enhance any scene. Similarly, the restrained color palette heightens the subdued atmosphere that lingers throughout, but also (inadvertently) emphasizes the portentous mood and absence of dramatic drive. The film feels as though it should flow along like composer Danny Elfman’s gentle musical accompaniment, but the final result is unnecessarily inert.

promised land damon mcdormand Promised Land Review

Frances McDormand and Matt Damon in ‘Promised Land’

As a whole, Promised Land unfolds as a hybrid of elements from Damon and Van Sant’s Good Will Hunting and Gerry, in terms of storytelling and style. It has the same script strengths, but more weaknesses than GWH – and doesn’t have equally strong central performances to compensate for writing flaws – while the cinematic aesthetics and touches of symbolism (see: shots of fizzling water, whenever Steve washes his face) aren’t the focus like in Gerry, but end up being heavy-handed as a result. It’s high-minded material, but makes for a flaccid viewing experience.

Here is the trailer for Promised Land:


Promised Land is Rated R for language. It is currently playing in limited release, but will expand to more theaters around the U.S. over the forthcoming weeks.

Our Rating:

2.5 out of 5
(Fairly Good)

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. This is another weak attempt at Hollywood ginning up fear about a non-issue.

    It’s also another example that demonstrates Damon’s gross incompetence.

    Just Google “debunking fracking myths”. There is tons of evidence.

  2. And the movie was bankrolled by MidEast Oil Producing countries that will be financially hurt by FRACKed oil and natural gas.

  3. Frack this movie, because I want to have firewater straight from the tap! Just figured I would get in on the ground floor and do some trolling of my own like these other frackers on here:)

  4. Gonna have to see this. Lately you guys (gals) reviews have been a lil narrow minded. no offense

    • Narrow minded? Because you wanted this film to be good? No offense, but I don’t think you read the review. Sandy Schaefer gave solid offense on the issues of the film, and gave you reasons why they didn’t work. It isn’t like she wrote a long rant (like one-third of the population on the internet would). It was a good and perceptive review.

      • FYI, Sandy’s a dude.

  5. I live in, basically, natural-gas drilling central, and I can tell you, there are MASSIVE problems associated with the fracking itself, many to be detailed in the future, and an incredible number of horror stories about how the gas well people are trying to bulldoze their way through regular people. All they want is to get more and more gas wells drilled, get the profits, to heck with the land and the people, as the rich get richer. The parallels between this and the building of America’s railroads in the old west are extremely similar. Get your facts straight people.

    • Excellent scientific argument. If I recall correctly, sound science is based solely on anecdotal evidence.

  6. Matt looks old !:(

  7. I have to say that this crystalized for me what I often have felt of late when watching, say, Paul McCartney doing a concert to help Sandy victims, or Oprah showing off how she has helped a charity, or a movie in which rich movie stars producers etc. tackle an issue with no real respect or sense of who the people involved are:

    As much as the screenplay from Damon and Kransinski – and story co-conceived by David Eggers (Where the Wild Things Are, Away We Go) – is coming from a sincere place, there’s an obstacle it fails to overcome: it’s from the perspective of privileged outsiders looking in.

    I don’t know, but isn’t Paul McCartney so rich that he could single handedly donate enough money to significantly help those in need???? The same with some of the other ‘performers’?

    Anyway, excellent review.

  8. This review confirms what I suspected from the trailer, the analogy of the politician rolling up his sleeves fits perfectly. The whole thing feels very forced and unauthentic

  9. i used to love Matt Damon.now i realise my mistake, he infact sucks balls,he could not pick a movie project to save his life,if anyone has ever seen matt damon not playing matt damon in a movie tell me, boaring little man.

  10. Another well-written review, although I watched the film recently and I thought it was pretty good.

    Damon’s character repeatedly tells us that he’s “one of them”; he grew up on a farm so he knows the peoples’ values etc. Granted, the film could have done more to show this, but particularly with that final speech it makes us empathize with the character more and connect with his story arc.