Nebraska City, 1991, two best friends get the chance to run the swimming pool snack shack, that later comes to be the perfect scenario for transgression, fun, personal discovery and romance.
Chuck says:
Being 58 years old, I’m fully aware there are things I don’t understand about today’s youth. Their obsession with social media boggles my mind, their immersion into video games worries me and the level of self-absorption on display causes me to weep for the future. Yet, I’m pretty sure when my generation was in its teens, we were doing things that mystified my parents. I suspect it’s simply the natural order of things.
I mention this because I have just watched a movie that I’m sure will be embraced by 16 – 25-year-olds and I, frankly, can’t make heads or tails of it. In his mind, I bet writer/director Adam Rehmeier sees his film Snack Shack as a poignant coming-of-age story with a subversive bent. I wouldn’t be surprised if he used Paul Thomas Anderson’s Licorice Pizza as his north star while making it. The result, however, is a wholly unpleasant experience, a film without a single appealing character and a fatal lack of reality.
The time is the summer of 1991, the place is Nebraska City and the two protagonists, are A.J. and Moose (Conor Sherry and Gabriel LaBelle), two 14-year-olds out to create as much mayhem as possible. They’re both chain-smokers, frequent a dog racetrack, seem to know the ins-and-outs of handicapping the canine contestants and brew their own ale. Keep in mind – They Are 14! They drink beer like its water, are known to smoke weed and are constantly scheming on how to make a buck. They secure the rights to the snack bar at the local pool for the summer where they plan to make beaucoup bucks. However, their plans hit a snag when Brooke (Mika Abdalla), an army brat who’s older than them, moves in next door to A.J. Securing a job at the pool, she ends up coming between the two friends, toying with them both.
I’m not sure where to start where all that is wrong with this movie. I’m the one who often must remind nitpickers about the necessity of suspending their sense of disbelief when watching any film but the lapses in logic here are so egregious, they cannot be ignored. I doubt any city council would hand over the rights to a municipal contract to two young teens. I may be out of touch, but I don’t think kids this age make their own beer, have implemented a betting system at a race track or have the business savvy to pull off half the things they get away with in the movie. Their frequency in dropping the F-Bomb, that I believe. As for Brooke, her cynicism and behavior befits a woman in her mid-twenties, not an irresponsible 16 year-old temptress.
Again, maybe I am blissfully unaware and if so, I apologize. Be that as it may, the biggest objection I have is Rehmeier casting delinquent, self-destructive behavior in a poignant, romantic light. After 90 minutes of teen shenanigans, he has the temerity to introduce a third-act tragedy to give the film meaning and weight. It doesn’t hold water because he hasn’t earned it. It’s an incongruous, shameless ploy that is obvious, embarrassing, and desperate.
I’m pretty sure teenagers will love this film and there may be older viewers who will see it as nostalgic. If so, someone needs to explain to me how when A.J.’s father, who is a judge, hands his 14-year-old son a beer in the final scene is poignant. Not a single thing in Shack rings true, a film that, in the end, is a reflection of its protagonists as Rehmeier will do anything for attention.
Zero Stars
