A Masterpiece!

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

I found this film to be much better than expected, especially compared to the relatively low score on IMDb. I'd give it a solid 8.5. Fine acting by both the father and the little boy (and all the incidental characters). It reminded me a bit of the Russian film "The Return (Vozvrashchenie)." Both were so-called last rides between father and son(s). If you like this film, there's a good chance you'll like "The Return." One of the things I really liked about this movie was that it didn't need to have every moment filled with dialog like a lot of movies. There are some great scenes with little or no dialog where the interaction between the characters and their environment created enough mood on their own. More dialog would have just been a distraction at times. My only complaint about the film was that I wish it was a bit longer. But then that's a sign of a good film, you don't want it to end.

Diane and I saw this engrossing examination of the other side of human existence; a side that as portrayed in Last Ride would probably be unfamiliar, unappealing and unflattering to all concerned and yet strangely curious as if they are the Other rather than us under different circumstances. Obviously a film that features only two central characters will rise or fall based upon the success of those two characters as actors; whether or not they can draw the audience into their lives and whether they can create enough drama in their interaction to sustain believability over the course of the script. In my opinion they succeeded on both accounts extremely well. I thought Weaving's portrayal of a guy caught between the mistakes of his past and the hopelessness of his present was unusual and unusually poignant. I can hear people laughing and saying that the formula has been rehashed so many times that it is trite. My answer to that comment is that I have not seen it done so well. Weaving portrayed a guy on a knife edge, caught between a past that will not let him forget and a future that has no place for him. How many of "hims" are out there? Do we as a society have a responsibility? What went wrong? Was the script over dramatised? Did Weaving play his character too wildly, too dramatically? I do not think so. I also thought Tom Russell was brilliant. I thought that his character morphed between the extremes demanded of him in the script very well. Diane knows children his age far better than I and her comment was kids do not spring back and forth between absolutes as Russell's character did but to me I found his morphing as real as his dad's. Under those extreme circumstances I could understand the motivations of both central characters. A difficult film but one that should be seen to see what film can do.

It takes a lot of guts to push for truth to character rather than going for the easy way out, softening the edges. In this film Hugo Weaving's character has been so severely scarred by life that he has become a total sociopath, with no capacity for empathy, let alone love. It would have been easier for Weaving to have softened him a bit, shown signs that really deep down he did love his son. But that would not have been this guy, who is as hard as nails and totally self-concerned. Even when takes his son camping, it is all about himself, recapturing the few happy times in his youth. When his son makes that picture shake, his reaction is vicious. All this makes it a hard film to watch, in the same league as some other Australian films like "The Boys". Matching Weaving step for step, Tom Russell's portrayal of the wary boy wishing his father would show him some affection but fearing the worst, is brilliant. Never overdone or mawkish, showing extraordinary subtlety and maturity for one so young. Finally, the ending is suitably enigmatic, leaving us with questions about what really happened, and what might now.A brilliant film, but if you like feel-good with a happy ending, don't go to this one.

If you've seen a lot of father and son stories, you won't see much that's new here, but there are some very affecting scenes, as crim dad drags innocent young son across the Australian countryside and bush. Hugo Weaving is okay as dad, but often he's not convincing. There are quite a few local actors who would have been less self- conscious, but, alas they are not semi-stars like HW. The boy, Tom Russell, is excellent. Trouble is the script is not very exciting. Many stock-standard father and son scenes start developing, and I think: 'oh.. my cliché expectations will be subverted at any second', but they are not. There are some tender moments - mainly created by sensitive direction and Russell's excellent underplaying, but it's too long a ride. I won't spoil the story, but I was not in the least bit convinced by the transformation at the end of the story..it just seemed like a sudden and easy way for the writer to put a full stop. However, the cinematography is superb..Last Ride is typical of what I think is wrong with Australian movies: they're well made, they look pretty, but not enough happens. There's no rigour in the scripting. Wouldn't it be better to make sure you've got a really solid vehicle before you start off on the ride?