Title DossierAction

Young Ones

ActionDramaRomance

Set in the future when water is hard to find, a teenage boy sets out to protect his family and survive.

Year

2014

Duration

1h 40m

IMDb

5.8

Poster Feed

Cast

Jake Paltrow

Director

Michael Shannon

Ernest Holm

Nicholas Hoult

Flem Lever

Cast

Jake Paltrow

Director

Michael Shannon

Ernest Holm

Nicholas Hoult

Flem Lever

Elle Fanning

Mary Holm

Kodi Smit-McPhee

Jerome Holm

Robert Hobbs

Caleb Moore

David Butler

Sam Lever

Aimee Mullins

Katherine Holm

CP

Christy Pankhurst

Robbie

Alex McGregor

Sooz

DC

David Clatworthy

Calvin Hooyman

Liah O'Prey

Anna

Carel Nel

Bandit

Andy McPhee

Foreman

BA

Barry Armitage

Well-dressed man

BH

Ben Horowitz

Water Guard

RW

Rachel Wood

Orderly

CT

Charles Tertiens

Border Inspector

Gideon van Schoor

Bandit Brother

Jake Paltrow

Writer

Trailer

Featured Picks

Looking for more entertainment? Explore our recommended gaming hub and short-drama destination.

Instant Games

Gamixo

Play casual browser games with puzzles, cards, sports, and quick challenges ready in seconds.

Short Drama

VSKIT Drama

Watch trending mini-series, romance stories, and fresh short dramas with fast daily updates.

Comments

10 Comments

Bri BriMay 29, 2023

source: Young Ones

glow princessNov 22, 2022

I didn't check the budget of this movie but it feels like a low budget production in many ways. First of all the characters are roughly cut and stereotypes, you don't find real inner conflicts in them, Flem could have had good intentions to a degree, but he was just selfish - that is to simple for a drama. Second the long chapters don't make much sense, it's just confusing. Finishing a chapter with the death of it's subject is not smart. No flashbacks, no learnings in the later chapters about Ernest or the past for example. The setup was perfect for a Rashomon style drama, by simply NOT letting the audience know every detail all the time. Wasted chance. The whole movie was to long for the story. The slow pacing and the lack of anything happening over long periods (nothing of substance at least) makes it tiresome. The automatic mule robot (Big Dog or LS3 Pack Mule) did not add much to the sci fi feeling - it was developed around 2009 or even earlier. If this movie is supposed to take place in the near future (like some 20-50 years) such a machine would be long gone and replaced by better systems. Some primitive drones and stuff do not convince me, too. A little bit more attention to the details would have been nice. Even poor settlers would use something better than an 80s style transistor radio. The border situation was awkward. I wonder how the patrols walking on stilts would defend against the mob pushing them over... the available fences and guard's walkways would allow much better control. Just silly. I watched the German translation and the dub voices were terrible. They sounded like some people from the street had been asked to dub the movie during their lunch brake. All in all the story was too simple, too often seen and the rest of the movie didn't save the day. I don't consider it a waste of time but would expect something more imaginative or original these days. It would make a solid first movie for a director starting his career right after film school.

le_stephanois_officielleNov 22, 2022

The plot: After a catastrophic drought, a man and his two teenaged children attempt to survive in a post-apocalyptic society. I wanted to like this more than I did. Everything about it seems like it would appeal to me. The problem is that I got a bit bored during a few slower parts of the film as I waited for the predictable plot to catch up to where I knew it was going. That's not a deal-breaker, but the scenes were telegraphed rather overtly early on, and anyone who's familiar with this sort of story can probably predict most of the film after twenty minutes. That said, it successfully avoided several annoying clichés in post-apocalyptic films: cannibals, biker gangs, raping all the female characters, and characters who do more yelling than talking. I was glad to see a post-apocalyptic film that was more concerned with characters than gratuitous elements such as these. Don't get me wrong: I love gratuitous exploitation films, but it's nice to have something a bit more restrained every now and then. I would hesitate to truly recommend this film to fans of post-apocalyptic science fiction. There's certainly much to enjoy if you're starved for good entries in that genre, but it's nowhere near as good as The Road, which was a near-masterpiece. Certainly, the mood and atmosphere of that film was missing, and if you're looking for a truly bleak and depressing story, you won't find it here. This is a more traditional Western story in which a family survives in a near-lawless frontier. If you're more a fan of Westerns than post-apocalyptic films, then I can see how you might enjoy this more than I did. Even so, I think that you'd be better served by watching old Sergio Leone films. You won't get robotic mules, but you'll get much better cinematography and pacing. I can't remember a time when I was ever bored in a Leone film.

MONDRAGONNov 22, 2022

We get introduced to life in a globally warmed world where society has degenerated into tough guys in a male dominated world. The movie centers around a family, the mother lives in a physical therapy place because she was hurt and has spine problems ... which they make a big deal about and show lots of peculiar hardware that looks futuristic, but it has nothing to do with the movie. Then they show this cool 4 legged robot, mule, for carrying things through mountain passes, and it is barely used in the movie, except that it looks so cool. There is a family where the son calls the father by his first name, and the underage daughter is going out with the local town bad boy. Bad things happen, but they happen slow and don't make a lot of sense, and certainly do not propel the movie from one scene to the next. This is a watchable movie, but you may find yourself asking - why did they make this movie and why did I watch it ... was that it? The movie is fun to watch, and many characters just come and go, but there is just not much to it, I would not want to watch it again, but I am not sorry I watched it. The rental fee was too much, and come to think of it on Amazon that is a reason to be angry ... nothing warranted this fee except it as hiked up because no one knew anything about it. So ... consider this review as your warning. I would wait until it is on NetFlix or Amazon Prime, it is not worth paying for. 4/10

mira mdgNov 22, 2022

This is set in the future when after prolonged droughts water has become the most precious commodity on the planet. The story is told in three chapters from the perspectives of the three main players. Ernst Holm comes first; he has stuck it out on his dehydrated farmstead. He has alcohol issues, a wife in hospital and two young children, his daughter Mary and son Jerome. He ekes an existence by servicing the local water mine and life is hard. His daughter has a beau in the shape of Flem Lever (Nicholas Hoult) who has designs on both her and her daddies land. He soon decides to put his designs into action with repercussions for all. Now this is an indie effort and the CGI is excellent despite that. The story is a slow burner but it is one that is very much worth staying with. Michael Shannon an Ernst is particularly effective as the guilt ridden, hard bitten man who is clinging on to hope. The sci- fi parts in terms of machines are also done quite well, there is some action, but this is a character piece with violence as a driver for the story and not the raison d'être. I like dystopian futuristic films and this is one that goes for that in most parts whilst still clinging to some of the more regular societal norms and I felt they got the mix really well. If you like to have to think about a film, but not too much, then there may well be something of merit for you here.

Funke AkindeleNov 22, 2022

Let's get this right of the bat: This is a low budget movie and it is draining the viewer (slow paced). But just because you have some recognizable faces, do not expect this to be "Hollywood" (as one other reviewer did). And do not even think about comparing this to Tarantino. If that's what you expect/your whole extension of movie knowledge, do not read any further, but especially: do not watch this movie at all. You'll be doing yourself a favor mostly. Back to the actors, who are giving extraordinary performances. No matter the age of the ones involved, we do get amazing on our screen. While to some it might seem there is no story, that is not true. It's just hidden well behind all that character driven development we're seeing. It's not a fun ride, but it's a well made one!

is_pen_killerNov 22, 2022

There's a tone in the Young One's that even though I can't put my finger on, it feels very familiar, almost a languid natural ease. The story is compelling, so much so, that almost a year after seeing it, I reflect on the bright light of the desert and still hear the soundtrack. There were movies with this light made in the 70's, panoramic, larger then life, but full of individual stories. Without even delving into the true nature of the accurate rendering of future issues regarding the environment, and natural resources, this is a story about justice and metering that out in the harsh climate of a shaken world.

NdeshiiNov 22, 2022

There's this one bit where the mechanical cowboy dealer gets all philosophical and attempted an argument for repeating our mistakes rather than risking the potentially worse circumstances that change could bring... and in a way that was a description of the entire movie: they tried doing something different than the usual Hollywood bullshit and it ended up being far worse. There was no director in the credits because I watched the director's cut where he edited his name out. Literally no one wants responsibility for this film. I invited friends around to watch it with me because the trailer looked good, they are no longer my friends.

FAHAPicturesHD Nov 22, 2022

This film was very good Science Fiction: great images, great story. It's original and full of remarkable details: the machine, the opening scene, the hospital together with smaller things that contributed to make the story more believable and increased overall quality. The plot, although classical under some respects, is not easily predictable and keeps the attention high. So does the beautiful South Africa landscape that Country Music makes sound 100% American. When both the script and the visual results are so good it is uncommon that they are the work of just one person. Jake Paltrow however both wrote and directed the movie, alone, and this impressed me. I didn't think of him as a top author (in my own private, useless, mental list) and I owe him a (private, useless, mental) apology.

KusiNov 22, 2022

This is a good movie. It looks good. It's interesting. It has a decent plot. It also has a few well defined characters, one of which is Ernest Holm, the father of two teenage children and the owner of a barren stretch of farm land turned desert. Holm is played by Michael Shannon in convincing fashion. He is determined without being unscrupulous. He is flawed yet humble enough to know it. He has convictions. He loves his family. This film reminded me of There Will Be Blood. The Daniel Day-Lewis movie is, of course, superior to this one although there is a similar perspective of harsh land and desperate men whose fates lie in their ability to coax wealth from it. The other major difference its that this is set in the near future and has the conceivable technological improvisations of a world where water has become the most rare commodity. All in all a pretty good movie well deserving of a much higher rating than it currently averages.