I saw Me Before You back in 1991. It was called Dying Young, and Julia Roberts was the star. It stunk. I am completely joking, but I promised myself I would use this as the first line of this review regardless. The truth is I didn’t see Dying Young until 2005. That part is actually true, but the real truth is that these movies aren’t even in the same league. Dying Young wasn’t as poor as I thought it would be, but I really don’t remember much about it. On the other hand, Me Before You was an extremely profound movie that I will remember from years on out. And I also believe it is a movie that showcased the range of Emilia Clarke (HBO’s Game of Thrones) and firmly planted her as a leading actress for the next 10-15 years. The film also introduced Sam Claflin to the rest of the world that has not seen The Hunger Games franchise, where he played the role of Finnick. Before I get firmly into the nuts and bolts of this review, I want to state that I was blown away by every aspect of this tear-jerker. While it was clearly designed to tug at our heartstrings, it felt completely authentic. It was carried by an absolutely superb performance by Clarke and backed up heavily by Claflin, who did just enough to play second fiddle. I remember seeing Brooklyn last year. Brooklyn was a movie that I adored, but I couldn’t understand it when I could hear the sniffling and see the watery eyes of all those sitting near me. In Me Before You, I understood it completely. There are a few quick and funny tidbits related to this movie that I thought I’d share:

1. I thought this was another movie based on a Nicholas Sparks book.
2. I kept getting this movie confused with Love & Friendship, the Jane Austin novel adapted for the big screen that came out around the same time as Me Before You. But, as I look at these two movies now, the only comparison was that I was convinced I wouldn’t see either movie at the time of their release.
3. I was talking to a co-worker about Me Before You, and she basically spoiled the moving, telling me that she didn’t want to ruin it for me, but continuing to do so.

She told me how the movie ended, and I didn’t stop her from doing so. It turns out she never actually saw this movie, but her cousin had told her everything that she then repeated to me. I look back on that conversation, and I can’t be upset that she ruined it for me because if she hadn’t broached the topic with me in the first place, I might not have seen it and almost certainly would not have seen it on the big screen. I am so glad that I saw it in the theater. It was easily the most moving movie of the first half of 2016 and one, in what is looking right now to be a poor year, that likely will hold its spot on my Top 10 Movies of 2016 list.

Those who haven’t been privy to Clarke’s Daenerys Targaryen on Game of Thrones, perhaps, the most-watched premium cable show of all-time) will likely be seeing her for the first time. Sure, she had a role in Terminator Genisys. Still, that movie was so terrible it would be understandable if you forgot about it entirely or, if you were lucky, was able to avoid seeing it all. If, like many, you have watched Game of Thrones in its entirety, you know that this, now 29-year-old, has been caring the franchise with Kit Harrington for the last six years. The stories revolving around Daenerys and Jon and, yes, Peter Dinklage’s Tyrion, too, are the reasons we turn in each Sunday night from mid-March until the end of June. I think there is some fear that a lot of Game of Thrones characters would be typecast forever. It would be hard to see them in other roles (see the entire cast of Friends who have all had success after the run of that franchise but who all struggled to escape the mold of the character they played). For those who were worried about this happening about Emilia Clarke, rest assured that this will not be the case. Her portrayal of Louisa is so far removed from her portrayal of The Mother of Dragons that after fifteen minutes, Game of Thrones will be the furthest thing from your mind. Trust me on this one because I wouldn’t have believed it if someone had told me that either).

So what exactly is Me Before You? It’s certainly not Dying Young, but, despite the muffled cries coming from the audience throughout most of the second half. It falls somewhere in between. A sexy, confident, and successful banker named Will Traynor (Claflin) had it all. He was young. He was rich. He had a beautiful girlfriend named Alicia (Vanessa Kirby – Everest, About Time). Though we only get a glimpse of him in his present state for about five minutes, it’s enough to see that he was a man who lived life to the fullest All of that changes in a fraction of a second when he is walking across the street and struck by an oncoming motorcyclist. He essentially develops quadriplegia (he does enough function with one of his hands to maneuver his wheelchair). It’s roughly two years after that we meet Will again. He’s living in their London castle with his wealthy parents Steven (Charles Dance – HBO’s Game of Thrones, The Imitation Game) and Camila (Janet McTeer – Albert Nobbs, The Woman in Black). The family is renovated a portion of the castle to serve as Will’s private residence where he is serviced by nurse Nathan (Stephen Peacocke – television’s Home and Away, television’s Wanted) who comes and goes a couple of times a day and is the one really administering his medication and giving him as baths as well as a slew of Monday-Friday caregivers who he has chased from their jobs with his negative attitude and intolerability to be around.

Louisa is the awkward but cute girl next door who you can’t get enough of. Her family is poor, and Lou makes sacrifices so that her older sister Katrina (Jenna-Louise Coleman – Captain America: The First Avenger) can attend school. Lou is a gentle and kind barista (the kind who will make your day each time you visit) who is laid off from her job because the coffee shop isn’t earning enough revenue (and also because we need a movie to tell here). We get just enough of a glimpse into her friendly demeanor. Lou, low on skill, struggles to find a new job in the difficult economy and knows she needs to not be so much of a chooser because of her family’s dependence on her income. When she learns of the job at the Traynor castle, she jumps at the chance to interview, despite not really being qualified. Camila is won over by her innocence and positivity (and, perhaps, her attractiveness) and offers her the sixth-month job.

I imagine that Me Before You is an excellent book. It is a fantastic movie, and sometimes that can be hard in a movie where you need to believe in the growth and development of its characters. It can be challenging to do that in such a short period of time. First, we have to believe that Will is truly depressed. Then we have to believe it when Lou goes through the gamut of emotions trying to do what she can to try and get him to believe that life is worth living even though he’s bound to a wheelchair and also prone to hospitalizations because of his health, events that have, at times in the past, come close to killing him.

I won’t say any more here regarding the plot. I strongly encourage seeing this movie. And I hope that after you do that, you will read what I wrote below my movie rating. It definitely a tear-jerker and is more than some might be able to handle or are even willing to try to handle. Situations like this (whether it be a debilitating life-changing incident such as this or something else) sometimes hit a little too close to home, and I understand that. With that said, this is the best love story so far this year. Claflin and, especially, Clarke are cementing themselves as leading actors for the next decade.

Plot 7.5/10 (honestly…we’ve seen this before…fortunately, the take on this one led us down avenues not yet explored)
Character Development 9.5/10 (Louisa and Will are both very different people by the end of this movie than they were two hours before)
Character Chemistry 10/10 (Clarke and Claflin are dynamic in this year’s best love story to date while Patrick is played perfectly by Lewis)
Acting 10/10 (what cannot be understated is that this movie had the potential to be a disaster without the right performance from the two leads)
Screenplay 8.5/10 (I think the biggest problem here wasn’t that they didn’t tell enough of the story at the beginning…that was fine…but how it rushed to the end)
Directing 8.5/10 (rookie Thea Sharrock benefited from outstanding lead performances, beautifully shot cinematography, and a soundtrack that would have had half of the audience weeping had there not even been a story to tell at all)
Cinematography 10/10 (Shot throughout England, we get some stunning  shots of sweeping landscapes that include castles….more importantly, though, are the intimate moments between Louisa and Will that are captured in such a way that you can’t help but wish that the love story of your life wasn’t more like theirs)
Sound 10/10 (The soundtrack of the year includes songs from Ed Sheeran, Imagine Dragons, X Ambassadors, The 1975, Cloves, and Jack Garratt, to name a few)
Hook and Reel 9.5/10 (whether it’s the confident, successful, handsome Will that we meet in the film’s first scene or the friendly and positive barista Louisa that we meet right after that, there are two characters that I certainly wanted to learn more about…and their story that was one that you were fearful might make you sad, but one that you were willing to take a risk on)
Universal Relevance 9/10 (some of us have only dreamed of a love like this)
92.5%

***Spoilers to be read after watching this movie***

Sharrock received some criticism for not changing the ending of this movie. Author Jojo Moyes received some of the same criticism when the book was published, but not nearly to Sharrock’s level for the movie. This goes to show that a mainstream movie, such as this, that’s going to make $70 million domestically at the box office, has a much broader reach than a big. The movie ends with Will going through with his plan of going to Switzerland to die by assisted suicide even though he has fallen in love with Louisa. I honestly believe that this is why the aggregate score of the critics was not higher than its current and respectable 59%. This wasn’t an easy or popular ending, especially because he was smiling a lot more than he had before in the six months of getting to know Clark. He had fallen in love with the woman. But that did not make his life any easier. For many of us (I think), it would have been easier to go on. But Will’s life was so vastly different than what it had before, and he couldn’t accept his circumstances. He gave the six-month offer to his mother and father that he promised but continued to go on with his decision to end his life.

So I have a couple of points that I want to bring up here. The first has to do with the relationship itself. I loved its development. It felt natural and believable. Sure it had to be sped up slightly to fight the confines of the movie, but I thought Sharrock handled that nicely. Claflin was masterful in his portrayal of a down-and-out paraplegic who was hellbent on going through with his initial plan after his six-month promise to his parents. He was such a miserable person to be around that it is no wonder that he chased a handful of caregivers away in such a short period of time. And while he initially wasn’t planning on giving Louisa her fair chance, her awkward charm and desire to change his outlook on life win him over in such a way that he wasn’t expecting. But he is still depressed and intent on ending his life. And it’s understandable. He was a highly successful businessman who was passionately in love with Alicia, living the prime years of his life when everything changed in a fraction of a second. Unwilling to accept the circumstances before him, he drove Alicia away and landed himself in a deep depression where the only way out for him seemed death. His parents were able to convince him to give it six more months which Will agreed to do, but this was only to suffice his parents. He wasn’t changing his mind.

I set up my first point but didn’t really explain my feelings on it. The way that Will and Louisa fell in love was so real and heartbreaking at the same time. While not a fan of cheating on a significant other personally, Louisa got a pass from, I think, everyone watching the film. Her desire was not to fall in love with Will, but he challenged her perspective on life. He encouraged her to live a life that she deserved rather than taking a backseat to her family and fiance Patrick (Matthew Lewis – Neville Longbottom in all the Harry Potter movies). Patrick wasn’t a bad person. He didn’t properly treat Louisa. He took her for granted and put his needs before hers. Again, there are many guys out there who are worse, and it was hard not to feel bad for Patrick because Louisa was his girl, and he did love her. It’s just that he had other priorities in life that were more important than his relationship with her. So seeing her get treated like the princess she deserved made us like Will more and Patrick less. And the fabulous Emilia Clark did an amazing job of showing her downs and ups in the movie. I think a scene that will stick with me forever was when Will and Louisa danced at Alicia and Rupert’s wedding. A little tipsy from the alcohol, Louisa had surrendered all vulnerability and seeing her arms wrapped around him. At the same time, he led her around the dance floor on the wheelchair made me feel completely envious as a human being who never has, nor will ever, experience that kind of love. Again, it speaks to Emilia Clarke as an actress and the amazing camera shots and angles of the intimate moments the two shared. It was as if they were the only people in that entire reception. So if they loved each other that much, why would Will choose not to at least try for a life with her? He later gives his reasons, and they feel very authentic. As a man, I understand the feelings of inadequacy. As a person who suffers from a mental illness, I understand what it feels like to never be good enough. I can understand how Will would forever be second-guessing a decision to stay on this planet when you know you are going to continue to deteriorate physically (they did do a great job of showcasing his health declining numerous times in this movie) while also not allowing the person you love to truly live. Many will say that this is a selfish way of thinking. I tend to think the opposite. I could relate with Will more than the average audience member of this movie, though. So, yes, I get it. But at the same time, I understand how hard that must be. When you are in love, you don’t want that feeling to end. And feelings of love can get us to do all kinds of crazy things and change our plans completely for the person we love. I see both sides.

Many advocacy groups heavily criticized the ending of this movie. And I understand how some would criticize. Euthanasia is as controversial of a topic as you can give. If anyone other than a human were forced to live a life as a person with quadriplegia, the humane thing to do would be to end the suffering. We do it with our pets all of the time. Yet when it comes to human life, we expect differently because humans have the ability to understand the pain and their situation mentally. Now, as a society, we value human life more than we value anything else. Still, if an individual in extreme pain and who is as miserable as Will goes through certain precautions (i.e., he takes some, as Will did, to make sure ending his life is something that he wants to do and doesn’t just act rashly), maybe they should be able to do that. Now, where do we draw the line? How bad does an individual’s situation have to be for us to allow this? What if they are just depressed and feel like ending their life, but the means to do so (hanging, a self-inflicted gunshot, jumping off a bridge, taking pills, etc.) are frightening. Should these people be allowed to go through the same protocol and then, if they choose to, ultimately be able to end their lives if we allow a person with quadriplegia to do so? This is an ethical topic you could debate from now until the end of time. The advocacy groups’ problem was that a person with quadriplegias’ life was valued less than someone with non-quadriplegia. The groups thought that Moyes and Shamrock were saying that life as a person with quadriplegia was not worth living, and they had a problem with that. But, again, I can see both sides.

Finally, something that felt completely misguided in this movie was the outward perception of Louisa herself. Sure she was goofy and came from a family without a lot of money. But she was still incredibly gorgeous (as Emilia Clarke would be). She was likable and endearing. And, despite a limited skillset, she was a hard worker. I didn’t ever feel like Louisa was down on her luck though I did understand her desire to help her family financially first (that’s just the type of person she was). But her external beauty, selflessness, and positive disposition were almost too great to make her a sympathetic character. We didn’t quite get there, but every time we heard that she deserves better or that she should aspire to a greater life or value herself, I wanted to shout out that this wasn’t a character that needed to be picked up. Emilia Clarke was almost too good of a version of her character.

Plot 9/10
Character Development 9.5/10
Character Chemistry 9.5/10
Acting 9.5/10
Screenplay 9.5/10
Directing 9.5/10
Cinematography 9/10
Sound 9/10
Hook and Reel 9.5/10
Universal Relevance 9.5/10
93.5%