The problem with this movie is that neither DeHaan, nor Pattinson hold the attention of the audience. The script is nondescript, and the directing cannot make up for the lack of a compelling story and characterization.DeHaan looks like a childish version of Dean with his unlined face, rounded cheeks, feathered, rubbable hair and those full, pink lips.Dean was young, but had an old soul reflected in his lined face, sunken eyes, and impossibly attractive visage. Even James Franco -- much as I detest that actor -- was better than DeHaan. The story had no real climax... its twin journeys (of the co-protagonists) made shallow and dull via the absence of any real conflict or urgency of mission.I'm sure Corbijn had good intentions.I gave this one a four.

It was based on the real life story of a young Hollywood star, especially during his early days of the acting career. In the 50s when a photojournalist was looking for a break, he ended up doing a story on James Dean. Initially who hated him, later gives a nod for the interview and so this story begins that focused on the time they spent together.A simple story, but a very long film. It was neither inspiring nor annoying. It was just like anybody's story around us, that's really boring. Because he was kind of an unfriendly and his tale that told in this film was very dull.Maybe if you like James Dean and his films, especially interested to learn about him, then you might like this film. But to me this biopic was just okay. Neither I enjoyed it, nor disliked. Yet to see his films which are very small numbers, then I might change my mind about this film, so till then what I said will remains.5/10

This film tells the story of a freelance photographer who spots something special in James Dean, who has yet to make it super famous. He tries to do a photoshoot with James Dean, only to be pushed around and played with for weeks. They form an almost coercive yet deep relationship with each other.I haven't watched a James Dean film, so I can't tell whether the demeanour portrayed is accurate or not. If it is accurate, I am rather unclear why a person who is mellow and yet manipulative can fascinate the world. I mean, his voice is monotonous as sleep inducing! The film is very slow, not much happens and things just drag on for way longer than it should. The characters are not interesting or sympathetic. There is nothing captivating about the story. The only thing I like about "Life" is the fact that Robert Pattison is finally looking healthy like a human, shedding his image of a vampire.

Life Magazine photographer Dennis Stock forms an attachment and gets to spend time and photograph a young James Dean in the early stages of his tragically short career. Set around the time of the announcement of the engagement of Pier Angeli to Vic Damone, the news sent Dean spiralling into depression, Dean having dated Angeli previously. Dennis recognises that 'Jimmy' is part of a change in society, and aims to be there throughout.James Dean is a truly iconic figure, to this day his tragic loss is felt, who knows how good an actor he would have become. It's a very sensitive film, everything is subtle and softly done somehow, I include the two leading performances in that summary also, I thought Dane DeHaan was an excellent piece of casting as James Dean, I bought into him. As for R Patz I quite like him as an actor, I question some of the roles he takes, I thought he was very good in this. The gravitas came from Ben Kingsley, who unfortunately didn't get a great amount of screen time.I find the start a little slow, but after the first thirty or forty minutes it really opens up. Rather good, underrated movie, 7/10