First, let me say that I didn't not like this movie, but I can say I didn't like aspects of it. Drive stars Ryan Gosling (who we all know I love), Carey Mulligan, Bryan Cranston, Albert Brooks, and Ron Pearlman. Great cast right? And they all do a really great job.
It's based on a book by James Sallis. I haven't read it, but I'm interested in doing so because I really liked the main character. He may not do the best of things, but he definitely does them for the best of reasons. He's a terrific anti-hero.
I loved the romance aspect of the movie - that meeting the right gal changed this man's life from being rote (albeit exciting rote) to having some real meaning.
The action scenes / violent scenes were fast / bloody respectively.
So, why didn't I love this movie? It a nutshell, it was slow. When it wasn't the above mentioned action / violence scenes, it moved at a snail's pace. I mean really s...l....o....w! My immediate thought as I left the theater was this must be the director's fault. I don't know. The overall vision is his, right? The pacing, the look, the editing are all his final say, right? I could be wrong - it's been known to happen. But when you have all these scenes where nothing is going on more than watching somebody do nothing or the camera zooms in on a hand clenching for like a minute (perhaps exaggerated), I have to think, huh?
I looked at the director's credits and didn't recognize anything, but then he was apparently chosen by Ryan Gosling to direct. I know Gosling has a history of doing some really bizarre movies, but I generally love them anyway. This one - not. But not because of the actors, acting, or story which were all good.
As a side note, apparently the critics loved it. It was "unique and to be celebrated". Different strokes, huh?