Yeah, I think you just have to accept the simplicity of the story, Way To Indie. It is refreshingly simple imo, and I think it is that very simplicity that translate into the spectator's performances, using suggestions and body language to convey depth. It seems like a cop out, but I happened to find a lot going on there.
I think it also gave Refn space to do his thing with the overall style of the film, which is stunning at times.
But to be honest a lot of people liked Ron Perlman in it, but every time he was on screen it took me out of the movie completely. I cringe when I think back on, "That is one mother ****in fine ass pussy mobile mother ****er". Gosling, Mulligan, Brooks, and Cranston were great though.
If you're not big on the guy, I could see how his performance would wind one up. But I thought it was a nice bit of casting against type. Besides
Blade 2, I don't think I have ever seen Pearlman in an unsympathetic role, and he is surprisingly effective at playing such characters.
Anyways, like you said, this film isn't for everyone. There seems to be two set minds when people go into the film:
A) That it's going to be a dumb, fun action adventure with pimped up automobiles and stuff, like in the
Fast & Furious series.
B) That it will be completely the opposite to A - that it's going to be this mega complex indie flick that's disguised as an action thriller.
As most will know by now, it's neither. To quote another user on imdb,
Drive is a discourse in filmmaking. I'm mostly attracted to the tone of a film and whether or not I care about a character, regardless of if I hate them or not, and
Drive ticked these things for me. If you're not big on neo noir or films that attempt to tell the story through atmosphere and great use of mise-en-scene then it's not the film for you.