 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
142.25.33.34
The Constant Gardener stars Ralph Fiennes and Rachel Weisz and City of God director Fernando Meirelles.I have not seen City of God so I'm sure some either like him or they do not but this political thriller is a crackler of romance of opposites. Tessa (Weisz) an activist of the firebrand nature wearing heart on sleeve attracts Justin(Fiennes) a middle of the ladder British Diplomat who's more interested in his pots and plants than in world affairs.
You can read about the plot outline. What works about this thriller as opposed to films like The Firm -- is that events and situations happen to these people and do not seem forced. The political aspect of the movie with big drugs testing deadly drugs on poor Africans doesn't come across preachy - and those trying to intervene and to get the truth is not handled in the usual Big chase action sequence Hollywood by the numbers average Joe fleeing from bullits and car chases and eveil thugs to put the drug company in place.
This film is a matter of fact reality piece and doesn;t shy away from reality. The Romance is handled deftly despite an opposites attract the leads make us believe in the match and the fondness they have for one another. And the deep love the grows like the plants Justin keeps. It is certainly a film to be seen and felt and one that resonates to second and more viewings. We want to know who Tessa was, what were her motivations?
Given the dense LeCarre novels it's a feat to be able to make an effective film from his material. It's the best film I've seen this year.
This is an art-house film -- if you're expecting big "pay-off" of action and suspense like Hollywood attempts then you will not find it here and it will bore you. This ios not an action film even though the trailers are making it out to be. It is a Romance and a political commentary and a story about personal human growth. Other critics are focussing on the drug commentary and the suspense -- it works on that level quite well but it is in my view the tertiary or backdrop to the individuals who are on a spectrum of how they involve themselves in the human plight of the third world. Indifference or apathy can become a journey of spirit and a will to do more than just going along with the system.
This is Ralph Fiennes' Best work in a leading role. And Weisz has not been better.
Grade: AGrading scale from F- to A++
Follow Ups:
Are there any shots that last, steadily, for more than, say, six seconds?
clark
Quite a few...for a welcome change. In fact, the cinematography is perhaps the strong point of this movie.Later
D
a
An intelligent movie about intelligent characters for intelligent viewers." studied sociology of culture at Columbia, where I received a Ph.D., at a time when there was M.A. but no doctorate in film studies. I belong to a small group of film scholars who have juggled two careers: teaching and criticism. Over the years, I have taught film at Columbia University, the New School of Social Research, Wellesley College, Arizona State University, and UCLA.
As a critic, I had a prominent voice at Variety, the bible of showbiz, for which I wrote throughout the 1990s. I then assumed the position of chief film critic for Screen International, which I left to pursue more serious scholarship."
His review...
I came away impressed by the effort, but with a luke warm opinion of this distinctly non-garden variety flick. It boils down to not being as fully engaged by this film as I should've been considering the content. The problem seems to stem from what Director Fernando Meirelles shows the viewer rather than what he doesn't, or vice versa, and THAT requires a bit of explanation!If the viewer hadn't been shown any of the related action the film might've been a tad more suspenseful, as with a mystery where the threads have to be woven together, but by showing brief snippets of actual horrors as both a preface to the film and in montage as flashbacks without providing the bloodthursty acts on screen it's more difficult developing the empathy you really want to feel for these characters.
This film appears to be neither fish nor fowl, but it is tasty & fresh, if not as readily consumable as one might prefer. As an acquired taste I'd give it a personal recommendation of *** 1/2, with the caveat that it probably won't please everybody.
AuPh
s
There is a shot that last more than 6 seconds --- why though would that matter?It is not a typically shot film and that may be off putting to some - I personally despised NYPD Blue because of the jerky camera work -- this film has a lot of hand helds and POV and angled shots. I don't really find it a plus in most films but nor was it a distraction. Though twice in the film I would have liked a steady dead on shot.
Clearly most critics were not put off by this.
"This is a supremely well-executed piece of popular entertainment that is likely to linger in your mind and may even trouble your conscience.""be on the lookout for op-ed columns and public relations bulletins challenging its dire view of big pharmaceutical companies"
After reading some of the things from some critics they were obviously too stupid to follow the plot or they were paid off.
- http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/31/movies/31gard.html?ex=1157083200&en=63ad3a91abcb4502&ei=5083&partner=Rotten Tomatoes (Open in New Window)
THE CONSTANT GARDENER
A wild ride to nowhere
DAVID WILDMANIt’s probably not a good thing when you leave a film in the throes of a schizophrenic disagreement with yourself, and the side that loved it had the weaker argument.
In the case of The Constant Gardener, the part of my brain that likes to gobble the candy of big, beautiful swooping camera angles, gorgeous scenery and any anatomical part of Rachel Weisz was swept away. At one point, this wistful inner wimp caused my hand to write breathlessly, “You almost want it to be more than a movie.”
The other part is me is embarrassed to be sharing a brain with this wuss.
Because, you see, when it comes down to it, The Constant Gardener is just a freaking movie, with a plot and characters and all that stuff. A very normal, fairly predictable little flick. But, boy, does it look good. This film reminds me of catching some ravishing woman’s eye from a distance: Suddenly emboldened, I cut my way through the crowd to meet her, my heart pumping faster as I get closer. Then after three minutes of conversation I find out she’s brain-dead. Or a Republican. Or both.
- http://www.weeklydig.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/article.view/issueID/9d7b53a0-a2a3-4492-8831-93544f236fa4/articleID/76e7fdca-c7e2-4a33-a1a1-091bf9f1a3a7/nodeID/c73f7601-ba43-4a94-b026-9f85e0c9dbc3 (Open in New Window)
NT
a
nt
nt
nt
nt
nt
[caps is the way it comes, sorry.]`GARDENER' SETTLES FOR FAMILIAR GROUND
TY BURR
RALPH FIENNES QUIETLY SHINES, BUT `GARDENER' MISSES A CHANCE TO PROVOKE BY TY BURR GLOBE STAFF WHO DO YOU MOURN FOR MOST IN ``THE CONSTANT GARDENER''? AUTHOR JOHN LE CARRE, WHOSE RICHLY INTELLIGENT THRILLERS HAVE BECOME MORE MORALISTIC AND LESS NUANCED AS THE COLD WAR FADES INTO HISTORY? BRAZILIAN DIRECTOR FERNANDO MEIRELLES, WHO HERE GETS HIS TEPID BIG-BUDGET REWARD FOR MAKING THE ASTONISHING ``CITY OF GOD'' IN 2002? OR IS IT THE TOPIC OF BIG CORPORATIONS ARROGANTLY USING AFRICA AS THEIR TEST LAB THAT'S MOST POORLY SERVED BY THIS MOVIE?
WILTED BOUQUETS ALL AROUND: ``THE CONSTANT GARDENER'' IS A PREDICTABLE CONSPIRACY THRILLER THAT SOMEHOW ENDS UP DIMINISHING THE REAL URGENCY OF THE WEST'S HUMANITARIAN DISCONNECT FROM AFRICA. IF IT SENDS AUDIENCES HOME TO LOG ON TO THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL WEBSITE, TERRIFIC BUT THAT STILL DOESN'T MAKE IT A VERY GOOD MOVIE. SOME WILL THINK SO NEVERTHELESS, SEDUCED BY THE ANTIC POST-``BOURNE IDENTITY'' CAMERAWORK, BY THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE FILM'S CONCERNS, AND BY RALPH FIENNES'S EXQUISITELY UNDERSTATED PERFORMANCE IN THE TITLE ROLE.
- http://register.bostonglobe.com/archives2/cgi-bin/archives.cgi?DBLIST=bg05&DOCNUM=38556&TERMV=5165:8:5173:8:5570:8:5578:8:5947:8:5955:8:6782:8:6790:8:9301:8:9309:8:9862:8:9870:8:9959:8:9967:8:15332:8:15340:8:26163:8:26171:8:58670:8:58678:8:59225:8:59233:8: (Open in New Window)
Meta critic takes all of the major critics around the US (not just some Boston nobodies) and ach has their say. FOr the most part it's been Universal acclaim...which means that clearly not everyone is going to agree or like it -- but then that was true of Citizen Kane or it would have won best picture. Right wingers won't like it -- they don;t like any film that says anything bad about big business.Didn't you know that big business is ONLY interested in human and civil rights and bettering the world for the poor -- nothing they do has an eye on profit...they will always look out for life over money every time. Please.
s
s
I was interupted 4 times while writing it in a big rush at my campus library on my laptop. Plus I was chased around by a wasp.Hmmmaybe the drug company was out to stop me with their robot wasps. :-)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
