Yes, last night I have a griefapalooza watching two films dealing people trying to deal with the death of a loved one. I'll start by Talking about BROTHERS. I was thinking of starting with the other movie, THINGS WE LOST IN THE FIRE, because that is a more straight-forward movie, but since I read the original spec and wanted to compare a bit, I decided instead I would talk about this movie, the screenplay of which I haven't read. I haven't seen the original movie (it was originally a Dutch film, 2004).
So how was it? Will it be griefalicious? Or will is it a griefappointment? You'll have to read the next paragraph to find out. Now let's get ready to GRRUUMMMMBBLLLLEEEEE!
About BROTHERS: I was disappointed. This movie stars Jake Gyllanhaal, Natalie Portman and Toby Maguire and sets up an interesting situation -- a husband/father (Maguire) goes to Afghanastan, where his helicopter is shot down and he is presumed dead. While dealing with their grief, his wife (Portman) and neer-do-well brother (Gyllenhaal) start to be come close. But it turns out the husband wasn't killed. He was catured, where to survive he had to do horrible things, like beat one of his best friends to death. When he is returned home, he is changed. He is dark and brooding, haunted by the guilt of what he has done. He is also suspicious of the relationship between his wife and his brother, and that suspicion begins to push him over the edge.
Now that has the makings of a good thriller, maybe even a great thriller. A modern SHINING, with modern themes and a more meat on the husband-wife relationship. Unfortunately, it isn't a thriller. And as a drama it's fairly weak. The problem isn't that they aren't dealing with interesting things, the problem is that they aren't dealing with them enough. Everything is played on the most superficial level. I've said before stories are about fascination. So what is this movie fascinated with? Is it about the way two people can come together and heal after the death of a loved one? Well, not really since that aspect end my midpoint. Is it about jealousy? Well, not really since we know the wife and brother didn't actually screw and both accept the husband coming back. Is it about guilt? It doesn't seem to be. It certainly didn't reach any powerful grief-point for me and the climax of the movie isn't really about some sort of acceptance with what the husband has done.
Part of the problem is structure. The first act (the first quarter of the movie) is about the husband leaving for war and being killed. The next quarter of the movie has the husband catured by the enemy as the wife/bother become closer and closer, the brother helping the wife and her children deal with their grief and that in turn helping the brother, who is a neer-do-well just out of jail, turn his life around as well. Then it is only over halfway through the movie that the husband comes home. The next quarter of the film is the husband losing his grip, becoming more and more violent, until (the final quarter) when things finally explode.
So as a thriller, it doesn't become thriller-ish until well into the second half of the film. Now this could have been fine if the movie really committed to being a thriller and went the full Shining. But it doesn't. And as a drama, well, it just seems to lose focus moving from people dealing with grief to a man tormented in war, to a man haunted by what he has done, to a thriller as a husband loses it.
There are good things in the movie. Having three actors as good as these guys are is almost always interesting, and the movie does a good job keeping things active. But ultimately, this movie felt like it was split between several different movies, and that, coupled with the lack of depth to any one story-angle, make this a dissappointment.
NOT THE GRIEFIEST.
No comments:
Post a Comment