In Bruges

In the interest of full-disclosure: I had high expectations for this movie...and perhaps that's part of the reason it never lived up.

The movie was relatively slow-moving, and the only character I really sympathized with was Brendan Gleeson. This is odd, considering the focal point of the story was Colin Farrel's character (who would show a glimmer of likeability only to resort back to his default, dolt-ish self).

As far as the story goes, there IS a significant plot twist. However, a successful plot twist usually takes us in one direction before going into another unforseen direction. In this case, the movie just shuffles around (going nowhere) before taking on the "surprise" plot issue. Is it a "twist" when the plot was going nowhere before-hand? Also, it was less than surprising.

On a positive note, the actors in this movie didn't disappoint. Working with limited material, it was interesting to see the depth (or lack thereof) they gave their characters.

Also, it wasn't the worst movie I've seen this year. There were some redeeming aspects (namely Gleeson's character).

Acting: A-
Movie: B-/C+

Two hit men, Ray (Colin Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson) are on a sort of makeshift holiday in Bruges, Belgium after a hit gone wrong. While awaiting word from their boss, Harry (Ralph Fiennes), Ken is interested in sightseeing and the history of the place, while Ray couldn't be more unimpressed and can't wait to escape.

After hearing so many wonderful things about this film I was absolutely prepared to be let down. Movies rarely live up to the hype for me, but I am happy to say this one did and then some.

In Bruges had me laughing out loud, hard and repeatedly, as the political incorrectness and the way Ray and Ken play off each other is hilarious. It had me sobbing big ugly girly tears as the emotion that pours from Ray, his guilt, his sadness, is absolutely palpable and heartbreaking. This movie had me gasping at the violence, on the edge of my seat and on an emotional roller coaster from one minute to the next. It was great.

The performances are grand by all three main characters and the supporting cast lends equally wonderful and interesting performances. I found this to be a multi-dimensional and complex film filled with irony, humor, action and sadness. I was really stunned at the power behind Colin Farrell's performance. He goes from a sort of spazzy, funny, slightly inept and combustible sidekick to a sensitive, deeply tortured soul in about 2 seconds and every facet of his character is believable and brilliant.

In Bruges is one of those quotable films with a billion awesome one-liners and moments. This is easily one of my favorite movies this year and definitely upon my list of all time favorites. I loved every fricken minute of it.

5+ stars

Cherise Everhard, August 2008

A flawless piece of cinema, guaranteed to move you. This is storytelling at its best. I would also recommend the books The Cyclops Hammer by Dale Myers and Memoirs of an Italian Terrorist if you're interested in mystery. Both are excellent books.

In Bruges is an intriguing idea for a film--the consciences of thugs, killers for hire. Since Puzo's The Godfather films and literature have been dealing rather regularly with the notion that murders are just like you and me--they have morals, they have lines they don't cross, and they get upset when their unwritten codes of conduct are violated.

And that's the dilemma with the main characters here. One has to off the other because the other accidentally killed a child while taking out his intended target. When the film begins the pair has just arrived in Bruges: they're mismatched, tired, and they argue a lot. It's also not clear at first who they are or what they do, but they are somewhere between hopeless and deeply violent--always an interesting combination. For a while the whole thing was reminding me very strongly of Harold Pinter, particularly The Dumbwaiter, with its unlikely protagonists dealing with existential angst. But then things divert. They get rather interesting when one of them men meets a cutie who sells drugs on movie sets and robs tourists. He bumps into her because a local production company is shooting a movie starring a dwarf (he does not like to be called a midget) and the small man will figure in the ending in a big way. It's all very convoluted...

And well-done. Henry James once famously said that if you introduce a gun on the first page of a novel by the end it must go off. A lot of guns go off here, but more to the point, every element in the story, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant, plays a key role in the ending. Even such a simple fact that the hotel clerk is pregnant has consequences. People who just appear for a moment will come back in a significant way. A couple of overweight tourists, a diner who does not like patrons smoking even though he's sitting in the smoking section, a sight-seeing boatride early on, all of these seemingly incidental details figure in the outcome, in ways you will not foresee.

So why ultimately does the film fall short? I don't know. When the curtain fell, I didn't feel much, other than "Hm, clever." I think the script and the director were so concerned with all the contrivances that they didn't give their people enough room to breathe. It's all a little *too* neat. We don't care about the thugs that much. The most interesting one, because he seems the most conflicted and selfless, is Brendan Gleeson. The rest are perhaps a little too slick. Believe it or not, the film may be that rarity of rarities, *over*written. Having just watched and reviewed a completely different type of flick, Notting Hill, I can assure you underwritten is far more common these days, so this is an odd complaint to be making. But while I found myself admiring In Bruges for its storytelling mechanics, I also felt strangely cold and uninvolved throughout much of it. (The most interesting scenes to me involve Colin Farrell's love life.) In Bruges has laughs, surprises, and excellent pacing. But it does not have that elusive thing called heart.

There are also some moments where technique and slavish attention to that tightly-wound structure make for some unnatural moments. Not to give too much away, but it's hard to believe all that killing in the final act could go on without cops arriving on the scene, without people getting just a bit more upset than they do. A lot of guns go off and a lot of people die, and it all just seems to happen...because it has to, to tie up the loose ends. In real life the violence would never go on so long and so casually, so after a while I began to feel everyone was more interested in the machinations of the screenplay than in anything that resonated. Some reviews have likened In Bruges to a Mamet play. I often have that same problem with his work--internally ingenious, but there's this suffocating quality to it all that's hard to explain.

Still, this movie is worth seeing. It's unusual, it's funny (when it's not violent), and the romance gives it an energy and a spontaneity. It's not Pinter, but it might get you in the mood for some Pinter. It may also make you want to go to Bruges yourself. Just be careful if you're standing underneath the bell tower...

Totally enjoyed this movie. Found it simultaneously funny, intelligent, and dark... Not very kid friendly. Some gore and violence..