Trader47
05-23-2006, 10:03 PM
I had a hard time deciding whether or not to review this film, because I think my perspective on it is going to be completely different from just about anyone else's who sees it...this because I'm one of the 6 or 7 people on the planet I guess who hasn't read the novel, and although I of course knew what it was about in a general sort of way, really didn't know much about what to expect from it going in. And although I've yet to read or hear an actual review of the film, I've gathered from all I've seen that the critics have generally trashed it mercilessly, and my guess is that audiences haven't much appreciated it either, since novels that are so well known and liked tend to be tough sells as movies. And because of all this, I feel like anyone who might read this probably knows a lot more about it all then I do, and that feels kind of weird from a perspective of trying to review it, LOL.
But, since the chances of actually reading an even somewhat positive review anywhere else sound like they might not be so hot, I decided to post mine...because, whatever else I think, I'd at least have to put this one in a sort of guilty pleasure category.
And guilty pleasure, at least to a degree, IS what I think I'd have to call it, because of what I consider to be it's major problems. For one, this film does not have anything like either the look or feel of lighthearted fantasy classics like Raiders of the Lost Ark, or even the ludicrous but goofily entertaining film National Treasure, which is probably the one it most obviously resembles in a lot of ways. But this one eschews the light touch of that style film, acting instead like a dark and serious minded thriller....and yet, right from the outset there are scenes that strain the credibility way past the breaking point, LOL, and while the film isn't exactly FULL of these, it continues to have it's share of them.
And then there's problem #2, which concerns at least one of the films climaxes, LOL...obviously, even though I know it's likely that anyone who reads this will already know what happens, I still won't say anything specific about this. But I will say that I could find no really logical explanation for the actions of one of the major characters near the conclusion of this film...and I realize that's a vague statement, but if anyone thinks they know what I mean and thinks they CAN logically explain this characters action's for me, I'd greatly appreciate either a pm or a post with spoiler warnings.
But in any event, these sorts of problems, which boil down to credibility issues at times and what, for now at least, I'll continue to consider a pretty major plot hole, are usually more than enough to make me consider this sort of thriller a big miss. But in this case, they somehow failed to ruin it for me. In spite of everything, I had a great time following this film through all it's mysterious twists and turns, and loved the neat intricacy of the overall plot, which, in spite of my motivation questions concerning a character, does make a sort of nicely ingenious sense in an overall way. And it's a great looking film, as well... with, of course, a great cast who all play their parts to perfection...there's real good chemistry between Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou, and Jean Reno and Ian McKellan are both excellent as usual in large supporting roles. And then, of course, there's Ron Howard, who I think just purely knows how to make good movies...(yeah, I know there WAS that Grinch incident...but everybody has inexplicable misses once in awhile, and THAT serves those who have so few of them right, LMAO.) But this type of material, which is essentially a popcorn thriller, but one which depends heavily upon an exposition of intellectual ideas through discussion of them, is, I think, very tough to make a good film out of. But Howard largely pulls it off, filling his film with enough dark atmosphere and fascinating dialog to keep things moving along much as they should. And for me, the result of all that is a film that won't make my list of the year's best, (or my list of Howard's best, for that matter) but one I really enjoyed nonetheless.
And so there you have it...if you've read this and seen the film, then odds are, from all I've gleaned, you completely disagree with me on this...but at least you HAVE seen direct evidence that there's somebody somewhere who, all reservations aside, actually liked this movie, LOL. :D
But, since the chances of actually reading an even somewhat positive review anywhere else sound like they might not be so hot, I decided to post mine...because, whatever else I think, I'd at least have to put this one in a sort of guilty pleasure category.
And guilty pleasure, at least to a degree, IS what I think I'd have to call it, because of what I consider to be it's major problems. For one, this film does not have anything like either the look or feel of lighthearted fantasy classics like Raiders of the Lost Ark, or even the ludicrous but goofily entertaining film National Treasure, which is probably the one it most obviously resembles in a lot of ways. But this one eschews the light touch of that style film, acting instead like a dark and serious minded thriller....and yet, right from the outset there are scenes that strain the credibility way past the breaking point, LOL, and while the film isn't exactly FULL of these, it continues to have it's share of them.
And then there's problem #2, which concerns at least one of the films climaxes, LOL...obviously, even though I know it's likely that anyone who reads this will already know what happens, I still won't say anything specific about this. But I will say that I could find no really logical explanation for the actions of one of the major characters near the conclusion of this film...and I realize that's a vague statement, but if anyone thinks they know what I mean and thinks they CAN logically explain this characters action's for me, I'd greatly appreciate either a pm or a post with spoiler warnings.
But in any event, these sorts of problems, which boil down to credibility issues at times and what, for now at least, I'll continue to consider a pretty major plot hole, are usually more than enough to make me consider this sort of thriller a big miss. But in this case, they somehow failed to ruin it for me. In spite of everything, I had a great time following this film through all it's mysterious twists and turns, and loved the neat intricacy of the overall plot, which, in spite of my motivation questions concerning a character, does make a sort of nicely ingenious sense in an overall way. And it's a great looking film, as well... with, of course, a great cast who all play their parts to perfection...there's real good chemistry between Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou, and Jean Reno and Ian McKellan are both excellent as usual in large supporting roles. And then, of course, there's Ron Howard, who I think just purely knows how to make good movies...(yeah, I know there WAS that Grinch incident...but everybody has inexplicable misses once in awhile, and THAT serves those who have so few of them right, LMAO.) But this type of material, which is essentially a popcorn thriller, but one which depends heavily upon an exposition of intellectual ideas through discussion of them, is, I think, very tough to make a good film out of. But Howard largely pulls it off, filling his film with enough dark atmosphere and fascinating dialog to keep things moving along much as they should. And for me, the result of all that is a film that won't make my list of the year's best, (or my list of Howard's best, for that matter) but one I really enjoyed nonetheless.
And so there you have it...if you've read this and seen the film, then odds are, from all I've gleaned, you completely disagree with me on this...but at least you HAVE seen direct evidence that there's somebody somewhere who, all reservations aside, actually liked this movie, LOL. :D