Monday, April 6, 2009

In Bruges

Ever since I first saw TV spots for In Bruges (2008) early last year, I knew I had to see it. A darkly existential hitman buddy comedy? Oh hell yeah, that sounds like my type of movie. I was even willing to completely overlook the fact that the lead was Colin Farrell, who I'd only actually seen in one movie (Minority Report) because his entire corpus of films looked like boring crime or war action/dramas. Yawn. Plus, he just seems like kinda a dick in real life. Anyway, my personal problems with Colin Farrell aside, this movie looked fantastic from the get-go, though such an early theatrical release (Feb. 8, 2008) is usually not a good sign for this type of movie. Usually, producers would look for a summer release date to tap into the film's action side, or a late-year release to harness the possible awards power. A February release usually means the film is DOA. The release date is still puzzling, considering In Bruges has since garnered rave reviews, both critically and publicly, and seems destined to join such greats as Office Space and The Big Lebowski in the annals of mediocre box-office/DVD smash hit lore. But anyway, I'm getting ahead of myself.....

As the film starts, we join our protagonists, hitmen Ray (Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson), exiled to Bruges, Belgium after a London hit goes horribly wrong. Ray and Ken have been ordered to Bruges by Harry (Ralph Fiennes), their ganster boss, to lay low until further orders. From the first, tensions mount between Ken, who views their time in idyllicly medieval Bruges as a much needed historically-themed vacation, and the younger Ray, who soon grows bored of Bruges and turns inward to his guilt over the death of a small boy in the botched London hit. It soon becomes clear that Harry wants Ray dead as cosmic retribution for the murdered boy, and Ray struggles with the decision to accept his fate and die or flee Bruges and live. Joining Ray in his own personal purgatory are fat Americans, snobbish Canadians, a wimpy skinhead, a beautiful Brugian drug-runner, and a drugged-out racist American dwarf actor.

The image conjured by writer/director Martin McDonagh of Bruges as a purgatorial allegory is obvious, yet beautifully and artfully presented. The cinematography is exquisite, rendering Bruges a fairy-tale city (a comparison not lost on the director and used in dialogue between Harry and Ken), and a silent extra character that stands in judgment of Ray alongside his own guilty conscience. Adding to the atmosphere is the score by Carter Burwell, a strange Faustian romp that sounds like the brain-child of a deranged carnival organist.

All of the performances were top-notch (yes, even Colin Farrell), so it's hard to single one out. Instead they all fuse together to join Bruges itself in a stange and wondrous tableau that reminds us that the world is never black-and-white. Likeable people commit heinous acts. Heinous people sometimes live by strict and honorable moral codes. In Bruges asks us to examine these contradictions, and to ask tough questions. Is a monstrous crime committed by accident truly monstrous? Do we tend to overlook serious character flaws in those who've been historically disadvantaged? Should we? Does a final admirable act in any way make up for a life otherwise spent in douchebaggery? Can people truly ever change? Can this reviewer forgive an otherwise great script for one truly unbelievable death scene?

In Bruges is hilarious, thoughtful, and dark. It made me actually care about a Colin Farrell character, and that is probably its highest achievement.

Storyline & plot: 9/10
Cinematography & effects: 8/10
Music & mood: 10/10
Performances: 9/10

The Reverend says: 9/10

No comments:

Post a Comment