TGWTG User Blogs

First of all, sorry, those who reguarly check for my blog for the last few days since I was ill with a head cold in no mood to write about anything. Hopefully this makes up for it.

Second of all, there's a new function to keep us amused while we wait for the forum - that's right, we have a chat room. Where you ask? Under 'User Menu' where you see the blogs, notice the new 'Chat' button. Click and voila. Now you can berate my blogs to me live! Ain't that fun, kids?

And now to the main event...

Seraphim Falls
Director: David Von Ancken
Cast: Pierce Brosnan, Liam Neeson, Michael Wincott, Ed Lauter, Anjelica Huston

You know sometimes how you hear people say something is a good movie and you rent it and its like manure spread onto a circular bit of plastic? Yeah, we've all had it. If I learned anything from Seraphim Falls, it's never trust forum comments from people who you are never going to meet in your life. This was my reason for renting this rubbish. My first sign of danger was an Empire quote on the back of the pack. Empire's quite a respectable film magazine, this can't be too bad, I thought. I later learnt that someone took the quote from a 3 star review. Talk about desperate. It reminded me of when I nearly got fooled into buying Four Brothers because some bastard took an out-of-context quote from a 2-star review. (A less reputable publication also plasters the box twice, probably for the same reason)

It's probably a good thing I learnt this lesson from the film, since the film doesn't say that much by itself. A man (Pierce Brosnan, complete with a beard like Saddam Hussein had when he came out the bunker) is hunted by some kind of posse, led by a man out for vengeance (Liam Neeson). They chase each other for a bit. And then a bit more. And then they chase each other. There's a five-minute pause, and then they chase each other again. And again. We don't know why they are chasing each other until late in the film, but we know they are chasing each other. This goes on for the best part of 2 hours.

My interest began to die. Why do I care? I don't have a clue who these people are, so why should I give a damn about whether or not they catch up to each other? There is very little dialogue, although given the way Brosnan mumbled like Brando, I was glad he just grunted most of the time. If I wanted to watch people chase each other without a plot, I'd watch a compliation of police chases. The repetition of the chases is tiresome after a very long time. But, no, the movie keeps on going, and then I suddenly feel like I watched this film before. Yes, I got really bad deja vu of the 3:10 to Yuma remake, becuase several points reminded me of that film, including a stop at a railroad which seemed to heavily recall the mine sequence in the latter film. I'm sure this was concidence, just like it foreshadowed something about the film somewhat ironically: 3:10 to Yuma had a bad ending, and the ending of this is even worse. At least I enjoyed 3:10 to Yuma until it reached that point; for Seraphim Falls, its the cherry on top of a dog-doo sundae.

The actors act their damn hearts out. As they bloody well should, since this is Pierce Brosnan and Liam Neeson, for crying out loud. I'm assuming both took this as an acting exercise and not because they thought it was any good, since they probably wanted to practice trying to act without using words (which, if you took drama in school, will know is a technique they drum into your head with good reason). But even they can't make these under-developed characters interesting. As I keep saying, we don't know these people and we don't care. That's a fatal flaw. The gang with Neeson might as well be filled in by waxworks, since we care about them even less and are just there so Brosnan can dispose of them. Oh, and the age old tactic of giving a supporting character a backstory before killing them off in the next scene is here: I love it when writing is so obvious. It makes me feel smug.

The "realistic" and gritty approach is initally quite well-used, as it holds your attention for the first 20 minutes. An early scene where nature-man Brosnan picks a bullet out of his arm and then uses a red-hot knife to stop the bleeding... ouch. The "realism" goes out the window when Brosnan starts using his trusty knife to drop it out of a tree accurately into someone's skull. From then on, Brosnan's ingenious nature man gradually gets more and more ridiculous, using a bit of rope and a bear trap to make an elaborate booby-trap that would make The A-Team proud. At one point, he even re-enacts the scene where Luke hides inside the creature's innards at the start of The Empire Strikes Back, using a horse, to get the drop on his enemy. (in fact, come to think of it, Brosnan's character has a thing for slicing bellies open: earlier, he cuts open a goon's belly to warm his hands up) Still, at least these moments are fleetingly entertaining while they last.

---WARNING: Major spoilers follow. If you wish to see this film, skip to the end.---

But the biggest faults are in the ending, which means I have to make rare use of my spoiler warning. Seraphim Falls has the one of the worst third acts I have ever seen. This thing is like a house of cards in a tornado - it just ends up as a great big mess.

First of all, the much-teased reason for why Neeson chases Brosnan is because Brosnan commanded a fleet of soldiers to capture Neeson and burn his house down. When one of the officers tells him the house is empty, he gives the command for the latter. It then turns out there was a baby inside, and then Neeson's whole family rush in to rescue it and get trapped inside. You can see why this is flawed - Brosnan wasn't responsible for them getting burned directly. He was misinformed, and he is clearly horrified and haunted by the results. If Neeson wants revenge, why not go for the soldiers who set fire to the house? Oh, yeah, I forgot: that would mean that one of them is a bad guy, when its much more "artsy" to be ambiguous. God, I hate prentention.

More "artsy" follows as Neeson and Brosnan both end up in a barren bit of desert and are tempted by Anjelica Huston offering them goods. In the middle of a barren desert. But there's a reason for that: she works, according to the back of her wagon, for a "Louise C. Fair". Say it aloud. That's right, she works for lucifier and she's tempting them into taking revenge and going to hell. Jesus Christ - I'm serious, I half expected a man to run into the middle of the finale called Jeebus Krist. He might as bloody well. But it's art, dammit! It's a metaphor! So they make a final confrontation and they kill ea-- No, they forgive each other. The easter bunny then takes them by the hand and takes them for some chocolate. Well, almost. Basically, I watched an R-rated Sunday school story. Did I mention this ending is completely different to the rest of the film in terms of just about everything?

---Spoilers end here---

You want a western? Get out The Assassination of Jeese James by the Coward Robert Ford. Just stay away from this prententious western that thinks it's far more soulful than it really is. Because really, it just boils down to lots of chasing and grunting, followed by a ludicrious ending. At least the rental was only £1.50.

2/5