Let me start this with an actual rant. I am sick to death of actors who play essentially one dimensional characters getting nominated for awards. Meryl Streep in Devil Wears Prada kicked off this hatred, but it's now been further compounded by Forrest Whittaker (spelling, whatever) in this film. Ok, so it was a historically prominent character. Charming but insane. All that. But honestly, I don't see that it was deserving of an Oscar nomination. It'll be an outrage if he wins. Furthermore, I really don't see this as a lead role, which is what he has been nominated for - to me, it was supporting.
Onwards!
For those of you who don't know, this is a film about a young Scottish doctor in the 70s who goes to Uganda to do some medical work at a mission. Due to a strange turn of circumstances, he ends up the personal physician and sometime political advisor of Idi Amin, the leader of the regime at the time which killed 300 000 Ugandans. Boyish, happless and arrogant, the trappings and new found status of his role keep him largely blind to what is going on around him for quite some time, and when he discovers, it's almost too late. The British government wants him to kill Idi Amin, and he simply wants to get out of the country.
I'll have to invoke my favourite cop out commentary for this film - something just didn't sit right with me. I'm not sure what it was, but I felt as though a film dealing with such subject matter should ellicit a more passionate response from me. And it just didn't. The first 2/3s were spent setting the scene and showing the trappings of life as the physican of Idi Amin. Only almost imperceptible hints of what was to come were given. So imperceptible that they almost weren't there, and not in a good way.
The tone rapidly takes a downward and sinister turn - too rapidly I think. I get that the film makers were probably trying to do some kind of commentary about how the doctor had kept himself in the dark for so long, and then suddenly it all came out when it was almost too late. But I'm afraid to say that I think that for an audience to invest (omg overused term alert) in the progression of a film, there needs to be a smoother (or if not smoother, at the very least, neater) transition to the second part of the film.
To me, this film didn't really say anything. It wasn't solid enough to give a decent commentary of 'young white guy goes to Africa to do some outreach work to make himself feel like a hero, but it all goes horribly wrong and he learns a lesson' but it also wasn't strong enough to be a meaningful historical commentary, from whatever angle. I suppose on a higher 'theme' level it was trying to talk about how people can hide from the truth depending on their point of view - but thematically, that angle was never developed either. The subject matter also deserved a grittier treatment.
I'm not sure I understand what this film was trying to do - and I'm not sure the film makers did either.
7
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
You'd better get ready - I think Whitaker is a LOCK for the oscar win. I'm not sure he can lose
(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455590/awards).
I actually liked his performance, and I think there was quite a lot of shade in his portrayal of Amin. He was extremely scary, but also generous etc. For me, his gives an oscar-nomination worthy performance, but I don't think he really deserves to win, either. Mostly because, like you said, he's in the wrong category.
What did you think of McAvoy's performance - I thought he was surprisingly excellent. I also thought the cinematography was excellent, to begin with, but the score was a mess, sadly. Kinda like the film!
I wish this movie was more a drama and less 'thriller'.
D.
Was McAboy Dr Garrigan? I thought he was pretty damn good. I also think i'm a little bit in love with him. OMG.
'A mess' really is the best way to describe the film. But it was still enjoyable, for the most part.
I don't think the film was a 'mess' but maybe a better word is unfocussed.
Yeah, I'm happy with that.
D.
I like the point you made yesterday about this film - the transition from the exploration of his life, the great african score and the general 'drama' tone of the movie to the 'thriller' genre was too stark and sudden. Justice could have been done to change in mindset equally as well by changing the tone of the 'drama' rather than resorting to thriller conventions. Blergh. I like this movie even less in retrospect.
Still love McAvoy though, like omg.
Hey Kat!
I'm back from the dead (meaning being hideously busy) and ready to put my two cents in about this film.
I was really disappointed by this movie. There have been some interesting and challenging films come out recently about the problems facing Africa (The Constant Gardiner, Blood Diamond, Yesterday etc) and I thought there was an opportunity to tell on screen the story of what happened in Uganda to a generation who may not remember. Instead, the movie was so preoccupied with a (fictional) minor player and his personal crises that I felt the scale of the atrocities committed was lost. I think the reason it left you feeling less than moved is because it was all about him. When they finally started showing what was happening under Amin(far too late in the film, agreed) it's all from the doctor's perspective - his guilt, his fear etc. For a movie about Uganda, it didn't really give a voice to the Ugandan people (apologies for the hackneyed turn of phrase).
He is a very beautiful man though, I'll admit ;-)
Well written article.
Post a Comment