DVD Review: The Messenger: The Story Of Joan Of Arc.

I am a major Luc Besson fan. I love almost anything he touches (directs, writes, produces... though mostly directs). As such, there are few films that he's made/directed that I haven't yet seen. The Messenger was one of them, and I'd been wanting to see it for years now, but never getting around to doing so. And now that I have... well, I wish I could take it back.

Joan (Milla Jovovich) is a peasant girl who, as a child, saw her village (and some of her family) destroyed. Now about 17, she believes God has chosen her as a messenger to speak with the rightful king of France (John Malkovich) and lead his army to victory against the British to reclaim French territory. And if you know the story of Joan of Arc, you know it isn't exactly a comedy.

And that's the biggest fuck up (pardon my French... and my bad puns) of the film. The tone is just terrible. During even the most serious of moments were strewn with most likely unintentional comedy that ruined most of the scenes. And then there were the scenes with intentional comedy that mostly didn't work. Tonally, the film was an utter mess.

And that leads in to how we feel about Joan (whose name sounds more like John through the film). Among other things, which I'll get to momentarily, Joan is portrayed as a flat-out lunatic. I know that in history, the controversy is that either Joan was really having visions and hearing God's message... or she was shizophrenic and just a strongheaded crazy lady. Besson really goes with the latter, and (again, bad pun coming) that really ruins what should have been the message of the film. Joan is so obviously insane that she's more of a joke than a martyr. By the time the movie ends and you see the title about how she was eventually canonized as a saint, it feels more like a mockery ("This crazy-ass chick is a saint?"). It was just a weird juxtaposition of information. It would be like having a movie that shows the true nature of Bin Laden and how he believes God told him to kill the infidels and take back his rightful land or something. But then he's arguing with himself the majority of the time, twitching... and then the movie ends with him dying in a cave... it fades to black... and you see "He was later canonized." The movie was supposed to be this ultimate tragedy, and it wasn't.

But Joan had other issues, and I'm not sure if I should put the blame on the acting or directing (as much as I'd hate to). When you first see Milla-Joan, she's this meek young woman who is near tears the entire time. Then there's this huge time lapse with no montage or training sessions or anything, and you see her on a war horse with a sword, and her personality has completely shifted. She's become this strongheaded, arrogant, crazy woman. And she got on my freakin' nerves. Seriously, there's a scene about halfway into the movie where she gets shot by an arrow. I know she's not gonna die because, well, there's still half a movie left and I know my history. But when she got shot, I couldn't help but do a mental cheer and wish that she would. Either the way Milla played her or the way Besson directed her was horrible.

Not to mention, with only a few exceptions, the casting of the film was awful. I've already discussed Milla. I like Malkovich, but a French king with an American accent surrounded by other people with accents? Why not just pick a French person? Or at least have Malkovich attempt an accent. And that was a big issue for most of the cast. It was a weird mix of nationalities (that should have been one nationality), and they didn't even attempt to make it more authentic. And then, of course, there's Dustin Hoffman, who I didn't realize was in the movie. So when I saw him near the end, I was like "what the hell? Dustin Hoffman?" He acted his part very well, but the character was too vague. It's listed as her conscience, but you don't know if it's that or Jesus/God or Satan or who. And his character brings in some of that awkward comedy (the 'where did the sword come from' scene... funny, but out of place).

For editing, it was hard to tell a lot of what was going on sometimes. One minute Joan would be one place, the next she'd be in a completely other place with things moving like a dream sequence. But then it turns out that it wasn't a dream sequence, and you're left confused. Though that could be an issue of scripting, as well. And I do think the script had some issues.

Overall, the movie is just a mess. My opinions aren't completely negative. There was some good cinematography (at least at the beginning) and some good (although miscast) acting. The fight scenes were decent, though incredibly fake-looking when it came to the blood or gore. It got overly cartoonish and sometimes slapstick at times, which just goes back to the tone. But now I'm going back to the negative during my positive section. I know this movie has a lot of lovers, especially at places like imdb. But although I have my deep love of Besson's films, and I'll still continue to see any others he puts out, I have to say I was highly disappointed in this one, and it took quite a bit not to just turn it off.


The Zed Word

CHANGELING.

I know this is normally a day for DVDs Or Death!... but I'm going to skip that this week in place of something magical. Yes... a movie review! I saw it last night... felt like sharing. So here you go!

---------------

When you have a Clint Eastwood-helmed picture, you know you’ll probably get at least two things out of it: great acting and depression (seriously, this man needs to make a comedy or something). Changeling is about a lot of things, but it starts when Christine Collins’ (Angelina Jolie) son, Walter (Gattlin Griffith), disappears. For months the LAPD looks for him and finally find him in a whole other state. Unfortunately, according to Christine, it’s not actually her son. And no matter what she says, neither Captain J.J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan) or Chief Davis (Colm Feore) will do anything to help, and actually say that she’s crazy and making up lies. But when Detective Lester Ybarra (Michael Kelly) stumbles upon a seemingly unrelated case, things start to line up together and, with the help of Reverend Gustav Briegleb (John Malkovich), Christine will do anything in her power to get to the bottom of things and find her son (assuming he’s still alive).

Now this was a long movie, but it didn’t feel like it dragged at any point in time (except maybe the beginning, but that was needed to set everything up). It actually held my interest all the way through up until the Return of the King-style ending, wherein it felt like the movie just kept jumping further and further along, never wanting to quit. But in the end, it all added together for a really good (albeit slightly depressing) experience.

The best thing this movie had going for it was the acting. My goodness, was this movie acted well. From the big names of the film (Jolie and Malkovich), to the supporting roles (Donovan and Kelly), and even to the barely-in-it roles, this movie was acted phenomenally. Amy Ryan, despite the very few scenes she was in, stole every one of them. After the great job in Gone Baby Gone wherein she held a good chunk of a movie, to the great job she does in this, wherein she’s only in a few scenes, you can really tell she’s heading for the top.

The next thing to bring up would be the look/feel of the movie, all brought together by the direction of Clint Eastwood. The movie felt very 1920s, from the clothes and houses to the cars and speech styles. It was quite believable and done very well. The camera work also stood out to me, though there were a couple interesting choices that I might not have stuck with in the end (a few scenes where the camera was stuck behind John Malkovich’s head, leaving for an awkward angle/shot).

There really isn’t much else I feel I can say about the film. It’s one of Angelina’s best that she’s done, and I think one of Eastwood’s best, as I, for once, actually don’t feel it would be overrated. The only thing I might have done would to have changed the title, as the only thing the movie had to do with mythological Changelings was a switched child—and that whole plot of the movie wasn’t even the only focus. Halfway in, the movie changes completely with a new added plot, and it starts becoming more about something else entirely (but then brings it all back to the switched boy… but still). Great performances. Great story. Great film.

Royale With Cheese

BURN AFTER READING.

So I finally got around to seeing this movie, and I now know why they didn’t show really any plot within the trailer. It’s best summarized in the last couple lines of the film, but I won’t write them here, because it’s one of the biggest laughs of the movie. So instead, I’ll try to do my best here. Osborne Cox (John Malkovich) quits his job at the CIA after they start to screw him over and decides to write his memoirs instead, but this doesn’t bode well with his wife, Katie (Tilda Swinton). Katie is an austere hardass who just so happens to be having an affair with the highly paranoid Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney), who is also married and having numerous affairs with other women. Katie starts to file for divorce against Osborne and pressures Harry into doing the same with his wife so they can be together. Enter Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand), a woman with low self-esteem who works at a gym and wants to get four different cosmetic surgeries, but just doesn’t have the money to pay for it. And then a disc that includes copies of Osborne’s memoir notes shows up at the gym, wherein Linda and her friend/co-worker Chad (Brad Pitt), a goofy and rather innocent ‘good Samaritan’, think they could get some kind of reward for returning what looks to be highly confidential information. But things get mixed up and everything begins to spiral down and become chaotic, causing bad things to happen to pretty much everybody.

The movie starts off rather slow. For about the first twenty or so minutes, I would figure, everything seems slightly random and unimportant. I wasn’t sure what to make of the movie, especially when it would use highly over-dramatic music for scenes about practically nothing. But the movie really starts to pick up once Frances McDormand and Brad Pitt are introduced. I would say that they were the highlight of the movie (specifically Brad Pitt). The only character I liked better than Pitt’s was JK Simmons’, but he was only in the movie for two scenes (though those two scenes were basically two of the best/funniest scenes in the movie). And the humor itself was randomly dispersed throughout, so it wasn’t non-stop laughter, but there were a good amount of laugh-out-loud moments.

The two best things about the movie, I would say, were the acting and the camera work. The acting from everybody was top notch, which is expected from such high-caliber actors and actresses. The underdog of the acting scene of the movie, however, was Richard Jenkins, who I don’t believe was even promoted to being in the movie, even though he has a rather big role. His character was rather heartbreaking, really. His and Brad Pitt’s character can really be seen as the two ‘innocents’ of the film (even though Pitt was involved in blackmail schemes, the quality of his character wasn’t even remotely malignant). And as I mentioned, the camera work was great. There were some really fun angles and shots that caught my attention as I was watching. Though this is a Coen Brothers’ movie, so that is expected.

There isn’t much else to discuss about the film. Those are all my positive and negative comments about it. I think the beginning could have been done a bit better, but the second half of the movie is just superb and really funny. There should have been more JK Simmons, though. Similar to my biggest complaint about No Country For Old Men, I would have almost complained about it having some anti-climactic moments (for not showing huge events and just ‘telling’ about it instead, especially at the end), but the only times that happened, it was ‘told’ during a JK Simmons scene, which really redeemed the quality of the effect. Otherwise, that’s all I have for you.

A Keanu 'Whoa'