Short Take: In Bruges
Jul 6th, 2008 | By Rick | Category: Short Take
Take two Irish hit-men — one twitchy, the other sentimental — and one ferocious Brit, and what do you get? Besides a civil war, I mean? In Bruges, of course: the debut feature by London-born Irish playwright Martin McDonagh.
The two hit-men, Ray and Ken, are played by Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson. (Guess which one’s the twitchy one?) Ralph Fiennes is their boss, Harry Waters, who has sent them to the picture-postcard Belgian town of Bruges to await further orders after after a hit gone wrong. I won’t spoil the plot by saying anything more, but you know from the outset that this isn’t going to be an idyllic vacation.
Gleeson and Farrell are first rate, although Farrell is a bit too mannered, a bit too “actor-ish” for my taste (but see Evan Derrick’s review for a different take). Ralph Fiennes is a marvel as the shark-toothed, lizard-eyed Harry, who can’t say one sentence without the F-word, but loves his kids and lives by a rigid code of honor. And as sometime-tourist-robber Chloë, Clémence Poésy (above with Farrell) is a beautiful delight.
McDonagh’s direction is solid and adequate to the task, and his cinematographer Eigil Bryld captures the beautiful little town in all it’s winter glory. But in Bruges, it’s the play that’s the thing, and McDonagh has crafted a beautiful — albeit twisted — little thriller. The dialog crackles along effortlessly, with the plot veering from comedy to thriller and back again. Although some have complained that these shifts of tone are abrupt and off-putting, I found them bracing and unexpected, aadding to my enjoyment of the film. In Bruges, the swings in mood punctuate the turns of the plot. Their unanticipated nature is half the fun.
RSS 2.0
Thanks for the shout-out, Rick. Did you ever seen McDonagh’s Oscar winning short, Six Shooter (I think it’s available on iTunes)? In some ways the comedy is even darker than this film, if you can believe it.
Great review Rick. I’ve got my own take on In Bruges in draft form and hope to post it soon (with me “soon” is sometime before the end of the year.)
But without giving anything away, did you not find the final moments of this movie to be a little too neat, as if all the planets had aligned just right to deliver a perfect ending dripping with irony?
I’d really like to know how you see it - maybe I’m being overly critical.
Evan — You’re welcome. I think it behooves us to do more of that … as you so kindly did for me in your preview of City of Men. It can’t help but increase readership, and it serves the admirable purpose of broadening the discourse.
I haven’t seen “Six Shooter,” I’ll probably check it out. As you said in a comment to my comment over at your blog, the “In Bruges” kinda sticks with you.
Rick, I think that’s a valid criticism. Things kind of interlocked like a chinese puzzle. I think it depends on how tolerant you are for that sort of thing. It doesn’t bug me too much, and I kind of admire the intricacies. There is one big unresolved loose end, however: does Ray die?
Rick - I loved “In Bruges” and, like you, found the abrupt shifts in tone to be part of the film’s appeal, rather than off-putting.
I know I’m way behind the crowd here, but I will finally get it in the mail today. Never made it to a theater near me, which was very annoying after seeing the trailer for it for 3 months.
Anyway, I have a positive feeling I will certainly enjoy it. I just get so jealous of reading everyone else’s reviews:(
Great little teaser on this one, Rick. I’m with you through to the end - I found the finale a bid disappointing, too gift wrapped. I also liked hearing Farrell not try to be American.
Pat, good to hear from you. Thanks for the comment!
Rachel — I don’t think it ever opened here in the wilds of Alabam either … although I did see the trailers for it in the theater. Kind of odd, don’t you think?
Let me know what you think of the flick.
Geez, Daniel, you’re right . . . it was nice hearing Farrell in his “native tongue.” By the way, I got the idea for “Short Takes” from your “In 300 words” pieces. I’m nothing if not a copycat!
Rick-
I’m with you on the performances… all great, but what did you think of the ending, or, the final 20 minutes?
While I started cooling to the film overall after the first 30 minutes or so, the ending really pushed me away. Granted, I’m not too keen on pessimism these days, but it was more than that… maybe it was just the tonal shift as you mentioned.
When Gleeson takes that dive from the church tower it kinda made me ill.
Fox, I think you’re have a point. When Gleeson fell, I got a sinking feeling in my gut, a feeling that it was going to be really messy. I think that it didn’t need to be that way, with the sickening sound effect and the splashing blood.
Of course, it can be argued that it was exactly the effect McDonagh wanted us to have, which then brings up the question of why? What does it gain a filmmaker to do that, what does it add narratively to the story?
By the way, what it reminded me of was Martin Sheen’s similar swan dive in The Departed.
Good point about the Sheen swan dive. Also, the DiCaprio head getting blown off in the elevator kinda pissed me off. I remember feeling pretty angry towards Scorcese at that moment.
Again, I think Scorsese was aiming to do just that: piss you off. Or to put it more generally, to mess with your head.
I have to review this one sometime, then I will read yours.
I remember seeing the trailer for this and thinking it looked awful. It seemed long and hokey. But then I talked with some friends of mine who had seen the and they thought it was awesome. Horrible marketing, I guess.
Nick — Cool. I’m looking forward to seeing what you think.
Whitney — the trailer was weird, wasn’t it? I don’t know what they were thinking … perhaps to minimize the rather black humor of it all. I’m not sure such dark humor does well in the general shiny happy crowds that throng our theaters.