Babel
People love stories about characters suffering through life’s great hardships. The Academy loves them even more. Case and point, though: this doesn’t make a film great. Written by Guillermo Arriaga, and directed by Alejandro González Iñárritu, Babel is a story about a group of people whose lives become increasingly complicated at the same time. The question is: does it work?
Each storyline has its strengths and weaknesses. The problem comes from the collective picture. Since the film continually jumps from one story to the next, you have a tendency to forget the “other” storylines until visually reminded.
Brad Pitt (Richard) and Cate Blanchette (Susan) portray Americans on a tour of Morocco. A random bullet shot from the hillside pierces the bus, and strikes Susan. Their problems (outside of the barely addressed personal problems) focus on finding care for Susan, getting help from their Embassy, and communicating with natives that do not speak English. I lead the review with this story as it was the most well executed portion of the film, and contained the best acting. Though I can honestly say that I never believed Brad Pitt would step up to become a great actor, he is certainly on his way. Both Blanchette and Pitt bring character and emotion to their roles, providing a great story with real danger.
Additionally, the storyline focusing on the boys who shot at the bus was done amazingly well. It’s interesting to see a different country’s perspective of the United States, and how the US reacts to a situation such as this. The film presses political points: focusing on the US media calling the shooting a “terrorist attack on Americans” when in fact we know very well that it was simply a childhood accident. It’s interesting; it’s done well; it kept my attention.
The final storyline focuses around a deaf Japanese girl trying to find companionship. Her sexual fantasies draw her to any man that may take advantage of her. The tragedy here: no one wants her. Its relation to the rest of the film: ummmmm?
Best guess (outside of a very minor plot point) is that it further demonstrates the pain all humans feel in the only common thing we share: life.
It’s a well executed, skillfully shot film with artistic merit. But I don’t think that it deserved the hype that it received at the Academy. Then again, I’ve never really looked to the Academy for examples of “great films”. Check it out for yourself. It’s an interesting watch, but a stretch for me to say “entertaining.” That’s harsher than I want to admit, but in the end, my attention was challenged while the story lulled with plot I felt was unrelated, and stole from the stronger points. 7.25 of 10.
And as something new, here is some trivia about the film. (Contains some plot points that could be considered spoilers)
Each storyline has its strengths and weaknesses. The problem comes from the collective picture. Since the film continually jumps from one story to the next, you have a tendency to forget the “other” storylines until visually reminded.
Brad Pitt (Richard) and Cate Blanchette (Susan) portray Americans on a tour of Morocco. A random bullet shot from the hillside pierces the bus, and strikes Susan. Their problems (outside of the barely addressed personal problems) focus on finding care for Susan, getting help from their Embassy, and communicating with natives that do not speak English. I lead the review with this story as it was the most well executed portion of the film, and contained the best acting. Though I can honestly say that I never believed Brad Pitt would step up to become a great actor, he is certainly on his way. Both Blanchette and Pitt bring character and emotion to their roles, providing a great story with real danger.
Additionally, the storyline focusing on the boys who shot at the bus was done amazingly well. It’s interesting to see a different country’s perspective of the United States, and how the US reacts to a situation such as this. The film presses political points: focusing on the US media calling the shooting a “terrorist attack on Americans” when in fact we know very well that it was simply a childhood accident. It’s interesting; it’s done well; it kept my attention.
The final storyline focuses around a deaf Japanese girl trying to find companionship. Her sexual fantasies draw her to any man that may take advantage of her. The tragedy here: no one wants her. Its relation to the rest of the film: ummmmm?
Best guess (outside of a very minor plot point) is that it further demonstrates the pain all humans feel in the only common thing we share: life.
It’s a well executed, skillfully shot film with artistic merit. But I don’t think that it deserved the hype that it received at the Academy. Then again, I’ve never really looked to the Academy for examples of “great films”. Check it out for yourself. It’s an interesting watch, but a stretch for me to say “entertaining.” That’s harsher than I want to admit, but in the end, my attention was challenged while the story lulled with plot I felt was unrelated, and stole from the stronger points. 7.25 of 10.
And as something new, here is some trivia about the film. (Contains some plot points that could be considered spoilers)
posted by Admin at 9:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home