A Western I Reckon?

A funny thing happens in the middle of Paul McGuigan's film The Reckoning, it actually becomes a good movie. Not a great one - but without a doubt, a good solid one. I remember seeing a still and reading a blurb about this film a few years ago in a British film magazine. So, you can imagine my delight when I finally heard it was being released in the U.S. on DVD. What happened to a theatrical release? Well, I guess a film that takes place in the 14th century about a priest who commits mortal sin and spends the rest of the movie running from his demons while joining an acting troupe who happen to take on a powerful Norman land baron who is trying to usurp the throne of England and also happens to be committing mortal sins of his own, all the while a young mute girl is about to be hung for a crime she did not commit and it's up to the priest who turns forensic detective (and near badass) and his fellow players to basically invent the modern theatre and set things right. Did you get all that?

Well the truth of the matter is, The Reckoning is still a beautiful film despite all it's faults. Namely, a sub-standard plotline that you can read a mile away, characters that are not clearly developed, a distracting wishy-washy accent from one of the leads (Willem Dafoe) that almost derails a great performance, a true waste of what could have been one of the cinema's greatest villians (Vincnt Cassel) had he not have been reduced to a near cameo appearance (his one big scene at the end is terrific), and a few minor excesses in style that do not fit in with the whole of the production (namely some wierd exposures in a montage that come in the middle of the film that would have worked better in an R.E.M. video) and a few Fassbinder-like camera tricks in the final confrontation that remind one what it's like to be sea-sick while standing still.

All that aside, let's review the good stuff. Paul Bettany gives one of his most rich and mature performances to date. If you do not want to know what happens to his character, then just skip ahead to the next paragraph now........................but his death scene at the end is simply one of the most realistic and touching moments of pure acting ever put on film. Period.

The production design should have been awarded an Oscar nomination, as should the costumes. If anything, you may find yourself just sitting back and taking in the gorgeous sets, which all appear to be real (what a treat in this day and age) and not computer generated. Andrew McAlpine, the production designer who did Alex Cox's masterpiece Sid and Nancy, proves that he is one of the best in his field working today. Julian Ashby (Sleepy Hollow) and Jordi Yria Roca turn in excellent art direction while Anna Pinnock's set decoration here is miles above her work in the recent bloated Hollywood epics Troy and Van Helsing. Yyonne Blake who has been designing costumes since the mid-sixties (in films such as Nicholas and Alexandra, Jesus Christ Superstar, Robin and Marian and Superman just to name a few) has not lost any of her talent and proves just how far you can go with a little budget. Adrian Lee and Mike Mancina (Training Day) are responsible for the evocative and hypnotic score that never goes too far. Finally, cinematographer Peter Sova, who also shot McGuigan's under-rated crime epic Gangster No. 1 (as well as Barry Levenson's Diner and Good Morning, Vietnam) juggles camera technique (despite the shot mentioned in one of the paragraphs above) admirably. He populates the film with an unsettling aura and an erie lighting scheme that borders on fantasy. These craftsman here are the true stars of the film.

Dafoe turns in his usual intense and comitted performance. One reviewer commented on how in some scenes it appears as if he's triyng out for Cirque de Soliel. I blame McGuigan, not him. First off, the director gets credit for chosing to make this film in the first place. He is a director who likes to work in other time periods (here being the Middle Ages while Gangster No. 1, also with Bettany, is set primarily in the late sixties) and is not afraid to use violence as a storytelling tool. I say this in admiration for his work in this medium and equate his abilities to the Sam Peckinpah (Straw Dogs, The Wild Bunch) school of filmmaking. This is a man who knows his influences and doesn't let them show. Therein lies the problem. One of the motivating factors in my seeking out this film in the first place (despite Bettany) was that I read how McGuigan likened his picture to an homage to Kurosawa and Leone. He was clearly emulating their mastry of the use of landscape here, but perhaps he began to go off on a tangent here or there and never pulled the picture back on course. Either way, I cannot call The Reckoning a western, which may be where he was headed. It ends up in somewhere just short of The Mission and The Name Of the Rose territory. But hey, if you're going to have a misfire, those aren't such bad places to end up.

The rest of the cast handled their jobs professionally. Brian Cox was a bit wasted. I'm happy he's working but what role wont this guy take? Is he becoming the new Michael Caine?

See the film. I'm not telling you to buy it (unless your a Bettany freak like me). The region 1 DVD doesn't have anything on it in the way of special features anyway, but it is a good movie. A little slow going at first, but once the real story kicks in, you wont believe the pace. A semi-historical english detective story that doesn't star Derek Jacobi. Stick around for Cassel's big scene and watch Bettany hit it out of the park at the end. Inevitably, it's a film less about religion than about sacrifice. I know there is more about human truth in this film than in Name Of the Rose. They are almost like distant relatives, these two films. Only because they are each set in similar times and feature a few similar themes (murder, the church, sin). I like the ending of Rose better however. I think McGuigan was unsure of how to end Reckoning. I'm not saying I wanted a happy ending, but maybe just a little something...more. Perhaps he should have had one of his heroes play a harmonica or slice someone in two with a kitana blade? Well, if he had, it certainly would have spiced things up a little more before the end credits.

Lastly, I don't want you to stop reading thinking that all is not well at the end of the film. The last important thing you should know is, the bad guy really does get it good at the end. Really good to the point of it becomming a precedent setting example of how to punish your film's villian. But then again, where do you go from there? I give McGuigan credit for reviving Malcolm McDowell's career (in Gangster No.1 - in fact I have not seen Mike Hodges' new film I'll Sleep When I'm Dead with McDowell and Clive Owen, but I'm willing to bet it's as good as that type of thing gets thanks to McDowell!) and for having the balls to adapt the book Reckoning's based on (Morality Play by Barry Unsworth) in the first place. Reckoning's screenwriter Mark Mills is responsible for writing one the most under-rated films of all time, Chris Menges' The Lost Son with Daniel Auteuil (see this film at all costs!!!). If only The Reckoning had stuck in my mind as much as that little gem. Then again, ask how many people you know that have even heard of The Reckoning? You may just get that familiar blank stare one gets when confronting the unkown. Perhaps the motto of The Reckoning should be: The Journey Is The Destination. Ya, know what I mean?

Into the Great Wide Open or How I Learned To Stop Worrying 'Cause Heath Ledger's tha Bomb!

There is a wonderful little featurette on the region 1 DVD of Gregor Jordan's Ned Kelly that unfortunatley tells you more about the real outlaw's life than the actual movie does. There. I got that out of my system. Now, for the review.

I loved this movie. I'm a sucker for westerns and period action, and this film does not dissapoint on either front. This film had a bit of trouble finding an audience in the U.S. I'm certain it's already become a household favorite in Australia, it's native country. I wont bore you with background information on who Ned Kelly was (and continues to be) and how he's shaped an entire populace, I would just assume recommend you buy (or rent) the DVD and watch the featurette for that. I would however like to tell you why I think this film is shaping up to be a true lost classic.

First off, Gregor Jordan is a gifted director. His command of a film and personal vision are evident in all of his work so far. His first major film, the Australian production Two Hands (which still has never been released on DVD in region 1!) is so good, it is not at all a mystery why he has been given the reigns to helm bigger and more expensive projects. A rough little crime story, Two Hands features the wonderful Brian Brown (who won the equivalent of an Australian Oscar for this film), and a then up-and-comming young star named Heath Ledger.

It almost seems as if Heath Ledger was born to play Ned Kelly. Kelly is afterall the national hero and icon of Ledger's native country. Ledger himself has become such a Hollywood commodity (through actual talent, and not just looks, for a change) that one must stop and try and remember who Mel Gibson is again? Let's just remember that Gibson is not a native Aussie (only his mother was). He was born in the states then moved there when he was young. It still would have been interesting if Mel had played the young outlaw back in his Mad Max glory days. I think it is unfair to (inevitably) compare Ledger to Gibson. They are completely different actors. Their wretched pairing as father and son in Roland Emmerich's The Patriot (though not wretched because of Ledger and Gibson) only confirmed that the younger of the two could hold his own against the mighty Mel pound for pound. Ledger carries Ned Kelly and is the main reason why it barely reaches classic status, because of his career-defining performance.

Jordan's next feature film, following Two Hands, was Buffalo Soldiers. Now, this is the movie Uncle Sam does not want you to see. If you're like me, that's reason enough alone to go watch it! It's ribald, edgy and certain parts of it are unforgettable. I'm not sure what type of film it is (comedy, drama, coming of age) but it's true testament of cult status is that most people have probably never heard of it, only seen it on the video store shelf. If you are one of those people, please rent it. It's very good. It has a brain and you will be entertained at the same time. A marvel in and of itself (Scott Glenn and Ed Harris in their third teaming really shine here).

Jordan, after bucking the system two in a row then turned to the ultimate story of anti-authority and youth displacement. Ned Kelly originally got some comparisons to The Outlaw Josey Wales. Well, being the Eastwood fanatic that I am, I can assure you that those claims are unsubstantiated. I think what the reviewer was trying to say is that Kelly, like Wales, shares a certain truth formula and honesty. Perhaps the better analogy should be that Kelly plays more like a Merchant Ivory film with bullets. It is simply a beautiful-looking film. Stylistically speaking, Jordan may have been going for that hrash, brutal Australian landscape effect, but there are scenes of pure beauty here. The horseback ride through the firestorm, the shots of tropical birds (Australia is a tropical frontier ya know) and various forms of wildlife (though sometimes a bit over-used) only re-inform the viewer that the film's characters are only trying to do one thing: desperatly hold on to thier youth and freedom. This fusion of style and theme is the other main reason why the film is a near classic.

So then why was it lost? I don't know. It drags a bit. It is also quite depressing. Some of the supporting performances shine however. Joel Edgerton is quite good, as is Geoffrey Rush in the obligatory bad-guy authority role. I was actually surprised by how reserved he was here. Really surprised. I was already expecting to cringe when I heard who he was playing. His character, like most of the other characters, are really only hinted at throughout the running time of the film. They leave only slight impressions (other than Ledger) and one begins to wonder what scenery shots Jordan could have trimmed in order to beef up some of the by-play. Naomi Watts has absolutley no part in the film to speak of. Her's is a glorified cameo. Was she just doing this as a favor to fellow Aussies Ledger and Jordan? Rachel Griffiths is also somewhat wasted. Why am I so freaked out by her? She almost seems like the Australian equivilant of Juliette Lewis (oh, maybe that's why!).

So, that brings me to Orlando Bloom. Don't get me wrong, I like the movie, remember (actually I love it) but why does Bloom keep getting work? I do not understand his appeal. The only thing I can say in his defense is that he's non-threatening. Wait a minute, he's playing a Kelly brother in this movie! A feared outlaw? Hardly. They needed another big name. They got one. He is quite effective in some scenes (his scene at the bar in the end is very emotional) but then he barely registers in others. I guess they did not want to take anything away from Ledger. I remember reading how one critic said Bloom stole every scene he was in. What other Ledger/Bloom movie was he watching when he witnessed this? The Two Towers?!

Klaus Badelt (credited as the film's composer along with other "additional contributors") provides a sweeping and tragic score with hints of Kelly's native Ireland thrown in for good measure. The only negative thing about the music is the overuse of it for dramatic effect. A small consolation given the excellence of the score. If it were an annoying theme, then yes, I would hate to hear it over and over. Stephen Frears' usual cinematographer Oliver Stapleton is a marvel here. Why has he not won an Oscar yet? Prick Up Your Ears, Restoration, The Hi-Lo Country, The Cider House Rules (hated it but loved the camerawork) to name just a few. He manages to make the movie look like the whole thing was shot at twilight, just before dusk. If you're willing, you really will be able to feel the skin of this film. The smell and taste. Who cares about everything else?

Perhaps why it is lost, and probably will remain so until a new generation discovers it, is that no one in this country cares about Ned Kelly. There have been countless films made about him. One of the first silent films was an Australian short about the Kelly gang. Mick Jagger's portrayl of Kelly in Tony Richardson's (Tom Jones, Look Back In Anger)1970 film Ned Kelly, was a little campy to say the least. He was however the first actor to play Kelly in the right age group (mid-twenties) and with the proper accent (Irish). But, Ledger's Kelly may be the definitive Ned. Only time will tell.

Finally, I must tell you about one more scene from the film. It occurs near the beginnning, and then again in a flashback near the end. Ledger, as Kelly, is riding on horseback with a young girl mounted behind him. In this one moment of the film, he sums up his entire character's innocence (before it is taken from him by fate) without saying a single word. I was almost moved to tears.

No wait, I just had something in my eye! (sniffle) No, really! I swear...

Seriously, if you like films about people standing up for what they believe in, against the odds, you can find no better film than this. And please, by all means, do find it.