|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
That
sounds like a decent setup for a film (and in
some ways it is). The unfortunate aspect is that the screenplay by
Charley
Parlapanides and Vlas Parlapanides is not that impressive. The biggest
mistake
of this almost entirely misfired effort is that it forgets the
fundamentals of
solid filmmaking. The storyline is so poorly developed as a whole and
the
characters are barely developed for most of the run-time that the
experience
winds up feeling more like a chore to sit through than like a history
lesson, a
journey into myth, or good entertainment. The lack of a worthwhile
story and
characters has a detrimental role in every other aspect becoming
underwhelming. The
visuals are often impressive. The film was
directed by Tarsem (The Fall) so it
shouldn't come as a major surprise to fans of the filmmaker that there
are
elements to the film that demonstrate genuine knowledge and skill in
regards to
the establishment of a memorable visual idea. It is unfortunate then
that so
much of Immortals focuses on an
overbearing level of grotesque violence and disturbing imagery that
doesn't add
to the film, but that removes yet another layer of possibility. One
might
wonder if the entire goal of making Immortals
wound up being to turn the film into as gloomy an experience as
possible so
storytelling wouldn't have to be a "consideration" of the audience. The
performances left me feeling disappointed. Most
of the actors seem interchangeable in their roles to some degree. There
simply
isn't enough time spent on developing the stories these characters
should have
had. The real winner is Freida Pinto, who is not only incredibly
beautiful but
an absolutely talented actress. It is interesting to see a nice
performance
from her in this otherwise dreary effort. John Hurt also offers some
good
supporting moments but his character is so briefly utilized that one
might wish
he had been offered an expanded part to help liven things up a bit. The
worst
actor in the film is unsurprisingly Mickey
Rourke. I'm saying that as someone who has actually been quite
impressed by the
actor in other efforts. It just seems as though some of the acclaim
went to his
head a little too quickly as several recent efforts from the actor have
demonstrated an almost complete disregard for actually attempting to
perform as
various characters. Rourke seems as though he is sleepwalking through
the same
dull performance over and over again in recent productions (including Immortals).
There
are many scenes where I wondered what exactly
was even happening on screen as it was so haphazardly pieced together
that I
genuinely felt some degree of confused irritation. The editing and
directing is
frequently so poor in execution that a slight attempt at drama is
followed immediately
by another bloodbath, then another,
and another... and it all starts to blur together and
any intended point
of the film feels lost in its own confused scripting. The scope of the
film is
constantly grand in ambition - that is one area where I felt no
confusion or
dismay. Yet why was so much effort put into creating a grand scope in
technical
areas of expertise when the very creation of the film feels
unnecessary? For a
story that claims to be about immortality it seems as though the
filmmakers have
forgotten their message to the audience. The film should remember that
most cinematic
efforts these days can achieve some level of "immortality" on DVD or
Blu-ray
but that audiences typically only fondly remember the good or great
ones. Immortals
is neither and will most assuredly be forgotten by many audience
members as
soon as the credits start to roll. Thanks for attempting to make a good
movie
Tarsem, but next time... please try a wee bit more. Skip
It. |