The Adjustment Bureau
Something I would not recommend to say as you're going into the cinema with someone is 'Nick I don't think I'm going to like this'. Can make you a little nervous.
Naturally expectations being the game it is, I came out frustrated and she came out pleasantly surprised.
But then she thought she was being taken to see a Bourne rip off and I thought I was going to see a modern Matter of Life and Death.
So first, the Bourne bits. Matt Damon is very good at running. If you've seen a Bourne film you'd know that. But it bears repeating. Most people would look ridiculous but he manages to pull it off. Which is just as well as he does a lot of it.
My worry is that he is the reason why there is so much running. It's a film which is trying to mix a number of things: fantasy, romance, action film and political thriller. And it could probably have succeeded if it had just tried three. I'm just bit sure which three.
Fantasy has to be kept. It's the best bit. There's a wonderful world created of trilbies, transporting through doors and highly bureaucratic angels. It's well conceived, fun and nicely executed. With the exception of the man Damon who can't pull off a trilby at all, everyone looks very snazzy and it gives a great feel to it.
Romance doesn't quite work. I don't really like Emily blunt in it. Partly I don't like her in it, she doesn't quite have the charm. Partly their scenes togetheraren't that well written.
They're not terrible. But not sparkling.
But mostly the problem is that she is a cipher. She doesn't have her own plot. She just is chased first by mr Damon in a nice way and then by the trilbies in a nasty way. Afterwards we were talking about how much more interesting it would be if she was the one who could be a great president and he had to decide whether to risk sacrificing that. Or if her fiancée was actually the person that really mattered and they needed her to support him. And finally they just simply didn't spend enough time together for it to feel right. They needed to have at least spent one night together before he gets too obsessed.
Action: as I said he's very good at running and it gives the film a pace that makes it refreshing given the rest of the subject matter. The director is no Paul greengrass though so while it's fine, it's nothing to write home about.
Political thriller. The first sequence, with him campaigning through to him giving a speech about how everything is focus grouped is really nicely put together. You get the feeling this is one of the bits which the director felt most assured with. And given the amount of
The Democratic party establishment who turn up in the first 10 pages, it's probably the bit he knows best. But they seem to drop it. He's told that they've manipulated his life to make him driven to be President. And that's set up as a bad thing, a cruel piece of social engineering which denies him his chance of happiness. Which is obviously true but I don't think it's considered much of a dilemma. The sense of duty, that the world might need him to be president, is shrugged aside very quickly in a way that I think makes the final decision somewhat unsatisfying.
So I'm not sure what bit i'd drop. I'd just like nearly all of them to be better. It's a great idea and so many details are great and imaginative. But it doesn't quite take the subject matter by the scruff of the neck. It, like so many of my own ideas, doesn't fulfil the promise of the premise. But at least his made a film.
My friend Graham responded to this before I posted it so I thought I'd put his response below the fold. It takes two comments because he goes on so long:
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree about the fitting too many types of genres into the film point. I was expecting lots of action and weird stuff, and yet the first ten minutes we just have some political stuff and then a pretty long bit of dialogue between Matt Damon and Emily Blunt. I think the political stuff was probably what didn't fit - it would have made a good film in itself, or it could have been done better here, but I never felt that he really stood for anything or that his election to office in any way mattered. All I really got was the sense that he was populist and could be elected - the only tension for me was about him finding her, not whether he'd become President. Maybe he should have been lower down the rung to give it some kind of jeopardy, a chance to escape from where he had already come from - although not POTUS, he was in a pretty decent place in his career to choose the girl.
Personally, I thought Emily Blunt was good. I thought there was chemistry and a sense that they were meant to be together, and given that she's not really on screen very much (before the final chase) and is given really a pretty slight role, I attribute that to her. I enjoy watching Matt Damon, but not sure if he can really pull off lovelorn all that well.
My only query was about her accent - at first I thought "oh no, she's utterly failing to pull an American accent off". Then I thought, "Oh hang on, she's just being British, or has she picked up a twang? Surely she's not been there long enough for that?" A friend suggested maybe she was affecting an "English with a twang" accent deliberately, which would have been impressive.
What I liked about this was that it did philosophical stuff around a proper plot (here a lovestory) whereas Inception was all about the concept without an engaging story to bring it to life (in my contrary view). However, this is why I felt too much was given away too quickly - once they've basically said (in the first half hour)that they're angel-types working for a God-type and ensuring the big plan goes ahead, the questions you're left asking are "what is the big plan?", "why are you intervening?", "what's God up to?" which are the basic philosophical questions we all ask anyway.
As such, the Bureau is never really much of a mystery or as engaging as it could be. I'd have preferred his realisation to have been more gradual, say after his friend had been adjusted, he would have wondered why he suddenly changed his attitude. Furthermore, it's all a bit too easy! It's kind of like Taken where after the initial hiccup of his daughter being kidnapped Liam Neeson experiences zero obstacles and just successfully shoots his way around Paris until he gets her back. Even before Matt Damon gets the hat he's able to evade Roger from Mad Men (clearly only accepts parts with hats) and get his own way.
I fear the most likely message of this film is that if your girlfriend breaks up with you and you thought it was meant to be then it's probably because somebody upstairs intervened, so if you keep pestering her and turning up years later she'll definitely be up for that. Also it's never coincidence when you inexplicably lose your keys, which I would find comforting.
Here's the other half:
ReplyDeleteThree more points:
1. Matt Damon is not only good at running, but good at running in the rain, which I think must be harder both to do and to do looking good.
2. History - this bugged me, such a simplistic view of history. Firstly for dismissing the "Dark Ages" (now termed the Early Medieval, because in fact it was full of culture), secondly for implying so many things were oh so rosy when they were in control and thirdly for implying that the whole world was operating along Western historical lines of development, when I'm pretty sure China and the Middle East were doing a decent job of things while we were in our "Dark Ages"!
3. A friend had two moments of amusing ineptitude during the film. Firstly when trying to remember the films it was meant to be like he asked "what was the name of those films with Jason Bourne?" ("the Bourne films?") and secondly he went to the toilet just before Harry explains all about the doors, the hats, and the "don't cross the streams" instructions about opening said doors. Couldn't have timed it worse/better!
4. Yes, four points. I really enjoyed the film, but as ever I realise all my points are negative, so I felt the need to end on a high. Would have loved it, but for it not quite hanging together and the history silliness.