|
...It
was 1764 when it appeared, terrorising the countryside and claiming
the lives of more than one hundred people. As panic gripped the
region it was feared no-one could deliver them from the bloody
grip
of the beast. In the darkest hour the King sent two men to slay
the beast but as they prepare for battle they discover a terrible
secret...
Now,
I saw this at the cinema. Fair rushed to see it, I did, so excited
was I by the prospect of seeing large beasties devouring comely
wenches and kung-fu Indians kicking miscellaneous arse. Several
hours later, however, I'd had enough, and had to be restrained
from leaving by a friend, whom I shall refer to as Wilson, since
that is his name. Wilson was unaccountably taken by this fantastically
overlong wedge of Gallic cheese, and so, in the interests of balance,
I have demanded that he explain himself for this review's benefit.
I like to think of myself as a reasonable, fair-minded sort of
chap. No one else does, but that's beside the point. Here are
his thoughts:
You
just can't help but admire the completely unapologetic way this
whole crazy thing was done - in American blockbusters, all fifteen
of the studio's script doctors would have been reading their Syd
Field textbooks, and inserting any amount of by-the-numbers motivation
for everything (usually involving childhood trauma) whereas Gans
just doesn't care if it makes no sense for an Dacascos's Indian
to be marching around France fighting like Jet Li, or that Le
Bihan's mullet-sporting naturalist can immediately turn himself
into an avenging Rambo. He's much more concerned with shooting
as much footage as possible in ludicrously overdone slo-mo (including,
so help me, people walking through puddles, never mind the crazily
over-stylised fight scenes) or randomly deciding it's about time
there was a scene in a brothel, and why not do that breasts into
mountains dissolve, and have one of the Pope's secret agents in
it (who cares if she's a woman) and a secret society, and so on
and so on... If you go along with it I think it's really good
fun in a slightly delirious way (it's the Starship Troopers policy:
don't worry, as long as everything's turned up to 11, it'll be
okay...). The climax, to the surprise of no-one given all the
preceding silliness, is completely bonkers... It's like the Crying
Freeman comics (the live action version of which Gans also directed)
- it's completely mad, it makes no sense at all, and yet it's
all quite fun really...(No honestly, er...) The downside of all
this is that the mad throwing together of everything they could
think of could just make you sit there thinking "If they'd
made that film it would have been Sleepy Hollow but not as good,"
or during a later scene "If they'd made that film it would
have been Last of the Mohicans but not as good," etc. etc.,
but I still think it's good, so there...
This
seems to me to sum up the appeal of Brotherhood of the Wolf, should
such appeal be conceded to exist, rather well, and if the above
description excites to you then I recommend it unreservedly. There
is a case for watching it just to see the aforementioned breasts/mountain
dissolve, which is as spectacular and joyous as it sounds. I should
also mention the revelation of the identity of the beast, which
will make your jaw drop in disbelief, though not in a good way.
Despite
this, woolly old traditionalist that I am, I prefer my films to
have a plot, and one that makes sense at that. This is jazz as
cinema, and I found it tiresome and laughable, the kind of movie
that causes the suspension holding up your disbelief to buckle
and snap, doing a nasty injury to your patience in the process.
-Mark
Blackmore/Mark Wilson
DVD
EXTRAS
· 'La Legend': a programme on the origins of The Beast
· Theatrical trailer
· Booklet
· Interactive menu
· Scene access
|
