28 Days Later

The other evening, I had a dream. It was a sequence from a zombie movie, a man trying to get into a van and people inside the van trying to help him, with zombies swarming the vehicle. The camera was mostly confined within the vehicle, except at the very beginning and the very end of the sequence (yes, I have dreams that look like movies, and I'm not in them), and the man never did get into the van, as the driver had to speed off when the window was broken and the door never opened. I took this as a sign that I should watch a zombie film. Luckily, sitting right there on my coffee table was 28 Days Later.

This movie SHOULD start with Cillian Murphy, waking up from a coma and noticing that he's all alone in a hospital. As he wanders around the hospital and London, he notices that he's all alone there as well, which is mysterious and somewhat menacing. You know there's something wrong, it's freaking London, that town's always busy. Eventually, he discovers when he goes to a church that everyone's either dead or a zomb..er "infected". He finds a couple people, and learns what happened while he was sleeping, and it didn't involve Sandra Bullock at all! Eventually, they get to an army base commanded by Doctor Who himself, Christopher Ecclestone, and learn that people are just as dangerous as zombies.

I said SHOULD, so obviously it doesn't open exactly like that, instead the first scene has to do with angry monkeys affected by a virus made out of RAGE, and some hippies release them and kills us all! It's stupid, partly because it's a RAGE infection, which doesn't make any bloody sense. Can't it just be a virus? Why does it need to be a stupid RAGE virus? And why do we need to know? We shouldn't find out until Murphy stumbles upon the first characters, and they should infer that it's a virus, by how it's spread.

Let's take Shaun of the Dead, which did this better. In that movie, there's no explanation of what causes the zombies. The zombies are there, nobody knows why, and they just want to eat some brains. It's menacing because the explanation isn't obvious. And that's a comedy.

Shaun of the Dead also did the action better. The encounters with the zombinfected don't have very much tension, the actors and zombies might as well be separated by a gigantic wall given how little they are in the same frame. They never seemed like a threat, and really that's the most important part of any monster movie.

Most of all, the movie is sloppy. Characters fall in love because they're the main characters, not because of particularly compatible personalities. Characters die because the script needs them to, the most flagrant example late in the film when there doesn't seem to be really any reason for the most likable character in the film to go down. Lots of time is spent wandering around, and there are lengthy sections where there is no indication that there are even any zombies at all.

So it is not lightly that I say that the climax is intense, exciting, well made and even makes a sophisticated point about the nature of man. The fight between the three different sides is as intense and tension filled as you may have hoped the previous hour and a half was. We learn more about the characters through an action sequence than the entire film beforehand, plus we're treated to a badass song and someone getting their eyes poked out.

The music is another huge plus for this film, I absolutely adore the soundtrack. It's exciting, it's tense, it's tender, it's everything the movie needs at any given moment, and sometimes makes a sequence seem much better than it actually is. I could listen to this soundtrack all on its own, it's that good.

Alas, some good music, and a great ending, do not a great film make. I keep going back to Shaun of the Dead, which did the whole zombie thing right. It makes me appreciate just how good a director Edgar Wright is, since he made a tension filled film with exciting action, and it's a comedic take on the genre. Here, we've got a serious version, and it's not as good at that.

But if I get to make my zombie movie that I just dreamed up the other morning, I'll totally show them both.

In Bruges

Dear Martin McDonagh,

Congratulations, you've just made your first feature length movie! I bet that's pretty exciting. While I've never made a movie myself, the feeling of something you created going out into the world and making an impression must be pretty great. Plus, for your first movie, you had some pretty good talent in your corner. Not everyone gets to work with Colin Farrell, Ralph Fiennes AND Brendan Gleeson on their first movie. Most people get people like the local animal health officer who has been in a few plays for the dinner theater, or the mayor, because if you cast the mayor he'll give you all the permits you want. So getting real talent in your first go, that's a pretty major acheivement.

I can see why they went for it. You did win an Oscar for a short film, and even if you hadn't, the script for this one is mostly fantastic. You've written a funny script, there's no question of it, and I imagine every great comedic actor would want to deliver some of that dialog. It's quite sweary, but hey, there's nothing wrong with being sweary in this context. It's a movie about gangsters - Brendan Gleeson and Colin Farrell - hiding out In Bruges, the former loving the scenery and the latter hating it. Of course it's going to be sweary, not to mention a great foundation for a black comedy. And when psychopathic boss Ralph Fiennes shows up, you're not going to want to tone down the language.

But here's the thing, I think the pressure of making your first movie might have gotten to you. Most of us would think "I've made a great, funny script, got some absolutely fantastic actors and a wonderful location. This is all I need." I don't think you thought that though. I get the feeling that you wanted your first feature to mean something. It should have some serious themes going on, some drama, maybe the story should be about regret and the consequences of murder. I mean, that's a pretty good idea, in some cases, but I think by trying to make a movie that means something and a wickedly funny black comedy at the same time backfired in a bad way.

I knew something was wrong when I heard the somber piano score and saw the moody shots of gothic architecture. I had seen the trailers before, and I was expecting something a bit, well, lighthearted. It might have been more appropriate for a serious drama, and while there's nothing wrong with serious dramas, there's a reason they're often shot and edited differently from comedies. Throughout, it seemed like a movie shot like a drama, but it really wasn't one. The extended reaction shots, the moments of quiet, the scenes of people crying and regretting their mistakes. If I didn't know English, I'm not sure what I would have thought the movie was.

So, when the comedy in the script started coming through, it seemed strange and out of place. Eventually, I began to recognize your serious themes and the questions you sought to raise, and I began to wonder if you even knew what movie you wanted to make. Most of the dialog is funny, but the story really isn't, and the entire style of the movie seemed a bit better suited for something a bit more somber.

I suppose there's nothing inherently wrong about mixing comedy and drama, but the end result was a movie that I was never really sure about. I was laughing, and laughing a lot, throughout, but there were several times when I wasn't sure if the scenes were meant to be funny or not. At the very end of the film, I was laughing but feeling bad, since I knew what you were trying to achieve with the scene, and I knew that the movie as a whole was building to a discussion on morality and mortality, but at that moment I just had to laugh at the ridiculous spectacle on stage.

Maybe that was the point. Maybe I was supposed to feel bad about laughing at these people, or feel uncomfortable about finding so much humor in a situation revolving around death, especially the death of innocent people. But I yearned for a movie that was either more comfortable in its comedic strength, or one that was more fully realized as a serious drama. As it was, it was a great comedy with some drama awkwardly shoved in, and that didn't work too well. Still, even so, I did love it, and I'm very interested in seeing what you do next. Your dialog is fantastic, your visual sense is pretty good - making Bruges your location, and almost another character, was a stroke of genius - and I can't wait for your next picture. I just hope you feel more comfortable in your direction, and can make a movie that doesn't feel quite so unsure of what it wants to be.

Yours,

Devin.


Screen taken at 12:52