30 July 2013
BANGKOK DANGEROUS
I beg your pardon, but Only God Forgives is complete bullshit. I'd like there to be a more intellectually suitable way to put my feelings than that, but I'd also like it if Only God Forgives wasn't such an artistically denuded, pointless waste of time and talent.
That's what's awful about it, really: this is a movie that was not made by incompetents. Writer-director Nicolas Winding Refn is every bit as much in control of his art as he was making Drive, his much-adored previous collaboration with Ryan Gosling in the role of a barely-speaking tough guy in a world of inexplicable and uncontrollable violence; there's no doubt that this is the movie he wanted to make, and he's still quite obviously the man who created Bronson and the Pusher trilogy, both of which I personally find to be more satisfying accomplishments than Drive. Only God Forgives is a strong piece of filmmaking-as-craft, and it's buoyed by truly breathtaking cinematography by Larry Smith, a sometime collaborator of Winding Refn's whose career started in a series of "not quite a full DP" projects with Stanley Kubrick. So you know he's bona fide, and his overwhelming saturation of the film in blankets of color (there are many moments in the film which consist visually of literally nothing but one shade of red and one shade of black) gives the film an incredibly compelling visual personality that you simply cannot deny.
So it's that much more frustrating that Only God Forgives ends up having no point. Of course, that's not entirely fair or accurate. It definitely has a "point" that is made clear from the title on down: violence and retribution are a devouring cycle which can only be broken by the truly self-sacrificing, and while forgiveness is the only thing that can make the world better, it is the hardest thing to imagine, let alone practice.
This translates to ninety of the most redundant minutes I have seen in a movie theater in a very long time. The plot concerns a pair of American brothers in Bangkok, mixed up in the drug trade. The elder, Billy (Tom Burke) decides one night that the cornucopia of prostitutes available in that city just isn't enough, so he insists on finding a teenage girl, whom he promptly rapes and beats to death. Her father (Kovit Wattanakul) is able to get his revenge when the corrupt police officer Chang (Vithaya Pansringarm) permits him access to the killer, though Chang thereupon chops off the avenger's right hand. Billy's younger brother, Julian (Gosling) quickly figures all of this out, but he can bring himself to kill the man who killed his brother, understanding that Billy brought it upon himself, and soon his hellacious gorgon of a mother, Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas) has arrived in Thailand to destroy all the men who had a role in her beloved older boy's death.
And once all those pieces are in place, Only God Forgives launches into a cycle of events from which it never deviates: Crystal berates Julian, he doesn't respond or even alter his expression, somebody is killed in revenge for somebody else's death, Chang chops off a hand to make a moral point, and then he sings karaoke. It is remarkable how much that includes every single event that happens after the 20-minute mark, except for one dinner where Crystal humiliates Julian in front of his favorite prostitute, Mai (Yayaying Rhatha Phongam), talking about the relative sizes of her sons' penises.
It's a telling scene, because it exists for no real reason other than to let Scott Thomas burst forth with a roar of crudely operatic dialogue, and her entire performance exists for no other purpose than to be extravagantly campy and wicked in speaking those lines. Things that only exist for one reason, and it's not even a very good reason, tend to crop up all the damn time in Only God Forgives, a movie which has one single argument and one single way of presenting that argument dramatically and visually, and it makes that presentation over and over again until after far, far too long, Gosling's character finally says "fuck it" (or rather, he doesn't, because he only says like, literally, 40 words in the movie) and puts himself in the way of all that repetitive violence.
Whatever impact the film makes, it has absolutely nothing to do with its threadbare characters, nor with its depiction of Thailand, which despite all Winding Refn's talk about his influences and his desire to evoke the culture is as generic and Othered as I can remember seeing it in recent cinema, depicting a world where the brown people are hookers or killers, and the white people are swallowed up whole by a society that cares for neither Crystal's screaming monstrosity nor Julian's heavily emasculated inability to act or communicate. Most of the impact comes entirely from the style, which has a thrilling Pop-Art sense of colliding colors in an attempt to create sensation through sheer abstract imagery, or from Cliff Martinez's somewhat unimaginative but fulfillingly driving score. Or, especially, from the much-publicised violence, which isn't quite as brutish and disgusting as the most breathless reports would have you believe - any habitué of Asian horror has scene plenty of stuff far more grotesque than anything that goes on here. But it's still pretty gory and unsparing, particularly regarding its omnipresent, impressively squishy sound design, and the variety of angles from which Winding Refn shows (or, more often than I'd expected, refrains from showing) the various dismemberings and disembowelings that are scattered across the film's landscape.
Impressively committed, sure, but it's also quickly tedious and one-note, and this I cannot forgive. The film being nihilistic and unpleasant (for it is both) is one thing, but it's nihilistic and unpleasant to no purpose at all, and the only thing about any of this that flickers with any kind of life is Scott Thomas's deranged performance, which I found to be memorable and striking in all of the very worst ways. All in all, it feels angry and punshing; like the director was very mad at people who enjoyed Drive, and wanted to make them suffer - "no, this is what I meant, meaningless, brutal violence that's too numb to be either exciting or off-putting". Only God Forgives just drags and drags, sullen and mean and boring as shit. It's absolutely gorgeous; it has that and only that in its favor, and it's not remotely enough.
2/10
That's what's awful about it, really: this is a movie that was not made by incompetents. Writer-director Nicolas Winding Refn is every bit as much in control of his art as he was making Drive, his much-adored previous collaboration with Ryan Gosling in the role of a barely-speaking tough guy in a world of inexplicable and uncontrollable violence; there's no doubt that this is the movie he wanted to make, and he's still quite obviously the man who created Bronson and the Pusher trilogy, both of which I personally find to be more satisfying accomplishments than Drive. Only God Forgives is a strong piece of filmmaking-as-craft, and it's buoyed by truly breathtaking cinematography by Larry Smith, a sometime collaborator of Winding Refn's whose career started in a series of "not quite a full DP" projects with Stanley Kubrick. So you know he's bona fide, and his overwhelming saturation of the film in blankets of color (there are many moments in the film which consist visually of literally nothing but one shade of red and one shade of black) gives the film an incredibly compelling visual personality that you simply cannot deny.
So it's that much more frustrating that Only God Forgives ends up having no point. Of course, that's not entirely fair or accurate. It definitely has a "point" that is made clear from the title on down: violence and retribution are a devouring cycle which can only be broken by the truly self-sacrificing, and while forgiveness is the only thing that can make the world better, it is the hardest thing to imagine, let alone practice.
This translates to ninety of the most redundant minutes I have seen in a movie theater in a very long time. The plot concerns a pair of American brothers in Bangkok, mixed up in the drug trade. The elder, Billy (Tom Burke) decides one night that the cornucopia of prostitutes available in that city just isn't enough, so he insists on finding a teenage girl, whom he promptly rapes and beats to death. Her father (Kovit Wattanakul) is able to get his revenge when the corrupt police officer Chang (Vithaya Pansringarm) permits him access to the killer, though Chang thereupon chops off the avenger's right hand. Billy's younger brother, Julian (Gosling) quickly figures all of this out, but he can bring himself to kill the man who killed his brother, understanding that Billy brought it upon himself, and soon his hellacious gorgon of a mother, Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas) has arrived in Thailand to destroy all the men who had a role in her beloved older boy's death.
And once all those pieces are in place, Only God Forgives launches into a cycle of events from which it never deviates: Crystal berates Julian, he doesn't respond or even alter his expression, somebody is killed in revenge for somebody else's death, Chang chops off a hand to make a moral point, and then he sings karaoke. It is remarkable how much that includes every single event that happens after the 20-minute mark, except for one dinner where Crystal humiliates Julian in front of his favorite prostitute, Mai (Yayaying Rhatha Phongam), talking about the relative sizes of her sons' penises.
It's a telling scene, because it exists for no real reason other than to let Scott Thomas burst forth with a roar of crudely operatic dialogue, and her entire performance exists for no other purpose than to be extravagantly campy and wicked in speaking those lines. Things that only exist for one reason, and it's not even a very good reason, tend to crop up all the damn time in Only God Forgives, a movie which has one single argument and one single way of presenting that argument dramatically and visually, and it makes that presentation over and over again until after far, far too long, Gosling's character finally says "fuck it" (or rather, he doesn't, because he only says like, literally, 40 words in the movie) and puts himself in the way of all that repetitive violence.
Whatever impact the film makes, it has absolutely nothing to do with its threadbare characters, nor with its depiction of Thailand, which despite all Winding Refn's talk about his influences and his desire to evoke the culture is as generic and Othered as I can remember seeing it in recent cinema, depicting a world where the brown people are hookers or killers, and the white people are swallowed up whole by a society that cares for neither Crystal's screaming monstrosity nor Julian's heavily emasculated inability to act or communicate. Most of the impact comes entirely from the style, which has a thrilling Pop-Art sense of colliding colors in an attempt to create sensation through sheer abstract imagery, or from Cliff Martinez's somewhat unimaginative but fulfillingly driving score. Or, especially, from the much-publicised violence, which isn't quite as brutish and disgusting as the most breathless reports would have you believe - any habitué of Asian horror has scene plenty of stuff far more grotesque than anything that goes on here. But it's still pretty gory and unsparing, particularly regarding its omnipresent, impressively squishy sound design, and the variety of angles from which Winding Refn shows (or, more often than I'd expected, refrains from showing) the various dismemberings and disembowelings that are scattered across the film's landscape.
Impressively committed, sure, but it's also quickly tedious and one-note, and this I cannot forgive. The film being nihilistic and unpleasant (for it is both) is one thing, but it's nihilistic and unpleasant to no purpose at all, and the only thing about any of this that flickers with any kind of life is Scott Thomas's deranged performance, which I found to be memorable and striking in all of the very worst ways. All in all, it feels angry and punshing; like the director was very mad at people who enjoyed Drive, and wanted to make them suffer - "no, this is what I meant, meaningless, brutal violence that's too numb to be either exciting or off-putting". Only God Forgives just drags and drags, sullen and mean and boring as shit. It's absolutely gorgeous; it has that and only that in its favor, and it's not remotely enough.
2/10
10 comments:
Just a few rules so that everybody can have fun: ad hominem attacks on the blogger are fair; ad hominem attacks on other commenters will be deleted. And I will absolutely not stand for anything that is, in my judgment, demeaning, insulting or hateful to any gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion. And though I won't insist on keeping politics out, let's think long and hard before we say anything particularly inflammatory.
Also, sorry about the whole "must be a registered user" thing, but I do deeply hate to get spam, and I refuse to take on the totalitarian mantle of moderating comments, and I am much too lazy to try to migrate over to a better comments system than the one that comes pre-loaded with Blogger.
I hated this as well. Even after all the reviews lambasted it I was like "They don't get it, man". Then I watched it and was like "....oh, no. They were right my bad." It's the same thing as To the Wonder. This was far more pointless though, much much more pretentious, trite and facile.
ReplyDelete"Impressively committed, sure, but it's also quickly tedious and one-note, and this I cannot forgive."
ReplyDeleteWould you say ... that only God could forgive it?
Spectacularly insipid puns aside, I was waiting for this review for a good minute - I needed to see if I was wrong in thinking that OGF is, frankly, a piece of shit.
I never imagined it would be this bad, though. What the hell was Refn thinking?
Sidenote: I didn't hate The Wolverine. I guess the universe has a way of restoring balance.
ReplyDelete"Haha! We've just been Refnd!"
ReplyDeleteThis is what I said to my friends who very graciously agreed to go see this movie with me.
I was predisposed to like OGF, as I have very quickly become an unrepentant Refn fanboy. I saw it as the culmination of a conversation he's been having with the audience that began with Valhalla Rising.
Thematically it was basically Pusher 2, filtered through the brain of a guy thinking about some different things.
The things Refn seems to be thinking about are religion and the act of watching movies.
You're not the first reviewer to have made the point that OGF is a sort of statement to the viewer, and I think you're right. I think Refn has enough of the Danish weirdo in him to basically use this movie as a middle finger for those of us (or himself!) who may have wanted more of the same. But though he's not Lars von Trier (thank God), this is as close as he will get to being a deliberate provocateur.
The thing that struck me more than anything else about the film was the number of times there are people sitting motionless in chairs, being forced to endure something unpleasant. Whether tied, told to sit still, on display in a window, or literally pinned down, it happens again and again. I mean, there's even a scene where a disabled boy is sitting motionless while he's being spoon-fed, surrounded by racks of film reels and the sound of a fan (but really it's a camera) ticking away in the background.
I'm not sure where I'm going with this. Tim, you're definitely in good company in not liking the film, and I can't even say I blame you. I really liked it, but at the same time I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. It feels like a very personal and intimate conversation. I'm quite sure none of the people I saw it with feel the same way I do about it, but none of them have seen Refn's whole catalog as I have. Perhaps that's a crappy prerequisite to enjoying something, but this isn't really a film that's meant to be enjoyed. Refn means for us to endure it; to live in the horribly broken and desperate mind of Julian - essentially a slow-motion nightmare - for 90 minutes. I will admit that it's the longest 90 minutes I've...endured...in a film that I also liked. I haven't even touched on the religion part, but I've rambled for a while.
"Ladies, close your eyes. And you, gentlemen, watch carefully."
You've been Refnd.
Thoughts?
That first sentence is all I can think after seeing this.
ReplyDeleteAn absolutely gorgeous piece of shit.
I'm surprised you stopped at 2/10 after what reads like a pretty scathing review. Was it really that gorgeous?
ReplyDelete@Pipe Dream,
ReplyDeleteThat may well be, and probably is, what Refn intended. My question though, after how amazing Drive turned out, is it really worth it? I like a film that freaks the squares as much as the next guy but when nobody but the director is in on the joke then it becomes a colossal waste of everyone's time and a waste of the best cinematography in quite some time.
@Atrophy: I think, by this point, it has been well established that our esteemed host loves him some camerawork.
ReplyDelete@KingKubrick,
ReplyDeleteI think what I'm saying is that I'm in on the joke too. I believe that it's pretty much up to the individual to decide to be in or out with a movie like this.
This is going to be one of those movies going forward that'll be talked about for a long time; time enough for people to come and go and decide to be in or out, but there OGF will be, implacable as Lieutenant Chang, just waiting to beat the crap out of us and cut off our hands.
There are some movies that are now considered great and/or notorious, like Salo: 120 days of Sodom. I will never ever like that movie. Or perhaps the works of Lars von Trier, or even some things by Kubrick. I'm thinking now about the initial critical and commercial response to Eyes Wide Shut.
Whatever the case with movies like that, this one is definitely up my alley. And I have no problem acknowledging that I've probably simply chosen it to be so. And that's kind of the point with movies like this, is it not?
@ Pipedream,
ReplyDeleteTouche, but, I don't think that Only God Forgives has that much substantive material to endure. All the meaning in the film is surface level so I can't really see it growing in reputation as the years go by. But who knows?
Maybe Refn is ahead of the curve on this one and we haven't caught up. It'd still rather he'd have chosen a different film to follow up Drive with. To each their own I suppose.