The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus (2009)

--** This blog has moved to www.averagefilmreviews.com, so if you like what you read then please come over and have a look! You can read all the old reviews over there including the one below for The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. You can, of course, continue reading this article here though. **--


Looking over Terry Gilliam's filmography on IMDb, I notice that I've actually seen 9 of his 14 films... so you'd think I'd have an idea by now of what to expect. But the fact is that you just can't know what to expect with him. Except that it's going to be odd.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is odd. To be honest, I don't know if I liked it. It was interesting but it wasn't particularly satisfying. It looked good but I don't know... I thought it would look amazing, that it would be set in this fantastical whimsical land and it wasn't. But at the same time I don't know why I really expected that... jumping to conclusions... I guess the word Imaginarium conjures up, for me, a carnival kind of atmosphere and that's kind of backdrop we'd have on the story. But it wasn't. Which is fine, it just wasn't what I expected.

What it was, was a loose modern-day old style cautionary tale. Or at least that's the best way I can describe it. My problem with it was that the story was... clouded. Or not clouded enough, they could have gone either way and like so many films, they just didn't really decide which way to go. I suppose my opinion has to come in here as well... I like a good reveal and it kept looking like there was going to be one but in the end it was split. There was a reveal but there was a drip feed as well and I just don't know if the timing really worked. There wasn't really that convergence that you need with if you're doing both.

There is, of course, the inevitable question. How much of an effect did Heath Ledger's death have on the film? I don't think the effect is particularly apparent but how can I know? Terry Gilliam's films are such personal works that it's hard to imagine that it wasn't affected in some way. I do think the transitions are seamless though, Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell can be proud of their work. They really do uphold Heath Ledger's legacy, they completed his last work while in no way treading on it. The faces changed but the character continued on.

Quick mentions as well, I thought Lily Cole was very good. I look forward to seeing her in more films. Andrew Garfield (who played Anton) on the other hand was crap, he almost spoiled the film on the me to be honest. What surprises me is that I've read other reviews where people really like him. I don't know why he was in the film at all... either get a better actor to bump up the character or write a role for him that is *ahem* better suited to his talent. Actually it's annoying me thinking about him... I'll forget him now.

So, what more can I say? It's a strange film. I would recommend it because I definitely think it's worth a watch, it's extremely imaginative... In fact the more I think about it the more I liked it, maybe I should watch it again. But the problem remains, I just didn't think it was that fulfilling... though it did remind me... if you play with fire...

7.5/10

N.B. You know what, I'm not actually sure what the Imaginarium was in the end... was it the mirror, the show or the imagining?

Share

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

It's been said before but I'll say it again, Harry Potter is a phenomenon, both literary and cinematic. In terms of Irish box office, all of the films so far have been in the top 5 of their year... and this is a country where The Hangover is currently #1 for the year.

I actually don't know if I've seen all the films but I do know that I read 5.5 of the books. I only got about half way through this particular book. I had enjoyed them but after the behemoth that was Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix I just couldn't face another one. I really just thought that HPATOOTP was crying out for a good editor and I couldn't read another one thinking the same thing. That said, I did know what happens in the end of Half-Blood Prince, a wikipedia vandal spoiled that one for me!

Personally, while I do think it's a brillant story, I haven't been that pushed on going to the films. They have been so close to the books that you don't really need to see them, they are pretty much exactly as you imagine them so what's the point. I'll probably go along and see the next two though, just because I never got around to reading the last book. So it was with a certain lack of anticipation that I went along to the Savoy to see it at the Irish première...

... and about 3 hours later (there was a delay) I walked out thinking ok, that was how I imagined it. Which is not to say that I didn't enjoy it but it seem a bit like... ok.

I really did enjoy it though, I thought it looked brillant and I really like how it was that bit darker. It was well balanced but if I had to criticise I'd say that it almost swept over things too quick... I'm not sure how, since it was 2 and a half hours long... but it did.

My word of warning would be that it is not a stand alone film. Harry Potter is absolutely a series and if you haven't read the books or seen all the other films, then there really is no point in going. It will not make sense. I think that's fair enough but I do wonder now if film really was the way to go... given how rushed some part of this one felt, and how they are splitting the last book into two films, perhaps they should have just made it a TV series spanning a few seasons?

Anyway I don't have that much to say by way of critque to be honest! It was exactly what it said on the tin, the actors were the same as they've always been (ok, not amazing), as were the effects (excellent), and the score (suitably dramatic) so as it was a good story well told, I gave it an 8/10 on twitter. On further reflection I'm going to downgrade that to a 7.5, I'm taking that half a point off as it felt a bit like a placeholder film really...

7.5/10