One of the best seasons of television I have ever seen was the first season of "In Treatment", an HBO show starring Gabriel Byrne. Byrne played a psychologist, and each episode featured a session between him and a patient. Seasons two and three of the show were good, but the first season was truly extraordinary. Many episodes consisted of nothing but two characters sitting down and talking, but it was absolutely riveting.
The second season of "Homeland" included one of television's greatest scenes. It was a fifteen to twenty minute long, unbroken interrogation scene between Claire Danes and Damian Lewis. It slowly takes Lewis, under suspicion of terrorism, from a position of full denial, to a confession, and finally an agreement to switch sides. It is the gold standard for how to do such a scene, involving callbacks to events from the first season and feeling wholly grounded in the reality of who the characters are--their strengths, their flaws, and their shared history.
I mention these examples to illustrate that large scale action scenes are not necessary to create fascinating filmed drama. Extended scenes of conversation can be more interesting than chases and explosions, even in the espionage/government intelligence genre (of which "Homeland" is a prime example). "A Most Wanted Man" features a lot of dialogue heavy scenes (an understatement, by the way), but, in what I believe is an attempt to strive for "realism", it fails to imbue them with the energy necessary to avoid being an incredibly boring film.
"A Most Wanted Man" includes a scenario vaguely similar to the scene I mentioned from "Homeland". Gunther Bachmann (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) has in custody an attorney (Rachel McAdams) who he believes can help him. He goes into the room where she's being held, they talk for a few minutes, and he leaves. A while later, one of his colleagues goes in, talks for a few more minutes, then leaves. A while after that, Bachmann again enters the room, talks for a few minutes, makes a few new points, and leaves. Within a few minutes, the attorney knocks on the door, now willing to help. There are no real dramatic moments, and the characters have no background with one another to lend multiple layers to the scene. I'm sure this is probably closer to how these kinds of things actually go down than the version portrayed in "Homeland". It also nearly put me to sleep. Movies play fast and loose with reality for a reason: Reality, in its purest form, is not always interesting. This was just one example. The film is full of them. It's obvious where a scene or series of scenes is ultimately going to go, but in the interest of "realism" it takes forever (step by agonizing step) to get there. I know that some people like this type of film. That's why they've made movies like this before (the two previous films based on John le Carre's novels, "The Constant Gardener" and "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy", I found to be similarly tedious), and it's why they'll make more in the future. I, however, kept wishing that Jack Bauer would show up and make things interesting. Everything that gets accomplished in this film, he could have pulled off in half an episode.
I will admit that there is a small payoff to the film's slow pace. There is a genuine sense of tension when something finally happens. The events of the finale have more weight to them because of the slow burn that led up to them. Unfortunately, this payoff is not nearly big enough to justify the two hours of boredom that precede it. Had there been a sense of tension slowly building throughout the film, it could have been effective. But the tension was almost nonexistent until the final few minutes and was ultimately too little, too late.
C-
No comments:
Post a Comment