Sorry to admit it, but “ Unbroken ” something wasn't enough to make a great movie. But there were all the prerequisites. The bright, if not incredible life of Louis Zamperini, based on his diaries, numerous interviews and other documents, is Laura Hillenbrand's bestseller, a talented team behind and in front of the camera. However, the director of the movie, Angelina Jolie, was never able to bring this movie to the proper level. Surely there is not only her fault in this, but also the producers and screenwriters, but the stumbling block was that `` Unbroken '' could have been a gorgeous movie of all time if Jolie hadn't made it her yet another run-of-the-mill attempt to break into the major league of Hollywood directors.
One thing's for sure: if the whole movie was as good as two or three scenes from it, it would surely make it to the Oscar nominees for the main awards. The life of Zamperini, an Olympic athlete who went to fight against Japan in World War II, was wrecked in the Pacific and survived only to be nailed to Japanese territories and held hostage, even sounds like a thriller. Hillenbrand's book is full of moments when you literally choke on reading. The movie came out at least dry and, sadly, not inspiring. The writers, including the Coen brothers, have chosen a non-linear storytelling that literally pulls you out of the story several times and actually breaks down all the tension, since the scenes simply break off at the most interesting places. This sometimes saves the movie from boredom (and there were too many drawn out moments), but at the same time consistently deprives him of his best moments.
Jolie can be judged as a confused director. It seems that she did not quite understand what she herself wanted to say with this story, in addition to some trivial things, like fortitude (not that fortitude was a trivial thing, but the topic itself, you see, does not amaze the imagination). The movie swings from striving to be a blockbuster to claims to intellectual cinema, from religious themes to self-belief, and then back to philosophical speeches, mutual assistance and brotherhood. And it does not happen smoothly, but as if someone had drawn the entire canvas of the movie into white and black stripes. A kind of variation on the theme "What is good and what is bad".
All the characters turn out to be extremely one-sided and all the actors, respectively, have practically nothing to play. Jack O'Connell is sometimes dragged into pretentious notations, although his “ chemistry ” with other performers creates several successful, one might say live moments among the rest of the completely inanimate movie. Domhnall Gleason is especially good, who noticeably adds humanity and warmth. It's time for Jay Courtney to prescribe a return ticket from Hollywood. One gets the feeling that this person simply does not know how to play at all.
The picture of Roger Deakins is pleasing to the eye, although he does not seem to be trying too hard to surpass himself. The same can be said about Alexandre Desplat, who can be credited with some very personal touching compositions, but nothing more. Jolie's merit is worth writing here, that for all the somewhat romantic beauty that Deakins and Desplat have imparted to the movie (whether visually or musically), `` Unbroken '' nevertheless, he retained, if not realism (which is not always present), then at least the stamp of pain and the severity of inhuman trials.
At the same time, not once in all more than two hours of `` Unbroken '' does not grasp you hard enough to drown out the flow of other thoughts in my head. Never once does he swallow the hall in the crystal blue of the ocean or the faded palette of a POW camp. But the immoderate pretentiousness of some moments and the sharp cruelty of others are striking.
If anything does not allow this movie to completely disintegrate, it is the story itself. This is what keeps the interest, boggles the imagination, makes you believe in miracles. This is proof of the real unyielding strength that a person can achieve through faith and optimism. After watching it, it becomes very difficult to believe that Louis Zamperini was a real person. However, the movie did not do him justice, if only because it is not necessary to watch him in the cinema, because he so often ironically resembles a well-made student movie.
“ Unbroken ” - this is a leisurely movie, when you would have to shoot like a rocket into the air, dissecting it with a red smoky tail, in order to explode at the end with fireworks. Hard but crumpled; literate but soulless; interesting but superficial – that's probably all that defines the second directorial work of Angelina Jolie, who once again could not pull out all that was given to her from the story, what was actually hidden in it. Either she lacked experience, or the courage to plunge into the depths of the true beauty of Louis Zamperini's life.
The Topic of Article: Review of the movie Unbroken. The transience of fragile creations.
Author: Jake Pinkman |
