Versus
Lake House Vs The Constant Gardener
frankly speaking it is an unfair comparison. however, its unfairness isnt for the obvious reasons. (kind of like, fast food vs gourmet) i think both filmmakers, from actors to the directors to the gaffer to the best boy had put in their blood, sweat and tears into the project. so i will refrain from making any opinions which would tread along those lines.
nevertheless, what i would like to do is to make a rather big meal of the protagonists of both films.
the intentions of both films differ greatly. Lake House glorifies the love between the two protagonist, while Gardener focuses on its sacrifice. admittedly, although both films has had more or less a profound effect on me, the latter have the edge over the former in terms of its dramatic ending.
for the Lake House, getting together at the end of film has been done many times. so it seems lame to say the least. for the Constant Gardner in the final scene in which he awaits his inevitable death in the hands of the contract killers, cuts through the bone.
maybe the basis of that belief is laid by the strength of the characters. The Constant Gardener has real characters. the everyday man, person. no muscles from brussels, cigars from austria or Stallion from the Brooklyn. no supreme assassin instincts. no master of disguise. just a good old middle ranking diplomat.
meanwhile, Lake House seems to be a star vehicle for Bullock and Reeves. hence, the level of believability is almost non-existent, to say the least. ...well at least to me that is. it is more like the story being tailored for the actors.
perhaps. that is a forte with The Constant Gardener, that the story is more important than the actors. this is particularly so in the final scenes of the film.
he looks to the sunset, across the drought laden plains. meanwhile a truck load of contract killers arrive. they sound out his name, he looks at them briefly and turns his back on them. the director cuts the scene back to the dry plains. shots are heard. he dies. we dont see it but we know he has let himself get killed.
'when a person dies still consumated by love, his/her place is in Heaven'. - Imam Ghazali
frankly speaking it is an unfair comparison. however, its unfairness isnt for the obvious reasons. (kind of like, fast food vs gourmet) i think both filmmakers, from actors to the directors to the gaffer to the best boy had put in their blood, sweat and tears into the project. so i will refrain from making any opinions which would tread along those lines.
nevertheless, what i would like to do is to make a rather big meal of the protagonists of both films.
the intentions of both films differ greatly. Lake House glorifies the love between the two protagonist, while Gardener focuses on its sacrifice. admittedly, although both films has had more or less a profound effect on me, the latter have the edge over the former in terms of its dramatic ending.
for the Lake House, getting together at the end of film has been done many times. so it seems lame to say the least. for the Constant Gardner in the final scene in which he awaits his inevitable death in the hands of the contract killers, cuts through the bone.
maybe the basis of that belief is laid by the strength of the characters. The Constant Gardener has real characters. the everyday man, person. no muscles from brussels, cigars from austria or Stallion from the Brooklyn. no supreme assassin instincts. no master of disguise. just a good old middle ranking diplomat.
meanwhile, Lake House seems to be a star vehicle for Bullock and Reeves. hence, the level of believability is almost non-existent, to say the least. ...well at least to me that is. it is more like the story being tailored for the actors.
perhaps. that is a forte with The Constant Gardener, that the story is more important than the actors. this is particularly so in the final scenes of the film.
he looks to the sunset, across the drought laden plains. meanwhile a truck load of contract killers arrive. they sound out his name, he looks at them briefly and turns his back on them. the director cuts the scene back to the dry plains. shots are heard. he dies. we dont see it but we know he has let himself get killed.
'when a person dies still consumated by love, his/her place is in Heaven'. - Imam Ghazali
Finger Acrobatics Performed
On Thursday, August 03, 2006 at 9:34 pm.
Skip It and Leave Some!
