"The Constant Gardener"

[Jake Schuster]

A good political thriller is hard to come by these days. Usually they act as star vehicles built around flimsy plots hung on a few setpieces and action beats. "The Constant Gardener" is different. It's a study in commitment; "constancy", in fact.

It's by far the most intelligent film I've seen these last six months on the big screen, and since I saw him in a satisfying "Hamlet" on Broadway some years ago, I thought Ralph Fiennes put in a shaded and subtle performance in which some of his best acting occurs when he's just standing still, absorbing the news of a death. He makes his work in the awful "English Patient" look like the worst type of hamminess.

Highly recommended; I expect it will take a few Oscar nominations, as well.

[refriedwhiskey]

I'm looking forward to seeing this one. It looks great. And so does Rachel Weisz.

I was p.o.'d about a sort-of spoiler in an interview with Fiennes, but I guess it's telegraphed in the trailer.

[Biohazard]

I'm looking forward to seeing this one. It looks great. And so does Rachel Weisz.

For once, we agree.

I just home the camera operator doesn't have an epileptic seizure, because that happened a few times for no reason in City of God.

[The White Album]

One of the best films all year.

[Hairy Lime]

Lazy, Jake. Just lazy. (http://scriptsales.com/boards/showthread.php?t=12013&highlight=constant+gardener)

[Jake Schuster]

:confused:

[Kelsey]

I*m really anxious to see this one. I*m hoping it appears here in France while I am here.

[Padget]

I enjoyed it as well and deffinetely thought it was one of the best movies of the year...so far. Although I found it a bit slow at times and as for political thrillers, I actually enjoyed The Interpreter more. Also, after I left the theatre it bothered me some (we're talking mild) how much of the unfolding of action depended on different letters or papers written by Tessa.

[Jake Schuster]

The fact that letters play a key role works well in a story about bureaucracy, greed and secrecy. Things reveal themselves slowly here, only after the damage is done, and every letter is like a fuse that's already been lit. Just give it time and it blows someone up.

[jellyjilly]

It dragged like crazy in the first half hour.

It was too agendized.

Rachel Weisz was great.

Ralph Fiennes was okay, but then he didn't have much to work with.

[Jake Schuster]

It was too agendized.
Um, well, yeah... It's a political thriller.

[jellyjilly]

Um, well, yeah... It's a political thriller.

Nevertheless. It was too agendized.

[Jake Schuster]

How would you characterize "All the President's Men", then? As anti-Nixon?

Let's look at the "agenda" of "The Constant Gardener": big pharmaceutical firms use citizens of Third-World countries as guinea pigs before marketing their drugs to us over here.

Can't see how one could support the other side in this one.

[Jake Schuster]

:p

[EricCartman]

I liked it a lot. Fiennes has a presence that absolutely pulls you into what he is going through (same in Schindler's List). He is very much the minimalist actor but I like that in this age of effects and fakery.
I was presently surprised by Rachel also and, in the last third, loved the cinematograhpy of the air shots of Africa and Sudan.
As much as I liked it, I was a tad disappointed with the cheese factor of the church scene.

[AnconRanger]

i don't know if this is off-topic, but i tried to have a garden once. i read this book from the library on growing vegetables, borrowed my neighbor's tiller, tore up half my backyard and followed the directions on the seed packages, watered when rain was scarce, etc.
i planted tomatoes, corn, squash, melons, pole beans, etc.

what the deer and rabbits didn't eat, the bugs did.

they all thought i was a fine gardener, i suppose.

[refriedwhiskey]

Ancon, did you try constantly?

The constant part appears to be key.

[AnconRanger]

you have to be constant at it, for sure.

much easier to just mow grass and go to the farmer's market when looking for a good tomato.

[refriedwhiskey]

Yeah, my parents have always had a little garden wherever they lived -- even in the suburbs -- but they never produced a tomato that looked like the ones at the L.A. Farmers Market.

And the fruit there! Good googly moogly, the fruit.

But, uh...yeah! The Constant Gardener. Looking forward to it. We don't get enough smart movies with relatively big budgets.

[Josh]

Watched this on Friday....really enjoyed it. I thought Fiennes was brilliant. I thought Rachel Weisz was good. I didn't find the movie overly agendized or heavy-handed in the least.



*SPOILERS*

























Does anyone know if this was shot standard 35mm? It seemed to possess a grainy documentary feel in some scenes, like super 16 blown up.

Also, I loved the ending. I thought it was great writing/editing to reveal Fiennes death during the eulogy before showing it onscreen. The emotional impact was heightened in what otherwise may have been, in less skilled hands, a standard HW climax/denouement.

[The White Album]

It was shot on both 35 and Super 16.

[jellyjilly]

Possible spoilers.....





When the Dark Force is an evil, faceless Corporation (more obvious and better still, a drug company), picking on cute little Black babies, countered by a woman who seriously considers naming her kid "Che," I feel an agenda coming over me.

[miles]

I liked it a lot. Fiennes has a presence that absolutely pulls you into what he is going through (same in Schindler's List). He is very much the minimalist actor but I like that in this age of effects and fakery.
I was presently surprised by Rachel also and, in the last third, loved the cinematograhpy of the air shots of Africa and Sudan.
As much as I liked it, I was a tad disappointed with the cheese factor of the church scene.

And Fiennes is a cool guy, along with being a fine actor.

R. Crowe: Get a clue.

[The White Album]

Possible spoilers.....



When the Dark Force is an evil, faceless Corporation (more obvious and better still, a drug company), picking on cute little Black babies, countered by a woman who seriously considers naming her kid "Che," I feel an agenda coming over me.

So how else would you attempt to adapt the novel? Please show us by example how you would take the agenda out of the source material and transform that into an intelligent political thriller/film?

[jellyjilly]

White Album,

John Le Carre publicly voices his political opinions and is unabashedly, unapologetically, explicitly agendized in his writing. That's why there's a fair chance I won't like movies based on his books -- they're too agendized.
How to take the agenda out? I don't understand the question. You don't try to make an agenda-free Constant Gardener; what you do is, you make a movie from some other book.

[The White Album]

White Album,

John Le Carre publicly voices his political opinions and is unabashedly, unapologetically, explicitly agendized in his writing. That's why there's a fair chance I won't like movies based on his books -- they're too agendized.
How to take the agenda out? I don't understand the question. You don't try to make an agenda-free Constant Gardener; what you do is, you make a movie from some other book.

As someone who hates John Le Carre, and as an educated consumer who knew the movie was based on a book by John Le Carre -- the question must be posed: why the hell did you go see it? And why do you seem so surprised the movie was agendized if you believe all his books are of the same nature?

Secondly, not all of Le Carre's books are explicitly agendized. They definitely have a political and global setting because they're spy novels, but the social message of The Constant Garderner is a bit of an anomaly in his cannon. So honestly, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

[AaronB]

I just home the camera operator doesn't have an epileptic seizure, because that happened a few times for no reason in City of God.

I just got back from seeing Constant Gardener at the cinema. The cinematography in many of the scenes induce motion sickness.

Otherwise, I found the story and the acting quite good.

[AaronB]

Let's look at the "agenda" of "The Constant Gardener": big pharmaceutical firms use citizens of Third-World countries as guinea pigs before marketing their drugs to us over here.

Can't see how one could support the other side in this one.

Well, that's because you agree with the premise.

(I'm not saying I do or don't; I don't know enough to have an opinion.)

[captain bligh]

i thought this was decent, but it was really heavy handed. even though i agree with the film's politics, i think it was ridiculous how the viewer was literally told, in dialogue, at least twice, once in a long speech at the climax: "this is what we believe and you should too." the story simply unfolding would have expressed the film's political point of view (and, in fact, did) much more elegantly than a condescending monologue at the climax. as soon as a film starts overtly proselytizing, as soon as the filmmakers start putting their op-ed pieces into the dialogue of their characters, it takes me out of the film, and this one did that at least one too many times for me to be able to totally enjoy it.

[jellyjilly]

why the hell did you go see it? And why do you seem so surprised the movie was agendized if you believe all his books are of the same nature?

Legitimate question. I saw it in the spirit of doing my homework, keeping up with industry trends, etc. HOWEVER, since I got pretty much what I expected, perhaps I shouldn't complain. I'll withhold future bitching on dogs that I walked into with my Eyes Wide Shut.

Secondly, not all of Le Carre's books are explicitly agendized. They definitely have a political and global setting because they're spy novels, but the social message of The Constant Garderner is a bit of an anomaly in his cannon. So honestly, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

I didn't read the book, so I must admit to ignorance there. The movie sure rubbed me the wrong way, though.

[whitenavel]

Smartest film of the year so far. Amazing job by Mereilles.
Fiennes is one of my favorite actors. If you haven't seen Sunshine (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0145503/), you've missed his best work.

[AaronB]

Did you notice that the film does several things that we newbie screenwriters are routinely told not to do?

For example, the flick regularly comes unstuck in time, with liberal use of flashbacks. It shows montages of Quayle's memories. It contains a great deal of frankly on-the-nose dialogue, in which people talk about their motivations and what they'll do next. It preaches.

Nonetheless (and despite the preaching) I found it an engrossing film. Is someone selling us a bill of goods, or do I just have taste for sh!t?

[wolfy262]

Write great drama and the screenwriting "do's and don'ts" will take care of themselves.

[AaronB]

Write great drama and the screenwriting "do's and don'ts" will take care of themselves.

Yes...that's another thing we're constantly told.

[Jake Schuster]

The "agenda" is vital to the story, since Rachel Weisz's character is driven by her anger at big pharma. Without that she has no mission.

[AaronB]

The "agenda" is vital to the story, since Rachel Weisz's character is driven by her anger at big pharma. Without that she has no mission.

Yes...but someone chose that story to tell, out of many possibilities.

[Jake Schuster]

With the subject matter there's really no other point of view than to tell it from Big Pharma's side; which would be a dry study of people toting up profits. I mean, this isn't really news. It's pretty common knowledge that Big Pharma's making a bundle on drugs that are either poorly-tested or tested in huge numbers on poor Third-world country populations.

Ask any senior citizen in this country who's been using a certain well-known painkiller.

[AaronB]

See? Like I said...you agree with the premise.

There are a million stories to tell about Africa, I promise you. This was only one of them. And I really did enjoy the film. That doesn't make it an objective film.

[WriteNow]

Finally saw this today. Overall I liked it, but there were two incidents that completely pulled me out of the story. Both times, a character comments on how it is "too hot to stand around here" or words to that effect and there are people in long sleeves, sweaters and jackets (!) all around them. Did anybody else notice this?

[wcmartell]

Films are not objective.

I thought the film was pretty good. Ralph's most human performance (he's downright wacky at times). Some great misunderstood dialogue ("A marriage of convenience that only produced dead children") - very clever stuff.

I read an interview with the director where he said he had enough footage to make 3 different films: A romance, a political thriller, or a film about politics in the third world. He decided to tone down the politics and cut out the car chase and all of the suspense & action scenes and focus on the romance. I thought there must have been a mistake made early on, just to have enough footage for 3 different films. I wonder what a version of the film that was *designed* as a political thriller would have been like? Would it have moved faster in those slow spots? Or as a romance, would the scenes where Ralph seems to be a cuckold had more impact?

As it was, it was a bit long. But some great travelogue stuff, and an interesting story. The grainy hand held artificial gritty style still bugs me.

And the film needed more gardening.

- Bill

[cluckyburger]

one of the better films of the past few years. i don't really know what anyone's talking about with regard to preaching. the film has an agenda. big f-ing deal. the cinematography was topnotch, music, casting etc. great work

[Padget]

Re: the film not being objective.

Human beings have agendas, political points of view and subjective experiences. Denying or avoiding this would make for very dull, unrealistic drama.

[captain bligh]

films aren't supposed to be objective and none is. that wasn't among my complaints about the movie -- but i did have several. it was just a solid movie, but so far as i could tell, nothing special, and with more than a few flaws.

i just don't get the big deal with the "best movie in several years" praise.

[cluckyburger]

i just don't get the big deal with the "best movie in several years" praise.

for me it's the sheer command of f. mereiles. some aspects of plot skew to the stock and you can clearly see what a hack would have done w/ it. the movie to me was a perfect synthesis of love story and political thriller w/ a-one shooting, cutting, acting etc. [of course i loathe anything large, corporate and international so they had me from frame one.]

[iembalm]

In one of the docs on the DVD, Le Carre explained that when writing the novel he was looking to tell the story of "a diplomat who marries his conscience," and that his first inclination was to have it all center around Big Oil, but decided that had been done. The conflict comes from within the man. Some of the voiceover that is laid over scenes of third-world plight was quite overt and on the nose, but I thought the film overall well done and compelling. Fiennes is always good. The "politicalization" in how the story is presented came from Meirelles and not so much Le Carre.

[randesq]

Great.

I thought the structure worked perfectly, much like the Hours. A smart movie that had little watered down. I'd be happy if there were more films like this.

[TwoBitHack]

This drug seemed even more dangerous than Provasic.

[English Dave]

And the film needed more gardening.

- Bill

I felt the same about 'Trainspotting'

One train in the whole movie!!!! WTF? ;)

[Hairy Lime]

Dave. I'd recommend Closely Watched Trains. You won't be disappointed.

[English Dave]

Dave. I'd recommend Closely Watched Trains. You won't be disappointed.

Lots of trains, now naive in execution but at the time a brave allegory of Soviet domination versus Nazi domination.

But I digress. ;) The Constant Gardener' is an important film IMO. Released in the year of Live 8 but obviously having been in conception for several years previously, it was ahead of the zeitgeist.

Important filmaking.

[CoalBunson]

I don't mind a deliberate movie as long as it's long in character or story. I came away twice enriched. The transitions were tremendous and Fiennes can play a reactive protagonist better than most.

[sasqits]

An excellent film.

It was a film about characters that had an agenda - like any other movie characters - more than it was a film with an agenda.

Best of the year? I haven't seen all the contenders yet.

[Architeuthis Dux]

Saw this tonight and liked it. I thought all the actors did a top-notch job, and the direction and most of the cinematography was top notch.

But about this "agenda" thing. I thought the pharmaceutical backstory was lame and implausible and I just didn't buy it -- enough so that it weakened the impact of the film for me.


SPOILERS --




It isn't that I don't believe that pharmaceutical companies would cover up deaths in third-world countries while conducting poorly-supervised human trials. I just don't believe that a drug company would go ahead with a drug with so many lethal side effects and sell it on the global market in the face of a rampaging TB epidemic. Sooner or later, someone would catch wise, and then your company would be history, fined and sued out of existence.

A bit more attention to making the plot plausible would have improved this movie a great deal in my view.

I hope "Syriana" is more plausible than this. Is it?

[Authorized]

Rachel Weisz will win the BSA Oscar for her role in this movie...(she already won the GG and the SAG for Best Supporting Actress).

[georgelondon]

I agree with Jilly. I love politics. I love thrillers. I think it was intelligent, which was a blessed relief BUT there was no gray. It was like being hit over the head with a political manifesto for a couple of hours ie this group of people are all good this group of people are all bad... where's the conflict in that? The City of God felt like it showed what was really going on, where the people made choices good and bad that had consiquences and it made for a much more complex, engrossing film.

G

[sasqits]

It isn't that I don't believe that pharmaceutical companies would cover up deaths in third-world countries while conducting poorly-supervised human trials. I just don't believe that a drug company would go ahead with a drug with so many lethal side effects and sell it on the global market in the face of a rampaging TB epidemic. Sooner or later, someone would catch wise, and then your company would be history, fined and sued out of existence.


Do some research on pharmaceuticals and you'll be surprised.

[Architeuthis Dux]

Do some research on pharmaceuticals and you'll be surprised.

I just did a two-second Google search and found out that the Pfizer corporation was fined $430,000,000 for making false claims about a drug approved for another use.

I also found out that the FDA yanked Fen-Phen, the obesity drug, off the market after 34 reports of irregular echocardiograms with no other symptoms.
Subsequent research showed that about 100 people, out of I don't know how many who took the drug (probably lots and lots), developed heart valve disease.

In the movie, 62 people were killed by the fictional TB drug just in the trials. There's no way something that lethal would ever be released -- although it might be repackaged for the veterinary market in hopes it would recoup some of its cost (as happened with PCP). Big corporations might be greedy, but they don't stay in business by being stupid.

In sum, I didn't find it credible that a pharmaceutical company would plan on making money by killing people. Unlike, say, a tobacco company.

[English Dave]

In the movie, 62 people were killed by the fictional TB drug just in the trials. There's no way something that lethal would ever be released -- although it might be repackaged for the veterinary market in hopes it would recoup some of its cost (as happened with PCP). Big corporations might be greedy, but they don't stay in business by being stupid.



Last year Eli Lilly was fined $25,000 in the United States after it was charged with covering up deaths and illnesses caused by its anti-arthritic drug, benoxaprofen. The drug was withdrawn from sale in 1982 after it was found to be associated with 61 deaths in Britain and unknown numbers elsewhere. In 1984, Smith Kline was fined $100,000 on charges of covering up adverse reactions to their product Selacryn, which was associated with 36 deaths in the US. Similar allegations of covering up adverse reactions are being made against A. H. Robins in the litigation over the Dalkon Shield intrauterine device. A former company lawyer has testified that he was ordered by his superiors to shred sensitive evidence.


No? Then again as I believe they are still in business I guess it's us that's stupid.

[Kwvillen]

ED: Last year Eli Lilly was fined $25,000 in the United States after it was charged with covering up deaths and illnesses caused by its anti-arthritic drug, benoxaprofen. The drug was withdrawn from sale in 1982 after it was found to be associated with 61 deaths in Britain and unknown numbers elsewhere. In 1984, Smith Kline was fined $100,000 on charges of covering up adverse reactions to their product Selacryn, which was associated with 36 deaths in the US. Similar allegations of covering up adverse reactions are being made against A. H. Robins in the litigation over the Dalkon Shield intrauterine device. A former company lawyer has testified that he was ordered by his superiors to shred sensitive evidence.


That makes me sick. :mad:

KWV

[pooks]

A bit more attention to making the plot plausible would have improved this movie a great deal in my view.



The execs at the top get their money and run, and let the rest of the company and employees go to hell.

Check out ENRON: SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM.

[Architeuthis Dux]

I still don't think a pharmaceutical company would act like that in today's legal climate.

I did another quick Google search and found that a woman whose husband, a Wal Mart employee, died after taking Vioxx, was awarded $253,400,000.00 by a jury in Texas.

You want a believable plot about an evil pharmaceutical company?

Here's one for free.

A woman whose husband died after taking the latest anti-arthritis drug sues the pharmaceutical company for 253 million dollars. They offer a settlement that is a tiny fraction of that. She turns it down. After talking things over with the company accountants, the CEO decides to hire a hit squad.

[Hairy Lime]

Subsaharan Africa isn't as litigious as the US - that's why drug companies conduct studies there ... nobody cares if Africans die. I completely bought the movie as plausible in the world created.

[English Dave]

I still don't think a pharmaceutical company would act like that in today's legal climate.

.
Well.... that might be because you've proven yourself as a d1ckhead.

No offence - I tested that response on thousands of desperate people.

[vig]

i didn't see one white pine, rose, not even one flower. who makes a motion picture about a gardener and there's no planting soil?

i mean come on. gets some lume and some seeds and be realistic. be true to the genre.

vig