
Worse still is that Von Ancken explains more and more of his film as it goes along. As a survivalist film, with Gideon (Pierce Brosnan) narrowly escaping an ambush by Carver (Liam Neeson), Seraphim Falls is gripping. Brosnan wins us over with his fiery determination to escape, and he gains our sympathy when he first digs a bullet out of his shoulder and then cauterizes the wound with a burning knife. From there, he pulls a lethal MacGyver, improvising traps to whittle down Carver's numbers, all the while staggering through oppressively thick blankets of snow. But after this, the film starts throwing in anecdotal scenes stolen from other Westerns, such as an incident with some missionaries and a slave-gang railroad encampment, and it's not clear if Von Ancken's wants to give a general history of post-Civil War America or if he wants to go with the morals of atonement and revenge he started with.
In the middle of the inevitable showdown, Von Ancken is suddenly overwhelmed with a desire to explain the backstory; what he conjures up is nowhere near as powerful as the audience already believes has transpired between these two opposing soldiers. All this exposition also interrupts the climax, and by the time the action picks up again, the film is riddled with overbearing orchestration, foreshadowing omens, and endless repetition.
Seraphim Falls owes what little success it has to the star talent of Brosnan (his co-star is too busy trying to be an emotionless savage). When the film focuses on his escape and personal atonement for an unknown crime, it shines; every time it dips into the traditional vigilante double-crosses, it goes cold. The ending is both contrived and a departure from the mysterious realism that made it so exciting to begin with; the final product is a joke of a Western, like the movie that Sam Shepard's seminal brothers wind up writing in True West. And really, unless it's Blazing Saddles, who goes to see a Western for laughs?
[First posted to Gather, on 1/31]
No comments:
Post a Comment