Constant Gardener (DVD)

For what it's worth, "The Constant Gardener" was my favorite film of the year. Not so much for its convoluted espionage plot, which, like me, Justin also found tiresome and clich??d, but for its unusual romance. The movie is as much a slow uncovering of the main character's deep love for his wife after she had gone than for anything he uncovers about illicit drug cartels. To me it was a touching and revealing story of a person's discovering what he had all along and only appreciated when it was gone.

Unlike that picture about the big ape looking into the sunset, this film actually moved me.

John

I second the observation about not appreciating something until it is gone; that was one of the major points of the film. Justin was so wrapped up in his garden that he missed the world around him. To me, the relationship felt as <i>real</i> as anything I've seen committed to screen. That includes the sinking feeling when Justin intercepts an email, the quarrel about naming the baby, and even the way they met.

Though I'm not sure I'll ever watch it again, I did enjoy seeing it.

I just watched the film and I'm a little ... uncertain what I think. I liked the film, i'm just not sure how much I liked it.

I've read the novel and wish I hadn't - I'd prefer to see a film without preconceptions. Still, I suspect having read the novel doesn't affect the viewing all that much. The visual style, however, does.

While I had no problem in the second half of the film, once it had decided to settle on Ralph Fiennes' character, in the first half I found the documentary style (for lack of a better word) simply compounded what was already a confusing exposition.

So I'm not so sure I give this a big stylistic thumbs up. I think it might have played better with a more conventional style. I think in the first half there is simply too much information to convey for this kind of approach. I think the style, as a style, is fine but requires a more simple story to work effectively.

As you've mentioned, both in the movie and the book, the relationship is easily the most compelling element of the story. The drug company thing ... well, that's the usual movie stuff. But the relationship - now that was compelling.

I don't disagree with your 7 ... but I might have dropped it down to a 6. But I'll have to watch it again before I decide.

goatboy,

I'm in the same boat as you; I liked the film, but am still not sure why. You do make a good observation about Finnes' character - They spend the first half of the movie exploring the deceased Weisz character, really leaving him hanging.

I erred on the side of a higher rating because I really respected the film's visual style.

I respect to the style too. I quite like it, I'm just not sure it works in this case for the first half. It may be, though, the problem isn't the style but one of script structure.

I kept think of the Matt Damon "Bourne" movies as I watched it. In those, the story is focused from beginning to end on Damon so the hand held work, cutting etc. give you a sense of chaos, pace and "reality" without completely disorienting you.

But as I said, I need to watch this again. I'm just not certain what I think is "not quite right" about it. But I liked it!

The scenes showing Rachel Weisz naked and very much pregnant looked very real. Was that filmed when she was really pregnant? Or is that just a suit?

she wasn't actually pregnant during shooting. she's pregnant now in real life, though.