What I Watched This Week (Vol. 1)

In Bruges, You've Never Been Closer to Hell

By THE 901 BLOGGER

Have you ever laughed at a midget before? Probably, but if you’re like me you refuse to admit it. I know it doesn’t do oneself good to ruminate on past mistakes, but let your tiny-person-humor moral faux pas sink in for a second. Feeling guilty? You’re never going to be so close-minded again, are you? Well I would wait until In Bruges finishes before making such a resolution, as you’ll probably eat those words. If you feel afterwards that your indiscretions have placed you right next to gay marriage on the Sin-O-Meter*, don’t worry about it, it was well worth it.

Now, that lengthy preamble isn’t to say that In Bruges is a movie solely about midgets or damnation, and it’s completely my fault if you got that impression. There is a prominent midget presence in In Bruges and much discussion concerning their kind – apparently they would rather be called dwarves – as well as damnation, but there are also fat jokes and discourses on a war between whites and blacks, and to say that the movie is about either of those would also be sadly untrue.

So you may be asking, what is In Bruges about and is it worth going to hell over?

On the surface it is a movie about the relationship between two hitmen: the young, hotheaded Ray (Colin Farrell) and his wiser partner Ken (Brendan Gleeson). The two are currently tucked away in the Belgian city of Bruges, awaiting orders from their boss Harry (Ralph Fiennes). While they wait there is much sightseeing, cursing, and drinking to be had, as well as a colorful supporting cast of midg— excuse me, dwarves – drug dealers and prostitutes to be met. More about the duo’s backstory is revealed as time goes on, and when instructions are finally received the movie lifts off and soars to its glorious, bloody climax.

There is much darker subject matter to be found here than the sad state of people-dwarf relations – I shan’t reveal it here – but it must be said that In Bruges and its actors pull off the performance with exceptional verve, preventing the viewer from ever being too offended or taking the movie too seriously or too lightly.

This can be credited substantially to the characters and the performers behind them. The movie’s lone dwarf Jimmy (Jordan Prentice) may spout his share of hilarious lines and serve as the butt of numerous sight gags, but he proves by the end that he serves a purpose beyond puerile comic relief. Ray is often a foul-mouthed prick and played by anyone else could be utterly detestable; with Mr. Farrell’s natural touch of charm though he is never anything but exceedingly endearing. Though he pulls off the comedic parts dandily with a combination of perfect timing and demonstrative eyebrows, he also manages to convey the darker sides of Ray’s psyche and troubled past quite effectively. Mr. Gleeson’s Ken is the perfect counterbalance to Ray, and the actor’s low-key, fatherly performance makes him as undeniably likable as Mr. Farrell. Though Mr. Farrell won the Best Actor Golden Globe for his role, Mr. Gleeson’s respective nomination was no less deserved. And when the ever-reliable Mr. Fiennes ultimately appears on screen he far and away steals what’s left of the movie, which is as furiously tragic and mind-blowing in its final act as it is offensively hilarious in the first.

But all this praise is by no means to say that the movie is perfect. Its faults are few, but its most egregious is a sub-par, quite unnecessary romance plot between Ray and an undistressed (tressed?) damsel named Chloe (Clemence Poesy). While the dwarf at least has a purpose in the movie, the same cannot be said about Chloe’s two-dimensional character. Blame probably lies less in the performance of Ms. Poesy, though, than it does on natural bias. The only relationship that we care about here is between Ray and Ken, a point emphasized by the undeniable chemistry between Mr. Gleeson and Mr. Farrell and the deniable chemistry between Mr. Farrell and Ms. Poesy. Everyone knows that in Pulp Fiction all that Samuel Jackson and John Travolta ever needed was each other, and the same rule applies here. This is the relationship that matters and no other.

So what type of movie is In Bruges? It’s quite hilarious and has its fair share of shoot-em-up sequences, but is also exceedingly grim from start to finish. There is dark matter here worth thinking about and a lot of it. Dark comedy thus seems the most fitting genre, but that category doesn’t exactly convey the strange equilibrium that In Bruges manages to achieve. You may feel guilty after watching it and be doomed to damnation, but eternal suffering was never so worth it.

In Bruges is rated R (if not 17, sneak in or bring your parents) for 1.18 f-words per minute – courtesy of IMDB.com – and no lack of gory demises.

* I support gay marriage