Derek McLean
Mrs. Lodge
APLAC
12 February 2012
There Be Dragons Review
Upon release, movies are often sorted into groups of either “good” or “bad” by critics. Films with realistic scenes, interesting and relatable characters, and thought-provoking story lines are considered good, while those that lack these qualities are considered bad. The film, There Be Dragons, directed by Roland Joffé, is not only considered bad, but one of the worst, scoring as low as four out of ten (rottentomatoes.com). This score, however, is not a good representation of this movie, which, while not amazing, is deserving of being called good. The film has thought-provoking storyline, realistic scenes, and relatable characters, and while it is not outstanding in any of these categories, it definitely meets the criteria for a good movie.
There Be Dragons starts the story from the viewpoint of a journalist, Robert Torres (Dougray Scott) who is writing a book about the saint, Josemaría Escrivá (Charlie Cox). Understanding that his father grew up with and personally knew this saint, Torres chooses to visit his father, Manolo (Wes Bentley) despite their frosty relationship. At this point, Torres’ father begins a long flashback, giving the story of both him and Escrivá. In doing so the Torres learns more about his father and his role as a spy in the Spanish Civil War, as well as Escrivá and his life as a catholic priest during a time when such people were seen as fascists. This story, based on true events, gives insight into life during the Spanish Civil War and forces the audience to look at their own lives and how they live them. Even the most negative critics say that the movie has “grandeur and richly nuanced storytelling” (washingtonpost.com). Very few can deny that this film has a thought-provoking and grand storyline and so, on this point at least, There Be Dragons is very strong.
To support the strong storylines, There Be Dragons uses very realistic scenes and settings. The towns have a distinct Spanish feel, clothing and technology fits the time period, and the entire move feels very well polished in this regard. Rarely if ever is the audience left confused with the scene. Even in the case of the more fantastical scenes, such as in the case of a vision Escrivá saw as a young man, the film handles everything very well. Minor touches make the scene come alive; in one case a tint of yellow to an entire scene gave the feeling of a hot sun, dusty air, and an impression of summer. Small touches like these gave the scenes a lot more power and realism.
The film did not skimp when it came to realism. Each character was relatable and interesting. None fall too easily under the banner of “good” or “evil” and their motivations and beliefs are made clear to the audience. This can be easily seen with Torres’ father, a man born of wealth who became a fascist spy. He is not really a fascist, however, he works for them, first as vengeance against the communists he believe killed his father, and later out of a wish to belong. He has obvious qualms about this though, as anyone would, and the audience can relate to his situation to an extent, despite never having been in such a place themselves. Characters like this drive There Be Dragons into the status of a good movie.
Admittedly, this movie is not one that will go down in history as amazing. The acting was often sub-par and subtracted the Spanish setting and the characters themselves, and many say that the story was too grand and that too much was crammed into it. However, these are not reasons for There Be Dragons to be branded as “bad” for the rest of eternity. This film crafted a beautiful story, created realistic scenes, and presented great characters to the audience, and should be commended for such feats.
Sources:
O’Sullivan, Michael. “There Be Dragons.” The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 6 May 2011. Web. 12 February 2012. http://www.washingtonpost.com/gog/movies/there-be-dragons,1180514/critic-review.html
“There Be Dragons.” Rotten Tomatoes. Rotten Tomatoes, 6 May 2011. Web. 12 February 2012. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/there_be_dragons/
I think that this rebuttal was very good. As a whole, you made the article flow in a method that was easy to follow.Subsequently, the points you made seem logical, and do have the backing of your definition of a good movie. It was interesting that you formed your essay to show that though this movie isn't great, it isn't bad either. You also created a very good "movie review" aura. For example, you never say you in the review, but its easy readability makes it possible to quickly see your side. Personally, I have not seen this movie, and from what you provided the reader, you chose a really hard point to defend. I commend you for your efforts as you made a controversial claim, and provided reasons to defend it.
ReplyDeleteI liked the honest tone of your review. I thought it was very fitting for a blog/movie review and helped you gain credibility (ethos) by showing that you considered alternative viewpoints. I also think you did a very good job explaining and transitioning between the different pieces of your argument using evidence from the movie. The only suggestion I have is to adjust the introduction. Stating that the movie is "not only considered bad, but one of the worst, scoring as low as four out of ten," and then saying that it's "deserving of being called good" doesn't set up an initially strong argument. I would suggest removing or shortening the counterargument in the intro so that the audience doesn't begin reading with the expectation that it's a mediocre film.
ReplyDelete