The Constant Gardener

constant gardener

Was classy, slick and well executed. Intriguing [sometimes confusing] at the start, it goes on to become a fantastic message movie, something that one wouldn’t expect from the Fernando Meirelles, the director of City of God[COG].

If this were to be a blurb on a poster, it would read, John le Carré‘s Tour-de-force. A perfect thriller told as docu-drama that unfolds completely only as you move to the second half of the movie. Just like City of God, it has super slick editing, great camerawork and interesting screenplay.

With those blue eyes and a verisimilitude visage, Ralph Fiennes cakewalks through the movie. The mummy girl, Rachel actually won an Oscarfor the best supporting actress despite her so-so performance.

Will be a very surprising movie if you haven’t been seen the director’s previous flick, COG. With the COG baggage, this movie stands good but certainly not as good as COG.

10 thoughts on “The Constant Gardener

  1. Nicely said, COG was excellent, TCG told the truth. Both ways, COG is about reality that’s happening everywhere, and TCG is about something that can blow out anytime anywhere in the world, but since its africa and no one bloody cares, they just do it there first.

  2. Lazy, the movie is so-so. But I watched it open-mouthed only for Ralph Fiennes. I am of the opinion that he is not suitable for these melo roles. Playing a menacing villain is his forte.

  3. Guru, I too thought The Constant Gardener was very well made movie on an interesting subject. It had a lot of wonderful images and typically edited in the style of COG.

    Ralph was actually subtle and very good in this movie and Rachel Weizz was very natural in her precise character.

    I would definitely add it with English Patient, Nowhere in Africa as some of the beautiful motion pictures made in Africa on a variety of subjects.

  4. Hotel Rwanda depicted Africa’s plight and the rest-of-the-world’s apathy. HR’s central character played by Don Cheedle was more believable and less complex character. Constant gardener’s Rachel weizz and Ralph fienne’s characters have their own personal issues and passionate beliefs hidden from one another. This weakened CG’s plot because these guys didn’t look as vulnerable as HR’s hero. This could have been a great movie.

  5. SPOILER ALERT

    A so-so performance by Rachel Weisz? Did you even see the film? This was the only Oscar nom that was truly deserved. It was a difficult role. The character does not elicit any sympathy at first, in fact there is even a suggestion that she may’ve had an extra-marital affair, and she’s a nosy do-gooder to boot.
    By the time the film ends, you are almost in love with her. You, in the audience, and her husband, in the film, get to truly KNOW her, what made her tick, how passionate and ALIVE she was. It is only after her death, (where the film itself begins) that her husband’s character, played by Fiennes, realises what he has lost.
    It was a sensational performance…
    I urge you to see the film again.

  6. //The character does not elicit any sympathy at first, in fact there is even a suggestion that she may’ve had an extra-marital affair, and she’s a nosy do-gooder to boot. //

    Film fan, you said that right. It was the character and not Rachel. I think it is a very mediocre perfomance and it was just because of the amazing clarity her character gets at the end of the movie, some mis-identified that her performance was classy.

    This has happened many times in the past. one sample is vijay’s character in Poove Unakaaga. It was his characterisation that should have be applauded and not him.

  7. Don’t think you really understood the point I was trying to make. I understand the difference b/w the ‘character’ and the ‘actor’.

    It is up to the actor to bring out the nuances of a character effectively for us to be rewarded with a good performance.

    It may be a very well written character, but without somebody breathing life into it in front of the camera (and thereby on screen), it’ll merely be so much ink on paper.

    When I wrote about the character not eliciting sympathy etc, I was referring to Weisz’s potrayal of that character, obviously, didn’t think that would need to be spelt out.

    Where we just have to agree to disagree, I suspect, is I feel Weisz HAS done this ‘character’ complete justice…and you don’t.

  8. Hi, great site http://cellringtones.host.sk/free mobile ringtone/ free mobile ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/50 cent ringtone/ 50 cent ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/real music ringtone/ real music ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/mobile phone ringtone/ mobile phone ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/hip hop ringtone/ hip hop ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/phone ringtone/ phone ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/lg ringtone/ lg ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/cheap ringtone/ cheap ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/free cricket ringtone/ free cricket ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/yahoo ringtone/ yahoo ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/ringtone converter/ ringtone converter
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/christian ringtone/ christian ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/ringtone juke box/ ringtone juke box
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/cellular one ringtone/ cellular one ringtone
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/ringtone software/ ringtone software
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/motorola ringtones free/ motorola ringtones free
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/free mp3 ringtones/ free mp3 ringtones
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/free mobile ringtones/ free mobile ringtones
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/free cingular ringtones/ free cingular ringtones
    http://cellringtones.host.sk/free real ringtones/ free real ringtones

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: