Felicia, mein Engel

Angel-faced Elaine Cassidy is suitably innocent as an unwed Irish teen naively searching England for the boyfriend who deserts her, and Bob Hoskins is effectively controlled and creepy as the serial-killing caterer who comes to her "assistance"; but this is a mostly uncomfortable smashing together of coming-of-age drama and "Silence of the Lambs". At times the film has a mesmerizing pull, but director Egoyan too often stalls things with needless flashbacks that provide information the audience has already come to understand, or tries to invest trite scenes with a revelatory significance that just isn't there. It climaxes awkwardly and absurdly with a delirious depiction of two religious crusaders being more monstrous than Hoskins' character himself.

Egoyan labors to establish some pre-conscious link between the girl and the killer, contrasting Hilditch's (Hoskins) warped, twisted innocence with Felicia's pure, unspoiled variety. He just can't quite pull it off though, as there is no escaping the conviction that what Hilditch has been doing (luring unhappy girls into his car, befriending them on videotape, then killing them) is repugnant beyond comprehension. In fact, that is probably the most tired, hoary theme in movies today: that the seemingly cold-blooded killer or assassin or whatever is "just doing his job" or is "really no different than you or me". Oh really? How fascinating.

Despite Egoyan's sumptuous visuals, I found myself focusing on the many plot holes due to his studied (some have found it hypnotic) pacing. How in the world did Hilditch attach a name to a face when it comes to tracking down Felicia's boyfriend? Why doesn't the boyfriend recognize Felicia at the pub? How can Hilditch be sure that Felicia wouldn't suspect him as the person who stole her money? True, she's gullible and trusting but he WAS alone with her bag in the car. There's no way he could've known she'd leave her bag out of sight anywhere else; in fact it's highly unlikely that she would. And why in the world don't the abducted girls he's giving rides to just escape by jumping out of his car? You can clearly see on the videotapes that he's driving slowly in populated areas, and you never see him using a gun. These are the sorts of things that really stand out when the central story isn't quite working.

"Felicia's Journey" certainly isn't a total failure and I admire some of the chances it takes, but ultimately it fails to work because the two approaches are at odds with each other. That is, the microscopically observed psychological "stuff" dehydrates the thriller elements (and at times, the movie is clearly trying to pump up the suspense and WANTS to be a nail-biter) and the thriller elements trivialize the dramatic breakthroughs.

Egoyan has disappointed me many previous times, although his "Next of Kin" remains one of my all-time favorite films. Not in a thousand years would I have expected a film like this from Egoyan. We've left Canada, for god's sake; a lovely country, some very talented and multi-talented people there, especially most -- it often seems to me -- of Hollywood's greatest actors and actresses. But to travel across the Atlantic -- Egoyan hasn't done that before. And this plot is character-driven (like "Next of Kin") -- and not always shouting at you "Hey, I'm a strange and brilliant director presenting all this odd stuff for you." Egoyan's penchant for films within films and pictures within pictures and other eccentricities don't distract,this time -- they remain, but much diminished, muted. And it works. Tremendously well, in fact. Families -- that's what Egoyan does best, what he knows most deeply -- how wonderful it is when they work, how deeply we need their sustenance. But how terrible, cruel, sometimes funny, but more often monstrous the effects parents have on their children in so many cases. Hoskins has been so great, so often before, can it really be surprising he's especially excellent here? A fine film; the old Peter Lorre film "M" comes to mind, his role somewhat comparable to Hoskins' here -- but many differences exist between these works. "Felicia's Journey" is amazingly beautiful to watch, idyllic at times; we see Felicia's inner and outer beauty first through our own eyes, then increasingly through Hoskins' character's odd lens. There's beautiful countryside to view. We have both hope and menace -- something slightly askew -- a spicy mix. The mundane, the commonplace are pleasantly present, but murder and madness hover very near. Entirely, hypnotically compelling; that's the best summation. And wonderful.

Egoyan's presentation really sets the mood for the film. The music is particularly effective, and the look has a certain ominous feel even in the scenes where characters would normally be at peace with nature.

This movie was so riveting and engrossing because it kept building up by revealing more about the mysterious main characters. It goes about doing this in a manner that makes the film more interesting by opening up possibilities instead of closing them. As we get more of an idea of who these people are, the tension mounts because we can see the movie is leading to a major disaster, but we aren't sure what and when.

The flashbacks and transitions between the two main characters are so effective. The flashbacks slowly reveal what caused the characters current traumatized state (their main similarity is it's one parent, but they don't know of this similarity), while the transitions emphasize comparisons between the two.

Hoskins performance is really the key because he has most of the lines. He does an exceptional job, changing a little bit with each revelation about his character. By the end of the story, he's nothing like the guy that you thought he was at the very beginning, but the changes are totally credible. Although I mentioned he has most of the lines, the most impressive thing about his performance is the believability of the emotions he's portraying throughout this dialogue because his character is one that generally doesn't say what he's really thinking and feeling. On some occasions, his intense feeling is really obvious. In a lot of others though, it's buried beneath the skin as the point is the topic of conversation or the other persons actions have caused something to stew inside of him but his character is trying his best not to boil over.

Cassidy is highly impressive because she's able to convey the all the emotions without many lines, especially since all her lines are purposely delivered with the same unassuming nature and low key tone. As is one of the trademarks of characters in Egoyan's movies, she also has a dualism in her actions and words where we kind of believe more toward the opposite is actually true. We aren't really sure, but we can see that something is beneath the surface. It's hidden just enough so that the person she's with doesn't see it. Depth, subtlety, and what lies beneath are definitely the strengths of this movie and Egoyan's cinema in general.

The movie really stands out because you could see how easily it would have been another boring and predictable thriller had it been made in Hollywood. Hoskins would have been much more narrowly defined so he could be a clear-cut villain. The narrative would have been dumbed down and told in a more conventional style. The director would feel he had to insert some happy or comical moments that would only water down the intensity and weaken the portrayals of these characters. The temptation to totally leave the psychological level and have Hoskins chase Cassidy around his house with a sharp object at the end would have been too great. Luckily, it wasn't made in the land of the rehash, so it was a somewhat challenging movie that stayed true to its roots from start to finish.

Aside from leaving Canada, I don't see why people think this is so different from Egoyan's other famous films, Exotica & The Sweet Hereafter. The core ideas, style, and presentation are all here. Like those other two, this is an excellent film that's one of the years 10 best. 9/10

Felicia's Journey was one of those films that I loved, then hated, then liked, then thought was decent. It was a difficult film to watch because the pacing that Egoyan has implemented is unlike any other film that I have seen. His use of the camera to create that uneasy sensation on screen and while watching the film was very impressive. Hoskins gives the performance of his career as this very controlled man with a very dark secret while Elaine Cassidy impressed me with her simplistic portrayal of Felicia. This was a brilliant film, but there were just some scenes and elements that didn't seem to match the rest of the film. The ending in particular was a bit misleading and at times rushed, but everything building up to that point really hit a strong nerve. If you were to define the word "thriller", I don't think that you could do it without mentioning this film. Brilliant acting, an interesting use of direction (which worked very well), and a story that allowed itself to be build upon during each scene are just a few of the great moments (that overshadow the poor) in this movie.

Felicia's Journey would not have been the powerhouse that it was if it was not for the powerful acting by Bob Hoskins who completely engulfed this character and showed us this rare glimpse of evil humanity. While I am sure that some of it is due in part by Egoyan's direction, but you cannot keep your eyes off Hoskins whenever he is on the screen. He builds his character so well, and bit by bit, that you never can anticipate what will he will say or do next. That is what is brilliant about Hoskins. Normally, when you have a troubled soul like Hilditch you can sometimes guess what he is going to do next. Actors sometimes fall into a pattern of repetition, but with Hoskins it was as if we were watching the final chapter and there were bigger events taking place. He also worked so well with Cassidy that at times I had forgotten that I was watching a film. His ability to be this sinister father figure to this girl was impressive. Hoskins really built this beautiful family dynamic to the film that I never saw coming. Outstanding performances by both that any film connoisseurs should not miss.

Taped onto the vintage acting is this deeply engrossing story that pours from the bottle like some freshly corked wine. The simplicity of the story allows the complexity of the characters emerge and be triumphant. The story gives our characters layers upon which we gradually peel away. Hoskins character especially. From the opening scene until the final, I felt as if I was given the whole course, and not just bits and pieces. While Felicia's name does take the title of this film, it is Hoskins whom this story is really about. We learn more about his life, and his struggles than we do with Felicia. Yet, the story does not stop there. I found it quite interesting that Felicia father caused her conflict, while a matriarchal figure challenged Hilditch's perception. I thought that Egoyan was really trying to do more than tell a serial killer story (as the box may reveal) by giving us these strange and strangled family moments. I felt as if this was more a story about family, then it was about the horrors of humanity … or perhaps it was a slice of both. Either way, the story is the foundation to this picture, and for the first time it really worked. So many times we go to the theater expecting to be blown away by a creative and empowering story, but this time it was a polar opposite. The acting is what kept this film high above water, while the story (as simple as it was) only helped build Hoskins and Cassidy further into the world of impressiveness.

Finally, there was Egoyan behind the camera doing what he does best. I have seen only one of his other films, Exotica, and he is notorious for building the suspense from behind the camera as well as in front. His choice of panning in the wrong direction, the colors surrounding our characters and the sound of the film hit our nerves before any actors even walk into the picture. This is all coming from Egoyan's mind, which continues to impress me with each film that I view. I cannot wait to see more of his work and to see how well he has developed with each project. You can definitely see the Hitchcock influence that has been imprinted with Egoyan. I finished watching Frenzy (by Hitchcock) right after this film and the similarities were uncanny. Egoyan reminds me of a cross between Hitchcock and von Trier. His bold style makes each film his own, yet he is not afraid to be brutally honest and attributive to the cultural setting. He is a true filmmaker that needs to continue to prove that you don't need millions to create a masterpiece.

While I have given credit to everyone, and thing, that deserves it in this film, I must finish this review by saying that this film was not perfection on a stick, but very close. There were some unfinished ends that could have been tied better, and the ending just felt as if there was this outside influence at work that Egoyan was battling. Up until the final twenty minutes of this film, I was thoroughly enjoying what I was seeing, but when the idea of religion was brought in from left field, I felt the final moments were rushed and forced. I needed something just as dramatic, just not so random. Also, I needed some form of conclusion to Felicia's actual "journey". Did she find what she was looking for? Overall, I was very impressed with this film.

Grade: **** out of *****

In an interview he did with Maclean's last year(the Sept. 12 issue, I think, though I'm not exactly sure), writer-director Atom Egoyan talked about an incident in his life which partly explains why his last three films - EXOTICA, THE SWEET HEREAFTER, and now FELICIA'S JOURNEY - have been about very twisted, almost predatory, relationships. It seems when he was a teen, he fell in love with a girl who, as it turns out, was being molested by her father, and naturally, that caused all sorts of difficulties. Unconsciously maybe, in order to understand how anybody could do such a thing, maybe Egoyan has tried since to use film to do that(although I won't state that as a fact; I'm no psychologist).

What is clear in FELICIA'S JOURNEY is that, for the first part of the movie anyway, Egoyan is clearly more interested in telling the story of Hilditch, the caterer who is more disturbed than meets the eye, than in Felicia, the young woman he befriends. If this were just a movie about Hilditch, maybe that would suffice. But in the novel by William Trevor this is based on, even though Felicia's story is a familiar one(young, somewhat naive girl falls in love with boy her family doesn't approve of, he leaves, she gets pregnant, and tries to find him), her story is of equal importance to the story of Hilditch, and Trevor is interested equally in both of them. The problem is Egoyan seems disconnected to Felicia's story, even though Elaine Cassidy is quite good in the role, so not only does the story go slack there, we start to question, as you didn't in reading the novel, how she could be so naive.

Eventually, though, when Felicia ends up staying with Hilditch and gradually learns about him, the terror of the story, and the fact that, thanks to Egoyan, we're seeing her primarily through Hilditch, makes us care. And, as I said, Cassidy is quite good.

Of course, the movie belongs to Bob Hoskins as Hilditch. Hoskins doesn't make the mistake of coming across as a sneering psychopath. Instead, he trusts us to make our associations from past roles of his(THE LONG GOOD FRIDAY, MONA LISA) to realize there's something bubbling under this mama's boy, and concentrates on playing Hilditch on someone who genuinely believes he's doing good deeds here, and just want to help. It also helps that Arsinee Khanjian, as Egoyan's wife, is quite good, and funny, as the domineering mother; you may never watch cooking shows the same way again.

Egoyan also doesn't make a conventional Hollywood thriller as the movie draws to its conclusion. What he substitutes is something which, admittedly, played out better in the novel because Trevor was able to stretch it out more, but it still chills you to the bone. One may wonder why Egoyan took to a genre piece right after THE SWEET HEREAFTER, but he reworks it into a movie which does resonate.