92 Bewertungen
Yes, it's a slow, slow build-up featuring seemingly unconnected story threads, fantastical settings and comic-book characterisation. Yes, it's all a bit of a muddle at times, and plays like the disconnected fast-cut chapters of a cynically devise modern supermarket bestselling novel.
But it's different.
Not out-there different, just stoically different from the average Hollywood committee-designed faux art-slice. It's a film that refuses to bend to the will of popular expectation and also to the viewer's clamouring desire for exposition.
For that it's to be applauded; it seems remarkable it managed mainstream distribution given the fact so many will be 'bored' ('man') awaiting the connections to satisfy their anticipation.
And you may well gather what's going on before it's explained (with a little ultimate dubiety) on screen, but this is still a well-executed piece of cinema with a solid cast that dares to offer something a little different to current lame traits after seemingly setting itself up as just another by-the-numbers collage.
Clever at times, atmospheric, beautifully shot with a good cast. Worth, nay deserving, of a watch as a mild antidote to patronising Hollywood mainstream. A solid seven out of ten.
But it's different.
Not out-there different, just stoically different from the average Hollywood committee-designed faux art-slice. It's a film that refuses to bend to the will of popular expectation and also to the viewer's clamouring desire for exposition.
For that it's to be applauded; it seems remarkable it managed mainstream distribution given the fact so many will be 'bored' ('man') awaiting the connections to satisfy their anticipation.
And you may well gather what's going on before it's explained (with a little ultimate dubiety) on screen, but this is still a well-executed piece of cinema with a solid cast that dares to offer something a little different to current lame traits after seemingly setting itself up as just another by-the-numbers collage.
Clever at times, atmospheric, beautifully shot with a good cast. Worth, nay deserving, of a watch as a mild antidote to patronising Hollywood mainstream. A solid seven out of ten.
- thesandfly77
- 27. Apr. 2009
- Permalink
- claudio_carvalho
- 9. Nov. 2012
- Permalink
I've seen a few movies similar to this, using sci-fi/fantasy imagery to portray an internal state of mind. Too intellectual for some I guess, and it definitely goes beyond 'what you see is what you get'.
This movie worked for me. Some have been critical that the characters in the film were not interesting enough. I on the other hand think the director/writer Gerald McMorrow successfully walked the thin line of saying just enough, enabling the actors to fill in the gaps and create personas rather than cookie cut-outs. The characters were memorable and real, responding to slightly surreal situations in two worlds that were both out of kilter with our own. The movie's alternate realities drew me in and kept me interested, and the eventual juxtaposition of both did so even more.
This is a smartly made movie - with very convincing CGI for the fantasy world combined with an almost indie sense of the intimate and human in the alternate world closer to our own.
Well this review is not much of a blow-by-blow synopsis, others can do that, but if you appreciate strong acting, and an imaginative script, I don't think you will be disappointed.
7/10
This movie worked for me. Some have been critical that the characters in the film were not interesting enough. I on the other hand think the director/writer Gerald McMorrow successfully walked the thin line of saying just enough, enabling the actors to fill in the gaps and create personas rather than cookie cut-outs. The characters were memorable and real, responding to slightly surreal situations in two worlds that were both out of kilter with our own. The movie's alternate realities drew me in and kept me interested, and the eventual juxtaposition of both did so even more.
This is a smartly made movie - with very convincing CGI for the fantasy world combined with an almost indie sense of the intimate and human in the alternate world closer to our own.
Well this review is not much of a blow-by-blow synopsis, others can do that, but if you appreciate strong acting, and an imaginative script, I don't think you will be disappointed.
7/10
The main page review for Franklyn on IMDb (at the time of writing) is telling. It is telling because the whole reason it praises (and indeed the only way it discusses) this film is in relation to the "popcorn cattle" that presumably won't appreciate this film. This I see a lot – anything different is seized upon by those seeking to elevate themselves above the normal cinema public – the same writer may also go out of his way to hate blockbusters whether he/she liked them or not. I can understand this approach to the film Franklyn because, superficially it does offer the Gothic thrills of a bigger budget film but with the creativity and intelligence that the interweaving, real/fantasy parts of the film bring. Or, could have brought I should say because the problem with the film is that it is not the intelligent, complex and well-written film that it (and those that rushed to love it for being different) wanted to be.
I went through a cycle with this film. At first I was engaged and curious, then that started to become a bit of confusion as my curiosity didn't get fed, this was then followed by a touch of impatience as things didn't seem to be coming together. Finally I ended up with a bit of apathy as the film brought itself together in a way that sort of didn't make sense, sort of seemed rushed and sort of seemed overly obvious and easy. And this is why the film doesn't work – because all the ideas, like the threads, just don't come together in a way that works. OK this might be a problem at the end of the film but this feeds backwards through each thread, keeping them separate, removing clarity and meaning each thread has to stand on its own. The fantasy world of Meanwhile City manages this, despite feeling like a cross between Dark City, V for Vendetta and Rorschach from the Watchmen graphic novel. However Emilia's thread feels, like her character, self-indulgent and petulant without anything to get the viewer into it and keep them there. Milo's thread sort of engages in regards the creation of fantasy worlds but it never really works or engages.
It isn't "bad" though but it is never more than OK because it the central problem of it essentially not working as a single story and also struggling even as individual threads. The cast are a mixed bag. Phillippe makes for a tough anti-hero and has a much better presence than I expected him to have but doesn't have the material to work with, and spends his "best" scenes in a mask. Green puts her all into it and delivers the script well – unfortunately this means the problems with her thread and character are all up there for all to see. Riley is surprisingly weak; I recognise that that is an aspect of his character but his performance didn't do anything for me. Hill is strong and it is just a shame that the film doesn't reward his work with more – he certainly seems to have an understanding of where he fits into the film.
The superficial appeal and intelligence of the film offer a potential that it never lives up but it does offer enough to make it feel like a shame when it fails to deliver. I'm sure the film will have a cult following but for me (and I imagine many casual viewers) it disappoints in its failure to come together with the intelligence and creativity that it should have had.
I went through a cycle with this film. At first I was engaged and curious, then that started to become a bit of confusion as my curiosity didn't get fed, this was then followed by a touch of impatience as things didn't seem to be coming together. Finally I ended up with a bit of apathy as the film brought itself together in a way that sort of didn't make sense, sort of seemed rushed and sort of seemed overly obvious and easy. And this is why the film doesn't work – because all the ideas, like the threads, just don't come together in a way that works. OK this might be a problem at the end of the film but this feeds backwards through each thread, keeping them separate, removing clarity and meaning each thread has to stand on its own. The fantasy world of Meanwhile City manages this, despite feeling like a cross between Dark City, V for Vendetta and Rorschach from the Watchmen graphic novel. However Emilia's thread feels, like her character, self-indulgent and petulant without anything to get the viewer into it and keep them there. Milo's thread sort of engages in regards the creation of fantasy worlds but it never really works or engages.
It isn't "bad" though but it is never more than OK because it the central problem of it essentially not working as a single story and also struggling even as individual threads. The cast are a mixed bag. Phillippe makes for a tough anti-hero and has a much better presence than I expected him to have but doesn't have the material to work with, and spends his "best" scenes in a mask. Green puts her all into it and delivers the script well – unfortunately this means the problems with her thread and character are all up there for all to see. Riley is surprisingly weak; I recognise that that is an aspect of his character but his performance didn't do anything for me. Hill is strong and it is just a shame that the film doesn't reward his work with more – he certainly seems to have an understanding of where he fits into the film.
The superficial appeal and intelligence of the film offer a potential that it never lives up but it does offer enough to make it feel like a shame when it fails to deliver. I'm sure the film will have a cult following but for me (and I imagine many casual viewers) it disappoints in its failure to come together with the intelligence and creativity that it should have had.
- bob the moo
- 14. Sept. 2009
- Permalink
This movie really is difficult. Not only to describe (it is far too complex for it's own good/commercial success), but also to watch and follow the plot. While there have been other movies who played with the time factor (and/or other stuff, which I won't say anything about here, so it won't spoil anything for you), not many refused to explain themselves to you.
In other words: While many other movies with the same or similar theme, show you the same scenes twice (or maybe even more often), this movie does not give you this luxury. You have to stay focused to get it. Of course the main plot and the big details will be easy to grab. But again, only if you let yourself into the movie. But this movie allows you to watch it a few times and catch nuances, small things, you might not have seen/understood, the previous time(s) you watched the movie. A complex, but rewarding viewing experience then
In other words: While many other movies with the same or similar theme, show you the same scenes twice (or maybe even more often), this movie does not give you this luxury. You have to stay focused to get it. Of course the main plot and the big details will be easy to grab. But again, only if you let yourself into the movie. But this movie allows you to watch it a few times and catch nuances, small things, you might not have seen/understood, the previous time(s) you watched the movie. A complex, but rewarding viewing experience then
Reading a synopsis of the film, I feared that it would be full on sci-fi ... but thankfully there were two strands - one set in contemporary London, and another of the more fantasy version ...
It really is the sort of film where knowing too much about the plot before seeing it, will spoil. I would say that if you like films where all the strands are nicely tied up at the end, you will be frustrated. A few of the strands are resolved, but I still can't work out what a couple of the characters were up to !
Eva Green has the largest role, and is mostly good, but at times she seems a bit wooden. Sam Riley was quite convincing as a bit of a loser, and Ryan Phillippe seemed to enjoy his masked role.
I saw the premiere at The London Film Festival and the director explained that some of the sci-fi imagery was based on the spires of Cambridge. Ryan Phillippe said that he did indeed act in all the masked shots, even those where he fights the "clerics" - having studied martial arts since he was eight !
This film will make you think, but be prepared for a gradual exposition, rather than any great revelations.
It really is the sort of film where knowing too much about the plot before seeing it, will spoil. I would say that if you like films where all the strands are nicely tied up at the end, you will be frustrated. A few of the strands are resolved, but I still can't work out what a couple of the characters were up to !
Eva Green has the largest role, and is mostly good, but at times she seems a bit wooden. Sam Riley was quite convincing as a bit of a loser, and Ryan Phillippe seemed to enjoy his masked role.
I saw the premiere at The London Film Festival and the director explained that some of the sci-fi imagery was based on the spires of Cambridge. Ryan Phillippe said that he did indeed act in all the masked shots, even those where he fights the "clerics" - having studied martial arts since he was eight !
This film will make you think, but be prepared for a gradual exposition, rather than any great revelations.
- londonviewer
- 15. Okt. 2008
- Permalink
I liked it, believe it or not. it's not the common sci-fi stuff that you usually see out there. is different, incredibly artistic, not bad but not that good either.
the cast is simply amazing. Sam Riley is good as always, Eva green gets the biggest role and rocks at it, an Ryan Phillipe really surprised me (he didn't like him much before this movie).
i enjoyed it, i think it has some flaws, but in the end it is just what it promises to be: unusual and artistic. if you're a "classic movie" lover, you will not appreciate this movie at all. i've you're a "new wave" kind of person it's a must-see.
the cast is simply amazing. Sam Riley is good as always, Eva green gets the biggest role and rocks at it, an Ryan Phillipe really surprised me (he didn't like him much before this movie).
i enjoyed it, i think it has some flaws, but in the end it is just what it promises to be: unusual and artistic. if you're a "classic movie" lover, you will not appreciate this movie at all. i've you're a "new wave" kind of person it's a must-see.
I've just come back from the premiere at the London film festival and I've thoroughly enjoyed, it but before I say anything, do not expect it to be "a mix between V for Vendetta and the Dark knight" which is a complete nonsense I read earlier, it's nothing like it.
In fact, the sci fi element is only a small (albeit crucial) part to the story, most of it taking place in present day London.
It's more of a psychological drama, a bit of a slow starter as well until all the pieces are put together and it starts making sense. To be honest the less you know about the story, the better otherwise it will ruin your enjoyment
The acting is excellent, I would say it really is Eva Green's movie, she shines throughout the movie with a rather difficult role and is absolutely beautiful. Sam Riley and Ryan Philippe are very good too although they have a little less material to play with.
I think it's going to be hard sell as it is unlike anything I have seen, and if they try to market it as an action/sci fi movie, it will be very misleading but I still definitely recommend it if you're looking for something a bit different.
In fact, the sci fi element is only a small (albeit crucial) part to the story, most of it taking place in present day London.
It's more of a psychological drama, a bit of a slow starter as well until all the pieces are put together and it starts making sense. To be honest the less you know about the story, the better otherwise it will ruin your enjoyment
The acting is excellent, I would say it really is Eva Green's movie, she shines throughout the movie with a rather difficult role and is absolutely beautiful. Sam Riley and Ryan Philippe are very good too although they have a little less material to play with.
I think it's going to be hard sell as it is unlike anything I have seen, and if they try to market it as an action/sci fi movie, it will be very misleading but I still definitely recommend it if you're looking for something a bit different.
- ldealberti
- 15. Okt. 2008
- Permalink
- dan-is-grate
- 12. Mai 2009
- Permalink
I have just got back from watching Franklyn at the London Film Festival, and let me tell you, this film is truly something special. A cleverly co-ordinated lesson in narrative structure, the plot revolves around 4 different people, delivered in 4 different strands of plot, one of which exists in somewhere a little futuristic called "Meanwhile City". Each of the four are all trying to fix something in their lives. ++DONT WORRY I SHALL NOT BE Writing ANY SPOILERS HERE+++ At first, my mind was drawn to the film V for Vendetta - the masked vigilante (played very well by Ryan Phillipe, holding his own in a predominantly British cast) seemed to be a similar character, complete with voice-over, telling us the troubles of Meanwhile City. But soon the other plot strands filter in and it becomes far more than a Vendetta-lite imitation, with a narrative structure very similar in delivery to Magnolia, or Gomorrah. However, the director here never makes it confusing as to who is who, with a definite and focused script keeping the four strands together very well.
All the other stories are set in contemporary London. My favourite was the story with Sam Riley's character. His bride to be has left him and he is finding ways of dealing with his grief. Elsewhere, Bernard Hill plays a man searching for his son who has (mysteriously) gone missing. The other story strand involves Eva Green as a troubled artist with a penchant for frequently attempting suicide.
Whilst the photography and direction in the film is brilliantly vivid and bold, and the cast are wonderfully believable, what really sold this film for me was the story itself. Intriguing, exciting, thoughtful, often very moving, and most of all, constantly surprising, Franklyn is by far the most fiercely intelligent and engaging film i have watched in a very long time. The final 10 minutes are simply amazing and very, very clever (dont read ANYTHING about it though!) Make sure to watch Franklyn when it comes out (the LFF was a lucky early screening, I am told it could be out in January at the cinemas nationwide). BUT WHATEVER YOU DO MAKE SURE NO ONE TELLS YOU ANYMORE THAN THE SYNOPSIS TELLS YOU! else you will not experience the joy of watching the story unravel and reveal itself for its truths. Thank you to all involved in creating something so utterly unique in its execution.
All the other stories are set in contemporary London. My favourite was the story with Sam Riley's character. His bride to be has left him and he is finding ways of dealing with his grief. Elsewhere, Bernard Hill plays a man searching for his son who has (mysteriously) gone missing. The other story strand involves Eva Green as a troubled artist with a penchant for frequently attempting suicide.
Whilst the photography and direction in the film is brilliantly vivid and bold, and the cast are wonderfully believable, what really sold this film for me was the story itself. Intriguing, exciting, thoughtful, often very moving, and most of all, constantly surprising, Franklyn is by far the most fiercely intelligent and engaging film i have watched in a very long time. The final 10 minutes are simply amazing and very, very clever (dont read ANYTHING about it though!) Make sure to watch Franklyn when it comes out (the LFF was a lucky early screening, I am told it could be out in January at the cinemas nationwide). BUT WHATEVER YOU DO MAKE SURE NO ONE TELLS YOU ANYMORE THAN THE SYNOPSIS TELLS YOU! else you will not experience the joy of watching the story unravel and reveal itself for its truths. Thank you to all involved in creating something so utterly unique in its execution.
- kieronstonemusic
- 18. Okt. 2008
- Permalink
- arjohnson-1
- 3. Juli 2009
- Permalink
that fizzles like wet firework!
Oh boy! Franklyn is boring, beyond boring. As many other reviewers have already written, the film tells the of apparently unconnected four persons living in London, three in the present and one in the future.
In the film we learn at, a snail's pace, the story of these characters, which are totally and completely uninteresting. But, out of curiosity, I decided to watch (or should I say endure) the film until its anticlimactic end to learn how and why the lives of these four poor souls are connected. And it was a bust!
It is interesting what people consider art these days. As long as something is tortuous, tedious and unimaginative it is considered a masterpiece! Franklyn is another big waste of time. Next time I will go out and watch grass grow for two hours. It is more fun and rewarding.
Oh boy! Franklyn is boring, beyond boring. As many other reviewers have already written, the film tells the of apparently unconnected four persons living in London, three in the present and one in the future.
In the film we learn at, a snail's pace, the story of these characters, which are totally and completely uninteresting. But, out of curiosity, I decided to watch (or should I say endure) the film until its anticlimactic end to learn how and why the lives of these four poor souls are connected. And it was a bust!
It is interesting what people consider art these days. As long as something is tortuous, tedious and unimaginative it is considered a masterpiece! Franklyn is another big waste of time. Next time I will go out and watch grass grow for two hours. It is more fun and rewarding.
- trans_mauro
- 5. Juli 2009
- Permalink
There are movies that, despite their lack of budget and film-makers' experience within the medium of film—despite their failings in telling a coherent, and entertaining story, nevertheless excel in their ability to enthral through idea and theme alone. Franklyn which too often sets out in this manner, in turn neglecting engaging narrative for contorted, mystery-tinged manipulation, is not one of those select few features. Restricted by a small budget and the director and writers' inexperience with feature length productions, the film is interesting to a certain degree but too often falls flat when trying to compel the viewer either through character or plot. Indeed, the only sole reason to continue watching a film such as Franklyn is to find out what the hell is going on; and then you get to that finish line only to realise that the payoff isn't quite what you expected. The result is a feature that feels half-baked, underdeveloped and frustratingly vague for its first two acts. So much so that by the time director Gerald McMorrow decides to show us his hand, we've more or less left the table and cashed in our chips.
The problem with Franklyn isn't that it is short on ideas, but that it is short on ideas upon which to implement the themes and arcs to which McMorrow obviously wants to get across. For sure, this is an original, interesting and intriguing piece of work; but it's also dreary and tiresome at the same time. First time viewers should not be alarmed if plot details go amiss, or if the story seems overly convoluted, disconnected and a little contrived—because this is exactly how McMorrow pens his tale. It's deliberately withholding for a reason, and that is because without that sense of mysticism and deliberate manipulation, Franklyn is a mirthless experience. Taken on face value in retrospect, the ninety minutes doesn't feel completely wasted, but there is a certain degree of fallacy involved here that comes off as cheap and overly ambitious. Indeed, this is a bold effort from the first-time filmmaker, and one has to applaud such an audacious venture—but it's also very hard to be convinced by Franklyn either in its grandiose tale, or its dubiously surreal and contorted narrative.
For the majority of the feature, we are treated to four stories revolving around four separate characters split over what appears to be two very different timelines of alternate dimensions (this is, of course, merely a subjective speculation on the part of myself, as the truth behind the events of the film are never truly explained—and fair enough, I suppose). Each of the characters have their own little quirks; Emilia (Eva Green) is an extremist artist driven to video-tape serial suicide attempts made by herself; Milo (Sam Riley), a romantic who has recently been left at the alter; a masked vigilante named Preest (Ryan Phillippe) who occupies the alternate reality within a city named "Meanwhile City" ruled by religion and dogmatic oppression; and a father in search of his son gone missing after a traumatic event involving his sister's death.
At first, all the characters within Franklyn's two worlds seem distinct from each other, and without and form of link—so much so that much of the feature's initial hour is slow moving and irksomely disjointed from any sort of clear focus or direction to the first time viewer. Yet as the plot unravels, and metaphysical realities are explored with death, imaginary friends and delusional beliefs briefly analysed, the seeds that are planted during the initial acts begin to blossom. It is disappointing then that by the time McMorrow pulls the proverbial rug on us, we don't really care anymore. Confined also by the limitations of such vague narrative and an ending that brings everything together in a poetic but fruitless manner, Franklyn eventually crumbles under its own weight and pretension. It's a movie that tries too hard to be larger than it really is on paper, and the cracks are all too obvious.
In the end, I wanted to like McMorrow's work here a lot more than I actually did—it's brave, interesting and makes some intriguing statements on the nature of reality and our perceptions of such manifestations to ourselves as human beings; but at the end of the day I couldn't bring myself to be convinced or won over by the implementation of such ideas. For sure, there was potential here within the bare-bones skeleton of McMorrow's premise and themes—but burdened with obstructive restrictions both in a narrative sense and a production sense, Franklyn simply never comes off the page like it should, and the result is lukewarm in every regard; sporadically intriguing, but overly flawed—I have to wonder why this made the big screen at all; I got the feeling that it could have made an even better mini-series for TV.
The problem with Franklyn isn't that it is short on ideas, but that it is short on ideas upon which to implement the themes and arcs to which McMorrow obviously wants to get across. For sure, this is an original, interesting and intriguing piece of work; but it's also dreary and tiresome at the same time. First time viewers should not be alarmed if plot details go amiss, or if the story seems overly convoluted, disconnected and a little contrived—because this is exactly how McMorrow pens his tale. It's deliberately withholding for a reason, and that is because without that sense of mysticism and deliberate manipulation, Franklyn is a mirthless experience. Taken on face value in retrospect, the ninety minutes doesn't feel completely wasted, but there is a certain degree of fallacy involved here that comes off as cheap and overly ambitious. Indeed, this is a bold effort from the first-time filmmaker, and one has to applaud such an audacious venture—but it's also very hard to be convinced by Franklyn either in its grandiose tale, or its dubiously surreal and contorted narrative.
For the majority of the feature, we are treated to four stories revolving around four separate characters split over what appears to be two very different timelines of alternate dimensions (this is, of course, merely a subjective speculation on the part of myself, as the truth behind the events of the film are never truly explained—and fair enough, I suppose). Each of the characters have their own little quirks; Emilia (Eva Green) is an extremist artist driven to video-tape serial suicide attempts made by herself; Milo (Sam Riley), a romantic who has recently been left at the alter; a masked vigilante named Preest (Ryan Phillippe) who occupies the alternate reality within a city named "Meanwhile City" ruled by religion and dogmatic oppression; and a father in search of his son gone missing after a traumatic event involving his sister's death.
At first, all the characters within Franklyn's two worlds seem distinct from each other, and without and form of link—so much so that much of the feature's initial hour is slow moving and irksomely disjointed from any sort of clear focus or direction to the first time viewer. Yet as the plot unravels, and metaphysical realities are explored with death, imaginary friends and delusional beliefs briefly analysed, the seeds that are planted during the initial acts begin to blossom. It is disappointing then that by the time McMorrow pulls the proverbial rug on us, we don't really care anymore. Confined also by the limitations of such vague narrative and an ending that brings everything together in a poetic but fruitless manner, Franklyn eventually crumbles under its own weight and pretension. It's a movie that tries too hard to be larger than it really is on paper, and the cracks are all too obvious.
In the end, I wanted to like McMorrow's work here a lot more than I actually did—it's brave, interesting and makes some intriguing statements on the nature of reality and our perceptions of such manifestations to ourselves as human beings; but at the end of the day I couldn't bring myself to be convinced or won over by the implementation of such ideas. For sure, there was potential here within the bare-bones skeleton of McMorrow's premise and themes—but burdened with obstructive restrictions both in a narrative sense and a production sense, Franklyn simply never comes off the page like it should, and the result is lukewarm in every regard; sporadically intriguing, but overly flawed—I have to wonder why this made the big screen at all; I got the feeling that it could have made an even better mini-series for TV.
- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net)
Ryan Phillippe's character Priest says,
"If a God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able - Then He is not omnipotent. If He is able, but not willing - Then He must be Malevolent. If He is neither able nor willing, then why call Him a God? Why else do bad things happen to good people."
After losing my daughter to cancer, these words resonated loudly for me. As a lifelong Agnostic, I've often struggled with these questions, but they were so neatly summed up in this film that it stuck with me as one of my favorite quotes.
digitalRITUAL
"If a God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able - Then He is not omnipotent. If He is able, but not willing - Then He must be Malevolent. If He is neither able nor willing, then why call Him a God? Why else do bad things happen to good people."
After losing my daughter to cancer, these words resonated loudly for me. As a lifelong Agnostic, I've often struggled with these questions, but they were so neatly summed up in this film that it stuck with me as one of my favorite quotes.
digitalRITUAL
- DigitalRitual
- 27. Aug. 2014
- Permalink
I've watched 'Franklyn' twice now. The first time I really liked it. The second time, I'm not so impressed. I think it was down to me knowing what was happening even earlier than I had originally.
It's an odd piece about two stories running parallel to each other. Nothing that original you might say, but one story is set in a clearly futuristic, dystopian world while the other is simply present day London. You may wonder how exactly these two worlds are connected. Then you kind of figure it out yourself (probably about midway) and the film then continues as if you're still in the dark.
Some bits of it are very good - Ryan Phillipe is about the best actor by far who does his best to life what - sometimes - is a bit of a flat script. If you like weird and dark futuristic worlds, you'll like his story best. However, his parts are almost like an action film, whereas the London bits are more like your basic melodrama, leaving the viewer feeling a little off balance.
There is definitely an interesting story here (and made more interesting the way it's told). However, I understand that it was originally a SHORT story. That explains a lot. It does feel like it's been dragged out a bit. I can see Franklyn definitely finding an audience. You have to be into lesser-known movies that deliberately try something different. However, I can also see as many people finding it boring, incomprehensible and worthless. Research it carefully before you invest your hour and a half in this film.
It's an odd piece about two stories running parallel to each other. Nothing that original you might say, but one story is set in a clearly futuristic, dystopian world while the other is simply present day London. You may wonder how exactly these two worlds are connected. Then you kind of figure it out yourself (probably about midway) and the film then continues as if you're still in the dark.
Some bits of it are very good - Ryan Phillipe is about the best actor by far who does his best to life what - sometimes - is a bit of a flat script. If you like weird and dark futuristic worlds, you'll like his story best. However, his parts are almost like an action film, whereas the London bits are more like your basic melodrama, leaving the viewer feeling a little off balance.
There is definitely an interesting story here (and made more interesting the way it's told). However, I understand that it was originally a SHORT story. That explains a lot. It does feel like it's been dragged out a bit. I can see Franklyn definitely finding an audience. You have to be into lesser-known movies that deliberately try something different. However, I can also see as many people finding it boring, incomprehensible and worthless. Research it carefully before you invest your hour and a half in this film.
- bowmanblue
- 28. Nov. 2014
- Permalink
If you like dark, Gothic movies with both style & intelligence, this one's for you. First-time director/writer Gerald McMorrow makes a great debut with "Franklyn", a cryptic fantasy-thriller about 4 lost souls in different times & places, bound together by a mystery that slowly unravels to a brilliant climax.
The story is told in fragments, and if you're not paying attention you might easily get lost. But that's what makes it so rewarding when you start to figure it out, and you realize what these people have in common.
Most of the action happens in a nightmarish, dystopian world called "Meanwhile City". These scenes are reminiscent of the haunting works of Alex Proyas ("The Crow", "Dark City") with bits of Frank Miller's comic book style ("Sin City", "The Spirit"). There are also some refreshing, humorous nods toward Terry Gilliam ("Brazil", "12 Monkeys"). But what sets this apart from those dark, shadowy films is the juxtaposition of contemporary London, bright & crisp, like something you'd see by the German master Tom Tykwer ("Run Lola Run", "Heaven", "Perfume").
If you don't recognize all those names, don't worry. The point I'm making is that McMorrow's directorial debut has elements of many great directors tied together in a fresh, original way.
There's not as much action in this film as in most fantasy-thrillers. Depending on how you like your movies, that's either a good thing or a bad thing. I thought it was perfect because it lets the story breathe, and it gives us the chance to digest the slowly-unravelling mystery. There are interwoven themes touching on religion, individuality, family, fate, love & hate. And psychosis, which always makes things fun.
And even though it may be light on action & explosions, there's tons of nice eye candy to keep you riveted. Speaking as a hetero male, by "eye candy" I mean Eva Green and her sexy goth wardrobe! (If I weren't such a hetero guy, I'd be tempted to become a cross dresser.) The 2 leading men are quite the lookers, too, both suave & classy in their own way. And if that's not enough eye candy, you can't miss the enormous sets & wide angle shots: breathtaking.
If you're a fan of any of the directors/films I mentioned above, don't hesitate to check this out.
The story is told in fragments, and if you're not paying attention you might easily get lost. But that's what makes it so rewarding when you start to figure it out, and you realize what these people have in common.
Most of the action happens in a nightmarish, dystopian world called "Meanwhile City". These scenes are reminiscent of the haunting works of Alex Proyas ("The Crow", "Dark City") with bits of Frank Miller's comic book style ("Sin City", "The Spirit"). There are also some refreshing, humorous nods toward Terry Gilliam ("Brazil", "12 Monkeys"). But what sets this apart from those dark, shadowy films is the juxtaposition of contemporary London, bright & crisp, like something you'd see by the German master Tom Tykwer ("Run Lola Run", "Heaven", "Perfume").
If you don't recognize all those names, don't worry. The point I'm making is that McMorrow's directorial debut has elements of many great directors tied together in a fresh, original way.
There's not as much action in this film as in most fantasy-thrillers. Depending on how you like your movies, that's either a good thing or a bad thing. I thought it was perfect because it lets the story breathe, and it gives us the chance to digest the slowly-unravelling mystery. There are interwoven themes touching on religion, individuality, family, fate, love & hate. And psychosis, which always makes things fun.
And even though it may be light on action & explosions, there's tons of nice eye candy to keep you riveted. Speaking as a hetero male, by "eye candy" I mean Eva Green and her sexy goth wardrobe! (If I weren't such a hetero guy, I'd be tempted to become a cross dresser.) The 2 leading men are quite the lookers, too, both suave & classy in their own way. And if that's not enough eye candy, you can't miss the enormous sets & wide angle shots: breathtaking.
If you're a fan of any of the directors/films I mentioned above, don't hesitate to check this out.
Franklyn advertises itself as an intriguing sci fi head twister. But those twists are just too few and far between. Most of the commentators here have identified the problems with this film but I still recommend Franklyn. Why?
For most first time film makers Franklyn contains all the pitfalls that should be avoided. But the irony is Franklyn is a great idea that dies through amateur film making. Good movies are, most of the time, simple and quick. Even if the idea is sophisticated the rendering of it should not be. But Franklyn's script is the primary fault written by a first timer who's not noticed its errors.
The author hasn't identified the important parts of his story. Preest, his father and Emilia are the centre of the film but instead we get a massive wtf Milo subplot and trips to see a mystically pointless hospital janitor. "Meanwhile City" works and while we can always compare it to Bladerunner we shouldn't. Ridley Scott didn't invent the dystopian metropolis Fritz Lang did. And as a metropolis for characters to move through it function's superbly. We just never see them move through it enough!
Preest's fantasy city is where the film should focus, Emilia should feature here somehow yet Eva Green's too busy playing Milo's imaginary girlfriend instead of opposite Ryan Philippe. And then when you do get in the city it's too brief and becomes a dull soap opera moping around London. I've no problem with duel reality (similar to Identity) but like that film it became all too one sided.
The trick to good screenplay is simple: learn to spot the errors before you spend £10 million on them. Then, as Hitchcock said, directing a film is simple: have a good script when you start. Of course we then realise it isn't that simple I've also experienced a small production where the first time writer/producer (not me) clung too much to their ideas and defended the mistakes rather that address them. A script can be about anything but it must not contain 'code' than makes the movie machine seize up. The character and events of Milo are a prime example. Suppose we dump this waste of space and just push Emilia and Preest closer together, give them more to do in Meanwhile.
I wanted Franklyn to work but it didn't. The script was rushed (it was based on a short story by the director) and was never good enough. But the fact it got made is a triumph albeit for all the wrong reasons. I will happily add Franklyn to the shelf with Dune, Dark City, etc despite its list of well meant errors.
PS One commentator here suggested the music and photography were poor. This is hogwash. Both were impressive for a small budget film.
For most first time film makers Franklyn contains all the pitfalls that should be avoided. But the irony is Franklyn is a great idea that dies through amateur film making. Good movies are, most of the time, simple and quick. Even if the idea is sophisticated the rendering of it should not be. But Franklyn's script is the primary fault written by a first timer who's not noticed its errors.
The author hasn't identified the important parts of his story. Preest, his father and Emilia are the centre of the film but instead we get a massive wtf Milo subplot and trips to see a mystically pointless hospital janitor. "Meanwhile City" works and while we can always compare it to Bladerunner we shouldn't. Ridley Scott didn't invent the dystopian metropolis Fritz Lang did. And as a metropolis for characters to move through it function's superbly. We just never see them move through it enough!
Preest's fantasy city is where the film should focus, Emilia should feature here somehow yet Eva Green's too busy playing Milo's imaginary girlfriend instead of opposite Ryan Philippe. And then when you do get in the city it's too brief and becomes a dull soap opera moping around London. I've no problem with duel reality (similar to Identity) but like that film it became all too one sided.
The trick to good screenplay is simple: learn to spot the errors before you spend £10 million on them. Then, as Hitchcock said, directing a film is simple: have a good script when you start. Of course we then realise it isn't that simple I've also experienced a small production where the first time writer/producer (not me) clung too much to their ideas and defended the mistakes rather that address them. A script can be about anything but it must not contain 'code' than makes the movie machine seize up. The character and events of Milo are a prime example. Suppose we dump this waste of space and just push Emilia and Preest closer together, give them more to do in Meanwhile.
I wanted Franklyn to work but it didn't. The script was rushed (it was based on a short story by the director) and was never good enough. But the fact it got made is a triumph albeit for all the wrong reasons. I will happily add Franklyn to the shelf with Dune, Dark City, etc despite its list of well meant errors.
PS One commentator here suggested the music and photography were poor. This is hogwash. Both were impressive for a small budget film.
The best film I have seen this year so far, its so brilliantly strange and such a brain-teasingly satisfying film to watch.
The film is a sci-fi thriller/drama about four characters dealing with problems in their life, from Eva Greens character who is a suicidal artist to Sam Riley's character whose bride ran away at the altar. These characters parts of the film are set in modern day London and their struggles may seem uninteresting at first but once the films pace sets in their stories take on as much importance as the real main character Preest. Jonathon Preest, the mysterious loner of the films alternate reality, Meanwhile City, is the only atheist in a city gripped by Faith, where every resident must have a religion which lends weight to the films plot and themes.
All the cast were very good at their parts, Phillippe does well as Preest without going into deep voiced batman territory and Eva Green portrays her very flawed character with enough humanity to keep you interested without becoming fed up with her characters behaviour.
The film constantly switches between the two settings, to both dramatic effect and to keep the film moving at a solid pace that should have you guessing at the link between all the characters and how the alternate reality of Meanwhile city ties in with them. Meanwhile City itself is a stunning and darkly captivating location for the other half of the film and provides the visual cement to the films concepts and makes for some of the most inventive design I've seen in sets and costumes for a long time. Its a Gothic vision of skyscrapers and futuristic landscapes with inspiration from cathedrals and ancient architecture.
Its safe to say that you shouldn't let anyone spoil the films twists or plot for you, because its twists often seem predictable before hand but upon their realisation they can be quite surprising reveals.
For those familiar with films such as Donnie Darko, the ideas driving the film may seem to be done and dusted but Franklyn's fresh approach to the concepts as well as its stunning execution make this film worthy of anyone looking to engage their thoughts in some very interesting concepts regarding, reality and perception. Go out and watch this film, it's conclusion will linger with you for days after wards.
The film is a sci-fi thriller/drama about four characters dealing with problems in their life, from Eva Greens character who is a suicidal artist to Sam Riley's character whose bride ran away at the altar. These characters parts of the film are set in modern day London and their struggles may seem uninteresting at first but once the films pace sets in their stories take on as much importance as the real main character Preest. Jonathon Preest, the mysterious loner of the films alternate reality, Meanwhile City, is the only atheist in a city gripped by Faith, where every resident must have a religion which lends weight to the films plot and themes.
All the cast were very good at their parts, Phillippe does well as Preest without going into deep voiced batman territory and Eva Green portrays her very flawed character with enough humanity to keep you interested without becoming fed up with her characters behaviour.
The film constantly switches between the two settings, to both dramatic effect and to keep the film moving at a solid pace that should have you guessing at the link between all the characters and how the alternate reality of Meanwhile city ties in with them. Meanwhile City itself is a stunning and darkly captivating location for the other half of the film and provides the visual cement to the films concepts and makes for some of the most inventive design I've seen in sets and costumes for a long time. Its a Gothic vision of skyscrapers and futuristic landscapes with inspiration from cathedrals and ancient architecture.
Its safe to say that you shouldn't let anyone spoil the films twists or plot for you, because its twists often seem predictable before hand but upon their realisation they can be quite surprising reveals.
For those familiar with films such as Donnie Darko, the ideas driving the film may seem to be done and dusted but Franklyn's fresh approach to the concepts as well as its stunning execution make this film worthy of anyone looking to engage their thoughts in some very interesting concepts regarding, reality and perception. Go out and watch this film, it's conclusion will linger with you for days after wards.
- bemyfriend-40184
- 8. Juli 2021
- Permalink
- aGuiltySoul
- 15. Aug. 2009
- Permalink