Na Mira do Chefe

This is an old movie so probably no one is gonna read this review, but writing Imdb reviews has been a hobby of mine for a while now. If you are not put off by gore, dark subject matters (suicide among others) and fat jokes, and if you like dark comedy, then congratulations, you have hit the jackpot! This movie is perfect for you. Even if you are put off by the aforementioned things, then you have also hit the jackpot cuz this movie freaking rocks. It really does. Has the tightest script I've ever seen, and so fugging funny that you might want to pause the movie for a moment just to laugh. If you are looking for a good comedy, you have come to the right place.

Going into this movie, I didn't have the highest expectations for it. However, I went to see it anyways, and let me just say that by the end credits I was completely shocked out how much I actually liked this movie. It was not only very funny but you were able to connect with the characters in a way you didn't think you would. The plot was def. very interesting and kept my attention the whole way through. Only real problem I had with the movie was that it was a little bit too long, but it didn't take away from anything. I should also say that I'm not a huge Colin Farrell fan, but after this movie I believe that he has proved that he can hold his own with the other leading men out there. I thought there were some beautiful moments that they captured on film where you see him dealing with his characters inner demons. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone who is looking for something "different", if you're sick of seeing the same "hollywood-esque" movies, then please give this movie a shot. If anything, enjoy it for the witty dialogue.

What drove me to seeing 'In Bruges' in the first place was primarily great actors like Brendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes, and also for the concept and Bruges itself.

'In Bruges' is definitely not for all tastes, one can say that for a lot of films but 'In Bruges' is one of the more extreme examples. It is very foul mouthed with an extreme profanity laden script, is very uncompromisingly violent and its political incorrectness will put the easily offended and the faint hearted off. Three reasons not to see it if all this bothers you. It didn't bother me much though (having seen plenty of films with those approaches that still manage to be great). Neither did on the most part the ridiculousness that 'In Bruges' has been criticised for.

What is meant by "on the most part"? 'In Bruges' weakest element, from a storytelling standpoint and for the film in general, is the ending. This to me was the only part of the film that went over the top on the ridiculousness to overblown proportions, and it just felt contrived and running out of ideas in feel.

Carter Burwell's music score is a well written and quite lovely one on its own. Within the film and its mood though, it didn't fit however and juxtaposes too much in terms of tone.

However, the performances are very good, excellent in the case of Gleeson (as always) and Fiennes having tons of fun as his sinister character. Wasn't expecting acting this good from Farrell, this is the best he's ever been and he is successful in providing an interesting character that was intended to be morally complex and not likeable. It's the relationship between Farrell and Gleeson that drives the story and drama, it was essential to the film's success and manages to be entertaining, affecting and thought-provoking,

Photography is both gritty and beautiful, with a clear sense of style and atmosphere. Bruges not just looks wonderful, it also is treated like a character of its own quite rightly.

Similarly successful is the script, which is surprisingly intelligent with a strong balance with thought-provoking philosophical musings, very funny black comedy and character moral complexity (not making the characters likeable but it was clear early on that the intent was for them never to be so) . The story absorbs and entertains, with the brutal holds no prisoners violence not feeling gratuitous, the central relationship being beautifully written and the despair and redemptions themes being surprisingly poignant.

Overall, very good if understandably polarising. 8/10 Bethany Cox

For those who might not know the name, director Martin McDonagh is an Irish playwright who won the Oscar last year for his short film "Six Shooter" about a chance encounter on a train, and that film's star Brendan Gleeson has returned as Ken, one of two hit men sent to the medieval city of Bruges in Belgium along with his partner Ray (Colin Farrell) to rest and lay low after a hit gone horribly wrong. Ray is a miserable bastard who makes it clear he's not happy about being in Bruges, but Ken convinces him that their boss Harry has a job for them there, as well as allowing them a chance for some sightseeing, none of which improves Ray's mood. Things look up when he meets the beautiful local woman Chloe, played by French actress Clémence Poésy--you may remember her as Fleur Delacore in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire--and scores himself a date, which also goes horribly wrong due to Ray shooting off his big mouth. From there things continue to go south as Ray and Ken get into all sorts of messes and meet strange characters, all of whom will play a part in the larger picture.

There aren't too many non-Belgian films set in Belgium, and Bruges is a beautiful but odd place to set an entire movie. You'll probably learn more about the place than you ever need to know as Ken narrates their sightseeing excursions with a few factoids about the place. The entire first act is driven by the chemistry between Farrell and Gleason as they deliver rapid-fire patter that reminds one of McDonagh's background as a playwright, but it makes them as immediately endearing as Vincent and Jules in "Pulp Fiction," allowing for an even bigger impact as things happen to them. Our first encounter with the boys' boss Harry is an expletive filled telegraph and an equally amusing phone conversation with Ken, making it obvious that this is a mobster cut from the same cloth as Ben Kingsley's Don Logan. Those who don't recognize the voice will be thrilled when they learn who plays Harry, because it's a pleasant surprise.

This is easily Colin Farrell's best role and performance in a long time, one that allows him to show a lot of range, not just as the big-mouthed prat we assume Ray to be, but also as a thoughtful man distraught about what happened in London. Having seen the error of his ways, he feels the need to make right, even if he hides it with a lot of complaining and arguments, and that carries over to Gleason's Ken, continuing his great run with McDonagh.

McDonagh has created a clever script that interweaves its small cast of characters into an intricate crime caper that mixes humor, violence and true heartfelt human emotions into a brilliant debut feature. Just when you think you know where things are going, McDonagh throws a sharp curve ball at you and then another, and another, and pretty soon, what started as a two-handed talkie has turned into a hold-your-breath action flick, when Harry turns up in Bruges to rectify some business that Ken has botched. Even so, it never loses what made the first half so charming and entertaining, because McDonagh's impressive dialogue remains at the forefront for the extended confrontation between Ken and Harry. The ending might be somewhat grim for some tastes going by the lightness of what's gone before, but the way everything is tied together makes it all worth it.

Anyone worried that Tarantino and Ritchie's best work might be behind them, can revel in the promise of McDonagh's take on the crime-comedy genre, as this talented filmmaker shows that "Six Shooter" was no fluke and this movie begins what's likely to be a long and promising film career. On top of that, if "In Bruges" doesn't end up being the funniest and most quotable movies of the year, then it should be very close

A European film through and through, showing its deep theatrical roots, "In Bruges" works on may levels, and is a fine night at the cinema.

The film follows the denouement of a "job" gone bad for two Irish hit men, who are forced to hole up in Bruges, Belgium, and really can't stand the inactivity. The forced waiting, a symbolic purgatory in both assassins' struggle for absolution, gives Brendan Gleeson and Colin Farrell a chance to act through some marvelous comic dialogue.

The film itself looks like it was filmed in an area of the old city of Bruges that is no more than a 500 square metre radius. It doesn't matter, because the film is a character study more than anything, and like all good theatre, the character interplay allows the audience to forget the confined spaces.

Ralph Fiennes comes into the film late basically stealing Ben Kingsley's character from "Sexy Beast". This has to be an absolutely deliberate choice, so can't really be criticized. The writing is so good that Fiennes can have real fun with it. All the actors do, as a matter of fact.

I have been deeply suspicious of Colin Farrell's ability to read a script in the past. His choices of projects in the past has been spotty. Not this time: his acting ability is brought to the fore by director and screenwriter Martin McDonagh. Farrell gives a very strong performance as a morally challenged hit-man.

Brendan Gleeson has been around forever, and is a renowned character actor. You may remember him from "Braveheart" as Hamish Campbell, Mel Gibson's loyal adjutant. He is able to completely bury himself in this part. Colin Farrell has the capacity to reach these heights as well, and in fact, in this film, shows many of the mannerisms and intensity of Russell Crowe (whom I consider to be the best actor on the planet).

I appreciated the comedy and satire working hand in hand with the moral complexity of the characters' inner struggles. It makes for a very satisfying film, one that is much more than entertainment. When you consider what the budget was in comparison to many Hollywood films, "In Bruges" serves as a reminder that it is the script and the quality of the direction that makes a film. Why Hollywood thinks they can just throw money into a project and expect people to come to the cinema is beyond me.