Na Mira do Chefe

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.

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

One of the problems with seeing a trailer for a film is it creates an expectation. If it raises expectations, and the film delivers, great. However, if the film is less then expected, then the viewer feels cheated. The best case scenario is the one I found myself in before I saw In Bruges. Low expectations.

After seeing the trailer, In Bruges looked like a plodding British comedy with little originality and repetitious humor, hence the low expectations. Yet, In Bruges exceeded my minimal expectations, and, unlike my impression from the trailer, was an original drama with good acting and a nice blend of comedy mixed in. It was funny in the right places and appropriately dramatic when the story shifted into high gear towards the end.

Set in, no surprise here, Bruges, Belgium, the plot focuses on two London hit men, Ray played by Colin Farrell, and Ken, played by Brendan Gleeson. The pair is sent to Belgium after Ray botches his first hi. And therein lies the humor, Ray has no interest in being in the medieval city, and Ken wants to sight see.

I've never really liked Colin Farrell but who knew he had such a good sense of comedic timing? There is a running gag involving fighting with a bottle, and karate, that he manages to keep fresh as it pops up throughout the film. Brendan Gleeson's character provides the moral center and plays the straight man to Farrell's Ray. This works well as the movie turns more serious towards the end. However, for my money, the best performance is delivered by Ralph Fiennes who plays Harry the pair's criminal overlord back in London. Whereas Gleeson character embodies the moral center, Fiennes's Harry fills the role of principled immorality, if there is such a thing. Fiennes creates a character with a dubious moral center and is a quite believable figure of menace when he travels to Bruges to square off with Ken. Also, of note, is Jordan Prentice, an irritable dwarf who's in town to act in a movie filming there. His ramblings in one scene, about a coming race war, is worth the price of admission right there.

The only aspect of the film that didn't work for me was Ray's love interest. Early in the film he manages to woo Chloe, a drug dealer with, drum roll please, a heart of gold. For my tastes, the budding romance seems a little forced and comes across more as a vehicle for jokes and drama. But it's a small thing and I doubt anyone but me would notice.

I intentionally left a lot of plot points out, because, as I've mentioned, this film surprised me in a good way and I don't won't to ruin it for anyone else.

In Bruges is a good film. Go see it.

At the very least, it'll make you want to visit Bruges.

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.

I've used IMDb for years but have never felt the urge to post a review until now. I had the pleasure of attending an advanced screening of this movie in NYC last night to which Colin Farrell attended. I bought the screening tickets just wanting to bring my fiancé to see some celebrities in person while not knowing much about the movie. I figured it would be a "hard-to-understand" foreign, indie film whose humor would be lost on a "dumb American." However, the truth was absolutely the opposite. My hard-to-please fiancé agreed.

The movie is a bit slow for the first half but it's entirely necessary to set the mood and the contrast between that and the second half. That's all I'll say so as not to spoil anything. It is really a great movie. There's comedy, beautiful cinematography, and awesome action scenes, albeit scattered throughout and absent at times when the viewer may be growing weary. I'd highly recommend seeing this movie. It's definitely worth the price of a movie ticket while most of the crap out there these days isn't worth the cost of the paper they print the tickets on.

Let us all know what you think after you see it.