Waiting for the Barbarians

This film makes the viewers question who are the real barbarians. I find it engaging and introspective. It's beautifully shot too.

THE PRO'S: The Barbarians is a beautifully shot meditation on what it means to be civilized on both a national and a personal level. Every frame in this film is gorgeous; from the windswept vistas of the blazing frontier to the bespoke stucco architecture sinking into the sands of time, this film has texture. Mark Rylance turns in a touching performance as a man trying to remain decent in an increasingly cruel situation. And while the central message of "maybe WE'RE the barbarians!!!!" would be usually easy and trite, the movie is careful to depict both sides as falling prey to xenophobia and the us-vs-them mentality. Johhny Depp is also good here: his enigmatic strangeness is reigned in more than usual and he sells the cruelty well. The set design is also worth noting and really succeeds in transporting you to this forgotten outpost from another place and time.

THE CON'S: At several points along its journey, the film can really drag. This was no doubt intentional, but that doesn't save the pacing. There's a little too much self indulgence, a few too many times the camera is allowed to linger. And while that does help this film achieve its melancholy epitaph for the civility and morals of an old world, it also breaks the immersion. The very last shot, which I won't spoil, is also in my opinion a misstep. There is a suspicion built up over the course of the film and bandied about by the characters which this shot sort of obliterates. Perhaps this is true to the source material; this is an adaptation after all. But a little restraint there would go a long way.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Waiting for the Barbarians is a fascinating study of helpless people in helpless situations, civility vs. Brutality, and the decay of the old world in the face of the inevitable winds of change. If you can hunker down for a slower, longer burn that admittedly should have been cleaned up in the editing room, you'll be rewarded. 8 out of 10 stars.

I'm a movie goer, I like very much watching great movies, the ones that touch our hearts with their great storyline, and every now and then one comes a long that leaves me think about what I've just watched and reflect its story on my personal life and the world we live in and what's going in it.

I don't think it was about any specific events in the human history, but it captures very well the cruelty of human beings against each other, but at the same time in the midst of this savagery, there is still someone who still have a very good heart, still human, still have the courage to stand up against those savages, even when his own life is put at risk. I believe it shows extremely well how those who speak the truth and warns us of our evil deeds and the unfairness we do daily how they are being badly treated, mocked and ridiculed in our organizations and our societies. This movie is really great.

JM Coetzee is the author of the original book, and is rightly lauded for his story telling ability as much as his literary ability. However, his works haven't easily transferred to screen, which is not uncommon for high-end literary works. This one to me is borderline.

What we have is a tale set in the 19th century of a humble wise magistrate of a garrision on the frontiers of an unnamed European Empire (seems like an area bordering around the former Soviet Union states). His stoic nature though is confronted by the entry of a colonel and his forces, who seem hell-bent to start battle with locals who are NOT looking for aggression. The Colonel is everything our magistrate is not, and the whole matter is complicated by the magistrates falling in love with a local lady he helps to return to her people.

Surprisingly this film hasn't been warmly received by the critics which is surprising, as it is actually very good. The main hold is the sublime performance by Mark Rylance in the lead, who can't have been any better than what he has done with the role. You empathise with him, and see his destruction at the hands of his colleagues (which clearly shows that the true Barbarians are at his side and not beyond the walls).

Johnny Depp was fine but seemed out of place, whilst Robert Pattison gets better with every film he stars in. The setting is perfect and beautiful, and the film has a fine slow pace. Admittedly it could have helped to flesh out some other characters more than just the magistrate to give them more weight, especially the mysterious colonel.

I don't get what it is that the critics were downgrading here? It's a fine existential story, and one that some will enjoy revisiting. Fair enough, the subject matter and a number of scenes are uncomfortable to watch, but that's the point! It's not about a rose-tinted look at the colonial past. It's also not 'Zulu' (which admittedly I very much love).

It's a tough watch at times, but very worth a viewing. Mark Rylance will little do better anywhere else ever again. He at least is a major reason to watch this one.

I expected the film with...fear. Because each adaptation of a great novel remains a try . Because the characters and the atmosphere are more posessions of reader than work of the writer . But the film is decent . Grace to cinematography , reasonable solutions for inner monologue of Magister and, no doubts, for the admirable work of Mark Rylance and Greta Scacchi. And, sure, for not bad Colonel Joll proposed by Johnny Depp. Moments of novel are fresh, the intro is just beautiful and it works, maybe better than as adaptation, like a colonial story. And the barbarians as Mongols remains an inspired solution. In my case, only two surprises - the absence of generous belly of Magister and his so large office. But , obvious, it is a reasonable adaptation. So, just decent.