In Bruges (2008)

8.5 of 10

Personal Bias Alert:  Likes dark comedy, not at all offended by language

            Few movies are as delightful smart as “In Bruges.”  Too often movies feel dumbed down, and even intelligent films can fall into the trap of making only one aspect of it truly interesting or surprising.  I understand why; movies simply don’t have a lot of time to tell their story.  According to Amazon, the average length of a book is 64,000 words.   A television show can have hundreds of hours of content, and even unsuccessful series often get 5 to 6 hours from their initial order, far exceeding the runtime of a movie.  Plays are the only equivalent medium, normally running between 1½ to 3 hours.  It makes sense, then, that an accomplished playwright could swoop in and effortlessly cram so much into a movie.

            “In Bruges” picks up the story of Irish hitmen Ray (Colin Farrell) and Ken (Brenden Gleeson) shortly after a botched assignment, finding them hiding out in the Belgian city of Bruges.  Ken seems happy about the paid excursion, dragging the huffy Ray around while he takes in the sights.  Eventually the botched hit catches up with them, and their lackadaisical days are replaced with life and death decisions.

            Other characters eventually come into play, including their boss played by Ralph Fiennes, but much of the movie is dominated by Ray and Ken’s odd couple pairing.  Despite their differences they do like each other, and their banter is razor sharp.  They discuss everything from mortality to gay beers, and it never fails to be fun.  This seems like a good time for a side note.  The characters say really offensive things throughout the film, so if you can’t get past that sort of thing, then this isn’t the movie for you.

            The wide range of discussions that Ray and Ken have are a direct result of how well drawn the characters are.  They both have a lot on their minds, and thoughts sink and surface at the drop of a hat.  That’s often enough to carry a film, but playwright turned writer/director Martin McDonagh puts in a deceptively intricate plot as well, then garnishes the whole thing with some well-used symbolism.  Oh, and it’s really funny, too.

            It’s a treat to see “In Bruges” walk the tightrope it does, balancing many tricky elements without dropping the ball.  It’s one of those plots where everything crashes together at the end, but the connections and coincidences don’t feel forced or disingenuous.  The characters aren’t cookie-cutter likable but do have an undeniable charm (Colin Farrell is perfect for this).   It blends genres with ease, and the tonal shifts aren’t jarring.  It’s delightful when a film sets itself up so well then capitalizes on its promise.

            It’s a pleasing, funny film, but I can’t say it ever becomes more than that.  It evokes an oddly subdued reaction.  I was amused but never laughed out loud.  I was engaged but not invested.  I liked it but didn’t love it.  It didn’t do anything wrong, and I can’t explain why I had this reaction.  My only clear complaint of the film is with the end narration, which felt tacked on.  But my subdued reaction predated the ending, so that’s clearly not to blame.  This is why I described “In Bruges” as delightful; it will make you smile, maybe make you feel a generalized affection towards it, but it’s not love.

            Other Notes:

Ø  The city was filmed beautifully.  It evoked the languid, fairytale-like atmosphere really well.

Ø  Ray is one of those characters that says the things you wish you could say, and I liked it.

Ø  Is Bruges purgatory?

Ø  “What’s a lollipop man doing knowing f***ing karate?”