To my regret, this will be my last post.
The In Bruges Blog and In Bruges Fansite will stay online, if it's up to me indefinitely. However it will be an archive. If huge things or fun things come up and I have the time, I will happily break my vow for a second and quickly post it on the site anyway. But consider the shop closed.
The only thing that is still to come is a bigger Soundtrack Section on the website. I will include my own review also.
I have a big list of reasons for closing up shop, but I'm not sure wether I should share this with you or not. These are my own reasons, and the main reason will always be that I am simply not one of those straight A students nor am I someone who takes their opportunity to go to college lightly. Studies go first, and let's just say I haven't found enough reason to make college and In Bruges share time anymore.
Maybe later I will edit this post with a list of reasons, but probably not. It would be a long list anyhow, so I'm pretty sure you can think of a reason or two.
The fanlisting will remain open for new members, also indefinitely. If you want to keep up with news about In Bruges, I suggest you join Colin Farrell Fansite or Ralph Fiennes Corner, where I will remain a member as I have been for a long time, and where news will be posted if it comes up - wether by me or by other members.
If you wish to discuss In Bruges, break into my new forum for MartinMcDonagh.Com - the forum is located here and I'd appreciate it if you'd break the silence and discuss In Bruges all you want however you want.
By the way a late happy birthday to Martin McDonagh!
Anyway. I've really enjoyed making this blog and fansite, and I've loved hearing from all of you. Keep supporting the film, no matter when it comes out. Even if you do download it, which is not something I will openly say I understand (maybe secretly but definately not openly), don't forget to go see this one on the big screen. I'm sure it is a great film and worth the money, and if anything Martin McDonagh and his cast are worth the support.
Those who were in Bruges a year ago - January, February, March 2007 - cherish the memories. Those who loved the film, keep spreading the love. Adios amigos!
Now I know that Universal Pictures knows about this website. I know fairly certainly that they have read stuff on here more than once. Which makes sense and is really cool.
I have one plea for Universal. Just one. If you're gonna change the Greek release date last minute, go ahead, they can wait another week. If you're gonna postpone the Belgian release date, fine, they've accepted it, they really don't care anymore.
But I am begging you on my online knees to PLEASE change the Dutch release date back. You had it on 5 June, and now it's gone to 26 June. I am begging you this because this way I will never see this film here.
Just before that release date I am leaving for Arizona and California, to visit family. I will be staying there for two months. This way I will miss the entire Dutch release. I am begging you please make the release date earlier. Please. I want to see this film here and support it. It is a bit ironic that I have invested days and days into this website and that I should be the one to miss the release. I think it would be very cruel. I'd have to wait for the DVD release, which'll be nearing 2009 I'm sure.
Please don't do that to me. I know I'm just one person, but I was gonna go see it at least five times and bring everyone and anyone I could. I know this is a laugh to you, but come on. When are you going to start cutting us some slack. Please?
A new site is being born! The site MartinMcDonagh.Com is currently under construction, as I designed its new layout which will soon appear.
Also it has a new forum located at http://martinmcdonagh.invisionplus.net where I will be the forum moderator. I'd be happy to see you there, we have an In Bruges section on the still empty forum so by all means discuss the film there!
Well, it took them ages of changing their minds, but now there is a definite date for the UK release of In Bruges. It is 18 April. Of course, that's the day I have a huge oral exam on science philosophy. Fuck.
The past release dates in chronological order have been (just for fun):
28 March
4 April
7 March
11 April
14 March
4 April
18 April
Here is the thing; I really want to go there and cover the premiere if there is one at all. But honestly with school and the continuously changing date making it difficult for me... and not being sure wether director or actors will be rocking a red carpet or not... I'm not sure if it will happen.
After the release date for Belgium was changed from "March" to 25 June, I have tried to figure out why. It seems that Universal Pictures is set on not commenting, which is fine. We love them for In Bruges, anyway. But a reason would have been nice.
I have been in touch with the Bruges City Film Council, and they were as disappointed as I was about the delay. They did not give any hint as to what Universal's reasons were, but did confirm that I got it right in my blog; this was entirely Universal Pictures' call. Apparently I do understand the film industry, kind of!
So to spell it out loud and clear once and again and for the last time; if it had been up to the city of Bruges, this would not have happened. From their disappointment I could tell they tried to fight the good fight for it, but nobody is a match for Universal Pictures, are they? Also, this confirms that the individuals publicly involved with this film (Martin McDonagh and his cast) did not call on this one. I don't know what their position on this is, and I wouldn't blame them for not having one at all. Martin McDonagh has clearly shown to care about what the city of Bruges thinks of his film, so if there was ever a hook he sure as hell isn't on it.
Since Universal will not fill me in, here comes my explanation for the matter.
Rumours went around about there being a problem with French subtitles or something of the sort, and that being the reason. I don't believe that, though.
As some of you may have noticed, the writers in Hollywood went on a strike a while ago. The industry obviously needs its writers, and though the strike is over, a lot of money was lost because of the strike. As you may have noticed, all production companies are currently doing the following to compensate that: they wage all their bets on the big blockbusters and forget about the little films. Because of the losses during the strike, they are cashing in on making big films even bigger - rather than investing in making small films bigger. This is a safe bet. This way they have a bigger chance at earning the lost money back.
In Bruges, unfortunately, does not fall in the blockbuster category and has along with many other films taken the backseat. You can see it in almost anything; America was screaming for a wider release, but the release in America is actually going smaller and smaller again. It never went over 232 locations or so. This says enough. In Bruges is not a priority for Universal Pictures, and so they are just not that interested in what the European fanbases have to say about it. The European fanbases will not make up for the writers' strike, the big audience will.
A lot is invested in films like Cloverfield and 10,000 BC - they would rather double the usual profits of films like these than double the profits on small films, understandably. It is too bad that the film industry has to be all about money, given that in the end it is all about the art.
And when it comes to high profits, and they already stopped caring about In Bruges, little countries like Belgium and The Netherlands are the least of their interests. If In Bruges gets any attention, it will be focused on (as you can see from the release dates) Ireland and the UK.
It's not unforgivable, but definately unforgettable. Honestly I doubt how quickly Universal Pictures will ever be invited back into Belgium again. Also the illegal downloads of In Bruges have increased, their main core being in Belgium and The Netherlands. What a surprise. I will however always keep encouraging you to go see this film in theatres. Just because Universal doesn't think we matter doesn't mean that we shouldn't support Martin McDonagh, Colin Farrell (whatever he's said about Bruges, he means well), Brendan Gleeson and Ralph Fiennes and all the others. Just don't forget the unforgettable experience they gave Belgium by filming there - I know I will never forget it.
So we'll just spend our money on them later!
Source: The Daily Reveille (Louisiana)
There is an oasis in the cinematic desert. It is located in Bruges.
While the bloated, flatulent "Jumper" floated around to box office acclaim, "In Bruges" tiptoed into theaters and maintained its anonymity to its own detriment - it is the most satisfying film I have seen this year.
In "In Bruges," two Irish hitmen, Ken and Ray, are sent by Harry, a voice on a phone, to cool off in the city after a job.
As is usual in these buddy films, Ray and Ken are studies in contrast. Ray, erratic, apathetic and blunt, would rather hang in a bar waiting for a date. Ken, on the other hand, calm, curious and cultivated, is more at ease unfurling maps and touring sights.
Instead of proceeding along this route, the story takes a detour once we become aware of the real purpose of the trip. Ray had mistakenly killed a boy in his first job. He is remorseful for what he did, pangs of penitence hitting him like a throbbing headache. Richard Shepard's "The Matador" had a similar premise. "The Matador" was about an assassin undergoing an existential crisis - a pregnancy of guilt.
So we wonder: if these killers grow consciences, what are they good for?
"In Bruges" is director Martin McDonagh's first feature-length film. He had previously directed live action short "Six Shooter," which won an Academy Award in 2005. McDongagh also had what from all appearances amounts to a successful playwriting career. Two of his plays, "The Lieutenant of Inishmore" and "The Beauty Queen of Leenane" were nominated for Tony Awards.
This glance at his career is essential because "In Bruges" is less a film than a tightly plotted play shot on location.
No action from a performer is wasted, all choices by them serve a specific purpose in McDonagh's dramatic universe. As later becomes apparent in the film, no actor disappears - once their part has been played, they do not leave the stage; instead they join the chorus, becoming observers of the impending cataclysm.
This literary mien is also captured by the dialogue. Humorous and relevant, instead of the smart rat-a-tat of Quentin Tarantino, the dialogue nudges the plot forward toward its determined end.
But not only is "In Bruges" a literary piece, it is also visually stimulating. No fancy angles or chiaruscuro effects here. What works are the scenes of the cobblestone streets and bridges, the vacant museums, all hinting at a forgotten part of Europe.
While "In Bruges" might bear some resemblance to Beckett's "Waiting for Godot," a closer cousin to it would be Carol Reed's thriller "The Third Man." In the "Third Man," more than half the film is spent speaking about the villain Harry Lime, so when he appears, it is less an entrance than a crystallization of our expectations as viewers. Harry's appearance is no different. His unveiling represents an eruption of the violence that has lain latent through out the film.
"In Bruges" closes with an act that is supposed to embody honor, though it is essentially a triumph of guilt. Harry is afraid of perpetual retribution, just as we are - everyone is scared of their private version of hell.
McDonagh plays with our expectations and like the paintings of a man's skin being peeled shows that beauty, humor and violence can coexist. He is a director who has refused to take the easy way out and in the process has delivered an entertaining, enlightening film. It is only the beginning of better things to come.
Source: Independent.ie
In 2004, Martin McDonagh expanded his glittering career into film with the brief and bloody short, Six Shooter. Like practically everything else the award-winning playwright has touched, it turned to gold, winning him an Oscar in 2006. In Bruges is his first feature.
Interestingly, McDonagh originally intended his two principal characters to be Cockneys; he wanted to get away from the Irish rural characters that have populated his plays, and write about the city he grew up in.
When Brendan Gleeson came on board, he remarked to McDonagh that his London dialogue read surprisingly well in a Dublin accent. When Colin Farrell joined him on the cast, the writer and director must have decided that resistance was futile and his two London heavies became Dubliners on the loose. Ray (Farrell) and Ken (Gleeson) are a couple of hitmen who arrive in Bruges in the aftermath of a botched killing.
Ray, it turns out, is an apprentice bad guy, recruited by Ken. When sent to kill a priest (Ciaran Hinds), Ray shoots the cleric but also succeeds in taking the head off an adjacent praying child. In McDonagh's sentimental underworld, gangsters have a code of honour below which they will not stoop. Whacking small boys is clearly unacceptable, and so Ray and Ken have been sent to the quaint Belgian city to lay low until things cool down. Or so they think.
When their verbose and excitable boss Harry (Ralph Fiennes) contacts Ken, he tells him that Ray has crossed the line and thus forfeited the right to live. As Ken brought him into the gang, it's up to him to kill him. But Ken has grown fond of his young partner, and is faced with a horrible dilemma.
Ray, meanwhile, moans bitterly about his surroundings. Bruges, he decides, is "a shithole", its culture is boring, its nightlife staid and hokey. Then he stumbles onto a film set and is smitten with a mysterious blonde who turns out to be a drug dealer. Chloe (Clemence Poesey) and he go out on a date, and though it ends fairly disastrously (he attacks a tourist who complains about Chloe's smoking and then beats up her ex-boyfriend) the two begin to fall in love. But Harry has arrived in Bruges, and doesn't seem very happy.
An intermittently frantic black comedy that adopts from the word go a playful and digressive verbal style reminiscent of vintage Tarantino, In Bruges is full of freshness and ideas. McDonagh and his producers had the sense to find themselves a good cinematographer, and Eigil Bryld's lovingly-photographed Bruges becomes a telling counterpoint to the squalor and pointlessness of the central characters' lives.
Some of McDonagh's writing positively sparkles, especially when a disembodied Harry is explaining to Ken that Bruges would be overrun by tourists if it was "somewhere else -- you know, somewhere good". In fact, it's Fiennes who best succeeds in bringing the dialogue to life, which makes you wonder if Ken and Ray might not have worked better as Cockneys. Fiennes, in an unlikely role for him, is simply fabulous, and draws all the comedy from his character's inner turmoil without turning him into a cartoonish buffoon.
Gleeson and Farrell are also very good as the loveable gangsters, and Farrell in particular looks sharper than he has in a long time. Ken and Ray have an almost father-son dimension to their relationship, and the two actors develop this theme with commendable subtlety.
However, there's an underlying glibness to the tone of In Bruges that prevents it from being entirely believable. Some of McDonagh's set pieces seem too contrived; his cleverness tends to get in the way of his characters' credibility; and sometimes the film feels more like an intellectual exercise than a story.
But there's loads to enjoy here as well, and for a first feature it's a remarkably polished achievement. One hopes this is the first of many.
Source: Go! Lubbock Texas Entertainment Guide
Dark ‘In Bruges’ will make you laugh
The first thing audiences will do at the conclusion of “In Bruges” is say, “That didn’t turn out the way I thought it would.”
The second thing many viewers will do is go home, Google the Belgian city of Bruges and think seriously about putting a visit to Bruges at Christmastime on personal bucket lists.
(I stole that from the movies: things you want to do before you kick the bucket.)
Those lacking funds for international travel still are advised to rush to see playwright turned writer-director Martin McDonagh’s feature-length film debut, which combines elements of murder for hire, guilt, bigotry, art museums, Dutch prostitutes and a dwarf into what is essentially a comedy.
OK, so it’s a very dark comedy, and a bit imperfect, to boot; the fact is, you’ll still laugh out loud, sometimes at the absurdity of it all, and you’ll definitely grow to like a couple of guys named Ken and Ray.
If the name McDonagh sounds slightly familiar, it is because his play called “The Pillowman,” also overflowing with dark humor, has been staged twice in the past couple of years in Lubbock.
“In Bruges” opens in bloody fashion, with Colin Farrell (as Ray) telling us, “After I killed him, I dropped the gun in the Thames” — which may be his longest sentence in the film that is not punctuated by F-bombs. Consider that a warning if trying to avoid profanity.
And from here, we view the killing in question, as Ray, a rookie entering the business of life-taking, is assigned a hit on a priest. While completing the assignment, the murder still does not go off as planned.
Afterward, he and his mentor, a veteran trigger man played by Brendan Gleeson, are instructed by their unseen employer, Harry, to hole up in Bruges and cool their heels.
They initially come off like an Irish Oscar and Felix, disagreeing about every little thing, with Farrell willing to accept anything but boredom.
Consider, though, that Bruges is Europe’s best preserved medieval city.
It is a fairy land of canals, museums and beautiful old homes. Ken (played by Gleeson) loves the church spires, the history, the possible existence of the blood of Christ, and at least interests Ray in the Bosch painting of “The Last Judgment,” even if Ray does compare purgatory to being stuck in Bruges for two weeks.
Upon being labeled the world’s worst tourist, Ray responds, “If I’d grown up on a farm and was retarded, Bruges might impress me. But I wasn’t and it doesn’t.”
McDonagh allows us time to get to know the two men for a reason. Ray may be suicidal; there was that one misplaced bullet during his first hit. And Ken becomes more of a father figure than simply a mentor.
The tone changes when Ray crashes a movie set, finds himself attracted to a young woman (Clemence Poesy) and strikes up a friendship with a dwarf, acted with reigned-in abandon by Jordan Prentice.
A night of depravity with cocaine, prostitutes and Jimmy predicting a race war gradually becomes an introduction to revelation.
Ray may be film’s most bigoted anti-hero; he has insults for the weight-challenged and the height-challenged, and for Canadians, and cannot seem to grasp where a lapse in manners might have occurred.
He’s also in pain, and using even these happy times to work up his courage to kill himself.
The final act arrives in a rush, with Ralph Fiennes transferring the malevolence of Voldemort into Harry, whose principles call for murder.
Farrell proves himself a terrific character actor here, and Gleeson steals more than one scene. But viewers may be challenged as black comedy takes a sharp turn into a finale likened to the bloody end of a Shakespeare tragedy — and, in the process, we also learn why McDonagh introduced Jimmy in the first place.
But in the course of two weeks in Bruges, what McDonagh is also able to unveil is that Ken and Ray are a pair of nice blokes … at least when they’re not killing people.
Source: The Michigan Daily
Explosions, hitmen and Belgium
Bruges is a quaint little city in Belgium, full of historical buildings and scenic canals. It seems like a lovely place to visit, but not for those who crave action and excitement. The film "In Bruges" is sort of a love/hate letter to the town, celebrating its innocence while simultaneously lamenting its dullness, all while using it as the backdrop for a deliberately out-of-place action picture.
Colin Farrell ("Miami Vice") and Brendan Gleeson ("Beowulf") play two Irish hitmen who are forced to hide out in Bruges as the result of a botched operation. Immediately, their contrasting personalities become apparent: Ken (Gleeson) relishes the opportunity to sightsee, while Ray (Farrell) takes an instant disliking to the place and declares it a "shithole." Both actors clearly enjoy their roles here (notice their expressions during a tranquil boat ride), and play off of each other well. It's especially nice to see Farrell loosen up and play the half-drunk, sarcastic Irishman, a role more suited to his personality, especially compared to the hard-boiled tough guys he plays in American movies.
From this point it appears that "In Bruges" will become a simple, mismatched-buddy comedy with European flair. However, the movie surprises by taking the time to delve into the lives and troubles of these two men. Ray, in particular, is especially shaken up over his recent sins, and questions what will happen to him in the afterlife. He sees Bruges as his own personal hell, but the city really acts as a sort of purgatory for he and Ken, as well as for all the other lonely and bizarre people who float into their lives.
There's a lot of humor here, but it has a dark tinge. "In Bruges" is built on guilt, desperation and fear, yet still manages to be extremely funny. There's even a dwarf named Jimmy (Jordan Prentice, "American Pie Presents Beta House") who's in town to shoot a dream sequence for a movie. Generally any dwarf in a film's supporting cast is only used as a cheap attention-grabber. But it doesn't feel that way. He has time to develop his own surly, sarcastic personality. In fact, Jimmy uses his demeanor to steal the movie's biggest laughs.
But not everything is so loose, though. The archetype of evil himself, Ralph Fiennes (Voldemort from the "Harry Potter" series), turns up near the end as a frustrated mob boss with a score to settle. His presence ushers in the film's blisteringly violent third act, in which moral codes are questioned and where lives are trivialized. The innocence of Bruges contrasts so sharply with all the chaos that it raises the movie to new heights of absurdity.
Bruges is a paradise and a nightmare, a tourist trap and a death trap all rolled into one. Writer-director Martin McDonagh ("Six Shooter") masterfully peels back the layers of the town while doing the same for his own story. One of the characters declares, somewhat ironically, that no one is fit to die without a visit to Bruges. In spite of everything else that happens, by the end, it's hard to disagree.
Rating: 3 and 1/2 out of 5 stars
Source: Daily Princetonian
Colin Farrell makes up for past bombs with 'In Bruges'
"In Bruges" was a surprise. The film's marketing gave us the wrong impression by printing posters with the corny tagline: "Shoot first, sightsee later." As if that wasn't off-putting enough, they then dropped a trailer filled with tacky PowerPoint-like gunshot sounds and swooping Christian imagery clip art. Frankly, the special effects of the trailer turned us off. We guess the producers were trying hard to give the movie some commercial appeal, but in the process they diminished its potentially respectable image. Even so, movies that provide girls the chance to drool over a bad-boy, hunky Irishman, a.k.a. Colin Farrell, do draw people to the cinema, giving "In Bruges" a fighting chance to fend for itself critically.
So, let's dive into the basics. "In Bruges" is about two hitmen, Ray (Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson) who are sent into hiding by their boss (Ralph Fiennes) in Bruges (a medieval city in Belgium) as punishment for a job screw-up. The beginning of the movie focuses very much on the relationship between the two seemingly mismatched hitmen and the humorous tensions that transpire between them.
Ray is the typical young, impertinent rookie, while Ken is the quintessential old, beaten-up seasoned veteran. Their bond evolves out of necessity, yet it embodies a father-son relationship. The chemistry between the pair comes across most touchingly when Ken tries to educate Ray about the history of Bruges' cathedrals, and Ray walks out on him. In one of the film's funniest one-liners, revealed in the trailer, Ray voices his disdain for Bruges by saying "If I'd grown up on a farm and was retarded, Bruges might impress me ... but I didn't, so it doesn't." Reading this, you might think the movie's just another pseudo-badass action comedy in the vein of "Rush Hour" or "Men in Black." But the plot soon spirals out of control, as the past catches up to these flawed characters with brutal, emotional results, and the audience is taken for a ride.
By setting the action amid the evocative, atmospheric canals, alleyways and alcoves of Bruges, writer-director Martin McDonagh gives us an unconventional spin on the hackneyed theme of hitmen facing the consequences for botching up jobs. His screenplay is great: a bracingly offbeat blend of deadpan humor and endless expletives - Fiennes in particular seems to have a liking for the F-word. The characters are strongly developed, too, and we become drawn in by their warm humanity and charmingly rugged personas. And it doesn't stop there: McDonagh includes themes of existentialism and nihilism while still finding time to pack in a thrilling chase scene, gunshots and stunt jumps. What more can you ask for?
The acting is commendable, of course. (Un)fortunately for us, Farrell does not play dress-up or take off his shirt to display his remarkable pecs. He does, however, succeed in stripping off at least one thing: the title of Mr. Mediocrity, which he earned through yawn-inducing bores like Oliver Stone's "Alexander" and Michael Mann's "Miami Vice." Not having to worry about his accent is probably a big help. Comfortable in his own Irish brogue, Farrell is able to concentrate more on acting and less on articulation.
Fiennes, in a performance reminiscent of his terrifying, career-defining turn in "Schindler's List," does not appear until halfway through the movie but steals the scene once he does. His cold, widened eyes pierce straight through the audience and every character onscreen so that even painful memories of "Maid in Manhattan" are forgotten. Hopefully this will be the beginning of Fiennes' return to quality filmmaking, away from "Harry Potter" and Jennifer Lopez.
One must not forget the other scene-stealer of the film: Jimmy the Midget, played by Jordan Prentice. He is the cherry on top of a large, creamy cake, the cute Ewok to Farrell's Luke Skywalker, and his drug-induced hilarities have the capacity to knock you out of your seats. As if the hitman theme were not enough, the midget's place in the movie adds to its eradication of political correctness, making it an entertaining spectacle.
Just as the characters in the movie don't write each other off, you should give "In Bruges" a chance to prove itself. The film as a whole, in fact, is like a midget: There's much more to it than meets the eye.
Pros: Funny and endearing, yet deeply meaningful
Cons: Someone should fire the marketing agency responsible for the trailers
Paws: 4 out of 5
I suppose going to Princeton gives you the right to judge Colin Farrell not to mention make up an image. Take off his shirt? I don't recall him ever doing a film based on taking off his shirt. Name one. He took it off in a couple, but actually those were good films and it wasn't like he was showing it off. He only had to have a six pack for Miami Vice.
