IN BRUGES Discussion - Page 2

If you want to see Gleeson's absolutely best performance and a damn fine film, check out Boorman's The General. Oustanding piece of work.

Anybody knows when it's coming to DVD? There are a few people I'm dying to show this to.

R2 comes out in August, but I ordered a R1 release that comes out next week on 24th of June.

I want more McDonagh movies. And it's also my favorite this year.

What was the hold up? The man is consistantly excellent. I've loved him since Braveheart, and can't think of anything he's done that isn't, at the minimum, very good. I just saw him again in Kingdom of Heaven, and it's a nothing role, as a secondary villain, but he just owns the film whenever he's on camera.

I've never really paid attention to him before. And I haven't seen Kingdom of Heaven.

I still think the clerk at the tower tapping Fiennes on the head repeatedly is one of the funniest things I've seen in cinema this year. I loved the whole setup of the final scene too, it was clear what was going to happen as soon as Farrel saw the midget again but it really was well orchestrated.

This things been out a while, but just in case I'll invisotext my question about the ending: I think there is some debate about whether Farrell dies or not, which seems intentional. On the other hand, once I saw the Bosch masks running around, I figured he was clearly dying and going to hell. I know they had a real world explanation (the movie shoot), but after all that foreshadowing, I feel resolved he spends eternity in Bruges. Of course, it's all very obviously up to interpretation, but that's mine. Man, I gotta see this again.

The ending of the original script was much different and I was dreading it as we got closer and closer to the end of the film. I had no reason to expect anything different because McDonagh treated the script like it was a holy text. But then it never happened. I'm glad it didn't, but it was a clever and moving piece of writing, even if I found it very depressing. If you're interested, I'll explain what it was in invisotext:

The scene with his POV as he's being placed in the ambulance was the same, but no voice over. You CUT TO sometime later and he's on the mend living in a shabby apartment. He has a newspaper article about the boy's murder on his wall and the confessional note.

His phone rings constantly and finally he answers it. It's Chloe. They have a dryly funny conversation where she pleads with him to let her take care of him. She's very worried about him. She wants him to come and visit. He refuses. She wants to come and visit him. He says he won't be there.

He finds out the lady at the hotel had a kid and named him Tobias. She wants him to admit he likes Bruges "just a little bit." He says he does, but "just a little bit." He then says he has to hang up on her. She asks why.

"Because I don't want you to hear the gunshot."

And he hangs up on her. And kills himself.

I was depressed for like half a day. And not just because it made me feel like a shitty screenwriter, that is a hell of a downer ending.

Fuck. Still, I like the ending we got. Spending the entire movie wanting to die, only to get shot and realizing he really wants to live. It's even more powerful.

The ending he settled on is my favorite version as well.

Well, after seeing this and reading The Pillowman, it's pretty obvious that McDonagh is a master at the downer ending.

I am really looking forward to this coming out on DVD next week.

I think In Bruges helped me remember what a warm and comforting presence Gleeson had. The roles he had in Troy and Kingdom of Heaven kinda made me forget. They were such one-dimensional bad-guys. Gleeson did the best he could, but what was there to play with? Don't even ask me about MI2. He was utterly wasted in that (as was everyone else who wasn't Cruise). I almost forgot he was even in the movie.

I also loved him in Braveheart. I think it was my first exposure to Gleeson.

Thank God we got the other ending. I might have killed myself after watching that. What a bummer.

You don't know karate!

But I zoo know about ze alcoves.

NOOKS AND CRANNIES!!!

Nothing will beat "BOTTLE!"

This thread's rejuvenation has me completely psyched about seeing this again. I can't wait for the DVD to come out. And let me say it again: Fiennes is a fucking god in this. Every scene he's in he steals. I know it's going to sound really superficial but I wish we could have a movie just about him.

The tagline would be, "The Cunt With A Code"

They've got my 10 quid. Make it so.

Who the fuck did Glesson play in MI:2?

I'm really glad this film and, by extension, Farrell and Gleeson are getting some love. Farrell has been beating a bad rap for a few years. I asked a friend of mine why he doesn't like Farrell, despite admitting his appreciation of his work in Tigerland and The New World. His answer was he seems like a prick. What? Show me the evidence. He's a pretty self-effacing guy who tries to pick interesting, challenging projects (much like Brad Pitt) to use what clout he has to bring money and exposure to them. Pisses me off that genuinely talented, interesting actors like Farrell and Russell Crowe are demonised (sure Crowe's done some bad shit, but he's actually a thoroughly decent guy these days) while less-talented douches are let off the hook cos they're "cute".

And Gleeson, well, he's just awesome.

The more I think about this film, the more I really think its a fine, fine piece of work. And I'll concur that I haven't seen anything else this year as thoroughly satisfying.

I'm not surprised you don't remember him. He played John C. McCloy, the CEO of the pharmaceutical company that tried to make a disease as well as its cure to make MILLIONS! Gleeson didn't have much to do other than look shady. Once the last action sequence kicks in, you never see him again.

Gleeson was the guy they pretended to get sick in M:I 2, I think.

I may have to buy this next week.

"Maybe if I was from a farm and retarded I would enjoy Bruges..."

Well, I must be from a farm and retarded then.

It's a much different film than I'd been preparing myself for, but I still loved it. Not my favorite movie of the year (That would belong to Funny Games) mostly because as much as I loved it the tone shifting was a little bit frustrating at times and up until the ending I didn't really enjoy the character of the midget as anything more than comic relief when I got the sense I should be getting at something deeper (anybody want to elaborate on that?).

As good as Farrell and Gleeson are Fiennes takes the movie to a whole other level. Glory.

It is strange, because in most movies the midget would be sad and would consequently get your sympathies, but in this movie everybody's sad.

I think part of it is that, being a foreigner in a dream sequence in a film in Bruges, he's supposed to really add to the fakeness of the setting. And at the same time, being from a different continent and midgetized, he shows that Farrell is not as much of an outsider as he thinks himself to be. I need to see this again, though, and I'll keep in mind your search for what the wee fella's deeper purpose is.

I was expecting a really over the top comedy, hardly what In Bruges ending up being. It was absolutely hilarious, but the underlying depression through the entire film gave it...not a twist, but a more serious mood that I think helped every joke's impact even more. Farrell's deliver, and mannerisms, are just brilliant. Man needs to do some more comedies. Aside from the "Raised on a farm and retarded" line my favorite two moments were Harry Water's message ('I'm the co-owner with my husband') and when Farrell gets into it with the Americans about going to the bell tower and Gleason asks what happened, then Farrell gives this awesome shrug and "hell if I know" look. Great, great movie.

A fine, fine motion picture.

I loved this. I loved how funny it was, and then how emotionally moving it became. And it's smart.

I watched this again. It's still my favorite movie of the year (or second after Wall-E). But the main thing I realized is this, I'm going to Bruges very soon.

This movie restored my faith in Colin Farrell as an actor. This is the first thing I've liked him in since Tigerland.

Clearly you haven't seen the episode of Scrubs that he did. He was so fucking funny on that show that his comic timing during In Bruges didn't surprise me at all.

I think the only movie role he's impressed me with was Bullseye in Dardevil. Say what you will about the movie, I think he's fantastic in it. I haven't seen The New World yet but I intend to. But I'm not a fan at all of Minority Report (although I should re-watch that one, it's been a LONG time and I don't know if I really got it back then), Phone Booth, Miami Vice (another need to re-watch) or Cassandra's Dream.

He was amazing as Bullseye. It was like he was the only person that knew what kind of movie they were making. It was ballsy, funny, and the right kind of over the top.

Just a great little fucking movie. And McDonagh never seemed to cop out on the way things were going. I loved that. And Bateman, I know what you are saying about the script. It can make you want to bang your ahead against the wall till the blood runs. Fucking nice piece of work.

For those who want it, his short film is on iTunes.

Edited to add, yeah I saw all the other mentions of Six Shooter on iTunes, thought I would just remind since we seem to be discussing it again.

Something else I love about this film, it never lets you love or hate any of the characters. As soon as you do, McDonagh has them do something which makes you swing the other way. To me, he wants you to love the characters for who they are completely. Not cause Ray is goofy or Harry is a badass. But because they are rounded (as much as these characters can be).

Yeah, this is one I am going to be thinking about for awhile.

"He was just a lollipop man. But he came at me with a bottle. What are you gonna do? I shot him down."
"Hmm. In my book, though, someone comes at you with a bottle, I'm sorry, that is a deadly weapon, he's gotta take the consequences."
"I know that in my heart, but I also know he was just trying to protect his brother, you know?"
"I know, but a bottle, that can kill ya. That's a case of 'It's you or him.' If he'd come at you with his bare hands, that'd be different. That wouldn't be fair."
"But, technically, someone's bare hands, they can kill you, too. What if he knew karate, say?"
"You said he was a lollipop man."
"He was a lollipop man."
"What's a lollipop man doing knowing karate?"

The lollipop bit was great, my favorite were the people from the restaurant and him blaming them as Americans for John Lennon, then when he found out they were Canadian his contemplating apologizing to them.

This is probably my favorite writing and acting in any movie this year:

"Well, you say all that fucking stuff I can't fucking shoot you now can I?"

That simple close-up of Fiennes and the way he plays his response to Gleeson's heartfelt speech is so great. It paints their characters and relationship in a whole new light.

And this is a runner up:

"I'm sorry for calling you an inanimate object."

It is lines like those which I talking about. You want to think Harry is a fucking asshole, then he turns right around and does stuff like that so you start thinking he can't be that bad. And then there is the sequence about Ken's wife and the fact that Harry got her killer.

Seriously, this movie is going to get rediscovered next year or the year after. Probably when McDonagh makes his ridiculously good sophmore effort.

I firmly believe this, but in a small way, it's being discovered now. And as much as I would have liked for it to find an audience in theaters, as that would have catapulted McDonagh and encouraged studios to cast Farrell in comedies, it's almost better that it's going to have a life on video. I don't think Focus dropped the ball in marketing the movie, because it's a hard tone to sell and it's not their fault that the second people see "Dark Comedy + Hitmen" they think one thing...bored. If someone picked this up with no preconcieved notions then they can see it as what it is, a funny and sad character movie where the character just happen to be hitmen.

I so wish I had seen this in the theater when it was here. But that is always the rub, when I am working on a production I have little time to go to the movies. Kind of wish I didn't have to send it back to Netflix. I will be picking it up once I go back to work.

I love Farrell in this piece talking about McDonagh's words.

Loved the film as well. Extraordinary acting.

I thought that the continuous shot of Ken talking to Harry on the phone, while the long tracking shot from Touch of Evil was playing on the tv, was a nice tribute.

I agree 100% with your sentiment, but your wording made me think: isn't it really in those other, lesser films that the characters just happen to be hitmen? This is one of the few films where I think the job title matters, for more than just setting and style.

When I first sat down in the theater and started to watch the movie I thought it was nice, funny, etc., another entertaining "quirky assassins" story, but I didn't love it until the phone call with Harry where Ken and the audience realize that Ken is there to kill Ray. This moment, along with its reasons and consequences, is the crux of the plot, and it could only work in a world where people kill people with honor and professionalism.

That's the main aspect of In Bruges that I love, how Harry's take on punishing a bad employee is reasonable, how Ken's dilemma between his current project and his friend makes sense, how each character at some point treats a friend's life differently than a target's and yet never gives up on the morality of the job as a whole. Everything is woven together so tightly, yet it always comes back to the simple nature of their world. It just really clicked with me (and as you may know from other threads, I've gone and read and liked all of McDonagh's plays.)

It's nowhere near as bad was what happens to you after you see a few episodes of The Wire, but seeing or reading something McDonagh sort of turns you into one of those douchebag fans that won't shut the fuck up. It's tolerable if you're talking to people that get it, but it has to be very annoying to ramble on to the unconverted.

I thought it was very funny in the thread for RockNRolla how someone said, "That's a great trailer. It reminds me of In Bruges. I should go watch that." People lump all the dark hitmen comedies into the same category. Everyone said Guy Ritchie films were just ripping off QT. Everyone said Smokin' Aces looked like it was going to be a Ritchie ripoff. Now, and it's funny how these people have such short memories, I see all these people posting on websites saying that RockNRolla just looks like Smokin' Aces 2.

But in spite of all that, I feel like In Bruges exists as its own thing. McDonagh has to know that hitmen have become cliche, but he just blazed forward and made something fresh and unique. Gross Pointe Blank is one of the only other hitmen movies that feels like it's a singular piece, but In Bruges is a much better film.

Edited to add: I should probably just speak for myself in regards to becoming "one of those douchebags." I'm sure most of you aren't as susceptible to stupid as I am.

This movie does seem to have "DVD classic" written all over it.

I didn't have any desire to see this movie until no less than 4 of my friends told me that I HAD to watch it, and they had only just watched it on DVD in the past couple of weeks. That rarely happens, a bunch of us agreeing on one movie.

I was considering skipping it based on the trailers, and I love McDonagh's plays. I might have done just that if not for free screening tickets from Chud.

Yeah, I do tend to act like some sort of Mormon missionary when a conversation turns to McDonagh. I just think he's the most exciting new voices out there, and I think he's going to mature into something akin to David Mamet, at the minimum.

I think a big part of the enjoyment of this film is so much more than the action or the hitman aspect. It is the language and the script itself which leads to us talking about it like like evangelicals coming out of a Benny Hinn service.

And personally, I am hoping for McDonagh to do better than Mamet. His first film is better than Mamet's, and I am a pretty big fan of House of Games and Mamet's more criminal and action work.

For reference and coordination: Martin McDonagh thread.

It'd be great to have more discussion in there, especially of the non-Pillowman plays, which I'm kinda itching to talk about.

Mamet is, in my opinion, the least he can do. I love Mamet, but looking at McDonagh's previous writing, The Pillowman in particular, and seeing how well it worked on film, I think he's got the potential to be Quentin Tarentino. Reservoir Dogs is a great point of comparison to In Bruges as well. A hitman comedy, but much funnier, smarter, and dramatically compelling than it should have been. It's also succesful in going to some very dark places, got great standout performances from old pros as well as surprisingly strong stuff from people like Colin Farrell and Chris Penn, and changed the tone up scene to scene. It's also notable that Res Dogs revitalized a genre that had been stagnating for years, whil In Bruges revitalized the same genre after it had been done to death by Res Dogs rip offs. All that has to happen now is for McDonagh to make his Pulp Fiction, and based on Pillowman, I think he has as good a shot as anyone out there of doing it.

Caught this last night, and I'm surprised no one has mentioned what was possibly my favorite moment in the film.

After Gleeson has jumped from the tower, he tells Farrell to take his gun. You can barely see it, but the sound of the gun falling to pieces when he pulled it out of his jacket absolutely cracked me up in what was supposed to be a sad moment with his death.

Really fun movie, and I can't recall the last time a city looked so beautiful on film...

Two reasons more why Brendan Gleeson is great in this:

1. The tie adjustment.

2. His coked out face when he comes back from the bathroom.

I thought the dwarf was to add to the "fairy tale" setting.
It was this 2-thumbed "douchebag" who made the comment in the ROCKNROLLA thread. Not knowing McDonagh's work at all (mea culpa), I only had seen the IN BRUGES trailer. The ROCKNROLLA trailer reminded me not of IN BRUGES the film (since I hadn't seen it), but that I needed to seek it out. It was an off-the-cuff remark. In hindsight (finally caught it tonight on dvd for the 1st time), it's not like a Ritchie film at all, and I was pleasantly surprised. You can blame the marketing guys for giving me those subgenre expectations (fast-talking UK crime flick), but I'm glad I was reminded to hunt it down and finally see it. It fits in-between GROSS POINT BLANK and SEXY BEAST (and not just alphabetically, but in tone).
I particularly dug the death scene eye-rolling.

The film is simultaneously tragic, comedic, and touching. The actors really embodied the characters and the dialogue is aces.