|
Somewhere
along the line once the decision was made to remake "The Four
Feathers" for the umpteenth time someone got queasy. They got
queasy because "The Four Feathers", at its roots, is an
adventure of imperialism championing the glory of the British army
over the brown masses who had the temerity to try and overthrow
them. Along the way, the filmmakers managed to lose their grip on
most of what made the first few versions work. "The Four Feathers"
is not likely to be remade again until Hollwyood stops trying to
make the stuff of shallow adventure serials into full-blown epics.
All the previous versions of "The Four Feathers" were
made during a time when political sensibilities about race were
not prominent, hence leaving each version of the movie to worry
about its essential quality: the adventure. "The Four Feathers"
2002 is a glossy, well-produced movie that tries to make the Kiplingesque
adventure into an epic and ends up being a wasted effort.
The
core story is about a young officer in the British army who resigns
at the last minute when his regiment is sent to the Sudan to put
down a revolt of Islamists, disgracing his friends but also his
fiancee. He receives the symbolic four feathers for cowardice. The
filmmakers seem to think that modern audiences wouldn't understand
this, so they spend the first twenty minutes explaining over and
over why being called a coward was such a deadly fate for a promising
officer. As if in today's war-crazy atmosphere the large majority
of Republicans feel any different. Believe me, the empathy is already
established.
Some
nice battle cinematography doesn't redeem "The Four Feathers"
Realizing
that he has lost the love of all he holds dear, the former officer
decides to follow his friends incognito to Sudan to help them, redeeming
his own courage in his own eyes, if not in theirs. In doing so,
he manages to rescue his friends and proves his worth to his fiancee.
That is a simple story. Unfortunately, "The Four Feathers"
is weighed down by the baggage of a modern retelling.
"The
Four Feathers" is the kind of film that has trouble getting
made because it is set during a time when white people were tromping
around Africa shooting brown people for the glory of empire (or
for god or gold). It's the same problem facing anyone trying to
make a cowboys vs. indians story. These are, in fact, racist stories
because they were set during racist times. "The
Four Feathers" is a war adventure. If you have a problem with
the setting, well then, set it in outer space or Afghanistan today
or Vietnam. Don't spend inordinate amounts of time apologizing for
the British calling the Sudanese 'wogs'. Don't create a new noble
dark-skinned character (played by professional slave actor Djimon
Hounsou) to teach life lessons to the bumbling white guy. If
you are going to try and humanize 'the other side', at least show
them being humans, not spiritual-advice spouting warriors or self-sacrificing
fanatics. The 'enemy' are neither super human nor less-than-human.
That is racist.
The
pacing of "The Four Feathers" reeks of an editing battle
where the constant apologia for British imperialism and an unneeded
dramatic subplot involving the Kate Hudson character shoe-horns
into the campaign in Sudan. Director Shekhar Kapur was adept at
portraying history in "Elizabeth" but here risks taking
the blame for an uneven picture that lapses each time it becomes
interesting and lacks the rhythm of "The Four Feather"'s
predecessors. Any tension built up by the action during the war
in Sudan and the tribulations of the hero in trying to rescue his
friends is wasted when suddenly 'the action' lurches off to merrie
old England. This happens twice in the middle of the movie. Not
only is cutting to England wildly disorienting structurally, it
gives the impression that characters could travel to and from Africa
at the speed of jet travel instead of taking days by ship and rail.
The problem could have been solved by book-ending the English parts,
keeping the film's focus on the adventure in Sudan.
Two
stereotypes, hiding their heads.
Despite
the time spent in England there is really an emotional vaccuum to
the characters, the most glaring being the Kate Hudson fiancee.
While modern audiences can probably reconcile the hero's friend's
feeling betrayed by his resignation just before they are shipped
off to war, many will have a problem with a woman who will dump
her fiancee because he doesn't want to be killed in a foreign land.
More will have trouble figuring out why he wants her back after
all that. Fools in love, perhaps.
Wasted
elements in "The Four Feathers" include some excellent
cinematography (by Robert Richardson) in the Sudanese portions including
a breathtaking bird's eye shot of a British square under assault
by the Mahdi's warriors and, really, a decent performance by Heath
Ledger as the hero.
Pity.
In
theatres now.
|
