MovieChat Forums > The Four Feathers (2002) Discussion > The good and bad

The good and bad

posted 5 years ago by Wuchak (8101)
2 replies | jump to latest

There are a lot of gems to mine here, like Harry's individualism in the face of great social pressure to conform. His reasoning is simple: He never wanted to be a soldier and only took the commission to please his gung-ho militarist father. Besides, how is what's happening in the Sudanese desert relevant to him and the British in the first place? Why should he risk dying or losing a limb for this dubious purpose? One of the best parts is Harry's growing friendship with Sudanian Abou Fatma (Djimon Hounsou).

Unfortunately, the movie's hampered by two problems: The mechanics of the plot sometimes drive the characters and it doesn't feel natural or real. For instance, when Harry easily joins the Mahdi rebels and is later seen riding toward the British regiment it's serious "Yeah, right" territory. Another problem is that, from the main battle forward the movie doesn't allow itself to breath and seems like it's in a rush, like it doesn't have the confidence to slow down and tell the story because it's worried about fitting into a 2-hour timeframe and pleasing those with ADHD.

If you can get past those two hitches, this is a worthy historical adventure flick. It's similar to Victorian-Brits-fighting-in-Africa flicks like "Zulu" (1964) and "Khartoum" (1966), but I prefer this one as it's just more compelling and is a quality modern production (I've never seen the old-fashioned 1939 version).

GRADE: C+/B-

[–] huwdj (4562) 5 years ago

When the book was written and the first film made the British were still being indoctrinated with the sense of duty and absolute God given authority to go forth and rule the World (in much the same way as Americans are now) so to refuse to serve for a piffling little thing like love was beyond the pale. Surely the act of a coward and an immense disappointment to his unsympathetic fiancee. It doesn't seem at all reasonable now (except perhaps to ardent Brexiteers - please excuse the dollop of current politics) and I'm not sure the Heath Ledger version reconciled the change of attitudes. In a way the story only make sense when told in an unflinchingly, unapologetic Victorian way.

[–] Wuchak (8101) 5 years ago

Thanks for the insights. I realize what you're saying and it's reflected in the film in the attitude/response of Harry's buds. But, even in the Victorian era, there would be dissenters (or doubters) as Harry is depicted in the movie, even if only inward dissenters. The film should be given props for illustrating this angle; it's one of the things I appreciate about this rendition.

(in much the same way as Americans are now)

Yeah, right (rolling my eyes); talk about indoctrinated, not to mention grossly ignorant.

RE: "ardent Brexiteers"

I have a friend in Cambridge who's an ardent Brexiteer. He's happy about Boris Johnson's appointment; maybe now something can actually get done in the wake of the dithering May.