JM Coetzee is the author of the original book, and is rightly lauded for his story telling ability as much as his literary ability. However, his works haven't easily transferred to screen, which is not uncommon for high-end literary works. This one to me is borderline.
What we have is a tale set in the 19th century of a humble wise magistrate of a garrision on the frontiers of an unnamed European Empire (seems like an area bordering around the former Soviet Union states). His stoic nature though is confronted by the entry of a colonel and his forces, who seem hell-bent to start battle with locals who are NOT looking for aggression. The Colonel is everything our magistrate is not, and the whole matter is complicated by the magistrates falling in love with a local lady he helps to return to her people.
Surprisingly this film hasn't been warmly received by the critics which is surprising, as it is actually very good. The main hold is the sublime performance by Mark Rylance in the lead, who can't have been any better than what he has done with the role. You empathise with him, and see his destruction at the hands of his colleagues (which clearly shows that the true Barbarians are at his side and not beyond the walls).
Johnny Depp was fine but seemed out of place, whilst Robert Pattison gets better with every film he stars in. The setting is perfect and beautiful, and the film has a fine slow pace. Admittedly it could have helped to flesh out some other characters more than just the magistrate to give them more weight, especially the mysterious colonel.
I don't get what it is that the critics were downgrading here? It's a fine existential story, and one that some will enjoy revisiting. Fair enough, the subject matter and a number of scenes are uncomfortable to watch, but that's the point! It's not about a rose-tinted look at the colonial past. It's also not 'Zulu' (which admittedly I very much love).
It's a tough watch at times, but very worth a viewing. Mark Rylance will little do better anywhere else ever again. He at least is a major reason to watch this one.
What we have is a tale set in the 19th century of a humble wise magistrate of a garrision on the frontiers of an unnamed European Empire (seems like an area bordering around the former Soviet Union states). His stoic nature though is confronted by the entry of a colonel and his forces, who seem hell-bent to start battle with locals who are NOT looking for aggression. The Colonel is everything our magistrate is not, and the whole matter is complicated by the magistrates falling in love with a local lady he helps to return to her people.
Surprisingly this film hasn't been warmly received by the critics which is surprising, as it is actually very good. The main hold is the sublime performance by Mark Rylance in the lead, who can't have been any better than what he has done with the role. You empathise with him, and see his destruction at the hands of his colleagues (which clearly shows that the true Barbarians are at his side and not beyond the walls).
Johnny Depp was fine but seemed out of place, whilst Robert Pattison gets better with every film he stars in. The setting is perfect and beautiful, and the film has a fine slow pace. Admittedly it could have helped to flesh out some other characters more than just the magistrate to give them more weight, especially the mysterious colonel.
I don't get what it is that the critics were downgrading here? It's a fine existential story, and one that some will enjoy revisiting. Fair enough, the subject matter and a number of scenes are uncomfortable to watch, but that's the point! It's not about a rose-tinted look at the colonial past. It's also not 'Zulu' (which admittedly I very much love).
It's a tough watch at times, but very worth a viewing. Mark Rylance will little do better anywhere else ever again. He at least is a major reason to watch this one.