Marlowe (Neil Jordan, 2023)

[DarkImbecile]

Neil Jordan’s Marlowe

[Mr Sausage]

Granted, I don’t have that much experience with Marlowe in books or films, but does he normally beat up that many people? Seems like more of a Mike Hammer thing.

[beamish14]

Granted, I don’t have that much experience with Marlowe in books or films, but does he normally beat up that many people? Seems like more of a Mike Hammer thing.

Typically no, but this is based on one of John Baville’s recent novels that recycles the character and not a Raymond Chandler story, and Banville alters his persona somewhat

[DarkImbecile]

Based on Letterboxd reviews from people I follow, I seem to be substantially less positive on this noir exercise than others, despite appreciating Jordan's evident delight in the period staging and in constructing scenes around smooth, dynamic shots with cinematographer Xavi Giménez that call just enough attention to themselves to be notable but not so much as to distract from the plot. My primary issues are with Neeson — who sadly just doesn't have the soulful, weary charisma he did even 10 years ago that might have made his take on Marlowe anything but leaden — and a script that does nothing particularly interesting with either the Marlowe archetype or the conventions of the genre.

There are bits of interest in the Hollywood trappings of this particular mystery — set off by Diane Kruger's mysterious blonde (of course) entering the detective's office to hire him to search for her missing lover — but for the most part it feels underdeveloped thematically and too loose narratively for the mystery and the roles of various characters in it to matter. Jessica Lange, Danny Huston, Kruger, Alan Cumming, and Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje all have fun with their roles, but none of their characters really matter to Marlowe or the audience, so their various deceptions, deaths, or killings barely register.

I'll echo others in saying that perhaps the most enjoyable part of watching the film is appreciating how credibly Jordan filmed an L.A. period piece in Ireland and Spain. It's a largely pleasant film to look at, but not one that I can promise I'll remember anything about by the end of the year.

[Brian C]

Hell, it's only been a week and a half, and I already feel like I'm having trouble remembering anything about it. If you make it till the end of the year before it fades out, I'll be impressed! Nonetheless, I think Glenn Kenny put it in a slightly backhanded way I can relate to: "I was able to get a reasonable amount of enjoyment out of this film."

To me, the biggest problem is simply one of familiarity. This basic story has been done so many times - and so many times to basic perfection - that it hardly seems much worth doing without a real, urgent reason to exist. And I just don't think this movie has that. It hits the familiar beats in familiar ways and I do seem to remember it having some vague charm, but whatever charms it has seem kind of incidental and inconsequential.

But, still, you know ... it passes the time well enough.

[DarkImbecile]

I’m glad you linked that, because Kenny briefly mentions the David Holmes score I forgot to address above: I don’t think I’m knowledgeable enough about music to fully articulate why it felt so weird, but the score seems like it would play fine in a vacuum while hanging oddly on this particular film, feeling like an incongruous match for the tone of some scenes while being almost too obvious for others. Like many recent period pieces, the digital photography already leaves things feeling off-kilter, so it doesn’t help that the score — along with Jordan’s penchant for bursts of graphic violence and Neeson’s performance — push everything even further from a credibly authentic ‘30s atmosphere.

[Monterey Jack]

Was anyone else distracted by the ages of the actors, compared to the parts they're playing? A 70-year-old Neeson turning down the advances of 46-year-old Diane Kruger for being "Half my age", and a 73-year-old Jessica Lange as a former actress past her prime. What, considering the movie is set in 1939, was she filming movies in 1890?

Had the movie been at least competent, these would have been negligible complaints, but it's all so boring, adding nothing to the annals of film noir throwbacks and boasting little of Jordan's usual visual elan, thus it's easy to be distracted. No real tension, the plot is uninvolving, and the few spurts of violence are awkwardly staged and creakily enacted by the clearly too-old-for-this-sh!t Neeson. It was bad enough when these Neeson January/February dump titles were directed by anonymous hacks like Mark Williams, but in the last year, we've had ones by Jordan and Martin Campbell, which is legitimately depressing (and Campbell proved he still had action directing chops with the pleasurably disposable The Protege).

[pistolwink]

There's a thing where as some directors get older, they tend to cast people closer to their age even in parts that would seem to call for younger folks. So you end up with films in which the "ingenue" is 40-something and the "cop nearing retirement age" is 85, etc. Maybe it's a matter of being blind to (or in denial of) their own aging, or just casting people they've known for a while and whose company they enjoy.

TBH it doesn't really bother me as it's often an appealingly literal extension of a filmmaker's worldview, which can justify the break in realism — and as you say if the film/an actor is really good it shouldn't matter much (does it really upset many people that 52-year-old Jimmy Stewart is playing a whippersnapper in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance?).

[ballmouse]

I think Philip Marlowe's appeal was his idealism behind his outward cynicism and Chandler's language. If the filmmakers focus on the straight noir aspect of the novels (which is what the trailer seems to have focused on), then they are missing the point of why anyone even finds Chandler's work interesting.

Also, the trailer seems to show scenes with a lot of light. At least to me, it's another ding from the trailer, and possibly the film. I'm not sure how you can make a good crime (nevermind noir) film without using lighting (or lack of it) to your advantage.