I got the film recently and watched it. I enjoyed it for the most part, but I came away wishing that they'd used River more. I know he was in a lot of scenes, but it seemed that in quite a few of them, that he didn't really have much to do.
Does anyone else think he was a bit underused?
Michelle
"Crikey means gee whiz, wow!" - Steve Irwin
The Bee Gees are great
you took the words right out ofmy mouth. thats all i could think of the whole movie.
"If I was starving, would you buy me pants?"- EM
"Bull True!!"- CC
RIP River Phoenix
[deleted]
I agree. You're the only character in a movie with voiceovers, you're a major player in the movie already. No matter how much screen time you have.
shareCharlie's arc as a character is very important. His acting is superb, and not overdone. I think if he'd been shown more, it would have been overkill, hitting you over the head with how he's reacting to the whole thing. It's an amazing voice over for such a young actor. Phoenix was really good, and always missed.
shareI felt the same way about Helen Mirren. For such an amazing actress you'd think she'd have more to do.
shareI agree. It was frustrating to see such a strong actress as Helen Mirren have such a limited role, especially because she was playing an essentially subservient woman who just follows her husband into the jungle despite having four children.
Although I admired the film, I felt that the female characterization was quite weak (perhaps it was in the book as well, I haven't read it). We weren't given enough background on Mirren's character. We weren't really given all that much background on Harrison Ford's character either. We're just dropped into their world and go on their wild ride with them.
What I admired was the portrait of an arrogant, misguided man from his stubborn idealism to his endangerment of himself and his family. Ironically, although he had contempt for the missionaries, and especially the reverend, he was quite like them in that he arrogantly believed he could better the native people's world. Like the reverend, he turned himself into a god figure. He acted this way toward the natives, as well as toward his own family. Whatever he said was supposed to be taken as the right and superior way.
That's where I think the brilliance of the film lies--in showing us the irony and tragedy of idealism turned into zealotry.
"Fasten your seat belts. It's going to be a bumpy night."
[deleted]
I agree. I liked the movie a lot, but I found myself saying "okay... so where's River?" in a lot of parts of it. Guess that comes naturally, being a River fan and all, though :]
.+*^*+.
Jack: Okay, what is your name now?
Eric: Plays With Squirrels
BMW. It's an obsession.
Yes, they really should have used to river more to their advantage. It seems it was only used for pleasure (swimming, playing with ice, etc.).
shareI agree beyond the shadow of any doubt. This was supposed to be Charlie's story, not Allie's story. Charlie is the narrator. Charlie is the protagonist. Charlie is the ingenue. Charlie is the sacrifice. The whole story is supposed to be about how Charlie learns bit by bit that his father is nuts, but, that is NOT how Charlie's character is allowed to come across. Not by the acting. Nor by the directing, but, I believe, by the editing. Somebody decided somewhere that this should be Harrison's film with River in the supporting actor role, instead of the other way around.
shareCouldn't agree more. It should have been river's movie not harrisons.
My 120 favorite movies http://www.imdb.com/list/Uvw_F2_GMx8/
What would you add?
River gives a far more mature and nuanced performance than HF.
So glad he got the role despite the director's initial misgivings.
Astonishing to think he made this and Stand By Me, arguably 2 of his finest works, back to back at just 15!
Don't forget 'Running on Empty', although he was a bit older in that movie.
My 100 favorite movies http://www.imdb.com/list/Uvw_F2_GMx8/
What are your favorites?