MovieChat Forums > The Girl in the Café (2005) Discussion > The problem I had with the movie.....

The problem I had with the movie.....

posted 18 years ago by archer1949
10 replies | jump to latest

was not the political message per se. After all, poverty in Africa is a serious problem that I don't think the industrialized nation of the World have found proper solutions for. I think that there was a way to get the message across without sounding ham-handed.The Constant Gardner was a good example of that. I think this movie had potential as well.

My REAL problem of the movie was the abrupt and completely unbelievable shift in Kelly MacDonald's Gina from an emtionally hurt, lonely aimless girl to an in-your facepolitical firebrand. I think her social awakenening could have been done in a subtle, more plausible way. Instead of ridiculous things like disrupting the conference, she should have been shown quietly (or forcefully) persuading Lawrence into action. It would make the film more credible and would have been truer to the character.

Instead, they resort to melodramatic stunts that would have gotten her instantly arrested and deported in real life. It took me totally out of the film.

It's quite disappointing, actually.

This movie had real potential. I liked the exploration of the characters in the first hour. But instead of keeping true to these decent, quiet characters, the writer decides to turn them into walking billboards. It's a real shame.

Are You On The List?

[–] NewHorizons37 18 years ago

My REAL problem of the movie was the abrupt and completely unbelievable shift in Kelly MacDonald's Gina from an emtionally hurt, lonely aimless girl to an in-your facepolitical firebrand. I think her social awakenening could have been done in a subtle, more plausible way.

But the point is, she did not go through a "social awakening" during the film. She was already "awake", and she reveals this at the end when she explains why she spent time in prison.

Our (and Lawrence's) view of her changed the way you describe, but that does not mean she did. So in that sense, it was not abrupt at all.

I do agree that the G-8 Summit people would not have stood for her acting out as long as they did.

[–] MajorSplash 17 years ago

I agree with all that was said above but I believe the Chancellor tolerated it as long as he did because of Lawrence's credibility on his team. The German leader did not tolerate it although she actually should have left before the formal dinner.

[–] ashfordcrane 16 years ago

In agreement with the original poster, as a story-telling device her "awakening" should have been more gradual. The film would have had a much smoother transition from love story to propaganda if the audience had been allowed to share her perspective more and empathize with her character's moral actions. Instead her abruptness comes across (in my opinion) like a fur protestor tossing red paint.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Goofy_Elfman 16 years ago

Agreed with NewHorizons.

There isn't anything about her that changes throughout the film. She is who she is. Lawrence however doesn't know who she is and so her actions, to him, seem abrupt, as they very well should be. That's the entire point of their relationship, or at least one very integral one. She proclaims to him that he doesn't know anything about her, and so telling him about her time in prison would be the last thing on her mind.

I think it worked perfectly. I adore her character immensely.

you know you bought it if you buy it with things...

[–] MrAleisterCrowley 16 years ago

I agree totally. I loved the relationship as it initially developed between the two of them -- and I had such hope for Nighy's character that at long last he would find a love with whom he might share his life and a pretty young woman at that -- but then found myself utterly repulsed by her character once her almost pathological need to harass the British politicians came out. She was selfishly driven, destroying Nighy's career without any real regard for his fate or compassion for his insecure position. There was a self-involvement to her actions that undermined any altruistic tendences.

[–] reikun86 16 years ago

Gina was someone who knew the facts but sounded like a moron in front of everybody Apparently, her feelings toward poverty were more important then her feelings for Lawrence. I thought she treated the Chancellor appallingly.

[–] hubBAbubBAgrrrl 15 years ago

i am sorry to say i agree with you archer. only "sorry" because this is still one of my favorite movies and i want it to be perfect.

i agree the political message is a good one. having lived in east and central africa, having friends there, loving it, i agree that we have more responsibilities there (i'm american).

but, to talk about the movie and what i see as the flaw: gina is shy as lawrence is and this creates some of the great chemistry and sweetness between them (and the great acting!). gina is given a history of acting out to protect a child: she felt so strongly she hurt a man and went to prison. i think this was done to justify when gina ends up in another situation learning what horrible things children are suffering, she will act out again. but i have trouble believing that such a shy person would act out with strangers via verbal confrontations and speeches. being a shy person myself, physical action is usually way easier than public speaking! i also agree her behavior would never have been tolerated as long as it was in the movie.

her pushing him to action would have been much more plausible - good idea!

i still absolutely love the dynamic between gina and lawrence and adore the movie.

[–] crutch321 15 years ago

I think you're absolutely ridiculous. Gina didn't develop political agendas she already had a predisposition to caring about the injustice done to children because her own child was killed. That's why she was in prison. Why don't you actually watch the movie while you're staring at Kelly McD's fun bags.

[–] jewellrunner 13 years ago

Ease up cowboy. Regardless of Gina's existing emotions on the subject, her 'speeches' were still completely out of character to what was presented to the audience. She's shy and soft-spoken - until the filmmakers want her to make a point. I think the whole thing was disgusting, but even if you don't mind having agendas shoved down your throat during a movie, the way they went about it here is what was the problem. Don't sacrifice characterization.

My Film Journal - Chrisfilm.wordpress.com