by Chris Marshall:
For a few very brief moments, I started to believe I was
going to enjoy Chariots of Fire. The
opening scene is its most iconic, the often parodied sequence where you see
guys running in slow motion while the famous theme song by Vangelis plays. If
you’re not familiar with the original—and I didn’t know this is where that
trope started either—you’ve likely seen similar sequences in films such as Mr. Mom. Everybody’s seen Mr. Mom, right?
Anyway, in case you’re not familiar with this film, and I
think there’s a very high probability of that, it’s a true story about two British
Olympic runners. Eric Liddell (played by Ian Charleson, who we’ll see again
next year) is a devout Christian who devotes all of his achievements to
advancing his religious beliefs, even going so far as refusing to run a heat that’s
scheduled to be held on a Sunday. Harold Abrahams (played by Ben Cross) is
Jewish, and he is attempting to use his fame to reduce anti-Semitic prejudices.
About the only person involved in this film that people
might have heard of is Ian Holm. He’s Liddell’s trainer, but he’s better known
for playing Bilbo Baggins in the Lord of
the Rings trilogy. And I guess some people may know John Gielgud, who we
will also see again next year.
For the most part, both the cast and the crew are anonymous.
I had never even heard of the director, Hugh Hudson. That’s not necessarily bad—Slumdog Millionaire didn’t have any
stars in it either—but when the movie has so little else to offer, it’s a
little disappointing.
 |
| I was hoping for something like this. |
I don’t want to trot out the dreaded “boring” word for this
movie, but it was difficult to get very invested in the story. There’s just so
little at stake; an Olympic medal is important, of course, but it’s not like
their lives would be tremendously different without them. I suppose that’s
usually the case in sports movies, but at least most of the time there’s an
underdog story or something to make me care a little more. These guys weren’t
even really underdogs.
The pace picks up a little bit in the second half of the
film, but it’s not enough to overcome the slow start. The score was basically
the only saving grace for me. Those were some crunchy jams. I can’t say this
with certainty, but I’m pretty sure it’s the first time a synthesizer appeared
in the score of a Best Picture winner. Even if it sounded totally out of place
in a 1920s period piece, it was still enjoyable.
I don’t know exactly what I was looking for from this movie.
Rather than having one glaring flaw, it had many different moderate flaws and
very few strengths. I didn’t hate it,
but there were so few positives that I think it ended up being one of the least
enjoyable Best Pictures I’ve watched so far. And I swear that has nothing to do
with beating out Raiders of the Lost Ark.
If they could have come up with a way to incorporate actual
chariots or actual fire, the movie would have been much improved. Talk about
false advertising. At least next year’s movie delivers exactly what it
promises. I’d be pretty upset if there were no actual Gandhis in Gandhi.
No comments:
Post a Comment