Coincidence in film - In Bruges - Spoilers.

Beware - SPOILERS

Just watched this after being nagged by the other Slaggs, who kept saying how good it was. Not a totally bad film but ruined by the coincidences.

Just the split second before Gleeson (unseen and from behind) is going to 'hit' Farrell, Farrell decides to commit suicide by bringing a gun to his head. This throws Gleeson and he tries to convince Farrell not to go through with it. The timing of Farrell's gun to head and the nearness of Gleeson to pulling his own trigger is far-fetched.

The Canadian couple that Farrell assaults in the restuarant also happen to be on the train when he's fleeing Bruges. They alert the police and get him dragged back to Bruge.

The film actor Dwarf keeps bumping into Farrell around town (at least four times IIRC). When Farrell's being chased at the end, he just happens to stumble upon the site where the dwarf is filming and as he gets shot, so to does the dwarf. The dwarf just happens to be dressed as a child, just happens to have his head blown clean off to prevent London boss realising he's killed a dwarf not a child, and we've just had London boss's sense of honour hammered into us by Gleeson in the church tower, in time to explain London boss's reaction to the dwarf's death.

Plus Farrell appears to survive the shooting despite taking 3-4 dum-dum bullets in the chest - one of which also took the dwarf's head off.

The ex-boyfriend of the female pickpocket just happens to be an associate of the Bruge gun-supplying contact and just happens to be there when the London boss turns up to hunt down his renegade hitmen. The ex also just happens to walk past and notice London boss and Gleeson as they go up the church tower for their showdown. Soon after, he notices Farrell and the pickpocket girl who are sat in the same square as the church. This double coincidence allows him to tell London boss that Farrell is back in town. The ex runs up the tower as London boss and Gleeson are walking down but the ex manages to know when to stop running so as to call out to the two men, rather than blundering into them and getting shot. And, yes, the dwarf makes another impromptu appearance in the square during this scene.

Good film? Only if you ignore the rather huge coincidences that continually break suspension of disbelief. Realistic, no. I think the clue is in the words of London Boss Fiennes when he describes Bruges as like being in a f%%!ing fairytale town. But if so, at least signpost this unreality in some other way. Rather, it's presented in a superficially realistic context, which just adds to the confusion when the coincidences sledgehammer the plot forward. I was disappointed that the film didn't end with one of them winning the lottery.

He's in purgatory. Purgatory is a messed up place. It's also like Tottenham.

It's based on something can't think what - have heard of the Pinter thing but I think there's something else, I know there are a lot of references/homage? to Don't look Now. If I remember I'll add. Didn't rock my coracle at the time of watching, which was later at night.

In Bruges is a great film, very enjoyable.

And only three quid in HMV. Well worth a punt.

I liked it very much - but then I liked the humour and stylised violence. The coincidences didn't bother me - but there again I love Dickens who used them all the time.

Definitely shades of Don't Look Now.

Quote: David Bussell @ January 6 2010, 12:07 PM GMT

He's in purgatory.

View original

That would make more sense, but (for me) the lack of pointers and the context just highlight the ridiculous stretches of believability required for the numerous plot coincidences.

To add the purgatory twist at the end (Doesn't Farrell only allude to it in the ambulance?) seems to put it in "The Usual Suspects" area. But in Usual Suspects, the audience isn't expected to swallow huge coincidence after coincidence. IIRC, the tale stands as it is, a hit presented as a awry drug deal. T.U.Suspects would survive without the added layer of "is Verbal really Kose, and is Kose the Devil?" That twist only adds a new way of looking at the rather credible story that's been spun by Spacey.

But In Bruges, rather than cleverly adding insight and layers to what's happened, the purgatory angle is necessary to make sense of an incredulous story that would be ridiculous without it.

It's kinda marketed as a Guy Ritchie style film when it's actually misleading. It's more Brothers Grimm with dum-dums.

Oh, just wanted to say that the acting in it was very good and was the one thing that kept me watching, despite my irritation at the plot.

Quote: Griff @ January 6 2010, 12:08 PM GMT

Also it's kind of based on a Harold Pinter play...

View original

According to IMDb, In Bruges won the BAFTA for Best Original Screenplay. A very poor choice of winner, if the film was based - to some extent - on an already existing work.

It was meant to be a bit farcical, I very much enjoyed it. It was great to see Colin Farrell give a decent performance after wasting so much time in pap.

Quote: bamalamafizzvaj @ January 6 2010, 3:07 PM GMT

It was meant to be a bit farcical.

View original

It wasn't 'a bit' farcical, though, in truth. The plot coincidences relied on 100% full-on farce.

But, in retrospect, maybe that's where I got it wrong: that I should have been seeing the plot as part of the comedy. It kinda helps make more sense of it. But the reactions of the actors to the farcical elements didn't help me out. They added to my intitial confusion in that they treated the most unlikely sequence of events as unsurprising and run-of-the-mill, rather than "WTF?"

I watched it on YouTube the otherday and it is one of the best non subtitled films I have seen in years. For me it is just a very charming film and the charm helps cover up any of it's technical failings.

I really enjoyed the film. I thought it was really funny. I don't care how silly/far fetched a plot may be as long as it's fun to watch and In Bruges is.

Me and the wife watched it on telly last night. I must say im amazed at the initial post on this film. What film plot doesn't not really on coincidence, telescoping of time and odd happenings? Fiction is rarely like reality and especially when the writer is trying to say something. What I found slightly irritating is the dwarf, ok so its a reference to "Don't Look Now" but he was set up to die in a very leaden way with his racist speech. Only one person in the film might have been a lose to humanity, the pregnant hotel lady. Ok so the child and priest murderer is redeemed (slightly) by endeavouring to save her life. But lets face it he was still a violent nutter. One dum dum through the gut would I think probably be enough to stop anyone, it might be that he started to die then as he then enters the square where Bosh characters wander round along with the traduced dwarf.

For some reason the title has always annoyed me.

It's a film. A fictional story. They use coincidences. Get over it and stop trying to suck the fun out of it!