The Prophecy
Directed by: Gregory Widen
Starring: Christopher Walken and Viggo Mortensen
~~SPOLIER ALERT!!!!!~~
Yes, I am going to reference things that happen in the film. If you don't want the whole thing spoiled for you, don't read this. I DO highly recommend the movie, though. :D
So, the set-up for "The Prophecy" is simply this:
The first war in Heaven was between the rebellious angels and those angels still loyal to God. Lucifer and his followers fell, and Hell was created. And now, there is a second war in Heaven, started by a group of angels that would not accept God's love for humans over all other creatures (including the angels themselves).
Easy set-up, right? A simple, but powerful plot with a lot of potential. So, how do you screw this up?
Well... what if you totally mess with the believability of the whole film?
As a viewer, I can totally accept everything that's going on in the film simply because I can SEE everything that is going on in the film. This movie doesn't have any questions of what is real and what isn't real. The film flat-out says, "Yes, there are angels. Yes, they are walking around on Earth. Yes, they are pretty bad-ass, so don't mess with them." I'm totally fine with that. But when characters in the film itself are so ready to believe these things, then I have a problem.
Our heroic main character, Thomas Dagget, is not what I'd call a fantastic detective. Alright, I get his backstory, he was just about to become a priest when his faith left him, he became a cop instead, blah blah blah. He's a flat, boring, stereotypical character, and he's not too hard to understand. However, as a detective, he has to think rationally, right?
So, here is the evidence he has: there is a hermaphroditic corpse with no eyes, un-aged skin and bones, and a tattoo in angelic script on its neck, which is later found burned to ashes in a morgue; among the corpse's effects is an ancient, hand-written bible with an added 23rd chapter to the Book of Revalations that tells of a second war in Heaven and prophesizes of a "Dark Soul;" there is a strange man named Simon that shows up in Dagget's apartment warning him of some mumbo-jumbo about the end of the world, who seems to have a connection with the charred corpse, and is later found burned to ashes as well; somehow the late General Hawthorne, a Korean War Vet that liked to torture people, is involved; there's a sick little girl rambling about "killing Chinamen;" and there's a suspicious man named Gabriel that seems to be involved in all of these events, and who also seems to like getting uncomfortably close to children.
So, what is Dagget's conclusion? Well, it's not that Gabriel might be some religious madman with a fixation on a man that liked to torture his enemies, who spends his free time murdering people, burning corpses, and getting close enough to these children to mess them up in the head. Neither does Dagget conclude that the strange corpse and Simon MIGHT have been religious madmen as well, perhaps in some sort of cult with Gabriel, or part of a gang. No, Dagget's conclusion is this: welp, they must be angels! (Insert much herping and derping here.)
I suppose you can't blame Dagget for coming to this conclusion, since he's been primed by his own religious beliefs. Besides, it seems logical, right? But it is in no way rational. If it were me, I'd need to actually SEE Gabriel do something supernatural before I would start believing he's some kind of evil angel.
And I know you're probably thinking, "But Dagget sees Gabriel do all sorts of supernatural stuff!" That's true, Dagget DOES see Gabriel perform some supernatural feats. However, Dagget comes to the conclusion that Gabriel, Simon, and the corpse are all angels BEFORE he even sees Gabriel do anything remotely inhuman. Dagget does have ONE encounter with Gabriel before he concludes Gabriel and the others are angels. The encounter only lasts about a minute, and all Gabriel says to Dagget is this, "Do you know how you got that dent, in your top lip? Way back, before you were born, I told you a secret, then I put my finger there and I said, 'Shhhhh!'" Wow... he must be an angel.
Dagget concluding Gabriel and the others are angels I can understand. What I have trouble understanding is why the leading lady of the film, Katherine, is so ready to believe this. The movie doesn't indicate that she's religious in any way. In fact, the film gives us NO backstory about Katherine. All we know is she's a teacher in a small, dying community. The only evidence SHE has to go on is this: some bum named Simon burned to death in the abandoned part of the school; some guy named Gabriel interacted with her students in a bizzare fashion; and one of her students, Mary, is sick from school and keeps rambling about torture and murder. At least Dagget has a seemingly inhuman corpse he can use as evidence. Katherine has virtually no evidence to suggest that there might be angels involved in everything. When Dagget says, "Gabriel is an angel!" Katherine sort of just looks at him and says, "Okay, I totally believe you." And I'm just sitting here, watching the film thinking, "Really? You people don't need any hard evidence?"
Okay... that was my first point. (Yes, I am long-winded. Bear with me here.)
Secondly, the film can't seem to make up it's mind whether Lucifer is a "good guy" or a "bad guy."
Okay, so the film is extremely clear that Gabriel is a bad guy. He's the main antagonist, he's cold-hearted and brutal... well, he's an asshole. One of my favorite lines in the entire movie is one that Gabriel says, with a cocky smile on his face: "I'm an angel. I kill firstborns while their mamas watch. I turn cities into salt. I even, when I feel like it, rip the souls from little girls, and from now till kingdom come, the only thing you can count on in your existence is never understanding why." Even though Gabriel's goal is to win the war in Heaven so he can put everything back to the way it was before God loved humans, which isn't evil in itself, he is still pure down-to-earth evil.
But what about Lucifer? He shows up near the end of the film to HELP Dagget and Katherine beat Gabriel. He gets awfully close to Dagget, almost tenderly so, and tells Dagget exactly how to beat Gabriel. And, at the last minute, Lucifer shows up to save the day, killing Gabriel and saving everyone. This sort of makes Lucifer seem like a good guy, right? However, Lucifer says he's only helping because Gabriel's actions will create another Hell, and Lucifer only wants there to be one Hell. He also says that because of the war in Heaven, no soul can enter there, but souls can still get in to Hell without any problem. And right after Lucifer saves everyone, he immediately tries to get them to give him their souls to bring back to Hell. Plus, Lucifer's attitude just makes him seem like a real cocky bastard.
So... what are we supposed to think of him? Are we supposed to like Lucifer, or dislike him? I suppose this could be argued as a good quality of the film, since the audience is left to ponder over whether the ultimate evil can be construed as "good." However, I feel as if this isn't really achieved, since Lucifer only appears in the last 15 or 20 minutes of the film. If Lucifer had been seen throughout the film, and had some form of development, then I would have found him a much better character. However, he only appears in 3 scenes, and probably only has roughly 5 or 6 minutes of screen-time in total, so the only thing I can really feel for Lucifer is confusion. It's almost as if the writers wrote his character in at the last minute.
Which leads me to my third and final point: the ending.
The ending of this film is an absolute mess. It's as if the writers ran out of time and hurriedly slapped an ending together, and the filmmakers shot and editted the whole thing as fast as they could. I was stunned at how abrupt the ending came, and how the outcome turned out. Everything about the ending of this film feels rushed. The acting feels like it isn't up to par with the rest of the film, the editting feels choppy, and the story sort of deteriorates in a way that left me sitting there thinking, "What the hell just happened?" Even the effects, which looked great throughout the rest of the film, seemed cheap and uncaringly thrown in. So... what happened?
The best parts about the ending of the film are definitely Christopher Walken and Viggo Mortensen. They may be overacting, but these two can definitely overact and get away with it. They are extremely enjoyable to watch, even when things seem to be falling apart around them.
So, to sum up the bad points:
The plot starts out strong and intriguing, and ultimately unravels into a confusing jumble at the end.
There is no real emotional connection to the characters, since they are so flat and don't really go through any character development.
Some bits that are supposed to be serious are made silly by awkward editting, stage direction, or performance on the actors' parts (mostly with Walken and Mortensen).
And lastly, (and this one bothers the hell out of me) some plot points either don't make sense or aren't explained very well. Like, how the heck does the little girl know you have to rip out the angels' hearts to kill them on Earth? Seriously, they never explain it. I guess that, by the movie's logic, she just knows because she's possessed by an evil spirit. Or, what about the Dark Soul? They never explain WHY the Dark Soul is so vitally important in winning the war in Heaven. I get that Gabriel wants the Dark Soul to fight for him... but why? I need an explanation here, movie! And what the hell is with the angels flying in the sky at the end, and the heavenly light that shines down on Mary to expel the Dark Soul from her? Did God just decide to suddenly intervene, or did the Native American chanting somehow summon angels to come to the rescue, or was it just "one of those things?" Seriously, it's just like "BAM! You're cured, the spirit is gone, hooray! End of movie." And why don't the Native Americans performing the exorcism EVER look up while all that crap is happening at the end. I mean, come on! Explain, movie, EXPLAIN!
Alright, so I went over every bad thing about this film. Now, here are the good things:
For a supernatural thriller / detective story, this movie actually isn't half bad. The story seems a bit choppy as a whole, but individual parts of the film work very nicely. You can take a scene on its own and say, "That was a very good scene." You get a nice mix of the supernatural, and a nice mix of mystery. The only problem is that, as a whole, it just doesn't seem to jive quite right. But still, those small parts are very well done.
Most of the effects and the atmosphere of the film are great. Any movie that can make the silhouette of an angel falling from the sky seem intimidating is doing SOMETHING right. The time lapse parts intertwined with normal-time shots of Christopher Walken are also extremely well done, producing quite a chilling effect. Like I said, the ending effects are laughable compared to the rest of the film, but for the most part the effects work and are executed perfectly. And, best of all, the film doesn't rely on CG or any tricks of that sort. The effects in this film feel very old-school, and I like that.
The cast, for the most part, is great. The best actor by far is Christopher Walken, with Viggo Mortensen in a close second. But the performances of Adam Goldberg as Jerry and Eric Stoltz as Simon are extremely good as well.
Stoltz has the perfect blend of "nice guy" and "creeper-stalker," making his character very likeable, but extremely suspicious all at the same time. The movie is very unclear whether Simon is good or bad, and he himself admits he's not sure which side he's on, and Stoltz pulls this uneasy balance off so well.
Goldberg is hilarious as Jerry, adding a nice touch of comic relief to an otherwise dark and twisted film. He's not overpowering, acting almost casual and sticking to the background in most situations, but when he opens his mouth and says something, it's usually enough to bring a smile to anyone's face.
Mortensen as Lucifer is, in my opinion, perfect. He has a soft voice and a handsome face, but he's cold and serious. Mortensen gives his performance fairly deadpan, almost non-chalant, but it is the perfect attitude for the character. By the end, he overacts to the point of perfection, matching Walken, making their own little battle seem so real. Mortensen gives a great performance, even though he gets a very small amount of screen-time, and has some of the best lines in the film.
Of course, the whole reason to watch this movie is to see Christopher Walken do what he does best: act like a creep. His performance is the best in the whole film. He's a bad-ass, he's a cold-hearted killer... he's a really bad guy, and he knows it. Not only that, but he LOVES it. You can just tell, Walken is having so much fun in this role. He sniffs random things, he licks blood off a table, he has a very strange tender moment with Simon, he whispers and shouts lines for no discernable reason, he pauses in strange places... this film was pretty much built around Chrisopher Walken just being Christopher Walken. Sometimes, it's like he's not even acting. At points, it seems like they just stuck him on the set and told him to do whatever he felt like doing, and then started rolling the camera. If you are a Walken fan, this is a fantastic Walken movie. You could cut out all the scenes he's not in, and this movie would still be totally watchable.
So, should you see "The Prophecy?" I would say yes, give it a watch. It is enjoyable enough, and most people seem to give it a decent rating. It was good enough to spawn four sequals, two of which also star Christopher Walken. It's kind of a blend of religious philosophy and supernatural action. Like, if you fused Underworld with The Exorcist. It's not quite action-y enough or stupid enough to be an Underworld-style film, but it isn't quite philosophical, smart, or scary enough to be an Exorcist-style film. This movie falls nicely in the middle, making it enjoyable for anyone. And, like I said before, if you like Walken, you'll love this movie.
My rating? ... I'd say it's about a 7 out of 10. Not a masterpiece, but certainly not the worst thing I've ever seen.
Thanks for reading, now go watch it!
~ Oliv ~
Directed by: Gregory Widen
Starring: Christopher Walken and Viggo Mortensen
~~SPOLIER ALERT!!!!!~~
Yes, I am going to reference things that happen in the film. If you don't want the whole thing spoiled for you, don't read this. I DO highly recommend the movie, though. :D
So, the set-up for "The Prophecy" is simply this:
The first war in Heaven was between the rebellious angels and those angels still loyal to God. Lucifer and his followers fell, and Hell was created. And now, there is a second war in Heaven, started by a group of angels that would not accept God's love for humans over all other creatures (including the angels themselves).
Easy set-up, right? A simple, but powerful plot with a lot of potential. So, how do you screw this up?
Well... what if you totally mess with the believability of the whole film?
As a viewer, I can totally accept everything that's going on in the film simply because I can SEE everything that is going on in the film. This movie doesn't have any questions of what is real and what isn't real. The film flat-out says, "Yes, there are angels. Yes, they are walking around on Earth. Yes, they are pretty bad-ass, so don't mess with them." I'm totally fine with that. But when characters in the film itself are so ready to believe these things, then I have a problem.
Our heroic main character, Thomas Dagget, is not what I'd call a fantastic detective. Alright, I get his backstory, he was just about to become a priest when his faith left him, he became a cop instead, blah blah blah. He's a flat, boring, stereotypical character, and he's not too hard to understand. However, as a detective, he has to think rationally, right?
So, here is the evidence he has: there is a hermaphroditic corpse with no eyes, un-aged skin and bones, and a tattoo in angelic script on its neck, which is later found burned to ashes in a morgue; among the corpse's effects is an ancient, hand-written bible with an added 23rd chapter to the Book of Revalations that tells of a second war in Heaven and prophesizes of a "Dark Soul;" there is a strange man named Simon that shows up in Dagget's apartment warning him of some mumbo-jumbo about the end of the world, who seems to have a connection with the charred corpse, and is later found burned to ashes as well; somehow the late General Hawthorne, a Korean War Vet that liked to torture people, is involved; there's a sick little girl rambling about "killing Chinamen;" and there's a suspicious man named Gabriel that seems to be involved in all of these events, and who also seems to like getting uncomfortably close to children.
So, what is Dagget's conclusion? Well, it's not that Gabriel might be some religious madman with a fixation on a man that liked to torture his enemies, who spends his free time murdering people, burning corpses, and getting close enough to these children to mess them up in the head. Neither does Dagget conclude that the strange corpse and Simon MIGHT have been religious madmen as well, perhaps in some sort of cult with Gabriel, or part of a gang. No, Dagget's conclusion is this: welp, they must be angels! (Insert much herping and derping here.)
I suppose you can't blame Dagget for coming to this conclusion, since he's been primed by his own religious beliefs. Besides, it seems logical, right? But it is in no way rational. If it were me, I'd need to actually SEE Gabriel do something supernatural before I would start believing he's some kind of evil angel.
And I know you're probably thinking, "But Dagget sees Gabriel do all sorts of supernatural stuff!" That's true, Dagget DOES see Gabriel perform some supernatural feats. However, Dagget comes to the conclusion that Gabriel, Simon, and the corpse are all angels BEFORE he even sees Gabriel do anything remotely inhuman. Dagget does have ONE encounter with Gabriel before he concludes Gabriel and the others are angels. The encounter only lasts about a minute, and all Gabriel says to Dagget is this, "Do you know how you got that dent, in your top lip? Way back, before you were born, I told you a secret, then I put my finger there and I said, 'Shhhhh!'" Wow... he must be an angel.
Dagget concluding Gabriel and the others are angels I can understand. What I have trouble understanding is why the leading lady of the film, Katherine, is so ready to believe this. The movie doesn't indicate that she's religious in any way. In fact, the film gives us NO backstory about Katherine. All we know is she's a teacher in a small, dying community. The only evidence SHE has to go on is this: some bum named Simon burned to death in the abandoned part of the school; some guy named Gabriel interacted with her students in a bizzare fashion; and one of her students, Mary, is sick from school and keeps rambling about torture and murder. At least Dagget has a seemingly inhuman corpse he can use as evidence. Katherine has virtually no evidence to suggest that there might be angels involved in everything. When Dagget says, "Gabriel is an angel!" Katherine sort of just looks at him and says, "Okay, I totally believe you." And I'm just sitting here, watching the film thinking, "Really? You people don't need any hard evidence?"
Okay... that was my first point. (Yes, I am long-winded. Bear with me here.)
Secondly, the film can't seem to make up it's mind whether Lucifer is a "good guy" or a "bad guy."
Okay, so the film is extremely clear that Gabriel is a bad guy. He's the main antagonist, he's cold-hearted and brutal... well, he's an asshole. One of my favorite lines in the entire movie is one that Gabriel says, with a cocky smile on his face: "I'm an angel. I kill firstborns while their mamas watch. I turn cities into salt. I even, when I feel like it, rip the souls from little girls, and from now till kingdom come, the only thing you can count on in your existence is never understanding why." Even though Gabriel's goal is to win the war in Heaven so he can put everything back to the way it was before God loved humans, which isn't evil in itself, he is still pure down-to-earth evil.
But what about Lucifer? He shows up near the end of the film to HELP Dagget and Katherine beat Gabriel. He gets awfully close to Dagget, almost tenderly so, and tells Dagget exactly how to beat Gabriel. And, at the last minute, Lucifer shows up to save the day, killing Gabriel and saving everyone. This sort of makes Lucifer seem like a good guy, right? However, Lucifer says he's only helping because Gabriel's actions will create another Hell, and Lucifer only wants there to be one Hell. He also says that because of the war in Heaven, no soul can enter there, but souls can still get in to Hell without any problem. And right after Lucifer saves everyone, he immediately tries to get them to give him their souls to bring back to Hell. Plus, Lucifer's attitude just makes him seem like a real cocky bastard.
So... what are we supposed to think of him? Are we supposed to like Lucifer, or dislike him? I suppose this could be argued as a good quality of the film, since the audience is left to ponder over whether the ultimate evil can be construed as "good." However, I feel as if this isn't really achieved, since Lucifer only appears in the last 15 or 20 minutes of the film. If Lucifer had been seen throughout the film, and had some form of development, then I would have found him a much better character. However, he only appears in 3 scenes, and probably only has roughly 5 or 6 minutes of screen-time in total, so the only thing I can really feel for Lucifer is confusion. It's almost as if the writers wrote his character in at the last minute.
Which leads me to my third and final point: the ending.
The ending of this film is an absolute mess. It's as if the writers ran out of time and hurriedly slapped an ending together, and the filmmakers shot and editted the whole thing as fast as they could. I was stunned at how abrupt the ending came, and how the outcome turned out. Everything about the ending of this film feels rushed. The acting feels like it isn't up to par with the rest of the film, the editting feels choppy, and the story sort of deteriorates in a way that left me sitting there thinking, "What the hell just happened?" Even the effects, which looked great throughout the rest of the film, seemed cheap and uncaringly thrown in. So... what happened?
The best parts about the ending of the film are definitely Christopher Walken and Viggo Mortensen. They may be overacting, but these two can definitely overact and get away with it. They are extremely enjoyable to watch, even when things seem to be falling apart around them.
So, to sum up the bad points:
The plot starts out strong and intriguing, and ultimately unravels into a confusing jumble at the end.
There is no real emotional connection to the characters, since they are so flat and don't really go through any character development.
Some bits that are supposed to be serious are made silly by awkward editting, stage direction, or performance on the actors' parts (mostly with Walken and Mortensen).
And lastly, (and this one bothers the hell out of me) some plot points either don't make sense or aren't explained very well. Like, how the heck does the little girl know you have to rip out the angels' hearts to kill them on Earth? Seriously, they never explain it. I guess that, by the movie's logic, she just knows because she's possessed by an evil spirit. Or, what about the Dark Soul? They never explain WHY the Dark Soul is so vitally important in winning the war in Heaven. I get that Gabriel wants the Dark Soul to fight for him... but why? I need an explanation here, movie! And what the hell is with the angels flying in the sky at the end, and the heavenly light that shines down on Mary to expel the Dark Soul from her? Did God just decide to suddenly intervene, or did the Native American chanting somehow summon angels to come to the rescue, or was it just "one of those things?" Seriously, it's just like "BAM! You're cured, the spirit is gone, hooray! End of movie." And why don't the Native Americans performing the exorcism EVER look up while all that crap is happening at the end. I mean, come on! Explain, movie, EXPLAIN!
Alright, so I went over every bad thing about this film. Now, here are the good things:
For a supernatural thriller / detective story, this movie actually isn't half bad. The story seems a bit choppy as a whole, but individual parts of the film work very nicely. You can take a scene on its own and say, "That was a very good scene." You get a nice mix of the supernatural, and a nice mix of mystery. The only problem is that, as a whole, it just doesn't seem to jive quite right. But still, those small parts are very well done.
Most of the effects and the atmosphere of the film are great. Any movie that can make the silhouette of an angel falling from the sky seem intimidating is doing SOMETHING right. The time lapse parts intertwined with normal-time shots of Christopher Walken are also extremely well done, producing quite a chilling effect. Like I said, the ending effects are laughable compared to the rest of the film, but for the most part the effects work and are executed perfectly. And, best of all, the film doesn't rely on CG or any tricks of that sort. The effects in this film feel very old-school, and I like that.
The cast, for the most part, is great. The best actor by far is Christopher Walken, with Viggo Mortensen in a close second. But the performances of Adam Goldberg as Jerry and Eric Stoltz as Simon are extremely good as well.
Stoltz has the perfect blend of "nice guy" and "creeper-stalker," making his character very likeable, but extremely suspicious all at the same time. The movie is very unclear whether Simon is good or bad, and he himself admits he's not sure which side he's on, and Stoltz pulls this uneasy balance off so well.
Goldberg is hilarious as Jerry, adding a nice touch of comic relief to an otherwise dark and twisted film. He's not overpowering, acting almost casual and sticking to the background in most situations, but when he opens his mouth and says something, it's usually enough to bring a smile to anyone's face.
Mortensen as Lucifer is, in my opinion, perfect. He has a soft voice and a handsome face, but he's cold and serious. Mortensen gives his performance fairly deadpan, almost non-chalant, but it is the perfect attitude for the character. By the end, he overacts to the point of perfection, matching Walken, making their own little battle seem so real. Mortensen gives a great performance, even though he gets a very small amount of screen-time, and has some of the best lines in the film.
Of course, the whole reason to watch this movie is to see Christopher Walken do what he does best: act like a creep. His performance is the best in the whole film. He's a bad-ass, he's a cold-hearted killer... he's a really bad guy, and he knows it. Not only that, but he LOVES it. You can just tell, Walken is having so much fun in this role. He sniffs random things, he licks blood off a table, he has a very strange tender moment with Simon, he whispers and shouts lines for no discernable reason, he pauses in strange places... this film was pretty much built around Chrisopher Walken just being Christopher Walken. Sometimes, it's like he's not even acting. At points, it seems like they just stuck him on the set and told him to do whatever he felt like doing, and then started rolling the camera. If you are a Walken fan, this is a fantastic Walken movie. You could cut out all the scenes he's not in, and this movie would still be totally watchable.
So, should you see "The Prophecy?" I would say yes, give it a watch. It is enjoyable enough, and most people seem to give it a decent rating. It was good enough to spawn four sequals, two of which also star Christopher Walken. It's kind of a blend of religious philosophy and supernatural action. Like, if you fused Underworld with The Exorcist. It's not quite action-y enough or stupid enough to be an Underworld-style film, but it isn't quite philosophical, smart, or scary enough to be an Exorcist-style film. This movie falls nicely in the middle, making it enjoyable for anyone. And, like I said before, if you like Walken, you'll love this movie.
My rating? ... I'd say it's about a 7 out of 10. Not a masterpiece, but certainly not the worst thing I've ever seen.
Thanks for reading, now go watch it!
~ Oliv ~
No comments:
Post a Comment