MovieChat Forums > Flashbacks of a Fool (2008) Discussion > good moovie but something missing

good moovie but something missing

posted 16 years ago by Mirissa07
13 replies | jump to latest

Overall I enjoyed this movie, but I felt that they didn't fully flesh out the story. Joe was supposed to be very upset about his friends death, but I would have liked to see more about his relationship with his friend rather than him having sex with Evelyn. I understand that that was a major part of what shaped him, but I would have liked to see the two friends together more.

Now on a little different note, I felt that the acting in this movie was wonderful Daniel Craig was fantastic. It was nice to see him play a troubled character like this. I also liked seeing him in an English movie, something not so Hollywood. All the supporting cast was wonderful as well.

[–] Nycbond 16 years ago

Yes I agree, the movie is great but there was something missing, it did not really have climax, and being able to see more of their friendship would make it better. They just show them get into a fight and then they depart

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sdalcorn 16 years ago

What???

But he didn't dorwned [SIC] - he swam ashore and hitched a ride. Next scene a cab is dropping him in front of his mother's house!

I think by missing this point, you missed the entire story.

[–] benighted2005 16 years ago

I liked how they dealt with the friend by not making it overdramatic. Maybe the character was not as connected to his friend but it was the situation and time. Remember that scene where he looks down from the building to see a few guys fishing? That scene and that hanging out with his friend is what he missed more than anything, Im guessing but not to an effect he'd be moved to tears cause he's not that sort of a guy.

"There. There."

[–] hppg 16 years ago

I agree, there was so much missing! I thought it was quite bad. It was slow at the beginning, then the flashback focussed mostly on sex/romance with the two women, rather than anything else. Like you said, the relationship with Boots was barely shown at all, and it was supposed to be important! So it left a lot missing...yes...

I'm so disappointed, I love Daniel Craig and I like much of the other cast, but this wasn't a good film.

[–] andell 16 years ago

I couldn't agree with you more about Joe's relationship to his recently deceased friend! To be honest, I found the film, and especially the flashback, to be pretty obnoxious in how his relationship with his best friend seems to be devoid of any reciprocal sense of friendship.

Now that in and of itself could suggest that his being upset could be because of guilt, however even that seemed to be a stretch! I suspect the only thing that could distinguish this British film from a Hollywood production would be him winding up in bed with the grieving widow.

Instead, the ending is so ambiguous that we're left to wonder (on another thread) whether the tears Evelyn sheds are out of some grief for a lost life she could've had with Joe, or if they are indeed for her husband!

I'll try watching it again, but yeah, I have to admit I was not impressed. Indeed, even in the flashback, it seemed like Joe was cast as some good looking blond Alpha male in a community full of flawed Beta male train wrecks! The movie even somewhat feeds into that near the end by suggesting that Boots was a fiscal failure, and had all but left his family destitute with his excessive debts!

I mean, sheesh!

I think that some of the moments were worthwhile, and that the movie with some tinkering could have been much more effective and meaningful! However it is more romance film pretending to be a mourning film than it is a coming of age story re-examined following a tragic death!

I guess Mirissa where I didn't see eye to eye with you was on this being a good film with something missing. I tend to see it more as a mediocre film, pretending to be a great film, that could've been much better had the screen writer and director taken a step back and made a conscious choice in the direction of the story.

The dead man in the film is little more than enabling a plot device! It seems pretty obnoxious to me!

[–] JackRandall 16 years ago

This was a strange film for me. Although flawed, I found myself , strangely intrigued.

While I agree with the previous points - the strangely unexplored relationship between Joe and Boots - I have a theory I'll throw out there...

I'm not sure Joe was upset so much because Boots died, but rather it brought back memories of his relationship (flawed relationship at that) with Ruth. His affair with Evelyn was always portrayed as purely physical and seedy, but his early relationship with Ruth (as kids) seemed to be a bit more sweet - a bit more like potential love. The affair with Evelyn and the death of Jane (which he seemed to blame himself for) catalyst the catalyst for his actions later in life - the way we see him at the beginning of the film... it's only on coming back for the funeral (late as he was! ;) that those feelings re-emerged... almost as if seeing how popular Boots clearly was and the effect of his death on Ruth and how she spoke so highly of him made him realise that had he NOT ruined it with Evelyn, he could have been living a very different life... hence, Flashbacks Of A Fool... also, the way in which Ruth reacts to his letter would *maybe* indicate that she thought something similar?...

However, I'm not sure whether this is what I'm supposed to feel? Haha. The opening sequence of Joe and Boots becoming blood brothers would appear to show otherwise... one of the flaws I mentioned. I couldn't understand why Joe became an actor for one? This seemed pretty major since him going to LA, becoming a popular (at some point) actor and having access to women and drugs and money leaves him in the state we first see him... yet when we see young Joe, he's almost shy, retiring, only confident around his friends... he actually seemed a bit - what's the word? - bumbling... Another major annoyance was the manner in which Jane died... a BOMB??!! I thought I was suddenly watching a very different film! ;) Seem's stange that a bomb of that size gets washed up and NO-ONE NOTICES IT??? Anyway, minor quibble! ;)

Beautifully shot - would you expect anything else from John Mathieson? Nicely paced if a little (or actually, quite alot) misguided... great soundtrack... a scene stealing performance by Mark Strong... great cast... but yes, *something* was definitely missing... I think it was a slight sense of style over substance for me... an air of superficiality... but maybe that was the point?... if so, I think the director should have looked into someone doing a swift script edit and rewrite, and concentrated more on the people and events peripheral to Joe, as opposed to making him carry the film... I didn't feel like I *knew* Joe enough to care...

"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken"

[–] denise1234 15 years ago

This film was not meant to be a fleshed-out story with all characters specifically and precisely drawn in a neatly packaged plot.

For one thing, the director started writing the story for the film based on an 'emotion' he felt after seeing a painting. He then drew from experiences from his own youth, including people he knew for some of the characters, and built his story from there.

For another, the 'flashbacks' are precisely that -- the recollections of a rather hazy-minded middle-aged man of his youth at 15 years old, 25 years earlier. You are supposed to see it through the filter of his memory. Therefore, that is what you are supposed to experience -- memories are not precise or distinct. They are blurry snapshots at best, and the older you are, the more nostalgic they become. Certainly Ruth and he did not sing together in slow motion, but that is the way he experiences that event in his memory.

The characters are not going to have any backstory because they don't need to, in Joe's mind, because he knows who they are. We are supposed to focus on what Joe is remembering and feeling.

I don't think we were supposed to know much about the how or why Joe became a successful actor (except maybe just enough as a backdrop to how his lifestyle based on hedonism and selfishness led him to examine his past mistakes, and how a rather tragic event he probably felt guilty about might have caused him to lead an empty, adult life, no matter how successful otherwise, and why he did not end up with Ruth). Neither were we supposed to 'know' something like Evelyn's motives for her behavior, just how she and Joe interacted (again, according to his memory of events) and how their interactions resulted in the outcomes for the characters it did. We might not have had any more information about his friend because the events he was remembering didn't have a lot to do with Boots.

Now, that might not be everyone's cup of tea. I found it quite a good film myself, and very moving. Made me think of spent youth and how our lives can become something quite different from what we expect when we are young. And, the music was good :)

Also, old WWII mines DID occasionally wash up on the British coastline.

"I can't stand a naked light bulb, any more than..a rude remark or a vulgar action" Blanche DuBois

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] withnail69 13 years ago

exactly that's what was missing about this film. There was nothing much to show their friendship...

This is how I would have written it.... The boys fall out over Ruth and then Joe runs away...I wouldn't have even cast Evelyn. The majority of that flashback was weak. Apart fromt he scenes with Ruth

[–] hans-dejong 13 years ago

I also think a lot ended up on the cutting room floor, as usually happens, for some reason or another. I wouldn't have mind the film to be a bit longer, this film could have been better than it now is.

[–] WarpedRecord 12 years ago

You are absolutely right. I don't think it would have been necessary to put the relationship with Boots front and center, but it seemed to take a backseat (really a backroad) to his adolescent relationships with the women (young and older).

This film is quite moving, especially for those of us weened on '70s music and culture, but the buildup is a bit detached. Still, I liked it enough to give it 8/10 stars.

[–] ilania_a 11 years ago

Good comments....I know your wrote them five years ago.... I just saw it and appreciated it too.

Ilania Abileah
Artist, and Culture Reporter