The topic of the invasion of American troops in Vietnam is covered in the cinema quite well, but what was in the country before that is not known to everyone. And “A Quiet American” is the film that helps to enlighten a little bit in this matter.
In the first half of the XX century, the country was one hundred percent raw material colony of France. The Vietnamese had a protest movement back in the 30s, but it was rather weak and shone about nothing in terms of independence. But there would be no happiness, but misfortune helped. During the Second World War, the French were kicked out of the country by the Japanese, sat for several years and by the end of the war saw themselves drunk in connection with the defeat of the German coalition, which included Japan. By that time in Vietnam, there was a whole horde of “liberators” of returning French, English and Chinese (Homildan), all of whom were in no hurry to go home. The Vietnamese were a little freaked out by such universal assistance and by 1946 they began to kick the French out of the country, because nothing, a hundred and more years of drinking blood, enough is enough. The film takes place in 1952, the last years of the conflict, when the French have already begun to understand that they do not face anything, and the Americans have already begun to think about how to defeat the communists in Vietnam (that is, the Vietnamese themselves, who went down the path of communism with the support of China and the USSR).
The main character of the film, on behalf of which the story is told, is a British journalist Thomas Fowler, who is sent to his newspaper in Saigon to cover first-hand the events taking place in the country. Being an old man, Fowler does not strain much, enjoying the Asian flavor in the company of a young Vietnamese girl and a pipe with opium, and issuing several articles a year. However, at some point, the paradise life begins to crack at the seams. A notice comes from the newspaper that it is necessary to either start working or return to England. At the same time, he meets a young American Pyle and he suddenly puts his eye on his girlfriend, and so specifically that he is ready to seek her hand right in front of Fowler. The journalist did not like it, he began to inquire and found that Pyle, it seems, is not just a humanitarian mission.
As is often the case, the film adaptation made Graham Green’s deep novel more superficial, depriving the viewer of the inner torments and monologues of the protagonist, who gradually goes from an indifferent observer to an active participant in the events in Vietnam in the early fifties. Instead, the film adaptation offers a visual feast of exotic Asian culture and a decent acting duo composed of Michael Caine, who stated that this is one of his best roles and Brendan Fraser, who in 2002 has not yet sunk into oblivion (a year earlier the second film of the franchise “The Mummy”, very successful). Kane is really good in this picture, although it is rather strange that he considers the image of a dried wobla the crown of his acting talent.
In general, I was interested throughout the film, but it seemed that the creators tried to chase two birds with one stone and did not catch one. Those who wanted oriental exoticism and melodrama received clearly less than the authors could give. And those who were waiting for a serious drama with political overtones also did not wait for anything special, because in the film everything is somehow at the level of “I just passed by and suddenly saw this!”. As a result, spending time on viewing justifies only a rare and entertaining entourage. Which, in general, is what you would expect from director Phillip Noyce, who previously became famous for tense but banal action films such as Patriot Games, Direct and Clear Threat and Blind Fury.
The screen adaptation of the eponymous work of the English writer Graham Green, which is the second film adaptation. From the first film adaptation, which was released in 1958, the writer refused flatly. Because the script was partially rewritten in favor of political “morals” (as a result of the intervention of a CIA officer). Unfortunately, the creator did not live to see the second transfer of the novel to the blue screens. But something tells me (the devils in the ear are whispering) that old Greene would be happy. Not that I would be delighted, but the game is still worth the candle.
The production of Phillip Noyce punctually switches from one genre to another (melodrama, drama), leisurely and at the same time not minorly developing events. The story revolves around the military conflicts in South Vietnam in 1952, and a love triangle flourishes at the heart of the story. The film deviates slightly from the political part, focusing more on individuality. Two quite talented actors, Michael Kane (Thomas Fowler) and Brendan Fraser (Pyle), in each scene open another dusty door of their large dungeons. Such disclosure of characters, undoubtedly, causes respect for the actors. But should the relationship between British journalist Thomas Fowler and a young U.S. embassy worker Pyle be called a hostile and dignified standoff? Yeah, there's a beautiful Vietnamese Phuong in between. Their morals and interests are in conflict. But there is a sense of dignity and respect for each other.
We do not share our destiny, but it is shared by us. May the proud masters of their lives tear me to shreds. But I won't lie to you or to myself. So you don’t have to look for antiheroes in this novel. All of us, at some stage in life or in a fraction of a few minutes, are both protagonists and antagonists. Only, sometimes we ourselves do not notice or do not see the line separating bad from good, good from evil, etc. Sometimes, this line is so thin that you can get lost. The climax is reached when Michael Caine’s character says, “Just, I should have apologized to someone.” And Thomas Fowler's devastated and sad look is an eternity.
As a result, The Quiet American is one of those films that appeal to a specific audience. So, connoisseurs of genres of melodrama and drama, you can get acquainted with this good film. This is not a top aerobatics, but without a doubt, worth your attention product.
The screen adaptation of the eponymous work of the English writer Graham Green, which is the second film adaptation. From the first film adaptation, which was released in 1958, the writer refused flatly. Because the script was partially rewritten in favor of political “morals” (as a result of the intervention of a CIA officer). Unfortunately, the creator did not live to see the second transfer of the novel to the blue screens. But something tells me (the devils in the ear are whispering) that old Greene would be happy. Not that I would be delighted, but the game is still worth the candle.
The production of Phillip Noyce punctually switches from one genre to another (melodrama, drama), leisurely and at the same time not minorly developing events. The story revolves around the military conflicts in South Vietnam in 1952, and a love triangle flourishes at the heart of the story. The film deviates slightly from the political part, focusing more on individuality. Two quite talented actors, Michael Kane (Thomas Fowler) and Brendan Fraser (Pyle), in each scene open another dusty door of their large dungeons. Such disclosure of characters, undoubtedly, causes respect for the actors. But should the relationship between British journalist Thomas Fowler and a young U.S. embassy worker Pyle be called a hostile and dignified standoff? Yeah, there's a beautiful Vietnamese Phuong in between. Their morals and interests are in conflict. But there is a sense of dignity and respect for each other.
We do not share our destiny, but it is shared by us. May the proud masters of their lives tear me to shreds. But I won't lie to you or to myself. So you don’t have to look for antiheroes in this novel. All of us, at some stage in life or in a fraction of a few minutes, are both protagonists and antagonists. Only, sometimes we ourselves do not notice or do not see the line separating bad from good, good from evil, etc. Sometimes, this line is so thin that you can get lost. The climax is reached when Michael Caine’s character says, “Just, I should have apologized to someone.” And Thomas Fowler's devastated and sad look is an eternity.
As a result, The Quiet American is one of those films that appeal to a specific audience. So, connoisseurs of genres of melodrama and drama, you can get acquainted with this good film. This is not a top aerobatics, but without a doubt, worth your attention product.
7 out of 10
If you are going to watch this film, then prepare for a measured rhythm, in it even the most dynamic scenes flow like water in a stream, and the viewer is destined to play the role of a contemplator, without unnecessary empathy. Such a comfortable English position, like the main character of the film, played by brilliant Michael Kane.
I’ll start with the downsides (the language doesn’t turn to call it the downsides): sometimes lengthy narratives and sometimes predictable actions.
The rest are pluses. This is, of course, a picture. The atmosphere of Vietnam is brilliantly recreated. Life, interiors, costumes, nature, even the weather when shooting - all this multiplied by the skill of the cinematographer immerses in an amazing state of presence. Beautiful film with a large grain. Next is the cast. Very harmonious and, in general, star. Separately, I want to say about Do Thi Hai Yen (Fong), its charm and beauty give the film a special grace, balancing the political intrigue of the picture. And, of course, the characters and their actions. The shock of civilizations is shown very plausibly, besides, there was no tediousness about democracy, communists, etc., which, to be honest, I implicitly feared. The depth of Michael Caine's character (Thomas Fowler) is striking: calmness, sociability and pragmatism are what the British Empire was built on, and Fowler is a typical representative of it. He is aware of everything, does not rush anywhere, but even being at home in one gown, manages to keep all the threads of intrigue in his hands. And what happened to the character of Brendan Fraser (Olden Pyle) is the result of two main mistakes of the latter: the first, when he showed weakness and came to ask for permission to love (a rather grotesque situation), the second, when “by friendship” he revealed himself, which could not be done under any circumstances. How it all ended, you can find out by watching this wonderful picture.
7 out of 10
Saigon, 1952. Experienced British journalist Thomas Fowler settled well in the exotic eastern edge, finding his happiness in the arms of a young beauty Phuong. The arrival of a young American Pyle somewhat dispels the monotony of everyday life of a sour journalist, already tired of local political clashes and intrigues. But once Pyle admits that he loves Phuong passionately, it was, friendship immediately turns into a hidden confrontation. Not wanting to submit to fate, Fowler decides to get to know Pyle better and soon realizes that his opponent is not at all who he claims to be, and, most importantly, much more dangerous than he wants to seem.
After the establishment of control over Afghanistan and the war in Iraq, the second adaptation (the first was in 1958) of the novel by the acclaimed English writer Graham Greene “The Quiet American”, again became relevant: the Americans continue to rudely interfere in the affairs of other countries and look for a “third way”. Everyone who knows not only about the shameful outcome of the long-term adventure in Southeast Asia, but also about many other US militaristic actions in different parts of the world can continue in his mind.
By the way, this impressive chronological work was done by Michael Moore in his film “Bowling for Columbine”, released simultaneously with the film by Phillip Noyce. And all because the methods and principles of the work of “quiet Americans in white pants” to create an atmosphere of tension and armed confrontation in countries that find themselves in the sphere of geopolitical interests of the United States, have changed little in recent years. The film had serious issues with the release, which were resolved only a year after Michael Caine went all-in. He began to attack in the press the chief of “Miramax” Harvey Weinstein, indignant that the painting was hidden from the public.
Although it is possible that such a scandalous scenario was directed by Weinstein himself, a great master of PR campaigns, who decided in such an unusual way - causing fire on himself, to pay attention to the picture. It is clear that Weinstein pursued his commercial goals, and here, as you know, all means are good, except unprofitable ones. But at the same time, it is no secret that America does not like, and does not seem to repent, especially in a timely manner. So the image of a "quiet American" - a kind of demiurge of provocations, destabilizing the situation, apparently, will not become obsolete for a long time.
The film "A Quiet American" was watched only because of his favorite actor - Brendan Fraser. I can't say if I'm sorry or glad I saw it. According to the plot, the film is quite monotonous and calm, even a little tragic ending did not cause emotional unrest and seemed quite logical.
The most interesting was the ambiguous personality of the young visiting American Pyle, the duality of his personality and behavior. On the one hand, he is so friendly, simple-minded, open-minded, feels a little clumsy in Thailand ... a typical American shirt - a guy, besides a doctor, came to treat sick locals. On the other hand, he is a serious, methodical and cold-blooded minister who carries out his true mission for the benefit of his country. It is always interesting to see people living a double life. It was all the more interesting to watch such a person at a time of moral choice, emotional upheaval ... for example, suddenly flared love for a woman or the opportunity to save a person, knowing in advance that without his help a person is doomed.
The hero of Fraser reminds the hero of Mikhail Porechenkov in the series “Liquidation”.
In general, the film did not leave any strong impression, just another life story against the backdrop of the tragedy of the war. Except that in the reflection of the realities of life, the facets of human personalities lies its charm.
8 out of 10
What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether in the name of totalitarianism or in the name of sacred democracy and liberalism?
Sometimes it happens that people you seem to have known all your life give you an unexpected surprise, and a new facet of the character of the person close to you opens up before you. There is nothing strange about this, because each person is essentially an unread book with its secrets and secrets that we are not always ready to share with others. So what is such an understatement? A lie for salvation or a cunning calculation? Today's guest will try to answer this difficult question, as well as raise a number of new ones. So this is "The Quiet American."
1952. The French are at war with the Communists in the wilds of Vietnam. Americans prefer not to intervene for the time being and play the role of peacekeepers. And against the background of this conflict, a love triangle unfolds, the participants of which were the American doctor Aljeune Poole, the English writer and publicist Thomas Fowler and the Vietnamese dancer Fong. And if young Fong for the time being can not understand their feelings for men that surrounded her with care and attention, Poole and Fowler hide much darker secrets about themselves, secrets that can kill innocent people. One might think that armed clashes in the streets of Vietnamese cities were not enough.
I thought for a long time whether to take up the picture. Ultimately, the main problem is not even to transfer all the key events from the book to the big screens, but to intrigue the viewer who is not familiar with the original source and make him empathize with the characters of the picture. But Phillip Noyce not only managed to get the viewer to empathize with the characters of the picture, but also to tell an interesting detective story about what American peacekeepers are and what they are ready to go for the sake of their notorious democracies. But I will probably not go into the intricacies of the plot, so as not to spoil your pleasure from watching, but rather talk about the characters of the picture.
So, Thomas Fowler played by Oscar-winning Michael Caine. I deserve to say that. So Thomas Fowler came to Vietnam without pursuing lofty ideals, and the desire to help his neighbor somehow did not follow him. He came to Vietnam to escape his wife, whom he doesn’t even love, and to have a good time – cheap alcohol, cheap opium and no less cheap whores were just a treat for Fowler. But the incredible happened - an old womanizer fell in love with a dancer, and then faced the death of civilians. And these two events superimposed on each other forced Thomas Fowler to reconsider his views on life and try to help the Vietnamese people. A quiet American appears on the scene.
Namely, Angel Pyle performed by the equally good actor Brendan Frazier, who in his life has not received a single award from the Academy, but I hope he still has. So Angel Pyle is a kind and sympathetic guy who came to Vietnam to treat people and help civilians to the extent of his modest strength and capabilities. In any case, it seems so at first glance, but a dazzling smile and self-sacrifice is nothing more than a mask behind which the real Angel Pyle hides - a cold and calculating person who is ready to do anything for his goals.
As for the rest of the actors, they are perceived rather as auxiliary details that should emphasize certain features of the main characters and do not follow their fate. But in principle, this is even a good thing, since you can fully enjoy the mental confrontation between Kane and Fraser.
To sum up, in recent years, most of the films devoted to the war, whether World War II or the Vietnam War, are just a beautiful picture, while the actors are just a nice addition. Here there is nothing like this and in the foreground brought out just that living people at the same time, the creators managed, as it were, to show the horrors of war, as well as the attitude to it from ordinary people. So if you like movies on military themes, where the feelings and experiences of the heroes are at the forefront, or you have long wanted to see what the vaunted American democracy is worth, then I strongly advise you to pay attention to The Quiet American, you will not regret it.
7 out of 10