Atonement (15)

Film

War films

migrate.31475.jpg

Time Out rating:

<strong>Rating: </strong>3/5

User ratings:

<strong>Rating: </strong>4/5
Rate this  

Time Out says

Tue Sep 4 2007

The first hour of ‘Atonement’ is an electric experience, during which one feels that Joe Wright (‘Pride and Prejudice’), the film’s young director, and Christopher Hampton, its screenwriter, have a clever grip on the potential of Ian McEwan’s novel to inspire more than just a well-crafted adaptation and a lyrical, intelligent film in its own right. McEwan’s book is about the telling of stories, about the perception of others’ tales and about delivering a lie to a rapt, conditioned audience for reasons of self-preservation: a key character even pleads to be believed with the defence that she saw something happening, ‘With my own eyes’. What greater appeal is there to the potential ability of cinema to twist, mould and convince us?

Wright tightly harnesses these ideas in the first, and longest, of the film’s three chapters. We’re in a smart country house in the late 1930s, just a few years before the war. Cecilia (Keira Knightley) has recently come down from Cambridge; Robbie (James McAvoy), her university contemporary and son of her parents’ housekeeper is dabbling with landscape gardening; and her brother Leon (Patrick Kennedy) is coming to dinner with a friend, the arrogant industrialist Paul Marshall (Benedict Cumberbatch). The performances are enjoyable and spot-on: Cecilia’s brittle beauty; Robbie’s educated but tempered confidence; the wily camaraderie between Leon and Marshall.

There’s clearly an attraction between Robbie and Cecilia, yet his connection with the servile classes and her inherited snobbery is holding Cecilia at bay. The class divide persists when Cecilia’s sensible 13-year-old sister, Briony (a terrific turn from Saoirse Ronan) – already dabbling in writing and staging plays at home – constructs her own, deluded fiction around the goings-on between Robbie and Cecilia that see Robbie falsely branded a ‘sex maniac’ and rapist. As with the coming of war to Brideshead, the spell is broken, the Second World War begins and Briony, later as a young adult (Romola Garai) and, much later, as a dying novelist (Vanessa Redgrave) recalls the errors of her youth.

Far from ‘unfilmable’, as some have described it, McEwan’s book offers real opportunities for a filmmaker to thread the perils of storytelling into an epic narrative that bursts out of the attractive claustrophobia of a rarefied world and onto the ravaged, classless beaches of Dunkirk and the fortified streets of London as Cecilia and Briony both, separately, work as nurses during the war and try to deal with their recent past. For the country-house scenes, Wright wisely makes us complicit with Briony’s perception of events, yet such is the strength of the director’s tactics in this chapter – repeated scenes, messing with time, the sound of a typewriter doing its damage on the soundtrack – that when he loosens his approach for a more traditional telling of the narrative for the rest of the film, one can’t help but be disappointed.

Compared to these earlier episodes, the film’s later scenes are more pedestrian and Wright becomes more prone to visual swaggery: a technically impressive but artistically questionable five-minute tracking shot of the carnage at Dunkirk; the nurses marching in formation around a hospital as lights go off above them one-by-one; the rush of water through a tube station as a character drowns – all these grate as one feels that Wright, rather than tackling the pitfalls of storytelling instead succumbs to its audience-pleasing thrills.

A noble, well-made, superbly performed and photographed (by Seamus McGarvey) semi-failure then, but still one that shows Wright to be one of the more imaginative filmmakers of his generation, capable of winning over large audiences with daring endeavours.

99+

Comments

Add +

Release details

Rated:

15

UK release:

Fri Sep 7 2007

Duration:

123 mins

Share your thoughts
  1. * mandatory fields

Comments & ratings

Rated as: 4/5 (87 ratings)
  • I disagree will all criticising it, the actors in it showed their best performance, I went to see the film with my mother and we both really enjoyed it, definately a film that appeals to a wide age audience. One that I would love to see winning many awards, truly brilliant.

    Kirsten Fri Oct 5 2007
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • brilliantly done.

    mark Thu Oct 4 2007
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • I had no preconceptions. I don't know the book. And my chap suggested we went to see it. I thought it was very thought provoking and we were still talking about it in the dark. I didn't realise that Bryony thought she was telling a lie really which is not a fault with the subtlety of the film but actually part of its brilliance. The cinematography is marvellous. Anyone who isn't touched by the small essay on Dunkirk has no soul. Those who condemn it as a chick flick must be inferred to have a birdbrain! I was fooled by the lie, I was shocked by truth: and like Bryony, found the truth so overwhelmingly pointless. I thought experiencing this film was a treat: rare, like 'watching' art. I loved that bucket of water 'shock' where the 'quaint' pictures end and we have multi-screened images. Even Bryony's request to stop. We both thought the stiltedness objectionable but is the whole thing not a novel, scenes revisited, reinterpreted, pictures filled out with script, the whole thing is in the end, a fiction, so we are all fooled. It's so clever, so intelligent, to be taken in. For Bryony herself is a fiction. I am reminded of Emily's double frame in Wuthering Heights with Lockwood and Nelly. I was impressed: I will certainly be watching it again.

    lo Thu Oct 4 2007
    Report
  • Must be my northern upbringing. The posh accents and milieu grated and I had to fight an urge to walk out early on. More glue was needed as the emotions werr laid on with a trowel. The ned for incessant typewriter noises did become apparent, but you could hear the stage directions clunk into place when you weren't assailed by the music . You got the feeling of a stock period production and all that was missing from the stately home was the grand ball. The Director was fortunate to have Saoirse Ronan to hold the thing together and after that splendid performance, Keira Knightley could just coast home and did. I could see people lusting after her, but why anyone should love her was beyond me. But they made sure she was loved. I suppose all the writhing was obligatory, but it didn't advance the plot. Bryony's jealousy was already malignant. The filming was well done, especially the Dunkirk and London street scenes. And there was the flavour of a Renoir painting in the garden scenes. That 4 engined bomber worried me too and I Ithink I caught the word technology floating about out of time. Thank God though for Vanessa Redgrave at the end to give us our moneys worth. At least they got that right.

    Roger Thu Oct 4 2007
    Report
  • I thought the popcorn was bad enough,but the film was worse.

    l.lowe Wed Oct 3 2007
    Report
  • Not a bad attempt from Joe Wright but nowhere near a great or even very good film. The plot is spun out with endless buzzing flies against window panes and sultry afternoons - which would be more atmospheric if they weren't ruined by the presence of the extremely lacking Ikea Knightley. Her limited acting talent is exposed alongside the far greater efforts of her cast. Joe Wright is one to watch but Knightley should only ever be doing Pirates of the Caribbean.

    M Parker Tue Oct 2 2007
    Report
  • About to go and see this film with my girlfriend. Shoot me now! Stephen C tells me these people dont understand attonement. I say he doesnt understand attonement. Attonement is having to go and see this rubbish because of some minor indescretion commited so long ago with a bottle of whiskey and an ex-girlfriends sister. This is definately a girls film as my auto-excuse membrane is already twitching. Headache, fever, studying, great uncles death, washing my hai...........

    James Sun Sep 30 2007
    Report
  • I'm one who felt that the book could never succeed as a filml, primarily, I felt, because i questioned the motivation for devoting one's life to service as an 'atonement' for a wrong committed. i didn't hink that folks acted like that. BUT...the horror of the consequences of the big lie were so graphic on screen that I am convinced that this kind of atonement is possible. In essence someone gives up her life to atone for a lie. Do people really do that? I did think the acting was superior, but the passion of the love was not convincing. KK is, I'm afraid, a bit wooden, and as a virile young male, I'm afraid I wouldn't be tempted to bed the young lady.

    Jack Pollack Fri Sep 28 2007
    Rated as: 5/5
    Report
  • The beautiful stately home used in the film is Stokesey Court, near Craven Arms, Shropshire. I recognised some of the lovely countryside as I lived there some time ago.

    May Fri Sep 28 2007
    Report
  • It's not a blokes film not my kind of thing at all although keira is well fit

    JONNIE Wed Sep 26 2007
    Rated as: 2/5
    Report
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13
  • Hotwise
  • Cool brands
  • Star