When I read this book in 2001, I was struck by how cinematic the writing was. The story was tragic and operatic--perfect for film. Why it took so long, I don't know, but this movie is a major disappointment. Weitz had a brilliant cast and Rene Fleming's voice to work with and he wasted both of them.
The most powerful moment in the book is when the guerrillas are going to execute a hostage and the singer faces them down and blasts them with "O mio babbino caro". Violence is impossible in the face of such beauty and the entire dynamic of the situation is changed. Choosing to cut out that scene was the first indicator that this director/screenwriter was clueless about this material.
The final assault that frees the hostages was just bad action movie crap. We need this scene to be operatic: the saddest aria in the repertoire blasting on the soundtrack as the assault plays out in slow motion--the death of each of the characters we have grown to know devastating us as we watch them gunned down one by one with all the tragic pathos of a great opera.
Patchett's novel deserves better.
Add a Review
-
phahof23 September 2018
-
bob9982 April 2022A few facts: on 17 December 1996, 14 Tupac Amaru guerillas took over the Japanese embassy in Lima, Peru, holding 700 plus people hostage. This total was quickly reduced to 72 hostages. The event lasted 126 days (!), with the result that we all know. Now out of this event, a soggy, inept movie has been made. Paul Weitz has little sense of pace and dramatic effect. The viewer is left thinking 'What does this have to do with anything?' too many times. The hostages have little individuality, are mainly interchangeable; the guerillas have vague motivations that we can only guess at. Julianne Moore and Sebastian Koch have done better work. I had the wish that they had hired Renee Fleming to play the soprano, she would have added a good deal of charm and star quality to this sad effort.
-
kaptenvideo-898757 December 2018A wealthy man (Ken Watanabe) throws a house party for important people, also inviting a world-renowned opera singer (Julianne Moore) to perform.
Sadly, the places turns into a hostage zone, and there will be no easy solutions to end the conflict.
Also starring, as internationally diverse supporting cast of actors as possible. The only name most would recognize is Christopher Lambert. Yes, the original "Highlander". But the only really noteworthy performance comes from Sebastian Koch as the hostage negotiator.
Anyway, the Oscar season is ready to start soon, so "Bel Canto" is sneakig in early to get some attention before the possible heavy-hitters arrive.
I am surprised that, according to IMDb, it's not a festival movie finally arriving cinemas - because everything about it shouts "made for festivals", adding "Look how tasteful I am, surely you can not NOT admire me, now can you?".
Tasteful approach is a good idea because despite it being hostage drama, "Bel Canto" actually hides a comment on modern times' most controversial topic - the migrants flooding to Northern America and Europe.
Sadly, the mastermind behind the movie, the co-writer and director Paul Weitz has not been able or willing to add something interesting to ongoing discussion.
He is good with generic messages such as "can't we all just get along" or "let's give love a chance" which frankly aren't personal or intellectually intriguing enough to match the otherwise ambitious nature of the project.
There are people who certainly could pull this off, turning essentially banal messages into something grand thanks to heartful execution - somehow Michael Jackson with his over the top epic mid-1990's and 2000's ballads springs to mind. Maybe cuz "Bel Canto's" underlying theme is also how the power of music can unite people.
But Weitz is not such a crafty man. In his quest to create something serious and tasteful, he has also avoided anything that would make the watching, you know, exciting. "Bel Canto" is easily the most tedious hostage story that I can recall. (Except the surprisingly powerful finale.)
Following the story, it seems like the authors are striving for something "European" or by all means not "American", so there is almost no action or otherwise intense scenes which would create some suspense.
What we basically have is two groups of people hanging around in this big house, waiting for some resolution, and exchanging a dialogue or two here and there instead.
The restrained approach is not problematic in itself but there's not anything much deeper happening neither. We don't see different characters wrestling with messy feelings which would seem like an expected thing in a life-threatening situation; we don't see them going through emotional crisis; we don't see exactly how the captives' relationships with captors actually develop over time (although we see what they turn into).
Hell, we don't even see much of their everyday life, nor get the sense of how long the whole thing goes on, exactly. There's just a bunch of people hanging around, some of them pointing guns at others.
In short, the "tasteful" detached approach makes the forming of emotional bond with someone or the events in general difficult. I get it, every hostage movie doesn't have to have Samuel L. Jackson to up the "cool" factor... but there really should be more than this.
I have a gut feeling that Paul Weitz was just tired of being known for just lightweight entertainment but ambition to do something memorable doesn't necessarily translate to movie gold. Despite good intentions, "Bel Canto" doesn't satisfy.
Sure, the man is surely capable of offering something beyond lightweight entertainment ("Being Flynn", anyone?) but honestly, he was at his best with early, unambitious efforts "American Pie" and "About a Boy".
His brother and former creative partner Chris Weitz has had a somewhat better run becoming more "serious" filmmaker, with co-writing 2017's "The Mountain Between Us" and directing "Operation Finale" fresh in Netflix. -
Kirpianuscus11 January 2020It is a beautiful film. But soulless . The theme is generous, the actors are admirables . But you feel nothing. No emotion,no thrill . Only , at the end, the shadow of compassion. Something essential is missing. The director seems in hurry development, the love stories are just sketches , the characters are reduced to few lines. The virtue - the delicacy of unfinished stories. A delicate sketch. But nothing more.
-
sammybuzz-4544330 September 2018I like you julianne moore but, not on this movie. Everytime she sings here, I cringe to death.... I thought that one of the easiest kind of acting is lip-synching but, I was wrong.. She just wasn't able to do it well... It saddened me. And Mr. Ken Watanabe, what's really your role in the movie again? I almost didn't notice you! Waste of funds for this one and, talent! (If there's any on this one, sorry.)
-
scott-16573 April 2019Because I thought this was a pretty good and touching movie. One test I have, when watching a movie on cable, is how many times I pick up my phone to check the net. I didn't during this one. I will not give spoilers but it's based on a novel ... so the outcome is not a script thing but an adaptation. I thought the performances were compelling enough. Don't be discouraged by other reviews. Make up your own mind.
-
ferdinand193222 September 2018This is a meretricious and pretentious piece of kitsch.
The artistic faults are not the filmmakers, nor the actors, because the film is a perfectly well-made piece of middle-brow entertainment. The moral and artistic failure lies in the writing. Not even Renee Fleming's signature piece, 'Song to the Moon', as mimed by Moore, can amend the dreadful experience of this film.
Firstly the title which does not refer to the style of bel canto opera, nor is there a piece of Donizetti or Bellini through which it could string a reason in order to use the term. There is not much singing of any kind apart from Puccini's 'Vissi d'arte', another typical name-checking aria which makes it clear that the use of bel canto is a silly irrelevant borrowing in order to add a vestige of style.
Then there is the drama itself which follows a predictable and sentimental course in which the leads fall for each other. Their bond is abbreviated, and it is not polite to say how, but it is a piece of deliberate and unsubtle manipulation, as well as very hackneyed plotting which ought to have been excised before it had been written.
Of course, as is the nature with this comforting vacuous work, love strives to conquer all, and all the struggles by the protagonists are in the name of love. This bromide, this stupefyingly simplistic nonsense, is incapable of providing drama beyond the stale and bland product it is.
It pretends to assume a form of drama with guns and noble gestures and a conflict of ideas but that pseudo battle and tragedy is elided with Dvorák's song. It's probable that the meaning of that song in the opera Rusalka evaded the understanding of all involved too.
For real bel canto drama, Donizetti's Tudor Queens operas (Maria Stuarda, Anna Bolena and Roberto Devereux) are much better. -
vasileioskyvellos25 September 2018Hardly a realistic plot to narrate, with great perspective though mostly because of Julianne. And somewhere between small doses of suspense and greater of humanity, the film leaves us with the feeling of unfinished business, as if the director wanted simply to proceed without the emotional strength, this movie could bring. It got flat at this very moment anyone expected the power behind the facts. Anyway, it was no waste of time, enjoyable but ...something finally was missing.
-
Aktham_Tashtush22 September 2018The story for a second would look like based on a true story as they advertise it .. but through the events .. things tend to get dull and unnecessary overuse of hiped unrealistic romance /love story.
Julianne Moore didn't do well in here ,, even the imitation of the song sounded fake on her lips... -
greenheart20 November 2018Classical music meets terrorism, an interesting mix. Some of the scenes in this movie are just a shade bizarrre, at times the tension is quite good, particularly in the first half of the movie, but then the tension gets broken by these odd scenes. I think the movie tries to touch on some of the terrorists vulnerabilities and how such people end up with semi-automatic weapons in their hands. But it doesn't quite get there, I wish it had stuck to one genre and thrown all its energies into that area. At the end of the day, I preferred the tension and drama to the love scenes which I didn't find plausible. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed the movie, I just feel that it never falls into the greatness category. My favourite quote from the movie "Are you sure they won't shoot, not everyone likes opera"
-
cdcrb17 September 2018I know we have three months to go, but I am declaring this the worst film of 2018. based on an incident from about 30 years ago in south America, this tells the tale of hostages taken by a group of guerrilla forces. Julianne moore gives the worst performance of her life. I am blaming the director for this. sam watanabe is totally wasted. I cannot believe people act like this in such a terrifying situation.
-
There appear to be a lot of "haters" because of what this movie is not about. What it is about is the relationships that develops between 2 groups, between terrorists and their captives (perhaps "Stockholm Syndrome"?). While the movie is not as good as the novel, it is very good.
-
sahlawi14 February 2019The only reason I saw this movie was because Julianne Moore, which she did a good job at, but I thought her character lacked some substance, something that I would have appreciated in order to better connect with the main characters of the movie. The movie has a good story, but I think its hard to go into that much details in less than 2 hours. Bel Canto would have been a great if it was made into a mini-series.
Besides Julianne Moore, others actresses and actors in this movie were not bad either, especially the Commandate Benjamin "Tenoch Huerta" and Carmen "Maria Mercedes Coroy," but again I would have liked to learn more about these characters.
Overall, it was a cute movie and as my title suggests it is not a thriller movie at all, there was more romance in the movie than the thriller part. -
Holli_Would25 September 2018What should tip off anyone who has the slightest bit of imagination about how bad this film is going to be (and it is!), is that Julianne Moore is cast as a famous opera singer. She's a fine actress in her own right, but talk about miscasting. Just imagine her trying to mouth opera...it just doesn't fit her looks or her persona, despite the glamourous clothes and jewels. The cast come from various corners of the film world (U.S., France, Japan, S. America) but it doesn't help this film whatsoever. Awkward from beginning to...the point I had to turn it off after 25 minutes. Don't recommend
-
cekadah8 February 2019I have never heard of the book this movie is taken from !
It's such an unbelievable story you have to watch it to the end. And when it's all over your first question will be -- "What"?
It's like pulling tape off a tape dispenser and suddenly you hit the end of the role and you haven't finished your project. You still need more tape!
María Mercedes Coroy and Ryo Kase are certainly the shine in this movie! -
imursel13 December 2018Acting: 8 /Story: 7 /Production values: 5 /Suspence - Thriller level: 6 /Action: 0 /Mystery - unknown: 0 /Romance level: 7 /Film noir ~ neo-noir density: none /Comedy elements: slightly /Overall: 7
-
Conquistadores16 February 2019While the acting is ok, the whole story makes the so-called guerrilleros look nice. The true story was nothing like it. They were real assassins. The "political prisoners" they wanted the Government to set free were, in fact, terrorists just like them. Mixing real video footage of the actual hostage crisis in this movie is a very bad idea, as it misleads the viewers into thinking those terrorists were nice people. Imagine Osama Bin Laden playing football and being nice to his hostages because, of course, he never ordered to kill anyone (ironic mode on) and surrendering when the troops stormed in. Utter nonsense.
-
KarenYVR2 October 2018Bel Canto is a heartbreaking story of love, justice and human connections. A group of freedom fighters invade a private event in Lima and keep wealthy people in hostage, and demand freedom of unfairly jailed comrades and retirement of corrupted president. Even though the film itself is full of warmth and is made with good intentions, I couldn't help but feel a sense of uncertainty of where the writers and the director were heading to. The film is based on true events, however it fails to give us in-depth character development, or more constructive and detailed description of the event. Julianne Moore and the rest of the cast did their best to help the movie out, but it just feels incomplete.
-
Vindelander9 December 2019So slow and disappointing I couldn't stay focussed. Usually a huge fan of Julianne but not in this. Nothing much happens and she must have needed the money.
No redeeming features at all I'm afraid -
Ann Patchett's novel has been 'altered' by Anthony Weintraub and director Paul Weitz and the result is a barely recognizable resemblance. It is obvious that the screenwriters wanted to take the movie into the current discussion of immigration and the journey through Central America by focusing on the dysfunctional governments in South America (and North America now.....) in their mistreatment of refugees and immigrants who are imprisoned and separated from their families. And if the film focuses our attention on a problem that most assuredly needs changing then the story works well.
In Patchett's sensitive novel, a world-renowned opera singer Roxanne Coss (visually Julianne Moore, sonically Renee Fleming) becomes trapped in a hostage situation when she's invited to perform for a wealthy industrialist in South America. There is a love affair between Roxanne and the important Hosokawa (Ken Watanabe) as well as one between the translator Gen (Ryo Kase) and a female soldier Carmen (Maria Mercedes Coroy) but those affairs get lost in the darkened rooms of the mansion where the hostage holders struggle with the government - the only speaking source of intervention is a Red Cross worker Messner (Sebastian Koch).
The message of hostages begins a few minutes after the opening arrival of Roxanne and remains until the end - too much too long. A fine cast just can't fin their way out of this flimsy script. If you loved the novel, pass....Even the excerpts of Renee Fleming's vocals fail to impress. -
nanettemeau18 June 2022I've never seen anything like it. Very unique film full of surprises. The culturally mixed crowd of hostages and revolutionaries combine to form a mix and mingle creating all sorts of magic. I found myself laughing and then tearful.
Ignore the so-called "expert critics." Hogwash. I think I'm up there in the movie-critic category and I say sit down relax grab popcorn and a glass of champagne or a margarita. Enjoy! -
jimcheva8 May 2023As a lover of Patchett's novel, I hesitated to watch it brought to screen (I didn't realize she was one of the producers). But I found this engaging and emotionally true to the novel, if, as almost inevitably happens, not quite the complete novel. The essential themes of people discovering each other under unpromising circumstances and the universal power of art (albeit a tad idealized here) come through and the evolution of the various relationships is developed believably. The savagery in the novel is all the more vivid here for being on-camera, but so is the fun and the complicity that devolops. I honestly can't say how effective it would be for someone who hasn't read Pathcett's (wonderful) book, but I found it satisfyinf overal..
-
nacemosmuertos22 September 2018Julianne Moore in decent films is ok, but without the caring of a big production it shows that she is a minor actress. The film is awful, full of cliches, bad actors, and a terrile rhythm. I couldn´t get to the end, don´t waste your time on it
-
wiesner-455583 February 201990 Minutes without any content , a drama without drama ...