Land of the Blind thinks it is a witty, modern satire on power and corruption. However, while presenting itself as an incisive commentary it fails to ask any questions of the issues it touches on. Ralph Fiennes' prison guard is converted to an anti-governmental cause by imprisoned playwright/ 'terrorist' Donald Sutherland and is led to help in the assassination of the local despot, but their relationship is based on little other than a few bewildering, pretentious quotations and long meaningful stares. We are given no real reason to believe why: a) Fiennes rises from prison guard to captain of a secret military platoon that hunts terrorists and guards the president and b) then sides with Sutherland.
Rather than be corrupted by power as he acquires it, Sutherland's character turns out to be just another dictator in waiting and after all his philosophizing and poetry-quoting in jail the first thing he does is end free speech and murder the previous ruler. And Sutherland's perfmance is at the same monotone, grandfather-esquire pace that he seems unable to escape from.
Because it sees itself as a 'satire' there are a few moments that are meant to to be funny, and make you see the absurdity prevalent through all spheres of life, but they are crass and dull. The repeated shots of elephants are heavy-handed and dull. The performances are two dimensional and obvious. The film gets so basic that we even get to watch the tyrant taking a crap.
The only thing that saved me from squeezing out my own eyeballs was Fiennes' performance. As usual, he's great to watch and he makes the most of the little he is given to work with. But its sad that such a strong performance is wasted on a misguided film that ultimately doesn't have the courage or intelligence to ask any questions about the themes it thinks it's so cleverly exploding and undermining. In the end we are asked to believe that resistance to totalitarianism, or corruption of any sort, is pointless. For Edwards, it seems, history is cyclical and there's nothing you can do about it. So its best to put up with the dictator you've got because you don't know what's round the corner. At least this one has a monkey.
Rather than be corrupted by power as he acquires it, Sutherland's character turns out to be just another dictator in waiting and after all his philosophizing and poetry-quoting in jail the first thing he does is end free speech and murder the previous ruler. And Sutherland's perfmance is at the same monotone, grandfather-esquire pace that he seems unable to escape from.
Because it sees itself as a 'satire' there are a few moments that are meant to to be funny, and make you see the absurdity prevalent through all spheres of life, but they are crass and dull. The repeated shots of elephants are heavy-handed and dull. The performances are two dimensional and obvious. The film gets so basic that we even get to watch the tyrant taking a crap.
The only thing that saved me from squeezing out my own eyeballs was Fiennes' performance. As usual, he's great to watch and he makes the most of the little he is given to work with. But its sad that such a strong performance is wasted on a misguided film that ultimately doesn't have the courage or intelligence to ask any questions about the themes it thinks it's so cleverly exploding and undermining. In the end we are asked to believe that resistance to totalitarianism, or corruption of any sort, is pointless. For Edwards, it seems, history is cyclical and there's nothing you can do about it. So its best to put up with the dictator you've got because you don't know what's round the corner. At least this one has a monkey.