I've seen this movie four times now, and I remain perplexed as to why it didn't (a) get theatrically released in the first place or (b) better received by IMDB voters.
Well, I'm going to take some guesses, anyway. First off, Hillerman fans. I'm a big Tony Hillerman fan, and it's true, this movie is not completely true to the text of the book nor to the in-depth development of the characters of Chee and Leaphorn.
Guess what? IT"S A MOVIE, NOT A BOOK. You can't get the complexity of
characters built up over a 20-book series into two hours. If you want the book, go read the book for heaven's sake.
What Director Morris did was combine the essence of the Chee character -- the tension between the science and modernity of being an investigating law
enforcement in the late 20th century with the earnest desire in Chee to maintain the traditions of the Dinei -- with a Whodunit that worked well on film. (Mystery novel plots and movie mystery plots do not work on the same level, usually.)
There's a nice quietness to the whole movie, and we're half in Chee's head much of the time. Morris uses the same kind of brilliant palette he used in 'Thin Blue Line' to such good effect, and essentially creates a hybrid film -- half noir, half western.
So why did this movie get sat upon by the studio? My guess is they just couldn't figure out what to do with it. It's not loud, noisy, the explosions and gun battles are minimal, the character has no love interest, and even though the Navajo traditional religion is not as deeply portrayed here as it is in the Hillerman books (by a long shot) even that was probably just confusing to the Hollywood types. The director known for documentaries may be a hard sell as a fiction auteur to critics. The deliberate pacing may appear to be "slow" if you're comparing it to 'Lethal Weapon II'. Who knows?
So, in conclusion:
(1) I think Hillerman fans were disappointed it wasn't more slavishly faithful to the original text of the specific book.
(2) Errol Morris acolytes probably didn't really understand the transition to fiction of his peculiar style.
(3) The Usual Hollywood suspects just didn't get a film so quiet, visual, and without the usual formulaic plot elements.
The movie's not perfect, mind you. I liked Lou Diamond Phillips' quite presence in the role, but there was a problem believing him as a Navajo (why not use a Native American actor?) Some of the dialogue is a little forced (although the same could be said about the Hillerman novels, too, at times). And Leaphorn's character is a bit thrown away (although, again, in the early Chee novels he plays almost no role at all, so why quibble on this point?)
I'd REALLY like to see this uncut and on the big screen sometime with a nice color print. I bet it plays very well that way. The sound and sound editing in the movie are really excellent (on top of the cinematographic highlights noted elsewhere.)
In any event, I think this is a good movie, and if taken just on face value, it's a better than average cop-whodunit flick.
Well, I'm going to take some guesses, anyway. First off, Hillerman fans. I'm a big Tony Hillerman fan, and it's true, this movie is not completely true to the text of the book nor to the in-depth development of the characters of Chee and Leaphorn.
Guess what? IT"S A MOVIE, NOT A BOOK. You can't get the complexity of
characters built up over a 20-book series into two hours. If you want the book, go read the book for heaven's sake.
What Director Morris did was combine the essence of the Chee character -- the tension between the science and modernity of being an investigating law
enforcement in the late 20th century with the earnest desire in Chee to maintain the traditions of the Dinei -- with a Whodunit that worked well on film. (Mystery novel plots and movie mystery plots do not work on the same level, usually.)
There's a nice quietness to the whole movie, and we're half in Chee's head much of the time. Morris uses the same kind of brilliant palette he used in 'Thin Blue Line' to such good effect, and essentially creates a hybrid film -- half noir, half western.
So why did this movie get sat upon by the studio? My guess is they just couldn't figure out what to do with it. It's not loud, noisy, the explosions and gun battles are minimal, the character has no love interest, and even though the Navajo traditional religion is not as deeply portrayed here as it is in the Hillerman books (by a long shot) even that was probably just confusing to the Hollywood types. The director known for documentaries may be a hard sell as a fiction auteur to critics. The deliberate pacing may appear to be "slow" if you're comparing it to 'Lethal Weapon II'. Who knows?
So, in conclusion:
(1) I think Hillerman fans were disappointed it wasn't more slavishly faithful to the original text of the specific book.
(2) Errol Morris acolytes probably didn't really understand the transition to fiction of his peculiar style.
(3) The Usual Hollywood suspects just didn't get a film so quiet, visual, and without the usual formulaic plot elements.
The movie's not perfect, mind you. I liked Lou Diamond Phillips' quite presence in the role, but there was a problem believing him as a Navajo (why not use a Native American actor?) Some of the dialogue is a little forced (although the same could be said about the Hillerman novels, too, at times). And Leaphorn's character is a bit thrown away (although, again, in the early Chee novels he plays almost no role at all, so why quibble on this point?)
I'd REALLY like to see this uncut and on the big screen sometime with a nice color print. I bet it plays very well that way. The sound and sound editing in the movie are really excellent (on top of the cinematographic highlights noted elsewhere.)
In any event, I think this is a good movie, and if taken just on face value, it's a better than average cop-whodunit flick.