RSS 2.0
Apparently this movie was a ‘tough delivery’ as it went through a lot of post-production and re-working. Still, the biggest mistake was to name it after the not-so-successful Van Damme flick that sports the same title. Partly because of this, the title was converted into The Sin Eater for the DVD release. All this work didn’t really save the movie, which is a shame, since it has potential and a lot of atmosphere.
If such a genre existed, one could call this a religious thriller reminiscent of movies like The Exorcist, End of Days but also the Name of The Rose. It doesn’t have the brilliant quality of the latter, but is summons the same secretive and mystical ambience that makes you wonder which part of the story is true and which is myth. There are even more similarities with Umberto Eco’s magnificent story. This movie also talks about a small controversial sect within the catholic church of which the priests seek arcane -and therefore heretical- knowledge rather than religious truth. This brings them in continuous conflict with the ruling powers of the Vatican which in turn led to the gradual disappearance of the subversive priests. The fact that they haven’t been excommunicated completely yet, lies within their vast esoteric knowledge, sometimes exploited for unofficial exorcism.
Heath Ledger is the unexpected choice to play one of the rogue clerics who has to go to Rome to investigate the obscure circumstances under which his mentor died. It is here where the cracks begin to appear in the plot. Some unclear flashbacks and vague hints try to explain the backgrounds and past of the young priest, but it all raises only more questions. Simultaneously, his confrere and brother-in-arms is introduced in a similar way, once more adding to the confusion. The way the two of them react to paranormal phenomena and demon spawn, hints to an impressive career in demon slaying of which little becomes known during the story. One also starts to wonder how a priest this young can already have such an impressive career in demon slaying. This incoherence kills off every ground for character development and makes the movie much less interesting. In these kind of stories the drama lies within the fact that the faith of the main character is put to the test.
What is left is some mythic story about the Sin Eater: an elusive entity who has the power to grant absolution to mortals by circumventing the laws dictated by the church. This causes embarrassment to the Vatican, since they have lost their exclusivity on tickets to heaven as it also leaves the way open to impure souls ascending. The young priest has to find this Sin Eater and is then confronted with his own demons. Quite standard stuff, but if they had put some more effort in developing the plot this would’ve been a great movie. It surely looks the dog’s danglies with some incredible set design, great camera work, nice lighting and loads of atmosphere. Ledger, although a bit lethargic sometimes, is not such a bad choice after all but could have done with a better script and direction.
paco (89 posts)Certified movie phreak and conspiracy theorist.
5 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
I thought this was pretty poor. I couldn’t take the thought of Heath Ledger as a devout priest seriously at all, so when he does stray from his vows, I was kind of expecting it. Peter Weller is just awful in this, but to be honest the whole thing seems like a bad Dennis Wheatley novel. It was worth a rental though, but sadly there’s nothing particularly memorable about it. The whole thing is too preposterous and the film relies on whether you believe wholeheartedly in the world it creates, but it’s created in such a caricature way that I found that really impossible to do. I’d only rate it at 2 out of 5.
Comment by damian — Wed May 12, 2004 @ 16:17My rating solely depends on the fact that it did create an atmosphere that I really like. I was only disappointed that they didn’t make more of it.
I love these kind of mystery-movies, however their quality is not often the best. I hope you agree with me that it looked terrific.
Comment by Paco — Wed May 12, 2004 @ 19:45I saw a trailer for this movie once, and it reminded me of “Bless the Child”, the horribly bad religious / supernatural thriller with Kim Basinger… brrrrrr….
Guess I’ll be skipping this one…
Comment by weefselkweekje — Thu May 13, 2004 @ 16:08this film is very good. all the bad reviews i read only make me more amazed at how thick all these reviewers seem to be and how easily they will condemn a film simply because it causes them to think and remember a bit more than the shit we are subjected to in recent years.
this film starts of the way it does because it wants to keep the viewer guessing. its trying to keep the fact that heath ledger is to become the next sin eater a secret. as far as we know he is going to find out why his mentor has died. what he doesnt know is that nearly every key figure in his life is working to make him the next sin eater. his girl friend is sent into his path by the sin eater. his parents are killed by the sin eater. the sin eater has a deal with peter wellers character, all these things are explained during the film. the cardinal, working to help eden get alex, only gives them pieces of info, alex and his friend are tricked into thinking that stabbing the sin eater with the knife will kill him when in fact it is all part of the ritual to become the sin eater. thats why the sin eater does everything in his power to ensure it happens. he gives mara the knightingales, or rather, makes her crazy so as alex will perform the exorcism. and before you ask why he would want to perform an exorcism on her its because his mentor, who is also helping eden, sends him to do so. again this is covered IN THE FILM. its all part of edens (sin eaters) plan to get alex to take over. and its all perfectly explained. he ensures that alex falls in love. and the reason he ensures that alex falls in love is because eden knew that alex would say no to his offer. and therefore killing alexs girlfriend would ensure that alex would try to kill him, thus releasing himself and forcing alex to take over. it was all a set up. its all very cleverly done and its all explained in the film. the sin eater has supernatural powers, he has probably gained this knowledge during the many hundreds of years he has spent alive. this explains why he is able to control things such as the two demon children, why he is able to influence people such as mara, and so on. whats great about this film is how cleverly explained the plot is. and if you actually pay attention to what everyone says in the film it all falls into place at the end with no effort.
sorry to rant a bit but i feel very angry when i read these birating reviews from people who complain that it makes sense. i watched it again tonite with my brother, who hadnt seen it before and he said it made perfect sense to him and he thought it was really good. mind you thats probably because he hadnt been put off by the nets opinion of the film or the bad advertising campaign that had been made for it. im sure they had no idea how to market it and just thought it best to make everyone think it was a horror film like all the other shit ones that come out nowadays.
Comment by Antony — Sun November 6, 2005 @ 2:04If you’d have read carefully, you don’t see me completely slag off this movie.
I enjoyed its atmosphere and story, but it could have been more solid. You just summed up the good part of the movie and I did get it, but I missed some of the backgrounds that would’ve made the characters more interesting, more alive. We learn quite something about the Sin Eater, but little do we know about Ledger and his confrère. THAT would have made the story more interesting and give it more substance, whilst adding to the drama. And this could’ve been done with a couple of flashbacks or some well-placed dialogue.
It’s subtle touches like these that can make the difference between a nice, promising movie and a really great movie.
Comment by paco — Mon November 7, 2005 @ 3:42