{"id":14001,"date":"2012-01-12T21:03:28","date_gmt":"2012-01-12T21:03:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.filmdetail.com\/?p=14001"},"modified":"2012-01-13T00:04:45","modified_gmt":"2012-01-13T00:04:45","slug":"war-horse-review-spielberg","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.filmdetail.com\/2012\/01\/12\/war-horse-review-spielberg\/","title":{"rendered":"War Horse"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Steven Spielberg’s latest film is a simultaneous reminder of his undoubted filmmaking skills and weakness for old-fashioned sentimentality.<\/p>\n

Adapted from Michael Morpurgo’s children’s novel<\/a> – which later became a huge stage hit<\/a> in London and New York – it follows a young horse named Joey as he gets caught up in World War I<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The resulting equine odyssey we explore his various owners: a Devon farm boy (Jeremy Irvine); an English soldier (Tom Hiddleston); two German troops (David Kross and Leonhard Carow); a French farmer (Niels Arestrup) and the effect he has on the them.<\/p>\n

As you might expect from a filmmaker of Spielberg’s vast experience, there are sequences here which are staged with his customary taste and skill.<\/p>\n

The rural English locations are beautifully realised through Rick Carter<\/a>‘s production design and skilfully adapted for the wartime action, which is impressive in scope and detail.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Perhaps the most impressive aspect of the film is one which audiences may take for granted: the acting and handling of the horses used to represent the title character.<\/p>\n

Although there are precedents for an animal as lead character – notably Robert Bresson’s Au Hasard, Balthazar<\/a> (1966) – it is highly unusual to see a mainstream live-action film built around a horse.<\/p>\n

The main trainer was Bobby Lovgren<\/a> and several were used to create the central illusion, which Spielberg pulls off, especially in the latter stages of the film.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, the screenplay by Richard Curtis and Lee Hall appears to have been tailor made for a ‘Spielberg Production’, which means that stilted stereotypical characters and frequent doses of lachrymose sentimentality get in the way of the drama.<\/p>\n

By trying to match the ideal of what they think are the directors strengths, the screenwriters have misunderstood that his best work (Jaws, Close Encounters, Schindler’s List and Minority Report) comes when he operates outside his usual comfort zones.<\/p>\n

Thus we have an array of great acting talent (Mullan, Watson, Arestrup) along with current casting-director favourites (Hiddleston, Cumberbatch, Kebbell) forced to read awkward lines which undercut the dramatic impact of their scenes.<\/p>\n

Visually the film is also mixed bag.<\/p>\n

Spielberg and DP Janusz Kaminski<\/a> are a formidable partnership but here their approach to lighting seems odd.<\/p>\n

Filming in the ever-changing climate of England poses challenges for any production, but here the lighting choices are distracting \u2013 at times bordering on the avant-garde – with characters faces being lit up like they were on stage.<\/p>\n

That being said, the battle scenes are composed with impressive precision and the use of wide-angles and Michael Kahn’s graceful cutting seems like a breath of fresh air in the current era of chaos cinema.<\/p>\n