AmateurMovieReviews.com

By Simon Woodhouse

When I think of Africa, I'm often reminded of the Moon - I'll explain. The Moon has two sides, the bright face we can all see in the night sky, and the dark side that's only been glimpsed by a hand full of people. Africa has two faces as well. There's the side we all know, the image painted by wildlife documentaries - herds of wildebeest sweeping across the plains, lions, leopards, elephants, that kind of thing. Then there's the other side, the images people don't want to see, the terrible inner city squalor, the shantytowns, human beings living as if they were still stuck in the world of five hundred years ago.

The Constant Gardener shows the dark side of Africa. There are no wildebeest, no lions, no romantic photo opportunities to be had whilst ballooning over the Serengeti at dawn sipping champagne. This film takes place in the Africa that people can't and don't want to see.

The movie starts as it means to go on, with a brutal killing. We then meet Justin Quayle (Ralph Fiennes), a British diplomat working in Africa. He's a mild-mannered man, the quintessential English gentleman. But his stiff upper lip is put to the ultimate test, when he has to identify the victim of the brutal killing, because it might be his young wife, Tessa (Rachel Weisz). Before this happens, however, the film jumps backwards in time and shows how Justin and Tessa first met. This is a clever ploy, because it puts their relationship in context. We see them at their happiest - falling in love. When the flashback ends, and we're with Justin in a squalid African morgue, the moment he lifts the sheet off the corpse has so much more power.

From here on the film jumps back and forth a lot. We see more of Justin and Tessa together, learn about their lives and why they're in Africa, as well as being shown what happens after Justin leaves the morgue. The movie piles on the intrigue, with all sorts of suggestions about Tessa's fidelity and why she married Justin in the first place. All this is set against a backdrop of industrial malpractice by a powerful pharmaceutical company. The plot gets a bit complicated (and this isn't helped by the flashbacks), but basically a new drug is being sold in Africa that may be doing more harm than good. The pharmaceutical company is getting away with this because it's Africa, and no one really cares what happens to the penniless masses.

The movie is shot in an almost documentary style, with shaky camera angles and grainy film. This gives it an added element of realism, but I found that a bit disconcerting. If the face of Africa portrayed in the movie is the dark side of the Moon, the film makers are free to show life there in anyway they want. But by using a very realistic style, they're saying 'this is real'. If it is, then kudos to them for bringing it to the world's attention. However, if the scenario they've created is an amalgam of all the worst bits, thrown together for the sake of a good story, then that's exploitation. Exploitation of both the audience and the people of Africa.

Putting those concerns aside, the movie is a compelling story, at least to start with. As the plot rolls on though, the water becomes more and more muddy. Exactly who was Tessa, and why was she in Africa? Justin is drawn into the shady goings on of the pharmaceutical company, and the movie turns into a conspiracy theory tale. As is often the case with conspiracy theories, they walk a fine line between believability and nonsense. And this is the direction the film takes as the last half an hour rolls past.

Unfortunately the finale leaves a lot to be desired. It's very contrived, and lets down what started out as a promising story. On the plus side though, Ralph Fiennes turns in a good performance as Justin. His character is a little unbelievable at times, i.e. how can someone as good looking and decent as Justin be single, and therefore ready and willing to fall in love with Tessa. Rachel Weisz fleshes her character out nicely, but Tessa is a little too good to be true at times.

None of these little flaws really spoil the film too much. It's a good, solid thriller, with enough threat and menace to keep you watching. If you're the sort of person who's wary of big business, and thinks large corporations are the work of the devil, the conspiracy theory within the film will appeal to your sense of paranoia. The movie might not be for the squeamish, as there are a couple of gruesome scenes. Mostly the violence is alluded to rather than shown, which in some ways is worse because you start imagining all sorts of gruesome goings on. It's not a ten out of ten film, but it's certainly very watch-able.