Review of The Constant Gardener (2005) by Stanis?Aw D — 03 Jan 2010

Their relationship started with sex. Then they marry, and begin to learn about each other. They were complete opposites: She is almost out of control, and he is almost too in control. They look at each other and see what?s missing in their own nature. These were two people meant to be together. Then she dies. What ensues is a journey of discovery for Justin (Fiennes), who discovers a woman he never really knew. It?s a deeply pragmatic kind of romanticism.

The Constant Gardener is an earnest political thriller, a film about evil and greed. It?s a love story only in passing. And yet the love story is what lingers in the mind. It gives meaning to everything that Justin goes through in the film. We see just how far he will go to set things right. His wife Tessa?s (Weisz) obsession becomes Justin?s obsession. He married his conscience and wants to better understand his wife in a way he never did when she was alive.

The lead actors are beautifully in tune with each other. Their chemistry was expressive and alive. I like how Weisz draws out something in Fiennes that?s so affecting and sensual. I?ve never been more moved by Fiennes? performance. I love their physical closeness, their delight in her pregnancy, the evening bath with the door left ajar. I?m sure that had she lived, they would?ve had a lasting marriage and fulfilling life together. She?s his tragedy, his salvation and his perfect partner.

For a long time, I was puzzled by the title. I knew the movie had political themes, but The Constant Gardener sounds like a horticultural romance. Of course, after watching the movie, I realize that the ?constant gardener? of the title is most obviously Justin. However, it?s Tessa who does the more constant tending. She opens his eyes and moves him to action. I love British films. Unlike Hollywood, the Brits have always known that life sucks. I like films that show that life sucks.

The other kind of attention that this film brings is the situation in Africa. As Arthur Hammond says, ?No, there are no murders in Africa. Only regrettable deaths. And from those deaths we derive the benefits of civilization, benefits we can afford so easily? because those lives were bought so cheaply. On another note, as much as I like Rachel Weisz, and as much as I like this film, I believe that she did not deserve the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress that year. That role could?ve been given to anybody, whereas I believe no one comes close to Amy Adams? performance in Junebug.