Captain Corelli's Mandolin

After a somewhat slow start I thought this movie about the Italian occupation of a Greek island during World War II picked up and became a quite enjoyable watch for a couple of hours, from primarily two points of view.

The love triangle is an interesting one and strikes me as believable, because I know it happened in various places under occupation. Penelope Cruz played Pelagia, a young Greek girl engaged to be married to Mandras (Christian Bale). I had questions about the depth of their love from the start, but their future was torn apart when Italy invaded Greece, and Mandras went off to fight. After German intervention, Greece is conquered and the island Pelagia lives on comes under Italian occupation, during which Pelagia meets and begins to fall in love with Captain Corelli (Nicholas Cage.) This, of course, was a dilemma that came to many young women in occupied lands. As they got to know their occupiers, they started to see them not as the enemy but as real people, and sometimes fell in love - often to the disapproval of their neighbours. I just finished reading an interesting book about the German occupation of Britain's Channel Islands in which this was a major issue. Once Mandras returns to the island, Pelagia is torn between them.

The second background issue is the Italian occupation itself, which I thought was quite realistically portrayed. First was the contempt with which the island treated their Italian occupiers. Greece defeated Italy (quite true from a historical perspective) and was really conquered by the Germans. The refusal of the town to surrender to the Italians and instead to insist on surrendering to a German officer struck me as something that could well have happened (and was quite funny in fact. I loved the line, "we would rather surrender to this German's dog than to you Italians.") The portrayal of the Italian troops also struck me as believable. The Italian Army was never enamoured of their German ally, and never enthusiastic about fighting with them. Although Hitler and Mussolini were close friends, their soldiers tended to treat each other with contempt. Here, the Italians are more interested in singing than fighting (which the German troops on the island simply can't understand,) and are ecstatic when Italy makes peace and withdraws from the war - until they discover that this may well make them prisoners of the Germans. It was all quite well done, I thought.

It falters a bit at the end with an all too predictable finish, but still deserves praise.

7/10

As is often the case when you attempt to take a 400 plus page book and cram it into a two hour film, a lot is lost. Here director John Madden (Shakespeare in Love) takes on an extremely ambitious project and almost pulls it off. What we get is a charming and emotionally compelling film that seems somehow incomplete.

There is much about this film that is wonderful and fantastic. The cinematography by John Toll (Cinematographer for Braveheart and Legends of the Fall, winning Oscars for both) is splendid. Working with Madden, the choices for locations on the Greek island of Kefallonia are superb and the visual images that come from photographing these majestic locations in varying light are lush and beautiful. Madden also uses numerous Greek actors as the townspeople, giving the town an authentic feel. The soundtrack is also terrific and the mandolin passages and vocals by the Italian soldiers are marvelous.

Madden does an excellent job of bringing us the Italian occupation and the romance, which take up the greater part of the film. There are numerous sweet and funny moments throughout this segment. However, by the time the serious battle drama is ready to unfold, there isn't much film left in the reel and this component is extremely rushed and abbreviated. While the battle scenes are well done, subsequent to the battle it is obvious that increasingly greater compromises are being made to keep the film from running too long. By the time we reach the post war scenes, the treatment is merely skeletal. Another negative is that the DVD is particularly sparse on features.

Nicholas Cage is charming in the romantic lead as the sentimental Captain who seems to have joined the army to sing rather than fight. When fight he must, Cage switches gears seamlessly into a man of fierce principle and resolve and somehow remains believable in both personas.

Penelope Cruz, whom the camera loves, gives an uninspired performance as Pelagia. In part this is because Cage so dominates the screen, but Cruz just seems too placid in a part that should be emotionally torrential and dynamic. She allows the character to be objectified as Corelli's love interest rather than establishing her as a powerful character in her own right.

John Hurt gives a fantastic performance as the wise old doctor, who knows as much about human nature as medicine. However, Christian Bale seems a bit overwrought and stiff as Pelagia's fiancé.

I rated this film an 8/10. Despite some drawbacks, this is a touching film that is well worth seeing. The photography alone is worth the price of admission.

When I was watching this movie one thought had come to my mind for several times: "It's not really what I expected, I thought it would be better", but now that I finished watching it I realize: why should I expect a better result from this movie? Isn't it just a "love story" made up in Hollywood show's standards? Of course, it is! If so, why expect more?

Captain Corelli's mandolin is a romance story in war time (WWII) and the plot which I was noticed about before watch the movie seemed very interesting to me. All that I didn't count was the "Hollywood standard's" touch... What I mean by this is that I expected a story a bit more realistic and with a stronger plot (which was not full of "plot holes" as this one is!) instead of this "sweet story romance, with the perfect ending", which we're used to watch in a great part of Hollywood's movies! Another Hollywood standard's gaffe which is very common is the natives' languages issue. The differences between Italian, Greek and German languages were all done just by a stupid accent, and all people seem to understand each other very well. The Italian and the German army arrive to a "forgotten" Greek island and they all understand each other very well as they all speak the same language! Of course it's just little technical details that don't even matter to the plot, but are all this little details which separate a good from a bad production!

But the movie has not just bad-sided arguments! On the good side, I can find the original idea (which comes from a book), and the thought that is possible to be Human, and have Human feelings, even inside a War. It's possible to sing and be happy, have good feelings, to love and to be loved in a War time! Was because of that main idea that I wanted to watch this movie, and at this particular point I wasn't disappointed! I just was dissatisfied about the way it was made! Another good-sided argument is History's knowledge… The movie is not very deep at that issue, but it's good enough to have a little idea how was the WWII in the Eastern-South Europe.

Globally Captain Corelli's mandolin is not a bad movie but it's not as good as I initially though either, mostly because of the "Hollywood show's standards" up-mentioned.

The main problem with 'Captain Corelli's Mandolin' is that it focuses primarily on the romance between Corelli and Pelagia and that too is half-baked. What is it that draws Pelagia towards him is too unclear. Is it just his musical talent or his zest? The film is set against the backdrop of a war between the Germans and Italians in a Greek island but the war is given less significance and what we see appears very sketchy. The entire film appears too sketchy, melodramatic and clichéd. Much of it is also historically inaccurate.

On the technical front it is well executed. The cinematography of the beautiful exotic locations is breathtaking. The score is terrific. Where acting is concerned, Penelope Cruz can't seem to lose her Spanish accent (she's playing a Greek character) but her performance is otherwise wonderful. John Hurt and Christian Bale are equally marvelous. Nicolas Cage is a miscast. His Italian accent, energetic personality, overdone non-verbal gestures all yield to a caricature rather than a character.

Perhaps director John Madden was pressured to fit the entire novel into a two hour period and he chose to focus on the romance more to draw a larger crowd. I can't shake the feeling that perhaps someone like Anthony Mingella would have made a better and more complete film of it.

Ok, it's a given that you cannot make a good movie from a good book. (Unless you make it a trilogy :-) But comparing the book Corelli's Mandolin to this movie it's clear how much has to be cut to fit a screenplay. The book is very funny in places, romantic (of course), dramatic. What's left of it in the film is inexplicable romance -- as other reviewers have remarked, it's unclear why she falls in love with the italian while her betrothed is still around, and I have no idea why this was changed from the book -- and some gratuitous gunning and bombing scenes, more than in the book which derives its power from not hammering on the obvious points. Whole characters are cut: Carlo has maybe 10 seconds screen time, while in the book he has a whole story line that runs several chapters.