Highlander: The Source |
  • UK / Lithuania • 2007 • 86m •    • Directed by: Brett Leonard. • Starring: Adrian Paul, Thekla Reuten, Cristian Solimeno, Peter Wingfield, Jim Byrnes, Stephen Rahman Hughes, Stephen Wight, Thom Fell, Patrice Naiambana, Sakalas Uzdavinys, Laurynas Jurgelis, Geoffrey T. Bersey, Antanas Surgailis. • Music by: George Kallis.      The world is falling into chaos. As he roams a crumbling city, Duncan MacLeod, the Highlander, remembers happier times before the love of his life left... Hopeless and alone, MacLeod finds his way to a band of immortal companions, including his mysterious friend Methos, and a mortal, Watcher Joe Dawson. Together this small group sets out on a quest to find the origin of the first Immortal and The Source of their immortality.
|
Trailers:
| Length: | Languages: | Subtitles: |
Review:
The movie's biggest problem is that it sets up a whole lot of ideas and then doesn't follow through with them. The practical effect here is that thinking about anything going on will, every single time, lead one to realize that none of it actually makes sense. The characters, often maligned as flat, over the top, or, at the worst, simply phoned in by the actors, are actually the most interesting and sensible part of the movie. This is a big reason why the movie needs more running time, so it can include the expected flashbacks to previous decades and centuries And it should explore Reggie and Giovanni, and why they've been lead to where they are now. We know plenty about Duncan and Methos already. Reggie's Jack Sparrow attitude about perceived insanity and his insinuation that he was in the military are hints about his character that would've been great plot points. The writers could've concocted whatever BS they wanted to make it relevant and it still would've worked fine. As for Giovanni, the guy's an immortal Catholic priest with enough zealotry and instability to scare Fred Phelps. His backstory could probably make a movie in its own right.
The fact of the matter is, the characters are interesting already if you watch closely, but there needed to be more effort to make it actually matter. I'm also outright baffled that people use "The Guardian is ridiculous" as a criticism. Anyone who says this will invariably turn around and say that the original Highlander was either the best movie, or the only movie that should've been made, period. Was everyone watching a different movie than I was? Because I remember the Kurgan licking priests and scaring hookers with his level of kink. Ridiculousness in Highlander villains is hardly a thing to criticize. Duncan fought demons in the series like he was Buffy.
Naturally, the plot suffers the same problems as the characters; it's relevancy is simply not explained. Why does the Guardian just kill Reggie and Giovanni instead of giving them their chance to make the same choice Duncan does? If he believes they've already failed the test - Giovanni can obviously be explained this way - why isn't there a single line of dialog even hinting at it? This is even contradicted in the Elder's flashback sequence, which clearly shows two of the immortals from the last celestial alignment trying for the Source, and the Elder is implied to have been cursed because he skipped the Guardian altogether without being tested. Is there some kind of malfunction going on with the current Guardian? One might say there SHOULD be, given that the Elder never talks about the old Guardian leaving the Source and coming to them like he does with Duncan and friends. Methos even suggests that the Guardian's sole purpose for leaving the Source is to hunt down the specific immortals seeking it. Maybe he's trying to win the Prize the old-fashioned way? And yet, this is explored no further. It would've taken very little dialog to give these things some justification and logic, and more runtime could've let the movie do it better than just having throwaway lines.
Finally, I also don't understand the general opinion that the Russian cut of the film is better- sorry, "less bad" than the Sci-Fi cut. Anna's opening and closing narrations are, at best, annoying. At worst, they're outright stupid, especially the ending monologue where there can be no question that the meaning of the Game and the Prize is being completely retconned. With the Sci-Fi version, you at least get the implication that it's an alternative to winning the Prize if you don't want to play the Game, instead of saying "lol the immortals have been wrong all this time even though it totally cheapens the entire franchise to wantonly change this fact that has been established since the beginning." Was doing that in Highlander 2 not enough to prove it's a bad idea?
Review by ssj-alhazred from the Internet Movie Database.
Off-Site Reviews:
Additional Off-Site Reviews:
Movie Database