Synopsis: Four souls bound by fate, romance and tragedy collide in the parallel worlds of London and the futuristic Meanwhile City, where a single bullet will alter the course of their lives forever. A masked detective, a self-destructive art student, a desperate father, and a lovelorn romantic are just a few of the unforgettable characters in this visually stunning fantasy thriller starring Eva Green (Casino Royale), Sam Riley (Control), Ryan Phillippe (Crash), Richard Coyle (Coupling), Bernard Hill (The Lord of the Rings), Art Malik (The Wolf Man), and Susannah York (Superman).
***********************************************************************

Franklyn 7.5

With a title like ‘Franklyn’, you’d be forgiven for thinking that this is a movie about an animated turtle. In fact, it’s a bit of a turn off for me. Not that I have an aversion to animated turtles; it just doesn’t lend the film credibility.

And then there’s the case of Ryan Philippe. I’ve despised him (only as an “actor” ) since ‘Cruel Intentions’, that travesty of a film that was chock full of the worst acting in -and of- a generation. I’ve always thought of him to be in the pantheon of such great nega-actors as Keanu Reeves and Kevin Costner: wooden, wholly unbelievable and well-deserving of a trip down a staircase.

Let’s do the math. Animated turtle + Ryan Philippe = stay away like the plague.

I don’t remember where I read something actually complimentary about this film, but I suddenly got curious. Could this film actually have some semblance of substance? Could it actually have some entertainment value? Basically, could it be worth the small investment of time and money?

To both questions I answer “yes”. Tentative ones, mind you.

With very little knowledge of the film (I rarely read synopses, because they’re frequently filled with spoilers – much like trailers tend to be ), I sat down to watch this with three other friends who knew even less about the film than I did. The fact that they trusted me was a bit daunting, considering that this one could go in any direction and I hate being the catalyst for a bad ol’ time.

I’m glad to report that all of us enjoyed the film. But it was a laborious process to say the least.

The thing is that ‘Franklyn’ is an overly ambitious film made on a limited budget by a first-time feature film writer-director. That almost always means a challenging time for an audience, because they’re essentially cutting their teeth on screen. Plus which I’ve since discovered that it was based on a short film he had previously made; he used its concept as the ending for ‘Franklyn’ and constructed the script from back to front.

That revelation made sense to me, because I found the last third more cohesive than the rest. Thankfully, the film gradually becomes easier to watch from start to finish. It’s just that you have to hold on for the first half or so. And I’m not alone in thinking this: most of us admitted to being puzzled for about 40-50 minutes. And even after reaching the midway point, it remains a hard road.

I can’t speak for the rest of my group, but I usually like a good mental workout like that – so there’s no way that I would throw in the towel before it wraps up. I like when a storyteller gives us scant clues and forces us to work things out; when you’ve focused and picked apart the minutia of a film just to figure it out, you can end up with a really satisfying experience – if it’s well-conceived, of course.

Whether this is the case is up for debate:

Is it a success, in that it intrigues and makes the viewer want to watch it again? Or is it a failure because it’s virtually necessary to watch it again to understand what’s going on? I mean, it can still be enjoyed with one viewing, but there’s no way that it can be embraced fully. Case-in-point: in our post-film discussion, two of us immediately expressed interest in watching it again (not right away… but soon! ).

At least ‘Franklyn’ is great fodder for discussion; I can’t say the same for most movies. The moment the credits rolled, I wanted to know what everyone else thought. And there began a lengthy chat about its substance, style and strengths and weaknesses. Truth be told, I’m terribly pleased that it was our film for the night – not… oh… ‘Horrible Bosses’ (which was not too shabby, but is hardly deep stuff )

‘Franklyn’ is set in modern-day London and in a place called Meanwhile City (actually, I would have preferred the film to be called ‘Meanwhile City’ over ‘Franklyn’, even if it’s not entirely appropriate). There are three stories being told at once, featuring four main characters. All are slowly being wound together – very slowly, but inexorably.

In all the mind-bending confusion, I thought there was one story taking place in our reality and two more abstract ones. It only occurred to me that there may be more than one abstraction about 1/3 of the way in – that’s how unclear ‘Franklyn’ gets. It turns out that I was on the wrong path at the time, but at least I had clued in a some fashion.

Here are some of the directions I went in along the way (beware of spoilers):

-for a while I thought that Eva Green’s character was committing serial suicide, but always making sure she’d survive, because it was the only way to join Sam Riley’s character (who I thought was in an afterlife otherworld). Snicker, snicker… I suppose I got that idea from a long-buried memory of ‘Flatliners’. Then again, I wasn’t alone in thinking this, so maybe not.

-I thought that the masked avenger, played by Ryan Philippe, was trying to avenge Green’s loss of faith. With all the religious overtones to the film, for a moment or two I thought this was a deeply faith-based production (there’s obvious commentary being made on religion and faith. But there may also be social commentary… something about individualism vs. the need to belong and society’s power over us. Either way it was unclear upon first viewing).

-at some point I wasn’t sure who was real and who wasn’t. Was the guy real and the girl not real? Had she died a long time ago and he was pining for her, not knowing of her permanent absence?

It all made sense in the end, it was all made relatively clear, but it will definitely require a second viewing to fuse all the pieces together in my mind.

On the acting front, I am happy to report that Ryan Philippe is actually quite alright here; he removed the cotton balls from his mouth (of course, one might argue that he spends most of the film with a mask on, but, when he didn’t, I was pleasantly surprised ). Eva Green is just right for the role of the suicidal art student (mind you, I’ve had a thing for her since ‘The Dreamers’ so maybe I’m biased ). And it was really nice to see Sam Riley in another lead role. ‘Control’ was his first big screen role, and you never know how careers will go. Bernard Hill was perfect as David’s dad.

What was fun was seeing that some of the secondary actors had dual roles in both the “real” world and also in Meanwhile City; it helped to cement the idea that not all was as it seemed (it didn’t give anything away, though). It was neat to see, because, once you know what is REALLY going on, you want to pay particular attention to them during the next viewing to see just how they fit in both.

From a technical standpoint, they did quite well for themselves considering the limited budget. They had terrific conceptual artists and a great crew to help design Meanwhile City. It’s unfortunate that they didn’t have more money because the CGI backdrops looked mildly on the cheap side. But only mildly: they really did quite well for something of this scale and scope and such limited means. I’m pretty impressed.

In the end, I was left wanting on two counts. I found the ending slightly weak, but not too much – mostly in the way our characters were united and how the masked avenger leaves the picture. And, as mentioned before, I wished I had been able to put all the pieces together the first time around.

Having said this, I’ll be very happy to watch this again with a clear line of sight. Watching it now that I’ve seen all the key elements that the film needed to unveil will be a sure treat. I’m quite curious to see if my appreciation will increase over time – that would be a nice bonus.

In conclusion, I give it a tentative rating of 7.5; it’s too cool and engrossing to give it a lower mark, but far too abstract and inaccessible to give it more. For now.