"The Constant Gardener

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
"The Constant Gardener

Just seen this¦ fantastically acted, cinematically stunning and very authentic. Although I don't think the story is actually true, it highlights what is probably a very real truth: that "we (so-called civilized nations) still see indigenous Africans as the starving masses, who we can treat like animals, rather than individual human beings, with indvidual and unique lives, families, hopes and fears¦ The story is about how Tessa (played by Rachel Weisz) dedicates her life, ultimately gives her life, to uncovering the truth about how an international pharmaceutical company are testing their latest drug on dying Africans. Her husband, the diplomat (Ralph Fiennes), was kept pretty much in the dark about what she was up to, but when she is found dead and mutilated, he sets out to continue pursuing her cause. Heartbreaking and thought-provoking stuff.

I read the book some yeras ago and thought it was one of the best reads I'd had in years. I thought the film had a worthy go, but didn't do justice to the novel. To me the novel was more about the shocking corruption of the pharmaceutical companies, who, as you say, treat human life like it it was dross in the pursuit of money; and how governments conspire with them in that process. The capacity for pure evil in humans (although I prefer to thoink of them a sub-human detritus) is revealed in the novel. The film had several key scenes missing (one is included on the DVD as an extra). I wonder if they felt they had to trim it to make it palatable, or more believable.
I know a number of people who work for pharmacutical companies and they are all very nice and none of them have ever treated human life like dross in my presence. Just thought I ought to mention that.

 

I think the point is, though, that it's about the companies as a whole, the people at the top, not the everyday bods at the "shop floor" (so to speak) - who are probably mostly not even aware of the extent of their employers' corruption. ~PEPS~ “Underlay is overrated."
It lost me from the off, when Rachel Vice is haranguing Rafe Fiennes at a public meeting, and journalists got up and walked out in disgust??????????? I don't think so. I thought the subject matter got a very light and flim flammy gloss.

 

I wouldn't say the film was light and flim flammy! Being a film, it probably didn't get across what the book did (I haven't read it, so I wouldn't know), but, inasmuch as Hollywood (actually, I noticed in this case, the UK Film Council) is able to do so, I think it got across the message pretty effectively. Scenes like the one Styx describes were, I think, more to do with setting up the romantic premise than anything else, but I think this aspect is also tastefully and realistically done and serves to highlight the wider issues. ~PEPS~ “Underlay is overrated."
As pepsoid said, its not the people who work for them (often) it's the peole who run them, and make the policy decisions. Apparently, John Le Carre researched the book thoroughly, and spoke to some within the pharma industry. I know someone who worked in market research with pharma clients, who bears out many of his points.
Read the book and saw the movie, enjoyed both very much.

Give me the beat boys and free my soul! I wanna getta lost in ya rock n' roll and drift away. Drift away...

_I_ knew someone at Uni who read chemistry so he could make his _Own_ pharmaceuticals. Clever boy. Not.
Read the book. It was rather weak, I thought, especially the ending which was silly. Le Carre has been floundering for a long time. I love his earlier stuff, though. I've spent many years eagerly awaiting his newest novel, but no longer. "You don't need the light of the Lord to read the handwriting on the wall." Copies of Warsaw Tales available through www.new-ink.org
Speaking of that, don't see Black Dahlia. It buthers James Ellroy's novel.

Give me the beat boys and free my soul! I wanna getta lost in ya rock n' roll and drift away. Drift away...

Topic locked