Risselada Blog

Under discussion:

Henry Fool  (1997)

Fay Grim  (2007)

Fay Grim

The sequel to my favorite Hal Hartley, Henry Fool.  In a way it has almost nothing to do with that original movie.  Or at least it seems to take everything that first movie was about or what you thought it was about and totally changes it, almost denying it.  That's not a bad thing at all though.  It's just counter to what you would expect of a sequel.

Actually that does happen with some sequels (although I'm too lazy to think of an example right now).  Where after you watch the second movie and you go back and watch the first one, you see everything in a new context and realize that certain actions taken and things said were not what they originally appeared to be since you now have new information about more of the back story.  In a way the information presented in Fay Grim changes the what was really going on in Henry Fool more than any other sequel I can think of.  But this case to go back and watch Henry Fool thinking about it with the context of the information given in Fay Grim would be wrong.  There's no way I can know for sure, but I suspect that Hal Hartley wasn't thinking of a sequel or of any international espionage and intrigue back story when he was writing Henry Fool.  At least I cannot imagine to this extent.  Although Hartley has always been interested in some of these themes of international espionage and terrorist warfare.

But there is a lot of mystery in Henry Fool that lends itself to the epic proportions of this sequel.  Epic in the way that Hartley is epic.  Epic not in a visual scope, but in the scope of words and ideas.  This is the spy movie as made by Hartley.

Hartley has his stock company of actors, but it's always interesting to see what new established actors he fits into his new films.  What kind of actors would fit well into Hartley's world I sometimes wonder?  Jeff Goldblum I think was actually an apt choice, and I was excited to see him here.  I also found it rather nice that Liam Aiken whose first movie was Henry Fool when he was 7 years old has developed and is still working as a film actor.  It was nice to see how well he still fit into Hartley's style as well.  I'll have to watch some of his other films.  Maybe Hartley put some kind of stylistic acting seed into him.

Why don't I give this movie a 10 instead of a 9?  It was a tough decision.  Things get extremely convoluted and many plot points are quickly lost or ignored.  Now I actually think that this is intentional and FANTASTIC because it makes things seem even more convoluted and epic.  So I think this movie is pretty much perfect for what it is, but I think Hartley's style which is still so ever present here is ultimately very best suited to his more focused simple work with the epic qualities in the background.

But I love the Dutch angles!

Rating: 9/10