Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Little White Romance

By Anthony Kaufman, AlterNet. Posted September 1, 2005.


The Constant Gardener's critique of big pharma is weakened by its reliance on the white-romance-in-Africa plot device.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Anthony Kaufman

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

The pharmaceutical industry is about to get another pain in the neck. If the recent mega-million-dollar verdict against Merck and its Vioxx painkiller didn't do enough to further taint the reputation of Big Pharma, The Constant Gardener, a new morally conscious thriller for the left, should only confirm the public's distrust.

Based on John Le Carre's 2001 novel, the film is a slick exposé of callous pharmaceutical giants and corrupt governments. But for all its laudable intentions, The Constant Gardener is the latest picture from "liberal Hollywood" (see also The Interpreter) to advance its agenda from a first-world, white perspective -- a point of view that ultimately clouds its potential power.

The erudite U.K. actor Ralph Fiennes stars as Justin Quayle, the constant gardener of the title, a mid-level, mild-mannered member of the British High Commission stationed in Kenya. As he tends to his gardenias, the evils of globalization are committed right under his nose. It's not until his headstrong, young wife Tessa (Rachel Weisz) is murdered in the bush that the dull diplomat arises from his greenhouse and stumbles upon a conspiracy of international scope.

Unbeknownst to Quayle, feisty wife Tessa was uncovering the dubious practices of a Swiss-based pharmaceutical firm and their testing of a new experimental tuberculosis drug, "Dypraxa," on unsuspecting Africans. "They're disposable drugs for disposable people," explains a doctor later in the film.

Such damning statements should satisfy viewers angry about Merck's recent egregious scam. And the same goes for our flashback introduction to the "privileged revolutionary" Tessa when she first spots Quayle at a lecture: She decries the failure of diplomacy in Iraq and dubs the undertaking "Vietnam, the sequel." But when Weisz's Tessa awkwardly backs down, apologizes for her outburst and inexplicably invites Quayle home for giggly sex, the radical heroine loses her edge -- as does the film.

As Quayle takes up his late wife's humanitarian mission, the film's conspiracy plot kicks into high gear -- referencing Robert Ludlam's "The Bourne Identity" rather than the modest, nuanced John Le Carre of "The Spy Who Came in from the Cold" and "Smiley's People." The film's political intrigue also dovetails with Quayle's more personal quest to understand the love of his life. As both stories intermingle, The Constant Gardener reveals its underlying nature: It's just one more movie about white romance in black Africa.

Perhaps it's a good thing that handsome sophisticate Fiennes is associated with another such tale, 1996's similarly positioned Oscar contender The English Patient. While The Constant Gardener is not as syrupy as that doomed romance, the actor's high-cheek-boned presence makes glaringly evident the preponderance of films that follow European elites against a backdrop of African strife. As a side note, the greatest achievement of Hotel Rwanda may be simply the fact that its protagonist is a black African.

However, Fiennes, playing the reserved bureaucrat, delivers as solid a performance as Don Cheadle gave in Rwanda: both appear initially as figures of denial. (In Rwanda, the hotel manager happily caters to shady generals; in Gardener, Quayle insists, "We can't involve ourselves in their lives.") In many ways, these protagonists function as surrogates for the uninformed American audience member: journeying from uninformed naiveté to passionate advocacy. And yet, leaving the multiplex after the evils have been vanquished, moviegoers can feel they have done something good as well, and in turn, feel better about themselves -- and then do nothing at all.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's an old, old story
Posted by: mandiwrite on Sep 1, 2005 4:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well observed, but I don't know why Kaufmann is surprised - it's an old story. Unless a film has white, and usually USA, protagonists (you can get away with Brits), it's not going to play to large audiences, not going to make money in the USA cinemas, therefore big money won't get behind it. In South Africa, we are often angered that powerful South African stories, even those with white protagonists whom those good ol' boys in the MidWest can identify with, have to be cast with US or European actors - Juliette Binoche and Samuel L Jackson in In My Country, an awful betrayal of the book by Antjie Krog, for example.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Then write the book.
Posted by: jeanettedca on Sep 1, 2005 4:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or at least mention some African authors of similar genre.
LeCarre's protagonist is almost always the suffering cuckold of Her Majesty's service who has a chance to make a difference only to find out he has only grabbed the tail and annoyed the bull. He's been writing this ever since the wall (Berlin) went up and gee whiz I've come to rely on it.
Hmm, mostly white diplomats from mostly white countries that have mostly white globalized corporations that are richer and more powerfull than many of the mostly black African countries that these corporations have operations and interests in. I would not miss LeCarre's take on this and I would love to read an African one. Suggestions anyone?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Read the book
Posted by: jwg on Sep 1, 2005 5:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't speak for this movie I haven't seen it yet. I did read the book a few years ago. I also lived in Nairobi from 1992-94. The reality of Nairobi is that there are between 50,000 to 100,000 expatriates mostly from white donor nations. The plot is wrapped up with the British embassy, international intrigue and it would be a farce for the actors to be African.

It is true that boys do place road blocks and try to collect tolls, that also happened to me in Cameroon, they must have learned it from the police.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Roadblocks Posted by: Olympiada
Hmmm....interesting story
Posted by: Olympiada on Sep 2, 2005 3:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But do I want to spend my non-existent money on it?
Nope.
Can learn more from the net and the local library.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Constant Gardener
Posted by: Olympiada on Sep 2, 2005 9:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I did actually see this film tonight and it was very sobering. It was based on a John Le Carre novel which is fiction not fact. Nevertheless the footage of Kenya and Sudan was very real and hard hitting and gut and heart wrenching.

Personally I would have liked to have seen less of the love story and more of the real life of the Kenyans and Sudanese.

Perhaps one of the most disturbing scenes in the movie was the raid on the village in Sudan. Men on horseback coming in with guns, stealing children. I know that is very real. And the footage of the women getting shot and the small children being left behind. Jeremy Irons character, Justin, tries to take a small girl with him in the plane that is escaping and the pilot stops him. Only aid workers. The child understands and runs away. Justin asks what is going to happen to the child. He is told she will find a refugee camp is she is lucky.

The last shot of the village is of a small child, a preschooler, abandoned, with a puppy on a leash...

Another thing that struck me in the movie was the character of Tessa, who met Justin when he was delivering a lecture at her university. She accosted him with questions about the maps Britain used to determine what land belonged to him and ended up clearing out the lecture hall. She charmed him of course...And ends up convincing Justin to bring her with him to Africa as his "mistress, lover or wife, take your pick". He said "that's too many choices". She gets her way, of course.

She discovers the pharmaceutical drug tests that are killing people in Kenya and investigates. She keeps her work a secret from her husband. Bad idea. She works closely with a Kenyan doctor named Arnold. People think they are having an affair. He's gay, which happens to be illegal in Kenya, so nobody knows.

The third thing that stuck with me was Justin's friend urging him to go back home during a conversation they had out on the Sudanese plateau. Justin said "I don't have a home. Tessa was my home." Justin's friend gave him a gun after that, in case of bandits.

There is so much I could say about this film. I have never commented on a film here before. I may write more later, but this is for now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Simplistic Analysis of A Bold Film
Posted by: Thivai on Sep 25, 2005 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author of this critique allows one aspect of the film to blind him from all other messages. Yes, this film is centered around white European characters, but then this is the story of the novel from which it was adapted. The relationship of the diplomat and his wife is so much deeper and explores complex gender relations in a way that is rarely seen. Likewise in the role of the diplomat we see a unique exploration of masculinity--a masculinity that isn't based on extreme violence and blowing things up to find answers. This is a peaceful man, perhaps even pacifist by nature, but he is driven to find out answers about his wife and why she died. The final scene vividly demonstrates his values... it is a shallow viewer who can only see through one critical lense that misses this powerful representation. Yes, we do need stories from the African perspective--hell, we should be able to see actual African films in this country, but do not dismiss a powerful movie simply because our country's entertainment industry bars "other" perspectives. This is one step in the right direction, it is an examination of a "white" European who believes that his government, despite its means, is generally seeking to do good for people--it is the devastation of that innocent viewpoint and examination of the struggle faced by anyone who wishes to expose the symbiotic industrial corporate-government exploitation of impoverished peoples. Perhaps the author of this essay should pick up a camera and take another step in the right direction?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who is this Anthony Kaufman
Posted by: calford on Mar 11, 2006 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find Kaufman's comments bias to no end, not to mention discriminary against whites. How many white people need to give their lifes for the cause of Africa before someone like Kaufman is happy.

This was not a movie about romance between a man and a woman at all, not even close. It was a movie about two people whose romance was for Africa and a mission to expose an evil. Justin took a little longer to be in this romance, but he did martyr himself in the end - being the ultimate form of love.

Where are the competent critics these days?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]