🟥 The Bridge of San Luis Rey (2004) Review - Guess I'll Die | Film Waffle

The Bridge of San Luis Rey (2004) directed by Mary McGuckian

Never thought I'd see a movie adaptation be more boring than its book, but by golly does The Bridge of San Luis Rey (2004) try. 

Full disclosure, I thought I got my hands on the original 2004 movie. Turns out I watched the 2022 remaster by accident. Oops. Well, the 2004 version is on Youtube. Skimmed through that. Pretty much the same barring a few scenes and the order of things. I'll be ranking them both as one item here.

This is my second review of a book-to-movie. Being an older book that critics in the past loved for some unknown reason, The Bridge of San Luis Rey has seen its fair share of directors attempt to translate the harrowing story to the big screen.

I'd say that starting with a better source material might help, but hey. The Mist turned out not to be that bad, and I didn't care for its original text. So let's see what Mary McGuckian has in store for us as we descend into her version of Thornton Wilder's classic.

Quick Summary

Brother Juniper is a Franciscan friar living within the Viceroy of Peru in the early 1700s. He is obsessed with analytics, math, and all boring things. Since those interests get you rightfully burned at the stake in this era, he applies his talents to scripture.

One day, he witnesses the collapse of an ancient Incan rope bridge, the eponymous Bridge of San Luis Rey. Five people die in the bridge collapse.

The first is Doña María, the Marquesa de Montemayor. She is trailed by her companion Pepita.

Next is a sailor recruit named Esteban.

Finally we have businessman Uncle Pio and his protege Don Jaime.

Witnessing this experience causes Brother Juniper to search for meaning. He interviews residents and reads their writings. Slowly he pieces together the lives of those who were killed, desperately trying to find divine justification for why it was they had to die.

Story & Characters

This movie is really boring.

Like really fucking boring.

After my review of the book, I thought it may have just been the audio that I was listening to. Nope. Sorry Sam Waterston. I realize now that it wasn't your fault.

It's so slow. So plodding. So without tension.

I only started getting into it at the 1 hour 30 minute mark when all the stories begin to converge. That's 3/4 of the way through the movie.

Asking an audience to bear with you for that long is borderline criminal.

Whilst reading the book, I remember feeling something for the first two character portraits: Doña María/Papita and Esteban.

But here... Christ. I felt nothing. Just boredom and indifference.

It's sad, really, because I like Kathy Bates. She plays the Marquesa in this film, but her performance was not doing it for me. Granted, I didn't care for her character in the book either, but it's kinda disappointing to see things be played out in an even more stilted and wooden way than my mind had imagined.

Esteban's story is perhaps the worst. For some reason they made him and his brother mute. 

Why?

Esteban and his brother had some of the best exchanges in the book. Why would you take that away? 

I think maybe it was to speed up the runtime. The movie was already getting up there in length. If you literally silence a couple of main characters, you can save a lot of dialogue. But that leaves us with a husk of a story where the protagonists in this mini-narrative have minimal ways to express themselves.

Absolutely stupid decision.

We do end on a high note with Uncle Pio's story, however. Our boy Harvey Keitel as Pio is working overtime to get this story back into shape. 

Here we have Romance. Family. Loss. Reunion. Despair. Regret.

These are the emotions I expect from a period drama! Slap that shit in Anna Karenina, and it would fit right in. Have Prince Karenin and Uncle Pio hit things up.

I'm probably making Uncle Pio's story sound epic. It wasn't. But it was something. And, hell, by this time in the movie, I was desperate to latch onto anything if it kept me from browsing my phone out of boredom. That or straight passing out.

We are also privy to parts of Brother Juniper's trial sprinkled throughout the film. Don't recall those in the books, but I think this was one of the better additions by McGuckian. We get Mr. Robert De Niro prowling around the chapel during the trial. A prosecutor strutting around in his Archbishop garb, acting like a total cunt. 

It was beautifully camp.

The trial scenes also provide a unique climax with the Viceroy of Peru that was really cool. +A addition there.

The final scene is the same as the book. Still think it's saccharine, but at least it was over. I had survived!

Mechanics & Structure

Here's where there is significant differences between the original 2004 release and the 2022 remaster. 

In the 2004 version, the narrative is structured as a linear story. Things happen chronologically. You'll have Day 1, jump between the main characters to tell their individual stories and then move forward to Day 2.

The remastered version appears to go the book route. It tells the entire story of one of the characters leading up to the tragedy. Then it moves on to the next. In the end, all of the threads lead to the final tragedy: the bridge. A future main cast member may pop in here and there as foreshadowing within another's story, but only as an extra. That's fun, I like that.

The 2004 version, while it may be easier to understand, I believe diminishes the impact of their deaths. By giving the reaped characters equal attention throughout the beginning, the narrative feels unfocused. And that's really bad considering that the slog to get to the bridge is immense. To make it even worse by weakening the characters through poor presentation... It's an awful choice.

The camerawork was fine. There are some weird shots like this.

Original 2004 release

A minute ago everyone was up in the stands acting as audience and the jurry. Now everyone is stood behind Robert de Niro looking like the marching band from Hell. 

Very odd.

I also note how the remastered version added a warmer tone to the bluish, Twilight-esque filter of original film. Here's that same shot in the remastered version for comparison.

2022 remaster

Much more orangy, right? 

Are we choosing colors because they look nice? Or because darker tones fit the theming mirror a trail of religious injustice? Who can say?

I like the brighter, prettier one most, tbh.

Props to the wardrobe people. No idea if these are period or setting accurate for the Viceroyalty of Peru in the 1700s, but they did look very nice. Kinda weird when the Viceroy or the Abbess don't change their appearance even after many years of time jumps, but I guess that's whatever.

Maybe they're born with it. Maybe it's Maybelline. Or, I guess, beeswax, rosewater, and lead paste to fit the time period?

The music was unremarkable, in my opinion. Fairly generic low tones. Ambience. Very whatever. I did notice a few differences between the 2004 and 2022 versions again. 

For the above scene in the 2004 version, the music is percussion-based with a steady mood. The Viceroy has made his final judgement!

The latter version opts for a more somber mood. A hero has been defeated.

Weird that the newer version made the filter warmer but made the music sadder.

The actor's accents are wild in this. Most are American. Some are speaking posh English. Some are doing a crappy in-between.

Émilie Dequenne as Doña Clara is seemingly dubbed in both the original 2004 version and the 2022 Remaster. Two different voice actors. They both sound awful and are synced awfully. It's obvious from the first scene. The same with Pilar López de Ayala as (La Perichole), although hers is better if only because it isn't grating to listen to.

Conclusion

Well, I don't rightly know what I expected.

After reviewing the book, I thought we may have another The Mist on our hands: a movie adaptation that surpasses and outshines its original. That was not the case here.

While McGuckian's vision does bring Wilder's characters to life on the big screen, they are just as lifeless as the text. Occasionally more so. Occasionally less so. But never to any noteworthy degree.

On the bright side, with how painfully dull the beginning of this movie is, I think it may be the cure for my insomnia that I've been looking for.

Always look on the bright side, friends.

🟥 Rating: 3/10