Anna and the King: Review By moviegeek

While watching the exorbitant production "Anna and the King" I couldn't shake the feeling that this picture would work best as a musical. And it did (see "The King and I"). This new interpretation of the same story is well-intentioned and has a good level of motivation behind it. But amid all of the costly production values and gallant costuming, there was a misinterpreted spirit.

The movie chronicles the love affair of English school-teacher Anna Leonowens (Jodie Foster) and the regal King of Siam (Chow Yun-Fat). She comes to teach the King's children of the British ways. While there, she begins to stick her nose into imperial affairs like judicial conduct, slave treatment, and even war strategies. One might guess from the title alone, but, if it has surpassed you thus far, you should know that a romance blooms between the two.

In a way, the film is a whimsical picture. It's a grand opera of sorts; a flowery display of forbidden love. While the filmmakers got the display and palette correct, they drastically missed the spirit and energy of the picture. There is no buoyancy in the film, no cheerfulness, no whimsy. The movie is bogged down by a constant urge to rise to a level of epic grandeur.

Because of that, Anna and the King is ballooned way out of proportion. The film drags on and on when it should just be simple and elegant. The film throws a parade for itself rather than just getting from "A" to "B". As the movie draws on, we lose any sense of rising and falling tensions. The picture sustains itself in immediate moments, but it fails to bring together its large scope into building tensions.

Jodie Foster is miscast in her role (though I've heard she was the third or fourth choice for the role after actresses like Kate Winslet and Emma Thompson). I've never once bought her British accent (see "Sommersby"), and it's all the more evident here. Her characterization is inconsistent throughout. Chow Yun-Fat doesn't really move around much in his role, and even if he was capable or not, I think it was a mistake to depreciate his role. I think the film should be as much about Anna as it is about the King.

Something must be said about the look of the picture though. The colors are breathtaking. The cinematography is astounding in every shot. The picture is truly an art form. By its look alone we get a pulse, a rhythm, an energy--none of which appear elsewhere in the film.

This isn't a bad movie. It's just an unnecessary one. Political parallels are under-emphasized to really make a point. The characters are too weak to support the exorbitant running time. Anna and the King tries to expand its purpose by adding more, when, instead, it should have just pushed one of its elements more heavily. At 148 minutes, this whimsical tale turned grand-scale epic is pulled too thin and fragile.