Firstly, he didn't know how to throw a wedge into the rather idyllic relationship between Farrell and Ondine. In order to create "drama" writers thrive on "conflict" (a word that gives them $tiffie$ - even female writers), but since there was no conflict here, the writer decided to get Farrell drunk and get him to actually dump Ondine somewhere then scurry away like a frightened loser. The ensuing conversation with priest Rea was then intended to somehow convince us that Farrell got rid of Ondine because "he doesn't believe in luck" or some such far-fetched cockamamie rationalization that only the biggest pushovers in the audience might fall for.
In reality, a down-on-his-luck divorced recovering alcoholic fisherman would APPRECIATE great fortune coming his way, especially in the shape and form of a pleasant, attractive and willing mermaid... or a selkie, or a Romanian drug dealer, whatever she may be. He'd defend her against the "husband" with fists flying. (Which he does eventually in the rather silly conclusion.) But no, Farrell is portrayed as such a meek failure that he is suspicious of his good luck. He is behaving like an uber-neurotic, even worse than a Woody Allen character or a millennial beta. Writers and their bloody "conflict", they never tire of that nonsense. "Conflict" is all well and fine (although I prefer to call it "plot"), but as long as it's grounded in reality and logic, not when it's as shambolic as this.
Secondly, the daughter. The girl is well cast and likable, but far too informed, intelligent, articulate and far too superior intellectually to literally all of the (mostly childish) adults featured here. Even Rea, the only mature grown-up character here, can't seem to match her wit, sass, intelligence and class. Smart-alecy super-intelligent Einstein-like kids have always been a horrible plot-device and a terribly annoying obsession of many delusional screen-writers, who portray these mega-idealized kids as if they'd never spoken to or even met a real child before. Have these clueless writers never HEARD a 10 year-old girl speak? They don't speak this way; none of them do. Not even remotely close. In fact, even a real "selkie" would have been a far more realistic character than the girl!
But the drop that really spilled over the exaggerated glass of the girl's adolescent supremacy is when she mentioned Sigur Ros, and in such a casual off-hand way, the way a mindless, pompous 18 year-old American hipster might. That Neil Jordan has a hipster mentality wasn't anything I was aware of (nor cared about, to be frank), but I am surprised given his age. (Or maybe one of his kids or nephews suggested he mention them in the script.) He portrays the ex's drunken ginger boyfriend as a moron - who listens to metal. On the other hand, the 260-IQ 10 year-old girl likes her lame, whiny Icelandic hipster pop. What's Jordan trying to say? Whatever it is, it's not very intelligent, let alone remotely accurate. (He has as much knowledge about metalheads as he has about 10 year-old girls, apparently.) Besides, it's rather embarrassing for a Baby Boomer to be a hipster. Hippies, yes; hipsters, no. (Being a hippie is embarrassing too, but at least to be expected amongst Baby Boomers.) Generally, the oldest hipsters are in their 30s, the vast majority are in their late teens and 20s, because by their 30s most of them smell the glove and mature, i.e. Evolve from the inferior hipster-larva stage they had degraded themselves with while they were young: i.e. Confused, self-absorbed, gullible and foolish.
Thirdly, Jordan actually allowed the movie to degenerate into a stupid, generic thriller, with cardboard criminals and stupid, unconvincing crime-related situations. I hate thriller situations even in thrillers, let alone in "fantasy" dramas. There is nothing easier than to inject some lame-brained drug-mule-with-the-heart-of-gold thug-gangster bash-up/mix-up to wrap up a movie; it's corny and not what a demanding viewer wants from his fantasy drama. Film-makers these days are so hell-bent on providing plot-twists (at any cost) that they throw logic and substance by the side, sacrificing the entire movie just to "surprise" the viewer with some lame twist. That horror films and thrillers do this obsessively, I can even understand (though not support), but for a romantic drama this is ridiculous.
Of course, when we find out that this is NOT a fantasy film, i.e. That the woman is just a Romanian criminal on the run, suddenly the car-crash and her finding the drugs in the water appear extremely cheesy and absurdly far-fetched events, plot-devices that reek of writer's block. The odds of those two events happening involve a long line of zeroes. You can get away with that in a fantasy movie (which implies higher powers, destiny and such), but not in a non-fantasy drama/thriller. You can't have it both ways.
Then there's that dumb minor plot-twist with the little girl secretly moving the drugs! That was so stupid. This wasn't just writer's block, this was post-traumatic writer's block! PTWB. Surely there must be centers at Beverly Hills that treat it. Jordan, the next time he doesn't know how to finish a (good) story, should check himself into such a center. They might teach him a thing or two about why plot-twists-at-any-cost screen-writing is lame.
The writer, despite being Irish, seems to know less about Irish immigration laws than I do. Ondine doesn't go to jail, which is absurd. Also, the question of her deportation is a bit iffy considering that she belongs to an EU country. Or did Jordan think Romania is a mid-East nation? No wonder he listens to Sigur Ros.
The movie has a very good first half but then things (predictably) start going South with corny car-crashes, idiotic relationship drama based on nothing, cheesy criminals, and of course - Sigur Ros.
Speaking of which, that whiny little clown high-pitch-singing the movie's "siren song" sounds like a ca$trated mule right after an alcoholic binge. Irony or intent? Because, I mean, Farrell got drunk, so...
Jordan manipulates his audience into believing that Ondine has powers. It's one thing to manipulate subtly, but something entirely different to cheat and lie to the viewer. The Romanian thug's behavior was completely in keeping with the legend of a selkie husband searching for his wife. At no point did he behave as if he was primarily after the drugs - as he suddenly does at the end when we find out who he is. This is just plain bad writing.
Great Irish scenery, competent performances, and an original story nevertheless can't be entirely crushed by clumsy and unconvincing third-act plot-devices i.e. Forced drama and stupid twists, and can't be totally obliterated just because the writer is a tone-deaf Sugar-Ross-hugging hipster. Maybe in another universe this writer would have not become a hipster hence would have had a greater movie career, and more success in closing out well-conceived stories.
In reality, a down-on-his-luck divorced recovering alcoholic fisherman would APPRECIATE great fortune coming his way, especially in the shape and form of a pleasant, attractive and willing mermaid... or a selkie, or a Romanian drug dealer, whatever she may be. He'd defend her against the "husband" with fists flying. (Which he does eventually in the rather silly conclusion.) But no, Farrell is portrayed as such a meek failure that he is suspicious of his good luck. He is behaving like an uber-neurotic, even worse than a Woody Allen character or a millennial beta. Writers and their bloody "conflict", they never tire of that nonsense. "Conflict" is all well and fine (although I prefer to call it "plot"), but as long as it's grounded in reality and logic, not when it's as shambolic as this.
Secondly, the daughter. The girl is well cast and likable, but far too informed, intelligent, articulate and far too superior intellectually to literally all of the (mostly childish) adults featured here. Even Rea, the only mature grown-up character here, can't seem to match her wit, sass, intelligence and class. Smart-alecy super-intelligent Einstein-like kids have always been a horrible plot-device and a terribly annoying obsession of many delusional screen-writers, who portray these mega-idealized kids as if they'd never spoken to or even met a real child before. Have these clueless writers never HEARD a 10 year-old girl speak? They don't speak this way; none of them do. Not even remotely close. In fact, even a real "selkie" would have been a far more realistic character than the girl!
But the drop that really spilled over the exaggerated glass of the girl's adolescent supremacy is when she mentioned Sigur Ros, and in such a casual off-hand way, the way a mindless, pompous 18 year-old American hipster might. That Neil Jordan has a hipster mentality wasn't anything I was aware of (nor cared about, to be frank), but I am surprised given his age. (Or maybe one of his kids or nephews suggested he mention them in the script.) He portrays the ex's drunken ginger boyfriend as a moron - who listens to metal. On the other hand, the 260-IQ 10 year-old girl likes her lame, whiny Icelandic hipster pop. What's Jordan trying to say? Whatever it is, it's not very intelligent, let alone remotely accurate. (He has as much knowledge about metalheads as he has about 10 year-old girls, apparently.) Besides, it's rather embarrassing for a Baby Boomer to be a hipster. Hippies, yes; hipsters, no. (Being a hippie is embarrassing too, but at least to be expected amongst Baby Boomers.) Generally, the oldest hipsters are in their 30s, the vast majority are in their late teens and 20s, because by their 30s most of them smell the glove and mature, i.e. Evolve from the inferior hipster-larva stage they had degraded themselves with while they were young: i.e. Confused, self-absorbed, gullible and foolish.
Thirdly, Jordan actually allowed the movie to degenerate into a stupid, generic thriller, with cardboard criminals and stupid, unconvincing crime-related situations. I hate thriller situations even in thrillers, let alone in "fantasy" dramas. There is nothing easier than to inject some lame-brained drug-mule-with-the-heart-of-gold thug-gangster bash-up/mix-up to wrap up a movie; it's corny and not what a demanding viewer wants from his fantasy drama. Film-makers these days are so hell-bent on providing plot-twists (at any cost) that they throw logic and substance by the side, sacrificing the entire movie just to "surprise" the viewer with some lame twist. That horror films and thrillers do this obsessively, I can even understand (though not support), but for a romantic drama this is ridiculous.
Of course, when we find out that this is NOT a fantasy film, i.e. That the woman is just a Romanian criminal on the run, suddenly the car-crash and her finding the drugs in the water appear extremely cheesy and absurdly far-fetched events, plot-devices that reek of writer's block. The odds of those two events happening involve a long line of zeroes. You can get away with that in a fantasy movie (which implies higher powers, destiny and such), but not in a non-fantasy drama/thriller. You can't have it both ways.
Then there's that dumb minor plot-twist with the little girl secretly moving the drugs! That was so stupid. This wasn't just writer's block, this was post-traumatic writer's block! PTWB. Surely there must be centers at Beverly Hills that treat it. Jordan, the next time he doesn't know how to finish a (good) story, should check himself into such a center. They might teach him a thing or two about why plot-twists-at-any-cost screen-writing is lame.
The writer, despite being Irish, seems to know less about Irish immigration laws than I do. Ondine doesn't go to jail, which is absurd. Also, the question of her deportation is a bit iffy considering that she belongs to an EU country. Or did Jordan think Romania is a mid-East nation? No wonder he listens to Sigur Ros.
The movie has a very good first half but then things (predictably) start going South with corny car-crashes, idiotic relationship drama based on nothing, cheesy criminals, and of course - Sigur Ros.
Speaking of which, that whiny little clown high-pitch-singing the movie's "siren song" sounds like a ca$trated mule right after an alcoholic binge. Irony or intent? Because, I mean, Farrell got drunk, so...
Jordan manipulates his audience into believing that Ondine has powers. It's one thing to manipulate subtly, but something entirely different to cheat and lie to the viewer. The Romanian thug's behavior was completely in keeping with the legend of a selkie husband searching for his wife. At no point did he behave as if he was primarily after the drugs - as he suddenly does at the end when we find out who he is. This is just plain bad writing.
Great Irish scenery, competent performances, and an original story nevertheless can't be entirely crushed by clumsy and unconvincing third-act plot-devices i.e. Forced drama and stupid twists, and can't be totally obliterated just because the writer is a tone-deaf Sugar-Ross-hugging hipster. Maybe in another universe this writer would have not become a hipster hence would have had a greater movie career, and more success in closing out well-conceived stories.