Introduction

The 2012 film Mr. Pip, starring Hugh Laurie as a schoolteacher in a remote part of Bougainville, has garnered mixed reactions from critics and audiences alike. While the movie has received some praise, it has also faced significant criticism, particularly regarding its handling of the setting and the setting’s historical conflict. This article aims to provide a balanced analysis of the movie, examining the reasons behind the bad reviews and offering insights from a local perspective.

The Setting and Historical Context

Mr. Pip is a story set in a rural part of Bougainville, a province of Papua New Guinea. This area is not entirely unfamiliar to Hugh Laurie, who hailed from Dunfermline, Scotland, which, like Bougainville, was a British colony in the past. The film's setting is deliberately chosen to evoke themes of colonialism and its enduring impact. The story is imagined as taking place during the height of the Bougainville Civil War, a conflict that began in 1988 and lasted until a ceasefire was signed in 2001, lasting nearly a dozen years. This war, which claimed thousands of lives, was one of the most protracted conflicts in the South Pacific.

Protagonist's Perspective

A central figure in the narrative is Matilda, the main protagonist, played by Romola Garai. Matilda is a young girl who uses Charles Dickens' novel, A Tale of Two Cities, to escape from the harsh realities of the war unfolding around her. The film largely focuses on her inner world, where the harsh realities of war are eschewed in favor of a more idealized and romanticized narrative. Critics argue that this approach, although artistic and imaginative, downplays the serious and brutal aspects of the civil war. The film's portrayal can be seen as a critique of how history and reality are often filtered through the lens of fiction and personal narrative.

The Central Complaint: A Gimmicky Love Story in an Out-of-Place Setting

The most common criticism of Mr. Pip is that it presents a "gimmicky love story" set in a "too-serious setting." Critics argue that the film fails to adequately address the historical context and instead opts for a more whimsical and unrealistic portrayal. The setup of a schoolteacher in a post-colonial setting, trying to impart literacy and imagination during a civil war, does create a sense of dissonance. However, it is important to recognize that the film is a work of fiction, and its primary goal is not to document the specifics of the Bougainville Civil War. Instead, it aims to explore themes of resilience, imagination, and the power of storytelling in the face of adversity.

Personal Insights and Local Perspectives

While the reviews may paint a picture of neglect and disinterest, it is important to consider the perspective of locals. As someone with personal connections to Papua New Guinea, I can attest that the film does not ignore the conflict entirely. The Bougainville Civil War is a significant and devastating part of the country's history, and the film does address it in a more subtle and metaphorical way.

The film's focus on the fictional world created by Matilda, while it may seem whimsical to some, is actually a method of coping with the harsh realities of the war. By immersing in literary works and fairytales, characters find a way to navigate the complexity and violence of their environment. The film's critique of the saturation of Western literature and the challenges of maintaining education in times of conflict also resonate with local experiences.

Evaluating the Validity of Negative Reviews

The reviews suggesting that the film "downplays" the war are not entirely without merit. However, it is also crucial to consider the broader context. The film is a narrative work, not a documentary, and its primary objective is to tell a poignant and inspirational story. The war is undoubtedly a heavily serious and real part of the setting, but its impact is felt indirectly through the protagonist's journey.

The anger and frustration of reviewers who argue that the war is not given enough attention may stem from a perceived lack of emphasis on the historical and factual aspects of the conflict. However, it is also possible that these criticisms are influenced by a desire to see a more straightforward, documentary-style representation of the war. It is important to recognize that the film is not meant to be a historical account but a fictional narrative that uses the backdrop of the war to explore deeper themes.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the criticisms of Mr. Pip are multifaceted and reflect the complex nature of our approach to historical events, especially when presented through the lens of fiction. While the film may not satisfy everyone’s expectations in terms of its handling of the Bougainville Civil War, it nonetheless offers a compelling and nuanced exploration of resilience and the power of imagination. As a work of fiction, it succeeds in presenting a unique and enlightening perspective on a difficult time in history.

If you are intrigued by the story and the themes it explores, I would recommend giving the film a chance. It is a thought-provoking and emotionally resonant work that deserves to be seen on its own merits.