PAPILLON – Review

Rami Malek (left) stars as “Louis Dega” and Charlie Hunnam (right) stars as “Henri ‘Papillon’ Charriére” in director Michael Noer’s PAPILLON, a Bleecker Street release. Credit: Jose Haro / Bleecker Street

PAPILLON stars Charlie Hunnam and in a remake of the highly-praised 1973 film of the same name, based on the bestselling books of Henri “Papillon” Charriere about his experiences as a French thief and safe-cracker sentenced in the 1930s to the notorious French prison on Devil’s Island off the coast of French Guiana.

The 1973 film starred Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman, who turn in sterling performances as Papillon and forger/counterfeiter/conman Louis Dega, and also sported a script co-written by the legendary Dalton Trumbo. Papillon is French for butterfly and refers to a tattoo on the safe-cracker’s chest, but also to the books’ theme of transformation as well as an indomitable human spirit.

Those are pretty impressive credentials to try to match in a remake, but the story is compelling enough that you could see how it would be tempting to try. Still there is that cautionary rule about remakes, that if you are re-making a classic, the best you can hope for is to be as good. Unfortunately, this PAPILLON does not escape that fate and, in fact, it is far inferior to the original.

The story in the 1973 Papillon is an inspiring tale of human endurance, redemption and an indomitable thirst for freedom. The sequel is none of those things.

Street-smart safe-cracker Papillon is framed for murder by another criminal, and finds himself both banished and sentenced to life in the notorious French prison on French Guiana. Also being transported to South America is the wealth infamous forger and conman Louis Dega (Rami Malek). Awaiting the ship, athletic Papillon offers his services as protection to the smaller, less-physical forger in exchange for Dega funding Papillon’s escape plan. Dega at first declines but reconsiders after another prison is murdered. But Dega wants to go along on the escape, a suggestion Papillon turns down.

Those who saw the McQueen-Hoffman film know this is a big deviation from the basic premise of the two characters’ relationship right there. In the 1973 film, it is Papillon who suggests Dega should join him in his escape plan but Dega turns him down, saying he has his own plan to be released which is underway and deeming Papillon’s escape plan too risky.

Hunnam spends the whole film looking hunky while Malek looks just weaselly. In fact, the changed relationship between the two characters is the biggest difference between the two films, and its fatal flaw. It is hard to know what director Michael Noer was thinking when he took this path. The intention may have been to craft a star vehicle for Charlie Hunnam by boosting the heroic image of the character he plays. However, the plan backfires as it undermines the friendship that was a major strength of the story, and diminishes its dramatic power and its arc of re-birth.

The prisoners do not start out on Devil’s Island but the name is a good stand-in for the whole penal colony system they endure. The voyage over is awful but once in South America, things get much worse. The prisoners are reminded that they have been discarded by their country and face the years of solitary or even the guillotine for infractions. Food is scarce as well as bad, the heat and jungle offer dangers, and they are surrounded by evil ex-cons turned bounty hunters and other nasty types.

The 2018 PAPILLON follows the general outline of the 1973 film, and even occasionally inserts dialog from the original. One can easily pick these lines out as the words no longer match the characters of the two men and the nature of the friendship. Violence is frequent.

In both films, the two men bond as friends over time but the nature of the friendship is different. In the 1973 film, Louis Dega starts out in a position of power with a plan for being released and for comfort while incarcerated, while Papillon is one of many common street criminals. The two brings complementary strengths to the partnership: Louis brings both money, connections and brains to the table, while Papillon brings street-smarts with knowledge of prisons, physical prowess and a willingness to take risks.

In the 2018 version, Papillon holds all the cards, and just drags Louis along for the ride. This Papillon is both the brawn and the brains, while a sniveling Louis Dega brings only money to their partnership. Over time, Papillon becomes fond of the little guy, who becomes somewhat less idiotic with time, but still pretty odd.

In the original, Dustin Hoffman’s Louis Dega is a self-possessed man used to being the one in charge and relying on his own brain-power. The prison experience humbles him, while elevating the always-hopeful Papillon, whose perseverance is one of his admirable aspects. In this new version, it is Papillon who has superior attitude, which is not much diminished over time. One thing that is the same between the two films are what drives these men. Papillon wants to escape at costs, while Louis wants to be safe at all costs.

Oddly, the 1973 version is much more graphic, gritty and realistic in depicting the violence and brutal conditions. Charlie Hunnam gets a little grimy but stays surprisingly clean and handsome throughout. Rami Malek looks kind of weird from the start and never looks much better, just a little messier. The focus is always on the heroic Hunnam character, reducing some scenes from dramatic to a shallow high school confrontation.

The remake does add one positive thing that the original lacked, which a little bit about Papillon before the false conviction, and an epilog that details how Charriere’s best-selling books brought about French prison reform and closed the penal facility in which he spent so many years.

It could have been a better film, and the poor result of this remake will do Hunnam’s career no good. If you are curious about the story, seeing the 1973 film or even reading the books is the way to go. If you are a fan of Charlie Hunnam, you are much better off watching the far-better LOST CITY OF Z.

RATING: 1 out of 5 stars