Thursday, January 12, 2017

Silence

Directed by Martin Scorsese, United States, 2016

The 1966 novel Silence, written by Shusaku Endo, is set in 17th century feudal Japan. After the Shimabara Rebellion, a thousands-strong uprising of mostly Catholic peasants against the ruling Tokugawa shogunate, the Emperor outlawed all Christianity from the country. Remaining Kakure Kirishitan ("Hidden Christians") were discovered by Japanese authorities by forcing them to step on the fumie, plaques with carved images of Christ and Mary. Those who refused were tortured or killed. In Endo's novel, two Portuguese Jesuits sneak into the country despite the danger, to spread their gospel and to track down their old mentor, Padre Ferreira, who is rumored to have apostatized under torture. Shusaku Endo had a unique perspective on his novel's subject matter. He was a Japanese Roman Catholic, a religious minority in his home country who experienced persecution for his beliefs, particularly during the imperial years of his youth. When studying abroad in France in the 1950s, he experienced racial hatred and the lack of understanding between West and East. His experiences must have granted him a rare, empathetic perspective on this time and place in history, as his Silence illuminates the sincere faith of the Jesuit priests while exposing their destructive colonial hubris.

Silence had been adapted onto film once before, in 1971 by filmmaker Masahiro Shinoda, but Endo reportedly disliked it, believing it misrepresented his story. Of course I would have no way of actually knowing, but I suspect he would approve of Martin Scorsese's new adaptation. Martin Scorsese has desired to adapt the book for decades, and his passion for the material shows clearly in the finished film. Even more importantly, he understands the book's multitudinous meanings, and has translated them from prose to cinema with powerful emotional and intellectual clarity.


Scorsese also wrote a foreword to a recent reprinting of Silence. He begins by asking, "How do you tell the story of Christian faith?" If his film can be taken as a reply to his own question (though certainly nothing like a definitive answer), you can tell the story of faith by stripping away everything else. And that is exactly what happens to the protagonist of Silence, Padre Rodrigues. With as much witty, unsparing ruthlessness as the Japanese Inquisitors, though with far more compassionate intent, Silence breaks down Rodrigues's assumptions, the things he clings to as truth but which are actually more related to cultural perceptions, his church's laws, and his own ego than any immutable truth. Once these things are painfully taken from Rodrigues, what is left?

These are only my first impression thoughts. I suspect this is the kind of film that will reveal something else on my second and third viewings. The story is dramatically straightforward and easy to follow, but its implications are startlingly dense, and lead to a multitude of moral, historical, and religious interpretations. Silence has the power to challenge and productively unsettle anyone who open themselves to its line of questioning, no matter their beliefs or ethnicity.


On first look, the visceral qualities and vibrant humanity of Silence resonate with me even more than any one interpretation of "what it means". The production values are phenomenal - it is a detailed and immersive recreation of Edo-period Japan, brought to life with beautiful cinematography. Scorsese's camera pays particular attention to hands and faces, to foggy landscapes and symmetrical Japanese architecture. His filmmaking recalls many of classic cinema's greats, from Japanese masters like Kenji Mizoguchi and Akira Kurosawa to European transcendentalist filmmakers like Carl Dreyer and Roberto Rossellini, but it remains very much a singular, personal vision.

The characters are unforgettable. Padre Rodrigues is an immensely complex character and Andrew Garfield is up to the challenge, charting out Rodrigues's turbulent psychological journey from beginning to end with piercing emotional truth. Rodrigues vacillates between steadfast faith and crippling angry doubt, cowardice and bravado, selfless love and arrogance, and Garfield shows us how all these various attributes belong to one personality, while making Rodrigues's core sincerity and goodness clear enough that we, as viewers, are never allowed to feel superior despite his faults. Even with a distracting half-assed Portuguese accent (I don't understand - if they're speaking English and not Portuguese, why bother?), it's a tremendous performance.


The entire cast impresses. Adam Driver gets less screen time than expected as Padre Garrpe, but has a striking presence as always. His unique facial features look especially gaunt and severe here, like a stern religious icon brought to life. The normally intimidating Liam Neeson looks deflated, his Padre Ferreira is a defeated and spiritually crippled man - though fascinating, subtle notes in his performance suggest that may not be the whole truth. Shinya Tsukamato radiates courage as Mokichi, a Kirishitan martyr. His faith is not only hope in the afterlife, but an assertion of his own value in the face of a feudal system that denies him dignity - the sequence where he is strung up on a cross in the surf, quietly singing a hymn even as the waves relentlessly beat his body, is at once horrific and beautiful. Tadanobu Asano compels as the Japanese authorities' interpreter to Rodrigues, a jovial sadist who is fascinated and disgusted by the proud Rodrigues, and knows the exact words to undercut the priest's sense of superiority. Issey Ogata's performance as Inquisitor Inoue might be the most unexpected, in part because it's unrecognizably different from the only other Ogata performance I've seen, as the businessman in Edward Yang's Yi Yi who is a paragon of kindness and joy. In Silence Ogata is joltingly bizarre and comic - his Inoue uses flamboyantly pronounced courtly manners to disarm Rodrigues before dismantling his pride with wicked wit and insight.

But the most affecting character in Silence might be Kichijiro, played by Yosuke Kubozuka. In addition to acting, Kubozaka sometimes models for advertisements and fashion magazines in Japan, but his role as Kichijiro is about as unflattering and unglamorous as they come. Kichijiro is a filthy, bumbling alcoholic, cowardly and dedicated to self-preservation at all costs. His unending cycle of panicky betrayal followed by scrounging repentance grows increasingly absurd - but is also fundamentally human. Like J.R.R. Tolkien's Gollum, Kichijiro is a fascinating tragicomic creation whose weakness and naked desires reveal a lot of uncomfortable but truthful things about human nature.

"Uncomfortable but truthful" is, I think, an accurate way to describe Silence. This is a great movie.

Thursday, January 5, 2017

Favorite First-Time Viewings of 2016

Apologies to any readers, as I've been dreadful in keeping up this blog! I've now started three reviews series (on Wong Kar-wai, Hayao Miyazaki, and the BBC Top 10) that I've left unfinished, and at this point are likely to remain that way - yikes. I still don't want to abandon this blog, though, and one of my desires for 2017 is to write more - including about movies, so expect this website to be more active in the coming months.

To kick it off, here's an unranked list of some older films that I watched for the first time this year and loved. I did not write reviews on most, but I'll leave brief thoughts on each, and why they moved / excited / fascinated me.


Tabu (F.W. Murnau, United States, 1931) - A tragic romance set in the South Seas that could be fairly accused of hokey exoticism (though a respectful portrayal of Polynesians for its time), but F.W. Murnau's expressionistic telling of this classic Romeo and Juliet story is movie magic, a joyful dream that turns into a nightmare. A silent film that creates a pure emotional experience through only its visuals, with an imaginative directness that puts most modern movies to shame.


Hellzapoppin' (H.C. Potter, United States, 1941) - Opens with a peppy musical number set in the depths of hell and keeps getting weirder from there. The humor is shamelessly corny, lowbrow vaudeville, but delightfully anarchic and creative, even 70+ years on. Also contains maybe the greatest, and almost certainly the most fearless, dance sequence in movie history.


Pather Panchali (Satyajit Ray, India, 1955) - A compassionate but unsentimental portrait of a year in the life of a regular Bengali family. It amazes me that this was Satyajit Ray's first film - its unforgettably specific characters and vivid evocation of life in rural India could only be the creation of a master filmmaker and keen observer of people.


Good Morning (Yasujiro Ozu, Japan, 1959) - A satirical but generous-hearted story of two young boys in newly-consumerist 1950s Japan who enter a vow of silence to protest their parents not buying a television. A rare comedy from Ozu, mostly a creator of quietly devastating melodramas, but his unique visual approach works beautifully for deadpan humor.


The Fabulous Baron Munchausen (Karel Zeman, Czhechoslovakia, 1962) - The tall tales of Baron Munchausen told through Karel Zeman's distinctive blend of live actors, animation, and stop-motion puppetry, like a psychedelic pop-art storybook brought to life. Fun and funny, also among the most visually inventive films I've seen.


Kwaidan (Masaki Kobayashi, Japan, 1964) - An anthology of four classic Japanese ghost stories. A horror film, but not one built for cheap thrills; a creepy, sublime and gorgeous excursion into the dark heart of folktales.


Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors (Sergei Parajanov, Ukraine, 1965) - Director Sergei Parajanov, a Georgian-born Armenian who did not play along with the rules of the USSR and spent much of his life in prison for it, had a style and approach to storytelling unlike any other. His films are wild, mythic immersions into forgotten ways of life and viewing the world - in this case, those of the Ukrainian Hustul culture. Soviet censors hated it for its religious and sensual imagery, but many ethnographers, historians, hippies, theologians, romantics, and adventurous movie-lovers over the years have embraced it. A one-of-a-kind movie.


A New Leaf (Elaine May, United States, 1971) - A very dark but ultimately good-natured comedy that ranks among the funniest movies I've ever seen. Directed, written by, and starring Elaine May, who is a genius, also showcases a brilliant comic performance from Walter Matthau.


Solaris (Andrei Tarkovsky, Russia, 1972) - A slow, sinister, spiritual experience, mysterious and soulful as science-fiction storytelling should be but so rarely is.


The Tree of Wooden Clogs (Ermanno Olmi, Italy, 1978) - A small-scale epic that shows the lives of a hard-laboring, devotedly Catholic peasant family in nineteenth-century Italy, based on stories from director Olmi's own ancestors. Small moments of unadorned honesty accumulate to make a film that radiates truth, both a religious and humbly human work of art.


Kagemusha (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1980) - Akira Kurosawa is just the greatest. My review.


A Brighter Summer Day (Edward Yang, Taiwan, 1991) - Has the expansive detail, thematic depth and character complexity of a great novel - also, at 4 hours long, the intimidating density of one, but it's worth the effort. Roger Ebert has famously called the movies "a machine that generates empathy". After watching A Brighter Summer Day, I really felt that I understood this time and place, this community, and the people who lived there.


The Long Day Closes (Terence Davies, United Kingdom, 1992) - An impressionistic autobiography of Terence Davies as a boy in working-class 1950s Liverpool. On the surface it's a lovely, stream-of-consciousness reverie, a nostalgic trip through memories of family, school, church, movies and music of the era. Hidden in plain sight are deep currents of bittersweet mixed emotions, recalling the happiness and the guilt of that time in life (Davies was gay, and just beginning to realize it at the age portrayed), and a sweet tribute to his beloved family. Most autobiography feels like misguided attempts at squeezing complex lives into simplistic narratives, if not outright narcissism, but The Long Day Closes is something different, like witnessing the raw materials of a personality in formation.

More movies I loved - because the 13 listed above are just a few of the awesome movies I watched for the first time this year. Here's some more that I will remember and value for a long time:
  • The Abominable Dr. Phibes (Robert Fuest, United Kingdom, 1971)
  • Alice in the Cities (Wim Wenders, Germany, 1974)
  • Allegro non Troppo (Bruno Bozzetto, Italy, 1976)
  • Ashes of Time (Wong Kar-wai, Hong Kong, 1994) / my review
  • Cafe Lumiere (Hou Hsiao-Hsien, Japan, 2003)
  • Children in the Wind (Hiroshi Shimizu, Japan, 1937)
  • Dead of Night (multiple directors, United Kingdom, 1945)
  • Dragon Gate Inn (King Hu, Taiwan, 1967)
  • Fallen Angels (Wong Kar-wai, Hong Kong, 1995)
  • Flash Gordon (Mike Hodges, United Kingdom, 1980)
  • The Flight of the Red Balloon (Hou Hsiao-Hsien, France / Taiwan, 2007)
  • Flowers of Shanghai (Hou Hsiao-Hsien, Taiwan, 1998)
  • Head (Bob Rafelson, United States, 1968)
  • The Heartbreak Kid (Elaine May, United States, 1972)
  • The Hidden Fortress (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1958)
  • Maborosi (Hirokazu Kore-eda, Japan, 1995)
  • Mafioso (Alberto Lattuada, Italy, 1962)
  • The Naked Island (Kaneto Shindo, Japan, 1960)
  • Raise the Red Lantern (Zhang Yimou, China, 1991) / my review
  • Red Beard (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1965)
  • Sanjuro (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1962)
  • The Saragossa Manuscript (Wojciech Has, Poland, 1965) / my review
  • Sazen Tange and the Pot Worth a Million Ryo (Sadao Yamanaka, Japan, 1935)
  • Them! (Gordon Douglas, United States, 1954)
  • Throne of Blood (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1957)
  • Topsy-Turvy (Mike Leigh, United Kingdom, 1999)
  • The Valley of the Bees (Frantiscek Vlacil, Czechoslovakia, 1968) / my review
  • Wings of Desire (Wim Wenders, Germany, 1987)
  • Yojimbo (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1961)

Saturday, October 29, 2016

BBC Best Films of the 21st Century #8: Yi Yi

The BBC recently surveyed 177 international critics about their picks for the best films released since 2000. You can read the resulting list of 100 films here. Of course, no-one will ever entirely agree with cumulative lists like this, but it's a great place to start if you're interested in exploring the best of what modern movies have to offer. I will be reviewing the top 10 picks, and offer my opinion on what's great about them.

Directed by Edward Yang
Taiwan, 2000
Yi Yi was director Edward Yang's final film before his passing in 2007, at only 59 years old. Yang was one of a small group of young, ambitious filmmakers who emerged from Taiwan in the early 1980s collectively dubbed by critics the Taiwanese New Wave. With the loosening of censorship in Taiwan around that time, artists could finally explore the history and identity of their country with honesty. Yang and his peers made formally radical, ethically serious movies that were a reckoning with Taiwan's turbulent past and uncertain present.

If Hou Hsiao-Hsien is the Taiwanese New Wave's poet, Edward Yang is its novelist. His 1991 film A Brighter Summer Day is an intimately-scaled epic set among the youth of 1960s Taipei, who have formed street gangs to give them a sense of security and identity that their country, politically insecure and culturally stuck between China, Japan, and America, doesn't offer. A Brighter Summer Day has the richness of character and theme - and, at four hours long, the sheer size - of a great novel. Yang's 1986 film The Terrorizers is an unusually literate, clever exploration of modern urban living's dark side. It's the type of story that would become popular several decades later with the likes of Crash and Babel, a multi-stranded ensemble narrative about how contemporary life can make individuals simultaneously more interconnected and more alienated than ever before.


Yang's films are densely novelistic in their writing, but simple and precise in their visual storytelling. Before becoming a filmmaker, Yang had studied engineering and was fascinated by architecture. His films display the mind of an architect - his images are cleanly composed and aware of how space and shape can inform a scene's mood and meaning. He is always careful to situate characters within their surroundings, mostly in long shots that contextualize the characters and their behavior within the environments that shape them. Close-up images are rare in Yang's work, and always deliberately used. Yang also loved comic books and animation - his planned, tragically unfinished follow-up to Yi Yi was going to be an animated martial arts saga. Even his live-action films display the sensibility of a cartoonist, who tell their stories through single panels and express character and emotion with simplified pen-and-ink sketches. Lone images of Yi Yi tell mini-stories of their own, which gain broader meaning in dialogue with the surrounding images; characters' simple gestures express depths of comedy or tragedy. In other words, Edward Yang was a true craftsman - nothing in his films feel accidental.

Despite all the acclaim he's received, Edward Yang's movies are frustratingly difficult to find. Yi Yi was his only film to receive a theatrical release in the United States - sad, but perhaps not surprising. It might be his most easily accessible film, as it is less specifically tied to Taiwan in its meaning than Yang's previous works, and tells a universally relatable story. Yi Yi begins with a wedding and ends with a funeral, and between shows the stages of life - birth, childhood, adolesence, adulthood, old age - through three generations of the ordinary Jian family.


Between the family gatherings that bookend the film, the Jians are almost always shown separately. Like many modern families, the Jians may share a roof but live mostly in isolation from each other - not because there's a lack of love or open dysfunction between them, but because they each have their own burdens to quietly grapple with amid the many distractions of 21st century city life.

Immediately after her son A-Di's wedding, the Jian grandmother, the beloved backbone of the family, falls into a coma. Doctors are not optimistic about her recovery, but encourage the family to take turns talking to her - as she might still hear them and it could help her return to consciousness. Their one-sided conversations with her become like confessions, revealing their innermost questions and longings.

NJ, her son-in-law, is a melancholy and distracted but gentle man. He notes while talking to grandma that it feels like prayer - "I'm not sure if the other party is listening, and I'm not sure if I'm sincere enough." What NJ really craves is sincerity. He doesn't find it in his work - a dull career in the video game industry, surrounded by co-workers who lack any ambition or integrity beyond the pursuit of profit. His marriage has become a benign but lukewarm partnership lacking in romance or friendship. Two figures enter NJ's static life and shake him out of complacency. He runs into an ex-girlfriend, Sherry, the first love of his life, now a successful businesswoman married to an American. From this abrupt, awkward encounter it's clear that strong bittersweet feelings still exist between them. He meets up with Sherry again in Tokyo and they reminisce on their past together and the possibilities of their future. At the same time NJ meets Ota - a Japanese businessman who also works in video games, but does so with a creative spirit that does not segregate business from morals, or art from commerce. He lives with the kind of passionate, engaged authenticity that NJ desires in his own life. Their friendship, which develops over the course of business meetings that turn into philosophical discussions, is surprising and endearing.


NJ's wife, Min-Min, takes the duty of talking to her mother seriously, and every night talks about what she'd done that day. But this leads to an unexpected personal crisis - Min-Min realizes that every day of her life seems exactly the same, and that she has very little of interest to talk about. "How can there be so little?" she asks, disconsalate at the realization of her life's lack of purpose. Hoping to find meaning again, she retreats to a monastery for an extended stay. Both NJ and Min-Min have reached mid-life crises, regretting either the choices they've made or their lack of intention in life, and realizing with frightening clarity: this is it, and perhaps all it ever will be.

Min-Min's brother, A-Di, is a mess. He's newly married, but immediately rekindles a relationship with his equally damaged ex-girlfriend. He's deep in debt, getting scammed by his scummy friends, and generally in denial about the disaster he's made of his life. He brags to his comatose mother about his various accomplishments and all the money he's making, as if trying to convince her and above all himself that it's true, but falters and falls silent. Perhaps her nonresponsiveness makes the hollowness of his own words harder to ignore. A-Di is a pathetic but poignant illustration of a certain, and particularly male, type of insecurity and despair.


NJ and Min-Min's teenage daughter, Ting-Ting, feels personally responsible for her beloved grandma's condition. Her grandmother was discovered unconscious by the garbage bins outside, and Ting-Ting realizes that she had forgotten to take out the trash earlier that day. She sneaks into her grandmother's room at night and tearfully asks her to wake up, because then she will feel forgiven. Her guilty feelings are compounded when she innocently becomes involved in a romantic triangle with troubled neighbor girl Lili and a moody boy nicknamed Fatty, and witnesses glimpses of the sordid lives of her next-door neighbors. Her first steps into adulthood are fraught with danger and confusion. "Why is the world so different from what we thought it was?"

Ting-Ting's younger brother, Yang-Yang, is a curious and watchful little kid with the conscience of a budding artist. He does not initially talk to grandma - she cannot see what he does and cannot respond, so he fails to see the point. This gets him thinking, in his own childish but nonetheless serious and thoughtful way, about the reality of different perspectives. He asks his dad: since we cannot see out the back of our heads but only what's in front of us, do we only see half the truth? His dad gifts him with a camera, which Yang-Yang uses to explore the world around him. He especially likes photographing the back of people's heads. This confuses NJ until he hears Yang-Yang's simple explanation - "you can't see it, so I've shown you."


Yi Yi is three hours of a family's everyday doubts and struggles, which may sound heavy, but Edward Yang has created a film with a beautiful lightness of touch. It's long but uses that length well, to envelop the viewer in its world so it can become vividly detailed and alive. Yi Yi is meditative and never melodramatic, emotionally expressive but never manipulative. It's also threaded through with sly visual jokes. In one memorable scene, NJ is visited by Min-Min's spiritual guru. We see Yang-Yang playing in the bath with his tub toys while we hear the adults talking in the next room, the conversation dominated by the monk's didactic evangelizing about the superiority of monastic life. Yang-Yang sneaks past the grown-ups into the kitchen to find a funnel for his bathtub experiments, and his towel unceremoniously falls off at the same moment as the monk finally reach his point - his whole highfaulting speech has been a pretext for asking NJ for money. Yang-Yang's sudden nudity humorously coincides with the reveal of the monk's pretension. Yi Yi is full of similarly lovely, witty grace notes.

Yi Yi's subtitle for its American release was "A One and a Two", which is an attempt to translate the title's meaning in Chinese. The title is a Chinese character made of two slashes stacked on top of each other, each signifying the number 1 on their own but 2 when put together. This must have been deliberate wordplay on Edward Yang's part, as every character in Yi Yi is alone but simultaneously connected to the others, in more ways than they perceive. Take as an example the scene that cuts between NJ and Sherry swapping memories of their first date decades ago, and Ting-Ting embarking on a first date with Fatty. We hear NJ and Sherry talking about nervously holding hands for the first time, while we see Ting-Ting and Fatty doing exactly the same thing. The two couples become a mirror of each other, though one date is unfolding in Tokyo and one in Taipei, with hundreds of miles and decades in age separating them. They are united by the shared nervousness and excitement of their experiences, the scary romantic thrill of finding a private space with another person in the middle of a busy world. Yang finds similar connections between all the characters, their hopes and fears are somehow both unique and universally shared.


The beauty of Yi Yi lies in how it captures the patterns that tie the Jians to each other, though they often do not notice, being too perplexed by the disappointments and tragedies of life. But in the film's last act, the Jians begin to see themselves, and each other, more clearly. Min-Min and NJ realize that their attempts to escape did not bring them any more fulfillment - that the problem was not the reality of their lives, but how they perceived them. Ting-Ting experiences life's cruelty and unfairness, but also encounters grace in a climatic scene that could be a miracle. Considering that Yi Yi is entirely realistic up to that point, the break with everyday reality should be jarring, but it isn't. Yi Yi may be mundane on its surface but has a spiritual undercurrent that gives even the most everyday events a luminous quality. The miracle is portrayed as matter-of-factly as everything else, and is astonishing in its quiet, cathartic power.

Yang-Yang gets the final word in Yi Yi, as he finally decides to speak to grandma. Despite coming from the naive perspective of a little kid, his words carry great weight. "Do you know what I want to do when I grow up? I want to tell people things they don't know. Show them stuff they haven't seen. It'll be so much fun." That could be Edward Yang's mission statement. He achieved just that with Yi Yi - he looks at ordinary lives and discovers wonder and mystery there.

The BBC Top 10: 
  1. Mulholland Drive
  2. In the Mood for Love (previously reviewed)
  3. There Will Be Blood
  4. Spirited Away
  5. Boyhood
  6. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  7. The Tree of Life
  8. Yi Yi
  9. A Separation
  10. No Country for Old Men

Saturday, October 15, 2016

BBC Best Films of the 21st Century #9: A Separation

The BBC recently surveyed 177 international critics about their picks for the best films released since 2000. You can read the resulting list of 100 films here. Of course, no-one will ever entirely agree with cumulative lists like this, but it's a great place to start if you're interested in exploring the best of what modern movies have to offer. I will be reviewing the top 10 picks, and offer my opinion on what's great about them.

Directed by Asghar Farhadi
Iran, 2011
A Separation received exceptional acclaim and success on its release in 2011. The critical response was unanimously great, and the movie earned nearly 8 million dollars in the United States - a tiny amount compared to the average Hollywood release, but a smash hit compared to the average Middle Eastern film, which rarely crack a million in box office earnings. It was nominated for Best Screenplay at the Academy Awards - an uncommon achievement for a film not written in English - and won for Best Foreign Language Film, a first for an Iranian movie.

Part of A Separation's enthusiastic reception was likely due to its novelty with many non-Iranians. In the United States, Iran is known mostly for its repressive government and politics, for nuclear fears and sexism. A Separation was an eye-opener for many. It's an intimate study of everyday people who live in a culture alien to most outside Iran's borders. A Separation was less novel to those who had been following Iranian filmmaking - a unique film culture that produced artists like Abbas Kiarostami and Mohsen Makhmalbaf, who had been making films of startling poetry and clarity since the 1970s despite restrictive censorship from their government. It was even less surprising to those who had seen previous Asghar Farhadi films like Fireworks Wednesday or About Elly, noteworthy for their multi-layered characters and intricate stories.


However, no matter how fascinating it is as a rare honest glimpse into a foreign culture, the main appeal of A Separation is not educational - it's just a tremendously good movie, the work of a master storyteller. Before becoming a filmmaker, Asghar Farhadi studied theater. His theater experience shows in his carefully structured, dialogue-driven screenplays. Farhadi's genius as a screenwriter lies in how he reveals the motivations of his characters and shows how everyone has reasonable cause to believe what they do, even as their individual perspectives fall disastrously short of the whole truth.

A Separation begins with a simple but difficult ethical quandary. By the end, the varying truths and lies told have woven an enormous web of moral questions, which the characters have created and cannot escape. Nader and Simin want a divorce. She wants to leave the country to provide a better life for their young daughter, Termeh, and their visa expires soon. He needs to stay to care for his Alzheimer's-afflicted father. During the divorce, Simin leaves home to live with her mother. Due to her absence, Nader hires a young woman, Razieh, to become his father's caretaker while he's at work. One day Nader returns home to find Razieh gone, and his neglected father injured after a collapse. Razieh returns to a furious Nader, who also accuses her of stealing before violently shoving her out the front door. Nader later learns that Razieh ended up in the hospital, suffering a miscarriage soon after their argument. Razieh and her hotheaded husband, Hodjat, take Nader to court, accusing him of causing her miscarriage by his aggression - an accusation that, if proven, would equal a murder sentence.


If there's a running theme connecting the Iranian films I've seen, it's the quest for truth. What is truth? How do we determine it? Maybe this search for truth in Iranian film arises from the urgent importance placed on certain virtues in Islamic Middle Eastern cultures, such as righteousness, justice, and honor. Maybe it's a reaction to a government with a totalitarian claim on The Truth in all aspects of life: religious, social, individual. The best, most conscientious artists cross-examine the accepted mores of their societies, and Asghar Farhadi is particularly bold in that regard. A Separation is about the impossibility of determining a singular, objective truth. Everyone's version of the truth is formed by their own limited perspective, their self-interest, justifications, and misunderstandings.

Where do we find truth? Turning to official, society-mandated truth often provides no satisfying answers. A Separation's opening credits unfold over images of passports being scanned - the elements of an individual collated onto an official document, proof of a person's existence even as it flattens and dehumanizes them due to bureaucratic necessity. The government courts of A Separation - fascinatingly different from the legal system in America - apply rigid moral judgments, drawn from the Qur'an and Iranian law, to messy human lives that don't fit in such neat boxes of right and wrong.


But individual perspectives in A Separation are often no more truthful. The opening scene is the film in miniature. Nader and Simin tell their reasons for seeking divorce to a judge. The dissolution of their marriage has been caused by, ironically enough, devotion to family members. Simin wants a better, freer life for her daughter - when the judge huffily asks why she believes Iran would not provide a good future for Termeh, Simin's silence and confrontational stare speaks volumes. Nader wants to be a good son and not uproot his already-fragile father from his home, or place him in a hospital. Their decisions are motivated by good, right things, but have nevertheless brought them to an ugly, wrong place - a formerly loving couple, now divided and spiteful. Farhadi's staging of the scene is simple but brilliant - the couple sit facing the camera, putting the audience in the place of the judge. This immediately draws us, the viewers, into their dilemma, making us more than passive spectators but directly involving us as judges to their case.

I found my judgments, and sympathies, constantly shifting throughout the film. Nader's anger with Razieh was justified. She had neglected her job, putting his father in danger. We see the depths of love he has for his father when he returns home to find him sprawled on the floor, hardly breathing. Determining he is alive and not seriously injured, Nader cradles him in his arms, weeping with relief. His fury with Razieh is largely a way to vent his fear. But his violence is cruel and unjustified, and has unforeseen consequences.


Razieh's duplicity proves destructive to everyone around her. She lies to Hodjat about the nature of her job, since he would not approve of her working alone in a man's apartment. She does not tell the truth about why she left Nader's father alone. And she neglects to mention all the events leading up to her miscarriage, which would throw reasonable doubt onto Nader's complicity in the tragedy. But she also lives under enormous pressure from the impossible demands of her strict religiosity and oppressive husband - her circumstances force her to be duplicitous to survive. One small scene reveals much about Razieh. She calls some sort of religious hotline to get the Islam-approved answer to a problem: Nader's father has wet his pants and it is her duty to clean him - but he cannot undress himself, and it is a sin for her to be in the presence of an undressed man apart from her husband. She is caught between the threat of damnation and the necessities of life, and is not always honest in negotiating the two.

Similarly, her husband Hodjat's plight is sympathetic even as his behavior is despicable. He carries himself as a man who has been mistreated his whole life. He has lost his job and been jailed for failing to pay his creditors, resulting in a terrible bout of depression. He cannot find work and feels emasculated by his wife working to pay the bills behind his back. Hodjat has become hyper-religious and quick to anger to compensate for his failings. Once his wife loses her baby, he finds in Nader an easy scapegoat for all his problems. It is easy to characterize Nader - middle-class, educated, successful - as The Man, a symbol of all his oppressors. Similarly, it was easy for Nader to accuse Razieh of theft (wrongly, we learn) because he views her as lower-class and uneducated. The stark difference in their lives is illustrated by their apartments. Simin and Nader's home is well-furnished, marking them as comfortably middle-class, and filled with stacks of books, showing that they are educated. Razieh and Hodjat's apartment shows their poverty, with its barren walls and floors, and generations of their family living in a few small rooms. Considering the very different environments that have shaped them, when presented with the same sequence of events how could these people possibly arrive at the same conclusions?


Another characteristic that many Iranian films share is the prominent use of children as major characters. This is for a multitude of reasons - some of them subversive, as supposed children's films are less likely to be accused of anti-government / anti-Islamic content, so filmmakers can sneak social criticisms beneath censors' noses. Often it's for the sake of contrast, as the guileless, faithful perspective of children reveals the hypocrisy and cynicism of the adult world - and this is certainly true of A Separation. Termeh remains faithful to both her parents, watching them intently and trying to ascertain what is right. She is put in the impossible position of having to choose between them, and the terrible cost of divorce is written on her face.

A Separation is not always pleasant to watch, but I urge you to do so anyways. Farhadi's script deserves to be counted among the all-time great screenplays. It is full of perfectly-timed twists and revelations without ever feeling contrived, and creates the suspenseful urgency of a thriller not from the threat of violence but from moral dilemmas and the weight of characters' decisions. This is a movie of rare intelligence and integrity.

The BBC Top 10:
  1. Mulholland Drive
  2. In the Mood for Love (previously reviewed)
  3. There Will Be Blood
  4. Spirited Away
  5. Boyhood
  6. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  7. The Tree of Life
  8. Yi Yi
  9. A Separation
  10. No Country for Old Men

Friday, October 7, 2016

BBC Best Films of the 21st Century #10: No Country for Old Men

The BBC recently surveyed 177 international critics about their picks for the best films released since 2000. You can read the resulting list of 100 films here. Of course, no-one will ever entirely agree with cumulative lists like this, but it's a great place to start if you're interested in exploring the best of what modern movies have to offer. I will be reviewing the top 10 picks, and offer my opinion on what's great about them.


Directed by Joel and Ethan Coen
United States, 2007
*Review contains plot spoilers
I hadn't watched No Country for Old Men since its release nearly a decade ago, but I still vividly remembered every scene. It's that kind of movie: whatever you think of it, it makes a lasting impression.

It's intensely scary, to start with. No Country for Old Men builds tension with ruthless patience. Everything about the film has an eerie starkness. The action unfolds in vast Texas deserts and empty motel rooms. There is no score. Even a horror film score would have offered a certain comfort, informing the viewer how to feel, and unconsciously reminding them of the film's artifice. In No Country for Old Men, the silence is unsettling. Every small sound gains sinister significance - the hiss of a cattle stungun, the beeping of a tracking device, the muffled patter of shoeless feet on concrete. When shotgun blasts tear through the quiet with shocking violence, it's enough to give you a panic attack.


The story begins as a straightforward cat-and-mouse thriller. Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) stumbles on the aftermath of a botched drug deal in the desert - bullet-ridden corpses, abandoned stacks of cocaine, and a satchel full of hundred-dollar bills. He takes the money, unaware that a tracker is hidden in the cash, putting psychopathic bounty hunter Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) on his tail, while a world-weary lawman (Tommy Lee Jones) surveys the carnage they leave behind.

The performances are across-the-board excellent. Josh Brolin plays a prototypical Coen Brothers character - an everyman who, through his own foolish decisions and thoughtless ambition, gets into deep trouble. Tommy Lee Jones brings a wounded soul to Sheriff Bell, a good man who has been spiritually exhausted by all the violence and evil he encounters on the job. Scottish actress Kelly Macdonald puts on an impressively believable Texan accent as Llewelyn's wife Carla Jean, a woman who initially seems naive but reveals surprising depths of courage.


Yet the standout is clearly Javier Bardem as the evil Chigurh. Just as Llewelyn is a classic Coen character, Chigurh is an archetypal figure of Cormac McCarthy, who wrote the novel No Country for Old Men. He's an unfathomable figure of pure malignance, a walking embodiment of evil, but bizarrely principled in his predatory instincts - a cousin to the Judge of Blood Meridian or Malinka of The Counselor. Playing an individual of total evil is a challenge for any actor (see Cameron Diaz's admirably committed but not-quite-convincing performance in The Counselor as evidence of how it can fall flat), but Bardem rises to the challenge with terrifying results. It's partially his physical appearance - the handsome Bardem stifles his natural charisma behind a freakishly incongruous pageboy haircut and alarming bulbous eyes. He moves with the steady precision and quiet of a predatory cat. Chigurh is amused by his own sadism and enjoys toying with his prey. Most memorably, he cruelly taunts a bewildered old man working at a gas station. "What's the most you've ever lost in a coin toss?" Chigurh growls, cryptically making it known that the old man's life is on the line, for seemingly no other reason than his attempts at small talk were bothersome.

That sequence makes clear what a harmonic convergence of very distinctive artists No Country for Old Men is. It displays the Coen Brothers' penchant for quirky characters, rich regional language, and darkly comic dialogue; at the same time, it exemplifies Cormac McCarthy's terse prose and fatalistic philosophy. No Country for Old Men is as accomplished and technically brilliant as anything the Coen Brothers have directed. It's all in the details. I've already mentioned the immersive sound design, but Roger Deakins' cinematography is just as noteworthy. A chase through the desert, backlit by a budding sunrise, is all the more heart-stopping for its harsh beauty. Deakins' images capture a level of textured detail that feels hyperreal, recalling our animalistic heightened senses when in danger. No Country for Old Men is a masterwork of film craft.


As if typical of both McCarthy and the Coens, No Country for Old Men may begin as a simple thriller, but ultimately upends expectations. The entire film appears to be building towards a showdown between our protagonist and antagonist, one that never comes. The last act does resolve the story, but not in the dramatically satisfying way you would expect - it offers no catharsis. This may be generically disappointing, but it's exactly the point.

"You make your own destiny" about sums up the ethos of so many American westerns and action films. Even mistakes - like, for example, Llewelyn taking the money - can be corrected with determination and ingenuity, and our hero can ride off triumphantly into the sunset. Cormac McCarthy does not believe that. Llewelyn does, but it does not stop his fate - gunned down ingloriously, a scene that the Coens perversely leave off-screen. Sheriff Bell is ultimately disillusioned of that belief - he may be sheriff, but he is not truly in control. "It ain't all waiting on you. That's vanity."


Cormac McCarthy's unrelentingly bleak worldview sometimes strikes me as contrived, but it's also a necessary and humbling corrective to so much of America's mythology, which can be blindly and selfishly optimistic. Fate and evil can overtake anyone, no matter how clever or good. I've read before, though I can't recall where, that Cormac McCarthy has a Catholic conscience without the redemption. His stories are convicted of the existence of evil and mankind's weakness, and there is nothing we can do in our own power to escape either. The best we can do is, like Sheriff Bell, be resigned to the existence of evil and hold a faint hope for the afterlife - represented by his dream, where he searches for his late father through a snowstorm, knowing that he will be waiting for him with a warm fire ready. Or, like Carla Jean, we can stick to our principles even in the face of inescapable fate. "I ain't gonna call it. The coin don't have no say."

I'll admit that I yearned for a character equivalent to Fargo's Marge Gunderson or True Grit's Mattie Ross - two characters from other Coen Brothers films whose goodness really has power in a world overtaken by chaos and evil. Some might call that wish sentimental, but I think it's closer to the truth. No Country for Old Men demands and deserves respect. It's the work of masters at the peak of their powers. Yet I admire but do not love it - not in the way I love Fargo or True Grit, or even McCarthy's novel The Road, which may present a massively depressing vision of the apocalypse but leaves room in its moral universe for selfless love that transcends evil.

The BBC Top 10:
  1. Mulholland Drive
  2. In the Mood for Love (previously reviewed)
  3. There Will Be Blood
  4. Spirited Away
  5. Boyhood
  6. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
  7. The Tree of Life
  8. Yi Yi
  9. A Separation
  10. No Country for Old Men

Saturday, July 23, 2016

The Night of the Hunter

Directed by Charles Laughton
United States, 1955
The Night of the Hunter was not successful in its initial release. Critics were mostly baffled by it, and audiences stayed away. It was the directorial debut of Charles Laughton, the famed British-American actor, as well as his last film. Its poor reception guaranteed that Laughton would not be given money to make another. He passed away in 1962. Since its release, The Night of the Hunter's reputation has slowly grown, and now it is considered among the all-time classics of American cinema. It belongs in fine company with many challenging films that were initially misunderstood or derided, to be later re-evaluated as masterpieces - Vertigo, Barry Lyndon, and The New World among them.

Like those films, The Night of the Hunter was out of step with tastes of the time. There was nothing else in 1955 comparable to it - and nothing since, either. It's impossible to pigeonhole in a certain genre or style. It's been called a horror, a film noir, a fairy tale, and it fits all those definitions. It is equally moulded by American folklore and the Old Testament, Nosferatu and Bambi. Perhaps Charles Laughton himself described it best, as a "nightmarish Mother Goose story".

It opens on a startlingly weird image - the floating head of wise old Lillian Gish, former starlet of silent cinema, imposed onto a starry sky. She is lecturing a group of eager children (also disembodied heads dangling in the cosmos), quoting the verse from Matthew about the danger of false prophets, who come dressed in sheep's clothing but inwardly are wolves. We then meet one of these wolves - Reverend Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum), a wandering preacher with a drawling baritone voice and the unctuous manners of a salesman. He's also a Bluebeard, a serial killer who preys upon lonely widows and steals their money. His latest target is Willa Harper, whose deceased husband, in a fit of Depression-era desperation, robbed a bank and murdered two people in the process. Powell, spending time behind bars for his latest act of petty theft, meets John Harper in jail before his execution. Harper unwittingly lets slip that the stolen money remains hidden back home. The only people who know where it lies are his young children, little John and Pearl. Reverend Powell has a new family to target.


As Reverend Powell, Robert Mitchum gives one of the all-time great villainous performances. He is a hateful character, frightening and darkly comic. Mitchum based the performance on people he met in the South - con artists who knew they would be believed as long as they spoke with conviction and brandished a Bible. Powell wields Biblical language like a weapon, and prays with an open jackknife clasped between his hands. He's enough of a charismatic personality that we understand why so many fall for his act. On his fingers he has tattooed L-O-V-E and H-A-T-E. With them he tells the story of right hand, left hand, pantomiming a battle between the two forces where Love ultimately triumphs. Powell is not a realistic character, but a mythic one - H-A-T-E in the flesh. He's a honey-tongued fiend around easily seduced adults, and a cartoonish Big Bad Wolf when alone with the children.

Laughton always emphasizes the innocence of John and Pearl even in the horror of their circumstances. Their mother is dead - a scene of morbid, horrific beauty shows her body at the bottom of a river, peacefully swaying among the reeds with a slit in her throat - and a devilish madman pursues them. The Night of the Hunter often adopts the naive perspective of the children - as in the incredible sequence where they flee Powell on a riverboat. The river is an obviously artificial set made with expressionist, dreamy exaggeration. Pearl sings eerily as the current carries them from danger - the moon and stars appear magically close while storybook animals graze on the shore. The children hear snatches of lullabies drifting from windows of passing farm houses, and see the silhouette of Reverend Powell on the horizon, relentlessly in pursuit. "Don't he never sleep", John wonders in terror. It's like a classic Disney musical took a very dark turn.


The children find shelter with Rachel Cooper, the old woman whose warning against false prophets we heard at the film's beginning. She has taken in several other vagabond children, raising them as her own. Lillian Gish, who had captivated audiences decades earlier in the silent melodramas of D.W. Griffith, is marvelous as Rachel. She's the only adult immune to Powell's snakelike charms, and his equally powerful antithesis - a strong, unshakable force for good, protecting the innocent against evil. "I'm a strong tree with branches for many birds," she says, "I'm good for something in this world and I know it too."

In the dead of night Powell appears in Rachel's yard, singing the gospel song "Leaning on the Everlasting Arms". In his voice the song becomes a threat, a menace to the sleeping children inside. Rachel sits on the porch with a shotgun, undaunted. She begins singing along, redeeming the lyrics as a sincere expression of faith. The duet becomes a showdown of good versus evil, one of the most powerful in film history.


The Night of the Hunter is among the great American movies, and a personal favorite of mine. It is beautiful and frightening, unforgettable for its cinematography, performances, and boldly unconventional storytelling.

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Babette's Feast


Hello everyone! I've been on an extended (and unplanned) break from writing recently, but promise to return to regular blogging in the coming weeks!

And I was recently able to do a bit of writing elsewhere - I was honored by the opportunity to write a review of Babette's Feast for Chris Williams's blog on films and faith, Chrisicisms! You can read the review here.