The local cinema offers us each year a meeting with Czech cinema in a week that combines films from the Czechoslovak film school of the 1960s with movies recently produced in the Czech Republic. From this year’s selection I chose yesterday to see ‘Shotgun Justice‘, whose title in Czech, as if more appropriate to the ironic approach of the whole film, is ‘Teroristka’ (‘The Lady Terrorist’). The film is a combination of a comedy of situations and of a social satire, a film that aims to please and amuse the viewers, but also to tell some bitter truths about today’s Czech Republic.
The situation described in the film is well known to Eastern Europe viewers from their own countries where after the fall of communism the savage variant of market capitalism was installed, a world in which the “local barons” took control over villages, cities, or entire regions, hand in hand with corrupt politicians. This is the case of the village where the story of director Radek Bajgar‘s film takes place, until an old retired teacher decides that if she already lives in the Wild East dominated by the mob, where the rules of grammar and decency as well as the rule of law value nothing, the change must be brought with the methods of the wild East and with the weapons of the mob. A tragic situation approached with the tools of comedy, because, as you can imagine, a retired teacher does not easily become a professional murderer at the age of 72.
I liked the movie, despite some obvious weaknesses. The idea of the movie has a dose of welcome insanity. There is emotion in the story-telling, and the team of actors is performing reasonably well, despite a too rude split of roles between ‘good gals’ and ‘bad guys’. The actress who plays the lead role, Iva Janzurová , is probably a Czech film diva, she has personality, humanity, and a dignity that captivates viewers. The action is well constructed, although the key scene of the film looks more like filmed theater. Not everyone will be satisfied with the final that resolves the conflicts too easily and too well. The realities, unfortunately, are different, the spectators will say. Some of them will, however, add that it is desirable that good should prevail upon evil, at least in the movies.
Often, when we want to tell or write appreciatively about an art documentary film that describes an exhibition or a museum, we use the expression – ‘watching the film is similar / second best to the experience of visiting the exhibition or the museum’. In the case of the documentary ‘David Hockney at the Royal Academy of Arts‘ which is part of the ‘Exhibition on Screen’ series coordinated and directed (most of the films) by Phil Grabsky, I think this comparison says too little. In fact, by choosing to focus on two exhibitions with a well-defined theme as artistic genres (one of landscapes, the other of portraits), Grabsky offers us in this documentary not only the opportunity to see the works in perfect visual conditions, without the crowds, without physical or financial efforts, but also an in-depth critical approach to a stage in the evolution of one of the leading contemporary artists of the United Kingdom and the world, still in full physical and creative form more than half a century since the beginning of his career as a painter.
Having become a member of the Royal Academy of Arts, David Hockney was offered the opportunity to repeatedly exhibit at the historic headquarters of the reputed institution at Burlington House in London. Together with curator Edith Devaney, Hockney has designed two exhibitions that focused on a distinct artistic genre. ‘A Bigger Picture’ from 2012 gathers landscapes, many large dimensions composed of paintings, outdoors painted in a light and with an impressionistic freedom, but using a kind of acrylic colors that combine an excellent mixing and synthesis capacity. with the necessary resilience to the artistic process under changing environmental conditions. ’82 Portraits and One Still Life ‘from 2016 is a collection of works done in fixed format and in limited time (20-22 hours in front of the sewer in three working days with models from the circle of friends and collaborators). On the one hand Hockney is an artist who needs frames and frames – geometric or in time. On the other hand, these component elements are combined in a unitary design and architecture. Each of the two exhibitions can be viewed as a work of art itself, a complex construction, a meditation of an artist at maturity on two of the major artistic genres of figurative art.
I believe that Phil Grabsky made an excellent choice by selecting these two new exhibitions by David Hockney. He had alternatives, too, because around the same time Hockney had several major retrospective exhibitions on display at major museums around the world, including Tate Modern. By renouncing to review the timeline of the painter’s career (there is no painting with a swimming pool in the movie!) in favor of filming two recent exhibitions, Grabsky not only left space for a in depth examination of the works at this time of artistic maturity, but also recorded the artist’s opinions about the phase in which he is, about his artistic past, present and future, about the connection with nature in landscapes and with the people painted in portraits. I am convinced that the two extensive interviews taken by Tim Marlow concerning the two exhibitions will remain for the future generations important documents in understanding the artist and man. ‘David Hockney at the Royal Academy of Arts‘ is the documentary I liked most of the ones I’ve seen so far in the ‘Exhibitions on Screen’ series. I don’t know what I could ask more from an art documentary.
Autoarea cărții ‘Povestea secretă a
speciei umane – Cum ne sunt modelate identitatea și viitorul de ADN și de
istorie’ publicată în 2014 și apărută la noi în 2019 la Editura Humanitas este
ziarista Christine Kenneally. Născută în
Australia în 1968, se află la a doua sa
carte. Cartea de debut, ‘Primul cuvânt’, publicată în 2007 se ocupă de
legăturile dintre lingvistică și istorie. În volumul publicat acum, care este
vizibil rezultatul unei documentări excelente și a unui mare număr de
interviuri cu experți și persoane legate de temele abordate în carte, Christine
Kenneally abordează o altă disciplină care influențează și oferă noi
instrumente de cercetare istoriei și cunoașterii individuale a lumii și
societății din jur – genetica. Tema este incitantă, lectura cărții este
pasionantă în multe momente, și cititorul care urmărește cele două domenii –
istoria și genetica – are ocazia să afle multe lucruri noi din lectura cărții,
unele surprinzătoare.
Genul acesta de demers care încearcă
să explice istoria prin intermediul informației și uneltelor oferite de științe
complementare nu este nou. Cel mai faimos exemplu este desigur cel al
psihanalizei. Începând cu întemeietorul acesteia, Sigmud Freud, și continuând
cu discipolii săi mai vechi și mai recenți, au fost încercate interpretări
psihanalitice ale fenomenelor istorice, sociale, culturale, la nivel personal
dar și generalizări la nivelul grupurilor sociale mai mici sau mai mari sau
chiar dincolo de acestea. Se impune precauție, cu atât mai mult cu cât genetica
este o știință care se află la începuturile sale, iar datele ei trebuie
interpretate cu atenție deoarece rezultatele testelor genetice sunt de multe
ori statistice și nu concluziv deterministe:
‘Până la urmă, toată lumea
care apelează la testele genetice referitoare la istoria familiei sau la propria
sa situație medicală ar trebui să știe că știința pe care se bazează, oricât ar
fi de bogată și interesantă, se află de-abia la început. Acest moment este
pentru știința genomică ceea ce erau anii ’70 și ’80 pentru computere. Pe
atunci, Steve Wozniak, Steve Jobs și toți eroii necunoscuți ai erei digitale
își construiau în garaj primele protocomputere personale. În zilele noastre
majoritatea dintre noi folosim în fiecare zi nu unul sau două, ci mai multe
aparate digitale. Dacă toate computerele din lume s-ar bloca, lumea nu ar mai
funcționa. Cei ce se folosesc de servicii genetice trebuie să tolereze un
anumit grad de incertitudine, în măsura în care știință avansează. Însă în ceea
ce privește genomul probabil că anumite incertitudini vor exista întotdeauna.’ (pag. 374)
Călătoria
intelectuală la care ne invită Christine Kenneally are că temă principală
modalitățile în care ADN-ul uman și știința geneticii influențează societatea
(la nivel macro și la nivel individual) și felul în care societatea influențează
ADN-ul. Dacă prima parte este oarecum intuitivă, ceea de-a doua are nevoie de
demonstrație, și aceasta va deveni evidentă pe măsură ce avansăm în lectură.
Primele capitole ale cărții sunt însă dedicate ramurii oarecum ezoterice a
studiului istoric care este genealogia. Aceasta are nevoie, în opinia autoarei,
de o reabilitare în societatea modernă. Afirmația aceasta mărturisesc că m-a
surprins, dar argumentele Christinei Kenneally sunt solide. Genealogia, pe care
o consideram ca o disciplină onorabilă care caută să descopere și să
documenteze orginea familiilor (regalității, nobilimii, dar și a oamenilor de
rând) a fost pe larg folosită în ultimul secol și jumătate în scopuri
discriminatorii politice și rasiale. Termenul de ‘genetică’ a fost introdus în
1906 de omul de știință englez William Bateson, și această nouă știință s-a
bazat pe trei piloni principali în prima sa perioadă: ereditatea, evoluția, și
eugenia (selecția genetică artificială).
Selecția genetică, pe care Kenneally o numește ‘cea mai rea idee din
istorie’, are o vechime istorică dovedită, una dintre primele sale formulări
teoretice apărând în ‘Republica’ lui Platon. Exemplul cel mai cunoscut este
reprezentat desigur de legile rasiale din perioada nazistă în Germania sau cea
fascistă în alte țări ale Europei în prima jumătate a secolului 20, dar vom
găsi în carte nu puține exemple de teorii de inginerie genetică care proliferau
și în Statele Unite, Anglia, Australia. În unele dintre aceste țări eugenia sub
diverse forme inclusiv sterilizările forțate era legiferată si practicată.
Christine
Keneally examinează câteva dintre cazurile în care istoria originilor
familiilor a fost studiată și documentată în mod detaliat și pune întrebări în
legătură cu felul în care informația despre ascendență a fost descoperită,
despre ceea ce generațiile precedente au transmis celor care au venit după ele,
și despre ceea ce au trecut sub tăcere. Australia, țara sa natală, este
exemplul pe care îl cunoaște cel mai bine, și în cursul cercetării autoarea
descoperă chiar în familia sa detalii genealogice care nu îi erau cunoscute.
Tasmania, provincia insulară din sudul Australiei, unde în prima jumătate a
secolului 19 au fost deportați deținuții considerați cei mai periculoși, este
un caz extrem, al unei insule care încercase să-și uite istoria, acesta fiind
prețul încercării (reușite de altfel) de a creea o societate nouă pornind de la
ce este mai rău în alta. Am vizitat Tasmania acum doi ani, este unul dintre
locurile cele mai liniștite și cele mai civilizate din lume pe care mi-a fost
dat să le văd, o dovadă, cred eu, că tendințele de criminalitate și de
imoralitate nu se transmit în masă, și dacă ele se transmit importanța lor este
relativ redusă în comparație cu influența condițiilor sociale și economice. Alt
exemplu al unei istorii genealogice uitate în mare măsură, a cărei recuperare a
început numai în ultima jumătate de secol sunt irlandezii. Din cei 70 de
milioane de locuitori ai planetei care își asumă o ascendență irlandeză doar
vreo cinci milioane trăiesc astăzi în Irlanda, și cea mai mare parte au pierdut
informația de dinainte de Marea Foamete care a redus fizic populația insulei, a
produs o emigrare în masă, și o discontinuitate istorică, culturală și
lingvistică. Mai puțin explorată în carte este genealogia evreiască pe care am
avut ocazia să o cunosc din alte surse, și ea confruntată cu un eveniment
apocaliptic – Holocaustul -, cu pierderea arhivelor în Europa evreiască
distrusă în cel de-al doilea război mondial, și cu zidul de tăcere al
supraviețuitorilor. Prejudecățile rasiale și tendințele de xenofobie par și ele
să fie transmise în anumite zone din Europa. Orașele din spațiul germanic în
care au avut loc pogromuri anti-evreiești în timpul Marii Ciume din secolul 14
au înregistrat cu 600 de ani mai târziu un număr de atrocități rasiale și de
evenimente antisemite considerabil mai ridicat decât orașele în care nu existau
populație evreiască sau în care nu fuseseră consemnate pogromuri anti-evreiești
in Evul Mediu.
Elementele
de bază ale geneticii sunt prezentate într-un capitol cam pe la mijlocul
cărții. Este bine că ele sunt reamintite, deși nu este explicația cea mai clară
pe care am citit-o în acest domeniu. Ar fi ajutat cred câteva ilustrații, și
poate și un glosar. Un indice de nume și termeni cu trimiteri la paginile din
text unde apar acestea reprezintă singurul aparat critic al cărții.
Sunt furnizate informații
interesante despre culegerea și păstrarea informației genealogice. Istoric cea
mai însemnată colecție de date genealogice a fost construită de Biserica
Mormonă, în a cărei credință există concepția convertirii și botezarii
retroactive a tuturor strămoșilor. În acest scop, de aproape două secole,
voluntarii mormoni culeg și înregistrează datele genealogice nu numai ale
familiilor lor ci și ale altor populații și credințe, când și unde li se
permite. Mai nou au apărut aplicații internetice, baze de date genealogice,
unele gratuite, altele contra cost. În ultimii ani au apărut și probleme legate
de confidențialitatea informației personale genealogice și genetice. M-a
surprins însă că nu este menționat în carte arborele genealogic cel mai celebru
și cel mai tipărit în istorie – cel din Biblie. Noul Testament începe cu
descrierea arborelui genealogic al lui Iisus, descendent din regii vechiului
regat evreiesc, la rândul lor descendenți din primii profeți – 42 de generații
între Avram și Iisus, după Evanghelia lui Matei!
Teza principala în ‘Povestea
secretă a speciei umane’ este că genetica și istoria se combină și se
complementeaza la nivel macro și la nivel personal. Unul dintre exemplele cele
mai spectaculoase menționate în carte este harta genetică a Marii Britanii
întocmită de matematicianul Stephen Leslie și interpretată de arheologul Mark
Robinson. Distribuția genomului locuitorilor actuali ai Marii Britanii cu
caracteristicile moștenite de diferitele grupuri etnice care au ajuns în
insulele britanice și le-au populat de-a lungul timpului a fost apoi suprapusă
pe hărțile istorice ale regatelor și comitatelor din perioada dintre retragerea
romanilor din Anglia (anul 410) și domnia primului rege normand (William
Cuceritorul, 1066). Rezultatele sunt apoi interpretate pentru a da răspuns
unuia dintre marile mistere ale istoriei Evului Mediu – care dintre populațiile
romanice (și ei de fapt în majoritate descendenți din Galia) și saxone a fost
dominantă într-o epocă din care nu au rămas aproape deloc documente scrise și
foarte puține urme materiale? Cei interesați vor găsi răspunsul în carte. Ne
putem imagina oare un studiu similar în legătură cu populația de astăzi a
Transilvaniei? Ar putea analizele genetice da un răspuns decisiv enigmei
istorice și disputelor dintre istoricii români și cei maghiari legate de cele
petrecute în Ardeal în timpul ‘mileniului întunecat’? Iată o temă de cercetare
pentru istoricii si geneticienii viitorului.
Însăși istoria primilor oameni și a
migrațiilor prin care specia umană s-a răspândit din Africa pe celelalte
continente populate primește noi dimensiuni datorită cercetărilor genetice.
Încep să fie elucidate mistere istorice care nu aveau explicații. Dacă originea
speciei umane se află în Africa și migrația din Africa a avut loc acum cam 60
de mii de ani, creând un efect de ‘gât de sticlă’ în evoluție (un grup relativ
mic și izolat cu mulți descendenți de-a lungul generațiilor), atunci cum se
explica osemintele umane găsite în Creta și Israel și datate între 100 și 130
de mii de ani? Analizele genetice demostrează că este vorba fie despre migrații
anterioare, fie despre ramuri noi ale arborelui genealogic al omenirii de
astăzi:
‘Ne-am imaginat migrația din
Africa ca pe o călătorie eroică a unui mic grup de aventurieri temerari ce
pornește către necunoscut. Însă acum se pare că nici măcar atunci nu exista un
“pământ al nimănui”. Locuitorii acestei planete nu includeau doar
neanderthalieni sau denisovani, ci cel puțin încă o populație misterioasă:
așa-zișii “hobbiți”. O specie umanoidă de talie mică ce a existat
până acum 13.000 de ani pe una dintre insulele indoneziene.’(pag.
309)
Fiecare
dintre noi este purtătorul unui cod genetic de o mare complexitate. Suntem cu
toții biblioteci ale unor fragmente de informație moștenite de la cei din
ascendența noastră biologică, și a modificărilor care au avut loc în timpul
vieților lor și a vieților noastre. Moștenirea nu este însă perfect
deterministă, ci statistică. Istoria ‘mare’ este legată de istoria personală a
fiecăruia dintre noi.
‘Istoria genetică nu
urmărește doar evenimentele majore ale trecutului și viețile câtorva
personalități marcante, ci construiește imaginea istoriei bucată cu bucată,
individ cu individ. Iar acest lucru nu numai că te ajută să vezi în adâncul
îndepărtat al istoriei lumii, ci și să descoperi de unde vine ADN-ul tău și ce
urme ți-au lăsat strămoșii în propria ta alcătuire genetică.‘ (pag.
250)
‘ … arborele nostru
genetic personal nu este același
lucru cu cel genealogic, ceea ce înseamnă
că nu toți strămoșii
noștri direcți
au contribuit la genomul pe care îl
avem acum.’ (pag.
266)
Fiecare
dintre noi purtăm informația
generațiilor precedente, de la cei mai vechi până la cei mai recenți strămoși,
dar moștenirea nu este numai genetică, ci
și socială
și culturală.
Din ascendență moștenim caracteristici asemănătoare cu cei care ne-au precedat, dar și markeri genetici și excepții
care nu au nimic de-a face cu aceste trăsături.
‘ADN-ul nu este numai un
document istoric ci și materia din care suntem alcătuiți – un set de
instrucțiuni pentru construirea și funcționarea corpului fiecăruia. ADN-ul ne
modelează stările, comportamentul și aspectul fizic, iar toate aceste calități
determina felul în care ceilalți ne tratează. … În măsura în care vom învăța
cum să interpretăm corpul uman în contextul codului său genetic, vom începe să
înțelegem cum soarta, alegerile strămoșilor și imensa călătorie a ADN-ului de-a
lungul erelor ne afectează viața chiar în aceste clipe.’ (pag. 320)
Ediția
de la Humanitas este tradusă de Andrei și Ancuța Bontaș. Traducerea nu mi-a
produs prea multe greutăți în lectură, dar nu am putut să nu remarc câteva
neglijențe evidente datorate probabil grabei (‘porcușor de Guinea’ în loc de
‘cobai’, ‘bilioane’ în loc de ‘miliarde’) care nu ar fi trebuit să treacă
filtrele reviziei editoriale. Problema principala a acestei ediții a cărții
Christinei Keneally este însă alta. Ea apare cu cinci ani după publicarea
cărții, și acești cinci ani înseamnă enorm de mult timp într-un domeniu științific
atât de nou și de dinamic cum este genetica. S-au întâmplat multe evenimente
semnificative în acest interval. De exemplu a fost concluzionat practic
proiectul construirii secvenței complete a genomului uman. Au apărut noi
aplicații ale geneticii în ceea ce privește medicina personalizată. Au fost
inventate și perfecționate tehnici legate de chirurgia genetică. Dintre
premiile Nobel în medicină, chimie și fizică atribuite în ultimii doi ani, o
mare parte sunt legate de aspecte ale biofizicii, chimiei și aplicațiilor
medicale ale geneticii. În același timp au apărut conflicte și dispute legate
de păstrarea informației genetice personale și de utilizarea acesteia în
scopuri științifice, dar și sociale și chiar și politice. Una dintre
concluziile principale ale acestei cărți este că genetica nu a fost niciodată
departe de controverse, și acest lucru nu se va schimba în viitor. Această
carte oferă informații interesante și este un bun punct de introducere în acest
domeniu. Trebuie însă citită curând, și apoi informația va trebui actualizată
cu lecturi ulterioare. Într-un domeniu atât de fluid și de dinamic cum este
genetica, o ediție de referință nu are șanse să apară în viitorul apropiat.
Hong Kong is the focus of the news these days, and that was another reason to be very curious to see ‘Chungking Express‘, a film made in 1994, a few years before the start of the process in which Hong Kong will return – in half a century – to be an integral part of China. Director Kar-Wai Wong enjoys considerable prestige, and this film in particular has one of the highest ratings. However, the viewing experience has only partially met expectations. ‘Chungking Express‘ turned out to be a special film, with many interesting film-making details, but it did not manage to resonate for me neither by story, nor by the way in which its heroes act on screen.
The intention of the director Kar-Wai Wong was likely to present one of the categories of characters that had made Hong Kong films famous at that time – the cops – in a completely different light. Instead of fighting with gangsters in gunshots duels or sophisticated martial arts choreographies, the two cops from the two successive stories from which the film is built are … in love. There are some violent scenes in the first story, but the one involved is not the policeman but rather the woman he falls in love and near whom he will spend the night, without knowing that she is involved in drug trafficking and homicides. The two successive stories have nothing to do with each other but one single transitional scene, and the fact that the two cops in the two stories are each struggling with loneliness, they go through not-too-happy love stories, and they eat at the same small fast-food restaurant that is the crossroad of the events in the movie.
The most beautiful and interesting part of the film is related to the cinematographic means. Director Kar-Wai Wong is a master of film shots at different speeds, combined at editing so that the viewers’ attention is directed to the experiences of the characters on the screen. Filming took place in downtown Hong Kong, I visited the city several times and recognized some of the places, with narrow streets, markets and restaurants, slopes and escalators, artificial lights and noises that create the unique atmosphere of this metropolis. The main actors are excellently chosen and live rather than they act their roles, even when they are put in less natural situations, at least for my eyes af an European spectator. The music and soundtrack are also excellent and contribute to the stylistic unity of the film. The only essential thing I lacked was emotion. What constitutes the main quality of the film is also at the end of the day the difference that separates this good and interesting film from the level of a masterpiece. Excited by his own professional skills, director Kar-Wai Wong seems to forget at one point to leave enough room for genuine emotion. Although it tells two separate stories, each of them has time to become repetitive and difficult to follow in the multitude of cinematic details. While watching ‘Chungking Express‘ I experienced a sensation that I sometimes have when visiting a richly ornate Baroque church. The richness and quantity of the details, each one admirable, makes me forget what is the purpose, the main thread of emotion and beauty of the whole construction.
In January 1972, Aretha Franklin gave two concerts on two consecutive days at a Baptist church in Los Angeles. The 29-year-old soul and R&B singer had already gained worldwide fame and the unofficial crown of Queen of Soul Music. In these two concerts she was returning to her musical roots, the gospel music she had known and began to play as a child in the Detroit church where her father preached. The concerts were recorded and filmed. The album whose name was ‘Amazing Grace’ has become one of the most famous in the history of this genre. The film footage however had a more complicated fate, although the filming commissioned by the Warner Brothers studios had been coordinated by the young director Sydney Pollack, who was already known for the 1969 ‘They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?‘. Technical problems of the synchronization between the footage and the soundtrack made it impossible to complete the film until technical methods emerged to overcome them. Later, both Aretha and Pollack, each for their own reasons, opposed some publicly unknown ones, to launch the movie on screens. It is a shame that only after their death the viewers had the opportunity to become acquainted with this film, which in my opinion is a great achievement, a document that honors them and invites respect for both artists.
Minister James Cleveland, who presents the concert and joins Aretha with the piano and his voice, warns us from start that we will attend a religious ceremony. Indeed, the movie ‘Amazing Grace‘ belongs to the sacred area, and this happens even if you, as a spectator, are religious or not, Christian or not. The voice, the feeling of the singers and of the chorus, the participation of the audience make this concert much more than a musical event with religious content. Aretha Franklin was at the peak of her musical form (where she stayed for several decades) but here, in the church, more than any other concert or recording, she seems to be in her element. In fact, she is the true leader of the sacred ceremony that takes place in the church in Los Angeles, the musical experiences in which she embarks as partners all those who saw her then live as well as those who later listened to the music or see now the movie.
Having to deal with a small, crowded space, Sydney Pollack used a relatively large number of portable cameras, constantly moving and searching for the most special angles. Aretha‘s close-ups are anthological. Post-processing and sound-image synchronization work perfectly. ‘Amazing Grace‘ the movie gives us, almost half a century later, the feeling that we took part in this exceptional musical event, that we were close to the great singer interpreting the musical genre in which she grew up and which she raised to a high artistic level. It is one of the most special and beautiful filmed concerts I have ever seen.
Night time TV shows are an American invention, brought to the level of art by the likes of Ed Sullivan, Johnny Carson, Jay Leno, David Letterman. This is also a very masculine world, there almost were no presenters of such shows among women. ‘Late Night‘ written by Mindy Kaling and directed by Nisha Ganatra takes place in this world and has as its main heroine a female presenter of such a show, of British origin atop all, who is facing a crisis inherent in the profession and life: age – her age and the age of the show to which she dedicated her career and life. Let’s add that the main role is played by Emma Thompson, who, at the age of 60, receives, after the ‘The Children Act‘, another lead role of those that are said to ‘fit her like a glove’ and here we have the premises of a highly interesting movie, one of those generating huge topic and casting expectations.
The peak moments of Katherine Newbury’s show are behind. In fact, for about ten years, the flow of ideas has become stagnant and ratings have slightly eroded, which makes the decision of the boss of the television network (and she’s a woman, at least in this movie, women go far!) to replace her as host sound logical. It is known that this is an extremely competitive business, in which broadcasts of this kind are fighting not only with each other for the attention and time of the spectators but also with the threats brought by the new medium of information and entertainment – the Internet. Katherine’s problems are in conservatism, in the lack of diversity of the team that writes her texts (all men, all white), and especially in the lack of human contact with her collaborators in particular (she never met some of the people who write her texts) and with the world around her in general. The host star had devoted all her efforts to the show that represents her whole life, but at the same time closed herself in an ivory tower losing contact with reality and thus with many of her viewers.
Newburry / Thompson will be challenged and helped at the same time by Molly Patel (played by Mindy Kaling, the author of the script), a young beginner engaged in the team of text writers by an extraordinary chance – she was in the right place (the job interview chair) at the right time (exactly when Newburry is looking for a woman, preferably non-white, to improve the diversity of the team). Molly seems completely unfit for this position and for the professional and social environment she entered, but the relationship between the two women will evolve so that Molly’s unlimited and unmistakable admiration for Katherine will turn into mutual respect to the point that one becomes dependent of the other, and the new breath brought by Molly will change the tone and theme of the show, saving its existence. Foreseeable? It’s one of the movie’s problems.
Script author Mindy Kaling and director Nisha Ganatra (debuting in feature films for big screens) know the world of television well. Kaling, who also plays the role of the beginner text writer of Indian origin, brings elements of his own biography to the screen. Here we can find the source of the complexity of the problems raised by the film (I have listed only a part of them) but also the facility of the film solutions. The story on the screen unfolds in an ultra-predictable way. The real and interesting problems related to women discrimination and lack of diversity, the reverse ‘me-too’ story and the romantic episodes of the two women who are at the center of the story, all find quick and easy solutions, just like in the television comedy series, which should end in a given number of minutes with all the characters on screen happy. In addition we are dealing with excessive verbosity. That would not be a flaw in itself in this film that deals with television talk shows in which by definition there is a lot of talking, the problem is that the words put into the mouths of the characters are surprisingly banal and terribly conventional. ‘Late Night‘ is not a bad movie. It raises interesting problems, is acted by two excellent actresses helped by a good team around them. Unfortunately, my expectations were much higher and the film only responded to a small part of them.
We’ve only been through the middle of 2019, but I think that I can mark the fact that I experienced the cinema event of the year, or at least one of the important events of the year in movies. This is the film by Korean director Joon-ho Bong, ‘Gisaengchung‘ / ‘Parasite‘. It has already received ‘Palme d’Or’ at the Cannes festival, and this time I believe that the jury’s choice is extremely appropriate. ‘Parasite‘ is a profound and complex cinematographic work, which does not hesitate to ask painful questions about the huge differences between the social classes and the deep prejudices that divide them in today’s world, but it does so in an elegant and expressive way, with images. and characters who have a chance to remain in the memory of the spectators for a long time, causing them to reflect but also engaging them with a captivating story.
At the center of the story of the film are two families from today’s South Korea, located at the two extremes of the society. The Parks live in a spacious and luxurious villa, full of works of art and surrounded by green landscape. He is the CEO of a large company, she is a spoiled housewife, the kids, a girl and a boy are even more spoiled. They are all surrounded by servants, drivers, tutors for children. The Kis live crammed into an unhealthy half-underground flat. The parents are unemployed, their children are smart young people, but with little chance of overcoming their social condition because of the poverty. The homes of the two families play a significant role in the story, the luxury and order of the Parks’ villa hides secrets, while the claustrophobic disorder of the Kis’ family home is similar to that of the family in the movie ‘Shoplifters‘ of the Japanese director Hirokazu Koreeda. The destinies of two families accidentally intersect when the boy in the poor family becomes (with the help of forged references) the private tutor of the daughter of the rich family. As relationships intensify, cultural differences seem to diminish, the less fortunate family being equal or even superior in adapting to life and in the cultural interactions. Until about halfway through the movie, the audience is watching a social satire in a light style, a kind of ‘rich family vs. poor family’ story. And then everything changes.
A few weeks ago, writing about another Korean film, I noticed that many of the films that came from there defy genre cataloging and combine different styles into original and surprising mosaics. ‘Parasite‘ is yet another example in this regard. We have here manifested social satire, melodrama, humor, love among teenagers, horror in the Gothic style, comments on art, a natural catastrophe, neo-realistic poverty and soap operas wealth. Stanley Kubrick and Yorgos Lanthimos are quoted. The natural tendency of the spectator to take the part of the oppressed in the class conflict that takes place in front of us is put to the test by the events that happen on the screen. ‘Parasite‘ is an excellently acted movie, filmed in style, a story with many ramifications and meanings, which will not be easily forgotten by the spectators and which gives them material to think about the society and the world in which we live.
In August 1970, more than 600,000 people invaded the Isle of Wight, located near the south coast of England and populated in the ordinary times by less than 100,000 inhabitants, to attend the third edition of the Pop Music Festival. It was not only one of the largest festivals of its kind ever organized, but also a historical event, that took place at the transition between two eras in rock music. It was just after the 60s, when American rock, blues and soul met with English pop on the fertile ground of the social revolt of the young generation in Europe and the United States and of the hippie movement. The commercial period which was to turn rock music into a huge industry in the 70s had started. The Isle of Wight Festival not only gathered many of the most important talents of the genre, but also reflected the conflict between the naive and anarchist conceptions of the ‘Flower Power’ generation and the expanding music industry. The chance makes that this huge but controversial event was filmed (well) by a team led by director Murray Lerner. But a quarter of a century will pass until the film of the ‘Message to Love‘ about the festival could be finished and presented for the first time. Now, almost another quarter of a century later, I also had the chance to see it.
Exceptional music was played in 1970 at the Isle of Wight Festival. Groups like The Who, Ten Years After or Jethro Tull were at the peak of their youth and musical force. Jimi Hendrix gave his last great concert here less than three weeks before his death in London, and Emerson, Lake and Palmer sang for the first time in public what would become their power play work – ‘Pictures in an Exhibition ‘. The versions sung here with ‘The End’ by The Doors or ‘Nights in White Satin’ by Moody Blues are among the best of their careers. Joan Baez’s voice sounds exceptional undertaking a cover of ‘Let It Be’, and Leonard Cohen looks young and rebellious, very different from the one we knew at the end of his life and career. The presence of Miles Davis demonstrates how relative the boundaries between musical genres are. Even the appearances of Kris Kristofferson and Joni Mitchell, faced with a hostile and unruly audience, have authenticity and finally overcame the conditions around. The filmed music, however, occupies only about half of the two hours of the film, as the attention of director Murray Lerner turned to the extra-musical events that also had their importance and message.
It seems that out of the over 600 thousand spectators only about 60 thousand paid the entrance tickets that cost … 3 pounds. The rest remained outside the enclosed enclosure, loudly pressing to enter. Eventually, the organizers gave up and declared that the festival was free allowing everyone to enter, but the result was bankruptcy for them and an ecological disaster for the place where the concerts took place. The outcome was that the British Parliament banned such events on the island, and the 1970 festival was the last of its kind. The record and concert industry will completely take over rock music over the next few years, the stars will start to earn (and waste) huge amounts of money, while music lovers will become accustomed to paying expensive tickets to see and listen live to their idols. More than anything else, the Isle of Wight Festival was an end of the romantic, drugs-and-music-for-free era. Murray Lerner‘s film catches the essential aspects of those days of musical and extra-musical madness and the characters involved in organizing the festival. ‘Message to Love‘ is a valuable documentary not only because of the music but also, or perhaps especially because, of the events that took place around the music.
‘Dolor y gloria‘ (‘Pain and glory‘) has been described by many viewers and critics as ‘Pedro Almodóvar‘s most personal film’. It is, to me, a slightly strange definition, because all the films of the great directors are to a lesser or greater extent ‘personal’ and this is all the more true in the case of Almodóvar, whose personality, style and perspective about the world are so evident in about all his movies. More correctly, it seems to me that ‘Dolor y gloria‘ belongs to the category of those films with an explicit auto-biographical character, which some of the great directors make either towards the end of their careers, or in respite and inflection moments, bringing themselves as the main heroes of the stories unfolding on the screen. Almodóvar is in good company from this point of view, with directors such as Fellini or Woody Allen among the guild colleagues who created alter-ego characters, movie makers in breaks or creative crises, with their diseases, neuroses, loves and especially with their memories.
The story that Almodóvar brings to the screen in this film is very sincere and at the same time delicate and elegant. These latter qualities are a relative novelty in his films. This time the eccentric characters are missing, so are the extreme situations that with his art Almodóvar explained and brought to us at the level of human understanding in other films. The main character, Salvador Mallo (Antonio Banderas) is a famous screenwriter and director, who is caught up by age and illness, but especially of memories. The cinematheque screening of one of his successful films 32 years after the premiere gives him the chance to meet his favorite actor, with whom he had broken since the film’s premiere. Physical pain finds an illusory solution in drugs, the creative crisis leads to introspection and the writing of a play that sublimates the memories of childhood and youth. Two love stories come back successively – his first and only true relationship, with a man with whom he shared the years of his youth but had not the power to support him in times of crisis, and the relationship with his mother (Penélope Cruz) to whom he tries to pay back at her old age the love and support he enjoyed during his childhood. But both relationships are ultimately failures, in both of them, Salvador Mallo fails to return to the loved ones the love and support that made his career possible. The personal salvation and the exit from the crisis are possible only by his returning to creation. This is the personal price paid by many artists.
Antonio Banderas creates an exceptional role in this film. His Salvador Mallo is also Almodóvar but he also has a life and personality of his own. Men who are on the verge of the old age, with their crises and fears, with their pains and neuroses, with the memories and the sufferings these bring back, now have a reference role on screen. On the other hand, I was a little disappointed with Penélope Cruz, for the first time maybe. It may not be her fault, maybe in the role of younger Jacinta, Almodóvar fails this time precisely where he has succeeded so many times in the past, in creating a memorable female character.’Dolor y gloria‘ is a beautiful and sensitive film, but it risks to disappoint those fans of Almodóvar who are used to find in his films not only beauty but also eccentricity. It is missing here. I do not know if the crisis of the main character in the film reflects a personal crisis of the director himself. But I hope that far from being an end point in his career, ‘Dolor y gloria‘ will be followed by other films bearing the master’s unmistakable imprint.
‘HaTzlila‘ / ‘The Dive‘ is one of those films that has an interesting and significant ‘making of’ history about how the idea was born and how the production was made. Director Yona Rozenkier is at his first film, although he is not very young, approaching the age of 40. It is a special film (also) as it can be defined as a family movie made in the family, and as a community film supported by the community. The story of three brothers has Yona Rozenkier and his two brothers (who are not professional actors) cast in the lead roles. The action takes place in a kibbutz, this is were the shootings took place, the locals were actors and extras but they also took part in the financing the film. However, there are many other reasons why ‘The Dive‘ is a special film in today’s Israeli cinema landscape.
The theme and the approach chosen by Yona Rozenkier go in many ways against the prevailing currents in today’s Israel, including in its literature and cinematography. The three brothers who are the heroes of the film meet in the kibbutz where they grew up for their father’s funeral. The father does not appear in the film but his last wish and the consequences of the way his sons grew up determine many of what will happen. Like most Israeli men, the three brothers are at the age of military service. The two older brothers have already gone through wars, both of them having returned with their traumas, which they face differently. The youngest brother is about to leave soon to participate in another war that is going on around. The Israeli viewers will know how to identify exactly which war, but in fact it doesn’t matter, there is always a war going on in Israel or another that is threatening to break out. The main theme of the film is the confrontation with the post-traumas, which leads one of the brothers to adopt a macho militaristic attitude, and the other an escapist and anti-militarist attitude. The younger brother does not have time to prepare for what is to come, in a few days he must not only learn some military techniques, but also, somehow, to overcome his fear. The boys’ mother and the father’s sister are the two feminine presences in the film, also representing two different ways of dealing with the ongoing tension around them, with the mourning and the risk of sending their children to war. This family represents a micro-cosmos of an entire society threatened by wars, seeking survival and normalcy under conditions of permanent fear, in which those who survive physically are psychologically traumatized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lat8e9_xuY
This is, of course, not the first film in which the heroic narrative of the involvement of Israeli youth in wars is challenged from an alternative point of view. But it seems to me that ‘The Dive‘ has gone further than most other similar films through the brutal frankness of tackling the themes of fear and post-trauma. In the discussion with the director which followed the projection I attended, he said that he avoided graphic exaggerations in choosing the means of expression, because he did not want to make a ‘horror’ genre film. But nonetheless, ‘The Dive‘ can be seen as a horror movie, the danger that threatens the heroes is a political and social one that on a personal level turns into primary human feelings. The drama of the situation is amplified by the place where the action takes place. But it is more than just a location for shooting. The kibbutz in decay, with its decreasing population, with the ruined economy, with the uncertain moral foundations is more than a background for the story, it can be considered as two major theme of the film. Of course, this is a topic that can be much more developed.
In the political and artistic context of today’s Israel, ‘The Dive‘ swims against the current (sorry, I couldn’t avoid the metaphor). The film opposes heroic demagoguery to the brutal human sincerity of the feelings of young people thrown into the violent world of the army and of the traumas of those who have passed this life experience less successfully. To the religious themes that dominate the Israeli cinema of the last years ‘The Dive‘ opposes a film about the atheist kibbutz and the confrontation with the realities of the country of the secular Israelis who pay a large part of the price of the capitalist economy and of the permanent war situation. Acted mostly by amateurs, with stylistic means that sometimes are a little schooly, the film has fluency and expressiveness. I only hope that for Yona Rozenkier this first feature film will be a launching pad. ‘The Dive‘ is a sincere and personal film, the autobiographical character and the involvement of the family and of the community it its making gives it authenticity. His next films will have to confirm the filmmaker qualities that he now demonstrated.
