The Voice of the Gatekeepers (Film: The Gatekeepers – Dror Moreh, 2012)

Israelis abide to very few myths. In a young country that is a melting pot of people coming from almost one hundred different countries, where a majority of the population is either born some other place or belong to the second generation of children of immigrant parents, what unites even more than the shared traditions (respected in various manners and to very different levels of obedience) or the common history which is for many yet to be learned (if not to be written) are above all the permanent external menaces perceived in many moments, rightly or wrongly, as existential dangers. In such moments the trust of the nation is not that much focused on politicians but on the people who defend the country, some with the arms in hands, other in wars that are more secret than visible. The heads of the military and the heads of the security services – the legendary spy agency Mossad and the internal Security Service ‘Shin-Beth’ as it is called in this film  are living legends for most of the Israelis. Until recently some of them were known only by their initials as long as they lived and were active. Their opinions count, and when they converge, as seems up to a certain extent to be the case in this film, people listen. The first major achievement of director Dror Moreh and the team that made this film is to have brought together six of The Gatekeepers, the former heads of the internal security service of Israel and make them talk about the history of the service, the war on terrorism, the relations with the Palestinian neighbors of Israel, the situation of Israel today, and the perspective ahead. The convergent views of these men should worry all Israelis who have seen or will see the film.

 

source www.imdb.com/title/tt2309788/

source www.imdb.com/title/tt2309788/

 

There is a lot of good and interesting information that is presented in this film, but of course, not all history and the whole complexity of the conflict could have been brought on screen in a documentary that lasts about 90 minutes. Lacking facts will certainly expose the film to critics from all directions, but these critics would be to some extent unfair. In fact for the Israeli audiences there is nothing completely new here, investigative reporting in the Israeli press, TV documentary movies, and books written by political experts and historians have exposed sometimes in much more details different aspects of the stories presented in this film. What is new and different is the candid manner the makers of the movie succeed to make the six different personalities who successively lead the service talk about the events that took place in the last 45 years, their meaning, their implications. Attentive spectators who also know the differences between the views and positions of the six leaders will perceive also the differences between their opinions and their approaches into presenting the facts, but overall a fascinating perspective is built by getting together their testimonies and the history of the area in the period between the Six Days War and today, the initial euphoria, the lost opportunities, the achievements and the mistakes in the fight against terror, the moral dilemmas and the price of the occupation, the human risks and morality of lack of morality of some of the methods – all come together in a perspective which is amplified by the coherent message delivered by each one of the speakers. If you search for information in this film you will not get the whole picture, and I am quite sure that the film will be much better understood from this point of view by Israelis than by audiences abroad. If you look for the historic trends and for indications about things to come, it’s mandatory viewing, and it does not look like good news, but rather like a very strong warning signal from people who were in the middle of the policy making and security actions of Israel.

 

(video source SupaDupaMovieTrailer)

 

I believe that this film should be seen by as many people as possible and debated in Israel. Best would be probably a screening on prime time TV, but I am not optimistic about this happening soon as prime time TV in Israel seems to be almost fully booked by (i)reality shows. At least, by now The Gatekeepers is distributed commercially and the audiences seem to be interested. However, the more echoes may come from abroad, especially as the film is a candidate for the Oscar in the documentary category, certainly if it also wins the award. The editing of the film is smart, the combination between historical footage and computerized effects puts even more life into the illustrations, and the permanent images of the big screens as a symbol of the technology used to permanently supervise the territories is haunting. I have seen however much more sophisticated technical means put at work in documentaries. ‘The Gatekeepers’ is eventually a talking heads movie and is important because of the stories that the talking heads tell and the message that they deliver.

 

 

 

Posted in documentary | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Mike Del Ferro in Tel Aviv

An encounter between jazz and opera is an intriguing proposal. Jazz of course takes inspiration from all places, but opera and jazz are considered two quite distinct disciplines, with apparently few people enjoying both genres and even fewer musicians knowing, understanding, loving both and bringing them together. The opportunity of meeting one of these musicians is thus a rare event, and thanks to the Hot Jazz series at the Tel Aviv Museum of Art for creating this opportunity last night.

 

 

Mike Del Ferro has a classical formation, but switched to jazz quite early and built upon it all his career. His father was an opera singer, but for quite a while his jazz inspiration was taken from the music he met during his extensive travel around the world – Asia, Africa, South America. It’s only recently that he returned to the music that must have impregnated his childhood, and the fusion he is created is both expressive, reverent to the sources, and full of the freedom of imagination and creation that jazz allows. His style is quite original, he seems to be playing permanently with the piano, fighting and challenging the instrument, and the result is energetic in many moments, melancholic in other, catching the audience inside permanently.

 

(video source edovansanten)

 

The evening and Del Ferro were blessed by the presence of an experienced and talented group of Israeli accompanying musicians. Saxophonist Amikam Kimelman has an impressive stature on stage and good technique.  Bassist Simon Starr (who made alyah from Australia three years ago) had only two solos the whole evening, and I would like to listen to him more. The drummer last night was Eitan Itzkowitz who was skilled and expressive during his solos, discrete and supportive of the other musicians during the whole evening. The program included jazz versions of arias and orchestral preludes of several very popular operas as well as of Neapolitan canzonettas so close to the tradition of the Italian bel canto.

The last concert with this program is scheduled for tonight in Haifa and is worth attending for these who have the opportunity. Mike Del Ferro’s Web site can be seen at http://www.mikedelferro.com/.

Posted in jazz | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Tarantino vs. Spielberg (Film: Django Unchained – Tarantino, 2012)

I saw yesterday Tarantino‘s Django Unchained. The film deals approximately with the same historical period as Spielberg‘s Lincoln, but what a difference!

Spielberg and Tarantino are without any doubt two of the most important American directors today. Both come from the let’s call it commercial cinema like let’s say both had remarkable blockbuster successes which translated into financial success enabling them to produce and direct everything they dream. Both use this success to explore with their personal craft tools, style and talent – various genres which they change and put their own imprint in. Both made films about the Second World War and about the Holocaust, and now about U.S. history, and the horrors and abolishing of slavery.

 

source www.imdb.com/title/tt1853728/

 

Concerning the movies about the Holocaust and the Second World War I think Spielberg and Tarantino are tied at the highest possible level. Schindler’s List was impressive and Saving Private Ryan is simply  the best war movie I’ve seen, while Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds rewrites with a Tarantinesque chutzpah and expressiveness  one of the final pages of the history of the Second World War.

Lincoln and Django produced me completely different reactions. Spielberg appears to wish to say by all means that ‘I can do serious films’ and the result is Lincoln – a rhetorical film, in which characters make speeches even when they are in bed with their wives, a film in which I miss the thrill of discovery and emotion and the fluency of the story telling I love in Spielberg. On the other hand Tarantino tackles that time in history in Django with his usual boldness and lack of complex, he uses violent action cinema and makes a deep reverence to Sergio Leone’s spaghetti westerns. The result is a sparkling film that is both  fun to watch and passes the message.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUdM9vrCbow

(video source The JoBlo Movie Network)

 

This is certainly a violent film, but maybe I should say something about Tarantino’s violence (on screen) the way I see it. The exaggeration and complete lack of realism in the violent choreography of Tarantino’s movies is his way of saying – do not take me too seriously. There is something more in this film however – the introduction creates the message of abhorrence towards slavery in a manner at least as efficient as Lincoln’s speeches in Spielberg’s movie.

There is a lot of good cinema in Django which makes the film enjoyable also for the passionate of quality cinema. Jamie Foxx‘s rendition of Django, the liberated slave who turns into a professional killer in order to save his wife is dark and compassionate at the same time.  Leonardo DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson are a fabulous pair of suprisingly bad guys, and Tarantino himself and Franco Nero show up in minor but memorable appearances. And the story telling … well … it’s good like in the good Spielberg movies.

Django is my preferred 2012 film about the period of abolition of slavery.

 

 

Posted in movies | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Abraham Lincoln deserved a better film (Film: ‘Lincoln’ – Steven Spielberg, 2012)

‘Lincoln’ is one of the bigger favorites for Oscar Awards this year and will certainly be one of the heroes of the evening in Hollywood a few weeks from now. It is made by one of the greatest directors of our time, it tells a big American story and features a big American hero, it enjoys some fine acting and is very accurate in searching into history and retrieving a moment and a story that continues to impact the American social and political fabric until today. And yet, ‘Lincoln’ did not turn to me into a cinema experience to enjoy. Actually something interesting happens with my relation with Steven Spielberg. The film I liked most is one of his first – the very little known Duel, a minimalistic masterpiece, followed by the wonderful Close Encounters … and E.T. I enjoyed the Indiana Jones and The Jurassic Park series for what they are meant to be – great entertainment. However my personal experience with his ‘serious stuff’ is mixed. While Saving Private Ryan is for me the best war film ever made, and Schindler’s List is one of the best in the Holocaust genre, other stuff looks sometimes pretentious, sometimes too naive. As much as he tries to prove, Spielberg cannot do films about any subject, I mean he certainly can, but not all are that good.

 

source www.imdb.com/title/tt0443272/

 

Most of the action in ‘Lincoln’ takes place during the month of January of 1865. After four years of Civil War victory is quite close for the North, but the ending would have been meaningful only if the 13th Amendment making slavery illegal was adopted, making the reason of going to war and the temporary judicial war decisions part of the Constitution. Timing is critical, as the nation is tired and aspires for peace and recovery, and without the adoption of the amendment the end of the war may mean a compromise that leaves slavery in place. Abraham Lincoln will make all possible political maneuvering in order to have the amendment pass, in a Congress where he did not have the required majority. There is an interesting dilemma here about using ‘unclean’ political means in order to achieve a just cause and this is one of the principal themes. There are two problems here however in my opinion. One is that the political intrigues occupy a good half if not more of the film, and what we get on the screen is a painfully long succession of bearded gentlemen under top hats arguing and bribing for the good cause. I guess some of the American audiences are more familiar with the historical characters, but even so this is a long and repetitive succession of more of the same, and even the climax scene of the voting in the House misses some of the thrill I have expected. The other problem is the political speak which is attributed to almost all characters in the film. Maybe the script writers used fragments from speeches, I do not know, but there is too much rhetoric, too many historical sentences are being said by many characters (not only by Lincoln) and even in what should have been day-to-day situations.  The overall result seemed to me tiring and emphatic. It is actually the non-political secondary threads that seemed more interesting – for example the agonizing decision of the parents Lincoln not allowing their elder son to fight in the war. This dilemma would have deserved a film by itself, a smaller but maybe better one.

 

(video source Movie Trailers)

 

Much was said and written (even a cover story in TIME Magazine) about Daniel Day-Lewis‘s impersonation of Lincoln. He is good but far in my opinion from his own creation in ‘My Left Foot’ or from Joaquin Phoenix’s act in ‘The Master’ (best acting of the year in my view). The way he is filmed does not help, too many frames are looking towards catching his silhouette or making his profile look like the pictures which represent Lincoln in his time. Again, when he is human, when his words are not taken from speeches he looks and sounds better, but this is only for part of the time. Rhetoric prevailed in the building of this role, and Spielberg’s scope looks like creating as many scenes to quote, but less to link them in a fluent story as he knows to do that well. I liked much more the supporting roles of Sally Field as a Lincoln’s wife, or maybe the wife of all presidents or great men who sacrifice their personal lives for the greater causes, and of Tommy Lee Jones as the radical pro-abolitionist politician Thaddeus Stevens, a man whose life was dedicated to the fight against slavery, but who knows to make the right political move at the critical moment to achieve the legal confirmation of the dream, at a tough personal price with respect to his own ideals. In a movie where so many characters including the one that gives the name of the film are no more than rhetoric symbols, these two living heroes played by the two great actors make a refreshing difference.

 

Posted in movies | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

under the spell of The Master (film: The Master – Paul Thomas Anderson, 2012)

Paul Thomas Anderson‘s The Master is one of the best acted and the most impressively filmed movie of 2012. And yet, I am concerned that as with another amazing film a few years ago which also enjoyed the acting of Philip Seymour Hoffman (I am talking about Synechdoche, New York written and directed by Charlie Kauffman) it is too smart, too complex, and too out of the mainstream taste of the majority of the viewers and of the Academy to get the Oscar Awards it deserves.

 

source www.imdb.com/title/tt1560747/

 

Unfortunately I know too little about Scientology and about its founder L. Ron Hubbard in order to give an educated opinion about how close the image of the charismatic healer and cult leader Lancaster Dodd (Hoffman) is to historic truth. Not it may matter too much in the logic of the film which is not that much about a specific cult or ideology and more about the relation between master and disciple, between the strong and the weak, between the castles of imagination people build in order to cope with hardships of life and reality. On the way the film tells a lot about surviving wars (the other hero acted by Joaquin Phoenix is not much more than a human wreck having survived WWII with psychological sequels, a dependency on alcohol, and a lack of purpose in life), but also about seeking and finding guidance in life, about relations between men and the different ways of human beings relying and becoming dependent one of the other. The more I think about this film which I have seen less than 24 hours ago more details come to my mind, and I am sure that a second or more viewings will let me discover new meanings and new angles of the story. This is not a film to see, enjoy and forget, this is an experience to carry and develop.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pALMMIoxTzY

(video source Movie Trailers)

 

Joaqin Phoenix and Philip Seymour Hoffman give in this movies two of the best performances I have seen in the last years and each in part and the two together deserve Oscar awards for what they do in this film. Phoenix (I am so happy that he is back to making movies) carries on his face, body, voice the whole pain of the broken lives of young people who went to war and were not able to put together the pieces of their lives when they returned. Hoffman apparently has the allure and the charisma of the preacher, but he hides a whole universe of darkness behind this glamor, and acting has the merit of building a complex image of the character without placing a sentence, letting the audiences judge by themselves. Cinematography is another great asset of this film that makes the experience of viewing memorable. Mihai Malaimare jr. who already worked in two films directed by Francis Ford Coppola uses in this film non-digital cameras and a film format (70 mm, I am not a technical expert, some comments say it’s seldom used nowadays) which both makes the image crystal clear and is similar to the one used for projections in the period the action of the film takes place. This format and the selection of colors make the viewing experience really special. The Master is a very special cinema experience which I feel only starts its path now but may become more appreciated in the future, finding its place among the best works of Paul Thomas Anderson.

 

Posted in movies | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Companhia de Dança Deborah Colker in Tel Aviv

The Tel Aviv Performing Arts Center (or the Opera House as it is popularly known) has a very solid dance program each season which brings every year to Tel Aviv most of the best ballet and modern dance companies world-wide. We used to be subscribed for a few years to the series, but the lack of time pressed us into giving up and attending only occasionally the ballet performances here or in other places in Israel. This time we changed the tickets to a cancelled opera performance for what was probably one of the picks of the ballet (actually modern dance) season this year.

 

source http://www.costanorte.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/12foto02.jpg

 

Deborah Colker was born in Brazil in 1960, she started her own company named now Companhia de Dança Deborah Colker in 1993. The style she developed is based on the celebration of the human body and on the artistic and acrobatic skills of her dancers. Some of the more recent performances show more sophistication in combining music, dance and stage accessories that amplify and enhance the efforts of the dancers. It’s no coincidence if the style reminds Cirque du Soleil, as Deborah created one of the most recent performance of that company.

 

(video source Cia Deborah Colker)

 

The program brought to the Israeli audiences is named Mix and brings together parts of the two first shows of the company created in 1994-1995. Six different pieces with a duration of around 10 minutes each deal with the relations between the human body and the environment, between men and machines, and between couples. The most daring piece and the one that will be remembered by all audiences who have seen the show is is the final one, which is danced on a vertical plane, creating a very special experience for dancers and viewers and challenging the sportive skills of the dancers. I have seen the idea perfected in the Cirque du Soleil’s ‘K’ show one decade after this program was created, and it seems that Deborah Colker really pioneered an idea that is still striking and daring even today.

The dancers gave last night a fantastic show, and even if the acrobatic thrills in some places seemed to prevail over the artistic emotions there can be no doubt about their dedication to the art they are making, and about their passion (and the evident pleasure of the leader of the company who showed up on stage at the end to thank the audiences) to dance and to be here. A great evening of modern dance.

Posted in ballet | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

intelligent sci-fi thriller (Film: Looper – Bruce Willis, 2012)

Once the future was projected in movies as a colorful and peaceful environment, where most of the human challenges will come from encounters with other civilizations and the confrontation with humanity’s own thirst in discovering the Universe and breaking all its frontiers. Then the dark political fiction interfered, as movies like 1984 and Brazil brought up to screen the social nightmares  of a world dominated by totalitarianism. Nowadays almost all movies that deal with the future seem to be dark dystopias that describe the planet after some kind of atomic, biological or ecological apocalypse, or in the best case a society that became some kind of Orwellian nightmare. Director Rian Johnson‘s Looper is no exception, as the world of 2044 or 2074 in the film is dominated by violence, human life has lower price than ever, and the technology progress did not bring to mankind any happiness (neither cleaner streets). Time travel was invented but quickly forbidden, as organized crime took over, and as with any forbidden substance or weapon it is the mafia that controls the illegal trade.

 

source www.imdb.com/title/tt1276104/?

 

‘Loopers’ are paid killers whose mission is to execute in cold blood in the year 2044 the victims targeted by the mob of 2074 to die. The trick and the trigger of the story is that 30 years later it may be decided that the looper is the one to die, and then if the sentence is not put in action a loop is created. Loopers are not allowed to feel any mercy, not even to their own self in the future. The smart script of this film, one of the smartest that I have seen lately avoids with the twist of a sentence the hard questions asked when the two instances of the same paid killer (Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt) meet in one of the scenes that is hard to forget for anybody who saw the film. ‘Too complicated, let us not enter the details’. And if details are left apart, this story works perfectly, and the ending makes a lot of sense in a story which could easily get too complicated and too hard to follow.

 

(video source SonyPictures)

 

It’s hard to tell from this film that writer and director Rian Johnson is almost a newcomer in the world of Hollywood. Not only the pace of the film is perfectly tuned accelerating and slowing as the story demands, and the cinematography choices he made seem efficient and the story and dialogs create the atmosphere of distrust that lets the viewer ask all the time what is meant by the sequence he watches and what comes next, without explaining things too early or too late – there is also something in the realistic style he picks that makes the story credible and the characters resonate with viewers despite the unusual situations they are facing. Bruce Willis proves once more that he is much more than an action hero actor (although the fans of Die Hard will find here a few scenes that will remind them their beloved character), Joseph Gordon-Levitt approaches the role with a self-confidence and a palette of nuances that makes me believe that we may have in him another megastar of tomorrow,  while Emily Blunt confirms the good vibrations I felt watching her in The Adjustment Bureau. Looper is a more than satisfying action thriller, it is one of the best written, directed and acted films I have seen in the last year.

Posted in movies | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

‘It is not for you to decide …’ (Film: Green Zone – Matt Dimon, 2010)

It is seldom that Hollywood gets it right when it comes to describing the realities of the world we live in, and especially when the relation between the American policies and the rest of the world are concerned. Director Paul Greegrass‘s ‘Green Zone’ comes however closer than many other films of the genre, maybe with the exception of Kathryn Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker. ‘Green Zone’ – which makes no claim of being based on true facts but looks and feels much closer to truth than many other movies that do – is both a very efficient thriller as well as a political statement.

 

source http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0947810/

 

Officer Miller (Matt Damon , Greengrass’s lead actor in the Bounty movies) is one of the many people the United States sent under uniform to fight for a war that history still needs to decide if it was a right or a wrong war, but almost everybody nowadays agrees that it started for the wrong reasons. The story focuses on the weeks and months after the American victory over Sadam Hussein, the search for WMDs, the decisions (which now we know were wrong) to discharge the whole Iraqi army and political structure and build from zero a democracy in Iraq. Not only is the disconnect between the theories of the American politicians and commanders and realities in the field complete, but the gap is also filled with lies and disinformation. Miller is the typical American hero trying to do the right thing, but doing the right thing in the wrong situation soon puts him in the situation to go rogue and fight his own side’s political and military mechanisms which at least in part are involved into supplying the high political echelons with the information that they want to hear. Of course, there is another side to this war, and the film has the quality of providing an image of that side which is far from the stereotypes. The Iraqi general trying to provide the true information to the American and reach a compromise, as well as the ‘collaborator’ who has his own personal motivation in the suffering he went through under Sadam are both credible and human, supported by excellent actors (Yigal Naor, Khalid Abdalla) in the supporting roles. The key phrase of the film which one of the characters tells the American officer resumes better than many other sources the logic (if there is a logic in such situations) of what happened in Iraq in these times – ‘It is not for you to decide what happens here’

 

(video source  PearlandDean)

 

The other very good part of the film is the way the Iraq of the first months of the American occupation is being filmed. In many moments it reminded me post-apocalyptic movies. The country looks like scorched land, populated by the hungry and thirsty phantoms of the defeated local population and by the high-tech silhouettes of the conquerors who seem at the same time to belong to another world but also end by being covered by the same dust and prey to the same basic human fears. Greengrass is very efficient in filming action and a quite complex intrigue ends by being clear and catching, and the actions scenes make sense and belong to the logic of the film.  The story of the Iraq war is far from being fully written or brought to screen, but when later things will get summed ‘Green Zone’ may be viewed as one well drawn piece of the puzzle.

Posted in movies | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

In umbra principelui (Carte: Florian Filip – Zilele regelui)

In Zilele Regelui (Editura Poliron, colectia fiction ltd, 2008) Filip Florian abordeaza o perioada din istoria Romaniei care este aproape Terra incognita. Este vorba despre perioada venirii in tara a principelui strain Karl Ludwig de Hohenzollern, si despre anii in care Romania incepe procesul de modernizare accelerata, de transformare a structurilor sociale si creare a celor politice impreuna cu institutiile statului modern in devenire. Este o perioada nu numai de mari schimbari, ci si de mari pasiuni, de conflicte politice, de clasa si personale, ale caror intensitate a facut ca multa vreme abordarea epocii sa fie dificila si pentru istorici, nu numai pentru scriitori. Principele insusi in carne si oase si cu slabiciunile sale trupesti si omenesti este personaj al cartii, dar dimensiunea sa istorica domina intreaga naratiune. Pe de o parte avem de a face cu locotenentul prusac pe care concursul de imprejurari il aduce pe tronul principatelor in partea opusa (geografic, cultural) a Europei decat cea a nasterii sale, cu dilemele, nesiguranta, timiditatea si durerile sale de dinti, pe de alta parte el este Principele care declanseaza imensele schimbari ale perioadei in care se desfasoara actiunea cartii.

Peronajele principale si naratorii actiunii sunt dentistul Joseph Strauss pe care principele il invita sa-l insoteasca in calatoria in noua sa tara si … motanul acestuia Siegfried. Despre prezenta motanului in poveste si ca povestitor se poate comenta in mai multe feluri, eu l-am vazut ca pe o voce alternativa care incearca sa dea o dimensiune in plus naratiunii, pe de o parte fantastica, pe de alta putin comica, si el va fi si cheia finalului oarecum ‘hollywoodean’ al cartii in care am sesizat din nou o nuanta de ironie dar si dorinta de a rezolva povestea intr-un happy-end. Caci finalul este de fapt inceputul ‘zilelor regelui’ adica incoronarea principelui si inceputul domniei lui Carol I, rege al Romaniei independente, si pacat ar fi fost ca personajele principale – dentistul Joseph si sotia sa, sarboaica Elena – sa nu se regaseasca in rezonanta cu bucuria momentului. In general tonul cartii lui Filip Florian este mult mai pozitiv si mai optimist decat majoritatea celorlalte carti scrise in ultimii ani in literatura romana contemporana.

 

sursa http://translations.observatorcultural.ro

 

Prima parte a Zilelor regelui se ocupa in mare masura cu socul cultural al personajelor la intalnirea cu tara in devenire de la extremitatea de nord a Balcanilor. Deoarece Karl Ludwig nu este eroul principal al cartii, scriitorul pare sa fi ales sa descrie socul intalnit de acesta la contactul cu noua tara prin intermediul devotatului sau dentist, de origine nationala identica cu a principelui. Ajuns in capitala principatelor Joseph invata la o bere sau la mai multe, de la conationalii sai care l-au precedat despre  obiceiurile locului:

‘La prima halba, poate si la a doua, Joseph a ascultat si a priceput cum se facea politica la Bucuresci, cum se fura pina nu mai ramasese nimic de luat, cum nu putini, visind la tron, sperau ca principele Karl sa obtina un imprumut insemnat si strain, sa umple visteria, apoi sa se intoarca in tara lui. La halba a treia, sorbind mai potolit, au vorbit despre cum putea fi invatata romana, o limba suierata, indulcita de vocale ca de sirop, care nu semana deloc cu limba lor.’ (pag. 45)

Viitorul rege insusi incepe sa fie confruntat cu realitatile tarii pe tronul careia ajunsese:

‘Si mai exista o cifra. Posaca. 8000. Atitia oameni numara armata aceea de vodevil. In rest, pe masura ce cunoscuse locuri si fapte, cercetind mai ales spiritul locului si starea de fapt, domnitorul incepuse sa descopere vraistea si lincezeala din ministere, drumurile desfundate, scolile si spitalele sarmane, jaful si delapidarile din prefecturi, din politie, si din celelalte institutii, putinele felinare cu petrol din Bucuresti si multele imputiciuni ale orasului, zvonurile, sforariile si taberele din politica, placutele plimbari la Sosea, satele ca niste catune oropsite, periferiile ca niste sate mocirlite, cochetul parc Cismigiu, unde intuia mina si priceperea unui gradinar german, indolenta si mirsaviile din tribunale, plicticoasele seri de teatru dintr-o sala nu prea mare si insuficient luminata, ciulinii de pe cimpuri, tirgusoarele prafuite, puscariile pline cu vinovati si nevinovati, rochiile si bijuteriile fastoase ale doamnelor, holera care bintuia ca ielele (iar ielele, in tara aia, faceau prapad), tihna manastirilor de cimpie si splendoarea unor mosii, precum cea a mitropolitului Nifon, de la Letca. (pag. 51)

Prezentarea perioadei prin intermediul unor eroi straini permite nu numai o detasare obiectiva in aprecierea situatiilor si a moravurilor locale, dar si o descoperire a teritoriului bucurestean in care se desfasoara cea mai mare parte a actiunii. Din acest punct de vedere cartea poate fi citita si ca un jurnal de calatorie apocrif, in care orasul cu reperele, culorile, frumusetile, mirosurile, praful si noroaiele sale devin din ce in ce mai familiare eroilor. Si asa, pe masura ce tara si orasul se ‘occidentalizeaza’ pentru eroi ceea ce numeau la inceput Bukarest devine Bucuresci. Ca bucurestean la origine, unul dintre pasajele preferate ale cartii este pentru mine cel in care Joseph suie impreuna cu iubita sa Elena pe turnul Coltei, locul cel mai inalt al orasului in acea vreme:

‘Nu-i interesa sa descopere incendii in departare, nu se gindeau la ziditorii turnului (niste soldati suedezi din armata lui Karl al XII-lea, rataciti in rasarit dupa infringerea de la Poltava), au numarat treptele, erau o suta optzeci si opt, habar n-au avut ca fusesera doua sute paisprezece (pana la cutremurul devastator din 1802, care retezase tuguiul cladirii), au privit zarile uimiti si imbratisati, tacind, nadusiti din prea multe pricini: vipia, urcusul in spirala, bucuria, nesatul si afectiunea pentru sutele de rindunele care isi facusera cuiburi sub stresini. Din inalturi, Bucuresciul se se dezvaluia altcumva decit il vazusera sau il ghicisera vreodata. Norii de praf care urmau carutele si trasurile aratau ca niste pete marunte, acoperisurile si hornurile asteptau ploile si frigul, turnele bisericilor si clopotnitele parca nu mai zgiriau cerul, Dimbovita lucea aprins, iar Bucurestioara mohorit, pentru ca apele acelea erau orientate altfel catre punctele cardinale, palatul domnitorului, de unde Carol I sigur lipsea (alungat de zaduf, de treburi si de plictis), nu era cu nimic mai falnic decit unele case boieresti, maidanele se zareau maronii, iar pilcurile de paduri intr-un verde prafos …’ (pag. 152)

 

sursa http://translations.observatorcultural.ro/

 

Mai sunt multe alte aspecte ale acestui proces de cunoastere a noii patrii si a zonei in care se poate bea ‘licoarea pe care o puteau numi in trei feluri, raki, ouzo sau mastica’ (pag. 143) – aluzie la conexiunile balcanice ale locului. De exemplu cea culinara:

‘A baut vin, a cercetat platourile abia sosite, unul cu ciuperci inabusite in smintina si altul cu o pulpa de porc la tava, rumena, acoperita cu maghiran, boia si felii de sfecla coapta …‘ (pag. 139)

… sau cea arhitectonica descriind un conac boieresc al vremii:

‘Piatra alb-cenusie, slefuita, venise cu doua sute treizeci de ani in urma din carierele de la Rusciuk, iar intregul conac, ridicat de mesteri unguri, in unghi drept si plin de simetrii, cu etaj inalt, cu doua intrari in beciurile boltite, cu acoperis cu olane, cu cercevelele ferestrelor rotunjite in partea de sus, identice, cite opt pe laturile dinspre cimp si cite sase pe peretii dinspre gradina …’ (pag. 141)

Partea finala a cartii descrie procesul de tranformare accelerata a principatelor, intrigile politice, crearea institutiilor statului, razboiul de independenta cu ororile si suferintele sale, spre incoronarea care va marca borna de inceput a ‘zilelor regelui’:

‘Pe urma, timpul, Dumnezeu stie si cum si de ce, n-a mai curs ca riul lenes si urit mirositor, capatind alta cadenta, deodata, asemanatoare cu galopul bidiviilor de soi, cu zborul ciorilor gonite de ploaie sau chiar cu fuga locomotivelor prin cimpie, cind nu erau nevoite sa frineze. Iar daca timpul, acum, tot nu mai aducea cu lentoarea Dimbovitei, ci cu alunecarea pe sine a unei locomotive, trenurile incepind sa circule binisor prin tara, provocind incintare pretutindeni, nu doar in jumatatea de sud.’ (pag. 217)

As face o nedreptate cartii daca nu as mentiona dimensiunea umana a personajului lui Joseph Strauss, dentistul prusac venit in principate pentru a-l servi pe Karl Ludwig, care ii ramane acestuia credincios dincolo de ruptura relatiilor poate inevitabila cand principele creste in rang si in statura devenind rege. Sacrificiul personal al servitorului uitat, care ia in grija odrasla nelegitima a domnitorului fara ca acesta sa afle vreodata de existenta lui, cu riscul de a-si pierde propria familie si iubirea vietii sale, si descoperirea treptata a noii patrii, asimiliarea ei de catre erou si a eroului in ea, sunt descrise cu minutiozitate si de dezvaluie treptat cititorului, dand nastere unui personaj poate neasteptat de cititor dar care dupa lectura devine o parte din peisajul epocii. O epoca pe care incepem sa o cunoastem mai bine si datorita unor carti ca ‘Zilele regelui’.

Posted in books | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

war is no party (Film: The Hunting Party – Richard Gere, 2007)

War is no party. Not even a hunting one. Neither are consequences of war, or trying to make justice and catch war criminals. The Hunting Party written and directed by Richard Shephard whose Matador I have seen a few weeks ago (and liked much more) is good action entertainment, but if you know nothing about the Balkans and the Balkan wars and you rely on this movie in order to get an idea about the tragedies and atrocities that happened 20 years ago in that part of Europe, you can get a distorted image about the region and the history.

 

source www.imdb.com/title/tt0455782/

 

Simon Hunt (Richard Gere) is a TV reporter who was once famous. While covering the war in Bosnia he had a nervous breakdown during a live coverage of the war atrocities, which cost him his job. A few years later he will be back in the country apparently healing from the wounds of war, trying together with his ex-cameraman (Terrence Howard) and the young apprentice in journalism (Jessee Eisenberg) who happens to be the son of one of the VPs of the TV network they used to work for, to find one of the most famous war criminals who escapes international justice, UN forces and all the spying agencies. No need to say, they will succeed in a few days where all the big fellows failed for years.

 

(video source jesseeisenbergfan)

 

Judged only as an action movie The Hunting Party is not a bad movie at all. Richard Shephard has a sure hand, and Richard Gere is more than credible in the role of the journalist whose life is turned upside down by war and becomes a war criminals hunter. He actually is the only character that has a motivation to do it in the script, why the other two get attracted into the mortal game is a mystery. There is a big problem with describing such a complex conflict as the Balkan wars through the simplistic simplistic perspective of an action movie, not only because the script takes parts on national lines, but also because many better films have already been made by Serbian, Croat, Bosnian directors about this complex conflict. Films with real dramas, true humans, good guys and villains, not vaudeville ones. In a tentative to distance the story from the action B-movies the heroes see on TV screens on a couple of instances Chuck Norris jumping out of the water to kill the bad guys in one of the flicks of the genre. Unfortunately, this is not enough. The Hunting Party is just by a bit better than the Chuck Norris movies.

 

Posted in movies | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment