Last night I skimmed through a wretched little footloose-twenty-something 'comedy' called Gente Pez from 2001, and realized that I had no one to whom to kvetch about it. I'm not suggesting that we all watch that particular excretion, but it occurred to me that it might be fun to schedule a sort of virtual film fest, in which we all agree to watch a particular Spanish movie by a certain date, and then post about it.
Any takers? We could stick with Goya winners, or literary movies. We could even start with something we've all already seen. Lengua de las mariposas, anyone? Or, Mar adentro?
For example, in my opinion, Mar adentro is a well-made film that seeks to be thought-provoking, but that ultimately does not do justice to the big problem at its center. The film purports to explore the nuances around the 'right to die,' but in fact, it allows no nuance. The default 'correct' position is one favorable to the right to die. Those opposed to the 'right to die' on moral grounds are reduced to characatures. So despite the power of its performances (and Javier Bardem is great in it) it ultimately comes across as a one-sided jeremiad.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I think it's a fantastic idea. I'm in.
Ok. I'll try but lately I've been falling asleep during the first 10-15 minutes of any movie I watch. (Man, that sounds geriatric. I suppose adult diapers are right around the corner.)
It happens that I saw Mar adentro a couple of weeks ago. I thoroughly enjoyed Bardem's performance (almost as much as his work in No Country For Old Men). Mike makes an interesting point about caricaturing the opposing point view. However, I really wonder if a film can take such a strong position on an issue without falling victim to accusations of caricature. (Tell me if you can think of an example to the contrary. I can't at the moment.) It is a curious coincidence that you mention Lengua de la Mariposa. I saw that film some years ago (I believe Damian was there, as were Joaquin and Jasmine). Joaquin came out of the film quite annoyed. When I observed that the characters were mere caricatures he was quick to agree.
I was at that viewing of Lengua with Joaquin, et al., and distinctly remember his annoyance.
Regarding caricature, I can't think of a good example of evenhandedness at the moment. I recognize that perhaps my response to Mar adentro is more visceral than reasoned, but because, in principle, I have problems with the 'right to die,' I resented the tone of the film, which clearly communicated that people like me do not have an intellectual leg to stand on. Thus, through visual irony, the film undermines the priest who insists paraplegics can live a life of dignity. What can be more laughably pathetic than a priest, who has come to impart quiet words of dignity, having to carry on his conversation by shouting because his wheelchair won't fit up the stairs?
I think it is a great idea. Count me in. As for Mar adentro, I always found it funny that they translated it as The Sea Inside, instead of Out to Sea. That said, if you haven't watched the deleted scenes on the DVD, you should. It makes for a much more nuanced and less caricatured film by showing how many people saw his choice as a tragedy -- in other words how many people loved the man, though he didn't seem to notice them.
Going back to the priest in Mar adentro, I do agree that he was deliberately made to act /look ridiculous for purposes of diminishing the validity of the other point of view. The movie would indeed have been better had there been a deep, nuanced treatment of the other perspective. I imagine this could have happened in the scene Mike mentions--the conversation between the paraplegic and the priest. Had the two had a face-to-face exchange of ideas (sans directorial editorializing) that would have been much more stimulating and interesting. It is almost an insult to the viewer's intelligence to not let the ideas stand on their own merit (or lack of it) and let the viewer decide.
Terrific.
Post a Comment